Hamlet: A Guide to the Play - Research Paper Example

Hamlet Critical-Research Essay Inaction is the major theme advanced by the play Hamlet, which serves to complicate the whole story and result in the play ending with many unresolved questions (Ho, 7). When the play closes, there are several questions that still remain in the mind of the reader. The first question is whether different characters in the story deserved to die the way they did. Could the tragedies in the play have been avoided if the necessary action was taken right in time? Did the end of the play create justice for those who deserved it? Why did the innocent in the play suffer and even die at the expense of the guilty character that had brought the entire problem that the play Hamlet depicts? The answer to all these questions goes back to the major theme of the play, inaction. Hamlet simply did not act when it was required that he acted and the consequence is tension and confusion that reigns throughout the play, resulting in the end of the ply that creates even more uncertainties (Kermode, 22). Thus, confusion and uncertainty is a major lens through which one can look at the play Hamlet, considering the fact that the whole story revolves around the uncertainties and confusion that keeps building up at every stage of the story until finally, virtually everybody in the story has perished. The major confusion that the inaction of Hamlet has contributed in the play is the confusion that surrounds the character Gertrude, the Queen of Denmark and Hamlet’s mother. Hamlet’s inaction has caused the character of Gertrude to raise more questions than answers in the play. This is because, it is not immediately clear whether she cooperated or contributed to the death of her husband who was the former king of Denmark, and neither is it clear whether she loved her former husband nor whether she betrayed her son to Claudius (Heilbrun, 202). All this uncertainty regarding Gertrude has been caused by Hamlet’s inaction, since if he had decided to act immediately after the ghost informed him to avenge his father’s death, he would have confronted Gertrude immediately, and the whole truth would have come out. On the contrary, Hamlet does not swing to action immediately, rather opting to take time and investigate the cause of his father’s death, despite the fact that he never had any doubt that it is Claudius who had killed his father. His delayed action enables the villain in the play, Claudius, to buy all the necessary time that is required to plan for the elimination of Hamlet as well (Lewis, 613). In fact, Gertrude is a character that would not have ended up dying, if only Hamlet had managed to act as swiftly as he was required to avenge his father’s death by the ghost. Thus, the character of Gertrude starts and ends with confusion, where it is not even clear what role she had played in the death of her husband, and whether she was indeed innocent or guilty of anything (Heilbrun, 204). Inaction has left it in the hands of the reader to make a conclusion depending on the reader’s own understanding of the story. The other major confusion of the play Hamlet is in relation to the major character himself. Starting from the time the ghost appears and informs Hamlet to revenge his father’s death; it becomes difficult to lay any claim regarding the true identity of the character Hamlet. Hamlet’s inaction causes delayed revenge in the play, Hamlet (Javed, 327). This delay drives everything that happens from the beginning to the end, resulting in the death of the protagonist and the antagonist, as well as several other key characters in the play that may not have deserved to die, if the revenge was not delayed. The major theme of the play is revenge. However, the revenge has been advanced in a counterproductive manner, mostly through the contrasted inaction of Prince Hamlet with the quick resolve and action of the rest of the characters (Ho, 9). Thus, Hamlet comes out as a unique character in the play, whose inability to make quick resolve and act upon them has caused his suffering to the point of being mentally instable, while causing tension and suffering of the rest of the characters throughout the play. It is not immediately clear why Hamlet decides to delay his actions to avenge his father’s death. While he is seen to be very capable of acting and swinging into action at certain instances in the play, for example during the time when he immediately stubbed and killed Polonius, he has appeared to be hesitant and indecisive in most parts of the play (MacCary, 44). This mixed character creates confusion on the reader, since it becomes difficult to understand whether Hamlet delayed the revenge simply as a matter of choice, or because he was unable to act when he was required to. The other confusion surrounding Hamlet throughout the play is his actual state of mind. While he has