Few characters in literary history have served the roles of opposing foils quite as well as Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Laertes. Two young men both presented with a similar situation, the murder of their father, and yet two completely contrasting courses of action in reaction. The analytical approach of Prince Hamlet sits opposite the seething passion of Laertes, blinded by his mission of vengeance. Zeffirelli’s Hamlet and Branagh’s William Shakespeare’s Hamlet both offer varying takes on the personalities of Hamlet and Laertes, particularly in how they interact with eachother and their courses of action to revenge the murders of their fathers. Through the text of the play and portrayals of the films, the opposing foils of Hamlet and Laertes represent two vastly different philosophies in regards to two very similar events.
When first the audience encounters young Laertes, he is found giving his advice upon his sister of Ophelia before he sets out for France, as some like C. P. Aichinger speculate, “[anxious] to return to the fleshpots of Paris” (Aichinger, par. 9). In this scene, Laertes gives a thorough warning to his sister to be careful of the affections of Hamlet whose noble birth will impede upon their relationship, as such “His greatness weighed, his will is not his own. / For he himelf is subject to his birth” (Shakespeare 1.3.17-18), yet as Ophelia retorts of Laertes’ hypocricy to lecture her, as “Himself the primrose pathof dalliance treads / And recks not his own rede” (Shakespeare 1.3.50-51). This scene speaks to the two-sided nature of Laertes, as he preaches to his sister despite himself walking a path of sin. Polonius, Laertes’ father, enters the scene after and proceeds to himself give advice and blessing upon his s...
... middle of paper ...
...played so well within Hamlet, offering mirrored approaches of how to solve the quandry of justice and revenge. Hamlet, with his “complex understanding of the moral dilemma with which he is faced” (Foster, par. 14) due to his extensive schooling in Wittenburg and Laertes with his passion-fueled quickness to act, justified to himself by the expectations of the society around him. In these interactions, much can be understood and learned about the reprecussions of mankind’s advanced higher intellect and emotional capacity, both revelers and slaves of our own understanding of morality and free will. Thought must be exercised before action lest the blade strike those not intended, just as Laertes’ plot struck Gertrude, but also not to let ourselves become obsessed with our own thoughts, as Hamlet when his own actions came too late to prevent the tragedy in Elsinore.
Throughout the play, Laertes is as an extremely caring member of his family. His strong emotions for family have an opposing side to it, a shadow that has repressed feelings of anger which cause him to add to the disaster in Denmark. An example that depicts this is when Laertes attempts to request more rites for Ophelia’s funeral. After he is denied, he starts a commotion by calling the priest “churlish”, explaining that Ophelia will be “A ministering angel” while the priest will “liest howling”(5.1.217-218). His compliments to Ophelia shows how much he loved her, while his nasty insults to the priest show his repressed rage. While this is occuring, Hamlet hears Laertes’s mention of Ophelia during the commotion and throws himself into a brawl with Laertes. It is the conflict built up from there that causes Claudius to target Laertes as his next weapon to kill Hamlet with. Laertes’s deep anger for Hamlet makes himself the best candidate for Claudius’s manipulation. Once Laertes’s sides with Claudius, he shows his dark intent by requesting Claudius to not “o'errule me to a peace”(4.7.58). On the day of the duel, Laertes undergoes a confrontation of his shadow while he clashes with Hamlet. His realization of his shadow comes too late into the duel when both Hamlet and Laertes are struck by poison, as this happens he declares that he is “ justly killed with mine own treachery (5.2.337).” In the moments that he is still alive, he dismisses his shadow and ends the circle of murder by announcing the true nature of Claudius. Laertes’s repressed anger guides the play into the duel where many deaths occur including Hamlet’s.
