The Changing Character Hamlet In Act Ii And Act Iv

692 Words3 Pages
In Shakespeare's Hamlet, although the character Hamlet makes similar points about himself in the soliloquies of Act II and Act IV, he seems to be less self-blaming and more in control of his emotions in the Act IV soliloquy. In the Act IV soliloquy, Hamlet is less self-blaming and more in control of his emotions. In Act II Hamlet blames himself for the delay in his revenge, "O, what a rouge and peasant slave am I!" (2:2:519). He also seems to be more self-abusive in his expressions, "Why, what an ass am I!" (2:2:553). Hamlet's deep depression is expressed through his comparison of himself to the lowest and most worthless things he can think of. However, in the Act IV soliloquy, Hamlet uses logic to reason his delay in killing Claudius, "How all occasions do inform against me and spur my dull revenge!" (4:4:32). While he is still a bit emotional, he is less self-abusive and more in control of his feelings, "How stand I then, that have a father killed, a mother stained." (4:4:56). Hamlet's reproach of his actions is gentler and less derogatory. He uses reason to explain how certain occasions have delayed him rather than blaming himself for backing out on his plans. In both soliloquies Hamlet makes comparisons between himself and other characters. In Act II he compares himself to an actor and in Act IV he compares himself to Fortinbras. In both soliloquies Hamlet uses the comparisons to put himself down for not carrying out his actions. In Act II Hamlet is angry with himself because he doesn't understand how an actor can get so emotional over a speech that he is reading, while Hamlet, who is actually in the real situation, is passive in his emotions, "Is it not monstrous that this player here, but in a fiction, in a dream of passion, could force his soul so to his own conceit." (2:2:520). In Act IV Hamlet expresses admiration for Fortinbras' courage and ambition

More about The Changing Character Hamlet In Act Ii And Act Iv

Open Document