Hamlet Essay Test Minnie

HAMLET’S & LAERTES’ PERSPECTIVES ON REVENGE Revenge is arguably one of the most prominent themes in the play ​Hamlet,​ which is why it can be analyzed over and over endlessly. Through each development in the plot, revenge is the main driving force of two main characters: Hamlet and Laertes, whose fathers were killed and whose families were permanently damaged. The amount of pain and suffering inflicted on these two is almost unimaginable. Although, the transition of their emotions can be tracked and examined clearly throughout the course of the play. Considering both of their mental state and social status, both deserve to act out in response to their great loss. How they go about it is similar and different in their own, reasonable ways. In William Shakespeare’s profound play ​Hamlet​, revenge symbolizes a manipulative duty used as an excuse to cure one’s self-inflicted impulse and anger. In order to analyze the true motives of Hamlet’s and Laertes’ intent for murder, the obvious motive should be thoroughly dissected. The fact that both of their fathers were murdered: the old Hamlet being intentionally poisoned by Claudius, and Polonius slain unintentionally by Hamlet. Hamlet is aware that the murder of his father was clearly intentional, as Claudius was after the throne. Laertes, on the other hand, has no clear evidence that Hamlet’s crime was intentional, as Hamlet doesn’t seem to have any clear motive of doing so. Confused and ill-tempered, Laertes was persuaded by Claudius and therefore believed that Hamlet did so on purpose. To prove that he is not involved in Polonius’ death, Claudius proposes to give up all of his possessions to Laertes as when he says: If by direct or by collateral hand They find us touched, we will our kingdom give, Our crown, our life, and all that we call ours, To you in satisfaction. But if not, Be you content to lend your patience to us, And we shall jointly labour with your soul To give it due content. (4.5.206-12) Moreover, Claudius insists to join forces with Laertes to murder Hamlet. This proposition further strengthens Laertes’ intent for revenge and his confidence in its success, explaining why Laertes takes more immediate action compared to Hamlet. Another difference between them could be that Hamlet has only his father as a driving force for revenge, but Laertes has many more: his father, his sister and Claudius, who influenced him to take revenge. So, quantitatively, Laertes has more reasons to take revenge than Hamlet. While Hamlet only has his father to avenge for, how he idolizes his father and the betrayal of his mother might possibly amount to the same pain and suffering as Laertes encounters. Hamlet tells Gertrude how incomparable Claudius is to his father: “A murderer and a villain, / A slave that is not twentieth part the tithe / Of your precedent lord,...” (3.4.88-90), which shows just how much he idolizes King Hamlet in terms of virtue. His disgust towards Gertrude is also shown through several insults: “O shame, where is thy blush?” (3.4.74), “Assume a virtue if you have it not” (3.4.156). Gertrude, in addition to the death of King Hamlet, adds up to Hamlet’s desire for revenge. It can be concluded that Laertes and Hamlet both witnessed murder, but experienced different overbearing emotions: Laertes outrage and Hamlet betrayal. Therefore,

both have strong reasons to murder and are susceptible to act out of their impulsive anger due to pain and suffering. Aside from being driven by negative emotions, both Hamlet and Laertes are susceptible to trauma-inflicted mental illness, or on a milder level, internal conflict. This can be proven through their approaches towards revenge. During the course of their revenge plan, both of them went through phases that made them hesitate and phases that strengthen their motive. Both of them follow the same pattern of behavior, just at different paces: from being determined, to hesitant, and back to determined. As aforementioned, Hamlet idolizes his father to the point that it becomes impossible to accept the fact that he is dead. Likewise, Laertes whose paternal relationship is not as explicitly explained in the play, suffers from the same denial of the truth: “How came he dead?” (4.5.130). Both prove that their intent to kill is strong at that point. For Hamlet, he has shown signs of hesitation early on in 3.3, when he stops himself from stabbing Claudius who was praying because not only does he want Claudius to die, but to suffer in the afterlife as well. By doing so, Hamlet has created another task for himself, to not only kill Claudius, but to kill him in the worst possible timing that would send him straight to hell. This condition is uncalled for by King Hamlet, but is created by Hamlet himself out of anger and attachment to his father. Consequently, Hamlet’s will is strengthened, but his action is weakened as he delays his murder. In Laertes’ case, his distraction from the revenge appears once he directly encountered the burial of Ophelia, when he jumped in her grave and begs to be buried in her place. Surely, for a young man whose father and sister are victims of madness, it is certainly easy to lose grip of sanity, or to question morality entirely. This internal conflict then channels into thoughtless, impulsive actions. This hesitant phase of both Hamlet and Laertes led to them feeling unworthy and ashamed of their cowardice. As for Laertes, he exclaims “That drop of blood that’s calm proclaims me bastard” (4.5.116). For Hamlet, he declares “[...]O, from this time forth / My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!” (4.4.68-69). This realization then fires their will once again, making them focus on their realistic tasks, despite their declining mental stability and morality. Both of the characters try to feed their anger with more and more opportunities and reasons to kill. Nonetheless, all of this anger is still temporary because they are consumed by impulse and negativity. Although both Hamlet and Laertes are proven to be victims of circumstance, they are also victims of their own flaws. Hamlet’s overthinking is a prime example of how plans usually delay and fail. In contrast, Laertes’ quick determination and susceptibleness lead to regret and failure. It is at the moment of death that Laertes realizes he was being manipulated and used out of his own vengefulness: “Exchange forgiveness with me, noble Hamlet. / Mine and my father’s death come not upon thee, / Nor thine on me” (5.2.324-25). In the end, both of them got their revenge and tragically foiled by their own plans. This failure would not have happened if they do not try to redeem themselves as responsible sons by dedicating themselves slaves of revenge. They have to fall under the belief that killing the murderers of their fathers would neutralize the murder itself. And by aiming to kill, they are alleviating and justifying death as the ultimate punishment. Consequently, their love for their fathers cost them excruciating pain, bearing the responsibility to kill the murderer and damaging their state of minds along the way. No one would want to go through this experience considering how destructive it could be. However, they also cannot take action without the fuel of their own wills. No matter how much they are influenced by others, Hamlet being told by his

