Essay on The Perfect Friend; A Character Review of Horatio

Within everyone's lives, self-motivation affects the relationships that one has with others. In William Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet, Prince of Denmark,” characters struggle with adherence as they continually attempt to benefit themselves. Throughout the play, very few genuine friendships with loyalty were recognizable as the characters seek revenge to deceive Hamlet in the time of King Hamlet's murder. When the benevolence and sincerity were true as Horatio had shown, personal gain did not interfere. This compares to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s fake affair, who harmed to better themselves. Finally, Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude shows betrayal towards Hamlet, with the marriage of Claudius.

In other words, he believes the ghost’s accusation. This leaves Hamlet as being a coward or as a fervent revenger without opportunity.

Throughout the play, Hamlet’s character is characterized both by periods of extreme caution and moments of impulsivity. One of the best examples of Hamlet’s heed can be found in Act 2, Scene 2 where he decides to have his theatre troupe perform his play, The Mousetrap. With this, Hamlet hopes that he will be able to “catch the conscience of the King,” by monitoring Claudius during the performance, that heavily mimics his murder of his brother, for signs of stress and guilt. While Hamlet was fully capable of bypassing this step by simply adhering to what he believes is the ghost of his father, Hamlet’s decision to unearth some sort of evidence that supports his father’s accusations is just one example of his cautious ways and need for certainty before action. However, such displays of caution find themselves juxtaposed with Hamlet’s bouts of impulsivity. One of the most telling illustrations of Hamlet’s rashness can be found in Act One, Scene Five, where he first conversing with the ghost of his father. Here, when the Ghost asks Hamlet to “revenge his foul and most unnatural murder,” Hamlet immediately agrees. In fact, within the next few lines Hamlet pledges he will “sweep to my revenge” with “wings as swift as meditation or the thoughts of love”. The fact that Hamlet coins this commitment to avenge his father’s murder without making much of any consideration of the possible repercussions of such an undertaking is one of the best representations of Hamlet’s impulsivity. This rash action, marked by a lack of extended over-analysis and internal debate, contrasts with the excessive caution Hamlet exhibits at many other points throughout the play. Ultimately, the interplay between Hamlet’s caution and impulsivity is one of the most notable juxtapositions of the play and serves to strongly steer the development, not only of

In the play by William Shakespeare, the ghost of King Hamlet approaches his mourning and depressed son, Hamlet, who is still affected by his death. The ghost explains to Hamlet how he died and demands that Hamlet avenge his death. Note how the ghost approaches Hamlet when he’s the weakest and still mourning to persuade and manipulate him into taking revenge for him. In Act one Scene 5 the ghost states, “If thou didst ever thy dear father love-/ Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder.” The way King Hamlet words his request is more as a challenge; in which Hamlet’s love for his dead father can only be proven by carrying out whatever his father wishes. The ghost influences most Hamlet’s behavior, which not only affects the plot, but also the relationships with other characters. The ghost influences the relationship between Hamlet and his mother, Gertrude. He becomes angry at Gertrude because of her fast marriage with his uncle Claudius. Through the use of innuendos, antic disposition, and metamorphic plays, Hamlet makes it his duty to get King Claudius back for killing his father. Hamlet agreed to avenge his father without second thought. As the play advances, Hamlet begins to doubt the apparition. In act 3 Hamlet begins to have second thoughts and states, “The spirit that I have seen/ May be a devil…” This shows Hamlet’s inner conflict between listening to his father and avenging his death or following his ethics. To be sure that Claudius

Hamlet has thrust upon him the dual responsibility of avenging his father and becoming a man. These new responsibilities push Hamlet’s already fragile sanity over the edge into madness. “Hamlet experiences anxiety both because of the dysfunction of previous masculine roles and because of his shames at their loss, a loss he holds himself accountable for” (Rosen, 63). Hamlet is instantly roused from a bout of depression at Horatio’s news of the ghost. Hamlet undoubtedly feels that this ghost might be able to put his mind at rest.

