The Stamp of One Defect

The Stamp of One Defect
“To know a man well were to know himself” (5.2.139), the definition of a foil in Hamlet’s own words. In literature foils can be used to contrast and highlight specific qualities of the protagonist or other main characters. Hamlet has many foils throughout the play, which help to aid in the understanding of Hamlet’s character and his motivations. However, three characters in particular, Laertes, Horatio and the First Player play key roles in how Hamlet ultimately takes his revenge. It can be argued that through his deep thinking Hamlet is aware of the foils in his life and uses their differing traits to complete his own character. Laertes compared against Hamlet displays under thinking vs. over thinking. The First Player contrasted to Hamlet displays action vs. inaction. And finally, the comparison between Horatio and Hamlet reveals balance vs. imbalance. In Hamlet, Shakespeare uses the contrasting character traits of Laertes, the First Player and Horatio to reveal Hamlet’s tragic flaw and the cause and course of his revenge.
In the death of their father’s comes Hamlet and Laertes largest similarity, revenge. However, their largest distinction shows how each chooses to follow through with their revenge. Hamlet has “cause and will and strength and means” (4.4.44), while Laertes is determined to “go far with little” (4.5.138). Hamlet is “bound” to revenge, but upon finding out who he must kill “lose[s] the name of action” (3.1.89). Laertes on the other hand reacts with unwavering “readiness”, ready to kill even the King to gain his revenge: I’ll not be juggled with. To hell, allegiance! Vows, to the blackest devil! Conscience and grace, to the profoundest pit! I dare damnation. To this point I stand That both the worlds I give to the negligence. Let come what comes, only I’ll be revenged Most thoroughly for my father. (4.5.128-134)
Laertes vengeance and rash character are arguably the reason Hamlet decides to kill Polonius. Hamlet murders Polonius knowing Laertes will come after him and that “tis dangerous when the baser nature comes / between the pass and fell incensed points / Of mighty opposites” (5.2.63-65). Hamlet is aware that Laertes will be willing to “be ruled” by Claudius as long as he is able to be the “organ” in Hamlet’s death. Hamlet welcomes this as he ultimately decides to use Claudius’s own plan for Hamlet’s death as a means in completing his own revenge. Also, since Hamlet fears “self slaughter” Laertes “dares damnation” it can be argued that Hamlet uses Laertes wanted revenge as a way pass into heaven and leave this “unweeded garden”. Throughout the whole play Hamlet and Laertes are rivals with the same deed to be done, however, because of Hamlet’s overactive conscience and Laertes rash undeveloped decisions neither are able to create and execute their own plan for a successful murder.
Hamlets second foil is found in the First Player. The First Player is again similar to Hamlet in that he has a murder to avenge. Unlike the relationship between Hamlet and Laertes, Hamlet admires the First Player and how he “in a dream of passion / Could force his soul to his own conceit” (2.2.527-529). Hamlet wonders “What would he do, / Had he the motive and the cue for passion / That I have?” (2.2.536-538). Action vs. inaction, as well as the undying passion found in the First Player is the largest difference between these two foils and ultimately the character traits Hamlet wishes he held. Unlike Laertes, Hamlet consciously contrasts himself to the First Player and uses their differences to spark emotion in himself calling himself “pigeon liver’d” and “a dull and muddy-mettled rascal” (2.2.543). In revenge the First Player takes immediate action to avenge Hecuba, he comes up with a plan and executes it without hesitation. Hamlet compares himself to the First Player and in him discovers what he thinks is his tragic flaw: Yet I,
A dull and muddy-mettled rascal, peak Like a John-a-dreams, unpregant of my cause, And can say nothing! No, not for a king, Upon whose property and most dear life A damn’d defeat was mad. Am I a coward? (2.2.543-547)
Hamlet admires the actor’s passion and as well his plan, so much that he uses it as inspiration for his own revenge. Hamlet asks the First Player “Play something like the murder of my father / Before mine Uncle. I’ll observe his looks” (2.2.574-575). Because Hamlet is cautious of the Ghost abusing his “weakness” and “melancholy” he decides to use the First Player to “Play something like the murder of [his] father” (2.2.574), where Hamlet will “observe [Claudius’] looks” and then he will “know [his] course”. Hamlet decides that “The play’s the thing / Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King” (2.2.583-584). In the end, Hamlet uses his similar situation and definite differences to the First Player to instigate the first steps towards completing the revenge he is “prompted” to by “heaven and hell”. Hamlet’s last foil can be found in rational and balanced Horatio. Horatio is “a man that fortune's buffets and rewards / hast taken with equal thanks” (3.2.60-61) while Hamlet views himself as “but one part wisdom / And ever three parts coward” (4.4.41-42). The fundamental difference between Hamlet and Horatio is that Horatio’s emotions and reasoning are in balance, while Hamlet’s is very much out of balance. Hamlet values Horatio and identifies him as “he that though knowest thine” (4.6.28), Hamlet also trusts Horatio more than anyone with his “wild and whirling words” (1.5.136). Horatio completes Hamlet in that Horatio’s decisions and judgments are sound while Hamlet is naturally “thought sick”. Hamlet admires Horatio’s well-balanced judgment and uses him as a guide and a balanced conscience while he decides how to act out his revenge. It is through talking to Horatio that Hamlet ultimately decides how he wishes to act out his revenge. Hamlet converses with Horatio and decides:
Does it not, think thee, stand me now upon - he that hath killed my king and whored my mother, … is’t not perfect conscience, To quit him with this arm? And is’t not to be damned To let this canker of our nature come In further evil? (5.2.67-74)
Here Hamlet makes the decision to turn Claudius’s own plan for his murder, and backfire it to use it in his own revenge. To Hamlet Horatio is “As one in suffering all that suffers nothing” (3.2.59). Horatio holds the judgment and reasoning that would have been required for Hamlet to successfully execute his revenge and therefore Hamlet uses this foil to complete his revenge in the best way his “poisoned” mind can.
All in all Hamlet can be considered as an incomplete man. Someone with “cause and will and strength and means” (4.4.44), but “thinking too precisely on th’ event” (4.4.40) is his ultimate ruin. Throughout the play Hamlet uses the similar and contrasting virtues and flaws of three other characters in hopes of using their differing character traits to complete his own self. Hamlet uses Laertes “rashness” and “indiscretion” to counteract his “pale cast of thought” (3.1.86). Also, Hamlet uses the death of Polonius and Laertes wanted revenge as a means of forcing his own revenge and using the King’s plan as means of backfire. Hamlet uses the First Players admirable “passion” and ease of action as inspiration on how he should act himself. Through deep analysis of the First Players motives and actions, Hamlet decides how he should act himself. And finally, Hamlet uses sound and balanced Horatio as sounding board for his overactive conscience. Horatio’s balanced judgment completes Hamlet’s unbalanced reasoning and through Horatio Hamlet is able to follow through with his plans. Without these three main foils working to override Hamlet’s “viscous mole of nature” (1.2.36) it is arguable that Hamlet would have never made any progress at all in the revenge he is so “bound” to complete”