Why Is Hamlet's Last Soliloquy
Bidden by the ghost of his father to ‘revenge his foul and most unnatural murder’ (1.5.31), Hamlet swears to avenge his father’s killing. He then fails to fulfill this promise for the majority of the play, even when the guilt of his uncle is undisputable. Yet, adhering to his father’s instructions is not so simple for Hamlet, who is confronted with an assortment of troubles and is in emotional distress. While he considers it is his filial duty to kill Claudius, he realizes that this act conflicts with his ethics. Hamlet expresses his inner struggle in his famous soliloquy: whether it is "nobler in the mind to suffer / or to take arms,” to be passive or to defend himself against the "sea of troubles" in which Hamlet finds himself (3.1.65-67). Although Hamlet believes it is his obligation to avenge his father’s death and protect the kingdom from a corrupt ruler, he delays action because he is an inherently moral individual who is fearful of death and opposed to using murder to avenge another murder.
…show more content…
At the commencement of the play, Hamlet is in the most tormenting circumstances imaginable.
While he is still grief-stricken from his father’s sudden demise, his mother marries his uncle, Claudius, within a month, who in turn robs Hamlet of the throne. Additionally, he discovers from the ghost of his father that his uncle is responsible for his father’s death. Consequently, there is a reasonable chance that Claudius will soon attempt to murder Hamlet, as he is the proper heir (Javed). Faced with an imminent threat to his life and honoring a promise to his deceased father, Hamlet must promptly kill Claudius, but he is not sure if it is the most ethically correct course of
action. Hamlet feels obliged to obtain revenge on King Claudius. He sees it as his duty as his father’s son to avenge his father’s murder and cleanse the country of its corrupt leader. He made a promise to the ghost of his father, whom he holds in the highest esteem, and he feels it is necessary to honor his oath. Hamlet already loathes Claudius for marrying his mother and replacing his father, but he does so even more after he discovers that his uncle killed his father in order to seize the kingdom. He does not want Claudius to get away with his actions. While revenge is damnable, something is crooked in the state of Denmark. As the play progresses, it becomes clear that Claudius is a villain and is plotting to murder Hamlet. Additionally, most of the court is spying on each other. The ‘time is out of joint,’ and Hamlet, though displeased by it, believes he ‘was born to set it right’ (1.5.188-189). He feels obligated to protect the kingdom from having an evil murderer as a ruler. Hamlet’s conscience inhibits his immediate action because he begins to question the morality of the Ghost’s call for revenge. He is stuck between two options: to commit murder or to allow himself and others to suffer under Claudius’ control. Morally, both are wrong, or, perhaps, both are right; this is the tragic decision with which Hamlet struggles throughout the play. Hamlet’s inability to act may derive from his religious beliefs. As Hamlet was raised in a Christian environment, his values may have been shaped by religious doctrine. While he hungers for revenge on King Claudius, he does not want to commit the sinful act of murder. Caught between two equally tough choices, Hamlet contemplates suicide. Catherine Belsey dismisses this idea in her journal article, “The Case of Hamlet’s Conscience”. She writes “Conscience forbids suicide to wretches, however intolerable their lives, and also forbids a murder which is simultaneously regicide” (Belsey). Hamlet’s conscience will not allow him to commit the act of murder, even though he feels obliged to do so. While Hamlet has no “right” course of action, he also cannot end his life because suicide, like murder, is forbidden by Christian doctrine. Moreover, Hamlet fears death because of the uncertainty of the afterlife. He says that “the dread of something after death / The undiscover'd country, from whose bourn / No traveler returns puzzles the will” (3.1.86-88). Though he toys with the notion of suicide, Hamlet is incapable of it because it violates his religion and he is too afraid of what happens thereafter. Nonetheless, for Hamlet to ignore his father’s slaughter is to risk his own death by Claudius, who is trying to kill the proper heir. The Christian belief is to leave vengeance to God, but to act passively is to leave Denmark under the corrupt rule of Claudius and jeopardize his life (Johnson). Struggling between several persuasive ideals, Hamlet’s virtue competes with his obligation to his father, and with no sufficient choice, he postpones his retribution. While part of Hamlet’s conscience is telling him to retaliate against