This is an in-depth summary of every single theme, character, critical lens / thinker and component in the play 'Hamlet'. It is at A level but would also blend into, and be suitable for, degree level due to the amount of depth. This is essentially the only thing you will need to answer an Essay Qu...
Explore Shakespeare's use of language and it's dramatic effects in act 3 scene 4 in Hamlet, model essay
A Level English Literature Hamlet Notes
In-Depth Study of Contemporary Interest in Hamlet
All for this textbook (7)
Written for
A/AS Level
AQA
English Literature B
Elements of Crime Writing
All documents for this subject (147)
6
reviews
By: anushakaajal • 7 months ago
Very insightful
By: gillamritq6 • 2 year ago
By: dautimanueladauti • 2 year ago
By: izzyphillips • 2 year ago
AMAZING!!
By: sofiamackie • 3 year ago
By: manveenchopra • 3 year ago
Seller
Follow
study1404
Reviews received
Content preview
Hamlet Essay Plans
‘In the world of Hamlet trust is a rare commodity’
Using your knowledge of the play as a whole, show how far you agree with this view
of Hamlet.
Introduction - In Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, the theme of distrust lays in all four corners of
this dwelling through the presence of eavesdropping. This sly way of spying allows the
characters to foil each other’s plots, and discover hidden secrets. It also raises the question
about the strength of relationships between people within the castle.
Hamlet’s distrust of conventional beliefs about the world:
Upon the hasty marriage of his uncle and mother, he finds himself compelled to doubt the
existence of true love and friendship. In his first soliloquy Hamlet states:
“How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable
Seem to me all the uses of the world!
… ‘tis an unweeded garden
That grows to seed. Things rank and gross in nature
Possess it merely.” (1.2)
The troubling vicissitudes Hamlet endures throughout the play is marked by his futile search
for a higher order within the universe, that he fails to find, this leads to a distrust of religion:
Hamlet, according to the French poet Mallarmé, moves through the play as “the dark
presence of the doubter”
This intense doubting of the world consumes Hamlet after he speaks to his fathers Ghost,
“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in your
philosophy.” (1.5).
“There is nothing good or bad but thinking makes it so” (1.5)
Hamlet rejects the idea of objective moral truth and sees a lack of definitive value in the
world. Harold Bloom argues, “Hamlet, more than any philosopher, makes us see the world in
a way we do not want to see it”.
In 1872, Fredrich Nietzsche argued in The Birth of Tragedy that Hamlet’s problems with trust
stem from thinking not too much too deeply.
Hamlet is evidently an intelligent character, with his philosophical methods of tackling his
internal conflict enabling Shakespeare to project such conflict on a cosmic scale. His
intelligence is tinged with an intense scepticism, embodied by his soliloquies.
“To be, or not to be” (3.1)
This antithesis of words emphasise Hamlet’s inner struggle to cope with two opposing forces
operating within him which are preserving moral integrity and the need to avenge his
father's murder which Richard Burbage, the famous Elizabethan tragic actor, for whom
Shakespeare wrote most of his tragic roles, would have performed this. Whether to continue
to exist or not – whether it was more noble to suffer the “slings” and “arrows” of an
unbearable situation, or to declare war on the “sea of troubles” that afflict one, and by
opposing them, end them.
,“O that this is too solid flesh would melt.” Hints at longing for death, distrusting life.
“Flesh that melt” implies suicide. Hamlet is aware that the 5th Commandment “Thou Shalt
not Kill” forbade suicide and so the fact he begins to even contemplate such extreme ideas
contextualises the extent of his depression and the distrust of existence. He repeats later on
but with “too, too” doubling showing the lack of progress and the paralysis Hamlet feels.
Hamlet’s distrust mirrors the nature of the Renaissance occurring in Elizabethan England,
beliefs and assumptions that had been taken to be the truth were being rigorously
questioned. Despairing, critical, disillusioned, unbalanced, rebellious figures pervade
Shakespeare’s plays. By rejecting, resenting and defying the established conventions he
becomes a philosophical radical who questions the presupposed ideas that are the
foundations of Elizabethan society.
He does not trust Laertes in Paris. Having given Laertes the “Leave to go” back to Paris (1.2),
he then Employs devious methods of espionage to uncover information. Uses Reynaldo to
investigate Laertes while he is in Paris to “observe” him, “By indirections find directions out”
to find out whether he is “Drinking, fencing, swearing” (2.1). Embodies the surveillance
society of Elsinore as a “prison” and ultimately is his hamartia.
He is obsessed with surveillance. He instructs Reynaldo to use indirect and devious methods
of inquiry. The fact that he recruits Reynaldo to spy on his behalf is significant in portraying
his over-bearing and sly character because “Reynard” means “fox”, a creature traditionally
thought of as cunning and difficult to detect. This is emphasised by the 2009 RSC production
of Hamlet, whereby footage of CCTV cameras frame Polonious when he is ordering Reynaldo
to spy on Laertes.
