AP English Literature Essay

Patrick DePeters

The mental delusion and irrational behavior displayed by Hamlet was a premeditated effort that Hamlet was to carry out in order to effectively facilitate his revenge on Claudius.  It is ambiguous as to whether Hamlet was actually mad after having met the ghost, or if his behavior and actions were simply a disguise. Regardless, the effects of his mad ways reverberated throughout the plot. The pretended or valid mental incompetence justified the ruthless actions and obscene thoughts committed by Hamlet, such as the maltreatment of women and the nonchalant murders of various innocent characters. Hamlet’s irrational mental activity is consistent with Sigmund Freud’s theory that every man has an id which represents unpleasant impulses—which, for most people, are suppressed by the ego, and super-ego, but for Hamlet are displayed and acted upon. 

            Prior to encountering the ghost in Act 1 scene 5, Hamlet is very thorough in his thinking. Hamlet is a quick witted fellow. He meticulously rationalizes his situations, and despite inappropriate thoughts—most notably, suicidal—he always suppressed those “id” attributes, and consequently, act rationally, honorably, and honestly.

            After having met the Ghost in Act 1 scene 5, Hamlet gives his first indication of madness to his entrusted acquaintances, Marcellus and Horatio, that he may act “strange or odd.” Hamlet says, “As I perchance hereafter shall think meet/ to put an antic disposition on”[1]. From this, the reader gathers that Hamlet’s insane, uncharacteristic, and distasteful actions that may arise throughout the rest of the play are related to his vengeance; and should therefore be pardoned.

            Directly following the aforementioned scene, in Act 2, Polonius directed Reynaldo to give money and notes to Hamlet. But most importantly, Polonius has asked Reynaldo to “make inquire/ of [Hamlet’s] behavior” (2.1.4-5). The reader does not know what Hamlet has already done to make Polonius believe that he is crazy, but this is the first instance that an outsider (one whom Hamlet did not confide in) has taken notice of Hamlet’s behavior. The subsequent conversation involving talk about Hamlet is between Ophelia and Polonius. Ophelia decried that Hamlet was all disordered, unhealthy looking, “piteous,” and frightened when she last saw him. She says:

“Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbraced,

No hat upon his head, his stockings fouled,

Ungartered, and down gyved to his ankle,

Pale as his shirt, his knees knocking each other,

And with a look so piteous in purport

As if he had been loosed out of hell

To speak horrors—he comes before me.

Polonius’ best explanation to Ophelia is that Hamlet’s behavior is directly related to his unrequited, profound love for Ophelia. Consequently, Hamlet’s behavior is due to “desperate undertakings” that are so common in the natural dealings with love (2.2.116). Polonius later suggest that Hamlet’s madness stems from Ophelia’s refusal to associate herself with him. At the conclusion of the scene, Polonius’ harbinger leaves the reader expecting more regarding Hamlet’s madness. He says to Ophelia, “This must be know, which, being kept close, might/ move/ More grief to hide than hate to utter love” (2.2.131-3). Polonius was quick to discern that “though this be madness, yet there is/ method in ‘t.” (2.2.223-4) Claudius witnessed first hand Hamlet’s apparent madness when Hamlet spoke with Ophelia in the palace. “Was not like madness. There’s something in his soul/ O’er which his melancholy sits on brood ”(3.1.178-9). He concluded that it did not stem from love because a man in love would not converse with his lover in such a demeaning tone and vulgar verbiage. “Get thee (to) a nunnery,” Hamlet says, “Why wouldst thou be a breeder of sinners?…/Go they ways to a nunnery” (3.1.131-40). He continues, “If thou dost marry, I’ll give thee this plague for thy dowry: be thou as chaste as ice, as pure as snow, though shalt not escape calumny…Or if though wilt needs marry,/ marry a fool, for wise men know well enough what monster you make of them” (3.1.146-51). It is possible that these words were truthful, and representative of Hamlet’s true feelings. It is also possible that Hamlet knew that to play the part of a mad man, he would need to do so in all of his interactions.

Perhaps the biggest enigma of the play is whether or not Hamlet is mad and delusional. The “discerning Eye” would likely conclude that the magnificence of Hamlet is in his ability to play the part so well, that the distinction between sanity and insanity is not entirely decipherable, even to the fully informed audience. When Hamlet has his play acted before the King in Act 3, scene 2, Claudius’ reactions reveals his guilt to Hamlet. One clue regarding the truth about Hamlet’s sanity is when Hamlet declines the opportunity to kill Claudius when he is on his knees praying. This reveals humanity and rationality on Hamlet’s part, indicating that he is still cognizant of his plan, and he is still in control of his thoughts and actions.

            In some ways Hamlet’s madness also justifies the King’s desire to have Hamlet banished. If the townspeople were to believe Hamlet’s accusations, Claudius would, and eventually is, tried with treason. By declaring Hamlet mad, and by sending Rosencratz and Guildenstern to do away with Hamlet, Claudius is protecting himself from persecution. In all, we have Hamlet, who wishes to portray himself as mad in order avenge the death of his father, and as a result, is not trusted or taken seriously; and we have King Claudius who must defend himself by declaring the bearer of truth, Hamlet, mad.

            Hamlet’s madness is not only imperative to the play for its own sake, but also as a tool for Shakespeare to reveal the truth about the human’s innate tendencies towards the irrational, morbid and forbidden. These tendencies are revealed by Hamlet’s outlandish promiscuous desires with his own mother, his misogynistic and malevolent treatment towards Ophelia, his unconscionable murder of five people, and his apathetic murder of three innocent others. Hamlet leaves the play in death, after having achieved his vengeance, and asks Horatio to “report [him] and [his] cause aright” (5.1.371). What caused such a bereaving ending? The cause may have been revenge, but more likely, it was the madness. The effect was death and ignobility. Freud was right, human’s suppress their own “id” with the super-ego; Hamlet is a testament to what happens if we do not.

---

[1] Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Washington Square Press. 1992. 1.5.190-1