Hamlet: A play about death

[billwic]

Death pervades the play. Of the 11 principal characters, one is already dead (the Ghost) 8 die during the course of the play (Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildernstern, Ophelia, Gertrude, Laertes, Claudius, and Hamlet), one attempts suicide (Horatio, who is stopped by Hamlet) and one is responsible for the death of thousands (Fortinbras). Death is referred to or someone dies in 18 of the 20 scenes of the play. The exceptions are the scenes of Laertes departure (1.3) and Polonius with Reynaldo and Ophelia (2.1)
Hamlet is obsessed with death. In every one of the 13 scenes in which he appears there is a reference to death or someone dies. When he first appears, (1.2) he is dressed in black and is in mourning for his father. He contemplates suicide: “O, that this too too solid flesh would melt, or that the Everlasting had not fixed His canon ‘gainst self slaughter” (1.2.129-132). His meeting with the ghost is about murder and death and a demand that Hamlet revenge his death. (1.5). He longs for death: When Polonius asks: “Will you walk out of the air, my lord?” Hamlet answers “Into my grave.” (2.2. 203-204). When Polonius says: “My honourable lord, I will most humbly take my leave of you.” Hamlet answers: “You cannot, sir, take from me anything, that I will more willingly part withal: except my life, except my life, except my life.” (2.2.210-214). When he meets with the players, he has one of them recite a speech about the death of Priam. (2.2.435-505). He asks them to play the Murder of Gonzago. (2.2.522), thinking it may cause Claudius to confess to the murder (2.2.573-590). He again contemplates suicide in his soliloquy: ”To die-to sleep, no more, and by a sleep to say we end the heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to: ‘tis a consummation devoutly to be wished” (3.1.60-64). He banters with Polonius about the death of Caesar (3.2.100-102) and talks with Ophelia about his father’s death (3.2.122-127). He has the player Queen talk of killing her husband. (3.2.172-174; 177-178). He talks of the murder of Gonzago. (3.2.230-231, 252-255). He almost kills Claudius (3.3.73-96). He frightens the Queen into believing he intends to murder her. (3.4.21). He kills Polonius, thinking he is Claudius. (3.4.24-27). He accuses Gertrude of participating in the murder of King Hamlet. “Gertrude: O what a rash and bloody deed is this!” Hamlet: “A bloody deed, almost as bad, good mother, as kill a king, a marry with his brother.” (3.4.24-26). After he is brought to the King, he banters with him about death and the location of Polonius’ body. (4.3.16-37). He ponders death and honor. (4.4.32-66). In writing to Horatio upon his return to Denmark he says: “repair thou to me with as much speed as thou wouldest fly death.” (4.6.21-22). Hamlet and Horatio are next seen in a graveyard. Hamlet engages in a discussion with the sexton (gravedigger) about corpses and philosophizes about death. (5.1.63-206). He fights with Laertes in Ophelia’s grave and wishes to be buried alive with her. (5.1.245-274). He tells Horatio of Claudius’ letter to England to have him instantly beheaded and how he substituted a new letter ordering the immediate death of Rosenkrantz and Guildernstern. (5.2.13-47). He kills Laertes and Claudius. (5.2) He stops Horatio from committing suicide, so as to have a witness to testify on his behalf. He tells Horatio “Absent thee from felicity awhile and in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain to tell my story.” (5.2 340-42). Hamlet directly or indirectly causes 8 people to die. He himself kills 3: (Polonius, Laertes and Claudius), has 2 put to death (Rosenkrantz and Guildernstern) and indirectly causes himself and 2 others to die (Ophelia and Gertrude). The last scene of the play (5.2) is an orgy of death. Four characters die on stage: Gertrude, Laertes, Claudius and Hamlet, the death of two is reported, Rosenkrantz and Guildernstern, Horatio almost commits suicide, and Fortinbras after a bloody war with Poland, enters the scene and seeing the dead bodies, says: “O proud Death, what feast is toward in thine eternal cell, that thou so many princes at a shot, so bloodily hast struck?” (5.2.356-359). The play ends on a final note of death, with the body of dead Hamlet and the others being carried off. (5.2. 388-395)

[Gladys]

Death is referred to or someone dies in 18 of the 20 scenes of the play. The exceptions are the scenes of Laertes departure (1.3) and Polonius with Reynaldo and Ophelia (2.1)
Even in these scenes we have grim allusions to human mortality.