In Shakespeare’s “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” Hamlet and Laertes act as dramatic foils, where their similarities are used to highlight their differences. Each character learns that his father has been murdered and each plots his revenge against the murderer. In the first act of the play, the ghost of Hamlet’s father tells him “Let not
The first foil or character that sets off Hamlet, in the play is Laertes. After King Hamlet's death, he, along with Prince Hamlet, return to Denmark for the funeral services. That is the first sign that Laertes will become a foil to Hamlet in the play. Both Laertes and Hamlet are very fond of Laertes' sister, Ophelia, which is the second similarity of the two. Another similarity of Laertes and Hamlet is the father figure of each, Polonius to Laertes and Claudius to Hamlet, has someone to watch them to see if they are acting accordingly. [accordingly?] In act two, scene one, Polonius instructs Reynaldo to go to Paris to give Laertes money and messages, and to find other Danes that will give him gossip about Laertes. In act two, scene two, Claudius instructs Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to find out why Hamlet is acting so strangely. The next similarity of Laertes and Hamlet is that they both grieve over a death in the play. Laertes grieves the death of Ophelia, while Hamlet grieves over his father, King Hamlet's death. The final similarity of Laertes and Hamlet is that both seek revenge for the death of their fathers. Laertes wishes to kill Hamlet after Hamlet murders Polonius and Hamlet wants to kill Claudius for the murder of King Hamlet. Both succeed in their quest for revenge.
Arguably William Shakespeare’s great tragedy, and perhaps his greatest work overall, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is a gripping tale of betrayal, insanity, and grim horror that captures the imagination of the reader. This tragic play centers around the titular character, Hamlet, and his quest to kill his Uncle, Claudius. Although it sounds to the common ear to be merely a story of revenge, the play contains vivid characters that bring the play to shocking light for the reader or the viewer. Controversy is common in discussion of Hamlet due to the choices of the main character to reject his love, spare his traitorous uncle for a brief moment in the pursuit of a ruthless revenge, and the accidental killing of an innocent man, having mistaken him for the aforementioned uncle. These actions can be seen as mere plot devices, or sloppy writing on behalf of Shakespeare. They can also be seen as the literary genius that enriches Hamlet, depending on the point-of-view of the reader or the viewer. This essay will be an examination of the idea that, while these actions may not be genius, and they are in-fact simple plot devices, the actions taken by Hamlet in this play are deliberate, as the author intended them. Hamlet’s actions during this play, sparing his uncle and banishing his love, and also killing an innocent man, are a masterful portrayal of justified retribution turning into hate-driven revenge and its consequences.
”(153) It becomes clear that the parallels presented throughout the play are there to further illuminate the flaws of Hamlet’s character. Laertes is a hot-headed man looking for revenge. His father was killed by Hamlet and his sister was driven insane due to the series of events that took place because of Hamlet. Like Hamlet, Laertes wants to avenge his father by killing the man who killed Polonius.
Laertes holds the most important role as a foil to Hamlet. He represents the rage that boils within Hamlet and the revenge which he seeks. In many ways Laertes mirrors Hamlet's character. Their anger is precipitated through the same source, the untimely death of their fathers. Other similarities between the two men include the love that they both felt for Ophelia, and the heartfelt sorrow which they displayed upon her tragic death. The differences between Hamlet and Laertes become obvious as the two characters are played off of each other. Both men are the dutiful sons of their father's. However Leartes is portrayed as the well-breed son, while Hamlet's character is played down to that of a more peculiar type commoner who possesses few royal qualities. Although both men are students, Leartes prefers to indulges in a Parisian type lifestyle, whereas Hamlet chooses to study in the more subdued atmosphere of Whittenburg. There is also a difference in the way that both men react to the death of their fathers. Upon learning of his father's death, Laertes immediately allows his grievances to be known and chooses to go strait to the arena for his revenge. Hamlet chooses a more peculiar approach...
The simplest and superficially the most appealing way to understand Shakespeare’s Hamlet is to see it as a revenge tragedy. This genre was well established and quite popular in Shakespeare’s time, but it was precisely part of his genius that he could take old forms and renew them by a creative violation of their standards. As this essay will explore, Hamlet stands the conventional revenge tragedy on its head, and uses the tensions created by this reversal of type to add depth to its characters and story.
