“Let four captains bear Hamlet like a solider to the stage, for he was likely, had he been put on, to have proved most royal”(Ham. 5. 2. 396-399). So said Fortinbras, the king of Norway, who after Hamlet’s death, took to the throne of Denmark “with sorrow”(Ham. 5. 2. 389). Despite the scene of carnage that he was greeted with as he entered the castle of Elsinore, Fortinbras believed that Hamlet, had he lived would have been a good king. Was Fortinbras correct? After all, the king of Norway knew nothing of Hamlet’s character, other than Horatio’s earnest promise to relate the story of the scene before them. Was his observation sincere, or was it merely an idle comment, meant to comfort Horatio at the death of his friend and occupation of his country? Would Hamlet, indeed, have made a good king? It is necessary, firstly, to establish what a ‘good …show more content…
All of these attributes may be considered to be attributes of a good ruler. Another ruler thought almost universally to be a ‘good king’ is King David of Israel, from the Bible. He is considered one of the greatest kings of Israel, partially because showed mercy to his oppressors and to those lower in status than he. One instance of his merciful nature is the event of his son Absalom's usurpation of David’s kingdom. David flees the city of Jerusalem with his faithful men (King James Version, 2 Sam. 15). After a Benjamite, Shimei, curses David, Abishai, one of David’s soldiers, offers to kill Shimei. David, however, rebukes Abishai and says, “Behold, my son, which came forth of my bowels, seeketh my life: how much more now may this Benjamite do it? Let him alone, and let him curse, for the Lord hath bidden him. It may be that the Lord will look on mine affliction, and that the Lord will requite me good for his cursing this day” (KJV, 2 Sam. 16.
Although the play Hamlet is largely centered around the “tragic hero” Hamlet, it is the minor foil characters that gives us a deeper understanding of the text and a more conscious understanding of the internal struggles experienced by Hamlet. Each of these characters contrasts a specific aspect of Hamlet that would otherwise be overlooked. Horatio consolidates all of the desirable features that Hamlet wants to be into one person. Fortinbras, although in the exact same situation as Hamlet with his father dead and his uncle on the throne, is the complete opposite of Hamlet by choosing action over inaction. Finally, Ophelia personifies Hamlet’s innocence and the death of his innocence after the death of his father. Despite being opposites of each other, each of these characters bring a new outlook on the tragedy of Hamlet.
The Effectiveness of Having Laertes and Fortinbras in The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark
In the Introduction to Twentieth Century Interpretations of Hamlet, David Bevington gives insight into Horatio’s character. However much Horatio’s philosophic skepticism may limit his own ability to perceive those “things in heaven and earth” that Hamlet would have him observe, Horatio remains the companion from whom Hamlet has most to learn. Hamlet can trust his friend not to angle for advancement, or to reveal the terrible secret of royal murder. Best of all, Horatio is “As one in suff’ring all that suffers nothing, A man that Fortune’s buffets and rewards Hast ta’en with equal thanks.” [. . .
Mack, Maynard. “The World of Hamlet.” Yale Review. vol. 41 (1952) p. 502-23. Rpt. in Shakespeare: Modern Essays in Criticism. Rev. ed. Ed. Leonard F. Dean. New York: Oxford University P., 1967.
Prince Fortinbras and Prince Hamlet have both lost their fathers. Through recent developments, Hamlet was visited by his father's ghost who reveals the truth of his murder and demands Hamlet to avenge his death. Assuring his revenge, he later protests what a “cursed spite that ever [he] was born to set it right” (Shakespeare I.v.210-211). Not only does he put aside what he must do, but compared to Fortinbras, he acts like a coward; perhaps not wanting to murder, perhaps not wanting to get murdered, Hamlet allows for King Claudius to keep wearing a crown that does not belong to him, but rightfully to Hamlet, heir to King Hamlet. Fortinbras, on the other hand, without being told what to do, “hath not failed to pester” Denmark in regards to “the
Hamlet, after learning that his father's death was a murder and vowing to take revenge, wants to be certain that what he has been told is the absolute truth before he attempts to take revenge on Claudius. Even after Hamlet is sure beyond any shadow of a doubt that Claudius is the murderer, he hesitates to kill him. Fortinbras, on the other hand, has been taking action even before the play begins. As the play opens, the audience learns that Denmark is in a state of alert; the country has been preparing for a war. From Horatio, the audience also learns that the young Fortinbras is getting ready his "lawless resolutes"(I.i.111) for action against Denmark for the killing of his father and for the return of lands previously owned by Norway (I. i. 79-107). These differences between Hamlet and Fortinbras' actions are further mentioned in Hamlet's last soliloquy (IV. iv. 32-66).
