Hamlet

2 Pages 503 Words

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Hamlets sanity is looked

at from two different perspectives. Is Hamlet a sane man acting mad, or is

he really a mad man. There are many “ clues “ presented during the play that

lead to the notion that Hamlet is only acting the role of madness. As Hamlet

mentions several times in the play that he is not crazy, but only acting crazy

to avenge his father’s death.

Hamlet has many reasons to be insane. He was visited by his fathers’ ghost who tells him that Hamlets Uncle Claudius has murdered him, and that Hamlet must take revenge upon his uncle. While pondering whether or not to avenge his fathers’ death, Hamlet assumes the role of insanity to confirm his suspicions of Claudius’ involvement. Throughout the course of the play Hamlet admits to certain people that he is putting on an act of insanity, and plays this cruel act role only to people whom he can not trust.

Hamlet’s logic for acting crazy is part of his plan, so that when

he kills Claudius it looks like a spur of the moment accident, and not like a

Premeditated murder, hoping in the long run to save his life from the

punishment of murder. Hamlet hesitates in the killing of Claudius, If

he were truly crazy he would not have spent so much time planning Claudius

death. He would have killed him a few hours after seeing the ghost of his father. Hamlet holds enough morals and reasoning to just run out and kill

someone.
There is a question of what being sane really is. Since it is agreeable that Ophelia was truly crazy, she can be used to make this point valid. Hamlet and Ophelia both shared the trait of having calculated thought, Hamlets verbal attacks and Ophelia's singing. They also shared a calmness before their deaths. Also if he were crazy like Ophelia he would have remained hectic up in till the time of his duel. He reasoned what death for him was, answering his question if life was w...