Comment on Hamlet's madness. Do you think it was altogether assumed or can you
offer evidence to suggest that Hamlet was not always in complete control of his
Shakespeare's tragic hero, Hamlet, and his sanity can arguably be discussed. Many
portions of the play supports his loss of control in his actions, while other parts uphold
his ability of dramatic art. The issue can be discussed both ways and altogether
provide significant support to either theory. There are indications from Hamlet
throughout the play of his mind's well being.
Hamlet's antic disposition may have caused him in certain times that he is in a roleplay.
Hamlet has mood swings as his mood changes abruptly throughout the play. Hamlet
appears to act mad when he hears of his father's murder. At the time he speaks wild
and whirling words:Why, right; you are I' the right; And so, without more circumstance
at all, I hold it fit that we shake hands and part... [Act I, scene V, lines 127-134]. It
seems as if there are two Hamlets in the play, one that is sensitive and an ideal prince,
and the insane barbaric Hamlet who from an outburst of passion and rage slays Polonius
with no feeling of remorse, Thou wretched, rash, intruding fool, farewell! I took thee
for thy better. Take thy fortune;/ Thou find'st to be too busy is some danger.- [Act III.
scene IV, lines 31-33] and then talks about lugging his guts into another room. After
Hamlet kills Polonius he will not tell anyone where the body is. Instead he assumes his
ironic matter which others take it as madness. Not where he eats, but where he is
eaten. A certain convocation of political worms a e'en at him. [Act IV, scene III, lines
If your messenger find him not there, seek him I' th' other place yourself. But, indeed, if
you find him not within this month, you shall nose him as you go up the stairs into the
...