FREE ESSAY ON AVENGING A FATHER

AVENGING A FATHER

Avenging a Father's Death
There are many different reasons why Hamlet must avenge the death of his father the late
King Hamlet. The aspect of justice versus revenge is a prominent theme throughout the
play. Prominent characteristics in each of the characters seeking revenge shows the
different aspects of what each character feels is justice. Hamlet is notoriously known
for being a man of action. This characteristic hampers the chain of events that follow
after his father's slaying. There are many reasons why Hamlet wants to avenge his fathers
murder, and justice and revenge play a big role in when and where his revenge on Clauduis
is played out There is the revenge that he feels must be carried out to save his families
name. One of the most common themes is an "eye for an eye", and this is shown many times
through out the play. This is the main difference in the revenge that hamlet seeks
compare to that of the characters foil Laertes. There is also the problems and the
turmoil Hamlet goes through with on when and where he must get revenge for his father,
because he is having trouble justifying the murder himself.
Critics argue weather or not hamlet waited too long to seek his revenge on Claudius.
Weather or not this is a justifiable act is up to the reader. In an article entitled,
Hamlet and Two Witness Rule" by Peter R. Moore, the work of two scholars is used to draw
compelling arguments for both sides of the issue of the murder being justifiable. Scholar
S.F. Johnson says there are certain books in the bible calling for revenge as the right
thing to do in the case of murder. He cites, Numbers 35:30 "Anyone who kills a person is
to be put to death as a murderer only on the testimony of witnesses. But not on is to be
put to death on the testimony of one witness." "This permits or commands a man whose next
of kin has been slain to kill the slayer"(Moore1). Therefore is makes Hamlet
unaccountable towards God for his actions. Eleanor Prosser the second scholar in his
article claims, Numbers requires the avenger to act immediately and without hatred or
malice(1). This seems more plausible an argument for justifiable murder if it is a heat
of the moment act. Moore agrees with Johnson on this matter however saying, Johnson is
quite right, as several aspects of Mosaic Law on avengers of blood were in Shakespeares
mind when he penned Hamlet...(1). This makes a strong case for why Hamlet should have
acted earlier if he was wandering about the repercussions for murder in the eyes of God.
This is the part of the play were the old phrase an eye for an eye comes to play. Hamlet
would only be giving Clauduis what he deserves. If murder were justifiable in some severe
cases then why did he wait for so long? Boris Pasternak's views on why Hamlet waited so
long is this,
The real problem of Hamlet's character concerns not his procrastination, but rather the
fact that living in a world where evil reigns, he finds himself every moment in danger of
succumbing to the general infection. Even while preparing to carry out an act of
justified vengeance, he causes, in the process, unwarranted pain. How to remain pure in
circumstances where evil is unavoidable-here is one of the major human problems rising
from the tragedy.(France 23)
This shows more insight into why Hamlet waited as long as he did before getting his
revenge. He is a good person at heart and does not want to lower himself to the level of
his uncle who is A little more than kin, and less than kind(1.2.65).
When one looks at the thought and turmoil Hamlet goes through it is easy to see the
difference in the personality traits of Hamlet and Laertes and the different ways they go
about achieving their revenge. One critic Boris Pasternak said of Hamlet He is not at all
a young man, but and aggressive heretic, burning with joy of struggle, drunk with
struggle with an unequal struggle: against him is forces, his only weapon is
thought(France 25). This is where is where the main difference between the two characters
is seen. While hamlet and Laertes are both honor bound to avenge the murder of their
father they go about it in different ways. Laertes is a man of action, filled with
impulse. He admits his own treacherous nature, and he does it with great pride. Why, as a
woodcock to mine own spring, Osric; I am justly killed with my own treachery(5.2.317).
Laertes murders Hamlet in a church thus widening the gap of their differences. Laertes is
a foil of hamlet throughout the play for these reasons.
Bibliography
Work Cited
Bevingtom, David. Twentieth Century Interpretation of Hamlet: A Collection of Critical
Essays. Discovering Authors. 1968. Pg. 1-12 Hamlet
Bloom, Harold. Bloom's Notes: William Shakespeare's Hamlet. Broomall, PA, 1996.
Doloff, Steven. Shakespeare's Hamlet. The Explicator, vol. 52 Pg. 69-70. 1994.
Dominic, Catherine C. Shakespeare's Characters for Students. Detroit, MI: Gale Research,
1997.
France, Karen. Boris Pasternak's Translation of Hamlet. Harvard Press. 1974.
Moore, Peter R. Hamlet and the Two Witness Rules. Notes and Queries, vol. 44 Pg. 498-504.
Dec. 1997.
Scott, Mark W. Shakespeare for Students. Detroit, MI: Gale Research Inc., 1992.
The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Bible Publishers,
1985.