Hamlet

Society has been preoccupied by the concept of good and evil since the emergence of civilization and, just as humankind has evolved over time, so has the definition of evil. Evil was first used to describe someone who placed themselves above others and it wasn’t until the Old and Middle English period that evil became associated with wrong-doing. As time passed, the definition continued to become increasingly more specific until it reached its modern day definition: “extreme moral wickedness. (www. etymonline. com/index. php? term=evil) However, what one ultimately defines as evil depends on one’s personal experiences, frame of reference, and culture. For instance, during World War II, the Americans believed that dropping an atomic bomb on Hiroshima was an act of good as it ended conflict with the Japanese. On the other hand, the Japanese viewed it as an act of evil as the bombings resulted in the deaths of thousands of people.

This proves that good and evil cannot always be seen as simply black or white, but also as shades of grey making it difficult to label characters in various literary works, especially those of William Shakespeare. The ambiguity of evil in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet forces spectators to interpret each character’s thoughts, actions, and personality in order to place them properly on the gradient of evil. Regardless of one’s personal idea of evil, Claudius can be seen as a villain from many standpoints.

He constantly performs actions with malicious intent and expresses true love only for himself. The first and most important act that Claudius commits is the murder of his own brother, which he does to obtain the crown of Denmark, as described by King Hamlet’s ghost: Now, Hamlet, hear. ‘Tis given out that, sleeping in my orchard, A serpent stung me – so the whole ear of Denmark Is by a forged process of my death Rankly abus’d – but know, thou noble youth, The serpent that did sting thy father’s life Now wears his crown. (I. v. 34-40)

The ghost’s speech shows the true nature of Claudius’ evil as he allows himself to kill his own brother. However, this is not to say that Claudius does not understand the nature of his sins. Following ‘The Murder of Gonzago’, a test of his conscience set up by Hamlet, Claudius feels overwhelmed with guilt and self disgust; he attempts to repent for his sins and expresses that he realizes the magnitude of what he has done: O, my offence is rank, it smells to heaven; It hath the primal eldest curse upon’t– A brother’s murder. (III. iii. 37-39)

This is the first and only time that the readers or spectators see Claudius acting as a normal human being and showing or recognizing his emotions. This is very important as many people believe that repentance leads to mercy. However, Claudius finds himself unable to properly do so as he comes to realize that he does not feel remorse for what he has done since he continues to reap the rewards of his deed: Pray can I not, Though inclination be as sharp as will, My stronger guilt defeats my strong intent… My fault is past – but O, what form of prayer

Can serve my turn? ‘Forgive me my foul murder? ‘ That cannot be, since I am still possess’d Of those effects for which I did the murder– My crown, mine own ambition, and my queen. … My words fly up, my thoughts remain below. Words without thoughts never to heaven go. (III. iii. 36-40, 51-55, 97-98) If Claudius had successfully repented for his sins, he would no longer be labelled as an evil character. He is, however, unable to do so. Despite Claudius’ callousness, the fact that he even attempts to repent is honourable.

However, by continuing to manipulate, destroy, and murder he voids any chance of forgiveness. He uses his “son” as a scapegoat by focusing all of the negative attention on him and thus avoids negative attention himself, marries his brother’s widow, turns Hamlet’s childhood friends against him, and ultimately causes the deaths of all the main characters in the play. He uses his charm and political power to unleash increasing amounts of chaos proving that, “One may smile, and smile, and be a villain! ” (I. v. 07) In the end, it is Claudius who is responsible for trapping otherwise innocent characters in a chain of deception, deceit, and destruction which is escapable only by death. Hamlet is the primary victim of Claudius’ malevolent deeds, causing a dramatic shift in his nature. He becomes a slave to misfortune and feels the need to right the wrongs in his life, specifically the murder of his father. Upon hearing the truth about the nature of his father’s death, Hamlet becomes a vital part in the cyclical pattern of evil as he vows to take revenge on his uncle, Claudius: Haste me to know’t, that I with wings as swift

As meditation or the thoughts of love May sweep me to my revenge. (I. v. 29-31) Although Hamlet is “a victim” of Claudius’ deeds, the reader is unable to sustain any feeling of heightened pathos once he seeks justice by exacting revenge. However, one must take into consideration the common thought processes of the time. It wasn’t until recently that society began to view retributive justice as unacceptable and morally wrong. Therefore, Hamlet would have been justified in his attempts to get revenge for his father’s murder.

In addition, getting revenge gives Hamlet no personal gain except the redemption of his father’s name, while Claudius kills with power in mind. Furthermore, Claudius is responsible for the death of an innocent while Hamlet is only concerned with killing those who are guilty, particularly his uncle. Hamlet even takes precautions, such as arranging the performance of ‘The Murder of Gonzago’, to prove his suspicions and keep a clean conscience: I’ll have groundsMore relative than this—the play’s the thingWherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King. II. ii. 603-605) By trying to figure out whether or not Claudius is guilty, Hamlet shows that he is trying to cause the least damage possible and does not want to kill those who do not deserve it. A truly evil person would not care whether or not their victim was innocent, as is the case with Claudius. Unfortunately, Hamlet becomes tangled up in his thoughts and emotions and causes more problems than he intends to; primarly when Hamlet and his mother are talking and Hamlet attacks Polonius who is hiding behind an arras.

The attack kills Polonius, who Hamlet initially thought was Claudius. While some may consider this to be evil, Hamlet recognizes the event as a tragic accident: A bloody deed. Almost as bad, good mother, As kill a king and marry with his brother… Thou wretched, rash intruding fool, farewell. I took thee for thy better. Take thy fortune. (III. iv. 28-29, 31-32) By comparing the murder of Polonius to the murder of his father, Hamlet acknowledges that what he has done is wrong but unfortunately this does not allow him to escape the repercussions which follow.

Killing Polonius is the biggest mistake that Hamlet makes in the play, turning Laertes against him and leading to the death of both himself and Ophelia. Although Hamlet can be seen as unnaturally cruel many times throughout the play, he is not evil. Hamlet is simply trying to play the cards he has been dealt in life. Throughout Hamlet, Laertes is described as a very loyal and noble gentleman. Unfortunately for Laertes, he suffers the same fate as poor Hamlet. He loses his father and his sister, just as Hamlet loses his father and mother.