Hamlet passed away young, a mere 30 years of age, and I sincerely regret that I will never be able to see such a fine young man take command of the throne and restore nobility to the state of Denmark. He was the son of the great King Hamlet, one of the best kings this country has ever seen, and Queen Gertrude, our countries finest lady who has also now sadly passed away. I am sure that all of you here today looked up to Hamlet as a fine young prince, but I knew him as much more than that. To me he was the best friend a man could have, loyal, witty, and extremely trustworthy. I remember the days back when we studied together in Wittenberg, we spent a lot of time together and he was always there to support and help me. He was always cheerful but quiet and had a quick wit, which fascinated me. Hamlet delighted in “flashes of merriment that were wont to set the table in a roar.” His ability to read my mind always astounded me, al...
...assing on his vote for Fortinbras and requesting that his story be passed on by Horatio (5.2.349, 356-357). This desire to move on shows the acceptance of Hamlet’s faith, and the final stage of the Kubler-Ross model.
Shakespeare's Hamlet is set in the Kingdom of Denmark. Display dramatic Isis Revenge displayed through a foil. Both Hamlet and fortinbras have lost their father to murder and now are attempting any way possible to get revenge. After the murder of Hamlet's father by his own uncle, hamlet sanity comes into question. All the characters around Hamlet believe he has gone insane because of the facade Hamlet is creating to mask his true intentions of seeking revenge on Claudius for killing his father. I will argue the claim that Hamlet is in fact truly sane by examining the decisions he makes while plotting his revenge against as well as the details he shares with other characters. In order to prove this, I will also argue against the counterclaim
William Shakespeare’s Hamlet presents a hero who hesitates to avenge his dead father when given the opportunity – what should be his judgment? This paper examines the decision from various points of view.
You should not have believed me, for virtue cannot so inoculate our old stock but we shall relish of it. I loved you not. Hamlet is angry with his mother, who has married his uncle Claudius, his father’s brother. Prince Hamlet is led by his friends to his father’s ghost, who tells him that he was murdered by his own brother, Claudius. The ghost asks Hamlet to kill Claudius. Young Hamlet must decide whether to avenge his father’s death, by murdering his uncle, thus inheriting his rightful place as king; or to allow God to take the actions to determine the fate of evil. This decision is one that Hamlet questions as a child, who has been abandoned by his father, before he was able to inherit his birthright; his father’s wisdom.
Tonight we lay to rest a hero, successful in avenging the death of forming King Hamlet. A great tragedy had befallen the kingdom on the night of King Hamlet's death, just as it has now. The young Hamlet, alike in both character and appearance to his father, would have ruled with the same strength and intuition as he. But Hamlet's time was felled like a sturdy oak in a forest of shrubs, his kingly potential not yet to be realized.
Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet” is a subtle reflection on the political and religious atmosphere of the early 1600’s and late 1500’s, that was dominated with conversation of the successor to the throne of England, and their religious denomination. Hamlet was written with the intention of mimicking the political world and all its machinations from treachery, duties to family, religion and country. Hamlet, begins with armies being mobilized to the threat of an invasion from Norway, helmed by Fortinbras, like the rumors that the eventual successor James VI would need to take the throne by force. Soon after, this we have Hamlet and his father’s ghost, they converse on the details of his untimely death at the hands of his brother Claudius. In this
The perfection of Hamlet’s character has been called in question - perhaps by those who do not understand it. The character of Hamlet stands by itself. It is not a character marked by strength of will or even of passion, but by refinement of thought and sentiment. Hamlet is as little of the hero as a man can be. He is a young and princely novice, full of high enthusiasm and quick sensibility - the sport of circumstances, questioning with fortune and refining on his own feelings, and forced from his natural disposition by the strangeness of his situation.
Hamlet is the best known tragedy in literature today. Here, Shakespeare exposes Hamlet’s flaws as a heroic character. The tragedy in this play is the result of the main character’s unrealistic ideals and his inability to overcome his weakness of indecisiveness. This fatal attribute led to the death of several people which included his mother and the King of Denmark. Although he is described as being a brave and intelligent person, his tendency to procrastinate prevented him from acting on his father’s murder, his mother’s marriage, and his uncle’s ascension to the throne.