Why Hamlet Is To Smart For Himself

Essay, Research Paper

Hamlet

Hamlet only kills Claudius when he has also murdered the queen, Laertes, and has also poisoned himself. It takes a threat of death to do what his own dead father orders him to do. A largely held opinion is that he is to emotional to do it, but it is when his emotions all come together that he murders Polonius. Another opinion is that he to full of morals to kill, but how then can he alter a note and literally sentence two old friends who were just following orders too death. It is also believed that he is too cowardly to go through with it, but if a man is bold enough to face a ghost, confront a queen and kill an eavesdropper, than what should stop him from avenging his father and ridding Denmark of the disease that infests it?s royal line. The answer is simple, he is to smart to get around to doing it.

Hamlet?s is a mind to be reckoned with. He thinks things out rather than just act on impulse. No matter what the situation, there is always something that stands in his way that a more impulsive, emotional man might overlook or just ignore. By thinking things over he gives Claudius time to figure out what he knows. If he had acted faster things may have turned out differently for our intellectual prince. The Brain can be a slow, bungling thing that is constantly tripping over it?s own feet whereas a body controlled by emotion knows no limits.

A complex mind will often add more and more factors and problems into the situation than is necessary. For example, why feign madness? What purpose does this really serve? All it did was isolate him from those that he loved. Rather than directly confront the king, Hamlet embarks upon a wild, complex scheme to discredit and trap Claudius. Wouldn?t it have helped things out a lot more to forgo the charade and just be good old Hamlet. That way nobody would have suspected anything and Hamlet would have had lots more emotional support from those that meant the most to him.

Don?t get me wrong though. Some of Hamlet?s plans almost worked out. The play for example. Claudius was so filled with rage that he was reduced to a stuttering imbecile and was ready to slaughter the actors right out in front of everybody. But like Hamlet, Claudius is no fool and caught himself just in the nick of time. The thing is, is that Claudius is to smart for these schemes. Hamlet would have to use a less thought or strategy to best him. Both being thinkers, Claudius could predict what Hamlet would do and would counter him. But if Hamlet had been a complete imbecile he would have died on the head mans block in England.

Something else to consider is the fact that Hamlet was fresh out of college. In school they teach you to think through all your options, carefully consider each, and finally make your decision based on what you have learned. Being spontaneous is not on the lesson plan. Coming straight out of all this mandatory organization, Hamlet is bound to retain at least a part of it and his thinking would be wired differently. If Claudius had hatched his plan before Hamlet left, young Hamlet?s emotions would have gotten the better of him, and he would have slain the king in a flood of unleashed rage. Laertes is a perfect example of this. The second he finds out that his father is dead he races to the palace and puts his sword tip to the throat of Claudius, Hamlet could have learned a lot from Laertes.

In the end his own gifts undo Hamlet. Even if he does finely kill Claudius, he is dead himself, and has no chance to fix the wrongs that occurred during the reign of Claudius. By procrastinating he sacrifices his chance at peace, for a long road of turmoil and pain with death as the only mercy. But not just the death of himself, had Claudius been disposed of earlier it is possible that Denmark could have been spared the wrath of Fortinbras regained it?s strength and become a grand kingdom once again.