Vengeance In Shakespeare's Hamlet

1127 Words5 Pages
Revenge in Hamlet Throughout history, revenge has been a natural part of human instinct as evident in genocides and world wars. In many works of literature, authors emphasise the desire for vengeance that humans experience which is rooted from a sense of injustice. In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, pursuing revenge can cause one to act upon his or her emotions, rather than logic and reasoning; this lack of thought placed into planning and executing an act of vengeance ultimately leads to the downfall and demise of Hamlet and Laertes. Throughout the play, changes in Hamlets behaviour become very evident, as well as the emotional motive behind Laertes rash decision making skills. Both characters feel the need to fulfill their filial obligation,…show more content…
Laertes, in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, is a character whose personality drastically changes from start to end. At first, Laertes is portrayed as Hamlets old friend from college, a loving and caring brother, and a tough son. However, as Laertes hears of Polonius’ death, he returns to Denmark with a large rebellion ready to avenge whoever is responsible for his fathers’ death. Before even knowing who killed his father, Laertes is immediately prepared to get revenge; “I dare damnation. To this point I stand, / That both the worlds I give to negligence, / Let come what comes, only I’ll be reveng’d” (4.5.132-134). Laertes completely disregards any other emotion related to sympathy and grief and instantly turns to anger to solve his problems. His impulsive decision making skills in this act correlates to the beginning of the play. Laertes suggests that Ophelia stay away from Hamlet because he is only after her virginity and her beauty (1.3. 29-38). He unwarrantedly decides that Hamlet is not fit for his sister and that she must stop seeing him in order to stay chaste and…show more content…
Although Hamlet and Laertes both go about their revenge in different ways, they both ultimately want to avenge their father’s death. This feeling of owing a favour to one’s parent is defined as filial obligatory. Hamlet feels bound to accept his father’s filial obligation by avenging King Claudius for his murderous act of killing Hamlets father. Essentially, Hamlet is having an internal conflict between obeying his filial duty and doing what he thinks will benefit him. In contrast, Laertes does not struggle between making a decision. He does not rationalize his decision to kill Hamlet, and acts purely out of anger. This idea of filial obligation is explored by Kastan in his article titled Hamlet and the imitation of revenge. Kastan believes that “[Hamlets] filiation becomes a diminution. He would be the only son, sworn to remember and avenge his father” (Kastan 111). In the Elizabethan era, it was a highly practised for sons to seek revenge on their parents behalf. In Hamlets case, his late father requests of him to pursue revenge on Claudius, in order for King Hamlet to be cleansed of his sins. Hamlet constantly deliberates this regicide and considers the consequences of his actions in his “to be or not to be” (3.1.60-80) soliloquy. However, Laertes has set his mind on plotting to kill Hamlet and does just that. In the end, Hamlet
Open Document