father’s ghost and Laertes being told by Claudius, they are still under the control of their own, broken state of mind. After all, the overarching theme of insanity gets drawn in to every aspect of the play. It develops into not a contest of who could kill their enemies first, but who could maintain their sanity longer. Revenge, when thoroughly examined, is a consequence of one’s guilty desire and selfishness. Because we think it is only fair to reciprocate violence with violence, we fall into torturous pain unaware that that pain is caused by ourselves.

CLAUDIUS’ COMPLEX NATURE Does a person in power deserve to be admired for the fact that he/she possesses the power, or does he/she need to prove themselves worthy of that power, in order for people to admire them? The idea of the relationship between power and admiration is timelessly inevitable. Through numerous historical evidence, one can prove and disprove the above statement easily. The determining difference is the means in which people choose to achieve their power. Either morally or immorally, the power can be attained and maintained if one is strategic and thoughtful enough. A strong and comprehensive example of this can be seen in the play ​Hamlet through the character of Claudius, a respectable ​king who attains and maintains power through corruption and outwardly selfish behaviors without any apparent motive. As a directly opposing character to Hamlet, his immorality is clarified and magnified to the point that if readers look only at his overall actions, most will likely conclude that he is purely evil. However, if his thoughts and actions are dissected and analyzed, it can also be concluded that he is merely a morally-conflicted round character. In the harrowing play Hamlet​, William Shakespeare portrays Claudius not as a completely evil antagonist, but a more complex character whose manipulative, empathic, prideful and conflicted nature led to the unattainable control over his life. The main portrayal of Claudius’s misconduct roots from his murder of the late king Hamlet, his own brother. This murder is acknowledged early on, and the story builds upon the consequences of that murder rather than the cause, to blur Claudius’ intention. The motive behind Claudius’ murder is kept unsaid in order to frame him as an evil, power-usurping antagonist whom readers have no reason to sympathize for. However, his true emotions are not revealed until after he had just witnessed and ran away from Hamlet’s set-up play which paralleled his crime. His shame and guilt then start to rapidly surface when he is left alone to pray. According to the famous quote “O, my offence is rank it smells to heaven;” (3.3.36), Claudius is aware of his commitment, and therefore desperately asks for forgiveness from god above. He then looks back at how corrupted his country’s laws work, “Offence's gilded hand may shove by justice, / And oft 'tis seen the wicked prize itself / Buys out the law. But 'tis not so above” (3.3.58-60). With the corrupted law and punishment system, thieves have the power to “justify” the law with the money they have stolen. This line does not only serve as a description of the calamity Denmark is in but also a reflection of Claudius’s own crime. Claudius committed an offense: killing the late king in which he paid off by taking over the responsibility as a king. However, he can only retain that way for so long as he is also plagued with paranoia, regret, restlessness and fear of not going to heaven as said in his prayers. This soliloquy shows that Claudius regrets murdering the late king as he has to deal with the external turmoil that is the state of the country and internal turmoil that is his own guilt, both of which haunts Claudius to the point that his life starts to revolve around covering up his murder rather than ruling the country. As a political figure, Claudius is rarely and subtly portrayed to be a benevolent ruler of Denmark. Knowing that as a brother, he had usurped the ultimate power by killing off his own sibling, readers would assume that as a ruler, he must be just as evil. For instance, his lack of prioritization shows in 2.2, where he said It likes us well;

