Every human being struggles with thousands of decisions in his or her lifetime. The bigger the situation the more thought people put into the decision. It is possible that by over thinking a negative outcome will occur no matter what the situation is, while relying on instinct will yield positive results. Such is the case in The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William Shakespeare. The play takes place when Hamlet returns home for his fathers funeral and is appalled to find that his mother has married his uncle Claudius. The princes situation worsens when he learns through supernatural means that his father was murdered by Claudius. Hamlet is unsure if this message is true, a sign of madness, or even a demon trying to corrupt his soul. Hamlet performs many ruses in an attempt to expose Claudius. This ultimately leads to the tragic death of Hamlet and the entire royal family. Another prince facing a similar dilemma is Fortinbras. His father was killed by Hamlets father in battle before the events of the play. As the play reaches its bloody end Fortinbras enters and takes over the decimated kingdom. Prince Hamlet and Fortinbras, both sons of murdered kings, show how hesitation versus bold action can make or break a kingdom.
When Hamlet returns home for the funeral his grief quickly turns to horror when he sees the ghost of his father. The ghost reveals that he has been the victim of a most unnatural murder. (I. v. 25) Hamlet also learns that The serpent that did sting thy fathers life now wears his crown. (I. v. 39, 40) The ghost charges Hamlet not to hesitate and avenge his death. Let not the royal bed of Denmark be a couch for luxury and damned incest but howsoever thou pursues this act taint not thy mind nor let soul contrive. (I. v. 82-85) At first Hamlet seems willing to believe the ghost as he tells his friend Horatio, It is an honest Ghost that let me tell you. (I. v. 138) However, Hamlet goes against the ghosts advice not to hesitate and instead feigns madness in order to investigate the ghosts claims. In Act II Hamlet reveals that his earlier claim to Horatio about the ghosts honesty lacks conviction. The spirit I have seen may be the devil: and the devil hath power to assume a pleasing shape; yea and perhaps abuses to damn me. (II. Ii. 533, 534) To determine the validity of the ghost Hamlet puts on a play about the murder of a king and hopes that Claudius reaction will prove his guilt, stating, The plays the thing wherin Ill catch the conscience of the king. (II. Ii. 539, 540) Hamlet believes that this is the safest course of action but in reality he is hesitating and doing exactly what his father warned him not to.
Hamlets second great hesitation comes after the play within the play. When Claudius sees a murder portrayed in the same manner that he used to kill his brother he flees the theater. Hamlet follows him to a chapel where he hears him confess his sin. Now, in possession of the proof he desired, Hamlet again hesitates. Despite the fact that Hamlet truly wants to kill Claudius he struggles with the difference between justice and vengeance. Hamlet worries that slaying his uncle in the act of prayer will send Claudius to heaven. Hamlet wonders if this is just proclaiming, A villain kills my father and for that I his sole son do this same villain send to heaven. (III. Iii. 76-78) This goes contrary to the ghosts demand, who never said he wanted Claudius to suffer in hell. This hesitation leads to the Climax of the play in his mothers bed chamber. Hamlets frustration is reaching its limit. Unaware that the lord chamberlain Polonius is hiding in the room, Hamlet finally confronts his mother. When he tries to make his mother see how wrong her marriage to Claudius is he frightens her which causes Polonius to cry out for help. Hamlet thinks it is Claudius behind the curtain. Believing he has caught his uncle in a sinful act he tries to obtain both justice and vengeance in the same stroke. He drives his sword through the curtain killing Polonius.
Hamlets murder of Polonius causes Laeretes to seek revenge, just as Hamlet is seeking revenge for his own fathers death. Laeretes drive to see vengeance served to his fathers killer delivers him into the manipulative hands of Claudius. The two devise a plan to poison Hamlet. Although Hamlet does receive the fatal poison the scheme also results in the death of the queen and Claudius himself. Were it not for Hamlets hesitation to kill Claudius when he had the chance a very different outcome would have occurred.
At the end of the bloody final scene Fortinbras enters and shows what might have happened if Hamlet had acted without hesitation. As Hamlet lies dying he hears the coming of Fortinbras army. Hamlet hopes that Fortinbras conquest of Denmark will be for the best. I do prophesy the election lights on Fortinbras: he has my dying voice. (V. ii. 323-324) Fortinbras enters and immediately asserts the bold action that Hamlet lacked. For me with sorrow I embrace my fortune. I have some rights of memory in this kingdom, which now to claim my vantage doth invite me. (V. ii. 355-358) Fortinbras impact on the play is far larger than his actual role. He shows what bold decisions and quick action can accomplish.
Fortinbras strength may have come from the size of his standing army just as much as the power of his convictions but the fact remains that his boldness led to an expanded empire. Hamlets caution may have been reasonable but in the end the hesitation led to far more bloodshed than necessary. These two princes show what the cost of caution is versus the rewards of action. Hesitation lies on the ground with Denmarks fallen prince while assertiveness stands proudly next to her new king.
Already have an account? Log In Now
4592