Now, Santayana's essay points out every one of Hamlet's mistakes that eventually sent him to his death. The big one that caught my attention was "he acts without reflection, as he reflects without acting." Now, applying this to the situation in the play where he invites everyone to his self made play, it is pretty obvious that he did not think the whole way through before going in to demonstrate that Cornelius was actually a murderer. The exact opposite applies to when he meets the ghost of his father for the first time. Whether he was actually insane, or faking, it took him a good while to finally deliver the strike to send the king out of power.
Taking a similar character like Laertes, there is a strong opposition seen. Laertes makes no hesitation in going for Hamlet for revenge. The only thing that stops him is the soothing hand of the king that reminds him that the time to strike will come. And Laertes is proof that Hamlet is not exactly sane: The first reflex for most people when they find that a loved one is gone, is simply revenge. Hamlet does feel this, but does not go like crazy to strike at Cornelius. This could either mean that he has gone completely mad, or that he is being clever about what move he wants to make in his game. This explains his constant talk with the excuse that he is just waiting for the right time and Shakespeare can't have him do nothing until that time comes.
Trying to explain a lack of action, or a very sudden action of a character is like explaining to the teacher why you didn't do your blogs in time...... But the best excuse (which is still pretty fake) is to say that he was waiting for the right time.
No comments:
Post a Comment