Similar to the quest for truth in Oedipus’ case, so does Hamlet lead to his own decease. In the first act of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, after Hamlet is aware of the tormented ghost of his father walking on the ramparts, he goes to witness it for himself. This immediately exemplifies the theory that Hamlet, like Oedipus, is in search of the truth, until he realizes it is too much to bear. Subsequent to seeing the apparition, he is convinced to avenge his father’s murderer. The ghost tells him, “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder,” (29). As Hamlet lays the trap for the new King Claudius, he is procrastinating in order to solve his self-doubt. Even after the ghost tells Hamlet how his father was murdered, Hamlet has the players act

When Hamlet's father appeared to him in the form of a ghost claiming the current king, Claudius, Hamlets uncle, had murdered him; Hamlet did not heed the information and obtain his revenge right away. Hamlet's reaction was that of a wise methodical individual. It took Hamlet some time to convince himself that the ghost truly was a good spirit of his father, relaying truthful words in order that his soul may rest in peace, and even then Hamlet still wanted more proof. Only until Hamlet was certain and had confirmation of Claudius's guilt was he ready to take action. The reader sees how Hamlet finds his final convincing piece of verification through a conversation Hamlet has with his good friend Horatio:

(II.2 ln 547-585) He mistakenly awards the pretense the same degree of authenticity as his own reality receives. However, because of the disparity between the actor's performance and Hamlet's own actions, Hamlet gains needed motivation. He remains uncertain of the ghost's reliability, confused by the seemingly genuine grief of the actor. Nonetheless, it is this uncertainty that provides Hamlet with the less disturbing purpose of proving the ghost's story in contrast to the more daunting intention of murder.

       In Act I, Scene II, one is first made aware of the strength of Hamlet's relationship with Horatio when the latter informs Hamlet that he has seen what he believes is the ghost of the former King Hamlet. This introduction to the relationship between Horatio and Hamlet demonstrates the strong bonds of trust and confidence they share. Unlike the other characters who have seen the apparition and would choose to shrink away from it, Horatio, recognizing the ghost for who it might be, tries to make contact with it, albeit unsuccessfully. After this initial contact, and recognizing the significance of what he has witnessed, it is Horatio that takes Hamlet into his confidence to relate what he has seen. "As I do live, my honored lord, 'tis true, / And we did think it writ down in our duty / To let you know of it" (1.2. 220-222). Horatio gives Hamlet a very detailed account of the sighting, answering Hamlet's questions with the honesty and insight of a concerned friend. It is obvious by Horatio's candor that he is neither fearful of Hamlet's response, nor is he concerned that Hamlet will not believe his accounting of the event.

Of Horatio we know best that what distinguishes him from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and indeed from Polonius, Ophelia, Laertes, and Gertrude, is that Claudius cannot use him. Critics have remarked upon Horatio’s ambiguously shifting status at the court of Denmark, and the late William Empson confessed a certain irritation at Hamlet’s discovery of virtues in Horatio that the prince could not find in himself. Yet Shakespeare gives us a Hamlet we must love while knowing our inferiority, since he has the qualities we lack, and so he also gives us Horatio, our representative, who loves so stoically for the rest of us. Horatio is loyal, and limited; skeptical as befits a fellow student of the profoundly skeptical Hamlet, yet never skeptical about Hamlet. Take Horatio out of the play, and you take us out of the play. The plot could be rearranged to spare the wretched Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, even to spare Laertes, let alone Fortinbras, but remove Horatio, and Hamlet becomes so estranged from us that we scarcely can hope to account for that universality of appeal which is his, and the play’s, most original characteristic. (5)

It is clear that the death of his father and his mother 's remarriage has taken an enormous mental toll on him and that he desires death to free himself of the burden laid upon him by the ghost. He romanticizes it, saying that suicide is the brave and courageous option akin to “[taking] arms” against troubles. However, he can’t commit to the idea of death, saying “To sleep, perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub / For in that sleep of death what dreams may come” (III, i, 66-67). He craves death, which would allow him to escape all the “natural shock / that flesh is heir to” (III, i, 63-64) but the more he ponders it, the further he is from reaching a decision. Ironically, the argument within his mind about how he should free himself of the ghostly burden — murder, or death — is impeding him from carrying out any action on it. At the end of his most famous soliloquy, Hamlet hasn’t made any decisive choice and therefore is in limbo regarding death due to his overarching rationale. His inaction proves “[his] endless reasoning and hesitation and the way in which the energy of his resolutions evaporates in self-reproaches” (Morgan 259). Moreover, Hamlet tackles the decision of interpreting what is real and what is false when he questions the ghost’s true nature. At first, Hamlet is certain

