I have to say it’s very agreeable to read someone writing seriously about literature. I also have aspired to do this as I am surrounded by books, and memories of books, in my home.
Appreciate this commentary. An addition about Fortinbraus, who I believe is mentioned in the beginning of the play as a possible challege waiting. He is Hamlet’s rival destiny, depending on his actions. Eros and thanatos are Hamlet’s challenge and nemisis. Death-vengence obsessed, he is unable to remake himself. Through love and pragmatism he could have transformed tragedy into higher purpose-detiny.
It is was required of Marco Polo, Ceaser or other transformative figures of Shakespeare’s knowledge.,Elizabeth i, his patron, had a mother beheaded, imprisonment at the hands of her sister. Even ascending to power, plots of death were constants. She was to many accounts saddened at the necessity of imprisoning and the execution of Mary Queen of Scots. Mary’s life was a tragedy.
So that is my view, why Hamlet’s tragedy was all to human and not the consciousness of the victor. Transformation was not possible.
Sorry to be obtuse. Fortinbraus was (to my recall) waiting to see what Hamlet would do. Hamlet did not rise to this existtentisl challenge. He was emotionally unable to rally himself to save his kingdom or his life. He could have married Ophelia, worked with his mother to act as the Prince with responsibilites to his people. He chose not just mourning but revenge and death. The people not being conquered is nowhere in this play. So yes Fortinbras was the anti-Hamlet, but he waited before invading.
That is a very well put argument! And i believe this also works well within my own understanding of the play which is the avoidance of problems until they become absolutely anarchy and conflict arises from them i guess
Interesting addition! I would however like to admit that i am a bit lost at certain points. I think i understand what you are saying but not completely. Could you please elaborate on your point a bit more and make it more clear?
I have to say it’s very agreeable to read someone writing seriously about literature. I also have aspired to do this as I am surrounded by books, and memories of books, in my home.
Then do it! Would love to read about your insights!
Appreciate this commentary. An addition about Fortinbraus, who I believe is mentioned in the beginning of the play as a possible challege waiting. He is Hamlet’s rival destiny, depending on his actions. Eros and thanatos are Hamlet’s challenge and nemisis. Death-vengence obsessed, he is unable to remake himself. Through love and pragmatism he could have transformed tragedy into higher purpose-detiny.
It is was required of Marco Polo, Ceaser or other transformative figures of Shakespeare’s knowledge.,Elizabeth i, his patron, had a mother beheaded, imprisonment at the hands of her sister. Even ascending to power, plots of death were constants. She was to many accounts saddened at the necessity of imprisoning and the execution of Mary Queen of Scots. Mary’s life was a tragedy.
So that is my view, why Hamlet’s tragedy was all to human and not the consciousness of the victor. Transformation was not possible.
Sorry to be obtuse. Fortinbraus was (to my recall) waiting to see what Hamlet would do. Hamlet did not rise to this existtentisl challenge. He was emotionally unable to rally himself to save his kingdom or his life. He could have married Ophelia, worked with his mother to act as the Prince with responsibilites to his people. He chose not just mourning but revenge and death. The people not being conquered is nowhere in this play. So yes Fortinbras was the anti-Hamlet, but he waited before invading.
That is a very well put argument! And i believe this also works well within my own understanding of the play which is the avoidance of problems until they become absolutely anarchy and conflict arises from them i guess
Interesting addition! I would however like to admit that i am a bit lost at certain points. I think i understand what you are saying but not completely. Could you please elaborate on your point a bit more and make it more clear?