Analyzing Hamlet By William Shakespeare English Literature Essay Free Essay

Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, is a drama in which the tragic hero, Hamlet, is forced to do assorted moral picks about the jobs that confront him. The picks and actions of the tragic hero aid to find his destiny. However, his actions seem to acquire the better of him, therefore go forthing non merely his destiny hanging in the air but the hereafter of the land that later ends up in upset. Claudius From the minute the Ghost calls on Hamlet to ‘Revenge his foul and most unnatural slaying ‘ ( Hamlet, 1.5.25 ) , the issue of retaliation by slaying is repeatedly examined by the drama in a figure of addresss and brushs between different characters. Hamlet himself ne’er inquiries his responsibility to follow the shade ‘s instructions, but the drama itself exposes the ethical, religious, and societal effects of slaying and retaliation. This essay will critically discourse the above statement by thoroughly analyzing two transitions in the drama, wherein several characters portray dissimilar concerns, uncertainties and trepidations towards the ethical, religious and societal effects that revenge and slaying will finally hold on their destiny as characters in the drama. ( Shakespeare 2008: 186 )

Hamlet is tasked with revenging his male parent ‘s atrocious and unnatural slaying. However, he faces a quandary: should he believe in the honestness of the shade? The shade might be a Satan. By nature a mind and truth-seeker, his first measure is to measure the truth of the shade ‘s bid, but this self-examination causes hold. Furthermore, his utmost depression at his female parent ‘s abhorrent remarriage, and the fact that Claudius was elected male monarch, has served to do him sarcastic and discrediting. A concatenation of fortunes provides a series of obstructions that Hamlet foremost has to get the better of in order to accomplish his retaliation. This nevertheless, affects Hamlet on a religious degree, as he accepts that both good and evil exist in the universe, and that there is a fittingness in executing his responsibility of retaliation. His aristocracy and balance is at changeless war with each other from the beginning to the terminal of the drama. The ethical concerns Hamlet has for Claudius and Gertrude are apparent to see, at the clip, the church considered matrimony to a sister in jurisprudence tantamount to incest. Hamlet ‘s ethical concerns environing his female parent ‘s sudden remarriage is overtly expressed when Gertrude asks Hamlet at her nuptials, “ If it be, why seems it so peculiar with thee? ” ( Hamlet 1.2. 76 ) Hamlet disputes Gertrude ‘s charge that he is being hypocritical, “ Seems, dame? Nay, it is, I know non ‘seems’aˆ¦ ” ( Hamlet 1.2.77 ) For him, she is the 1 who has shown lip service and he does non hold with her ‘seems ‘ ( Hamlet. 1.2.76 ) Whereas, Hamlet ‘s societal concerns for Denmark is strictly centered around the male monarch and the influence he might hold on the remainder of the land. Hamlet makes usage of an equivocal wordplay that depicts his disfavor towards Claudius ‘s falseness and Claudius ‘s effort to smooth over what has happened. Hamlet shows clear ill will, “ A little more than family, and less than sort ” , ( Hamlet 1.2.64 ) Hamlet is more than near in relationship to Claudius ( an uncle and a ‘father ‘ ) , but He resents him and has no feelings of liking and affinity for Claudius. ( Shakespeare 2008:158 )

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Another Cryptic wordplay Hamlet makes usage of is in his illustration of the bitterness he holds towards Claudius, Hamlet resents Claudius naming him my boy, “ Not so, my Godhead, I am excessively much i’th ‘ Sun. ” ( Hamlet 1.2.66 ) Hamlet implies that his been deprived of sequence to the throne and refuses to take on the function of Claudius ‘s boy. Hamlet faces tremendous obstructions in transporting out his retaliation. Both his character and fortunes conspire to set him into a province of paralytic inaction. His head is excessively complex. His acute sense of morality makes him recognize that incorrect should non take to farther incorrect. Furthermore, he wrestles with the extremes in his character, which merely harmonize when his undertaking is no longer a load. Then character and circumstance combine to enable his retaliation. ( Shakespeare 2008:158-159 )

