Sunday, March 1, 2009
To Act or Not to Act
Are the consequences of acting hastily worse than those from acting too late? In so many things, a split-second hesitation and all is lost. But reckless action can have a devastating aftermath. When Hamlet kills Polonius in a thoughtless blunder, it leads to the insanity and death of Ophelia, and Laertes’ and Hamlet’s duel and subsequent deaths, which results in the queen’s poisoning. Thus Shakespeare seems to feel that mindless action is certainly the wrong path to take. But if Hamlet hadn’t hesitated, when before he holds his dagger above the praying king, none of those terrible events would ever have occurred. So does Shakespeare think deliberation is worse? The only problem with compulsively murdering Claudius for Hamlet was that his uncle would have gone to heaven. Yet afterwards Claudius says his prayers didn’t reach heaven anyway. Perhaps with this irony Shakespeare chooses wild action over thoughtful indecision, and just rubs in it Hamlet’s face.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Emma,
Though brief, this is nonetheless an insightful post. I think it's interesting that you're convinced that Shakespeare feels that "mindless action is certainly the wrong path to take." Fortinbras (who, arguably, winds up the 'winner' in the end) is a man of decisive action. What are we to make of his relative success in the face of Hamlet's demise?
Hmmm...
I agree with you most of what you say in your post, but can't help also understand what Lavender's point is about Fortinbras coming out on top from being a chief decision maker.
Shakespeare continuously contradicts himself and it is hard to pin point what his final decision is about quick and rash decision makers...
You can’t ignore that quick and hesitant characters both end up dying throughout the book, but it is Fortinbras who ends up the final king.
Post a Comment