and even offers to Gertrude: “...It is not madness / That I have utter’d. Bring me to the test, / And I the matter will re-word, which madness / would gambol from...” (3:4:143-46). In conclusion, if Hamlet was an individual Williams 4 consumed by madness, he would have entertained only irrational thoughts and would not have had the power to choose certain individuals to speak rationally with. The final argument proving Hamlet’s sanity during the course of the play is that after Hamlet’s altercation with Laertes at Ophelia’s funeral, Hamlet suddenly ceases to put on this antic disposition. During Hamlet’s feigned madness, whenever he was speaking to someone that was not aware of his plan he would ridicule them but in the form of ambiguous metaphors and irony to imitate madness. After the conflict with Laertes, however, Hamlet no longer continued this masking of his insults. For example, while speaking to Osric, one of the king’s courtiers, Hamlet remarks: “Thy state is the more gracious, for ’tis a vice to / know him. He hath much land and fertile. Let a / beast be lord of beasts and his crib shall stand at the / king’s mess. ‘Tis a chuff, but, as I say, spacious in the / possession of dirt” (5:2:85-89). Hamlet makes no attempt here to disguise the fact that he believes that Osric is a member of the court only because he possesses a great deal of fertile land. Immediately prior to Hamlet and Laertes engaging in their duel Hamlet, whilst speaking in a sane coherent fashion, requests: “Give me your pardon, sir. I have done you wrong; / But pardon’t as you are a gentleman” (5:2:222-23). If Hamlet were truly mad he would not recognize the wrongs he committed against others and possess feelings of anguish over them. Further proof that Hamlet is no longer acting mad is that in the final moments of his life he performs very noble acts that were execu...