his father’s murder, he also feels it is immoral to answer a murder with another murder. Kiernan Ryan explains that killing his uncle “would mean becoming a clone of Claudius, the mirror-image of his father’s murderer, and believing taking revenge is enough to right the wrong and settle the matter.” He then becomes a killer as well, and the guilt would stick with him. This does not resolve the murder of his father; rather, it introduces a new crime. Hamlet recognizes the ‘time is out of joint’ (1.5.188), but he believes it cannot be settled by disposing of Claudius, who is simply a product of the cruel period in which Hamlet finds himself (Ryan). While the audience would rationalize his logic if he slew the king, it is himself he cannot satisfy by doing the deed, no matter how impelling the motives may be (Snider). Hamlet’s conscience impedes his action, and he does not allow himself to kill Claudius until it is absolutely necessary. Hamlet begins to shrink from the role forced upon him by his deceased father. He is ordered to execute Claudius for no reason other than the fact that he is a blood relative of the victim of the crime. The ghost of King Hamlet exploits his child to do his dirty work, and Hamlet, as a dutiful son, feels compelled to carry out his father’s orders. Hamlet soon realizes he is playing the cliché role of the righteous avenging son—and failing. Shakespeare makes this point evident by juxtaposing Hamlet with two other characters whose fathers were murdered: Fortinbras and Laertes. Laertes actively makes an effort to get his revenge on Hamlet for accidently killing his father, Polonius. Yet, he is manipulated by Claudius and loses his own life in the process. In contrast, Fortinbras does nothing to directly avenge his father’s death and the murder eventually resolves itself (Hamilton). Neither of these provide an adequate model for Hamlet. He cannot immediately get his vengeance, since this would involve committing another crime. Nor can he disregard the crime and wait for it to settle itself because he made an oath to his father, and he feels obligated to establish justice in the state of Denmark. Hamlet scorns the fact that this responsibility was forced upon him because he does not want to perform the task of killing his uncle that is expected of him. Thus, he is miscast a role by the world around him and refuses to adhere to it; Hamlet’s moral consciousness dominates and prevents him from murdering King Claudius. Though Hamlet feels compelled to requite his father’s murder, killing Claudius will not settle his matter because his conflict has sources deeper than his uncle’s villainy. In the first scene of act five, Hamlet observes a common gravedigger crudely unearth the skills of upper-class individuals who once ruled and owned Denmark (Ryan). He says to Horatio, “Here’s fine revolution, an we had / the trick to see’t. Did these bones cost no more the / breeding but to play at loggets with them? Mine / ache to think on ’t.” (5.1.92-95). He is perplexed by the realization that power, wealth, and status are worthless after death. Thus, death provides equality, and Claudius’ death would offer retribution and make the kingdom a better place. Kiernan Ryan counters this idea by stating, “What if Hamlet’s tormented resistance to performing the role of the revenger expresses a justified rejection of a whole way of life, whose corruption, injustice and inhumanity he now sees clearly and rightly finds intolerable?” Hamlet does not see a purpose in killing Claudius if it does not change the fact that he is still a moral man trapped in the immoral “prison” that is Denmark (2.2.247). He realizes that the society in which he is living is inherently evil. While killing Claudius would eliminate his uncle’s status, it would lower Hamlet to the same level as the immoral individuals around him. Any personal contentment killing Claudius might provide him would be obtained at the expense of complicity with an evil society that is bound to foster crimes just like Claudius’s. Hamlet realizes the entire kingdom is essentially unjust, and with no adequate course of action, he stalls his action. When Hamlet finally kills Claudius, he does it impulsively out his of anger towards Claudius for causing the death of his mother’s and plotting against him. Therefore, the play isn’t about a successful vengeance of a murder; that was taken care of in a matter of seconds during the final scene. Instead, the play is concerned with Hamlet’s inner struggle to take action and the validity of revenge. While Hamlet acknowledges it is his sacred duty to avenge his father’s killing and protect the kingdom from a corrupt ruler, he also realizes the iniquity of murder. He cannot subordinate these two equally painful principles of action, and they fight for superiority in his mind.
