Could it have happened differently?

[Vance]

I'm wondering what Hamlet could have done to dodge his fate. Perhaps he should have been a bit more intelligent about how to kill Claudius. Perhaps he could have had another man kill Claudius.

[NickAdams]

It was the death of Polonius that sealed Hamlets fate. If there was a way for him to avoid that, then I believe his fate would have been altered ... if fate is altered was it ever fate?

[bleucanary256]

Hi, hope someone's still reading this thread after two months, i liked the subject, so...
I think Hamlet's fatal error comes in the scene wherein (listen to me, wherein, i've been reading too much shakespeare) Hamlet comes up behind Claudius as he prays, and yet again vacillates in his resolve.
If Hamlet had done away with Claudius then, none of the proceeding deaths would have occurred. It could also be interpreted that, in letting the perfect opportunity for justice go by, Hamlet's fate becomes a punishment of his avoidance of the act. Destiny forces his hand, and things don't go as well when it's not on his own terms. It's the appointment-in-samarra lesson driven home: you can't escape fate, and in trying, you can only wriggle horizontally, not get out from under it. Weird stuff.

[Niamh]

If he hadnt procrastinated and did it sooner, he might have lived. But he didnt.

[Redzeppelin]

The great arc of tragedy required Hamlet to die; all stories are really versions of the one great story of the hero who pays the ultimate price for the restoration of the society. Disney would let Hamlet live - but Disney tells us that the battle against evil requires little by way of sacrifice; tragedy tells us that it may cost us severely.

[Jill D. Navarre]

I'm working as a director with Hamlet, and we have talked a lot about the moral imperative: Hamlet's father asking his son to kill his uncle because he himself was killed doesn't sound like very loving advice from a father to a son. All Hamlet Sr. can think about is revenge, not about its consequences. Revenge may be honourable in some cultures, but is it necessary, is it right? Hamlet's acceptance of his father's injunction starts the whole dirty ball rolling. Maybe Hamlet Jr. so much yearned for some evidence that his father loved him that he would go to any lengths to do something which might raise his father's opinion of him. How about you fathers and sons out there .. does this ring a bell?

[schadenfreude]

I believe that the only way that Hamlet could have avoided his fate is if he abandoned all his moral principles, acted spontaneously and stabbed his uncle when he had the chance. But then, Hamlet wouldn't be Hamlet anymore, would he? He would just be another rash fool in a corrupt society. Hamlet's moral dilemmas which causes him to procrasinate profusely (which, I must admit, is quite irksome at times) is what makes him an admirable person and not just another bumbling Polonious or malicious Claudius.
It seems that there is no possible way for Hamlet to save himself. If Hamlet did not avenge his father's death, he would be rebelling against the whole Elizabethan code of honour, and he would be placing his country, Denmark, in the hands of a scheming maniac. Not to mention that he would be living out the rest of his days (possible very short) in agonised torment as he will have to withstand the gruesome images of his uncle and mother's incestuous, bloody marriage.
But then, how can Hamlet avenge his father's death quickly and still retain his integrity? My conclusion is that he cannot, but Hamlet's obvious reluctance to revenge shows that he at least attempts to balance revenge with morality, unlike Laertes who quickly leaps rashly to avenge Polonious' death. Unfortunantly, they both die anyway.
It seems that this fatalistic play comes to a sort of post-modernism conclusion: you are doomed if you do and you are doomed if you don't. There is absolutely no way Hamlet can escape his fate and still remain the pensive, moralistic and tormented character we know him as.

[JBI]

Hamlet could not avoid his fate. By analyzing this play from an Aristotelian perspective, one notices that is Hamartia is caused by his father's ghost haunting him, and telling him to avenge him. At this point his fate is sealed.