To See or Not to See, Essay Example

When I started to write this essay, first I thought I was going to write about how Claudius stole the throne from its rightful heir Hamlet, and how Claudius and his court were a bunch of drunkards driving the country down, and how Hamlet sought revenge for his father’s death. But then I decided to give the play another look. I saw that I had soaked up little the first time around. I think Hamlet will have something new each time you re-read it.

My first mistake was based on Act 3, Scene 4 (“That from a shelf the precious diadem stole”). I assumed that Hamlet was of course the rightful heir to the throne now occupied by his uncle Claudius, the murderer of Hamlet’s father, the King.  But it turns out there has been a lot of head-scratching on this point. In a nutshell, it seems to turn on whether Shakespeare had historical Denmark in mind, or England of his own time. If it was Denmark, then Hamlet was probably the rightful heir. But some critics say it was England that Shakespeare was really talking about. If they’re right, then Hamlet’s right to the throne is open to question.

My second mistake was that Claudius and his court were a bunch of drunkards who were weakening the country. I got this idea from Act 1, Scene 4, where Hamlet complains about the new King’s loud drinking going on inside the castle. But then Hamlet admits it is a custom followed “east and west” that makes “us” (not just “them” — Claudius and court) held in contempt. The drinking is a national pastime. Claudius is just a part of it, not its leader and cause.

My third mistake was that Hamlet seeks revenge for his father’s death. But he doesn’t. He seeks revenge for his father’s ghost, who told Hamlet to kill Claudius with a clean conscience. For Hamlet, his father is very much alive and suffering in purgatory for a life of earthly sins. (I’ll pass over the question of whether the old king got what he deserved).

In Shakespeare, it’s easy to miss details the first time around. And thereby hangs a tale.