In 1.3, Laertes warns Ophelia,


The canker galls the infants of the spring
Too oft before their buttons be disclos'd,
And in the morn and liquid dew of youth
Contagious blastments are most imminent.


Compare with 3.4, where Hamlet calls the poisoning of King Hamlet a 'blasting'.

In 2.1, Ophelia says of Hamlet,


Pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other,
And with a look so piteous in purport
As if he had been loosed out of hell
To speak of horrors

[Three Sparrows]

Hamlet is a very ethical play, a dead play, as it were, therefore a good play.
Death is the primary thought in Hamlet's mind, the King fears death, the Queen is haunted by the death of her husband, Laertes swears death, King Hamlet is dead, death is every where. Every body is dead, and haunt in the prison of Denmark. It is not just king Hamlet that is dead, but everybody is morally dead, except Horatio. What is Horatio?

[Janine]

Hamlet is a very ethical play, a dead play, as it were, therefore a good play.
Death is the primary thought in Hamlet's mind, the King fears death, the Queen is haunted by the death of her husband, Laertes swears death, King Hamlet is dead, death is every where. Every body is dead, and haunt in the prison of Denmark. It is not just king Hamlet that is dead, but everybody is morally dead, except Horatio. What is Horatio?

Horatio is the balast for the play; he balances out the darker aspects of Hamlet's being; he checks his actions unemotionally and with more logic and advises him throughout the play. He's the only one who truly knows Hamlet's thoughts and heart. In some way, Horotio acts as a mirror for Hamlet as well. Without Horatio, Hamlet would be all over the place. The play probably would end much sooner. Hamlet would be total emotion, without some outlet to express his inner thoughts. I think Hamlet would indeed gone totally insane, without this human connection to Horatio as his best friend. Ironically, in the end, it's Horatio who wishes to commit suicide but really to join Hamlet in the afterlife, I believe, or in dreamless death. It makes me think he does believe in some form of the afterlife since his last line concerning his friends makes mention of the angels conveying him to Heaven. He desires not to live on with his friend gone; which would be totally understandable; considering all the other circumstances and deaths within the play.

Billwic, I enjoyed the long 'death' post very much. Very well thought out and layed out. Is this part of a paper or thesis you might be writing? I would be interested to hear more.

I am pleased to welcome you to the forum. Currently, a few of us are disgussing the history plays, if you should be interested. We are now on Henry IV Part I. It's a little slow now but it will pick up soon. I hope to post something later tonight or tomorrow. It's the holiday weekend here so it might be later, maybe Monday night. Hope you can join us, or sometime later in a Shakespeare discussion group.

[DanielBenoit]

Oooo, this looks like such a good thread!

Were to begin?

Hamlet is the eminent philosopher of death in literature, he is one of the few characters in all of literature to have truly looked all the way into the abyss.

Take the graveyard scene for example, what I see as the greatest visual presentation of ideas in all of literature. Hamlet examines one by one all of these skulls and speculates what they were in life, who they where. He takes each one and reveals all of these "roles" of life to all end in vainity, in dirt. It's such an intriging play.

I'm tired, but I'll sure be back.

[Janine]

Oooo, this looks like such a good thread!

Were to begin?

Hamlet is the eminent philosopher of death in literature, he is one of the few characters in all of literature to have truly looked all the way into the abyss.

Take the graveyard scene for example, what I see as the greatest visual presentation of ideas in all of literature. Hamlet examines one by one all of these skulls and speculates what they were in life, who they where. He takes each one and reveals all of these "roles" of life to all end in vainity, in dirt. It's such an intriging play.

I'm tired, but I'll sure be back.

Oooo, DanielB, you are so right! I simply adore the play of Hamlet; to me it's the most honest portrayal of death and investigation into death. You said it well when you say he looked straight into the abyss. Now, I see just what intrigues me about it all. I happen to think the graveyard scene amazing. I love the way, Hamlet surveys each skull and speaks about it as though addressing a real living human being. Exactly, realising too that someday we all turn back into earth and dust. I love the ending about Alexander....

“Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth into dust; the dust is earth; of earth we make loam; and why of that loam, whereto he was converted, might they not stop a beer-barrel? Imperious Caesar, dead and turn'd to clay, Might stop a hole to keep the wind away”....

[billwic]

Thank you for your kind words about my thread. I have been studying and thinking about the play for a long time, and have posted some of my ideas.

[kelby_lake]

It's not just mortal death; the play is also about decadence and the death of greatness. Hence lots of references to Ceasar, weak leader of Rome, a once great nation which turned into 'trash'.

[Odysseus93]

Good point, but Caesar was not a weak ruler; if anything he was the opposite. How else would he have taken control of the greatest empire that had ever existed?

[kelby_lake]

Good point, but Caesar was not a weak ruler; if anything he was the opposite. How else would he have taken control of the greatest empire that had ever existed?

He was part of a triumvirate (three men with equal power ruling over Rome) (or at least in Shakespeare's play) but the other two were killed. Pompey was especially great.
In Shakespeare's play, Caesar is a weak man who views himself as a god but is blind to the opinions of those around him.

Hamlet would similarly be a rubbish king- you could easily take the interpretation that he is a narcissist unable to cope with reality. He detaches himself from Denmark.

Recently I saw the West End production of 'Six Characters in Search of An Author', which added lots of Hamlet allusions to great effect.

[Janine]

kelby lake, I think your last statement, about Hamlet proving to be a poor king, is false and unfounded. Fortinbras states otherwise and also does Ophelia in the nunnery scene. Hamlet was educated and ready to take over the kingdom. The fact, that he was underminded by his uncle and the ghost, seeking to be avenged, are two elements beyond Hamlet's control. He does not have the power, of being the king, to overcome this in a civil way. Hamlet, by feigning madness to the person(s) undermining him, shows a brilliant craftiness of purpose. No doubt, Hamlet would have made a fine king....far from what you called him..."a rubbish king". I don't think that at all. He was quite aware of the state of Denmark and disliked intensely, the way the kingdom was being run. He states this right before his encounter with his father's ghost.

[Gladys]

kelby lake, I think your last statement, about Hamlet proving to be a poor king, is false and unfounded.

Interestingly, Claudius and Gertrude reign with wisdom until Hamlet intervenes with unsettling consequences.

Ophelia's, less than impartial, praise of Hamlet pertains as much to scholarship as monarchy. Can praise from the hot-heated warmonger, Fortinbras, who fights 'even for an eggshell', count for much?

[kelby_lake]

kelby lake, I think your last statement, about Hamlet proving to be a poor king, is false and unfounded. Fortinbras states otherwise and also does Ophelia in the nunnery scene. Hamlet was educated and ready to take over the kingdom. The fact, that he was underminded by his uncle and the ghost, seeking to be avenged, are two elements beyond Hamlet's control. He does not have the power, of being the king, to overcome this in a civil way. Hamlet, by feigning madness to the person(s) undermining him, shows a brilliant craftiness of purpose. No doubt, Hamlet would have made a fine king....far from what you called him..."a rubbish king". I don't think that at all. He was quite aware of the state of Denmark and disliked intensely, the way the kingdom was being run. He states this right before his encounter with his father's ghost.

Hamlet may feign madness at the beginning but he seems to go mad anyway. Why didn't he kill the king when he had an opportunity to? Because if he killed the king, he would have to become king, and he isn't mature enough. This isn't some carefully orchestrated plan- or at least, if it starts off as such it doesn't exactly have the desired effect.

Hamlet is a bit too obsessed with the sexual aspect about his mother's marriage. He doesn't politically assassinate Claudius. Poor Hamlet's personal desires get in the way of his public duty.

[Janine]

Hamlet may feign madness at the beginning but he seems to go mad anyway. Why didn't he kill the king when he had an opportunity to? Because if he killed the king, he would have to become king, and he isn't mature enough. This isn't some carefully orchestrated plan- or at least, if it starts off as such it doesn't exactly have the desired effect.

kelby, this first part of your post has a clearer answer. He didn't kill him when the oportunity presented itself while the king was praying in the chapel. Hamlet then reasoned it would be wrong to do so since his uncle was in the church and in a state of grace; therefore he believed his soul would not go to hell but to heaven and that was no reward for his foul actions against his father. In oposition to his own father was taken when not in a state of grace; therefore the church would have believed him in Hell. If his murder was not avenged apparently he would remain in pergatory. I am not Catholic but I believe that is how it works or how people though back in those days. Later the belief system is brought up again with the burial of Ophelia who had a questionable death. If she truly committed suicide she was barred by the church to be buried in sanctified ground. The gravediggers first debate this; later it's questioned at the gravesite by Laertes and the priest.


