Characteristics of a Machiavel in The Spanish Tragedy and Hamlet
To understand a renaissance machiavel as portrayed in The Spanish Tragedy and Hamlet, it is necessary to find characters from both works that exhibit the characteristics of a machiavel (Plotting, secrecy and eventually murder). This is the difficult part, as most of the major characters in both plays exhibit some, if not all of these characteristics - while neither Heironimo nor Hamlet are villains, they both rely upon machiavellian tactics; they both feign madness to seem unthreatening, then proceed to strike when least expected:
I will revenge his death!
But how? Not as the vulgar wits of men,
With open, but inevitable ills,
As by secret, yet
…show more content…
This is not the only example of machiavellianism on her part; she takes advantage of Balthazar's and Lorenzo's preoccupation with their own intelligence and cunning to fool them into believing she is harmless - as Heironimo pretends to be mad, she pretends to be stupid:
Brother, you are become an orator -
I know not, I, by what experience -
Too politic for me, past all compare,
Since last I saw you; but content yourself,
The prince is meditating higher things.
The Spanish Tragedy III x 82-86
In essence, she convinces them both that she, being a woman, and women traditionally being rather passive members of the revenge tragedy, is in no need of further imprisonment. Indeed, she goes so far as to say that she is too stupid to understand what they are trying to do to her:
To love and fear, and both at once, my lord,
In my conceit, are things of more import
Than women's wits are to busied with.
The Spanish Tragedy III x 93-95
It is the stupidity she affects (Unlike Heironimo and Hamlet, her disability is completely feigned) that allows her to get into a position from which she can kill Balthazar. Indeed, her relationship with don Horatio started out as being a vehicle for her desire to avenge don Andrea's death. It is arguably the case that she is the most devious,
In analyzing portrayals of women, it is appropriate to begin with the character of Margarita. For, within the text, she embodies the traditionally masculine traits of bravery, resilience, and violence as a means of liberating herself from an existence of abuse and victimhood. Even more, the woman plays upon stereotypes of femininity in order to mask her true nature. The reader witnesses this clever deception in a scene where the character endures a “wholesome thrashing” from her huge, violent, and grizzly bear-like husband, Guerra (81). Although Margarita “[submits] to the infliction with great apparent humility,” her husband is found “stone-dead” the next morning (81). Here, diction such as “submits” and “humility” relate to the traits of weakness, subservience and inferiority that are so commonly expected of women, especially in their relationships with men. Yet, when one
After reading Machiavelli’s The Prince and watching Shakespeare’s Henry V in class, one begins to notice similarities between the authors’ idea of what a “perfect king” should be. The patterns between the ideal ruler of Shakespeare and the ideal ruler of Machiavelli can be seen in numerous instances throughout this story. For the duration of this essay, I will compare the similarities in both pieces to give the reader a better understanding of how Shakespeare devised his view of what a “perfect king” should be.
Shakespeare sprinkles subtle lines alluding to Hamlet’s apparent cowardice and failure as a classical revenger. In addition to this, Shakespeare may intentionally delay Hamlet’s revenge and remove emphasis from his passion to break the trend of morally blind, obsessive, psychopathic avengers as traditionally depicted in plays such as “The Spanish Tragedy”.
This derives from the play as a recount of historical events with a known outcome and a medium for propaganda in support of the monarchy, an avid determinist. Nevertheless, the aforementioned tension is prevalent throughout and epitomised by the paradoxical pun ‘I am determined to prove a villain’. Uttered with a tone of poise and self-assuredness, the term ‘determined’ implies a conscious statement of purpose and a preordained villainy. Thus Richard is aligned with the stock character of the Vice, an instrument of predestination, and the innovative Machiavel, an advocator of humanism. Despite this, the ultimate decline of Richard is consequential of the reign of determinism. The directly antithetic correctio ‘I am a villain. Yet I lie, I am not’ yields an implicit self-doubt and acknowledgment of an inability to fulfil his humanist purpose. Providentialism thus displays precedence over self-determination. This is in direct contrast to Pacino’s docudrama, composed for a secular modern American audience disengaged with traditional notions of determinism. A greatly diminished and altered portrayal of Margaret, the primary instrument of determinism in the play, is expressive of this. Pacino devalues her curses by reducing her to a ‘sort of ghost of the past’. A frenzied montage of informative discourse and the activity of the play complete with
Shakespeare is known for his use of recurring themes throughout his work, including love, death and betrayal. These themes are present in his work of Othello. However, the most fundamental issue is jealousy. The lives of the characthers in Othello are ruined by jealousy from the beginning to the end of the play. The telling of the story is carried out by passion, jealousy, and death. Shakespeare’s Othello reveals devastating tragic inevitability, stunning psychological depth, and compelling poetic depth; the fragility and mysterious power of love, as well as demons of doubt, and how suspicion can be triggered by manipulative villain (Barthelemy 12).
