Hamlet Essay, Research Paper
Hamlet: Nice Work!
In Hamlet, Shakespear writes about a prince named Hamlet. The prince, troubled by his father s murder, wants revenge from Claudius the murderer. Although Shakespear wrote this play four centuries ago, many trends mentioned in Hamlet are still alive today. For instance, heinous crimes are still committed to gain power and fortune. People like Polonius still pretend to dignify their superiors to achieve recognition. The concept of supernatural beings also exists today. All the characters in this play were important; however, I found Hamlet s character the most interesting. He impatiently wanted to kill Claudius but he acted with extreme caution while avenging his father s death. I would like to compare myself with Hamlet because I would have taken the same actions that Hamlet took if I was in his shoes.
One of the most engaging parts of the play is mentioning of ghosts. The phenomenon of supernatural beings still exits in the modern world. Some believe in their existence, while others consider their concept mythological. I believe ghosts exist because while growing up in Pakistan and visiting the remote village that my mother comes from, I have heard about many interactions that some of my close relatives have had with ghosts. My religion, Islam, also believes in the existence of ghosts. However, like Hamlet wanted to see Claudius reaction before believing in his father s ghost s claim, if I encountered a ghost, I would some how check to be certain that the creature in front of me is a ghost and that this ghost is telling me the truth.
If I were in Hamlet s place, I also would have made the decision to kill the King. People like Claudius commit many crimes just to reach their desired status in society. Claudius case can be compared to the recent political crisis in Pakistan. Pakistan Army s Chief Marshal, Mussharaf, overthrew the democratically mandated government. After two years it was revealed that the coup had taken place due to personal disputes between the President and Mussharaf. Mussharaf knew little about politics but he still took over, ignoring the betterment of the country for his personal interests. The General committed many crimes in his quest to become a ruler. He violated the Constitution and the Army killed many people in riots. In my opinion, a person who destroys the lives of so many people merely for his personal interests deserves to be hanged till death. Like Mussharaf, Claudius did not work for the betterment of his country. He spent most of his time partying and made the incompetent mistake of awarding safe passage to his enemy. Claudius not only forfeited Hamlet s right to Kingship; he also killed Hamlet s father, who Hamlet loved dearly. Therefore, I think Hamlet had solid reasons to kill Cluadius.
People of Polonius nature have always annoyed me. I have a personal disliking for people who pretentiously respect others for their personal benefits. Fo
I also believe that Hamlet s rude attitude towards Ophelia can be justified. Ophelia seems to be a woman who lacked wisdom. She failed to make judgments based on logic, rather she believed what everyone else said. Hamlet was aware that like everyone else, Ophelia also thought that he had gone mad. Additionally, this dumb woman obeyed his father more than she listened to Hamlet. So, in Hamlet s opinion, there was no difference between Ophelia and others.
Guildenstern and Rosencrantz chose their own route to death. They were Hamlet s friends but were working to kill him. Both were given a chance when Hamlet caught them spying for Claudius, but the King s loyalty was everything to them. In order to save his own life, Hamlet made no mistake to forge official papers and order their deaths. Some body said, A friends in need is a friends indeed. Guildenstern and Rosencrantz were not true friends and thus, Hamlet was disappointed. I think Hamlet made the right decision to kill these betrayers because I would have dealt with their type in the same manner.
Another good move by Hamlet was to obey Claudius orders to leave for England. If in his place, I would have evaluated my options. I would have accepted the Kings offer because he was trying to find any solid reasoning to justify my murder to the queen. Moreover, I had no solid plan to finish the king. Hamlet had the same options and did exactly what I would have done.
Hamlet can be analyzed as a peaceful yet logical man. He showed his peaceful side by not killing Claudius when he was praying and his logical side by killing Claudius when the time was right. He kept trying to protect himself and to make Caludius pay for his crimes. Although it is sad that Hamlet died at the end, I think he died as a hero who was not an immoral killer but a fair punisher. In conclusion, people have doubts about Hamlets mental condition. The reason being that in some instances Hamlet acted normal while in others like that of Ophelias death, he seemed mad. However, he took the right actions according to me. Hamlet could not have killed Claudius outrightly because the society would not allow it, and yet he could not finish him quietly because he was not a criminal.