If I were in Hamlet’s position, I would wait. The worst thing that he can do in the current circumstance is to act on his emotions and commit to a rash act. I would take my time, count my chickens, and see how things develop. Even though he just got information from a figure that claims to be the ghost of his father that may very well not be the case. In the current place in time, several stars have aligned in favor of the ghost, but in my eyes, it is not enough to act upon. The ghost claims that Hamlet’s Uncle, Claudius, murdered Hamlet Sr. with snake poison. There is no hard proof for this act to hamlet’s eyes, or to his knowledge. He should wait and continue doing what he has been until facts start to form and he has something worthy to act upon. What happens if he acts on his instincts and slaughters everyone, and is wrong in his assumption? It would give him a bad name and probably would ruin his life. I would rather act on something that I know is right and fact rather than something that I think is fact. If Hamlet takes his time to justify what the ghost had just told him and put some concrete evidence under it, and then acts with a blazing slaughter of family members and associated people, it would be the correct move in my mind. Even though what the ghost had said seems logical and correct, the ghost very well could be tricking Hamlet into ruining the Denmark throne for a sweep by the King of Norway.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Alex FujaPart time nerd, Full time geek. Archives
March 2016
Categories |