Government spying and repression was widespread in Shakespearean England. Every play
was subject to government censorship. These turbulent circumstances fuelled Shakespeare’s
portrayal of Polonius as a devious, meddling being who is always prying into others’ affairs.
“Claudius and Polonius have been eavesdroppers together” – Walter Gierasch
Hamlet shows no remorse after Polonius is killed, he voices his epitaph “Thou wretched,
rash, intruding fool … Thou find’st to be too busy is some danger” (3.4), Hamlet’s distrust of
Polonius surfaces and there is a sense of poetic justice achieved.
“A certain convocation of politic worms are e'en at him.” (4.3) – When Hamlet is questioned
about where Polonius is, the imagery he uses reinforces the sense of distrust he felt.
Greenblatt argues that that this passage parodies the debate about transubstantiation i.e.
the transformation of the body and blood of Jesus into the bread and wine of the Christian
communion or mass. Protestants delightedly pounced on the logical absurdities involved in
transubstantiation, continually taunting the Catholics that the body of Christ must then be
chewed, swallowed, and digested, making “a progress through the guts of a beggar.”
Likewise, a mouse or rat might catch some leftover crumbs and feast on God’s body.
Greenblatt points out that Hamlet’s language insistently recalls these Protestant polemics
against the Mass. Illustrates Hamlet’s distrust towards Catholicism.
,Distrust of the Ghost’s Validity:
Stephen Greenblatt in his book Hamlet in Purgatory argues that we should only be
concerned with the “poetics” of purgatory and that it is irrelevant to speculate about the
theological nature of the Ghost, but better to be immerse in the “magical intensity” of the
apparition.
Graham Bradshaw vehemently disagrees with this and in line with Wittgenstein’s Lecture on
Aesthetics, he argues we cannot usefully discuss the “poetics”/ “aesthetic values” without
considering the subject matter behind them. Bradshaw, as well as A.C. Bradley maintain that
Hamlet is Shakespeare’s “most religious play” and to “diminish the play’s religious terrors is
to diminish its dramatic terrors”.
The nature of the Ghost in Hamlet is riddled with ambiguity, audience members are unsure
whether it is a “Spirit of health, or a goblin damned” or whether it “Brings with thee airs of
heaven or the blasts from hell” (1.5). Given the importance and emphasis placed on religion
in Elizabethan society, an early 17th Century audience are likely to have associated
supernatural apparitions with Lucifer and evil. Hamlet’s perception of the Ghost ebbs and
flows throughout and his trust in the ghost wanes significantly throughout the play. At the
end of Act One, after re-joining Horatio following his meeting with the Ghost he declares, “It
is an honest Ghost, that let me tell you”. However, in his soliloquy at the end of Act Two a
sense of mistrust creeps into Hamlet’s mind and considers whether the Ghost was sent to
take of advantage of his suicidal melancholy. “The spirit that I have seen/ May be the devil”
(2.2). A.C. Bradley in Shakespearean Tragedy takes a fairly direct stance towards the Ghost,
he argues that the Ghost is not just “Thy father’s spirit” but also the “majestic and
incontrovertible messenger of divine justice”. He goes onto argue that Hamlet does in fact
trust the Ghost and that his questioning of the Ghost’s validity is “no genuine doubt but an
excuse for his delay”. Bradley insinuates that Hamlet does have the commodity of trust,
namely in the Ghost and that he should have unequivocally executed the “Dread command”
that the Ghost initially posited. John Dover Wilson in What Happens in Hamlet, maintains
that the Ghost’s provenance is alarming and would have been particularly distressing for the
first audience’s.
, ‘A great surprise of the play is that Claudius has a conscience’
Using your knowledge of the play as a whole, show how far you agree with this view of the
character.
Introduction - Nicollo Machiavelli wrote ‘The Prince’ in 1513, which set out a list of
guidelines of how to cease the throne and consolidate power. Shakespearean critics have
often categorised Claudius as a callous, “Machiavellian” figure in an absolute. However, the
on-going fascination with Shakespeare’s Hamlet is somewhat indebted to the sophistication
of the characterisation of Claudius. It would be an oversimplification to gloss over the
intricacies entangled within Claudius’ nature and to simply pigeonhole him as ‘evil’. Given
the psychological realism in Hamlet and in-depth exploration of the main characters,
Shakespeare avoids a one-dimensional juxtaposing of an antagonist with a hero. It is
therefore not necessarily a surprise that Claudius “has a conscience”, however his
conscience does ultimately fails him, leading to the demise of his “Ambition… Crown… and
Queen” (A3.S3)
Claudius the manipulator:
Richard Altik claims that “The cunning” Claudius’ “evil has corrupted” the Kingdom of
Denmark which Hamlet feels the obligation to put right. In Claudius’ dying moments, Hamlet
smears him as an “incestuous, murderous, damned Dane” (A5.S2). He constantly
manipulates everyone around him in order to further his agenda. Illustrative of his conniving
ascension to the throne; Claudius’ unscrupulous nature is akin to the serpent’s in the Garden
of Eden. King Hamlet’s Ghost describes Claudius as “The serpent that did sting” him in his
“orchard” (A1.S5) – reminiscent of Eden which was so rife in Catholicism and their beliefs.
