Hamlet Accountable Talk

1.Did Hamlet really go crazy? How does this connect to his wavering between action and inaction? Why doesn’t Hamlet just kill Claudius? Is he just a man who needs assurance beyond a doubt of Claudius’ guilt? Is he unable to take action because the opportunity never presents itself? Is he simply a coward? What are Hamlet’s true motivations for even pursuing the murder of Claudius? Is it Fear? Revenge? Love? Loyalty/Obligation?

I’m not entirely sure if Hamlet was necessarily crazy rather than experiencing a devastating tragedy at such a young age. His reaction to “play crazy” was that of a child’s; playing make-believe is very much a child’s way of dealing with such dramatic events. “To put an antic disposition on, That you, at such times seeing me, never shall, With arms encum’red thus, or this headshake, Or by pronouncing of some doubtful phrase” (lines 172-174) is how he tells Horatio and Marcellus his plan. In a very child-like game, he tells them he will play pretend and they must abide by his rules of playing along. Hamlet not killing Claudius seems to be explained through the lack of perfect opportunity. Hamlet is wary of Claudius before the ghost even appears and the ghost merely assures Hamlet that Claudius did infact kill King Hamlet. Although Hamlet is attempting and plotting the act of murder, I don’t find him to be a coward or even “evil”, he is reacting as most human beings do when they lose a loved one in a tragedy caused by another. I believe that Hamlet’s true motivations cannot be named as one emotion or another, rather, I think they are a plethora of emotions such as fear, revenge, love, and loyalty but not necessarily obligation. Hamlet seemed to have truly loved his father and respected him as a man and a King. In Act III, when Hamlet visits his mother’s bed chamber, he tells her “A combination and a form indeed Where every god did seem to set his seal To give the world assurance of a man. This was your husband. Look you now what follows. Here is your husband, like a mildewed ear Blasting his wholesome brother. Have you eyes? Could you on this fair mountain leave to feed, And batten on this moor? Ha! Have you eyes? You cannot call it love, for at your age The heyday in the blood is tame, it’s humble, And waits upon the judgement, and what judgement Would you step from this to this?” (lines 61-72).

2.What is the role of both Laertes and Fortinbras in the play?

There are several roles of Laertes and Fortinbras in the play, the first is that they are great juxtapositions to everything Hamlet is not. Laertes, in the beginning of the play, is seens as very successful and helpful, even to King Claudius. Fortinbras, although he has an army and plans to attack Denmark, Hamlet admires him for taking action to avenge his father’s death while Hamlet is still lingering in thought in Act IV, “Why yet I live to say, “This thing’s to do”, Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means To do’t. Examples gross as earth exhort me.Witness this army of such mass and charge, Led by a delicate and tender prince, Whose spirit, with divine ambition puffed, Makes mouths at the invisible event, Exposing what is mortal and unsure To all that fortune, death, and danger dare” (lines 44 - 52). Furthermore, both Laertes and Fortinbras have a similar tie to Hamlet in that all three characters try to avenge their father’s deaths. Fortinbras tries to take back the land his father owned in Denmark, Hamlet tries to kill King Claudius who murdered his father, and Laertes tries to kill Hamlet for killing his father.

3.Describe Hamlet’s relationship with Ophelia. Did Hamlet really love Ophelia? Is he to blame in her death? Was it suicide?

Although warned at the beginning of the play by both her brother and father, Ophelia was convinced Hamlet loved her. Hamlet, however, denying all claims of love when Ophelia confronts him, I do believe he did really love her. His reaction at her funeral was crazy and frantic, much like how loved ones react when a beloved dies. I believe he did love her but was too wrapped up in his plan of madness to destroy King Claudius and did not want to loop her in with him like he did with Horatio and Marcellus. Similarly, his lack of bringing her along for the crazy ride is the exact reason why I think he loved her more than even she thought he ever did. As for her death, there seemed to have been several factors roped in, primarily Ophelia’s own father’s death, Polonius. Since the beginning Polonius and Laertes warned Ophelia to back off from Hamlet and when Hamlet denied every loving her to her face, Ophelia was heartbroken. Without any female guidance on how to handle the situation, when Ophelia’s father died, I believe she continued to spiral which caused her to commit suicide.

