Hamlet Essay: The Madman(?)

Hamlet is one of Shakespeare’s most famous plays; it is also one of the most open to interpretation. Modern viewers of the play see the protagonist as a nut job that experiences delusions such as the ghost of his father, is fickle in making his decision, and insane. All literature is open to personally interpretation, but these claims remain only bolstered by the fallacies of authority and popular opinion. Hamlet is none of these things people ascribe to him.

To understand the story we must look at it from its origin, England four hundred years ago. Not much is known of William Shakespeare’s life most of it is mystery and speculation. Looking at the beliefs of the people in the period Hamlet does not seem insane but to follow the norms of the time. This ghost is not a sign of schizophrenia, to the audience in the main religious sects this was a possibility, so the author is not portraying him as a lunatic. We also know the ghost isn’t just a figment of his own imagination because in the first scene the tower guards were able to see it too. Most of the antics he does are to mask the fact that he one knows about how Hamlet Senior actually died and two to deceive other characters into thinking he’s lost his mind where in reality it is a ploy. So he fools Polonius’ family into believing his lie by acting like a wild animal for Ophelia and with his pretty one-sided conversation with Polonius. From the standpoint of the characters he is mad but this is a trick the audience knows he is doing. And from the perspective of the audience with his visions of the dead and other now seen as mythological things was not absorbed as it is today.

Most commentary seems to follow the general assumption that the prince is indecisive. How can one determine if this is true or not? From reading the text we discover that the boy is fairly certain he will exact his revenge just not sure of how to do so without ending up dead himself. Having not arrived at the ending to witness the righteous moment of regicide we can infer only a few things. From the method he simply stabbed Polonius and disposed of his body assuming it was Claudius it’s fair to say that would be his original plan. Now that others are aware of his intent he may need to find a stealthier approach especially since the monarchs will now be paranoid they could be next. The ease he possessed during his killing of the royal advisor displayed that he did not hesitate to go through with the act. Not only through his actions in the middle of the play but in his words has he spoken to the audience of his want to avenge his father. This is not only said and shown but if we look at the plot wondering what Hamlet’s motives are then more of the events go from looking like insanity to a mastermind meticulously plotting the demise of Claudius.

As for questioning the psychology of the main character it is a play only the asides do they reveal their inner thoughts the rest is seen and not told. Those who accuse Hamlet of being a psychopath seem mislead since the scholars at the time didn’t understand almost anything about the human body or mind. Bleeding was the way to get better if you were sick. Many heroes outside of the saints for the contemporaries were warriors that did kill when they had to. So Hamlet’s actions were not seen as vile or cruel but just. As for how he feels about killing Claudius, a terrible person who is a murdered that poisoned his father and married his mother afterward, is empathetic. He does yearn to send him to Hell yet does not simply go on a rampage of the royal court and guards so he has to move slowly to hurt only who he wants to punish. This is not a mental problem it is genius.

By the end of a skim or spark notes reading Hamlet may appear to be a crazy boy who suffers from hallucinations, being undecided and mental problems. This however does not hold to scrutiny he does the things he must in the play for retribution of Hamlet Senior, to bamboozle other characters, and to hide his true motives. Hamlet is not insane, psychopathic, nor deranged. He is a regular young man facing his nadir; his life has changed dramatically, his father is gone, and a tyrant has taken his lineages throne. Making the choice of whether to dispose of Claudius is not the thing he spends so much time contemplating but how and when to do what needs to be done to restore the throne.