Without knowing exactly what you have written, it is difficult to advise you how to revise, but I shall give you some more general input on the subject.
These twin themes are in fact deeply intertwined with one another through the events of the play. The story begins in earnest when the ghost of Hamlet's father appears to the Prince and enjoins him to "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder" (1.5). In the same scene, Hamlet resolves to "to put an antic disposition on", meaning that he will feign madness in order to confuse the usurper King Claudius, so that he will not suspect Hamlet knows the truth about his father's murder. This plan, by the way, derives from the same source that inspired much of the play's basic plot and even its name: an ancient Icelandic tale called "Amleth", also about a young prince who feigns madness after his uncle kills his father and marries his mother "Gerutha".
Now, that might at first glance appear to be all there is to the question: Hamlet is faking insanity so that Claudius will let his guard down and Hamlet will be able to take his revenge. But the matter of madness in Hamlet is much more ambiguous and complex than this. First of all, consider that the actual existence of the ghost is somewhat ambiguous. Granted, the two guards and Horatio both see the ghost as well, but the guards have been starting at shadows since the play began and have likely been drinking. Hamlet is also the only one who interacts directly with the ghost. Indeed, in some staged interpretations, Hamlet is shown as speaking to thin air. Does this mean that he was hallucinating and that the entire basis of the play's action was a figment of his imagination? The answer is unclear and open to interpretation, which is a large part of what makes this play so brilliant: there are no easy answers. Indeed, ambiguity and uncertainty is another major theme of the play, expressed especially through Hamlet's ongoing indecision about actually following through with his murderous plans for revenge.
Now, the question of whether Hamlet is "really" insane or merely faking is one that has been asked countless times and is honestly not particularly fruitful or interesting to pursue. It certainly seems that he is at least in large part "putting on a show" for the other characters (this is, by the way, a very self-aware and "meta" play, anticipating postmodernism by several centuries). Although Hamlet's performance of insanity may well edge toward something more genuine (and he does demonstrate mental instability and deep depression at several points in the play) he is clearly in control of his faculties. As he says to his childhood friend Guildenstern, "I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw" (2.2). That is, he is (or appears) mad when it suits his purposes, but beneath the veneer, he knows what's what.
A more interesting point, I think, is the relationship between Hamlet's desire for revenge and the unarguable madness of Ophelia. Her life is suddenly shattered when her boyfriend Hamlet murders her father, and is then drawn into a duel with her brother Laertes. The all-consuming grief into which she plunges snaps her mind like the frail branch from which she supposedly falls. The exact nature of her death is again ambiguous, but there is a very strong case to be made that she committed suicide, and did not (as Gertrude says) fall into the river accidentally when a branch broke. It is likely that Gertrude was lying to cover the shame of suicide and give her a proper burial. In any case, Ophelia's descent into madness and death is a direct result of Hamlet's obsession with his revenge. And indeed, even though Hamlet's "madness" is largely an act, this obsession hardly makes him a picture of mental health.
When Hamlet accidentally kills Ophelia's father Polonius, he displays little to no remorse (depending on the actor's interpretation). Rather, he simply seems annoyed that he has killed the wrong man. While Hamlet is by no means a raving lunatic at this point in the play, such callousness may speak to a much deeper and more disturbing detachment from the reality of his actions. So, did his thirst for revenge drive Hamlet "mad"? It is impossible to answer such a question in absolute terms, but one can analyze the ways in which his pursuit of blood-for-blood retribution has destabilized the lives of those around him as well as his own inner life.
I hope that this is helpful, good luck on the test!
No comments:
Post a Comment