Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Sanity is questioned on many occasions throughout Shakespeare’s Hamlet. It is not a question of whether a character is sane or insane, but rather which is more desirable. Normally, it is the more admired trait to be considered be sane and in ones right mind. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the idea of how desirable it is to be sane or insane is questioned and looked at through binary oppositions, undecidability, and the unstable qualities of language. In contrast to popular ideas, on many instances throughout this play it appears that insanity is the more preferred trait in characters. This can be revealed through Shakespeare’s polar opposites throughout the play, how many conflicting meanings fill the text, and just how contradicting the words being …show more content…
He reveals that he is seeing the ghost to only a few of his friends and his mother. When he tells his mother that he believes he is seeing the ghost of his father, it is unclear exactly how she feels about his sanity. “Queen: To whom do you speak this? Hamlet: Do you see nothing there?” (Act 3, scene iv, line 131-132). She goes on to tell the King that Hamlet is mad, but it is unclear whether she truly believes that he is, or if she is hoping that he is mad to sooth her own guilt of remarrying after his father’s death. This is an occurrence of decidability in which the Queen is saying one thing, but possibly meaning another. It cannot be determined what the real meaning of the text is here. The question of whether it is better to be sane or insane continues within the relationship between Hamlet and this …show more content…
He talks with what he thinks is the ghost of his father on multiple occasions, and seems to question whether this Ghost is his father, or the Devil in disguise. “The spirit that I have seen May be a [dev’l], and the [dev’l] hath power ‘T’ assume a pleasing shape” (Act 3, scene i, line 578-580). Hamlet is showing that although he thinks he is a normal sane person for seeing a ghost, he must not be totally sane because he is still willing to do exactly what this ghost wants him to do. The unstable qualities of language is shown clearly here, and is very contradicting to the idea that Hamlet should be considered a sane person. In this case, it could be argued that it would make Hamlet and the audience more comfortable if they were to know that he was insane for being so blindly willing to act upon the Devils
He is mentally disturbed by the thought of his uncle killing his father to the point where he loses touch with sanity. Hamlet is a tragedy that will never have a straightforward answer as to if he faked being crazy or not. My belief is that Hamlet had in fact lost touch with reality. The slow decline of his mental health throughout lead me to believe he did go crazy, even if he might have been faking it at first. After seeing his father’s ghost, I believe he started acting like he had lost his mind to blame his future actions on the fact that he was crazy. I also believe he truly did lose his mind shortly after when he found out about Claudius murdering his
As Hamlet transforms from a motivated intellectual to an obsessed griever, Shakespeare evaluates the fluidity of sanity.The juxtaposition of Hamlet’s desire to act and inability to do so unveils Hamlet’s inner turmoil, for as Hamlet disconnects from family, distrusts his environment, and forms an obsession with perfection, the audience realizes his fatal flaw and watches him tumble into the grasps of insanity. This degeneration forces the audience to consider how equilibrium between thought and action influences the conservation of sanity, not only for Hamlet, but also for all of humanity.
After the death of King Hamlet, Hamlet proclaims that he saw his father’s ghost when he, Horatio and Bernardo were in the forest. The ghost spoke to the trio and apparently told them that Lord Hamlet’s uncle, Claudius, now the King, was behind the murder of his father. This troubled Hamlet and at that point he came up with a plan to see whether the ghost’s prophecy was true. A huge part of his plan included him acting insane. “As I perchance hereafter shall think meet to put on an antic disposition on” (I,I,191). This statement is significant as Hamlet himself ...
Throughout William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, Hamlet undergoes a transformation from sane to insane while fighting madness to avenge his father’s death. The material that Shakespeare appropriated in writing Hamlet is the story of a Danish prince whose uncle murders the prince’s father, marries his mother, and claims the throne. The prince pretends to be feeble-minded to throw his uncle off guard, then manages to kill his uncle in revenge. Shakespeare changed the emphasis of this story entirely, making Hamlet a philosophically minded prince who delays taking action because his knowledge of his uncle’s crime is so uncertain. To begin with, Hamlet portrays himself as sane.
In Shakespeare’s play Hamlet the main character Hamlet experiences many different and puzzling emotions. He toys with the idea of killing himself and then plays with the idea of murdering others. Many people ask themselves who or what is this man and what is going on inside his head. The most common question asked about him is whether or not he is sane or insane. Although the door seems to swing both ways many see him as a sane person with one thought on his mind, and that is revenge. The first point of his sanity is while speaking with Horatio in the beginning of the play, secondly is the fact of his wittiness with the other characters and finally, his soliloquy.
Hamlet: Hamlet's Sanity & nbsp; & nbsp; “Great wits are sure to madness near allied, and thin partitions do. their bounds divide.” Though John Dryden's quote was not made in regard to William Shakespeare's Hamlet, it relates very well to the argument of whether or not Hamlet went insane. When a character such as Hamlet is under scrutiny, it can sometimes be difficult to determine what state he is in at. particular moments in the play.