At the commencement of the play, Hamlet is in the most tormenting circumstances imaginable.
While he is still grief-stricken from his father’s sudden demise, his mother marries his uncle, Claudius, within a month, who in turn robs Hamlet of the throne. Additionally, he discovers from the ghost of his father that his uncle is responsible for his father’s death. Consequently, there is a reasonable chance that Claudius will soon attempt to murder Hamlet, as he is the proper heir (Javed). Faced with an imminent threat to his life and honoring a promise to his deceased father, Hamlet must promptly kill Claudius, but he is not sure if it is the most ethically correct course of
action. Hamlet feels obliged to obtain revenge on King Claudius. He sees it as his duty as his father’s son to avenge his father’s murder and cleanse the country of its corrupt leader. He made a promise to the ghost of his father, whom he holds in the highest esteem, and he feels it is necessary to honor his oath. Hamlet already loathes Claudius for marrying his mother and replacing his father, but he does so even more after he discovers that his uncle killed his father in order to seize the kingdom. He does not want Claudius to get away with his actions. While revenge is damnable, something is crooked in the state of Denmark. As the play progresses, it becomes clear that Claudius is a villain and is plotting to murder Hamlet. Additionally, most of the court is spying on each other. The ‘time is out of joint,’ and Hamlet, though displeased by it, believes he ‘was born to set it right’ (1.5.188-189). He feels obligated to protect the kingdom from having an evil murderer as a ruler. Hamlet’s conscience inhibits his immediate action because he begins to question the morality of the Ghost’s call for revenge. He is stuck between two options: to commit murder or to allow himself and others to suffer under Claudius’ control. Morally, both are wrong, or, perhaps, both are right; this is the tragic decision with which Hamlet struggles throughout the play. Hamlet’s inability to act may derive from his religious beliefs. As Hamlet was raised in a Christian environment, his values may have been shaped by religious doctrine. While he hungers for revenge on King Claudius, he does not want to commit the sinful act of murder. Caught between two equally tough choices, Hamlet contemplates suicide. Catherine Belsey dismisses this idea in her journal article, “The Case of Hamlet’s Conscience”. She writes “Conscience forbids suicide to wretches, however intolerable their lives, and also forbids a murder which is simultaneously regicide” (Belsey). Hamlet’s conscience will not allow him to commit the act of murder, even though he feels obliged to do so. While Hamlet has no “right” course of action, he also cannot end his life because suicide, like murder, is forbidden by Christian doctrine. Moreover, Hamlet fears death because of the uncertainty of the afterlife. He says that “the dread of something after death / The undiscover'd country, from whose bourn / No traveler returns puzzles the will” (3.1.86-88). Though he toys with the notion of suicide, Hamlet is incapable of it because it violates his religion and he is too afraid of what happens thereafter. Nonetheless, for Hamlet to ignore his father’s slaughter is to risk his own death by Claudius, who is trying to kill the proper heir. The Christian belief is to leave vengeance to God, but to act passively is to leave Denmark under the corrupt rule of Claudius and jeopardize his life (Johnson). Struggling between several persuasive ideals, Hamlet’s virtue competes with his obligation to his father, and with no sufficient choice, he postpones his retribution. While part of Hamlet’s conscience is telling him to retaliate against his father’s murder, he also feels it is immoral to answer a murder with another murder. Kiernan Ryan explains that killing his uncle “would mean becoming a clone of Claudius, the mirror-image of his father’s murderer, and believing taking revenge is enough to right the wrong and settle the matter.” He then becomes a killer as well, and the guilt would stick with him. This does not resolve the murder of his father; rather, it introduces a new crime. Hamlet recognizes the ‘time is out of joint’ (1.5.188), but he believes it