Hamlet is a bit too obsessed with the sexual aspect about his mother's marriage. He doesn't politically assassinate Claudius. Poor Hamlet's personal desires get in the way of his public duty.

To this second part, I am clear on what you are saying. How would Hamlet reveal to the public that his uncle was a murderer? Would he announce that a ghost told him so and that now he feels it is proven from his reaction to the play - The Mousetrap? Hamlet thought he was killing his uncle when he struck the curtain, only to discover another man (Polonius) was in his mother's bedchamber. Well, I say, Polonius rather deserved it, for being such a nosy meddling person. I don't have a lot of sympathy or love for Polonius, as you can see.

[Janine]

Interestingly, Claudius and Gertrude reign with wisdom until Hamlet intervenes with unsettling consequences.

Wisdom? What wisdom...spying on people is ok and letting the kingdom go to ruin and be handed over to another country. What wisdom did they posssess in the long run? Many lines in the play point to their lack of attention to the outer threats to the kingdom. The loss of the last king, Hamlet's father, is what now determines the ruin of the nation.


Ophelia's, less than impartial, praise of Hamlet pertains as much to scholarship as monarchy. Can praise from the hot-heated warmonger, Fortinbras, who fights 'even for an eggshell', count for much?

I have to think about these and come up with quotes before I answer to this precisely. I don't have time right now, going out for the rest of the day.

[kelby_lake]

If it was a political assassination, Hamlet would've killed Claudius when he was praying. Sure, Claudius doesn't go to Hell, but he's dead, and if it's for the good of the country for Hamlet to be king, that is what he should have done. But he didn't.

And come on, Hamlet's not that nice to Ophelia.

[Janine]

If it was a political assassination, Hamlet would've killed Claudius when he was praying. Sure, Claudius doesn't go to Hell, but he's dead, and if it's for the good of the country for Hamlet to be king, that is what he should have done. But he didn't.

And how is he going to prove it's a rightous assination and then would the people believe him and would he be respected as king. No, this is the point; Hamlet is left in a precarious and bad place by seeing his father's ghost which is emploring him to avenge his murder so he might rest in eternity in Heaven and not Hell. Hamlet is acting rationally, in not killing him at that moment. Read the text, he completely rationalizes it in his mind. He is one tiny move from killing him and then refrains. I don't think he did the wrong thing at all.


And come on, Hamlet's not that nice to Ophelia. No, it turns really ugly right after he realises she is in the scheme to spy on Hamlet. She is, afterall, part of the set-up to see why he's acting this way. She also, before that refused to see Hamlet at her father's command. If she really loved her Lord Hamlet would she have done this? She is torn between father love and Hamlet's love. I think something really snaps when she gives the letters back. First off she shared intimate letters with her father and then with the king and queen. Wouldn't anyone be defensive and suspicious after these acts. Yes, Hamlet act poorly but it's understandable. I wish everyone would just give him a break for being human.

I see the play in two parts distinctively; the first half Hamlet is very manic and things move along quickly. After returning to Denmark after his sea trials he is calmer and he thinks things out more clearly. The separation has given his pause to think and to realise many things. Right after his return is the famous graveyard scene in with much is ruminated on the idea of mortality and death. That scene says so much. The only part of the story that truly bothers me about his rejection of Ophelia is when he comes from the gravesite and then seems elated and not heartbroken over the loss of Ophelia. It seems that minutes before he was exclaiming his love for her and then he sesms calm and resigned. Of course we might not know just how much time has elapsed between the two scenes. He does mention his regret to Horatio, but that doesn't seem like enough to me. From that scene onward the action again picks up and quickly the play, tragedy, is resolved.