Hamlet is as much a story of emotional conflict, paranoia, and self-doubt as it is one of revenge and tragedy. The protagonist, Prince Hamlet of Denmark, is instructed by his slain father’s ghost to enact vengeance upon his uncle Claudius, whose treacherous murder of Hamlet’s father gave way to his rise to power. Overcome by anguish and obligation to avenge his father’s death, Hamlet ultimately commits a number of killings throughout the story. However, we are not to view the character Hamlet as a sick individual, but rather one who has been victimized by his own circumstances.
Hamlet, the eponymous hero of Shakespeare’s greatest work, descends swiftly into madness and paranoia after the murder of his father and the realization of his mother’s true, morally reprehensible, nature. As a result of these new responsibilities and extreme circumstances, Hamlet diverges from his usual, logical thinking into paranoia and over analysis, a condition that prevents him from trusting anyone. Hamlet, having been born a prince, is, for the first time, forced to make his own decisions after he learns of the true means of his father’s death. Another contributing factor to his madness is the constant probing of others into Hamlet’s sanity. These factors all contribute to Hamlets delay, and that delay contributes to the tragic
The parallels between Machiavelli's Prince and Shakespeare's Measure for Measure are significant. The great majority of characters in Measure for Measure - the Duke, Angelo, Claudio, Pompey and even Isabella - display Machiavellian qualities. A comparison of key passages, both of The Prince and Measure for Measure, will establish this clearly.
Many would perceive madness and corruption to play the most influential role in Hamlet. However, it could be argued that the central theme in the tragedy is Shakespeare's presentation of actors and acting and the way it acts as a framework on which madness and corruption are built. Shakespeare manifests the theme of actors and acting in the disassembly of his characters, the façades that the individuals assume and the presentation of the `play within a play'. This intertwined pretence allows certain characters to manipulate the actions and thoughts of others. For this reason, it could be perceived that Shakespeare views the `Elsinorean' tragedy as
Machiavelli states that "it is necessary for a prince, who wishes to maintain himself, to learn how not to be good, and use this knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the case." Machiavelli's ideas both compare and contrast to the methods used by Hamlet. Hamlet's desire to drive the king mad and eventually kill him, is what he thinks he must do in order to set things right. Hamlet struggles to maintain his position as prince. Perhaps he lacks the essential qualities of a prince outlined by Machiavelli.
The legendary drama, Hamlet, written by William Shakespeare is a play illustrating the theme of virtue vs. villainy. The 17th century tragedy is plagued with treachery and deceit as it opens with the news of a foul murder in the kingdom of Denmark. Prince Hamlet, by word of his late father's ghost, is informed that his uncle Claudius is to blame for his father's sudden demise. Prince Hamlet's mission is to uncover the secrets surrounding the murder and to avenge his father's death. Thus, the insidious web of disease and corruption is formed. The relationship between disease leading to the greater corruption of Denmark plays a significant role in the lives of the principle players.
The Prince is a celebrated and highly controversial piece of work by the Italian aristocrat Niccolo Machiavelli. His work is a summation of all the qualities a prince must have in order to remain in his position. Machiavelli supports the idea that a prince use his power for the ultimate benefit of all, but he also does not condemn the use of any unpleasant means in order for the prince to maintain his power. His ideas both compare and contrast to the methods used by Prince Hamlet of Denmark in Shakespeare's Hamlet. Hamlet, as we know, struggles mightily to maintain his position as the prince, and one must wonder if this is due to some of the highly essential qualities outlined by
The parallels shown between Hamlet and The Spanish Tragedy demonstrate the influence Kyd's play had on Shakespeare. The similarities can be seen throughout the plot lines and context of both plays. While using the plays as different tools, both are used for expediting revenge. Shakespeare, through the impact of Kyd's play, established and perfected an ideal plot for a play expressing revengeful tragedy. The actions and thoughts that Hamlet shows greatly displays many characteristics from The Spanish Tragedy. Hamlet models himself after Hieronimo in the way he approaches revenge. However, Hamlet wants his victims to suffer not only on earth but in the afterlife.
Villains play a very important role in every literary work. Whether they exist as people, circumstances, or even nature, their purpose is to provide a problem to be solved by the “good guys”. Without villains, no piece of literature would be worth reading. Abigail Williams in Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and Iago in Shakespeare’s Othello are master villains. Both antagonists are fuelled by thoughts of revenge, and rely heavily on deception and manipulation to get what they want.
Hamlet is one of Shakespeare’s most well-known tragedies. At first glance, it holds all of the common occurrences in a revenge tragedy which include plotting, ghosts, and madness, but its complexity as a story far transcends its functionality as a revenge tragedy. Revenge tragedies are often closely tied to the real or feigned madness in the play. Hamlet is such a complex revenge tragedy because there truly is a question about the sanity of the main character Prince Hamlet. Interestingly enough, this deepens the psychology of his character and affects the way that the revenge tragedy takes place. An evaluation of Hamlet’s actions and words over the course of the play can be determined to see that his ‘outsider’ outlook on society,