Following his father’s death, Laertes feels the need to kill to uphold his family’s name. At first Laertes believes the murderer to be Claudius but when Claudius convinces him otherwise, Laertes shifts his attention towards Hamlet. In order to get Laertes to do this, Claudius manipulates him into thinking that Hamlet is the root of all evil and must be taken care of. Laertes agrees to do so and even contributes his own ideas: I will do’t. And for that purpose, I’ll anoint my sword. I bought an unction of mountebank So mortal but dip a knife in it, Where it draws blood, no cataplasm so rare,

Collected from all simples that have virtue Under the moon, can save the thing from death That is but scratch’d withal. I’ll touch my point With this contagion, that if I gall him slightly, It may be death. (IV. vii. 139-148) Similarly to Hamlet, it is not evil that gets the best of Laertes, but his emotions. His anger and sadness cause him to react drastically and he makes decisions at a time where he is unable to think straight. Laertes later comes to realize this as he reflects upon his plan to kill Hamlet: And yet it is almost against my conscience. V. ii. 288) At this point in the play, it becomes evident that Laertes’ “evil” is not of his own creation but of Claudius’. It is not only Laertes who realizes this but Hamlet as well, allowing the men to see the similarities in their situations and apologize to one another: He is just serv’d. It is a poison temper’d by himself. Exchange forgiveness with me, noble Hamlet. Mine and my father’s death come not upon thee, Nor thine on me. (V. ii. 321-325) Unlike Claudius, the men are forgiven for their sins and are able to die as heroes rather than villains.

This final act of nobility is what truly defines the characters of Hamlet and Laertes, not their mishaps. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet exemplifies how it is not what a character does but who a character is that determines whether they are truly evil or not. Nevertheless, that is not to say that the character’s do not fall victim to temptation or evil. It is the way that they handle themselves once they have done so that allows spectators an insight into their true nature. As Hamlet says, “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking it makes it so. ” (II. ii. 245-246)

Renaissance Drama in England

The Italian Renaissance had rediscovered the ancient Greek and Roman theatre, and this was instrumental in the development of the new drama, which was then beginning to evolve apart from the old mystery and miracle plays of the Middle Ages. The Italians were particularly inspired by Seneca (a major tragic playwright and philosopher) and Plautus (comic cliches, especially that of the boasting soldier had a powerful influence on the Renaissance and after). However, the Italian tragedies embraced a principle contrary to Seneca’s ethics: showing blood and violence on the stage. It is also true that the Elizabethan Era was a very violent age. As a result, representing that kind of violence on the stage in scenes. The plays had 5 acts; Physical realism; Issues borrowed from the ancient Greek drama (the chorus); Allegorical characters borrowed from the Medieval moralities; Issues borrowed from the Italian drama (the pantomime); Exaggerated feelings (love, hatred, revenge); Props and settings were simple; Costumes were rich and in accordance with the fashion of the time; There was no curtain; Women were not allowed to perform.

The establishment of large and profitable public theatres was an essential enabling factor in the success of English Renaissance drama—once they were in operation, the drama could become a fixed and permanent rather than a transitory phenomenon. The crucial initiating development was the building of The Theatre by James Burbage, in Shoreditch in 1576. The Theatre was rapidly followed by the nearby Curtain Theatre (1577), the Rose (1587), the Swan (1595), the Globe (1599), the Fortune (1600), and the Red Bull (1604). Usually polygonal in a plan to give an overall rounded effect (though the Red Bull and the first Fortune were square), the three levels of inward-facing galleries overlooked the open center, into which jutted the stage— essentially a platform surrounded on three sides by the audience, only the rear being restricted for the entrances and exits of the actors and seating for the musicians. The upper level behind the stage could be used as a balcony. Usually built of timber and plaster and with thatched roofs, the early theatres were vulnerable to fire and were replaced (when necessary) with stronger structures. When the Globe burned down in June 1613, it was rebuilt with a tile roof.

1. The early tragedies
2. The early comedies
3. The plays of the University Wits

William Shakespeare’s plays the “university wits” The decade of the 1590s, just before Shakespeare started his career, saw a radical transformation in popular drama. A group of well-educated men chose to write for the public stage, taking over native traditions. They brought new coherence in structure and real wit and poetic power to the language. They are known collectively as the “University Wits,” though they did not always work as a group, and indeed wrangled with each other at times.  John Lyly (1554-1606) Thomas Lodge (c. 1558-1625) Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593) Robert Greene (1560-1592) Thomas Nashe (1567-1601) George Peele Thomas Kyd (1558 –1594). Th. Kyd was the author of The Spanish Tragedy, and one of the most important figures in the development of Elizabethan drama. The Spanish Tragedie was probably written in the mid to late 1580s. The earliest surviving edition was printed in 1592; the full title being, The Spanish Tragedie, Containing the lamentable end of Don Horatio, and Bel-imperia: with the pitiful death of old Hieronimo. However, the play was usually known simply as “Hieronimo”, after the protagonist. Kyd is more generally accepted to have been the author of a Hamlet, the precursor of the Shakespearean play (Ur-Hamlet). Christopher Marlowe(1564 –1593).

The foremost Elizabethan tragedian before William Shakespeare, he is known for his magnificent blank verse, his overreaching protagonists, and his own untimely death. Marlowe’s most important plays in which he created his titanic characters are: Dido, Queen of Carthage (c. 1586) (possibly co-written with Thomas Nashe) Tamburlaine, part 1 (c. 1587) Tamburlaine, part 2 (c. 1587-1588) The Jew of Malta (c. 1589) Doctor Faustus (c. 1589, or, c. 1593) Edward II (c. 1592) The Massacre at Paris (c. 1593) Marlowe is often alleged to have been a government spy killed upon the orders of the Queen. Robert Greene (1558 –1592) is most familiar to Shakespeare scholars for his pamphlet Greene’s Groats-Worth of Wit (full title: Greene’s Groats-worth of Wit Bought with a Million of Repentance), which most scholars agree contains the earliest known mention of Shakespeare as a member of the London dramatic community. In it, Greene disparages Shakespeare, for being an actor who has the temerity to write plays, and for committing plagiarism.”… or there is an upstart Crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his Tygers heart wrapt in a Players hyde, supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you: and being an absolute Johannes factotum, is in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in a country”. William Shakespeare and His Contemporaries. Francis Meres, one year younger than Shakespeare, described himself as “Maister of Arte of both Universities”; in 1598 Meres published a work which has proven most valuable in dating Shakespeare’s plays, for he mentions many of them, and in the most laudatory terms.