cannot be settled by disposing of Claudius, who is simply a product of the cruel period in which Hamlet finds himself (Ryan). While the audience would rationalize his logic if he slew the king, it is himself he cannot satisfy by doing the deed, no matter how impelling the motives may be (Snider). Hamlet’s conscience impedes his action, and he does not allow himself to kill Claudius until it is absolutely necessary. Hamlet begins to shrink from the role forced upon him by his deceased father. He is ordered to execute Claudius for no reason other than the fact that he is a blood relative of the victim of the crime. The ghost of King Hamlet exploits his child to do his dirty work, and Hamlet, as a dutiful son, feels compelled to carry out his father’s orders. Hamlet soon realizes he is playing the cliché role of the righteous avenging son—and failing. Shakespeare makes this point evident by juxtaposing Hamlet with two other characters whose fathers were murdered: Fortinbras and Laertes. Laertes actively makes an effort to get his revenge on Hamlet for accidently killing his father, Polonius. Yet, he is manipulated by Claudius and loses his own life in the process. In contrast, Fortinbras does nothing to directly avenge his father’s death and the murder eventually resolves itself (Hamilton). Neither of these provide an adequate model for Hamlet. He cannot immediately get his vengeance, since this would involve committing another crime. Nor can he disregard the crime and wait for it to settle itself because he made an oath to his father, and he feels obligated to establish justice in the state of Denmark. Hamlet scorns the fact that this responsibility was forced upon him because he does not want to perform the task of killing his uncle that is expected of him. Thus, he is miscast a role by the world around him and refuses to adhere to it; Hamlet’s moral consciousness dominates and prevents him from murdering King Claudius. Though Hamlet feels compelled to requite his father’s murder, killing Claudius will not settle his matter because his conflict has sources deeper than his uncle’s villainy. In the first scene of act five, Hamlet observes a common gravedigger crudely unearth the skills of upper-class individuals who once ruled and owned Denmark (Ryan). He says to Horatio, “Here’s fine revolution, an we had / the trick to see’t. Did these bones cost no more the / breeding but to play at loggets with them? Mine / ache to think on ’t.” (5.1.92-95). He is perplexed by the realization that power, wealth, and status are worthless after death. Thus, death provides equality, and Claudius’ death would offer retribution and make the kingdom a better place. Kiernan Ryan counters this idea by stating, “What if Hamlet’s tormented resistance to performing the role of the revenger expresses a justified rejection of a whole way of life, whose corruption, injustice and inhumanity he now sees clearly and rightly finds intolerable?” Hamlet does not see a purpose in killing Claudius if it does not change the fact that he is still a moral man trapped in the immoral “prison” that is Denmark (2.2.247). He realizes that the society in which he is living is inherently evil. While killing Claudius would eliminate his uncle’s status, it would lower Hamlet to the same level as the immoral individuals around him. Any personal contentment killing Claudius might provide him would be obtained at the expense of complicity with an evil society that is bound to foster crimes just like Claudius’s. Hamlet realizes the entire kingdom is essentially unjust, and with no adequate course of action, he stalls his action. When Hamlet finally kills Claudius, he does it impulsively out his of anger towards Claudius for causing the death of his mother’s and plotting against him. Therefore, the play isn’t about a successful vengeance of a murder; that was taken care of in a matter of seconds during the final scene. Instead, the play is concerned with Hamlet’s inner struggle to take action and the validity of revenge. While Hamlet acknowledges it is his sacred duty to avenge his father’s killing and protect the kingdom from a corrupt ruler, he also realizes the iniquity of murder. He cannot subordinate these two equally painful principles of action, and they fight for superiority in his mind.