Hamlet

The interpretations of the text can shift and change with time and place, but the underlying messages and themes remain crucial to the understanding of the play in any context. The messages and themes prevail in Hamlet because of its strong textual integrity relating to, specifically, the plot and its connection to the tragic structure defined by Aristotle. In saying this, in some contexts, other parts of the play are given different priorities. For example as in the 19th Century Foakes’ theory of “Hamletism” reigned true. In our context, political issues such as monarchies are of little concern and our focus and connection with Hamlet is through the twisted family values and deep philosophical messages to which we can all relate.

Aristotle’s Poetics was written in response to writers such as Homer and other writers of early literature. Shakespeare wrote Hamlet in the early 1600s which was quite some time after Aristotle’s tragic structure was created. One of Aristotle’s main arguments was that a true tragedy should “awaken fear and pity” in the responder through the plot, “there could not be a tragedy without action, but there could be without character”. After Hamlet became a major part of literature, many believed that Aristotle’s view of character and plot was out-dated. Hamlet was one of the first characters to portray tragedy without the need for plot. Boyce said; “Hamlet is almost universally considered one of the most remarkable characters in all of literature” because of his power over the plot. We can see Shakespeare’s textual integrity through Hamlet’s consistent hamartia (fatal flaw) of procrastination, and his ability to hold an antic disposition. In Act 2 Scene 2, the use of the character “Pyrrhus” in the players monologue is a metaphor for Hamlet and his procrastination as shown through “Pyrrhus stood, and like a neutral to his will and matter, did nothing”. This use of parallelism is constant within the play and Hamlet’s hamartia is pointed out...