The Death Of Hamlet By William Shakespeare

In the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, there are two characters that foil each other. Hamlet and Laertes go through many similar events throughout the story. Firstly, both of their fathers are murdered during the play. This makes both characters want to seek revenge at all costs. Secondly, Hamlet and Laertes are both spied on during the play. Finally, Ophelia's death affects Hamlet because she was his lover and it affects Laertes because she was his sister. For the following reasons one can see that Hamlet and Laertes go through similar problems throughout the play which make them foil characters.

Hamlet The story of Hamlet has become an age old telling of the idiom, “what goes around comes around”. Throughout the play, there were many different themes and symbols that were portrayed. The play begins in describing the lies and deceit that were played out by one of the most important characters, it then turns to revenge toward that character, and eventually becomes the cause of each death that takes place. In essence, these three themes lead the story into each form of irony that occurs.

Laertes character is perhaps best known for being an obvious foil to Prince Hamlet. Both of their fathers are killed, and they both love Ophelia. Hamlet has mistakenly killed Polonius, Laertes’ father, while mistaking him for Claudius. This turn of events places Hamlet in the same role as Claudius. Laertes, like Hamlet, also lost his father and wants to make Hamlet pay for his father’s death. Unlike Hamlet however, Laertes shows his passionate reaction very openly when he says that he will throw "conscience and grace to the profoundest pit" (IV, V 129) and is ready without any hesitation to take revenge. Laertes comes back to Denmark, knowing of his father’s death, and goes up to Claudius and says"…to hell, allegiance! Vows, to the blackest devil! Conscience and grace, to the profoundest pit! I dare damnation: to this point I stand that both worlds I give to negligence. Let come what comes; only I'll be revenged most thoroughly for my father” (IV V 128-134). This provides insight into Laertes’s mind, showing that he will never cease gaining his revenge. However, Laertes is a man of action similar to Fortinbras. His reaction to his father's death is very different from Hamlet's response to the news of his own father's murder. Comparing Laertes and Hamlet, Laertes displays impulsive reactions when angered. Once Laertes discovers his father has been murdered, he immediately assumes the person guilty of killing him is Claudius. Returning home from France, Laertes hears the news about his father and sister’s death, and takes immediate action. He gathered up a crowd of followers and invades the castle. He is not a man to sit down quietly waiting for an opportunity, which is how he differs from Hamlet as Laertes shows that he makes very rash decisions. In the play and Branagh’s film, Laertes is foil to Hamlet because Laertes displays qualities that differ from and are

After Hamlet kills Polonius, Laertes makes his return from France infuriated with the poor burial his father was given and convinced that Claudius was the culprit. With only his assumptions as his guide, he charges into the castle as the head of a mob and curses the king, claiming “To this point I stand, That both the worlds I give to negligence, Let come what comes; only I'll be revenged Most thoroughly for my father”(4.5.151-154). In his quest to redeem the death of his father, Laertes states that he does not care what happens to him in his current life or his next as long as Polonius is avenged. This scene draws parallels to Hamlet and his reaction to his father’s death. For both Hamlet and Laertes, their fathers were killed while they were away from home, and their killers got away with their crimes.

Quintessentially speaking, revenge is a thing that many have sought in response to a tragic event unfolding. Typically, as a result, vengeance is contemplated upon by the victim as a means of retribution, a way of making things right and seeking justice on the behest of the victim, if the law will not grant justice through due process due to corrupt forces stemmed deep within it- corrupt seeds of a corrupt plant. Therefore, revenge become an apparent option for those willing to walk that path [of no return]. However, instances of revenge not being attained in the “clear cut” way it is ordinarily acquired have occurred from time to time throughout history. One of the most prominent examples of unconventional revenge attainment can be found within the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare, entailing the revenge path walked by its eponymously named main character, Prince Hamlet. Specifically, his intentful delay in attaining his revenge against his uncle Claudius for his direct role in the death of his father, King Hamlet. This literary conundrum has dumbfounded literary critics for over 400 years and counting- due to the fact that a universally accepted consensus amongst them as well as the general public as to why Hamlet delayed his revenge has not yet been reached.

Laertes serves a foil to Hamlet, although they are not similar in birth, they are similar in that they both have a dear father murdered. Using this parallel, Shakespeare uses Laertes to show what Hamlet should be doing, contrasting Laertes’s words of action to Hamlet’s own words of action. We see this most clearly when Laertes is talking with Claudius and he says that he will “cut [Hamlet’s] throat i' th' church” to avenge his father, this contrasts directly with Hamlet who decides not to kill a praying Claudius when he has the chance (4.7.144). Laertes also serves as external conflict as he challenges Hamlet to a fight and is convinced by Claudius to kill Hamlet with a poisoned sword. Without this fight, who knows if Hamlet would have gotten around to kill Claudius? But when we really look at Laertes’ words and consequent action, we see another similarity with Hamlet, both are rash and passionate. This is significant because

Laertes, a foil to Hamlet in the play, faces similar problems as Hamlet. Laertes learns Hamlet is responsible for the death of his father, Polonius by Claudius. But, in Act III Scene iv, Polonius was hiding behind the arras of the Queen Gertrude’s room and Hamlet killed him accidentally. Claudius took the opportunity to use his manipulative skills and convince Laertes he should kill Hamlet for what he did (Cruttwell). Claudius’ speech to Laertes implies that not acting would show no love for his father, “Not that I think you did not love your father, but that I know love is begun by time, and that I see in passages of proof”(IV. vii. 111-113). Claudius’ tone influences Laertes to immediately seek revenge on

There are many different ways to put karma into words. People say “What goes around comes around” and “You get what you give.” There are many different beliefs, some believe that you get back sevenfold, others believe that you get the equal. Whatever the case, you still want to be as good as you can. In Hamlet karma is a common factor throughout the play. Some examples are when Polonius gets killed when he is spying on what is supposed to be a private meeting between Hamlet and his mother. Laertes gets killed by his own poisoned weapon. Hamlet is also a victim to karma as well as many other characters in this play.

