Thought VS Action
Evans1
Jeffrey Evans
B Boisvert
AP Literature
11/22/14
Thought VS. Action
Across many works of William Shakespeare, it can be seen that shakespeare preferred not men of thought nor men of action, but the combination and interaction of the two. If not for the men action, nothing would be achieved. If not for the men of thought nothing but useless action would occur. This can be illustrated in Hamlet where Hamlet ( a man of thought) squares off against Claudius ( a man of action) who killed his father). This interaction can be seen in two examples in the play. First, is Hamlet trying to prove how Claudius is guilty of the murder of his father. Second is the king making the decision to hide behind the tapestry and spy on Hamlet.
Lastly, it can be seen how both action and thought are required for the play to have meaning and what happens when there is an imbalance of the two.
In the play Hamlet the lead character Hamlet tries to revenge his father’s slaying by killing the murderer. This murderer turns out to to be his uncle Claudius who became king.
Throughout the play Hamlet tries to devise a way to prove Claudius’ guiltiness in the murder of his father. For Hamlet, being a man of thought, many of these ideas never get placed into action due to his overwhelming state of indecision. Intellectually he could be considered far superior to anyone in the royal court, however he is plagued by the non ability to make rapid “gut”
Evans2
decisions. In Act 3 Scene 2 Hamlet makes his boldest move in the play. He tells the players who have just arrived to add a key scene to the play that they will be putting on for the king and rest of the court. The scene that is added is made to mimic the actions that Claudius committed when killing King Hamlet. This move on the part of Hamlet was meant to jostle the king and allude to the fact that Hamlet knows of the murder. Unfortunately while the king notices this addition, it does not have the
Jeffrey Evans
B Boisvert
AP Literature
11/22/14
Thought VS. Action
Across many works of William Shakespeare, it can be seen that shakespeare preferred not men of thought nor men of action, but the combination and interaction of the two. If not for the men action, nothing would be achieved. If not for the men of thought nothing but useless action would occur. This can be illustrated in Hamlet where Hamlet ( a man of thought) squares off against Claudius ( a man of action) who killed his father). This interaction can be seen in two examples in the play. First, is Hamlet trying to prove how Claudius is guilty of the murder of his father. Second is the king making the decision to hide behind the tapestry and spy on Hamlet.
Lastly, it can be seen how both action and thought are required for the play to have meaning and what happens when there is an imbalance of the two.
In the play Hamlet the lead character Hamlet tries to revenge his father’s slaying by killing the murderer. This murderer turns out to to be his uncle Claudius who became king.
Throughout the play Hamlet tries to devise a way to prove Claudius’ guiltiness in the murder of his father. For Hamlet, being a man of thought, many of these ideas never get placed into action due to his overwhelming state of indecision. Intellectually he could be considered far superior to anyone in the royal court, however he is plagued by the non ability to make rapid “gut”
Evans2
decisions. In Act 3 Scene 2 Hamlet makes his boldest move in the play. He tells the players who have just arrived to add a key scene to the play that they will be putting on for the king and rest of the court. The scene that is added is made to mimic the actions that Claudius committed when killing King Hamlet. This move on the part of Hamlet was meant to jostle the king and allude to the fact that Hamlet knows of the murder. Unfortunately while the king notices this addition, it does not have the