aequitas
12-30-2005, 10:36 PM
I think this is a vaild reading of the play, and it seems to fit with the rest of the play's themes, but I do tend to be little overzealous when it comes to Hamlet...So here's an argument:
First of all, the ghost is, in a sense, a way for the Hamlet's father to "defeat" time's effects on men: the ghost, a memory, outlives the King.
Conversely, time is, in a sense, defeating Hamlet in his attempts at revenge: it keeps passing while Hamlet plans and over-plans and waits. The fact that it takes Hamlet so long to actually kill Claudius shows that time is especially problematic to Hamlet (more so than to, say, Laertes).
Hamlet idolizes his father--it's pretty evident from the text--and probably idolizes his memory for its ability to overcome time's restraints. This may make him evey more determined to avenge his father/his father's ghost.
All this ties into the Yoric/Caesar-as-a-keg-plug scene in Act V, in which Hamlet discusses (or, rather, monologues on) death in general and the "dust-to-dust" idea.
Hamlet's breakthrough comes after he realizes that time is completely out of his control: when he accepts the duel with Laertes, he acknowledges that it doesn't really matter when he dies, since it's going to happen someday. After this breakthrough, Hamlet actually does avenge his father; his willingness to duel Laertes comes from his surrender to fortune, and the duel is where he actually kills the king. So indirectly, Hamlet's coming to grips with his lack of control enables him to avenge his father's memory.
Some of this connects to another post I made here (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=142146#post142146) on why Hamlet's a control freak.
Does this make sense to anyone? Have I gone completely nuts? And if it does make sense, then does it seem fair to say that Hamlet's need to avenge his father results from his desire for power over time itself?
Any thoughts, or even looks of extreme disbelief, would be appreciated.
First of all, the ghost is, in a sense, a way for the Hamlet's father to "defeat" time's effects on men: the ghost, a memory, outlives the King.
Conversely, time is, in a sense, defeating Hamlet in his attempts at revenge: it keeps passing while Hamlet plans and over-plans and waits. The fact that it takes Hamlet so long to actually kill Claudius shows that time is especially problematic to Hamlet (more so than to, say, Laertes).
Hamlet idolizes his father--it's pretty evident from the text--and probably idolizes his memory for its ability to overcome time's restraints. This may make him evey more determined to avenge his father/his father's ghost.
All this ties into the Yoric/Caesar-as-a-keg-plug scene in Act V, in which Hamlet discusses (or, rather, monologues on) death in general and the "dust-to-dust" idea.
Hamlet's breakthrough comes after he realizes that time is completely out of his control: when he accepts the duel with Laertes, he acknowledges that it doesn't really matter when he dies, since it's going to happen someday. After this breakthrough, Hamlet actually does avenge his father; his willingness to duel Laertes comes from his surrender to fortune, and the duel is where he actually kills the king. So indirectly, Hamlet's coming to grips with his lack of control enables him to avenge his father's memory.
Some of this connects to another post I made here (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=142146#post142146) on why Hamlet's a control freak.
Does this make sense to anyone? Have I gone completely nuts? And if it does make sense, then does it seem fair to say that Hamlet's need to avenge his father results from his desire for power over time itself?
Any thoughts, or even looks of extreme disbelief, would be appreciated.