My reaction to both Hamlet and Oedipus was ultimately the same.... "What a sham." I suppose that was the intention of Shakespeare and Sophocles to convey that feeling, hence their fitting category of "tragedy." Both plays end in bloodshed and mayhem with the tragic heroes at their downfall; Hamlet dies while Oedipus lives on to face disgrace and shame. However, even though Oedipus managed to preserve his life, it is he who suffers the greater loss. Not only is he unable to avenge the death of the old king and his revealed father, he has to live with the fact that he married his mother and procreated with her. Along with the content of Hamlet and Oedipus' behaviors and attitudes, we were able to foresee their tragic destinies through their persistent inquiries.
             Hamlet and Oedipus shared the role of investigator. Both were obsessed with pursuing the truth and taking action according to it. They were both seeking their father's murderer, although Oedipus was doing so unknowingly, so that they can avenge their deaths. It is revealed that Oedipus was the more compulsive hero while Hamlet is the more rational. Oedipus was impatient and stubborn, refusing to listen to Jocasta when she told him to stop searching for answers. She adamantly expresses her concerns while he ignores her fear and anxieties. Hamlet, on the other hand, takes his time to devise a plan and measure its pros and cons. This is a reflection of their education. Hamlet was a highly educated scholar while Oedipus was not. Although it may seem that Hamlet had the advantage, this is not the case. It is his precise contemplations that disabled him to act. He had chances to kill Claudius but chose to wait. Had he acted sooner, maybe he did not have to die. On the other hand, had Oedipus only thought ahead before he acted, maybe he could've avoided some of his immense suffering.
             Heroes usually place their honor on a ped
             ...