In Palladis Tamia, Wits Treasury, Meres begins by praising Shakespeare’s poetry the two narrative poems, Venus and Adonis and The Rape of Lucrece, and the Sonnets – then compares Shakespeare to Plautus in comedy and to Seneca in tragedy: Shakespeare was “not of an age, but for all time. ” These are the words of Shakespeare’s great friend and contemporary, Ben Jonson. The quotation comes from Jonson’s poem, To the memory of my beloved, found in the First Folio of Shakespeare’s works, published in 1623. Ben Jonson (1572-1637) William Shakespeare (1564 – 1616). There is no simple explanation for Shakespeare’s unrivaled popularity, but he remains our greatest entertainer and perhaps our most profound thinker. He had a remarkable knowledge of human behavior, which he was able to communicate through his portrayal of a wide variety of characters. ? His mastery of poetic language and of the techniques of drama enabled him to combine these multiple viewpoints, human motives, and actions to produce a uniquely compelling theatrical experience.

SHAKESPEARE’S EARLY YEARS

English playwright William Shakespeare was born in a small house on Henley Street in Stratford-upon Avon in April 1564. The third of eight children, William Shakespeare was the eldest son of John Shakespeare, a locally prominent glove-maker and wool merchant, and Mary Arden, the daughter of a well-to-do landowner in the nearby village of Wilmcote. The young Shakespeare probably attended the Stratford grammar school, the King’s New School. Shakespeare’s Birthplace Stratford upon Avon On November 27, 1582, a license was issued to permit Shakespeare’s marriage, at the age of 18, to Anne Hathaway, aged 26 and the daughter of a Warwickshire farmer. The couple’s first daughter, Susanna, was born on May 26, 1583, and twins Hamnet and Judith who were named for their godparents, neighbors Hamnet and Judith Sadler followed on February 2, 1585. Anne Hathaway? s Cottage Charlecote Park, Sir Thomas Lucy? s Property Sometime after the birth of the twins, Shakespeare apparently left Stratford, but no records have turned up to reveal his activity between their birth and his presence in London in 1592 when he was already at work in the theater. Shakespeare? s biographers sometimes refer to the years between 1585 and 1592 as “the lost years. Speculations about this period abound. An unsubstantiated report claims Shakespeare left Stratford after he was caught poaching in the deer park of Sir Thomas Lucy, a local justice of the peace. Another theory has him leaving for London with a theater troupe that had performed in Stratford in 1587.

SHAKESPEARE IN LONDON 

Shakespeare seems to have arrived in London about 1588, and by 1592 he had attained sufficient success as an actor and a playwright to attract the venom of Greene, an anxious rival. In 1594 Shakespeare became a member of Lord Chamberlain’s Men and was active in the formation of famous theatre, the Globe. London – The Globe Theater (rebuilt in 1997) London – The Globe Theater (rebuilt in 1997) Shakespeare’s Last Years Shakespeare’s company erected the storied Globe Theatre circa 1598 in London’s Bankside district. It was one of four major theatres in the area, along with the Swan, the Rose, and the Hope. After about 1608 Shakespeare began to write fewer plays. In 1613 fire destroyed the Globe Theatre during a performance of Henry VIII. Although the Globe was quickly rebuilt, Shakespeare? s association with it – and probably with the company – had ended. Around the time of the fire, Shakespeare retired to Stratford, where he had established his family and become a prominent citizen. Shakespeare? s daughter Susanna had married John Hall, a doctor with a thriving practice in Stratford, in 1607. His younger daughter, Judith, married a Stratford winemaker, Thomas Quinney, in 1616. Shakespeare died on April 23, 1616 – the month and day traditionally assigned to his birth – and was buried in Stratford’s Holy Trinity Church.

John William Waterhouse Gather Ye Rosebuds While Ye May (1909) Famous Quotes Macbeth:  To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow, Creeps in this petty pace from day to day, To the last syllable of recorded time; And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle! Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player, That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 19–28 John William Waterhouse The Magic Circle (study) (1886). To die, to sleep; To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there’s the rub: For in that sleep of death what dreams may come, When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause—there’s the respect That makes calamity of so long life… Hamlet Act 3, scene 1, 55–87 Sir Laurence Olivier (1907 – 1989) as Hamlet Shakespeare, Our Contemporary Hamlet’s Soliloquy. Since first performed in the early 1600s, the title role in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has remained a favorite of many actors because of the emotional complexity of Hamlet’s personality. Nowhere is this complexity more apparent than in Hamlet’s famous soliloquy in Act III, Scene 1. The soliloquy is a monologue in which a character reveals inner thoughts, motivations, and feelings. Shakespeare used the technique often, and his soliloquies are poetic and rich in imagery. In Hamlet, a play about a man whose mind may be his fatal flaw, the form reaches its highest level. The Structure of Shakespearean Tragedy as devised by Andrew Cecil Bradley? Andrew Cecil Bradley (1851–1935) was an English literary scholar, best remembered for his work on Shakespeare? The outcome of his five years as Professor of Poetry at Oxford University was A. C.

Bradley’s two major works, Shakespearean Tragedy (1904), and Oxford Lectures on Poetry (1909). Bradley’s pedagogical manner and his self-confidence made him a real guide for many students to the meaning of Shakespeare. His influence on Shakespearean criticism was so great that the following anonymous poem appeared: I dreamt last night that Shakespeare’s Ghost Sat for a civil service post. The English paper for that year Had several questions on King Lear Which Shakespeare answered very badly Because he hadn’t read his Bradley.

CONSTRUCTION IN SHAKESPEARE’S TRAGEDIES

As a Shakespearean tragedy represents a conflict that terminates in a catastrophe, any such tragedy may roughly be divided into three parts.

• A. The first of these sets forth or expounds the situation, or state of affairs, out of which the conflict arises; and it may, therefore, be called the exposition.
• B. The second deals with the definite beginning, the growth, and the vicissitudes of the conflict. It forms accordingly the bulk of the play, comprising the Second, Third and Fourth Acts, and usually a part of the First and a part of the Fifth.
• C. The final section of the tragedy shows the issue of the conflict in a catastrophe. The application of this scheme of division is naturally more or less arbitrary. The first part glides into the second, and the second into the third, and there may often be difficult in drawing the lines between them.
• D. The role of the exposition is to introduce us into a little world of persons; to show us their positions in life, their circumstances, their relations to one another, and perhaps something of their characters; and to leave us keenly interested in the question of what will come out of this condition of things.