4.What is the significance of Ophelia's madness? Why include it? What does it represent?

Ophelia’s madness represents the lack of equilibrium in the play. She was supposed to be in love with Hamlet yet lies to him while they are talking about her father eavesdropping (Act III, Scene I, Page 65-66 or Lines 131-132). She is supposed to stay away from Hamlet according to her brother and her father, but cannot help but love him. She was given the role of equilibrium among the characters and was supposed to play the confidant for both, however this is the exact reason she is forced into madness. Given the same role from both sides was too overwhelming and essentially, she ended up losing them all.  

5.Who is at fault for the play’s concluding events? Was this ending unavoidable? How much responsibility for the tragedy are you willing to place on Hamlet? Claudius? Gertrude? Ophelia? Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? Horatio? Why?

The play’s concluding events are primarily at the fault of Gertrude, although the ending was unavoidable due to all the built up tension among all the characters. If Gertrude had not married Claudius most of the events in the play would not have happened, most likely. Although I do blame Claudius heavily since he did murder his brother out of jealousy, it is Gertrude’s actions that kept the ball rolling in Hamlet. Hamlet was at the mercy of a tragedy and as was Ophelia, they were two young kids wrapped up in grown-up mistakes. Horatio, was simply the good friend and confidant of Hamlet that probably kept him from going into total madness. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are partially to blame, since they found it a greater obligation to serve their King rather than be loyal to their childhood friend (pushing Hamlet a bit more into madness, although Horatio was able to hold him back).

6.Will Horatio “tell the tale” accurately? Why is he one of the few left standing? What is the purpose of his character?

I do believe Horatio will tell the tale accurately because he was the only one to stay by Hamlet’s side through the entire play, including during his feigned madness. He is one of the few left standing because unlike the rest, he let Hamlet deal with his emotions the way he wanted to and did not try to interfere with any of the affairs. His character purpose was the ultimate confidant of Hamlet. Hamlet told it all to him, including his feelings for Ophelia, his plan to kill Claudius, playing crazy, everything. Horatio was the one Hamlet needed in order to not really lose his mind.

7.Was Hamlet an honorable person, less than honorable or somewhere in between? Was Hamlet a moral and ethical person? Is there a difference between being honorable and being moral? Was Hamlet justified in his pursuit of revenge? At the end of the play, Fortinbras states “Let four captains bear Hamlet like a soldier to the stage, for he was likely, had he been put on, to have proved most royal…” Do you agree? Why or why not? Is Hamlet a true tragic hero? A tragic hero wants to do good, means to make things well, but is ultimately flawed. What are Hamlet’s flaws? Does he allow his passions to overrule his reason?

I think Hamlet was somewhere in between honorable and less than honorable. He was only trying to avenge his father’s death and it needs to be reminded that Hamlet in the play was merely a child, although for the time was very class to being an adult, still a child in mourning of his father due to his uncle. Although I find Hamlet’s reasoning behind his actions rather compelling, I struggle with deciding whether he was a moral and ethical person. Morality and ethics are rooted in understanding there is more than just the self and that ending someone else’s being is not right. However, it would be a lie to say that every grieving person is able to cling to that morality or ethical thought. Similarly, does that mean that the person whose thoughts revolve around murder and hurting someone else, even during a time of pain, are just being who they are inside? I’m unsure. I think Hamlet was a confused and hurt kid, going through a lot of issues without his mother or a real friend to take care of him (Horatio could not be there to actually take care of him, being he was more of a servant), which justifies his actions throughout the play. I find that the line between honorable and moral is very blurry much as the line between love and hate or trust and loyalty. I do not necessarily agree with Fortinbras’ final statements, however, because while Hamlet’s actions may have been justified due to grief, he was not a soldier standing up for the moral high ground. He was trying to killing Claudius for revenge, a personal and self-absorbed action taken for personal satisfaction. Which is in turn, why I do not think Hamlet is a tragic hero. He did not want things for the greater good or to save his mother from this evil murderer, he simply wanted to take Claudius’ life because Claudius took King Hamlet’s life. This is a perfect example of how Hamlet allows his passions to overrule his reason. Hamlet is much a man of thought and less so of action. He plots and ponders and thinks things through, hence his “To Be or Not To Be” soliloquy.

