I think the
whole play (Hamlet) is about madness but a different kind of it. The main character Hamlet is mad from the
start. He is mad about getting revenge. He wants to avenge his father and this desire
causes lots of people’s death. We see a
massacre at the end of the play which shows us the madness once more. Madness is not just a mentally thing. It can appear with desires we have. It can happen when we are too conscious. That may be a message from the play. Hamlet is aware of who did what. He sees a ghost and he is not doing any
extreme behavior towards the ghost. He just
wants revenge. He is not after fame or
becoming the king. Hamlet is not like King Lear. King Lear was caring about fame and wealth. He couldn’t understand the difference between
truth and lie, and then he becomes mentally ill. That is what we can call a mental
problem. He understands the truth in the
very end and he was sorry for what he had done, but it was too late. Hamlet wasn’t feeling regretful. He avenged his father in the end. So what do you think about these plays
madness situation? Is there a reason for
both Lear’s and Hamlet’s madness or they are just doing everything wrong?
Batuhan
I think Hamlet does care about becoming the King, and this is why he sees Claudius as his ultimate enemy, because in one stroke Claudius has deprived him of his father, of his mother (because Gertrude is bound to side with Claudius no matter what), and of his chance to become the King (remember when he complains that he "lacks advancement" and also when Rosencrantz & Guildenstern tell him that he will be the next King, Hamlet is very flippant -- "while the grass grows, the steed starves.")
ReplyDeleteBut I don't think Hamlet is "mad" as such, it's just something that he puts on, many times during the play he speaks more sense than any of the "sane" characters.
Lear on the other hand is quite a way away from being sane, he does seem completely incapable of rational thought after the episode on the heath. The difference is that Lear's madness isn't an act to fool anyone, his deprivation (of his kingdom, his daughters, and his power) does make him "mad", insofar as we can define what madness is etc.
-- Idil
Re Hamlet's ambition to be a King, I just came across a very interesting fact whilst I was looking through the notes to my edition of Hamlet (it's the Pengun version). Apparently at the time Denmark was governed by an elected King, and not by bloodline succession. This also explains why Hamlet "votes" for Fortinbras at the end of the play, why Claudius gets to be King, etc.
ReplyDeleteThere's also a rather intriguing anecdote: In 1597, when an ambassador from Poland arrived at Queen Elizabeth's court to crtiticise her on behalf of the Polish King, the Queen retorted that his King must be an ignorant young man, "being chosen not by right of blood but by right of election, and newly at that."
So, that's one mystery sorted!
-- Idil
Lear goes mad because the things that happen to him completely shatter his (rational) idea of the world as an orderly place, right? And his idea of order is unassailable because not only is it an order universally accepted by mankind but, as king, he is at the center of it, between God and the rest of mankind. Further, as king, whatever he THINKS, automatically IS, and therefore all is right between the world and himself. To learn that this is a mistaken idea and that he has no power actually and that there is in fact no harmony between his inner reality and the external world is more than his poor human mind can take. He comes to himself in the end because he manages to go a little bit beyond his mind, or ego, during the night on the heath.
ReplyDeleteFor Hamlet too there is something "rotten in the state of Denmark," and as the heir apparent he would be expected to feel it and to remedy the matter. A king is "sovereign" and a cure is "sovereign" if in fact it heals. So Hamlet might share some of the causes of madness that affect Lear, but I would agree that MOST of his madness is "madness" feigned and therefore proceeds from other causes. Question: if you pretend to be mad long enough, though, might you in the end become truly a bit insane?
I think it depends. It is like an actor getting carried away by his role and remain on that role forever.
ReplyDeleteBatuhan