We are left thus expectant. This situation is not one of conflict, but it threatens conflict. For example, in “Romeo and Juliet” we see first the hatred of the Montagues and Capulets; and then we see Romeo ready to fall violently in love; and then we hear talk of a marriage between Juliet and Paris; but the exposition is not complete, and the conflict has not definitely begun to arise, till, in the last scene of the First Act, Romeo the Montague sees Juliet the Capulet and falls in love with her. Sir Frank Dicksee – Romeo And Juliet, 1884 Some Shakespearean “Tricks”. When Shakespeare begins his exposition he generally at first makes people talk about the hero but keeps the hero himself for some time out of sight so that we await his entrance with curiosity and sometimes with anxiety. On the other hand, if the play opens with a quiet conversation, this is usually brief, and then at once the hero enters and takes the action of some decided kind. For instance, compare the beginning of Macbeth to that of King Lear.

In the latter, the tone is so low that the conversation between Kent, Gloster, and Edmund is written in prose (although they are of noble extraction). At the thirty-fourth line, it is broken off by the entrance of Lear and his court, and without delay, the King proceeds to his fatal division of the kingdom. William Dyce – King Lear and the Fool in the Storm (c. 1851). This tragedy illustrates another practice of Shakespeare’s. King Lear has a secondary plot, which concerns Glouchester and his two sons. To make the beginning of this plot quite clear, and to mark it off from the main action, Shakespeare gives it a separate exposition. In Hamlet, though the plot is single, there is a little group of characters possessing a certain independent interest, – Polonius, his son, and his daughter; and so the third scene is devoted wholly to them. The construction of a Shakespearean tragedy is based on the fight between two opposing sides in the conflict. They are of almost equal strength and it is difficult to guess which of them is to win.

They are victorious in turn until the conflict reaches its climax. In some tragedies, the opposing forces can be identified with opposing persons or groups. So it is in “Romeo and Juliet” and “Macbeth”. But it is not always so. The love of Othello may be said to contend with another force, as the love of Romeo does; but Othello cannot be said to contend with Iago as Romeo contends with the representatives of the hatred of the houses, or as Macbeth contends with Malcolm and Macduff. ? Thomas Stothard, The Meeting of Othello and Desdemona (c. 1799). Hamlet completely baffles Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who have been sent to discover his secret, and he arranges for the test of the play scene: the advance of A. But immediately before the play scene his soliloquy on suicide fills us with misgiving; and his words to Ophelia, overheard, so convince the King that love is not the cause of his nephew’s strange behavior, that he determines to get rid of him by sending him to England: the advance of B. The play scene proves a complete success: decided advance of A.

Relationships in the 1600 BY Disher84 Ryan Disher 5th hour Due October 18th, 2013 16th Century era of Male and Female Relationship My essay is over Male and Female relationships during the 16th century. In my essay I will be able to tell you what their relationship is based on, How the relationship works, and I will compare some characters from the story Hamlet in my essay also. This essay is full of facts so sit back and enjoy the ride! During the 1600s women were treated as inferior compared to the men who were superior. Women were expected to clean, cook, and tend to the children.

Also During his era men argued that women were not capable of higher thinking because a woman’s skull is smaller than a man’s skull. Another statement that was said, women have wider hips which means there naturally supposed to be mothers. Overall woman were treated poorly and were not treated fair in the relationship either. In the play Hamlet Claudius and Gertrude, Claudius wants to remain King and in order to do so he must please Gertrude and show love to Hamlet in front of Gertrude, but behind her back he plots to kill Hamlet.

Another good topic is how their relationship works out. During the 1600s women n the upper class were often set up to marry very young. Women of the middle class usually waited till there mid twenties to get married so they had enough money for a household. Women that did not marry were forced to learn some sort of trade to carry on their lives. Child birth was one of the most important things of being a woman, Although men weren’t expected to be there while in labor. The woman’s family, friends, and mid wife were there for her though.

Woman in the upper class who didn’t want to breast fed often had other mothers do it for them called wetnurses. Some relationships worked out great and well others didn’t go as lanned. In this time, the male was almost always the one who brought in money for the family. Although there were times where the female brought in the bigger chunk of cash. Compared to our current time, where we go to work and then go home; Back then they might of worked right out of there own home and didn’t know the ditterence between work lite and tamily lite.

It was always tamily lite and they never experienced anything different. In comparison to the story Hamlet, all of Hamlets family had royalty and were most definitely the upper class. People may ask did there relationships work in the 1600s? ell they did, and they didn’t. It wasn’t a guarantee that they would be together forever. William Shakespeare did not believe in woman having a say in anything. Then there’s feminists which say that woman have every right to be treated equal and they can have there own say in what they want to do, who they want to be with, and what there kids do.

As a Male(father) you could decide who you married, what your wife did, and what you wanted your children to do. In the 1600s families were bigger and closer than today, the reasons why is because such high death rate of infants because lack of technology and medicine. Which meant that families came together on the farm to help everyone out. Also religion played a major role back than, very often back then the only book in the house was a bible and that’s what children used to learn how to read. Another fact about Shakespeare’s time is that, once a boy turns 8 he no longer has to listen to his mother.

The ideal woman was believed to be a virgin and a faithful wife. Female honor and social respectability were tied in closely to sexuality that death was often presented if the woman was not a virgin. There are so many different relationship views and gender views, and it has all changed as time went n. Some similarities are that men are still usually considered the “Man of the House”, but there are woman that are very independent and who can do anything and everything them self. Children are expected to respect/obey their parents, Boys carry on the family name.

Although now a day, Females if they would like to keep there maiden name they can keep it; back than if you said that people would of looked at you and thought you were as crazy as Hamlet, for seeing a ghost. Relationships back than were often between man and woman, you were frowned upon if you were with the same sex. The “Royal” and the “Elite” were the only type of people that were able to have more than one relationship. If you were born of Royal nature or Elite you were among the few that could have side partner relationships.

This reasoning is because those types of classes were the only people that had the time, the money, and the energy to fool around. Middle class people might have had affairs but not as often as the upper class did. Which this problem also leads to having kids with your side partner and also syphilis was considered a rich person disease back then, because they were the only one who, like I said had the time, the oney, and the energy to “Get Around”. Some might say that Shakespeare cheated on his wife, because he was gone and there were no records of him for a few years.

