Hamlet’s feigned madness The greatest debate about Shakespeare’s Hamlet is whether Hamlet was faking his madness or not. A person who is insane does acts of extreme foolishness or irrationality while being unaware that he or she is performing such out of the box acts. Hamlet could not have possibly been insane as there is evidence throughout the play that he can control his actions and choose the moments when his ‘madness’ appears. Hamlet uses this “antic disposition” (Hamlet I.v.172) to throw off the other character such as Polonius and Claudius and gain the upper hand in the grand scheme of things. If it weren’t for Hamlet’s supposed insanity then the King would have seen that Hamlet knew the truth about the old King’s murder and would have had him dealt with immediately.
They are corrupt because they have social status but then they abused this power. Furthermore, the villains in both The Duchess of Malfi and Measure for Measure have the characteristics of Machiavellian villains. Per contra, Angelo is not like the villains in The Duchess of Malfi because he does not have an assistant to help him and does not have a personal vendetta against another in the play. He just wants to eliminate crime but, eventually, contradicts his own laws he is enforcing by asking Isabella to give her body to him sexually to save her brother: ‘You must lay down the treasures of your body To this supposed, or else to let him suffer: What would you do?’ (Act 2 Scene iv) This quotation tells us that; females of that day and age would have done exactly what they were told to do, on command if told to. We can see this by looking at the language of this quotation.
Deadly sins The seven deadly sins are renowned for a reason, which is that just one of them can drive a person insane. Greed and envy together can lead a person into doing immoral and unjustified deeds. In the play "Hamlet" by William Shakespeare, Claudius is the villain who contradicts Knight's The Embassy of Death because Claudius's actions and behavior result from his innate greed for wealth and envy of true love that his brother King Hamlet had; on the other hand, Knight views that his actions were forced upon him due to Hamlet's unstable mentality. (wrap up the thesis statement, condense to the main point. You don't need to make a comparison, but pick which view you agree with, Knight or Shakespeare's, or make it into 2 separate sentences.
Richard shows a dangerous capacity for poor judgment and fascination with luxury, which deviate from the expectations of royalty. The servile followers that Richard is surrounded by also play an integral role in his incompetence. Moreover, there is mirrored imagery when Shakespeare discusses Bolingbroke’s determination to depose Richard with the Earl of Essex’s rebellion to overthrow Queen Elizabeth. However, the Earl of Essex’s rebellion was unsuccessful, as his supporters had deserted him before arriving at London whereas Bolingbroke’s uprising was successful due to the support of the nobles. Bolingbroke strives to preserve his family honour and retrieve his rightful land, thus his ambitions prove him to be a competent co-ordinator.
The Prince has elicited debate amongst generations of readers for its seemingly ruthless approach to statecraft and its abandonment of conventional morality. What Machiavelli recommends may seem, in a different political context to the stability of interstate relations today, to be shocking or immoral. However, such an interpretation fails to consider that The Prince is very much made by and for the real world. Machiavelli’s prescriptions are tailored to circumstances where society is already immoral by human nature and is blighted by disorder. Thus this essay will posit that Machiavelli is not motivated by immorality but rather pragmatism, in his advocacy of the means necessary to achieving an ‘end’ of stability and security for the collective good of the people.
The connections in the mentioned themes demonstrates how shared ideas impact differently on individuals in different contexts. Shakespeare’s work deals with the identity of Kingship and monarchical authority and in ‘Richard II’ we see the character Richard struggle with self identity as his throne is threatened to be taken from him. As Bolingbroke takes the crown Richard believes that he is a thief of more than just his kingship, but takes everything of him, as without his role, he has no persona and no existence. We see how much Richard values the relationship between his identity and title and names as he states , while disorientated after losing his kingship ,“Nor no man’s lord! I have no name, no title.
Friar Laurence is responsible for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet because he acts before he thinks and is a selfish person. Friar Laurence is an impetuous individual. The Friar leaves Juliet in the tomb when she sees Romeo lying on the ground dead. He tries to get her out by saying “A greater power than we can contradict/Hath thwarted our intents. /Come, come away.
This is a problem because if he wants to save everyone he has to sign his name to a piece of paper saying that he is a witch but he cannot do that because he is to proud of his name to tarnish it with such a thing, and in return he dies and cannot save the community. John proctor is a tragic hero in the novel The Crucible because he won’t let himself ruin his name. Edward Murray says “John Proctor is a physically powerful, distrustful of authority, and strong willed. Struggling against his own fears and guilt, reshaped by a new understanding of self at the end of the play.” In this quote Edward is saying that John is a strong willed person that struggles against his own fears. Meaning that he wants to save the community by admitting to everyone that Abigail is just trying to get back at Elizabeth, but his own fears of what the people will then think of him is holding him back from being the savior of the community.
The murder was driven by lust for the queen and also a desire for power, two factors which remain with the king until the final moments in the play. “Mine crown, mine own ambition and my queen. Can one be pardon’d and retain the offence?” Claudius’ deceiving nature is central to the plot of the play, and is the catalyst for the betrayal of many other characters, such as Polonius, Hamlet and Laertes. Hamlet himself is not immune to corruption, and he himself deceives those around him in his actions and in his words. Following the revelation from the Ghost, Hamlet assumes an “antic disposition”, in order to distract those surrounding him from his suspicious behaviour.
In one of the early ironies of the play, Hamlet’s antic disposition, though intended to alleviate suspicion of his actions, only serves to confuse the King and inspire his decision to use Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as spies against his nephew. The King’s observation that Hamlet’s behaviour resembles “more than his father’s death” not only shows Claudius as an astute character, but also hints at a concealed fear that he may have towards the protagonist. At this early stage of the play, however, the audience has no means of deciphering the King’s true nature, as he is yet to reveal his guilt and the Ghost is an uncertain figure, shrouded in an ethereal mystery. The audience remains aware of Horatio’s warning to Hamlet that the Ghost may have an ulterior intent. Horatio even states to Hamlet that the ghost may intend to “draw you into madness”, and this line in particular reverberates in the audiences’ minds as they see Hamlet descend into an undecipherable lunacy.