Universal Acceptance of Hamlet by William Shakespeare Essay

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, is a timeless play which continues to remain relevant across all generations due to its presentation of ideas that are fundamental to humanity. The play highlights aspects that relate to the society of not only Elizabethan England but also that of our modern society. Hamlet, as a character, considers ideas from outside his time and is somewhat relatable to modern day man. By drawing from ideas of archetypes and the human psyche, it reveals that Hamlet relates deeply to the elements of humanity.

When looking at Hamlet, one could say that William Shakespeare put the play together as a very cathartic tragedy. The emotional result of dealing with so many deaths brings on a plethora of emotions which are not usually felt in a typical play. Hamlet begins not with the normal prosperity and good fortune as do most tragedies, but with a more stifling and depressing sort of mood (Tekany 115). However, something else could be said about this play as well. The play centers on Hamlet and his existential characteristics, such as angst, isolation and his confrontations with nothingness. The exhibition of these characteristics proves Hamlet to be an existential character.

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Prince Hamlet serves as one of the most multi-faceted characters in the entire play with critics often deeming his personality “paradoxical”. Ultimately, Hamlet provides the audience with the epitomy of internal contrast and instability by rapidly transitioning through periods of caution and rash action, introversion and extroversion and calculation and spontaneity.

In Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, Hamlet, a studious young man and Prince of Denmark, struggles to face the death of his father and the task to kill his father’s murderer, Claudius. He was once known as a charming, smart young man before his father’s death. However, Hamlet experiences depression and anger at the world, causing him to look outwardly on society but failing to look inwardly on himself. The death of his father and the task for vengeance leads him to question whether or not he should follow through in killing Claudius. He becomes a man of thought rather than a man of action. In addition, the delay of King Claudius’ murder leads the readers to believe that he wishes not to kill him; he

The tragedy of Hamlet by William Shakespeare brilliantly recounts the tale of feigned and true madness as it delves into themes of betrayal, incest, revenge, moral corruption, and death. The play, set in the kingdom of Denmark, gives an account of how Prince Hamlet seeks exact revenge on his uncle Claudius, for murdering his own brother and Prince Hamlet’s father. After assassinating King Hamlet, Claudius succeeds the throne and becomes joined in holy matrimony to King Hamlet’s widow and Prince Hamlet’s mother, Queen

Further evidence of Hamlet's tragic flaw can be found in act III, scene 3. At this point, Hamlet is sure of Claudius' guilt, and has even declared that "Now could I drink hot blood and do such bitter business as the day Would quake to look on." (p. 99 lines 406-408) He comes to find King Claudius alone, and recognizes it as an opportunity to act, but almost immediately talks himself out of action on the bases that the King is praying, and will therefore go to heaven. He decides yet again to delay avenging his father's murder, this time until he can kill the King while he is in a vile condition, such as "When he is drunk asleep; or in his rage; Or in the incestuous pleasure of his bed." (p. 103 lines 89-90) Hamlet has failed to act for so long that the Ghost soon comes back to remind him of his duty.

Hamlet is a suspenseful play that introduces the topic of tragedy. Throughout the play, Hamlet displays anger, uncertainty, and obsession with death. Although Hamlet is unaware of it, these emotions cause the mishaps that occur throughout the play. These emotions combined with his unawareness are the leading basis for the tragic hero’s flaws. These flaws lead Hamlet not to be a bad man, but a regular form of imperfection that comes along with being human.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a work of immense depth in character development, most notably the personal, moral and psychological battles

Hamlet sees something that is rotten in his kingdom and he knows it is his moral responsibility to resolve this issues however he finishes off by saying that in actual fact he is powerless “but break my heart, for I must hold my tongue” admitting his weakness. Hamlet begins to grapple with the nature of humanity and morality following the confrontation with the ghost. The appearance of the ghost triggers Hamlet’s existential struggle “All is not well… I doubt some foul play… foul deeds will rise” (Act 1 scene 2) through the use of foreshadowing, Shakespeare exposes the nature of humanity to audiences through the construction of Hamlet’s character. He emphasises that a strong sense of morality can cause conflicts in the decision to make noble choices.

Many of the plays written by Shakespeare in his time were performed to influence his audience and provoke thought and debate the social, cultural and economic events that were taking place at that time. Shakespeare’s Hamlet, in particular, was a reflection of the events happening during the Elizabethan era. In this essay, the focus is mainly on Act IV scene IV and the speech of Hamlet and the essay focuses on answering the question of the effect Hamlet had on the audience in the Elizabethan era, specifically culturally, socially, and economically. It is the purpose of this essay to demonstrate that due to the religious turmoil of the Elizabethan era, Hamlet’s reference to God in Act IV was significant to show that

Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, begins with the appearance of a ghost, an apparition, possibly a hallucination. Thus, from the beginning, Shakespeare presents the air of uncertainty, of the unnatural, which drives the action of the play and develops in the protagonist as a struggle to clarify what only seems to be absolute and what is actually reality. Hamlet's mind, therefore, becomes the central force of the play, choosing the direction of the conflict by his decisions regarding his revenge and defining the outcome.

     Claudius’ lies are effective enough to persistently deceive to play’s antagonist, Hamlet. Despite Hamlet’s disgust with Claudius for marrying Gertrude, and his view of Claudius as “a king of shreds and patches” (III.iv.104), Hamlet suspicion of Claudius as a murderer is preliminarily nonexistent. The appearance of a spirit claiming to be Hamlet’s dead father first alerts Hamlet to the actions of “that incestuous, that adulterate beast, /With witchcraft of his with, with traitorous gifts” (I.v.42-3). And yet still, Hamlet remains hesitant to believe that Claudius was the murderer, searching for complementary evidence. The play that Hamlet enacts -- designed to “catch the conscience of the king” (II.ii.562) --succeeds in revealing Claudius’ guilt, but does not provoke instant action on Hamlet’s part. So effective is Claudius’ manipulation of the royal circle that he manages to almost permanently stay the revelation of his guilt, and if it weren’t for supernatural intervention against an injustice, he may never have been exposed.

This essay will discuss several literary criticisms of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. After skimming through several articles, I ended up with four peer-reviewed journal articles, each a different critical perspectives of the play: feminist, psychoanalytical/freudian, moral, and new historicism. My previous studies of Hamlet, as well as my rereading of the play this semester, has collectively given me a general knowledge of the text. My familiarity of the play made it easier for me to decipher the academic journals and see the connections each critic made with the play.

How we respond to the ending of Hamlet – both as revenge drama and as psychological study – depends in part on how we respond to [the most important underlying theme] of the play – that is, to Hamlet as a prolonged meditation on death. The play is virtually framed by two encounters with the dead:

At least six or seven years pass after the writing of Midsummer Night’s Dream before we find Shakespeare engaged on Hamlet, the second of the great plays with an important Supernatural element, and, in the opinion of many, the greatest tragedy ever penned. What a profound change has come over his attitude towards the Unseen! No longer does he handle it in . . . [a] cheerful,