The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark - Essay Example

Introduction The main characters in William Shakespeare’s play ‘The Tragedy of Hamlet Prince of Denmark’ are depicted as characters whose comparisons and contrasts can be easily drawn by any reader. Both Hamlet and Laertes have similar and different character traits that this paper will outline. Besides the character traits of Hamlet and Laertes, this paper will also seek to ascertain what it is between these two characters that makes that allows them to approach similar situation differently. One of the prominent similar situations that accost both of them in a similar manner is in their father’s death. Both are facing a similar problem, but by different approaches that will be outlined in this essay, they both take different paths in seeking to establish the truth about their father’s death. Bennett, Josephine Waters. “Characterization in Polonius’ Advice to Laertes.” Shakespeare Association of America (2006) http://spcezproxy.alamo.edu:2097/stable/2866550?&Search=yes&searchText=Polonius%27&searchText=Characterization&searchText=Advic In Josephine Bennett’s characterization summary of ‘The Tragedy of Hamlet prince of Denmark, she observes Laertes as a person who is querulous and likes to fight. In the play, Euphues advises both Polonius and Laertes to be lavish of thy tongue; Euphues further goes ahead and tells both of them not to be querulous for any slight provoking. (Bennett, pg 4). From the advice they are given, and specifically to Laertes defines many ways in which Laertes dealt with situations. Euphues advice shows that Laertes was not in any way calm in his approach towards situations that did not necessarily warrant such an approach. Fighting and quarrelling has undoubtedly never been a solution to a situation that requires to be handled carefully. Fighting only makes the matter more badly than it was at its start. The eloquence of Laertes in both spoken and written Latin and English languages is a significant contribution towards his flighty and quarrelsome character. This eloquence means he can understand and converse with ease in any of the two languages. This gives Laertes an upper hand in executing his feelings in a querulous manner. Later on in the play, the narrator talks of Hamlets involvement in the killing of Polonius. (Bennett, page 9). In fact, Hamlet killed Polonius of his appointment to the high office. This scene makes Hamlet an equal character to Laertes. Killing is a result of a person with a querulous character and who loves to fight. It is because of this character in Hamlet that drives him into killing Polonius. This reference helps the reader to compare the characters of Laertes and Hamlet. This simply concludes that they were both quarrelsome and preferred to fight as a means of solving the different situations they found themselves in. Skulsky, Harold. “Revenge, Honor and Conscience in `Hamlet.” 1970 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1261433?uid=2&uid=4&sid=56077421413 Harold Skulsky provides further evidence to the characterization of Hamlet and Laertes with regard to their approach of different situations. Laertes is depicted as someone who makes quick decisions with relatives is as compared to Hamlet. After Hamlet makes a plea after killing Polonius, Laertes is not embarrassed to be undecided about Hamlets plea of innocence. (Skulsky, pg78).The narrator argues that there is a sharp contrast between the two characters attitude towards their responsiveness towards different situations. While Hamlet is seen to quickly make decisions. The best instance of such a character is when he decides to make a plea of innocence after killing Polonius. Even though this decision also awards him with another character trait, it does not take away from Hamlet the ability to make quick decisions. This ability serves as a benefit to Hamlet; quick decisions often get him out of situations that would rather be messy if such a quick decision was not made. Unlike Hamlet, Laertes can be described as a slow thinker, taking all the time to make decisions. Another character trait that presents itself between Hamlet and Laertes is honor. These two characters have different levels of honor within them. In the play, Hamlet is positive that honor can of itself exalt an argument and imparts a rightful greatness to the arguer. This of course proves Hamlets dislike towards building a whole case on it, honor. (Skulsky, pg 81). On the other hand, Laertes does not believe in the course of honor. The situations that these two characters face play a crucial role in defining Hamlet and Laertes attitude towards honor. The fact that Hamlet has a case defend himself against humbles him totally. Hamlet has to show honor in order to increase the possibilities of getting acquitted from the case. On the other hand, Laertes is not confronted with any situation that warrants of his honor. This reference helps the reader to compare and contrast the different character traits that emerge between Hamlet and Laertes. Charney, Maurice, "Hamlet without Words." ELH 32 (1965): 457-77. http://spcezproxy.alamo.edu:2097/stable/2866585?&Search=yes&searchText=Words.&searchText=without&searchText=Hamlet&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBas Maurice Charney explores revenge as a character trait that contrasts and compares between Hamlet and Laertes in detail than Skulsky. Just like in other references above, parallels are drawn between Hamlet and Laertes. Both characters are seen to be involved in revenge. Both of them are remarkably aggrieved by their father’s death. Due to this, a deep desire to avenge their father’s death rises within them. Laertes does not immediately choose to complain after the father dies, but Hamlet to complain almost immediately. (Charney, pg 18). Despite the fact that both are particularly determined to seek revenge for the father’s death, a contrast emerges between the two on their ability to make decisions. However, a lengthy period of time lapses before Hamlet decides which course of action to take against the perpetrator of his father’s death, Claudius. Revenge, as depicted by the narrator, is developed within these two characters just for the situation they find themselves in. Their father’s death is the main reason that Hamlet and Laertes get the feeling to seek their father revenge. This reference helps the reader to know how revenge is a common character trait between the two main characters. In other situations, it can help the reader to know the risks that lie in revenge and how to best control the raging tempers. Downer, Alan S. “The Hamlet Year.” 2003 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2866585?uid=2&uid=4&sid=56077421413 Superstition, as reflected by Alan S. Downer in the ‘Hamlet Year’ is a theme that draws character traits out of both Hamlet and Laertes. As the story develops, a ghost resembling his father tells him that his father did not actually die of a snake bite as the reports said. The ghost said to Hamlet that his father was indeed killed by his fathers own brother, the same man who is now married to his mother. Hamlet does not quite believe in the ghost as Laertes would do. Hamlet decides to act slowly on the matter and decides to set up an investigation that will conclusively give him the correct results. If it were Laertes with and his quick tempers, he would have confronted his uncle there and then and maybe kill him. Hamlet is seen to act responsibly and thereafter acts like a detective to establish the truth surrounding his father’s death. He even goes ahead, and feigns madness in order to know the truth. This reference, in similar version with all the references used above, helps the reader to draw father comparisons and contrasts between the two characters, Hamlet and Laertes. Conclusion Despite the few characteristics that exist between Hamlet and Laertes, much of the story exploits the sharp contrasts between them. While it may be a little difficult establishing why they develop contrasts between them, it is relatively easy to conclude that the setting and situations that they find themselves plays a key role in characterizing their approach and reaction towards those situations. Bibliography Bennett, Josephine Waters. “Characterization in Polonius’ Advice to Laertes.” Shakespeare Association of America, 2006. Retrieved 20th April 2012 from http://spcezproxy.alamo.edu:2097/stable/2866550?&Search=yes&searchText=Polonius% 27&searchText=Characterization&searchText=Advic Charney, Maurice, "Hamlet without Words." ELH 32 (1965): 457-77. Retrieved 20th April 2012 from http://spcezproxy.alamo.edu:2097/stable/2866585?&Search=yes&searchText=Words.&s earchText=without&searchText=Hamlet&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBas Downer, Alan S. “The Hamlet Year.” 2003, Retrieved 20th April 2012 from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2866585?uid=2&uid=4&sid=56077421413 Skulsky, Harold. “Revenge, Honor and Conscience in `Hamlet.” 1970, Retrieved 20th April 2012 from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1261433?uid=2&uid=4&sid=56077421413 Read More