ated. She dealt with it by killing herself, a death that could have been avoided under different circumstances. Laertes, son of Polonius, decided to take a more Shakespearean approach to the situation: revenge.Laertes learned of his fathers death and the kings cover up and stormed the castle. He wanted to kill the king, but Claudius persuaded him that he was not at fault and started to plot. The plot was against Hamlet, Claudius needed him out of the way and Laertes was the perfect weapon. So the Claudius and Laertes set up a duel.The idea was a friendly fencing match, best two out of three, etc, etc. One catch: Laertes sword would not have a protective cover and the tip would be dipped in poison. In the case that Laertes did not strike Hamlet at all the king even had a back up plan, a poisonous celebration drink. Hamlet apologizes for Polonius death and Laertes seems to accept, but all is not well.Hamlet and Laertes duel and Hamlet is not hit once. His mother the queen celebrates by drinking from the poisonous cup. Laertes, in a rage strikes Hamlet when he is not looking and Hamlet does a very complicated move in which he takes Laertes sword from him. Hamlet strikes Laertes with the poisonous sword and now all but one are doomed. The queen collapses first and realizing what has been done Laertes turns the king in and Hamlet kills Claudius.Had Polonius not been spying in the queens bedroom he would not have been killed. Had he not been killed Ophelia would not have committed suicide and Laertes would have no need for revenge. No revenge would have meant no swordfight and no victory drink. No fight and no drink probably would have only meant the death of Claudius in the end (ignoring the Norwegian invasion).As with most tragedies, it is the main character(s) who dies. The death may be at the hands of another major player but that person is not always the direct cause. We find that the secondary characters play a bigger ...