The visual aspect of the shade exemplifies the subject of visual aspect versus world. The male monarch appears to be at supplication, and Hamlet decides non to kill his uncle while he is in the province of grace. Hamlet wants his retaliation to be non merely for the penalty his life on Earth but for infinity. Furthermore, if he does kill him in his province of pureness, “ do this same scoundrel send to heaven. O, this is hire and wage, non retaliation ” ( Hamlet 3.3.76-78 ) , for Claudius ‘s awful discourtesy. The world is that Claudius can non atone, as he is unwilling to give up his Crown or his queen. When Laertes declares that – “ the male monarch is to fault ” , ( Hamlet 5.2. 274 ) world and visual aspect eventually meet. On a societal degree, Hamlet is depressed and melancholy because he believes he can see the evil world behind the visual aspect of good in Denmark. The province should be just, but it is icky. Work force should be baronial, made in the image of God, but to Hamlet, life is dust. Women basically pure and guiltless are unfaithful and septic and Love purportedly faithful and honest, is dishonest and unfaithful.

The drama shows the strain of cognizing the truth about people, populating in a universe of visual aspects. Basically, Hamlet expresses the quandary of life in that universe. Marcellus ‘ comment “ Something is rotten in the province of Denmark ” ( Hamlet 1.2. 65 ) , reveals the corruptness that is found on all degrees in the province. As a consequence, there are frequent mentions to, and images of, corruptness. Claudius is irredeemably corrupt, guilty of fratricide ( the slaying of a brother ) and regicide ( the slaying of a male monarch ) . Hamlet refers to Claudius as “ a Canker in our nature ” ( Hamlet 2.2. 290 ) . The relationship between Claudius and Gertrude, which starts with criminal conversation, is immoral, but this is glossed over. The corruptness Claudius embodies contaminations everything: Polonius, Laertes, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern all lose their moral sense under Claudius ‘s use. The punishment they pay is the loss of their lives. There is an expressed nexus between the moral legitimacy of a swayer and the wellness of the state. If this is flawed, the province, “ the organic structure ” ( Hamlet 1.2.163 ) , is ill, so Denmark is often referred to as a organic structure made ailment by corruptness. Laertes ironically says to Hamlet ( Hamlet 1.2. 20-21 ) “ that on his pick depends/ the saneness and wellness of this whole province. ” Unwittingly, he has hit upon Hamlet ‘s undertaking in the play- to reconstruct soundness and morality to Denmark. The effects of slaying for Claudius ( Shakespeare 2008: 155-335 )

Most Elizabethans believed in shades. Ghosts were considered existent, and were taken earnestly. They could non originate conversation, and came from an external universe. This shade is dressed in military armour and looks like Hamlet ‘s male parent, but it could good be a devil portraying the dead male monarch. An unnatural set of fortunes has led to the perturbation of the concatenation of being and infection sets in. Jenkins states that, “ the existence, ordered by God, consists of different hierarchies: the angels were stopping points to God, and were followed by work forces, animals, objects, and the Satans in the underworld. ” ( Jenkins. H 1982:154 ) Although Hamlet does non yet know that his male parent has been murdered by his uncle, there are already baleful marks that all is non good. Claudius has hurriedly and incestuously remarried, a shade walks the dark and Denmark is being corrupted by revelry and inebriation. These marks are witnessed and announced by Francisco who is “ ill at bosom ” . ( Hamlet 1.1. 9 ) Angstrom strong feeling of inappropriateness is present. Horatio acknowledges that the shade ‘s visual aspect signifies “ some unusual eruption to our province ” ( Hamlet 1.1 69 ) . The oncoming of disease is suggested. When the concatenation of being is broken, upset is the consequence. ( Shakespeare 2008: 143-148 )

