Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • Free Essays • My Term Papers • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Shakespeare hamlet1 hamlet1 Justice, in Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a conflict between two Bible teachings: The Old Testament says, "An eye for an eye," but the New Testament preaches, "Turn the other cheek." Those around Hamlet tell him to let go of his father's death and accept his mother's remarriage to Claudius. Claudius himself says, In obstinate condolement is a course Of impious stubbornness, 'tis unmanly grief “ (Hamlet, I.ii.92-94) and “Why should we in our peevish opposition/ Take it to heart?" (Hamlet, I.ii100-1). However, Hamlet, especially upon learning of Claudius' responsibility for, the former King, Hamlet's death, takes the Old Testament view and seeks to avenge his father's death. To Hamlet, his revenge will wipe out the injustice brought on by Claudius' usurping of the former King Hamlet's throne and wife, and justice will be served. Hamlet thinks, Claudius' ascension to power was unjust: He murdered his brother, Caludius, and married his brother's wife, Gertrude, two months later. To the people of Hamlet's day, the son avenging his father's death was an acceptable form of justice. Hamlet himself sees such an action more as "cleaning house" than revenge: "A villain kills my father, and for that, I, his sole son do this same villain send Why, this is hire and salary, not revenge." (Hamlet, III.iii.76-79) The son avenging the father theme is especially prevalent in Hamlet, with Fortinbras seeking to fight the elder Hamlet for the death of his father, Hamlet looking for revenge against Claudius for the death of the elder Hamlet, and Laertes pursuing Hamlet to avenge the death of Polonius. In this sense, the society that advocates "turn the other cheek" still allows a certain degree of "an eye for an eye." In the case of Hamlet (and that of Fortinbras as well, except that Claudius became king after killing the elder Hamlet), the issue of regicide comes up. At this time, the king was considered above all others, and had a right to "play god" as he saw fit (an attitude compounded by the idea of divine right). Regardless of how the king came to power, the fact remains that he is king and above everyone else. The acceptability of regicide especially becomes an issue given the overthrow of Richard III in the late 1400s by the Earl of Richmond "recent history" for Shakespeare and his contemporaries. Richard III had been established as a tyrant, and some viewed the actions of the Earl of Richmond (who later became Henry VII) as God's intervention. Given this added dimension, Hamlet's revenge could have been accepted by the people, but for one major difference, the public perceived Richard as a tyrant, while Claudius was a popular king. Hamlet would have to convince the people that Claudius was wrong to be king by letting everyone know the circumstances behind Claudius' ascension to power. Given these conditions, Hamlet's revenge may have been socially acceptable, if he had not gone to such excesses with his scheme, which resulted in the deaths of many innocents. If Hamlet had simply killed Claudius outright once he received verification of Claudius' role in his death, he could have avoided so much bloodshed and become king himself. For the purposes of Shakespeare's society, justice could be considered restored. However, justice would never have been truly served. Matters would have spiraled out of control again. The son (Hamlet) had killed the killer (Claudius) and taken control, but what about sons, family, or supporters of Claudius? There would likely be some degree of retaliation for Hamlet's actions, sending the world into bloody chaos again. Young Hamlet resents Claudius but does not turn murderous until he learns from the ghost of his father that Claudius was responsible for King Hamlet's death: "The serpent that did sting thy father's life/ Now wears his crown" (Hamlet, I.v.39). After receiving this news, Hamlet sets out to receive verification through the group of actors and his own "mad" behavior. Hamlet's growing madness interfered with his judgement, and he almost completely succumbed to his growing rage. The Ghost asked his son to center his plans on Claudius and to leave Gertrude out, because her sins were few and of lesser degree: "Taint not thy mind, nor let thy soul contrive/ Against thy mother aught. Leave her to heaven" (Hamlet, I.v.85-6). However, Hamlet's madness and resentment had grown to the point that the idea of his mother sleeping with Claudius both disgusted and horrified him, and he continued to torture his mother despite his father's ghost's request. The madness continued with his treatment of Ophelia and the paranoia that led to the death of Polonius. In a sense, the Ghost is an instigator of Hamlet's madness, for while Hamlet was to some degree distraught after his father's death and mother's remarriage, it is the testimony of the Ghost that sends Hamlet over the edge. In the final act Hamlet realizes the faults of his actions. Hamlet's deeds were the result of his increasing madness and obsession with revenge. He had initial doubts about the validity of the Ghost's claims, but once Claudius' guilt was confirmed, Hamlet began almost unrelentingly planning revenge. Hamlet never faced an internal moral battle, to Hamlet, his "duty" in the matter was clear. At the end, however, his view begins to change: "Not a whit, we defy augury. There is special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come-the readiness is all." (Hamlet, V.ii.192-195) Hamlet moves from pursuing absolute justice to resolving to take matters as they come. This new attitude returns some of his sanity, and he begins to take more responsibility for his actions, including facing Laertes and asking for forgiveness after killing his father, Polonius: "Give me your pardon sir, I’ve done you wrong,/ But pardon't as you are a gentleman." (Hamlet, V.ii.198-9). While Hamlet faces Laertes, he essentially ignores the scheming Claudius, who has helped Laertes poison his sword and who holds a drink of poison to give to Hamlet. Hamlet had shown signs of holding back from killing Claudius, but he finally delivered the deathblow to the king when Gertrude drank from the poisoned cup meant for Hamlet and he learned of the poisoned weapons. Ultimately, Hamlet decides to throw a final blow for his justice, striking Claudius with the same poisoned sword that was killing Hamlet and Laertes: "The point envenomed too! Then, venom, to thy work!” (Hamlet, V.ii.301), “Here, thou incestuous, murderous, damned Dane,/ Drink off this potion. Is thy union here?" (Hamlet, V.ii.304-5). The monarchy of Shakespeare's time was fearful of public unrest, and in order to keep the royalty's support for his work, Shakespeare had to appease the crown by ensuring that those who threatened the crown in the story did not survive the play. In Hamlet, everyone connected to the killing of a king died, Claudius for killing the King Hamlet, Gertrude for breaking the standard period of mourning and marrying her husband's killer, Hamlet for killing Claudius, and Laertes for killing Hamlet (who, technically, was king very briefly between Claudius' death and his own). Hamlet, was treated honorably after his death, Fortinbras says, Bear Hamlet like a soldier to the stage, For he was likely, had he been put on, To have proved most royal; and for his passage, The soldier’s music and the rite of war Speak loudly for him." (Hamlet, V.ii.374-79) It is true that innocents died as well in Hamlet, but the significance lies in the deaths of the guilty. In the face of the monarchy, Shakespeare could not let any of the guilty, no matter how noble or virtuous, live through the play because it might send the wrong message, to both the audience and to the crown. Thus, the crown's justice plays a part in the plays' final outcome. Hamlet eventually become worse than the "monsters" he intended to stop, and “self-realization” comes too late to stop the tide of chaos brought on by his actions. By the end of the play, justice is no longer possible. Matters have become too chaotic to repair, and the injustice of the situation has become far greater in degree than the injustice that originally led Hamlet to perform the evil deeds. Perhaps the moral of this play is that taking justice into one's own hands, for whatever reasons, will lead to chaos and disorder, so it is best to avoid playing God. Bibliography: Word Count: 1423
Copyright © 1998-2008 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved. DMCA Notifications and Requests