Shakespeare was married to Anne Hathaway, who was eight years older than him. They had there first child on May 26th, 1583 whose name was Susanna. Then 21 months later Anne had gave birth to twins, named Hamnet, and Judith. After that they had no more children and remained married until 1616 when he died. He bought a fine house for his family in Stratford after his only sons death, Hamnet at the age of 11 died in 1596. Shakespeare was buried in Holy Trinity Church in Stratford, where Anne later Joined him in 1623.

He had lived apart from his wife and children, except every once in while ne would visit them tor at least a decade. Shakespeare was a very well professional writer of his time and has been remembered for centurys. I hope that you have learned a lot from my essay, and you found it very interesting. My only hope is that you were able to walk away from this paper knowing something new, that you hadn’t before. My name is Ryan Disher and this is my essay over Male/Female relationships during the 1600s.

Larry in the story “My Oedipus Complex” has a very composite character made of hardness. With very few things that he noticed and experienced in life, his conclusion to a certain topic doesn’t come up with much logic. Though he is the only child till the birth of Sonny, but due to a very coddling behavior by his mother throughout this period of his father being in the war, it became obvious to him that he is “the boss around”. When his (Larry’s fathers) back was tuned, mother let me get a chair and rummage through his treasures. She didn’t seem to think so highly of them as he did” (O’Connor) Events of his mothers lack or carelessness made him come up with the idea that may be his father wasn’t that important. Never knowing the role of his father and living with such little knowledge he keeps guttering around in his own flow. Again, his priority was considered the most as there was no one else with his mother.

He hadn’t any siblings and was poised with a thought of being unable to afford a new person in the house. His very sense of freedom made his day and the time passed by along with his mother. Ever since Larry’s father arrives home after the war, he feels this very lack of superiority that he lived with. He was being less noticed and was stopped from coming up with his childish acts. All of a sudden he starts getting annoyed off the thoughts of being ignored by his mother as his mother had to spend more time with his father.

He had to compromise on his own share of his mother’s reaction and her response wasn’t quite what he expected. In a very small time the changes in return of things he did earlier, was growing unbearable for him. His grab on his freedom collapses as his very little intelligence couldn’t do much good to him. He tries doing things that started to be an ignorant part of his parents. He started expecting from things that was barely a part of his daily life, now even a cup of tea would matter to him. He starts feeling he is cared less in the house.

His father on the other hand was quiet calm responding to the situation, realizing that Larry is just a small child. He carried on being the quiet guy up to sometime but sooner ahead he was obvious to have lost a grasp on it. “I see he’s better fed then taught,” (O’Connor) Stated his father concentrating on larrys reaction to things. Sooner as Sonny arrives in the scene, the tables turn as Larry concentrates on his mother and accepts the fact of his father, but doesn’t easily seem to buy the fact of Sonny consuming most of his mother’s attention then.

Throughout the whole time, his acts seemed childish because there was someone older who was compared more mature. Talking big words are easy but Larry is still a child who was cared for but not in all ways. Larry had his mother to stay busy with before but as she grew busier with his father’s presence later on, he starts thinking of what he should do to prevent his father from taking his time. He came across jealousy and his expectations kept on crawling, making him emotional and irrational at times.

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a play about indecision, apprehension, and inner turmoil. Hamlet, the main protagonist, struggles within himself, attempting to muster the courage to avenge his father’s death by the hand of the current King, Claudius, who is also his late father’s brother. There seem to be many possible reasons for Hamlet’s delay in doing so. However, the one theory that answers all the questions is that Hamlet was possessed by his own Oedipus Complex , that is, he was deeply in love with his own mother, Gertrude. This can be seen throughout the play in several ways.

Hamlet was understandably upset over his father’s death, but he was much less angry about the loss than he was disgusted with his uncle. His “girlfriend” Ophelia was not his lover, the relationship was a cover-up for his true feelings. King Hamlet’s spirit was aware of this. When he finally gave his blessing to Hamlet and Gertrude, he still did not act against Claudius. And most significantly, when Hamlet finally did take revenge and murder Claudius himself, he only did so because he knew Gertrude would approve at that point. Hamlet did not seem angry with Claudius as much as he seemed disgusted.

After Claudius’ marriage to Gertrude in the first act, Hamlet is clearly suicidal in his first soliloquy: O, that this too too solid flesh would melt Thaw and resolve itself into a dew! Or that the Everlasting had not fix’d His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter! O God! God! However, the soliloquy is not about the loss of his father, or about Claudius taking the throne, but about his hasty marriage to Gertrude: Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears Had left the flushing in her galled eyes, She married. O, most wicked speed, to post

With such dexterity to incestuous sheets! It is not nor it cannot come to good: But break, my heart; for I must hold my tongue. This undue preoccupation with Gertrude’s personal life and suicidal tendencies show his self-hate and inner turmoil over his feelings for Gertrude, and the repressed desire to have her for himself. It seems as if he had been privately waiting for the inevitable death of his father for a long time, and was extremely bitter that Claudius married Gertrude before he had her to himself for any amount of time.

Hamlet’s relationship with Ophelia was a guise put up for two reasons: Firstly, a cover-up for Hamlet’s inappropriate feelings for Gertrude, and secondly, a sexual release for Hamlet. Whether Hamlet consciously realized this or not, he showed displays of love for Ophelia when he felt he was obligated, such as when he jumped into her grave, but when the two of them were together in private, he did not treat her as one should treat a significant other. It was seen how Hamlet treated Ophelia in private when he spoke to her in the castle: You should not have believed me; for virtue cannot o inoculate our old stock but we shall relish of it: I loved you not.  Get thee to a nunnery: why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners? I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offences at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. He told her, essentially, that he never loved her and discourages her from breeding immoral beings like himself.

It seems that he may have begun to realize his complex around this point, and while he cared for Ophelia enough to try and let her go, he did not love her enough to continue the guise. However: When Hamlet was in the graveyard in Act 5 Scene 1, he speaks matter-of-factly about death and dying with Horatio: No, faith, not a jot; but to follow him thither with modesty enough, and likelihood to lead it: as thus: Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth into dust; the dust is earth; of earth we make loam; and why of that loam, whereto he as converted, might they not stop a beer-barrel? Imperious Caesar, dead and turn’d to clay, Might stop a hole to keep the wind away: O, that that earth, which kept the world in awe, Should patch a wall to expel the winter flaw! He seems apathetic towards the bodies in the graveyard, and even after Ophelia’s corpse was brought to the grave, he did not react until Gertrude said: Sweets to the sweet: farewell! I hoped thou shouldst have been my Hamlet’s wife; I thought thy bride-bed to have deck’d, sweet maid, And not have strew’d thy grave.