8.Hamlet famously declares “something is rotten in the state of Denmark.” Is something rotten in the state of Denmark? If so, what precisely is it? Is Hamlet’s “revenge” more than simply the killing of the king? Could it be that he is purging all the rottenness in the Danish court? Or is Hamlet contributing to the decay of Denmark? Is Hamlet a Noble Prince in a corrupt and evil world? Or a death-infected source of the rottenness in Elsinore?

There was something rotten in the state of Denmark, King Claudius’ evil actions killing his brother for his kingdom and wife. Hamlet’s revenge seemed to never really surpass any thought other than simply killing the king. It never seemed that he was trying to kill the King to purge the rottenness in the Danish court or save his mother from the evil murderer, instead, it was solely about his father’s death. Consequently, this means that Hamlet merely contributed to the decay of Denmark through his games and plots rather than trying to actually just prove Claudius guilty of murder. However, I still believe that Hamlet was trying to be a Noble Prince which could play devil’s advocate for “it’s the thought that counts”. Ironically, Hamlet was a boy of thought rather than action until the very end with his mother’s death pushing him to have Claudius die as well.

9.As we discussed before reading, Hamlet is often considered a play of questions. What do you believe is the dramatic question for the play? Where is the corresponding climax of the play? There are many questions in this play that have been quoted over time, especially during times of moral dilemma. Find three such lines/questions, other than “To be or not to be…” and discuss their context within the play as well as how you think the question/dilemma should be resolved.

The dramatic question for the play is whether or not Claudius actually killed King Hamlet or not and the corresponding climax of would be the play within the play that Hamlet throws. This is the climax because this is the first actual action Hamlet takes (other than feigning madness) towards his plot of revenge and this is when Hamlet finds out Claudius is most certainly guilty. Three lines/questions that have been quoted over time, especially during times of moral dilemma are “Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t” (lines 207-208), “Doubt thou the stars are fire, Doubt that the sun doth move; Doubt truth to be a liar, But never doubt I love.” (lines 116-119), and “To thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man” (78-80). For the first, Polonius was speaking an aside to the audience about Hamlet’s madness and he is merely saying there is a method to his madness. The second, is a quote from a letter Hamlet wrote to Ophelia that Polonius reads to Queen Gertrude. The moral dilemma Hamlet had in the letter was loving Ophelia and telling her never to doubt that. The final quote, was Polonius reminding Laertes, before he left for Paris to stay true to himself. The moral dilemma would be to stray from your personal beliefs in order to please another, but the solution would be to stay true to yourself.

10.Why is this one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays? Do you believe it should be considered one of Shakespeare's greatest works?

Hamlet is one of most famous plays because it holds a little bit of everything for any audience. There’s several plot lines within the play such as the love story, family drama, madness, revenge, and political thriller aspects, appealing to all. I do believe it should be considered one of Shakespeare’s greatest works because there are a lot of questions related to the play and it makes the audience truly think. For example, is Hamlet’s plot to kill Claudius justified by grief? Or is Ophelia’s suicide exempt from judgement because of her reasonings? Is the act of Hamlet briefly thinking about suicide still considered sinning based on his final conclusions? The play, Hamlet, raises very controversial topics to discussion while still being entertaining and holding several plot lines, make it worthy of a title as one of the greatest works of Shakespeare.