Laertes does not think about his actions or reason through them as Hamlet does, but reacts indecisively and quickly to his father’s death with no concern for the results. For instance, when Laertes finds out about his father’s death, when he barges into the castle Elsinore, and demands to see the king, when Claudius convinces Laertes that he did not kill Polonius, answering Claudius’ question whether Laertes would kill even a friend to avenge his father, Laertes answers, “None but his enemies.” (IV, v, 165) The fact that Laertes would kill his own friend to avenge his father shows that he does not care for the consequences that would follow murdering your friend. He is hot headed and does not stop to think, so he does not realize he is being manipulated. Another instance, following the discussion between Claudius and Laertes aforementioned, Claudius starts to flatter Laertes into killing Hamlet for him, as Claudius questions Laertes commitment to avenging his father, Laertes declares, “ To cut his throat i’ th’ church.” (IV, vii, 144) Laertes confesses with this line that he does not believe in the consequences of the after life. He has no regards for the eternal condemnation that taking a life results in.

The theme of Revenge has been utilized in numerous works of art throughout history, including books, plays, movies, etc. Revenge is the result of one’s desire for vengeance, however, revenge is known to be implied under high emotions of anger thus not with reason concluding with a horrible outcome. Shakespeare’s play ‘Hamlet’ is no doubt a play about a tragedy caused by revenge; Prince Hamlet’s retribution for his father, King Hamlet’s murder and Laertes vengeance for his father, Polonius’ murder. The theme of revenge in Hamlet is portrayed through various literary techniques such as foreshadowing and irony.

In William Shakespeare’s tragedy, Hamlet, it is clearly evident Prince Hamlet is overcome with “madness” due to his father’s murder and other malicious actions taken against him. Throughout the play, there are many examples of how Hamlet displays his insanity due to certain situations he experiences and how he handles them. Hamlet shows his madness through the killing of Polonius, his treatment of Ophelia, his thoughts of suicide, and the treatment of his mother Gertrude.

Somewhere between the years of 1599 and 1602, William Shakespeare wrote his longest, most influential and powerful tragedy, The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Set in the Kingdom of Denmark, the play stages the revenge that a young prince seeks against his uncle for murdering his father, inheriting the throne, and subsequently marrying his mother.

In “Hamlet” however, this clear symmetry is replaced with a more muddled intertwinement. Rather than maintaining two relatively separate plot threads in the journeys of Lear and Gloucester, Shakespeare opts to interweave the motivations and fates of Laertes and Hamlet, using their conflict as the central dynamic, while their parallels take a reduced role. In this sense, while King Lear is driven solely by the dualism of the story, Hamlet relies on the clash of the two plots to suggest injustice. This injustice, through conflict, is shown most prominently in Hamlet’s and Laertes’ duel at the end of the play. Hamlet, describing Laertes as a “a very noble youth.” (5.1.231), reveals a respect towards his foe that suggests that it is circumstance, not choice, that forces his hand. Similarly, Laertes’ singular goal, “To this point I stand, that both the worlds I give to negligence, let come what comes, only I’ll be revenged most thoroughly for my father.” (4.5.151-154) shows that his wrath is fueled solely by duty, such that his pursuit of revenge imparts upon him a single-minded myopia that drives him inexorably towards the final conflict. Ironically, upon meeting Claudius after hearing of his father’s death, Laertes asks “How came he

"But I am very sorry, good Horatio, /That to Laertes I forgot myself; /For, by the image of my cause, I see/The portraiture of his" (V.2). In seeking to revenge, Hamlet accidentally stabs Polonius, the king's advisor, thus killing the father of Laertes. Hamlet acknowledges, with his sense of higher justice and objectivity, that Laertes has a reason for hating him, given that he is also a parricide. There is a sharp, circular irony to this cycle of revenge. Similarly, Ophelia is driven mad by the death of her father and kills herself. Hamlet, while much of his madness is assumed, is also driven to a state of emotional distress. Laertes, Hamlet, and Ophelia all act irrationally in ways that bring about their death because of the extremity of their grief.

Laertes meanwhile, had initially been a very noble youth, who is had presumeably been an honourable figure throughout most of the play. However, when his father is murdered, as he tries to seek revenge for honour, he instead becomes an instrument for Claudius evil plot. Thus, he becomes engaged in the immoral schemes of Claudius, and even though he does admit that such doings are against my conscience, he still conspires to end Hamlets life in a dishonest manner. Thus, as a result of his lapse in judgement, he, like the other villains in the play, is condemned to death. However, before his death, he is redeemed when he admits that he had been justly killed with my own treachery. Thus, in this case, his underlying integrity, in the end, is able to free him from heavens judgement, and a more honourable death is restored to him, as compared to the previously mentioned villains. Had Laertes taken his fathers advise and been true to oneself, he may have gained a more rewarding end. Thus, we are again able to