One of the foils important to the play is Laertes. Although Laertes does not appear often in the play, he brings much to the plot and to Hamlet's character. These two are similar in many ways. They both seem to be about the same age, are well educated, and gentleman. One main thing that they have in common is they both are seeking revenge for their father's deaths. Both of their fathers were unnecessarily killed. Hamlet's father was killed by his father's brother for the crown and his wife, and Hamlet killed Laertes' father over mistaken identity. It was the revenge of these two that made up the plot of the story. Because of Laertes, the two could finally fulfill their revenge in the battle at the end that killed both Hamlet and the new king. If Laertes had not challenged Hamlet, the king would have died by some other way; however, the king died by poisoning just as he had killed his brother.
Rosenberg, Marvin. "Laertes: An Impulsive but Earnest Young Aristocrat." Readings on Hamlet. Ed. Don Nardo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Rpt. from The Masks of Hamlet. Newark, NJ: Univ. of Delaware P., 1992.
Although similar in age, class and ambition to destroy their fathers killers, Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras each have characteristics that make them different from each other and show how each acted unlike the others when carrying out their plans. Hamlet seems to be the one who lets things dwell in his mind before taking any action or making an attempt at trying to get on with things. He shows this after the death of his father when he remains in morning and a depressed state for three months without trying to get on with his life. Laertes seems to be the more quick minded of the three as he makes hasty judgements about Hamlet and is quick to force his opinion upon his sister, Ophelia about his fears for her if she stays in the relationship. “For Hamlet and the trifling of his favor, hold it a fashion and a toy in blood, a violet in the youth of primy nature, forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting, the perfume and suppliance of a minute—No more.
In the play, Hamlet, William Shakespeare explores the theme of revenge. Throughout the work, Hamlet acquires a moral dilemma; he cannot decide how to carry out revenge without condemning himself. Thus, although the play promotes the idea of revenge at the beginning, the cultivation of dialogue, relationships, and complications provide evidence of the detrimental consequences and limitations of the theme.
From this play we learn of the difficulty associated with taking a life as Hamlet agonises as to how and when he should kill Claudius and furthermore whether he should take his own life. Hamlet being a logical thinker undergoes major moral dilemma as he struggles to make accurate choices. From the internal conflict that the playwright expresses to us it is evident that it can kill someone, firstly mentally then physically. The idea of tragedy is explored in great detail through conflict where the playwright’s main message is brought across to the audience; Shakespeare stresses to his audience the point that conflict be it internal or external it can bring upon the downfall of great people and in turn have them suffer a tragic fate. It is Shakespeare’s aim to show us the complexity of man and that moral decisions are not easily made.
Hamlet is one of Shakespeare’s most well-known tragedies. At first glance, it holds all of the common occurrences in a revenge tragedy which include plotting, ghosts, and madness, but its complexity as a story far transcends its functionality as a revenge tragedy. Revenge tragedies are often closely tied to the real or feigned madness in the play. Hamlet is such a complex revenge tragedy because there truly is a question about the sanity of the main character Prince Hamlet. Interestingly enough, this deepens the psychology of his character and affects the way that the revenge tragedy takes place. An evaluation of Hamlet’s actions and words over the course of the play can be determined to see that his ‘outsider’ outlook on society, coupled with his innate tendency to over-think his actions, leads to an unfocused mission of vengeance that brings about not only his own death, but also the unnecessary deaths of nearly all of the other main characters in the revenge tragedy.
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.
Rosenberg, Marvin. “Laertes: An Impulsive but Earnest Young Aristocrat.” Readings on Hamlet. Ed. Don Nardo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Rpt. from The Masks of Hamlet. Newark, NJ: Univ. of Delaware P., 1992.