Was Hamlet Right in Postponing the Murder of Claudius - Essay Example

? Hamlet Decision William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has been recognized as one of the seminal plays in the English language. While there are a complex variety of reasons the play has assumed its place in the canon of Western literature, there are a number thematic currents that many literary critics and theorists have examined. One of the main such questions is that of motivation throughout the play. In these regards, the nature of decision, or indecision, is perhaps the most central concern, with Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius one of the primary elements of the narrative. This essay considers Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius, examines how it affects Hamlet, indicates why Hamlet made that decision, and indicates that Hamlet made the wrong decision. Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius represents the worst decision of the play and the decision to which nearly all negative narrative elements emerge from. One of the primary reasons for the negative aspects of this decision is the problems it creates with Hamlet’s relationships. During the beginning scenes of the play the reader comes to grasps Hamlet’s growing anger at Claudius. Referring to Claudius who asks Hamlet a question, Hamlet responds, “A little more than kin, a little less than kind” (Act I, scene ii, 267). Here Hamlet is indicating the nature of his relationship with Claudius in a negative way; more than kin means Claudius is now more than merely his uncle, and less than kind means Hamlet is angered about this occurrence. While this statement doesn’t overtly indicate Hamlet’s psychic dysfunction, it does give an early indication of his growing negative demeanor that would come to affect not only him, but all the other characters in the play. As this act advances and Hamlet interacts with his mother, his general spite and hatred becomes evident. He states, “'Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,/ Nor customary suits of solemn black,/ Nor windy suspiration of forced breath,/ No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,/ Nor the dejected 'havior of the visage,/ Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief,/ That can denote me truly” (Act I, scene ii, 280-285). At this point it’s clear that Hamlet has been significantly affected by his father’s death and is angered at Claudius for the action. In these regards, Hamlet’s indecision to kill Claudius and resolve the problem has both affected his relationship with his mother. Another of the central elements related to Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius is the psychic confusion it creates within Hamlet’s own demeanor. While Hamlet’s decision not to kill Claudius at this point has affected his relationship with his mother, perhaps the more central concern of this decision is its effect it had on Hamlet himself. While earlier Hamlet had indicated his discontentment towards Claudius, he later goes to internalize his discontent. In Hamlet’s first soliloquy, the reader comes to realize the incredible psychic confusion and anger Hamlet is experiencing. Hamlet states, “Oh, that this too, too sullied flesh would melt,/ Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew,/ Or that the Everlasting had not fixed/ His canon 'gainst self-slaughter! O God, God!” (Act I, scene ii, 333-336). Here the reader discovers that Hamlet is experiencing suicidal thoughts as a result of the actions relating to Claudius. Indeed, this becomes a prominent theme throughout the play, with many of Hamlet’s soliloquys indicating his intense passion and desire to commit suicide; this is perhaps most notably seen in ‘to be or no to be’ soliloquy. With this intensity of expression, it’s clear that Hamlet would be better off murdering Claudius and resolving his psychic confusion, rather than suffering the sling and arrows of outrageous fortune. In addition to Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius affecting his demeanor and his relations with others, Shakespeare also indicates that the combining of these elements is also a treacherous element throughout the play. In these regards, the reader sees that because of Hamlet’s indecision he has started to go crazy. One of the primary relationships this has effected is his relationship with Ophelia. For instance, in referring to Hamlet, Ophelia states, “Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbraced;/ No hat upon his head; his stockings fouled,/ Ungartered, and down-gyved to his ankle;/ Pale as his shirt; his knees knocking each other;/ And with a look so piteous in purport/ As if he had been loosed out of hell/ To speak of horrors—he comes before me” (Act II, scene I, 1034-1041). This indicates that Hamlet has been making advances towards Ophelia and that his demeanor has been off due to his decision not to kill Claudius. As the play advances these elements will come to a fateful conclusion in regards to Ophelia. As the play advances, Hamlet’s relationship with Ophelia because increasingly complicated and he ultimately rebuffs her instructing her to get to a nunnery. Ophelia faces serious psychic dilemmas in response to this and is later found have killed herself. While Ophelia’s death is tragic, it is only the first in a series of deaths that result like dominos because of Hamlet’s decision not to kill Claudius. Hamlet is sent away with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who have secret instructions to have Hamlet killed. Rather than succumbing to this, however, Hamlet turns the plans around and has Rosencrantz and Guildenstern killed. When confronting his mother late in the play, Hamlet hears a noise he believes to be Claudius and stabs at it with his sword. This ultimately proves to Polonius who is killed in the effort. By the play’s conclusion, when Hamlet finally decides to kill Claudius, his earlier decision to delay the murder has indirectly resulted in the death of four individuals. The fateful conclusion will cost the lives of a few more. One of the predominant reasons Hamlet decides to delay killing Claudius is because he is not entirely sure if it was Claudius that killed his father. Elements of this are evident throughout the play. In Act I, scene ii, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern appear. They are old friends of Hamlets and have ostensibly been brought to Elsinore to cheer him up. Rather than interacting with them Hamlet decides to use them to gain a deeper insight into Claudius nature. In these regards he plans on-staging a play. Hamlet states, “The play’s the thing wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king” (Act II, scene ii, 1679-1680). This line indicates Hamlet’s tremendous apprehension in killing Claudius do to his not being sure whether Claudius was the true murderer of his father. Later in the play, Hamlet’s decision to delay killing Claudius is further explored, as Hamlet comes upon him while Claudius is praying. Here, Hamlet refuses to kill Claudius because if he does so then Claudius will go to heaven. These reasons that Hamlet decides to refrain from killing Claudius may seem superficial, and indeed, psychoanalysts have argued that it may be because of a deeper psychological reason; in either case, it’s clear that Hamlet decides to delay killing Claudius until the end of the play. In conclusion, it’s clear that Hamlet made the wrong decision to delay murdering Claudius. Because of his decision to delay murdering Claudius a number of negative elements emerged. Among these elements includes the nature of Hamlet’s disposition, which deteriorated throughout the play. Hamlet’s relationships with others also significantly suffered. Finally, and most importantly, Hamlet’s indecision caused the death of many individuals in a domino effect, concluding with the play’s catastrophic conclusion. Ultimately, it’s clear that Hamlet should have killed Claudius in the first act. References Shakespeare, William. (2010) Hamlet. New York: FQ Books. Read More