“adulterate beast” with “shameful lust” (A1.S5)
Claudius unfaltering hypocrisy and duplicity as he killed his own brother, “there’s such
divinity doth hedge a king, that treason can but peep to what it would” (A4.S5)
His premeditated prose shows his manipulative nature. Andy Lavender calls Claudius “calm”
and “reasonable” Conniving nature emphasised by his “bitter cold” introduction and the
“dreaded” nature of the opening scene, the juxtaposing “delight” of the vibrant and
celebratory mood of the second scene achieves dramatic contrast and is incongruous with
the mood in Denmark. Represents Claudius creating a façade that he wants others to see.
“But now, my cousin Hamlet and my son” - (1.2). The bizarre conjunction of the two
relationships “cousin” and “son” highlights how distorted the relationship between Claudius
and Hamlet really is. Superficially an endearing, sentiment but it exposes Claudius’ true
intent to demoralise Hamlet. Through the lexical field of family closely linked to incest in
concomitance with the possessive use of personal pronouns, Claudius appears as an
ingratiating manipulator.
“Tis unmanly grief” Claudius’ criticism over Hamlet’s mourning highlights a particular
callousness and indifference as he shows little sympathy towards Hamlet but rather
undermining and insulting him, calling his emotion over his father’s passing “unmanly”.
Hamlet: “my uncle, my father’s brother” - (1.2) is a somewhat awkward and clumsy
tautology. The appositive verb usage could be interpreted as Hamlet not only rejecting
Claudius’ self-imposed position of father, but also a way of distancing himself from Claudius.
Martin Scofield argues that Claudius is “morally empty” due to his unsympathetic nature
Hamlet: “O villain, villain, smiling damned villain … that one may smile and smile and be a
, villain” - (1.5) Hamlet muses on the notion that Claudius has hidden his deceit and villainy
behind a “smiling” facade, links back to the idea of performance, pretence and the conflict
between appearance and reality.
“Revenge should have no bounds” (4.7) Not only highlighting Claudius’ lack of piety, which is
notable given his fear of divine retribution as expressed in his soliloquy, but also his lack of
scruples in contrast to Hamlet - whilst Hamlet refused to kill Claudius in the act of prayer,
Claudius is endorsing revenge in the church. This reinforces the characterisation of Hamlet
and Claudius as the moral hero and the villain respectively.
Denmark has become “an unweeded garden” possessed by “things rank and gross in nature”
– the words “rank and gross” stress the destructive nature of this influence – the word
“rank” has connotations of festering and rot – the nature of the Danish Kingdom too has
begun to rot and corrode in the hands of the Machiavellian Claudius.
“If it be so Laertes… will you be ruled by me?” -Claudius as a constantly machinating, plotting
machiavel. Using Laertes’ grief and anger as a tool to achieve his aims.
Carla Stockton says Claudius is “clearly the antagonist”, the religiously principled audience is
meant to disassociate themselves from his behaviour.
Provokes Laertes, “was your father dear to you” – testing Laertes’ passion– fashioning a tool
through which he can attack Hamlet. Twisting and instrumentalising him to prove his love
for his father.
Suggests Laertes is “the painting of a sorrow”, and “a face without a heart” in the process –
infuriates Laertes by indicating Laertes’ grief is not genuine, but a mere imitation of such a
powerful emotion. This is ironic as Claudius is the one who is a fake.
Laertes “I’ll not be juggled with” ironically as the villainous Claudius systematically outwit
and corrupt the gullible and defenceless Claudius.
Claudius is shown to be evil due to his failure to adhere to religious rules and teachings – he
consciously disobeys these.
Incest is forbidden, such a union is explicitly forbidden in Leviticus XVIII, a Biblical book. The
1567 Incest Act made it clear that to fornicate with your dead husband’s brother or dead
wife’s sister was “abominable vile and filthie”, the first audience’s of Hamlet would have
been receptive to this and thus, as it was “Goddis worde”, it was eternally binding and could
not be undermined”
It is a Sunday that Claudius is breaking the Fourth Commandment, and thus compelling men
to work on Sabbath. “does not divide the Sunday from the week” This would suggest to the
audience that Claudius, the new king, was modern, pragmatic, and prepared to defy
conventional morality.
Claudius’ habit of breaking these moral, religious codes at the heart of Shakespearean
society means that a Shakespearean audience would have perceived him to be a sinner and
a malevolent being as a result.
Claudius assures Laertes that it is in the nature of revenge to “have no bounds” and
therefore “no place indeed should murder sanctuarize” – Claudius argues that the necessity
for revenge is so great that it is acceptable for him to kill Hamlet in Church.
Claudius’ conscience weighs him down:
Wilson Knight says that Claudius is presented to be “not a criminal” but “a good and gentle
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying this summary from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller study1404. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy this summary for R223,66. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