It was then that Laertes leapt into Ophelia’s grave, and presumably for the sake of attaining Gertrude’s approval, Hamlet did as well. His feelings for Ophelia were of lower priority than pleasing his mother. He stayed with Ophelia for a sexual release, and when Ophelia found out that Hamlet did not love her and what he was using her for, she went mad. The songs she sang before the time of her death were about her dead father, Polonius “He is dead and gone, lady/He is dead and gone/At his head a grass-green turf/ At his heels a stone,”. “I hope all will be well.

We must be patient: but I/ cannot choose but weep, to think they should lay him/ i’ the cold ground. My brother shall know of it” (IV, 5, 73 75). This shows how Ophelia was consumed and eventually driven to madness and suicide by the influence of controlling men over her life: Hamlet was the catalyst to her destruction. King Hamlet’s spirit seemed to be well-aware of the nature of Hamlet’s love for Gertrude. While the ghost did come back to ask Hamlet to avenge him, there was an underlying implication that he was conscious of Hamlet’s true feelings, and disapproved of them. So to seduce! –won to his shameful lust The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen! ”. King Hamlet stated throughout the scene several times that his love for Gertrude was dignified, and that he was against incest in Denmark’s royal bed. However, when speaking about incest, he never specifically says that he only means Claudius. Throughout the play, Hamlet showed an indecent interest in Gertrude’s sex life. It is highly irregular for a son to go into such graphic detail when expressing his unhappiness with Gertrude’s choice in partners.

Hamlet actually says to Gertrude: Nay, but to live In the rank sweat of an enseamed bed, Stew’d in corruption, honeying and making love Over the nasty sty— This outburst seems unnecessarily sexually explicit. Hamlet’s preoccupation with Gertrude’s personal life is strange, given that he could have addressed the situation with critique of Claudius’ leadership or Gertrude’s marriage without the graphic imagery. In the 3rd scene, Hamlet is invited into Gertrude’s closet, a strangely intimate situation for mother and son, and speaks with her about her marriage to Claudius.

King Hamlet’s ghost appears and tells Hamlet to “Step between her and her fighting soul” presumably encouraging Hamlet to help her put an end to her relationship with Claudius. However, Hamlet is still scared to act, as he says: Do not look upon me Lest with this piteous action you convert My stern effects: then what I have to do Will want true color. Hamlet meant that he was afraid to eliminate Claudius, because he was afraid of the desire deep within him to consummate his relationship with Gertrude, which he knows that his father would definitely not approve of.

This shows the conflict between his own complex and his respect for his father: The cause of his delay of action throughout the entire play. The time when Hamlet finally acts and murders King Claudius is when Gertrude, after drinking poisoned wine that had been intended for Hamlet, was dying and realized that Claudius had done. Despite his contempt for Claudius and respect for his father, Hamlet had always been hesitant to murder the King because deep inside, he was more desperate for his mother’s approval than he was his father’s.

As these instances show, Hamlet had a deep love for his mother, Gertrude, on platonic, maternal, and sexual level. It was Hamlet’s own Oedipus Complex, the neurosis that turned maternal love into a silent competition with his own father for her complete love, that kept him for so long from murdering Claudius to avenge his father. It seems as if Shakespeare knew enough about the workings of the human mind to discover the “Oedipus theory” long before Sigmund Freud or the science of psychology itself even existed.

Voltaire and Rabelais satirize war and religion in their works. Voltaire goes after religious hypocrisy in chapter three of Candide. An orator asks Candide whether or not he supports “the good cause”. Candide, being a man of reason, responds by saying “there is no effect without a cause”. The orator, feeling challenged by Candide’s reaction challenges him right back by asking Candide if he believes the Pope to be the Anti-Christ. Candide doesn’t know and changes the subject bringing up the fact that he’s hungry.

The orator declares that Candide does not deserve to at because of his lack of affirmation toward believing in the Anti-Christ. The orator’s wife suddenly enters the scene and sees Candide as one who does not believe that the Pope was Anti-Christ. She proceeds to pour trash on his head. This is an example of Voltaire Jabbing at Protestants and Catholics of the world. He is explaining his views, through the use of satire, on religion. War is an evil that is satirized in Candide. Voltaire as a foundation for his war satire uses the Bulgarians.

Voltaire explains on page 13 how the Bulgarians seized Candide and then gave him the option to be “thrashed thirty-six times by the whole egiment, or receive twelve lead bullets at once in his brain. ” Candide decides to run the gauntlet but comes up about 34 short. He pleads that the Judges would Just smash his head instead. Voltaire shows more war satire on page 14 in Candide when the Bulgarians’ burn down the Abarian village “in accordance with the rules of international law”. Voltaire satirizes war in another sense.

He goes on in chapter three by writing about the atrocities that the Bulgarian soldiers would indulge in. Not only did they kill people but they also raped, disemboweled, and dismembered innocent women and children. As a matter of fact, Candide’s was trained as a soldier by being abused and pummeled. Voltaire uses this to show his hatred toward the cruel and vulgar acts of war and which such belligerent groups like the Bulgarian soldiers demonstrated. Voltaire believed these acts of injustice to be morally wrong. Voltaire in this section of Candide is now showing his true thoughts towards Leibniz’s theory of optimism.

Leibniz believes that if this is “the best of all possible worlds” then innocent women and children would not be slaughtered and dehumanized and there would be no bloodthirsty Bulgarians. Rabelais rejects all types of war. On page 299 Grandgousier explains his thoughts to Picrochole about going to war: “… l shall nevertheless go to war before trying all the arts and ways of peace. Of that I am resolved”. This shows Rabelais’ opposition to war. Rabelais also mentions Pangrue’s absurd Justification of the killing of 660 knights on pages 124-125 of Gargantua and Pantagruel.

