Why Hamlet Delays His Revenge
Why Did Hamlet Delay? - Shakespeare Online
While the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used 'as is' because they will not meet your assignment's requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (hamlet why did hamlet delay killing the king )
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!
Hamlet - Why Did Hamlet Delay Killing the King
At the end of the play, Hamlet does end up exacting his revenge. The circumstances were not the best, as Hamlet and his mother die along with Claudius. Despite that, Hamlet fulfills his vow to avenge his father. Now was Hamlets delay right or wrong? That subject remains open to discussion but there is no doubt that Hamlet did delay in search of the optimal moment where his revenge would be most successful.
Hamlet delayed in seeking revenge for his father because he wanted to be absolutely sure that Claudius did indeed kill his father. Hamlet was also seeking authenticity of the information the ghost gave him, and had to find out for himself if it was true. Thus Hamlet set up “The Mousetrap.” Hamlet was behaving similarly to the way teenagers act today. His father told him something that was true, but Hamlet couldn’t just act without proving the truth to himself, and then acting on his own terms, not those of his father.-- crystal (), October 16, 2002.
I believe that hamlet delayed the murder of claudius after the play because claudius confessed his sins right after (to no one though) and hamlet did not wish him to go to heaven.The fifth theory commonly advanced to account for Hamlet's delay differs from the four preceding in that it attributes the prince's hesitation to objective, external circumstances and to the environment in which Hamlet is placed and is therefore unable to control, rather than to internal, subjective causes. As early as 1803 the actor Ziegler wrote and published an analysis of the play on this basis. Ziegler said that Hamlet delayed because of external difficulties, mainly "the quick, glittering swords of the (King's) bodyguard, or the cold array of judges condemning the slayer of the King." This theory, however, was made more widely known by L. Klein (see Cohn's translation of Klein's , 1846, in Furness's ) and Karl Werder (, Berlin, 1875). It is commonly known as the Klein-Werder theory. Briefly, it is that Hamlet fails to act because of a desire publicly to unmask the King's guilt, and thus to prevent summary justice being executed against himself who had neither evidence nor reason to offer in support of cold-blooded murder. Professor Bradley, quoted once before, disposes of the Klein-Werder theory thus: "From beginning to end of the play, Hamlet never makes the slightest reference to any external difficulties. Not only does Hamlet fail to allude to such difficulties, but he always assumes that he can obey the Ghost, and he once asserts this in so many words ('Sith I have cause and will and strength and means To do't': IV-4-45)."-- Patrick Walker (), January 26, 2003.
I feel that the reason Hamlet delays does not lay directly in a character flaw, but in a literary necessity. One may point this out as a simple cop out of the question at hand; however, I feel it is the root to the prolem we are tackling. The flaw is not primarily in the character himself, but in the play. In other words, Hamlet is indecisive only out of literary necessity. If he was impulsive rather than pensive, the play would be a one-act. Yes, "The play's the thing". Indirectly, I suppose I have said Shakepeare's work is flawed. He gives us no concrete reason for his protagonist's delay. In all his other plays (or the tragedies with which I am most familiar), the theory of the characters is evident. The motivation (or lack there of) for their actions is evident. The plot is logical and characters behave accoring to their circumstances. Hamlet, however, has trouble scholars and critics for years, but I say Shakespeare made the error here... Now, due to that error, this play has become the most analyzed, criticized and praised play of all time. So do we give Shakepeare a pat on the back or do we file this classic peice in the dud file. Of course we could not do that...so keep criticizing, but I feel I must end here. Unfortunately, I have an essay due tomorrow on this very topic and I do not feel my teacher will accept this simple explanation, however probable it may be.