Hamlet Revenge

Revenge is a strange idea. It has been around since the dawn of time. An Eye for an eye, right? If someone hits you, you hit them back harder. In the play, Hamlet, William Shakespeare, Revenge is the overarching theme of the play. As I delved deeper into studying Hamlet this semester, I've come to realize how it shows what revenge can do to a person. Hamlet views revenge as a good deed: something that he must complete to avenge his dad.

It's fascinating how this medieval story still resonates with modern audiences - we've all felt that primal urge for payback at some point. Revenge is binary, meaning it isn't only the act of revenge, there are many layers to it for example, who it hurts or who it benefits. While this ancient concept of revenge seems straightforward at first glance, Shakespeare's treatment of it in Hamlet reveals its true complexity.

The play has several critical turning points where revenge is apparent and shows what revenge can do to people, especially Hamlet. Through multiple readings of the play, I've noticed a pattern. According to Hamlet, revenge preserves honor. This belief justifies his actions. This perspective challenges our modern understanding of justice and morality. Hamlet's existentialism shapes his approach to revenge. He rejects society's moral standards. Instead, he creates his own framework for justice. This reminds me of how today's youth often question societal norms and traditional values. This moral justification for revenge becomes even more compelling when we consider the supernatural element that triggers Hamlet's quest.

In Act 1 scene 1, Hamlet talks to his dad in the form of a ghost, and learns his father was murdered, by Claudius, Hamlet's uncle and his father's brother, "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder"(1.5, 25). The first time I read this scene, I got chills - imagine having your dead father's ghost appear and demand vengeance. This quote is the beginning of Hamlet's existential crisis. He is ordered from his father to murder his killer which Hamlet was ready to take revenge for his horrible murder. The weight of this supernatural command must have been overwhelming - it's not just about personal vengeance anymore, but about fulfilling a sacred duty to family. Yet the supernatural command for revenge quickly collides with Hamlet's own moral nature, creating a fascinating psychological struggle.

Moral Complexity

The complexity of Hamlet's revenge journey fascinated me from the start. Murder is against Hamlets morals, "And so he goes to heaven. And so am I revenged. That would be scanned. A villain kills my father, and, for that, I, his sole son, do this same villain send To heaven"(3.3,75-80). Here is yet another reason Hamlet should be justified in his quest for revenge. If Hamlet is going to kill Claudius, then he wants him to suffer for the rest of eternity for what he did to Hamlet's father. This isn't just about ending a life - it's about ensuring cosmic justice. In our modern world, we might call this kind of thinking obsessive or even toxic, but in Hamlet's medieval mindset, it makes perfect sense.

He refuses to kill Claudius during prayer. A death in prayer might send his uncle to heaven. Hamlet wants more than revenge - he wants to control his uncle's eternal fate. The theological implications are fascinating. Hamlet throughout the play does not act on the murder that he promised his father. In Act Two, scene two Hamlet expresses that he hasn't done anything: "That I, the son of a dear father murdered, Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words And fall a-cursing like a very drab, A scullion! Fie upon 't, foh!"(2.2, 545). Reading this soliloquy aloud in my drama class really brought home the depth of Hamlet's self-loathing and frustration. While Hamlet's moral dilemma forms the philosophical core of his revenge quest, the family dynamics add another layer of complexity to his situation.

Family and Betrayal

The family dynamics in Hamlet hit particularly close to home for many readers, including myself. He viewed his father as a powerful, fair, and noble King, "So excellent a King, that was to this Hyperion to a satyr. So loving to my mother"(1.2, 140) which is why Hamlet was so dire for revenge. When discussing this in our study group, we couldn't help but draw parallels to how children often idealize their parents. His mother betrayed his father and then tells Hamlet, "Good Hamlet, cast thy nighted color off, And let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark… All that lives must die, Passing through nature to eternity."(1.2, 70) Hamlet is told by his own mother that death happens, she has no sympathy for Hamlet who just lost his father, even worse he was murdered.

When the ghost of King Hamlet says, "That incestuous, that adulterate beast"(1.5,49) he is implying that she never loved him, cheated on him when he was alive, and used him for the power and wealth. The raw emotion in this accusation resonates even today - the pain of betrayal transcends time. Gertrude then makes Hamlet feel as if he is in the wrong for mourning his father's death, "Why seems it so particular with thee?"(1.2, 75) asking why is this so particular or important to you? Having experienced loss myself, I understand how such dismissal of grief can feel like a second betrayal. He feels that his own mother doesn't even care about him or his dead father. The ripple effects of Hamlet's revenge extend far beyond his immediate family, poisoning even his closest friendships.

Price of Vengeance

The psychological cost of pursuing revenge becomes increasingly apparent as the play progresses. In Hamlet's most famous soliloquy we see the character that he developed into: "To be, or not to be? That is the question Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And, by opposing, end them? To die, to sleep"(3.1, 57-63). Due to Hamlet's duty bound revenge that was consequently forced upon him, he considers how easy it would be to kill himself and end all of his troubles. Our class spent an entire week analyzing this speech, and each time we found new layers of meaning about how revenge can poison one's mind.