And at our more considered time we’ll read, Answer, and think upon this business. Meantime, we thank you for your well-took labour. Go to your rest ; at night we’ll feast together (2.2.80-84) Although the Norwegian king agrees to stop the war against Denmark and redirect the troops to Poland instead, he demands “three thousand crowns in annual fee” (2.2.73) in exchange. This, Claudius has no problem with as he will once again use his seemingly unlimited money and power to buy out justice, the same way he covered up his murder. Through these irresponsible actions, Claudius’ immorality is largely magnified. However, in subtler places, it is shown that he is in fact quite a considerate and efficient ruler. In 1.2, he said “Farewell, and let your haste commend your duty,” (1.2.39) to Cornelius and Voltemand, his messengers. Claudius insists them to hurry delivering his letter to the Norwegian king in order to stop Fortinbras’ war plan. This action indicates that he at least cares about his country’s state of being. In addition, he also uses words like “good friends” to refer to his messengers. Alternatively, it can be interpreted that he uses this strategy to maintain his servants’ loyalty and therefore maintain his superiority. This shows that no matter how evil Claudius is portrayed to be, he always prioritize his power first by whatever it takes as he cannot achieve power by sheer cruelty, but by gaining respect from others below him. With this belief, Claudius cannot be a truly evil antagonist, or else it would shudder his instantaneously-earned position. Overall, Claudius’ role as a political figure is much overshadowed by his role as a murderer of Hamlet’s father, which is why it is important that readers take into consideration his different interactions with other characters. In contrary to his questionable behavior as a king, Claudius is unarguably a respectable husband. In order to gain the respect he needs to retain his position, one person he could not overlook is Gertrude, his widowed queen. Towards her, he acts respectfully and kindly as he truly loves her and knows how much she emotionally suffers from the death of her husband. He refers to her directly as “Sweet Gertrude” (3.1.29). Even if he is not in front of her, he still lovingly speaks of her: “She’s[Gertrude’s] so conjunctive to my life and soul / That, as the star moves not but in his sphere” (4.7.14-15). During this point in the play, Claudius is more than determined to kill Hamlet that he compiles up positive consequences that would happen if Hamlet is dead, one being to protect Gertrude from Hamlet’s madness. To further justify killing Hamlet, he says “His[Hamlet’s] liberty is full of threats to all; / To you yourself, to us, to every one. … But, like the owner of a foul disease, / To keep it from divulging, let it feed / Even on the pith of Life” (4.1.14-22). This speech makes Claudius a compassionate, empathic person who cares about the good of the whole more than the good of himself. More than that, he is strategic and strong-willed: qualities that make up an efficient ruler. One example is when he learns to adapt to the contagious madness in the royal family. As when he stops the news of Polonius’ death from reaching Laertes: Her[Ophelia’s] brother is in secret come from France, Feeds on this wonder, keeps himself in clouds, And wants not buzzers to infect his ear With pestilent speeches of his father’s death; (4.5.84-87)

He has learned from Hamlet’s situation how mad he could go once he knows the detail of his father’s murder. Now, he has the chance to protect Laertes from knowing his father is murdered, moreso knowing who the murderer is. He does this to protect Laertes from prematurely going insane like Hamlet and Ophelia, and to build up a stronger and more immediate intention to kill Hamlet, which Claudius would use to his advantage. Because one cannot spontaneously usurp all power without a reason to use it, Claudius obviously has an underlying reason to why he takes the throne. Some possibilities may be that he dislikes the way King Hamlet was ruling the country, or that he is jealous of him having Gertrude as a queen. No matter how intentional he seems to be as a villain, it is because he is morally-conflicted. His chain of misconduct stems from his first grave mistake: killing his brother for the throne. At the core of his character, he is still led by morality and empathy as seen in the aforementioned scenes. To compare, his moral compass has been steered out of direction once, and so he tries to steer it back by gaining respect from those who are still alive. Claudius chooses to deal with the problems at hand decisively, while trying to forget the past. Unlike Hamlet, he chooses to spend time taking action instead of pondering about the how’s and why’s. It is this very quality that makes Claudius an introspectively conflicted character. Because of his lack of contemplation, Claudius becomes a morally weak king and husband. The one time that he does contemplate leads to possibly the greatest loss in his life: when Gertrude died from drinking the poisoned cup he intended for Hamlet to drink. That was when he learned that although he has others all under his control, he is not always able to control himself, and that has proven all his actions leading up to that point worthless. As we all are sentient human beings, we are bound to take responsibility of our own actions. How ever we respond to our own mistakes is up to our own idea of justice, as well as how long we can bear the weight of guilt.

Reference: Shakespeare, W., & Hibbard, G. R. (1998). The Oxford Shakespeare: "Hamlet". Oxford: Oxford University Press.