The character and function of Claudius is malevolent, perceptive and crafty. He manipulates people and persuades them in taking up his point of position. His great strength is his capacity to see all sides of a state of affairs. He is power hungry. Keeping power is all that affairs to him. He is an first-class narrator, and his chief arm is his influential usage of linguistic communication, which enables him to smooth over state of affairss and turn them to his ain advantage. He is fallacious. He lies slickly and persuasively. Even when he knows he is mortally hurt, he says, “ O yet, support me, friends, I am but hurt. “ ( Hamlet 5.2. 350 ) He knows Gertrude is poisoned but says, “ She swoons to see them shed blood. ” ( Hamlet 5.2.350 ) He earns the qualified commiseration of the audience. As the audience, we see him as a adult male tortured by guilt over his actions. He is besides an able male monarch, deciding rapidly the menace against Denmark. The effects of slaying for Claudius is losing everything he greatly sacrificed so much for his “ Queen, aspiration and his Crown ” ( Hamlet 3.3.55 ) ( Shakespeare 2008: 354 )

However, on a religious degree, Claudius reaches out in assistance for forgiveness and commiseration. Particularly in this case, he is imploring for forgiveness, this is the first and last clip as the audience that we witness Claudius in a turn, he is unable to whirl himself out of wholly. The characters in the drama assume functions in order to conceal themselves. Claudius appears to be a grieving brother, concerned uncle and lawful male monarch, but in world, a he is a liquidator and supplanter.

The first transition ( Hamlet 3.3. 36-98 ) concentrates chiefly on Claudius ‘s beggary for forgiveness so that he is saved from his iniquitous act that he had committed, the slaying of his brother. His confession is instead ambivalent and is in contradiction to that of his true word. He ask ‘s for forgiveness but he might non be unfeignedly atoning for his error. In his supplication, it seems as though he is truthfully inquiring for a 2nd opportunity: “ Try what penitence can. What can it non? / Yet what can it when one can non atone ” ( Hamlet 3.3.64 ) Claudius ‘s monologue is unexpected, for it shows him struck by his scruples, suffering and human. He makes an honorable admittance of his offense. However, sing all the facts Claudius has committed a awful evildoing. However, despite his strong purpose to inquire for expiation, he is unable to make so because of the negative effects in Heaven, ” O, my discourtesy is rank, it smells to heaven. “ ( Hamlet 3.3.37 ) and his involuntariness to give up what he has gained through his offense, “ My Crown, mine ain aspiration, and my queen. “ ( Hamlet 3.3. 55 ) , so Claudius wantonnesss penitence. His supplication has made no transmutation, and he carries on untasted. ( Shakespeare 2008:272-273 )

On a societal degree of the drama, and by agencies of close scrutiny of the transition wherein Claudius and Laertes plan to revenge the decease of Polonius, seek out ways in order to kill Hamlet. As the audience, we are led to believe that on a superficial degree Claudius unfeignedly, truthfully and truly experience the demand to soothe Laertes in his hr of demand. However, Claudius abuses his place as King and in many ways manipulates Laertes. Just as Claudius had poured toxicant into Late King Hamlet ‘s ear, so excessively is he pouring toxicant into Laertes ‘s ears, which is apparent in their conversation when Claudius asks Laertes, “ Will you do this? “ ( Hamlet 4.7.106 ) . Claudius uses his rage and bitterness to his advantage. Claudius misuses the control and power that he has in the land in order to do himself look like the victim in all of this. ( Shakespeare 2008: 316 )

Claudius repeatedly blackens Hamlet in his conversation with Laertes and subtly compares his Acts of the Apostless to Hamlet ‘s iniquitous and unacceptable behaviour that has increasingly led to Polonius and Ophelia ‘s decease. Claudius ‘s retaliation is like a disease without a remedy, it festers and becomes an ugly sore, incurable and uncontrollable, and his bloodthirsty hungriness for taking Hamlet ‘s life is all he wants and even if it is to the hurt of the current province of Denmark. ( Edward. P 2003:57 )

