Within the tightly plotted play "Hamlet," William Shakespeare devises a series of dark twists for his protagonist to follow, satisfying the revenge genre -tragedy and, in turn, generating a heartbreaking story that still fascinates audiences of all classes. The concept of revenge is mainly pursued by the character of young Hamlet, who seeks a way to punish his uncle in response to his father's sinful murder, which is described in a very positive way, seen particularly through Hamlet's soliloquies, one of which includes the excerpt “such an excellent king.” Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay However I disagree with the idea that Hamlet's revenge was "virtuous" and come to the conclusion that the protagonist's vaulting ambition was completely useless; instead of naturally inheriting the crown, Hamlet much preferred to play the role of a public hero rather than a methodical character who would plan ways to discreetly incriminate Claudius before assisting with meting out justice on his guilty uncle, who would consequently be punished according to the highest degree of treason. For many, the fictionalized figure that Hamlet hoped to convey throughout the play is the overall impression that the audience was left with even after his death in the play's closing scene, forming the impression that Hamlet was incredibly brave, when under this, Hamlet was simply an attention seeker and lacked stability, ultimately causing him to mutate into the monster himself. These negative qualities are immediately identified by the audience in Act One, Scene Two, which sees Shakespeare causing Hamlet to isolate himself from the celebrations surrounding the table, blessing the supporters with his moody presence. This is actively demonstrated through Shakespeare highlighting through Gertrude, that Hamlet is a living contrast to the promising atmosphere within the gathering, which sees Claudius making speeches about the future of Denmark. It is as a result of this contrast that Gertrude commands Hamlet through a simple imperative syntax to "throw away thy night-colour". The adjective "nocturnal" has connotations of darkness, in the same way as the dark colors of night, all of which connect to death. through the shared belief that "sleep is the death of everyday life", Gertrude wishes for Hamlet to turn away from his father's death and allow some of the light of the surrounding positive aura to ignite some sort of spark within Hamlet. Although Gertrude tries to be as respectful as possible towards her son through the gentle opening of "Good Hamlet", her attempt to free her son from his melancholy mindset is ultimately in vain, as Hamlet continues to pass by in a rude manner to conflict with the words of his uncle, who now wears his father's crown. The premodifier used in this example also refers to the description given to Hamlet's father, who was also known by many as a "good king", in this case, being the words of Horatio. This relationship serves as a gesture of homage to Hamlet, as it suggests that Hamlet is similar to his father through the idea that he is "good" and noble in terms of how he cries so much for his father. Not only that, but we see that Hamlet is quite passive-aggressive through the line “A little more than kin and less than kind!” in response to Claudius greeting him as his son, which is a thoughtful action performed in an attempt to simply make Hamlet feel included within the family; rather than isolated in pain andsadness. Such a gesture obviously not appreciated by the protagonist, which can almost be interpreted as a threat from Hamlet, which allows the audience to create the inference that Hamlet is driven by his character, from the fact that "less than kind" ends with an exclamation point indicating anger and the volatility of the character in such a vulnerable moment. I feel that Shakespeare portrays Hamlet in this particular light early on in the play to foreshadow Hamlet's aggression towards the other characters in the play, whether they are trying to be nice to him, or the opposite. The fact that Hamlet felt able to threaten despite his pitiful state also foreshadows his confidence in his own abilities to cause harm to others; a trust that is greatly required as he seeks revenge on his uncle in retaliation for the murder of the dead king. I admit that in the times of the 17th century, people's lives were dominated primarily by the Omniscient God, who would have seen through the alleged "snake bite", which befell the life of Hamlet's father. This therefore means that Hamlet's actions would be somehow justified through the biblical teaching of "an eye for an eye" which presents the idea that the sins suffered as a result of the murder can be forgivable by God since he was simply putting into practice the teachings of the Bible and bring justice upon a force that had been left unchallenged by anyone else except Hamlet. However, due to the presence of the supernatural in the play, it is evident that Elsinore is primarily a place without God, as Protestants did not believe that Purgatory existed. , or that the ghosts were anything other than an evil threat, making me question the validity of Hamlet's defense, after all, if Hamlet were to work in correspondence with the Bible, surely there would be more of a divine presence within Elsinore, rather than be however wild and sinful it is. Even so, there are Bible teachings that also convey messages of forgiveness, Jesus telling his followers to forgive people "not seven times, but seventy-seven times", rather than setting out to avenge others for their actions. . In conclusion, surely someone who has followed the teachings of the Bible would rather be more likely to please God than end the lives of those he created in his image, making his actions increasingly contradictory to the heroics of the person that the public disappoints. see other than. Another example of Hamlet's selfish tendencies is demonstrated by his selfish refusal to kill Claudius in Act Three, Scene Three, which sees the perfect time for Hamlet to carry out his plot to avenge his father's life. During this, Shakespeare includes Hamlet's train of thought, which is becoming increasingly obscured from the audience, suggesting that Hamlet has become so absorbed in himself and his plan that he regards the audience, who is witnessing the protagonist's gradual downfall as a result of such heinous plans. Despite the fact that Claudius is an open and easy target for Hamlet to kill, he explains that he feels incapable of doing so, wishing to capture his uncle when he is not free from sin rather than in the midst of praying, which would cause him to ascend to heaven rather than heaven. the hell to which Hamlet feels he truly belongs. This withdrawal is demonstrated through the interrogative structure of Hamlet's utterances, which end with the minor syntax "No" to conclude the directions of his actions. This decision is reached after the conflict expressing the concern that "am I then avenged / To take?" him in the purification of his soul / When will he be fit and seasoned for his passage? This excerpt,.