Pangurge says to them: “Gentlemen, I believe you have brought some harm on yourselves. We are sorry, but it was none of our doing: it was because of the lubricity of the sea-water – sea-water is always a lubricant and we entrust ourselves to your good pleasure. ” This example of satire lso shows Rabelais’ opposition to war. In canto XVII in lines 92 and 93 ot Dante’s Purgatorio Dante’s guide Virgil explains to Dante the two types of love (natural and mind directed) and the differences between them. He goes on to explain to Dante that some people choose to love the wrong thing or sin by loving something too much or something not enough.

Virgil’s main point of his speech is that love is the inspiration to people’s action. Love is the only thing that motivates people. Love and Justice are basically one in the same. According to Dante, God created the Justice system (the system we see throughout Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven) based out of love. And because love inspires Justice, love and goodness are practically synonymous. It is safe now to connect this Justice to the gift God gives to man. In Paradiso Dante explains on page 43 in canto V on lines 20-30 “God’s greatest gift”.

Lines 20-22 specifically give the reader Dante’s interpretation of God’s grace: “God’s greatest gift, the gift in which mankind is most like Him, the gift by Him most prized, is the freedom He bestowed upon the will. ” Goodness comes from free will according to Dante. On line 27 Dante goes on to remind readers that “God ives his consent when [one] consents. ” It is in this sense that we must realize that evil exists in this world even though God is good. Voltaire, a very skeptical man, believed that people did not get what they deserved.

He makes it clear through his satire that he was against Leibniz’s idea of life being the best of both worlds. Voltaire says that evil is random. It comes at random moments Just as the 1746 and 1755 earthquakes in Lima, Peru and Lisbon, Portugal did. There was an imbalance of Justice at this time because Jews were assumed to be the cause for this natural disaster and then publically killed for their wrongdoings. People believed that the disaster happened because God was angry. However Voltaire’s point is proven when the second earthquake strikes. He is proving that things Just have the ability to sporadically happen.

Three deists influenced Voltaire John Locke, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. Their theories encouraged Voltaire to understand that there is no balance of Justice. To explain his point Voltaire creates the character: Dr. Pangloss – a wholehearted believer of Leibniz’s philosophy. Voltaire discreetly states Leibniz’s idea early on Candide by stating on page 16, “Dr. Pangloss was right in telling me that all is for the best in this world… . To contrast Pangloss, Voltaire creates Martin, a more practical thinker to point out the flaws of Leibniz’s philosophy. St.

Augustine understands that solved his problem of evil by believing that there was a lack of goodness in something. He explains that if something is corruptible and thus evil then it is good by nature because it exists. If something can be tarnished by means of evil or by vices it’s because there is goodness that can be taken away from it. Basically saying that everything is good because it is corruptible St. Augustine explains himself on the bottom of page 127 of his Confessions: “And I made an effort o understand what I had heard, that free will is the cause of our doing evil… 3) Quote A is taken from Act l, Scene Ill, lines 201-207 of Shakespeare’s King Hamlet IV. In this section we see another classic ABA rhyme scheme. Hotspur, a very valiant soldier, is worried about his honor. He is demonstrating his concern for his honor by ranting on about his excitement to take down King Henry. Hotspur’s initiative is so strong that he claims, on line 202, that it would not be difficult for him get honor from “the pale-taced moon”. This is Shakespeare’s way ot saying that Hotspur could get light from the sun, or “the pale-faced moon”.

Shakespeare continues in this passage with a clothing metaphor in lines 206-209. Hotspur is saying that his honor would show the same way clothes show on people. These lines show that he’s not only ready for battle but also that he has a very tangible idea of honor. Honor, according to Falstaff is useless because it means nothing if you’re dead. Fallstaffs view of honor clearly undercuts Hotspur’s. Falstaff sees honor in a different sense. He sees it as something that is useless. This is an important quote that relates to the larger work because it shows an aspect that is seen throughout the story: honor.

Honor, as we earn throughout King Henry ‘V, is perceived in a different sense in the end of the book. It goes from a goal to be achieved with direction to something that is more personable and to be reached to a more personal idea to treasure. Quote B is from Chapter 20 of Candide. On page 68 Martin is explaining how corrupt the world can be. Candide does not believe Martin when he says that he is indeed a Manichaean. This quote puts into perspective Voltaire’s idea of the world and how he believed it to be a cruel place.

This quote relates to the larger work because it reinforces what Voltaire is attempting to get across to the reader. The corrupt families who seek to destroy others and acquire power through it are examples of an evil that comes from his belief that bad things can still happen even in a world where there is goodness. Quote C is from Dante’s Paradiso on page 134, Canto XIII, line 130-135. In this passage we see Dante using his standard ABA rhyme scheme. St. Thomas of Aquinas is giving Dante advice. He is warning is warning Dante not to Judge too soon because things could change and go the opposite way.

He explains this through two metaphors. He explains how a bush has the capability to lose all of its leaves but hen eventually blossom to a beautiful rose when the springtime comes around. By these two examples St. Thomas means that a change can pop up out of nowhere. He explains his point in another fashion on this in the third stanza of this passage in lines 133-135. These lines explain that St. Thomas has seen a strong ship sail and eventually sink Just as it was about to set anchor at its port. Quote D is a portion of Rabelais’ Gargantul and Pantagruel on page 229 of chapter six.

Gargantua crying is being described here. It is explained that if he were to start crying out of annoyance then he would drink all of his tears and use them to bring im back to his original condition. Quote E is a passage from Shakespeare’s Hamlet. In this quote Ophelia is commenting on how she misses when Hamlet’s mind was noble. She’s beginning to realize now that Hamlet is going mad. She claims that he wouldVe been considered noble and possibly a King if he had not gone so mad when she says: “Th’ expectancy and rose of the fair state” on line 166.

She goes on to note that he used to be idolized by all. She explains this by saying on line 167 that he was “The glass of fashion and the mold of form”. “The glass of fashion” is Shakespeare using a metaphor for saying that he was respected by all. When she says, “the observers quite, quite down! ” she is commenting that the observers of Hamlet no longer think of him the same way they used to. This passage is basically Ophelia realizing that Hamlet is changing and she cannot believe it. This quote relates to the larger work, Hamlet because it sums up basically the thoughts ot the rest ot the kingdom.

Ophelia speaks tor everyone else when she says notes that Hamlet’s behavior has drastically changed. As the story goes on it changes even more and more as we learn how complex of a character Hamlet is. Quote F is taken from page 43 of Beowulf, specifically lines 2529-2531. This assage follows the speech that Beowulf gives his warriors. Beowulf, who is getting old and worn down, explains to his men the importance of this battle. He salutes his men then explains that he will not give up no matter what. The brave warrior that this passage describes is indeed Beowulf.

