!Hamlet"s inability to act is at the root of the tragedy." How far would you agree with this view?

Alexander Pope, in his poem, "An Essay on Criticism,# states, "To err is human, to forgive, divine.#
This quotation shows Pope#s awareness of a common human aw; procrastination - "erring# on the side of
caution. He goes further to suggest, this trait is the basic separation between humanity with the divine
beings, specically, God. Hamlet could be said to possess both of these human fallibilities, and if he does,
this poetical musing serves to highlight the tremendous discordance between Hamlet and the empyrean.
In Act I, Scene IV, the ghost "beckons# Hamlet and Hamlet "follow[s] it.# This scene is incredibly tense,
with the audience fearing for Hamlet#s safety as Horatio pleads with him to "maintain his sovereignty of
reason.# However, Horatio#s initial conviction to inform Hamlet of the ghost contradicts his now cautious
approach, hinting that he is more eager to discover about the ghost than his "desperate# warnings would
belie. Indeed, it is possible to see "Hamlet# as an allegory for the story of Adam and Eve; Horatio and the
other guards representing "Eve,# and Hamlet, "Adam.# Following the news from the watchmen, Hamlet listens
to the ghost, representing the fall to temptation. The subsequent social breakdown in Denmark and Hamlet#s
death representing metaphorical exile from Eden. In terms of symbolism, this suggests the hopelessness of
Hamlet#s situation; once he decided to act on the ghost#s message, he is condemning himself to God#s
punishment and none of his later actions have any impact on his eventual fate.
Nevertheless, there are many occasions when Hamlet#s has great inuence over events,
contradicting the previous theory. None more so than his refusal to kill Claudius, in Scene III, Act I. During his
deliberations, Hamlet utters in his famous soliloquy, "To be or not to be, that is question.# At rst glance,
Hamlet would appear to be simply deliberating whether or not to kill Claudius. However, upon deeper
analysis, Hamlet seems to be questioning the philosophies of life: the fabric of being entirely. Shakespeare
contrastingly uses dental "t# and plosive "b# sounds, combined with the near chiasmus of, "To be or not to be,#
give the line a rhetorical feel, almost jest. Shakespeare realises that an answer or even a denitive
interpretation to Hamlets antithetical consideration is impossible - humorously futile. German philosopher,
Arthur Schopenhauer, realises this and in response writes that, "death is not an absolute annihilation,"
meaning death is not the end - "quietus# has no known constants and nothing is absolute. This lack of
certainty dramatically distorts any ideas of justice. Hamlet could slay Claudius while he prays. "Perchance
[for Claudius] to dream,# thus "send[ing Claudius] to heaven. Some critics argue that this course of action
would have prevented the coming tragedy. However, Claudius would become a martyr if he were to die
during prayer, ironically, making him eligible for sainthood. Hamlet is aware of this and realises that death
would not "end the heart-ache," or "the thousand natural shocks# he feels. He notes that, if it did, it ""tis a
consummation devoutly to be wished.#He wishes that by killing Claudius now, that would end his problems,
but likely it would not. This causes the countenance of his soliloquy to be desperate, with Shakespeare
powerfully symbolising the alienation of Hamlet. On one side, "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,#
and on the other, "a sea of troubles." Consequently, it is entirely possible that Hamlet#s inaction is born from
Hamlet#s realisation that no outcome would be desirable, rather than mere procrastination on his part.
Directly supporting this is theory is Act III, Scene IV, when Hamlet murders Polonius. This scene is a
cathartical moment in "Hamlet.# Not simply because of Polonius# murder but also because Gertrude rejects
Hamlet#s accusations, choosing to place trust with Claudius over Hamlet. This is highly microcosmic of the
breakdown of Danish society, proving that the natural order in Denmark is utterly disturbed, with even the
Douglas Ebanks AS English Literature: Hamlet
maternal relationship apparently meaningless. He tries in vain to convince his mother to not "let the bloat
King tempt [her]# and similarly, to his friends, Rosencrantz and Guildernstein, he queries their true allegiance.