The King and Queen send Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to spy on Hamlet to see why he is going crazy. These characters represent how revenge can corrupt even friendship. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were Hamlets old friends, which Hamlet hadn't seen for a while. In our modern context, it's like finding out your best friends are secretly reporting your social media activity to someone you hate. After the death of Polonius, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were asked by the King and Queen to take Hamlet to England, with a letter instructing Hamlet's death. Their deaths highlight negative effects of revenge because they are in a situation between the King and Queen, who at the time had total power. As the revenge plot spirals towards its inevitable conclusion, we see how it affects not just Hamlet, but every character in the play.

Final Consequences

Shakespeare's use of the two side characters played a big role in how Hamlet's conscience changed over the course of the play. Unlike Hamlet's calculated approach to revenge, which I've always found fascinating, Laertes does the opposite: "That both the worlds I give to negligence. Let come what comes, only I'll be revenged Most thoroughly for my father"(4.5, 108). This contrast perfectly illustrates how different personalities approach revenge - some overthink, others act instantly. Laertes, unlike Hamlet, promises that "my revenge will come"(4.7, 29) because he doesn't have the same moral struggles.

This analysis has taught me something important. Revenge isn't just a plot device. It reveals Shakespeare's writing style. More importantly, it shows how people struggle with moral choices. The characters' internal battles reflect universal human experiences. The genius of Shakespeare lies in showing us how revenge can destroy not just the target, but the avenger as well. For example, Hamlet had a lot going on in his life: His girlfriend ended their relationship, his dad was murdered by his uncle and remarried to Hamlet's mother. These layered motivations make the story feel real and relevant even today. In a sense, Hamlet's delayed revenge reflects not just hesitation, but the complex reality of human nature itself.

Would Shakespeare's message about revenge resonate so powerfully if Hamlet had simply acted immediately? I don't think so. It's the delay, the philosophical struggling, and the ultimate price paid that makes this story timeless. While the events of Hamlet take place in medieval Denmark, the psychological truth about revenge that Shakespeare reveals remains startlingly relevant.

Modern Reflections

Studying Hamlet's revenge through a modern lens reveals universal truths about human nature. While my classmates often argue that Hamlet should have acted faster, I think his hesitation makes the study of revenge in Hamlet more compelling. Unlike modern revenge stories that focus on quick gratification, Hamlet's revenge journey forces us to examine deeper questions about justice and morality.

The concept of revenge in Hamlet particularly resonates with our current cultural moment. My literature professor made an interesting observation. Social media has created modern forms of revenge. People now use public shaming, cancel culture, and information exposure as weapons. The methods change, but the desire for revenge remains the same. Yet Hamlet's struggle reminds us that revenge, whether medieval or modern, comes with profound psychological and moral costs.

Hamlet's revenge spreads like a contagion through the Danish court. One act of vengeance triggers another. The cycle becomes deadly. No one escapes its effects. During our class discussions, we mapped out this chain reaction: Claudius kills King Hamlet, Hamlet seeks revenge, Polonius dies, Ophelia goes mad, Laertes seeks revenge against Hamlet. It's like watching dominoes fall, each death leading inevitably to the next. The timeless nature of Hamlet's revenge story is perhaps best demonstrated by its lasting influence on literature and popular culture.

Legacy of Revenge

The examination of revenge in Hamlet has influenced countless works of literature and film. In our drama club, we recently compared Hamlet's revenge plot to modern movies like "The Lion King" and "John Wick." While these stories might simplify the moral complexity that makes Hamlet's revenge so fascinating, they show how this theme continues to captivate audiences.

What makes Hamlet's revenge unique is its psychological depth. Through his soliloquies, we don't just see a man plotting revenge - we see his mind unraveling as he grapples with the moral weight of his task. During our class performances, I played Hamlet in the "To be or not to be" scene, and trying to capture that mental turmoil gave me a new appreciation for how revenge can poison someone's mind.

Shakespeare's genius in portraying revenge in Hamlet lies in showing us both its necessity and its cost. Through my multiple readings of the play, I've come to see it as a warning about the price of vengeance. Yes, Hamlet eventually gets his revenge, but at what cost? The death of Ophelia, his own moral corruption, and ultimately his life - was it worth it?

Contemporary Significance

Analyzing Hamlet's revenge in today's context raises important questions about justice and retribution. In our increasingly divided world, where the impulse for revenge often masquerades as justice, Hamlet's story feels more relevant than ever. The play reminds us that revenge, even when seemingly justified, can lead to unforeseen consequences.

My personal journey with understanding revenge in Hamlet has changed how I view conflict resolution. While Hamlet's situation is extreme, his internal struggle reflects universal questions: When is revenge justified? Does vengeance bring peace? How do we balance personal justice with moral integrity?

A lot can be learned and taken away from the theme such as why people think revenge is necessary or what are its consequences, both good and bad. In Shakespeare's Hamlet, the only thing that was achieved was revenge. Although it can be justified, the play comes to the conclusion that revenge is negative. The true tragedy of Hamlet lies not just in the deaths that occur, but in how the pursuit of revenge transforms a thoughtful prince into an instrument of vengeance.

Perhaps that's why Hamlet's revenge narrative continues to resonate - it reminds us that vengeance, no matter how justified, always comes at a cost. As I finish my analysis of this timeless play, I can't help but wonder: in a world still plagued by cycles of revenge, what lessons can we learn from Hamlet's tragic journey?

Did you like this example?

1605

87