The poet is emphasizing the fact that he is indeed the bravest of all warriors the Danes have ever seen. The poet hopes to get the reader to comprehend the amount of courage he has for standing up to the dragon to defend his honor and his community. This quote relates to the larger work because it clearly shows the Beowulf’s heroic qualities. It also relates to the larger work because it shows a Germanic value. Beowulf is showing that he’s not afraid of death. Quote G is a passage from Part IV, lines 2025-2030 of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

The narrator is explaining the gear that Gawain is putting on as he gets ready for his rendezvous with the Green Knight. The poet is using alliteration to give better detail of the attire Gawain is donning. The letter R is used significantly on line 2025, the letter C on line 2026, the letter S on line 2027, the letter W on line 2029, and both letters L and G are used simultaneously in line 2030. The poet aims to grasp the eaders attention at the beauty of his battle outfit. However the last line of this passage is most important: Yet he left not his love-gift, the ladys girdle.

The hosts’s wife promises to Gawain that this magic girdle save from one from death. This quote relates to the larger work because this girdle ends up being a major symbol of the book. The girdle is a way to show that Gawain is weak for using it as a way of cheating to survive against the Green Knight. Quote H is from Act Ill Scene II of Shakespeare’s Hamlet. In this scene Hamlet makes it clear to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that he is not tricked by their phony riendship. In Hamlet’s speech from lines 393-402 Shakespeare uses a play on words with a musical metaphor.

Pluck, an action used to play a string instrument, is said on line 395. Hamlet is accusing his friends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern of playing him. The same way a musician would pluck (play) a string instrument. Another music reference Shakespeare makes is found on lines 396-397. The lines read: “… you would sound me from my lowest note my compass… ” A note is basically a note or pitch that is made from an instrument. Here Hamlet is saying that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern bring him up and down yet he is not fazed by it.

In the play of Hamlet, Shakespeare sets up three plots of revenge which involve three characters, each determined to avenge their deceased loved ones. Revenge is essentially a recurring element in the play and can be noted as an important theme. Revenge is often lead by uncontrolled emotions, affecting an individual’s thoughts and feelings differently and provoking the individual to act without a reason. The play helps us question the justifiability and benefits of revenge through the story’s individual characters.

King Hamlet appears as a ghost and informs Hamlet that he was murdered in his sleep by Claudius. He tells his son that while he was sleeping, Claudius poured poison into his ear. Hamlet is shocked by the ghosts words. The ghost asks Hamlet to “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder. ” (I. 5. 25) Prince Hamlet vow’s to avenge his father’s death, and promises not hurt his mother even though he blame’s her for re-marrying to his uncle right after his father’s death.

Since the revenge was requested, and not Prince Hamlet’s own decision, we could question if Hamlet would consider avenging his father, even if he wasn’t told to. We are aware that Hamlet is depressed about his father’s death, his mother re-marrying, and the lack of mourning the kingdom is doing for the death of the King, but he does not commit suicide even though he considers it at one point. Hamlet’s loneliness, feelings of anger, and sorrow would certainly compel him to avenge his father’s death by killing Claudius. A villain kills my father, and for that, I, his sole son, do this same villain send to heaven. ” (III. 3. 77)Hamlet doesn’t immediately avenge his father’s death, he goes through a phase where he contemplates and delays when he should commit the act of killing Claudius. Fortinbras is another character in the play who feels the need to avenge his father’s death by reclaiming the land his father lost to King Hamlet. Both Prince Hamlet and Prince Fortinbras have uncles who have taken their deceased fathers rightful spot at King while the Princes plot a way to avenge their fathers.

Fortinbras builds an army to take back the territories they lost while also attacking Denmark, making him a problem for Denmark. “… Now, sir, young Fortinbras, of unimproved mettle hot and full, hath in the skirts of Norway here and there sharked up a list of lawless resolutes, for food and diet, to some enterprise that hath a stomach in’t; which is no other as it doth well appear unto our state but to recover of us, by strong hand and terms compulsatory, those foresaid lands so by his father lost; and this, I take it, is the main motive of our preparations… (I. 1. 95) This particular quote helps us perceive how fast Fortinbras acts towards avenging his father. He takes action without delay, as apposed to Hamlet who suspends his opportunities. While discussing with his mother, Hamlet suspects that there is a spy in the room. “How now? A rat? Dead, for a ducat, dead! ” (III. 4. 23) Assuming that it is Claudius, Hamlet draws his sword and strikes at the curtain where curious Polonius is eaves dropping. Receiving the news of his father’s death, Laertes is vow’s to avenge his father. How came he dead? I’ll not be juggled with: 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 the worlds I give to negligence, let come what comes; only I’ll be revenged most thoroughly for my father. ” Laertes responds swiftly, his words full of venom. Just like Fortinbras, Laertes acts immediately; surging into the castle, prepared to punish the person responsible for his father’s death. (IV. 5. 35) Claudius is able to manipulate Laertes and Hamlet in a duel, claiming that “Revenge should have no bounds” (IV. 7. 128) and promising that Hamlet would be poisoned to death. At this point of the play, all three sons are committed to avenging their father’s deaths. Laertes is also notified that Ophelia has drowned, further upsetting him, and worsening the current situation. The three significant characters: Hamlet, Fortinbras, and Laertes each have their own ways of seeking vengeance, for their father’s deaths and obtaining their desires.

Fortinbras uses revenge as an excuse to send in his army to take back the territories his father lost to King Hamlet, which justifies that he wants some sort of control. Hamlet and Laertes know that their father’s have been wronged. Hamlet suffers from depression, and the kingdom does not know the true reason behind his father’s death, so he is determined to reveal truth and overturn his uncle. Laertes is enraged about his father and sister’s unnecessary death, blaming Hamlet for the cause of it. The play can be viewed as a tragic story with multiple deaths mainly provoked by members of their own family and kingdom.

They are forced to duel, and fight to the death to honor their father’s soul, rather then to resolve the situation in a civilized way. The motif: revenge is recurring because the characters of the play feel the need avenge their fathers, they are driven mad by it, as it takes control of their mind. Their eyes are filled with hatred, distrust and despair as they who were once friends, battle to the death. What they achieve at the end is a worthless effort, because it resulted in additional unnecessary deaths, that are not justifiable.