Introduction
The tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is a play depicting tragedy written by Shakespeare and set in Denmark. The play outlines a drama where Prince Hamlet is on a revenge mission to wreck his uncle, Claudius after being inspired by the ghost of his father, King Hamlet. Claudius had killed his brother the King and assumed the throne immediately marrying his brother’s widow. This play remains one of the most perplexing and the most popular among the works of Shakespeare. The artistic stature associated with the play is universally admired regardless of whether it is a drama, literature or philosophy. Though its excellence cannot be explained in a nutshell. Apart from the artistry associated with the play, much of its appeal is based on the character Hamlet himself. In his mission to avenge his father’s murder, he faces obstacles such as ethics, morality and humanity in the call of duty. Most critics have been tantalized by the Hamlet mystery in the essence of his complex behavior especially on his reluctance to act and somehow elements of indecision (Shakespeare, n.d).
Thesis statement
This paper critically analyses a literary critic on Hamlet done by E.K. Chambers with much focus on the strength and weaknesses of the critic.
Secant of the literary critic
Most critic works about the tragedy of Hamlet; Prince of Denmark usually revolve around the question as to whether Hamlet was mad. The problem outlined in the play is not sufficiently soluble in the essence that psychologists haven’t been able to draw the thin line between insane and sane. Pathologist however are able to come up with abnormalities in sections of the brain referring to them as deceased while lawyers are able to apply practical tests and determine that the behavior of an individual does not serve the public interest. This means beyond all these reasoning and application, it is quite difficult to deduce that in a given way, madness lies. Therefore, the Hamlet tragedy remains a mystery to most critics till to date.
I would agree with Chambers that Shakespeare did not design the play to outline the essence of madness in vengeance but it turned out to that the actions of Hamlet were way out of category from other men. If it were to outline the essence of madness then that would deprive the humanity works of Shakespeare making them sort of meaningless (Chambers, 2006). This means that the tragedy of Hamlet does not base itself on the pillars of beginning with a murder then culminating into a massacre. It holds more spiritual weight than that. The play outlines that the most tragic thing which can ever happen to humanity is the ruin of a high soul. This makes the theme of Hamlet. I like the way Chambers analyses the theme. I wouldn’t agree much that the hamlet tragedy was a tragedy of failure which was made possible by a low environment and obstinacy of state of affairs. Such an analysis demystifies the play and makes it drift from the common assumption that the theme of the play is based on madness.
I would concur with the manner in which Chambers describes the character Hamlet. This description befits the character in a manner that outlines the shreds of humanity in him. Speaking of a man of high intellectual gifts and temperament depicts Hamlet character as a normal human being who later discovers himself. In the self-searching, Chambers gives an insight first of how calm he was before being called up and his peace distracted by the ghost of his father. Distraction of the calm peace, Chambers outlines that once he was not like an ordinary prince. Hamlet was one character who is touched by finer issues according to Chambers. Hi wit is keen edged and dipped fully in irony. The critic achieves much in describing the irony aspect of the wits associated with the character, this makes it easy to connect the same with what the author outlines as the theme of the play.
Again, it is a score where the critic, Chambers in his description of the person character, Hamlet depicting him as an individual of passion for reading, friendship and love, for instance where he shows his strong affection for Ophelia in compromising ways (Shakespeare, n.d). These draws the whole analysis from the madness aspect which most people would assume to be the theme of the play. Though the people around Hamlet could not understand his intellectual levels, the critic scores by majoring on this to support his argument that the theme of the play is on ruin of a high soul. I agree to the same in that shreds of humanity becomes depleted when trigger factors advance to destabilize the spirits of an individual. Mixed with high intellectual abilities, an individual can turn out to be a disaster to humanity. That is why the play remains a mystery because it begins with a murder and ends with a massacre to show the destructive results of vengeance.
In his analysis, Chambers majors on the mission of the dreamer who suddenly finds something to do. I would assume that Hamlet initially was a dreamer, some sort of a sleeping giant but all of a sudden sets on a destructive mission. His motives are not well comprehended by most since his intelligence depicts him as a schemer. At some point, he feigns madness to allow him time to consider his course of action. In this I agree with the critic, Chambers in outlining the same. It is a score though the critic does not sufficiently tell the main reasons why the character was buying time. In my own analysis, I would say that it is human nature to outline vengeance in a soft and more painfully manner which would culminate into ultimate destruction to the antagonist.
Though it is true that the antagonist was already aware of the protagonists, Hamlet, plot, his emergency plans were not sufficient. Chambers outlines that Claudius being a villain, he already set his path to destruction. Ultimate ruin was on his way. It is a score for the critic to outline that being intellectually capable, Hamlet finds himself on one side with the people around him on the other side. This complements all the elements of tragedy as Chambers notes. In his mission he identifies the obstacles aided by his intelligence and sees to the completion of the mission (Chambers, 2006).
In conclusion, this critic essay is effective in that it outlines all the aspects of the play and demystifies the same in a more elaborate manner. This makes the reader of the play and the reader of the critic different in the essence that him who reads or watch the play will be drowned in the plays mystery while the one reading the critic will be able to connect elements of the same to the actual theme of the play.