aid earlier that he is what he appears to be, and there is no reason to doubt it. In the next act, however, Hamlets intentions suddenly become mired in confusion. In the first act, Hamlet was dedicated and inspired in seeking revenge. However, when Hamlet appears again in the second act, it seems that he has lost the conviction that was present earlier. He has yet to take up the part assigned to him by the ghost. He spends the act walking around, reading, and talking with Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and the players. It is not until the very end of the act that he even mentions revenge. These two acts are crucial because they show Hamlets dire duplicity, and how tragedy results. With certain people, Hamlet is resolved to avenge his fathers death. With others, that seems to be the last thought in his mind. If he had any of the resolve he had showed earlier, his act of revenge should have already been completed. So instead of playing the part of the vengeful son, or dropping the issue entirely, he spends the entire act "slacking off," avoiding the decision he has to make, and pretending to be mad. This is shown when he says to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, "I know not-lost all my mirth, forgone all custom of exercise." (Act 2 Scene 2). Later he tells them that he is just faking his madness when he says, "I am but mad north-north-west, when the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw." (Act 2 Scene 2). I feel that by admitting he is faking madness, he is ultimately saying that is comfortable with it. The idea of feigning or faking madness has a lot to do with acting. Faking, or in other words, playing a role, is at its root a way of acting. It is ironic how in a play, something entirely composed of acting, the theory of acting is brought up so much. By "faking madness," Hamlet is, definitely acting. It is strange that Hamlet is comfortable with playing at this point, but the crucial concept here is that he is not acting ou...
