Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William
Shakespeare has been viewed as one of the most brilliant and challenging pieces
of literature in history because the controversies therein have baffled both
pleasure readers and scholars alike since its penning. One particular
controversy is that of Hamlet’s indecision throughout the play. The question
that the Prince of Denmark struggles so terribly with is whether or not he
should kill his uncle Claudius who, he suspects and the audience knows, killed
Hamlet’s father. This begins the problem within the problem. After he agonizes
through four passionate soliloquies, Hamlet and the audience must judge whether
his indecisiveness is due to strength or weakness, wisdom or folly. However, by
examination of Hamlet’s words and actions, it is more definitive that the
reason is all of the above.
Indecisive is a bit of myth.
Shakespeare goes to some length to show that procrastination or delay is a
human trait not necessarily a particular trait of Hamlet alone. The key to
Hamlet' indecisiveness can be seen in his sollilloquies; he is struggling to
define himself, and his failure to settle on one definition traps him in
inaction.
It is also important to note that
Hamlet is extremely sad and discontented with the state of affairs in Denmark
and in his own family. He is extremely disappointed with his mother for
marrying his uncle so quickly, and he repudiates Ophelia, a woman he once
claimed to love, in the harshest terms. His words often indicate his disgust
with and distrust of women in general. At a number of points in the play, he
contemplates his own death and even the option of suicide.
The soliloquy “To be, or not to be:
that is the question” appears in Act 3 Scene 1 in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
It is, perhaps, one of the best-known soliloquies by Hamlet in the play, which
generates profound literary interest even today. Hamlet is feeling deep pain
and sorrow because of his father’s death. It seems that he is unable to accept
this separation. He doesn’t want to live. Contemplating suicide, he questions
himself philosophically if it is justified to live with so much pain and agony
or if ending his own life is the best possible option. So this soliloquy
presents to the audience Hamlet’s dilemma of should he live or should he just
die. In the next few lines of the soliloquy, he considers the fact that since
suicide is a sin, it is not a noble thought. Such an unrighteous act will lead
to eternal damnation. So, of course, Hamlet doesn’t commit suicide.
Many people have seen Hamlet as a play
about indecisiveness, and thus about Hamlet’s failure to act appropriately. The play goes on with Hamlet endlessly
debating the merits of everything from suicide to homicide to the meaning of
life. Hamlet finally does get things in order but unfortunately it's too late
for him to debate anything further. Hamlet and many others die at the end of
his doing. If he had acted decisively in the beginning, without confirmation
that what the ghost said was true, it is likely that only Claudius would have
died. One could argue, then, that Hamlet’s lack of action was a result of his
weakness and foolishness. However, that analysis would be incomplete because it
does not consider the superstitions of the time or the unwritten code which
surrounded revenge. By that route, the conclusion is that Hamlet did his best
to act wisely, and was therefore strong of character, and what happened in the
end was simply a tragedy, something that could not have been avoided. His capability
to act with both wisdom and folly, strength and weakness makes the Prince of
Denmark human and incapable of perfection, in decisiveness or any other area in
question.
