Hamlet Minor Characters Essay Research Paper It

It is reasonable to wonder what Shakespeare had in mind while writing Hamlet.

After all, Shakespeare wasn’t a philosopher or historian, or even a literary

critic. He was a playwright. He didn’t leave critical essays examining his work.

It is left to us to examine his work and decide for ourselves, if we care to,

what Shakespeare was thinking. Did he know that he was writing a drama of deep

psychological significance, a play which would eventually be viewed and read the

world over, produced many times over hundreds of years, taught in schools, and

thought of as one of the world’s greatest plays? I, for one, imagine him

crossing the “t” in the last word of the play, putting down his pen,

and saying, “I hope it runs a year.” Yet Hamlet is an extremely

complex play. To appreciate the imagination which went into the creation of this

tragedy, let’s first delve into what is putatively Shakespeare’s most complex

tragedy, King Lear. Lear has three daughters: Cordelia, who is faithful and

unappreciated by Lear, and Regan and Goneril who receive everything at his hands

and betray him. These themes of misplaced love and filial betrayal are mirrored

in the subplot of the play, the relationship between the Earl of Gloster and his

two sons, Edmund, who is supported and approved by Gloster and betrays him, and

Edgar, who unjustly becomes a fugitive from his father’s wrath. The mirror is

whole. In it we view Cordelia’s reflection and see Edgar, while Regan’s and

Goneril’s reflections, which are of one face, show us Edmund. In the main plot

of Hamlet, Hamlet’s father has been murdered. Hamlet swears revenge, but feign’s

madness and delays. In the subplot, the chamberlain, Polonius, is murdered by

Hamlet. One of Polonius’s children, Laertes, swears revenge, while the other,

his daughter Ophelia, goes mad. Here, the mirror is cracked. Hamlet’s reflection

is splintered. We see one part of him, his revenge motive, in Laertes’ action,

and we see his pretended madness in Ophelia’s piteous condition. More than this,

Hamlet’s image is dimmed compared to those of his counterparts. Hamlet speaks of

revenge, but procrastinates; Laertes instantly raises and army and attacks the

kingdom, but he must be satisfied over his father’s murder. Hamlet only acts

mad; Ophelia’s madness is too real. Shakespeare presents us with a play dealing

with striking human similarities and differences-and a protagonist who is more

than a character, but is a compendium of the qualities of the minor characters.

Hamlet’s unrealized potential throws the fully-realized actions of Laertes and

Ophelia into relief. If the play were about Laertes and Ophelia, Hamlet would be

the perfect foil. In Hamlet’s fibrillating performance we appreciate Laertes

boldness. Viewed against Hamlet’s affected loss of wits, Ophelia’s true madness

is the more pitiful. But to consider Hamlet a foil for Laertes and Ophelia is to

miss the point. After all, Hamlet is the hero. The play is, more than anyone,

about him. Mirrors can be deceptive. One can lose sight of what is real and what

is merely image. Claudius is a case in point. We could never mistake Claudius

for the protagonist of the play. Could we? He is Hamlet’s antagonist. But, In

fact, Claudius has several characteristics common to Shakespeare’s tragic

heroes. Using *A. C. Bradley’s definition, let’s examine Claudius’s

qualifications to be the protagonist of Hamlet. ? The tragic hero is a person

of high degree or great importance. Claudius qualifies here. He is the king. As

his fortunes go, so go those of all who surround him. As he is cheerful, the

court is cheerful. As his brow is contracted in woe, so the Danish court

suffers. ? The tragic hero has a predisposition in some particular direction,

accompanied by an inability to resist the force which drives him or her.

Claudius is ambitious. His ? ambition drives him to murder his brother, the

former king. ? Claudius is evil. But the tragic hero need not be good. Consider

Macbeth and Richard III. ? By their acts, Shakespeare’s tragic heroes hope to

achieve intended outcomes. “But what they achieve is not what they

intended; it is terribly unlike it.” Claudius’s murderous act brings him

only short-lived happiness. As the play opens, Claudius’s situation is secure.

He fears no upsets until Act 3 unfolds. From then on he knows no peace. He is

threatened from within by pangs of conscience and from without by Hamlet’s

knowledge of his crime. Finally, he pays for his crime with his life. ? The

play depicts also the troubled part of the hero’s life. Beginning with the death

of Polonius, Claudius must plot to kill Hamlet. Moreover, he must deal with

rejection by ? Gertrude, the madness of Ophelia, and an insurrection brought by

Laertes. At the end of Act 5, he dies. ? In the end there is a sense of waste.

Our reaction to the death of the protagonist can be expressed with the words

“If only . . .” All the foregoing characterize Shakespeare’s tragic

heroes. What is missing in Claudius’s case is a tragic effect. There is no sense

of waste in Claudius’s death, no sense that this death could have been avoided,

no arousal of “pity and fear” as there is in Hamlet’s, Macbeth’s,

Othello’s, and Lear’s deaths. If only Macbeth had been less ambitious, Hamlet

more forceful, Othello less passionate, and Lear wiser, their untimely deaths

need not have occurred. We feel sympathy for these tragic heroes. We react to

their deaths with a sense of regret. No one regrets Claudius’s death enough to

say “if only . . .” And so, Claudius’s reflection, while almost that

of a protagonist, lacks the proper form. Gertrude, Hamlet’s mother, is at once a

cause of Hamlet’s pathos through her marriage to Hamlet’s uncle and a glass

through which we view something of Hamlet’s family. We see the family together

only once, the ghost appearing in order to remind Hamlet of his vow of

vengeance, perhaps, also, to reunite the family. The moment in Act 3 that he

appears, when Hamlet and his mother are together, suggests such a motive.

Moreover, he appears in his night gown instead of in armor, as in his first

appearance. Acting like a husband, he rescues his former wife from Hamlet’s

anger. However, the ghost’s efforts at reunion fail. Gertrude’s guilt–marriage

to a husband’s brother was considered incest–prevents her from seeing the

ghost. By reflection we see Polonius’s family, all members destroyed through

involvement with Hamlet. We see them together, too, only once, early in the

play, as Laertes is preparing to set sail. Ophelia is guiltless. Laertes is

guilty only of seeking revenge for his father’s murder. Polonius is guilty of

being a busybody, a dangerous involvement in Hamlet’s tragedy. The longer Hamlet

procrastinates, the more bodies pile up, and the more the question of his

procrastination takes on importance. Why does Shakespeare make us, wait until

the end of Act 5, for Hamlet finally to play his proper role and resolve all

questions? This is Shakespeare’s genius. We view Hamlet’s procrastination as

probable. After all, no matter what Hamlet does, the past cannot be undone.

Running a sword through his uncle’s ribs will not bring Hamlet’s father back. We

are willing spectators to the unfolding of this tragedy. And between the

anticipation and the act fall some of the most beautiful lines in all of

dramatic literature. Shakespeare achieves his goal. Hamlet has run a year,

several hundred times over.

A. C. Bradley, “The Substance of Shakespearean Tragedy”

Shakespearean Tragedy, MacMillan and Company Limited, 1904, pp. 1-29 **David

Daiches, A Critical History of English Literature, Vol. 2.