However, there is a touch of sarcasm in the relationship that Hamlet and Laertes portion. Hamlet seeks to revenge his male parent ‘s decease, receives messages from a shade that is meant to stand for his late male parent and based on this, Hamlet, in the heat of the minute, by chance kills Polonius, trusting that he has killed Claudius. Laertes now switches topographic points with Hamlet, harbors the really same hatred that Hamlet holds towards Claudius merely now everything Hamlet went through is go oning to Laertes. This sudden reversal of functions adds enormously to the retaliation and slaying subject Hamlet. Shakespeare frequently compares characters similar images so that the audience may do a decisive determination on whether its message is existent, natural and accidentally created in order to put the scene. One illustration of this is the similarity of lunacy that Ophelia and Hamlet portion, nevertheless, Ophelia ‘s lunacy is existent unlike the assumed lunacy that Hamlet seems to be, a reminder of the existent power of heartache and the helter-skelter emotions that Hamlet must hold felt. ( Bradley. A. C 1952: 137 )

On a religious degree of the drama, and by close scrutiny of the text, Claudius kills the late male monarch Hamlet on a bodily, fleshly and bodily platform. However, the slaying of the male monarch hangouts Claudius on a religious degree ; his guilt is what leads him into traveling to the church and squealing to his flagitious offense. Claudius, ‘the snake ‘ ( Hamlet 1.5.39 ) “ poured toxicant in his brother ‘s ear and now he speaks to Laertes on a metaphorical degree and, in bend, pours toxicant into Laertes ‘s ears ” , ( Lecture notes ) “ Laertes, was your male parent beloved to you? / Or are you like the picture of a sorrow, / A face without a bosom? ” ( Hamlet 4.7. 94-96 ) . His sudden concern leans towards the manipulative, conceited and unscrupulous features of “ a snake ” ( Hamlet 3.2.239 ) portraying oblique and cunning Acts of the Apostless upon his quarry, in order to take full advantage of any state of affairs he may happen himself in. ( Shakespeare 2008: 187-316 )

Laertes, nevertheless, thinks of dual lese majesty ; unlike Hamlet, whose purpose is chiefly to revenge his Father ‘s decease but thinks about the right and incorrect in all his determinations. He ponders invariably over himself, attaches intending to the kernel of life, decease and the significance of being. Laertes non merely seeks to revenge his male parent ‘s decease, but besides wants Hamlet to endure by taking his life and penalizing him in his hereafter. He shows deliberate, planned and premeditated slaying when he speaks to Claudius and shows no compunction. Laertes says to Claudius that he will “ cut his pharynx i’th ‘ church ” ( Hamlet 4.7.103 ) and the significance of slaying person in a holy topographic point as the church, suggests Laertes ‘s hatred tallies much deeper and the penalty that Hamlet deserves should non merely last for now but everlastingly. ( Shakespeare 2008: 316 )

Claudius and Laertes both portion commonalities in the sense that both are power hungry. Laertes, flattered by Claudius ‘s changeless congratulations, falls into his trap and gives Claudius the feeling that he is merely every bit vindictive, defeated and determined in taking retaliation on Polonius ‘s and Ophelia ‘s decease for his sincere concern for Laertes. Claudius takes full advantage of the fact that Laertes is so unfastened to explicating himself to him, being the maestro of use, unprincipled and unscrupulous utilizations Laertes ‘s choler, bitterness and fury to acquire Hamlet killed, finally acquiring precisely what he wanted. ( Bradley A.C 1952:123 )

In decision, the assorted degrees of the drama culminate into one way that finally leads to the decomposition of the land and the autumn of male monarch of Denmark. On a societal degree, Claudius abuses his power in order to derive the trust he needs to claim his place in the societal kingdom of the power hungry group. In add-on to this, Claudius hopes to busy the kingdom of male monarch and to acquire Hamlet out of the image wholly. On a religious degree, the representation of the shade is seen as either Claudius ‘s scruples pricking him, the guilt that clouds his head or it is to bespeak to the audience that although Claudius has killed Late King Hamlet in his physical, he has non needfully killed him in his religious signifier. His psyche still lingers in the hope that justness is served and Claudius is brought to undertaking for his iniquitous Acts of the Apostless.

Last, on an ethical degree, the drama does, nevertheless, have a rebuff principled and virtuous intimation to it, instances wherein right and incorrect are differentiated between, for illustration, the battle Hamlet has within himself and the choler he wants to show against Claudius in hunt of his retaliation. Wholly taking himself, Laertes, Gertrude and Claudius decease.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *