A breif analysis of Shakespeare

From the start of the play, the reader is shown a tormented Hamlet, mourning the loss of his father and insulted by his mother’s hasty remarriage to his uncle. However, this sadness and disappointment quickly turns to wrath as the ghost of his father reveals to him that it was Hamlet’s new stepfather who murdered him. As the play unfolds, all these factors play an integral role in the young prince’s untimely end. It is also notable that Hamlet had little control over these events, seeing as his father was killed while he was abroad at university and even if he were there, he would not have been able to intervene, as he would not have known of Claudius’ murderous intentions. Similarly, Hamlet was unable to stop Gertrude’s marriage to his uncle seen as his protests to that end fell on deaf ears.

. . .
Even so, one cannot escape the fact that had Hamlet slain Claudius there and then none of the many people that died need have done so.

Laertes is an important character in the play, not least of all because it was he that murdered the protagonist. This fascination is perhaps down to jealousy for his uncle, as there is some evidence to suggest that Hamlet may have had Oedipal feelings for his mother, the most notable of which, can be seen in the closet scene where his behaviour towards his mother is decidedly risqué. But he also feels that he must seek revenge and faces equal pressure to that end form the dead king’s apparition. However, the impact of these outrageous twists of fate could have been dampened if not completely averted had Hamlet not reacted as he did and so it is fair to say that overall Hamlet is the one to blame for his own death. Laertes and Fortinbras both have had their fathers killed and both actively seek revenge, these parallels encourage comparison with Hamlet, whose inaction is thus highlighted, again suggesting that procrastination was an integral part of Hamlet’s downfall. Hamlet’s reasoning behind this being, that if he killed Claudius now, Claudius would surely go to heaven – and Hamlet wanted to see him suffer. Firstly, even though there is little evidence in the play to suggest any wrong-doing on the dead King’s part, Hamlet likens his father to a god on numerous occasions throughout the play – and no matter how good a person is, they are never going to met expectations of godhood. This emphasis put on his inaction is not merely seen by the audience but is only too apparent to Hamlet, who is once again encouraged to act in a way contrary to the commands of his conscience, putting more pressure on his already troubled psyche. The matter of Hamlet’s role in his own demise is one of the play’s greatest ambiguities and as such it is impossible to attribute it to one factor, in fact it is the delicate balance struck between unfortunate fate and foolish behaviour that makes Hamlet such a great tragedy. This case of divided loyalties and guilt is bound to put considerable pressure on Hamlet and perhaps spur him into acting in ways he might not under normal circumstances. For example, had Hamlet not stabbed Polonius through the arras, he would not have angered Laertes, who in turn would have had no desire to duel with Hamlet, and certainly none to do so with poisoned swords. Hamlet could be accused of indecision at several points in the play – not least of all in Claudius’ prayer scene, where unwitting Claudius’, knelt by an alter, is approached by Hamlet from behind but Hamlet seems unwilling to act.

Common topics in this essay:
Kings Hamlet, Laertes Fortinbras, Shakespeares Hamlet, Christian Hamlet, Claudius Claudius, Similarly Hamlet, Hamlets Christian, Hamlet Oedipal, , Hamlet Hamlet, dead kings, main factor, example hamlet, outrageous twists, throughout play, seek revenge, hamlets downfall, twists fate, play –, outrageous twists fate,

Approximate Word count = 1080
Approximate Pages = 4 (250 words per page double spaced)

Already a member? Click here