The Melancholy Vigilante & HAMLET'S SANITY IS IRRELEVANT! Osten
Throughout some of the readings for this semester I've noticed a common them. People like to be vigilantes. It seems that the phrase strength in numbers wasn't a philosophy or even a saying yet. Hamlet was given a task by his ghost dad to kill his father's murders. While he may have been the king, an eye for an eye makes the world go blind. Do they not realize that this string of killing one person who killed another is a horrible justice system. Instead couldn't Claudius have spent several years on bread and water? Don't get me wrong I'm all for the death penalty but it seems to be overused in these cases. You may be thinking that since Claudius is the law then no one would help to overthrow him. I however disagree. While sometimes very skewed, people have an idea of right and wrong. They would have understood that the death of a king in order to gain his wealth and wife is wrong. Due to hamlet's genius thinking with the play, Claudius' response would have been enough to convict him or at the very least give reason to investigate. Had hamlet not acted alone he could have overthrown Claudius and lived to tell the tale as the king. However smart decisions never make a good story. While Shakespeare knew this, Hamlet may not only be a lesson in the dangers of inaction but also a satire in the dangers of acting alone. There are always people willing to help others out of a difficult situation but not using them as a resource can cause death.
Shakespeare is a genius in the invisible questions he asks. I call them invisible questions because they are hard to see but if you know what you're looking for they can be quite obvious. For Hamlet one of these questions is what is sanity? Hamlet has a very difficult job of staying sane while convincing others that he isn't. This means that if he wants to do this correctly he must know where this line is. Whether he is or isn't sane is irrelevant. The fact that he (as a fictional character) even tries to do this shows that like everyone else, Shakespeare was a philosopher and that if you look hard enough you can classify anyone as insane. So the question isn't whether or not Hamlet is crazy, the question is whether or not you're crazy and how to prove it.
I commented on Zelda and Breanna
Shakespeare is a genius in the invisible questions he asks. I call them invisible questions because they are hard to see but if you know what you're looking for they can be quite obvious. For Hamlet one of these questions is what is sanity? Hamlet has a very difficult job of staying sane while convincing others that he isn't. This means that if he wants to do this correctly he must know where this line is. Whether he is or isn't sane is irrelevant. The fact that he (as a fictional character) even tries to do this shows that like everyone else, Shakespeare was a philosopher and that if you look hard enough you can classify anyone as insane. So the question isn't whether or not Hamlet is crazy, the question is whether or not you're crazy and how to prove it.
I commented on Zelda and Breanna
I've noticed that a common theme in Shakespeare is "There Was Some Poor Communication And Then Everyone Died." Whether or not everyone will die remains to be seen (unless you've read/seen Hamlet before, in which case please don't tell everyone what happens). And I am personally of the opinion that Hamlet isn't actually insane. He's just really, really smart. I guess that would contribute to his horrible communication skills, inability to act on his plans out of self-inflicted fear, and intense need to do everything alone.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your analysis and would argue that Hamlet's sanity is in fact very relevant. It is a very big plot point but at the same time it's one of those things that Shakespeare left up to the actors to decide. Many of Shakespeare's plays have these sorts of character traits where the actor playing the character gets to decide whether it's real or not. However, Shakespeare can still be philosophical with this relevant question. You don't have to choose one or the other. Hamlet's sanity is a relevant plot point that can also cause the audience to question themselves.
ReplyDeleteI like where you're going with this! We should question things that people usually just accept. If he wasn't a philosopher, Shakespeare is at least a sociologist. He knows exactly how people work. He is very good at getting people to think about themselves, even hundreds of years later! It blows my mind that one guy could be world famous even hundreds of years after his death. As for Hamlet's sanity, I always thought it was an exaggerated point. In my opinion, every character is a little insane.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that many people tend to latch on to Hamlet`s sanity and tend to ignore other parts to the play, yet the sanity question is still relevant to the story. Hamlet should not take revenge on his uncle. That is true, but if Hamlet wanted justice so far that is the only way shown. Hamlet has not been proven so far to be able to gain allies. His uncle, on the other hand, has many. If it was just based on that then his uncle would win. If it was based on evidence Claudius could claim his response to the play was of grief that his own that it could be taken as an accusation that he murdered his dear brother and his own beloved nephew would kill him. There is no other evidence than Hamlet`s word against the King and well Hamlet is not in the best place to ask for people to believe him.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, why is my name in bold?
ReplyDeleteSecond of all, I have to disagree with you. Hamlet's sanity is perhaps one of the most essential pieces of his character. Trying to say that his sanity is irrelevant is like saying Uncle Ben dying isn't relevant to Peter Parker. If Hamlet is actually sane, then the story is one about a man doing whatever it takes to avenge his father, if he is insane, than it's a tale of a madmen acting uncontrollably. Hamlet knowing where the line of 'sanity' does prove anything -- even people who are traditionally considered 'insane' believe themselves to be sane. Hamlet's true mental state is ultimately left up to whatever actor plays him and how far they want to go with it, but his sanity is vital. Him being sane or insane is so important to how we view the play and his actions. It's important on both a character and plot level.