[kelby_lake]

Hamlet may rationalise it in his mind- after all, the majority of the play is him rationalising it- but it doesn't make it rational. He could have got someone else to kill Claudius. Hamlet lives in his own little Greek tragedy where he is the avenging son. You've got the incest and death- nice tragic themes for Hamlet.

Ophelia is little in the whole grand scheme of things, hence when Hamlet is in the graveyard and sees the skull, he realises his mortality- his anagnorisis, making him a tragic figure.

Hamlet might be a betrayed lover then but he has no idea what it's like for Ophelia. She has a duty to her father as Hamlet has to his- she relies on her brother and father for protection. In Measure for Measure, Isabella says that were she to give in to Angelo, she would 'die for ever'. Of course, it is a business deal and not a relationship but it's still not a good thing to be unmarried and not a virgin. Hamlet veers between treating her as a maiden and then as a whore.

[Janine]

Hamlet may rationalise it in his mind- after all, the majority of the play is him rationalising it- but it doesn't make it rational. He could have got someone else to kill Claudius. Hamlet lives in his own little Greek tragedy where he is the avenging son. You've got the incest and death- nice tragic themes for Hamlet.

kelby, I am just saying that Hamlet does rationalize and is rational as compared to mentaslly ill or insane. I don't personally subscribe to Hamlet being mentally ill as you know from the other thread on the subject. I think he is very distressed and especially rash in part one of the play. I think I divide the play into two parts. Second part Hamlet is much calmer and resigned to fate. I refer to the time of his arrival back on Denmark's soil. It seems getting further away from the whole affair, no matter how precarious his journey on the ship was, he has seen the whole affair in a clearer light. The first half of the play he is very manic and the whole play and actions move along quickly reflecting the rashness on Hamlet's part. This is also testing Hamlet in very unusual circumstances - ones of a totally personal aspect, being immersed and entangled within a family conspiracy. I can well imagine how I would feel if I felt bombarded by people acting behind my back and knowing full well they all are talking about me and finally conspiring against me. I think, when Hamlet disengages from the center of the stress and strife and confusion he begins to see things more clearly. At least he does calm down some but then is again temporarily stirred up by the graveyard scene and Ophelia's burial.


Ophelia is little in the whole grand scheme of things, hence when Hamlet is in the graveyard and sees the skull, he realises his mortality- his anagnorisis, making him a tragic figure.

Yes, I think I do agree with this, if I am reading it correctly. This scene is the consumate death scene in the play in my own opinion. It certainly does make one consider mortality, even their own. I think that Hamlet here makes a direct connection to the audience and everyman.


Hamlet might be a betrayed lover then but he has no idea what it's like for Ophelia. She has a duty to her father as Hamlet has to his- she relies on her brother and father for protection. In Measure for Measure, Isabella says that were she to give in to Angelo, she would 'die for ever'. Of course, it is a business deal and not a relationship but it's still not a good thing to be unmarried and not a virgin. Hamlet veers between treating her as a maiden and then as a whore.


I think he treats Ophelia badly, yes, I don't one minute deny that fact; however, she is not entirely innocent either. She does several things which do not aid or support Hamlet in his strife; just how understanding is she really? She is also rash in going along with the scheme with her father and the king to spy on Hamlet. She might have to obey her father, but it's quite sad to think he can control her so entirely. He's quite a meddlesome old man. Ophelia is not a teenager; she's a grown woman. I have read that Hamlet is suppose to be about 35; He is a grown man. We are not talking about adolescents, being dictated to by their parents. She was pretty weak herself not standing up for her lover and being constant with her love for him. She did argue some with her father, but then gave in entirely to his demands.

I think the main point that Shakespeare is bringing out here in the nunnery scene is the fact that he feels betrayed by all women. He can no longer trust any of them. He believes now they paint their faces - great metaphor- to disguise who they really are inside. This last thread that existed between Hamlet and the female element is not broken with the knowledge that Ophelia knows about her father spying on Hamlet. There might have been a shred of hope for them at that point, had this not happened; but this was, as they say, 'the last straw.' At that point is when I see the greatest tragedy for Hamlet. I feel for him more right at this pinacle moment than even how I feel at the end of the play. This action of the two fathers spying on Hamlet and knowing that Ophelia is part of this really saddens me for both Hamlet and Ophelia.

[kelby_lake]

What is Hamlet's tragic flaw?