come out as a character who has turned mentally instable and almost mad, his ingenious and scheming ways that enables him to evade the death trap set for him in England creates an impression that he is actually in his stable mental state (Heilbrun, 203). The confusion around Hamlet is build by his philosophical and contemplative attitude, which neither the reader nor the other characters in the story seems to understand (Kermode, 77). Hamlet has finally been able to gather and face evidence that is most certainly enough to indicate that Claudius was the one who killed his father. However, even when faced with such apparent evidence, Hamlet is still obsessed with proving that really Claudius was the one responsible through seeking the confession of Claudius himself (MacCary, 42). His need for the actual confession by Claudius himself is something that no one seems to understand, further raising the question whether Hamlet was indeed seeking to avenge his father’s death. The obsession with direct confession from Claudius is not the only thing that seems to characterize the inquisitive and extreme thoughtfulness of Hamlet. He is always contemplating about other issues that seem to be trivial and insignificant in the eyes of the storm that he is facing, such as wondering about life after death, questioning what happens to dead bodies and seeking answers to the wisdom in committing suicide (Lewis, 627). The extreme contemplation of Hamlet has driven the whole play into a state of confusion, and he remains a character who is not understood completely until the end. Inaction has contributed to the confusion and uncertainty that revolves around the true identity of the ghost spirit. This is because; if Hamlet had acted immediately to avenge his father’s death after the ghost spirit had appeared to him, then it would have been certain that the ghost was indeed from his father (Lewis, 636). However, the uncertainty and confusion in the play that remains unresolved is that around the true identity of the ghost. The ghost appears in form of a King Hamlet’s specter, and it requires his son, Hamlet to revenge his death (Ho, 2). However, there is confusion regarding whether the ghost is really Hamlet father’s spirit or it is other evil spirits that are seeking to turn Hamlet into a murderer. This is the major factor that contributes to the overall confused character of Hamlet, who is now seeking to get evidence beyond reasonable doubt that Claudius indeed killed his father, so that when he kills him, he will be absolutely sure that he has done the right thing. The confusion around the true identity of the ghost spirit has turned Hamlet into a character that can no longer be understood, since he always seem to be preoccupied with certain fears that have caused him to remain hesitant and indecisive throughout the play, thus causing the whole tension and confusion that characterizes the story. The question of what actually the ghost is and where it comes from still remains unresolved to the end of the story. Further, it is not clear why the ghost just appeared to Hamlet and not to any other characters in the story and neither is it clear why the ghost wanted that it is only Hamlet who revenges the death of his father. The ghost does not seem to torment Hamlets mother, his uncle or any other of the characters in the story (Foley, 47). This uncertainty seems to drag the story in the play Hamlet to an endless confusion, which forces Hamlet to take the path of first ascertaining the true cause of his father’s death, so that he can be able to act with certainty. However, the end of the story comes tragically, where Hamlet, his mother and his uncle all die, without the true identity of the ghost that brought the idea of revenge having been disclosed. It is this occurrence that has kept the reader still wondering whether indeed the ghost was the true spirit of King Hamlet, or it was a different evil spirit sent by the antagonistic Norway kingdom, to see the fall of the Denmark kingdom, so that Fortinbras, the young prince of Norway could avenge his father’s death (Foley, 51). Works Cited Foley, andrew. "Heaven or Havoc? The End of Hamlet." Shakespeare In Southern Africa 24.(2012): 45-56. Print. Heilbrun, Carolyn. "The Character of Hamlet's Mother". Shakespeare Quarterly 8,2 (1957): 201–206. Print. Ho, James, et al. "Low Resolution Solution Structure of Hamlet and the Importance of Its Alpha-Domains in Tumoricidal Activity." Plos ONE 7.12 (2012): 1-12. Print. Javed, Tabassum. "Perfect Idealism in Shakespeare's Prince Hamlet." Dialogue (1819-6462) 8.3 (2013): 327-333. Print. Kermode, Frank. Shakespeare's Language. London: Penguin, 2000. Print. Lewis, Rhodri. "Hamlet, Metaphor, and Memory." Studies in Philology 109.5 (2012): 609-641. MacCary, Thomas. "Hamlet": A Guide to the Play. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Print. Read More