Riddled with ambiguity by its very nature, the text of William Shakespeare's Hamlet has been a commonly debated subject in literary circles since its first performance. The character Hamlet undergoes intense physical and emotional hardship in his quest for revenge against his despicable uncle. This hardship, some argue, leads to an emotional breakdown and, ultimately, Hamlet's insanity. While this assessment may be suitable in some cases, it falls short in others. Since Hamlet is a play, the ultimate motivation of each of the characters borrows not only from the text, but also from the motivations of the actors playing the parts. In most respects, these motivations are more apt at discerning the emotional condition of a character than their dialogue ever could. Thus, the question is derived: In Kenneth Branagh's film adaptation of Hamlet, does the character Hamlet suffer from insanity? Giving halt to the response, this paper will first endeavor to establish what insanity is and will then provide sufficient examples both from the text, film, and Branagh's own musings on his motivations as proof that Hamlet's character, at least in Branagh's version of the play, is not insane.
A popular topic of discussion for Shakespearian critics is whether or not Hamlet is sane at various points in the play. Usually, this digresses into a question of at what point Hamlet crosses the fine line which marks the bounds of sanity into the realm of insanity. This is a confusing matter to sort out, due to the fact that it is hard to tell when the prince is acting, and when he is really and truly out of his mind. The matter of determining the time of crossing over is further complicated by the fact that everyone around him is constantly speaking of madness. At the end we must either conclude that Hamlet is an extremely talented actor capable of staying in character under the most trying circumstances, or that he is human and as a result his sanity gives way to the many external emotional barrages coming his way. The more likely conclusion is that Hamlet is at some point insane. What is left to discover is at what point does this crossover occur, and second, what are the main contributing factors in his mental collapse. I will ignore the issue of the point of crossover, and let another paper consider that point. Rather, I propose that Hamlet's religious beliefs, acquired at the University of Wittenberg, heavily contributed to the loss of his sanity.
William Shakespeare’s creation of the character of Hamlet within the tragedy of that name left open the question of whether the madness of the protagonist is entirely feigned or not. This essay will treat this aspect of the drama.
According to the article “9 Signs You Might Be Going Insane” by Mamapedia, Hamlet falls into several categories of mental illness ( Mamapedia). One of the mental ilness's that show Hamlet is insane schizophrenia. Hamlet can be considered to be schizophrenic due to his paranoia that everyone is on claudious's side and his his hallucination of his father's ghost in his mother's chambers as well as his delusion for revenge of his father's murder. In act 3, scene 4 Hamlet talks to his father's ghost in front of his mother but the ghost is completely imaginary to his mother Gertrude and she even calls him mad because hamlet seem to be talking to some kind of a hallucination (3, 4, 105-7).Therefore, this supports the argument that Hamlet is actually insane in Shakespeare's play Hamlet.
Logan Gaertner Mrs. Amon English IV 1 March 2014 Is Hamlet’s Insanity Real? Is Hamlet truly insane? While the play is not extremely clear on the matter and often contradicts itself, many of Hamlet’s wild ramblings and words of nonsense seem to be not the true words of a madman. Hamlet says that he is merely “putting on an antic disposition” (Act 1, Scene 5, Line 181). He admits very early on in the play that his insanity will be nothing more than a ruse to fool those around him.
The question of Hamlet’s insanity is a question raised by many people, is Hamlet a great actor, or has he lost complete sense of what’s real? There is no right answer, there is no wrong answer, many readers have different perceptions on what really was going through Hamlet’s head. My perception is that hamlet comes full circle with his insanity, and at points lets it get the best of him, and brings him down to a extremely low point.
Right after Hamlet’s father dies, he goes through a mourning phase and acts differently than he normally does, but this is just an effect of seeing his dad’s ghost. The reader can make inference that he is not crazy when he sees the ghost the first time because his friends and the guards saw the ghost too. The second time the ghost appears to Hamlet, his mother can not see it but Hamlet is talking to it. For instance, Hamlet rushes into Ophelia’s room but he doesn’t say anything; he just stared at her while holding her arms down.
Hamlet grants himself the opportunity to momentarily direct himself, yet it remains unknown as to whether he directs a representation of truth or a falsity. He exemplifies madness so well, as the sight of "a damned ghost" (77) insanely induces his imagination and comfortably transforms his identity to one of lunacy. This role he acquires is one he portrays so explicitly well as an actor that he easily utilizes it as the foundation for his players. He instructs the players:
Throughout William Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, Hamlet’s behavior and actions cause readers to question his sanity. Hamlet’s character can be interpreted in many different ways. It could be said that he is indeed insane, or it can be disputed that he, as he made known, is simply putting on a good act. The complexity of knowing Hamlet’s true character derives from the fact that we, as readers, are unable to read Shakespeare’s or Hamlet’s minds. Therefore, judgments could be made solely by reading and interpreting his behavior and coming up with a satisfactory conclusion. Taking into consideration incidents such as Polonius’ murder and Hamlet’s contemplating suicide, it is natural for individuals who perform such acts to be categorized as crazy. Ignoring Hamlet’s actual actions, and paying keen attention to what altered his character, one can debate that Hamlet is not at all insane. It is important to consider the situations which triggered Hamlet’s different actions. By giving discreet thought to Hamlet’s position and what he endures, one will realize that he is not demented, but he is actually an angry, betrayed and emotionally devastated fatherless son.