The majority of the plays we have read this semester have had clearly defined roles of protagonists and antagonists. For instance, King Richard III was as crooked as his back and Othello stood as the foreigner led astray by emotions. However, our current play of Hamlet raises some interesting questions about the namesake character. With Claudius firmly in place as the guaranteed evil, does this immediately thrust the Danish prince into the position of hero? It seems like a given, but as per usual Shakespearean way, a wrench or three has been thrown into the system.
Unlike your typical hero, a general malaise hangs over Hamlet like hideous curtains; he is consistently down and out and wearing his emotions on his sleeves, shoulders and belt-buckle. Does this create a challenge in gaining the admiration of the audience? A more determined, headstrong figure might possibly do the job, but I feel that Hamlet sits on the fence between revengeful nephew and sad sap who could kill either the villain or himself at any given moment. This, I feel, compromises his standing as the classical hero of the story.
In addition, there is also the issue about his interpretation of the ghost's desire to "remember him." Hamlet takes this as a means to avenge the death of his father, but the question of reliability arises. Is the ghost's insistence of the good kind, or is it laden with a sort of evil that comes as baggage with the paranormal. Spirits in Shakespearean plays often come with an omen of death; is the death in question only Claudius or the entirety of Denmark's royalty? I feel this mucks up the idea of Hamlet being a hero. Only of the absolute tragic kind can a hero's action lead to pure destruction on all sides.
So, I shoot the question out to the entire Shakespeare class and, since this is the internet, the whole wide world: is Hamlet a true heroic figure?
6 comments:
I think to answer the question we'd have to come up with a definition for "hero". In the play Hamlet continuously compares himself to Hercules, just as the female characters are compared to other Greek figures and persons from the Bible. It's interesting in that while the comparison for the women illustrates their positions in their world (like Jephthah, Ophelia is made a victim.sacrifice for the male dominated values of her society; like Hecuba, Gertrude's worth-and therefore her power-stems from her childbearing potential) the comparison for Hamlet contrasts with his position. Hercules is the classic hero: male, strong, persevering, determined, triumphant. Hamlet, meanwhile, is questioning, hesitant, and "unmanly." The one similarity between the two is that both are subject to powerful women: Hercules was always persecuted by Hera and Hamlet is threatened/haunted by his mother's marriage to Claudius.
Hamlet is more of a philosopher than the classic hero, and therefore I think he stands as the beginning of the new hero, the first in the line of what we now call "anti-heros." Today we have James Dean from "Rebel Without a Cause," Paul Newman in "Cool Hand Luke," Donnie Darko, Holden Caulfield, Grendel (my favorite), The Underground Man, Ellison's invisible man, and a whole slew of others. (Not many female antiheros; I wonder why?) So Hamlet is a true heroic figure, because his constant questioning of a world that is so egregiously malformed can be considered an act of heroism in itself.
While I have to agree with your points of clear protagonist/antagonist I still have to wonder what is Hamelt's true role within this play. If he is not the hero and some poor deranged boy, then who could possibly be the leading man? Laertes perhaps? There is no clear line I feel within this play, unless you feel there is something to price otherwise?
The fact that Hamlet is so outspoken about his emotions does not create a challenge of gaining the audience's admiration, but is part of the reason why he is the most admired out of all the Shakespearean characters. Hamlet is a true heroic figure in that he gives his self to a right cause, that being to avenge his father after his murder at the hands of his brother, Hamlet's uncle, Claudius. The fact that he is so conflicted gives him a human side, which is what has made Hamlet Hamlet; he is the most relatable out of the Shakespeare plays. Hamlet essentially is Shakespeare's best crafted figure... there is way to much to say about him, the likes of which a comment cannot do him justice.
Tyler,
I really enjoyed your post and it's catchy title! I too have been thinking about this and I would agree with your point about Hamlet being able to kill his uncle or maybe even at some points, himself.
Is Hamlet a hero? Maybe he's just more of a realistic character who struggles and preservers through his life. He is pulled in many different directions and I think deal with them in the best way that he can (his family has more issues than many families presented on Jerry Springer, he's got the whole idea of the crown to grapple with and really has very few people to trust besides Horatio and maybe a ghost.
I was also thinking about Othello, who also does not turn out to be the hero of the play. I'm enjoying these new types of characters, who don't seem to fit the Disney role of the hero and are somewhat relatable.
Tyler,
I really enjoyed your post and it's catchy title! I too have been thinking about this and I would agree with your point about Hamlet being able to kill his uncle or maybe even at some points, himself.
Is Hamlet a hero? Maybe he's just more of a realistic character who struggles and preservers through his life. He is pulled in many different directions and I think deal with them in the best way that he can (his family has more issues than many families presented on Jerry Springer, he's got the whole idea of the crown to grapple with and really has very few people to trust besides Horatio and maybe a ghost.
I was also thinking about Othello, who also does not turn out to be the hero of the play. I'm enjoying these new types of characters, who don't seem to fit the Disney role of the hero and are somewhat relatable.
I believe Hamlet has heroic characteristics we are keen of in story telling, but his inactions in a failure to positively resolve the play, evident with Ophelia, deem him less than that.
In the affirmative, he holds the unfading resolve of a hero in his unchanging gravitation to the Truth. He also embodies the archetype of "The Chosen One," being of royal blood, and the only soul with whom the ghost (inciting incident) will speak with.
However, his state of grief (A major dark force propelling this to tragedy)led him to emotionally torture and abandon Ophelia. A true hero would not idly stand by to such a thorough corruption of youth.
His grief leaves him unaware of certain aspects of the play, there for unaware of the whole truth, and not an absolute hero in the way we have come to know it.
Post a Comment