In addition, he begins to doubt what the Ghost tells him during the beginning of the novel, which shows logical reasoning and thinking because of the lack of proof presented by the Ghost. Consequently, he decides to find out first if the Ghost is speaking honestly, which shows that initially, thoughts of retribution did not corrupt Hamlet’s judgment till the latter acts of the play. Also, Hamlet makes evident his ability to think analytically when he again questions his lack of motivation. After watching the play, Hamlet berates himself over the lack of effort he exhibits. Hamlet questions, “Is it not monstrous that this player here, /But in a fiction, in a dream of passion, /Could force his soul so to his own conceit” (2.2.59-61). Hamlet’s adroit use of language again makes evident his control of mind, in complete contrast with his state of mind at the conclusion of the play. The doubt that lingered in his mind eventually transforms into an imminent burning desire for revenge, eventually corrupting Hamlet’s thoughts and leads to such doltish actions as the innocent killing of Polonius, Laertes’ father. His language reflects his lack of judgment because it contains no figurative devices and his statements are short, blunt, and are not straightforward. Laertes exhibits a similar transformation from thinking logically and reasonably to acting blindly with anger and without reason. During the beginning of the play,

Hamlet trusts Horatio completely. It is to Horatio that Hamlet writes upon his return to Denmark, and Horatio to whom he confides his thoughts before the duel: “the readiness is / all. Since no man has aught of what he leaves, what / is't to leave betimes” (V. ii. 223-225)? Hamlet has not placed this much confidence in anyone else; it is only to Horatio that he reveals his true feelings.

In his attempt to "catch the conscience of the king" with The Mousetrap (2.2.558), Hamlet tells Horatio that if Claudius' "occulted guilt/ Do not itself unkennel in one speech,/It is a damned ghost that we have seen" (3.2.70-72). The significance of Hamlet's dilemma is that it shows Hamlet to be very vulnerable and he seems only subconsciously aware of it. It is this vulnerability that makes the character of Hamlet problematic to the reader/audience because it leads to the blurring of the boundaries of right action and wrong judgment.  On hearing of the appearance of his father's ghost, Hamlet exclaims: "My father's spirit, in arms! All is not well./ I doubt some foul play."(1.2.254-255). His expectations that something is wrong is confirmed when the ghost tells him of Claudius' treachery. In this sense, Hamlet is willing to believe in the ghost even before he hears the ghost speaks as he "waxes desperate with imagination" (1.4.87). Then, as the ghost starts to speak, he tells Hamlet to "List, list, oh list!"(1.5.22), pouring into the latter's ears the verbal poison that juxtaposes words like "foul", "unnatural" and "lust" with words like "virtuous queen" and "marriage", "royal bed"(1.5.25-83). It seems that the ghost is trying to place a constant and elevated value on the royal marriage only if it includes having him as the rightful king. Yet life, marriage and death are cycles and not fixed points and death of one spouse

Before examining Horatio and Hamlets friendship, it is important to look at Horatio as a character, if only to see why he offers such good companionship to Hamlet. From the very beginning of the play, Horatio is portrayed as being part of the old regime, meaning he was loyal to the old King Hamlet and does not necessarily works of the new king and the way he acquired the throne. It is understood that Hamlet and Horatio were not old friends but they at least have known of each other and were amicable because of their close relationship to the old King. (Evans 7) Horatio is characterized as being someone that would never break a loyalty no matter what was offered to him and that is why he can never be a close friend to King Claudius and possibly why he offers Hamlet his friendship regardless of how he is acting throughout the play. (Lucking 4) Hamlet and Horatio may share similar interests in that they both disapprove of what is going on and feel like it is a disgrace to the dead king Hamlet and all that he has worked for and stood for. (Doubt 7) Sharing all of these common feelings towards everything is what defines a friendship in the first place. Another possible reason why Hamlet feels inclined to trust Horatio is that he is the only one that still showed support to Hamlet and felt for him