After the "Mouse Trap" scene in Hamlet, Claudius's guilty conscious starts to show. He confesses out loud in his prayer that he seeks forgiveness for killing King Hamlet. Hamlet overhears it all, and draws his sword preparing to kill Claudius. But as the prayer goes on Hamlet starts thinking; would killing Claudius now actually be revenge if he ends up in Heaven for confessing his sins?
Hamlet's hesitation to kill Claudius is understandable. His father's ghost mentioned how he is forced into a purgatory type place until he can burn off his sins because he died before a final confession. Why should Claudius die and have a chance at entering Heaven when he is responsible for both King and Prince Hamlet's suffering? Waiting until there is a more vulnerable time to strike was very wise in my opinion. It may lower Hamlet's chances to get revenge, but what is revenge if the murderer dies with internal peace?
If Hamlet was to have killed Claudius in that moment, his problems would not have been solved. Even though Hamlet was the rightful heir to the throne after King Hamlet's death, and still the heir after Claudius's death, everyone at court thinks he is truly mad. So he would be the first suspect of the one who committed murder and treason against the king. His title might have saved him if he did not pretend to be mad, but because he did he would have made it more likely for him to die as well.
Now only is Hamlet believed to be mad, but the only other people to know the truth about Claudius's crime are Horatio and the two men who first saw the ghost. What are the chances they would be believed if they took Hamlet's side? That is even if they did. With another King day no one might want to get involved in investigating the trust; was Claudius actually guilty? For all we know as followers of the play, Hamlet could actually be mad and created the ghost and everything that has happened in the play so far in his head. None of what we know could even be true. Imagine if Shakespeare had decided to make us root for Hamlet the whole play, but in reality when writing it he kept it hidden that he made it so Hamlet went insane a long time before the story even started.
Hi Veitta, I believe hamlets hesitation to kill Claudius was a smart move but was it right? I mean think about him if he didn't have his religious beliefs he would of killed him without a problem. For instance, since it was just Hamlet and Claudius in the room, no one would have notice Hamlet killing Claudius. But If that happened Hamlets fathers ghost would still wander because the revenge was not resolved properly. Either way this decision was adequate because "It's not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters" (Epictetus)
ReplyDeleteGood job on your post, Vietta! I really enjoy your reasoning for why it made sense to not kill Claudius yet. Hamlet DEFINTELY should...in-prove?...his madness before killing his uncle. Also, why do you think that Hamlet stays alone? Your post made me think that he could stand stronger with even just his one friend Horatio. Any thoughts? One last thing, your thought of Hamlet being mad well before the play starts is an incredible thought to have. How long do you think it took for Hanlet to become mad after his death? I'd suppose it would have been sometime after the remarriage of his mother. One last time, good job!
ReplyDelete