Hamlet asks, "What have you, my good friends, deserved at the hands of Fortune, that she sends you to
prison hither? Hamlet light-heartedly refers to Denmark as a "prison,# as subtle way of testing his friends
loyalty. With equal acuteness, Hamlet personies "Fortune," which, due to her divine connotations, shows us
Hamlet is asking for a confession. He is untrusting, probing their actions, in the hope they will reveal
something or at least prove their commitment. His doubt is soon vindicated when they reveal they came to
Elsinore under orders from the King. Like with his mother, Hamlet has been betrayed, and essentially by Act
IV he is wholly alone in a world of "connes, wards and dungeons.#
The root of an argument with regards to Hamlets inaction is centered around, rstly, his decision to
forgo the chance to slay Claudius in prayer and, secondly, it can be seen that he only acts when action
forced upon him by the aggrieved Laertes. However, by killing Polonius, Hamlet irrevocably distances
himself from the label of a procrastinator - in fact, he is guilty of, at times, acting in a "rash and bloody#
manner. Hamlet believed that Claudius was eavesdropping, and unlike before when Claudius was praying;
the act of deception would allow Hamlet to slay Claudius without seeming treacherous. After all, Hamlet
wants to be King, he states, "[Claudius] pop#d in between the election and my hopes# and to plainly murder
the King would have him perceived as a traitor. This shows Hamlet is not motivated by mere vengeance,
indeed, if he was, his task would be simple. His monarchal ambitions are often dismissed, with the simple
conclusion that Hamlet is indecisive. This would be a shallow presumption.
Hamlet, to say the least, is not single-minded. Yes, he wants revenge, but he is reluctant to sacrice
either his reputation, those close to him to or a claim to the throne. His tragic aw is not inaction, although,
perhaps, by neglecting to act he causes the death of, "fair Ophelia,# and later his own mother. These death to
incorporate an important message on morality into "Hamlet." Hamlet believes, "I must be cruel, only to be
kind: Thus bad begins and worse remains behind.# In this quotation, Shakespeare juxtaposes "cruel# and
"kind# oxymoronically to suggest that to do right, one must forget that other people could suffer as a result.
Moreover, because of this oft-cruelty to righteousness, the worst of a character is frequently what "remains
behind."
Hamlet#s tragic aw is having multiple motivations; a view famously advanced by Isaac Asimov. The
term tragic aw is often considered to be synonymous with harmatia, yet in true Aristotelean meaning
harmatia is not evident in the demise of Hamlet. Humphrey House denes harmatia as "an error derived from
ignorance of some material fact or circumstance.# Hamlet shows ignorance of neither, he is merely
determined to revenge his father; a task an audience would consider just and fair. Thus, ultimately, Hamlet is
not a tragic hero in the conventional sense. The tragic downfall of Hamlet, a character who is fundamentally
"good,# shows Shakespeare is challenging contemporary tragic and romantic ideals, and "Hamlet# is marking
of the gradual shift from classicist to modernist tragedy, and telling of Shakespeare rebuking the neoclassic
trends of the early 17
th
century.
In order to properly answer the question of whether Hamlet#s inability to act is at the root of the
tragedy, what makes the play tragic must be clearly dened. A feminist approach would conclude the death
of Ophelia and Gertrude is the height of the tragedy. Feminists argue that they denote woman as victims of
men. Despite that, Hamlet was written in a patriarchal society, by a man, ergo, to use such an interpretation
Douglas Ebanks AS English Literature: Hamlet
would be ill-founded. No, the source of tragedy in "Hamlet# is the death of the autonomous protagonist. The
audience mourns his death above all others - if indeed the other deaths are lamented at all.
Shakespeare has created a hero, who, tragically deserted by his friends and mother, dies from
Laertes# poisoned sword. Hamlet kills Laertes# father and thus the audience does not blame Laertes. And, in
essence, the murder of Polonius can be labelled as the root of Hamlet#s tragic undoing; it turns Ophellia into
a lunatic, Laertes against Hamlet and labels Hamlet as "unhinged,# justifying, in Claudius# mind, the use of
poison both in the cup and on the sword. It must therefore be asked if, Hamlet, through his earlier inaction,
made his killing of Polonius inevitable, because of a feeling of frustration at his own indecision. This could
be answered in both ways, but, as explored earlier, Hamlet#s inaction is entirely pragmatic. In reality, had
Claudius taken the place of Polonius behind the curtain, the tragedy would have likely been avoided. As a
result, it is impossible to conclude with any conviction that procrastination was the primary source of tragedy.
Ultimately, Hamlet is the victim of tribulation at "the hands of Fortune,# and the tragedy lies at her feet.
Bibliography: "Hamlet,# New Warwick Shakespeare, Kenneth Grose, 1969, William Shakespeare
"Hamlet: York Notes Advanced,# York Press, 2003, Jeff and Lynn Wood
Word Count: 1522

Douglas Ebanks AS English Literature: Hamlet