This is a research paper I did on Hamlet for a college English class. I got a terrific grade and some very nice comments. I'm very proud of this accomplishment.

1. Avery 1
Mike Avery
Mrs. Dennis
English 102
22 November 2013
Hamlet’s Madness: Design or Destiny
Few literary characters are as well-known or as extensively researched as the melancholy
Danish prince of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Many scholars have analyzed the play over the
years, often focusing on Hamlet’s madness. When exploring his psychosis, two primary schools
of thought tend to dominate the discussion. Some believe that Hamlet is feigning insanity
throughout the play while others are firm in their conviction that Hamlet was quite mad almost
from the beginning. There is, however, a third school of thought. A careful reading of the play,
compared with an analysis of performances over the years, clearly shows that while Hamlet was
acting insane early in the play, he does start to lose his mind as his world begins to crumble
around him. The madness that was initially his design clearly becomes his destiny.
When examining Hamlet’s madness, one must first look at Hamlet before the events of
the play. While the audience first meets Hamlet following the death of this father, Shakespeare
gives some insight into Hamlet’s life before everything is changed by tragedy. Writer James
Boswell reported an extract of Irish actor Thomas Sheridan’s journal that spoke of this. Sheridan
wrote of Hamlet, “Shakespeare drew him as the portrait of a young man of good heart and fine
feelings who had led a studious contemplative life and so become delicate and irresolute” (83).
The word “irresolute” speaks volumes here. Hamlet has been away studying at university in
Wittenberg and seems to have developed into an impressive scholar. School, however, has not
prepared him for the gut-wrenching decisions that face him following the death of his father. The

2. Avery 2
role of the fresh-faced, gentleman prince has done little to prepare him for his new life as the
revenge-seeking son of a murdered father.
By allowing the reader to look deeply into Hamlet’s thought process, Shakespeare offers
the audience a view of an extremely active mind. Of Hamlet, Yale professor and drama critic
Harold Bloom writes, “Even Plato’s Socrates does not provide us with so powerful and
influential an instance of cognition in all its processes as does Hamlet” (1). Hamlet is frequently
dealing with a number of simultaneous thoughts, often including ideas that are opposites. Each
soliloquy demonstrates a troubled mind filled with conflict and frustration. While many scholars
agree that Hamlet is totally sane at the beginning of the play, signs of instability begin to appear
very early. The audience gets a front row seat to these changes in Hamlet throughout the play.
Hamlet’s soliloquy at the end of Act 2 gives the audience an exceptionally clear picture of the
inner turmoil with which he wrestles. In a particularly soul-baring passage, Hamlet says, “Why,
what an ass am I! This is most brave. / That I, the son of a dear father murdered, / Prompted to
my revenge by heaven and hell, / Must like a whore unpack my heart with words / And fall a-
cursing, like a very drab” (2.2.515-19). Throughout the play, Shakespeare reveals Hamlet’s
every thought, allowing the audience to peer deeply into his mind and inviting each to come to
his or her own conclusion about the melancholy prince’s state of mind.
Initially, Hamlet’s number one problem seems to be perfectionism. Throughout the play,
Hamlet is unable to accomplish anything because he demands a flawless set of circumstances
before he will act. Hamlet’s decision to have the actors stage a play using his own script shows
how desperately Hamlet needs to be sure of the guilt of Claudius before he will exact revenge.
Hamlet even insists on his words being delivered exactly as he wishes. At the beginning of Act
3, Scene 2, Hamlet instructs one of the players, “Speak the speech, I pray you, as I pronounced it

3. Avery 3
to you, trippingly on the tongue. But if you mouth it, as many of our players do, I had as lief the
town crier spoke my lines” (3.2.1-3). While some view this passage as a sign of the emergence of
Hamlet the leader, it more clearly indicates Hamlet the micromanager, trying to keep everything
under his complete control. His apparent need for each situation to be perfect and within his
complete control keeps him from taking action and ultimately dooms him to madness.
Although Hamlet feels strongly about revenging his father, he struggles with the task. He
involves Horatio in the plot so that he can get his friend’s acknowledgment and approval before
moving forward with his plan. After observing the king’s reaction to the play, as well as gaining
Horatio’s concurrence, Hamlet is convinced that Claudius did kill his father. Nonetheless,
Hamlet fails to act. He refuses to kill Claudius because he is praying. Hamlet is worried that if he
kills Claudius while in prayer, Claudius will go to heaven and Hamlet desperately wants him to
go to hell. Hamlet says, “A villain kills my father, and for that, / I, his sole son, do this same
villain send / To heaven” (3.3.76-78). This theme of failing to act due to imperfect circumstances
continues throughout the play. Each time Hamlet fails to act, he becomes more discouraged with
himself and his mind slips a little further into instability.
On closer examination, however, Hamlet’s problem is not simply perfectionism. What is
driving him over the edge is a personal conflict between two immense and opposing forces. In
his book, Scourge and Minister: A Study of Hamlet: A Tragedy of Revengefulness and Justice, G.
R. Elliott proposes, “Hamlet is torn, and driven more and more into an ‘antic disposition,’ by his
deep, unavowed discord of revengeful passion and the spirit of justness” (30). One side of
Hamlet desperately wants to kill Claudius and send him to Hell. He even convinces himself that
he should not kill Claudius at prayer because he might go to Heaven. Nevertheless, the noble,
gentlemanly side of Hamlet must also weigh the anguished words of his father’s spirit as he

4. Avery 4
talked about being killed in a state of sin. In his first appearance to Hamlet, the ghost says, “Cut
off even in the blossoms of my sin, / Unhouseled, disappointed, unaneled, / No reckoning made,
but sent to my account / With all my imperfections on my head” (1.5.77-80). As much as Hamlet
hates Claudius, he must consider the consequences of damning him to an eternal hell with no
chance of redemption. Such an act would be anathema to Hamlet’s good side.
Hamlet’s madness is of such vital importance to the audience because Shakespeare
presents him as the penultimate, yet tortured, good guy. The audience cheers Hamlet and
desperately wants success for him even as it becomes obvious that he is headed for destruction.
In Shakespeare Quarterly, Yale professor Thomas Greene wrote of Hamlet’s appeal:
Despite his confusions, Hamlet’s perception of evil necessarily appears attractive
to us, because it demonstrates a sharpened moral sense possessed by no one else
in the play. While most of the other characters are bound in a miasmal moral fog,
which renders the descent into evil almost imperceptible, Hamlet is endowed with
the gift of moral precision. (358)
Even as he attempts to exact revenge for his murdered father, Hamlet’s overriding motivation is
to do the right thing. Honor and morality are vital concepts to him and Hamlet seems perplexed
by those in the play who do not share his way of thinking.
When analyzing Hamlet’s madness, it is necessary to look at the specific nature of the
condition. While there are times that he appears to be quite mad, those instances are more related
to Hamlet’s feigned antic disposition. His true madness is much more subtle. In his essay “The
Sanity of Hamlet,” respected chemist Tenney L. Davis said, “His madness, whether real or
feigned, was an excess of sanity. A Greek name for the psychosis would resolve the paradox”
(630). Tenney makes an excellent point here. Much of the argument about Hamlet’s madness

5. Avery 5
comes from a confusing array of symptoms. When taken as a whole, however, all of his actions
together clearly show a departure from normal thought process. More specifically, as Hamlet
moves further from his moral center, his mind slips more into instability. Sadly, his own actions
are the fuel that constantly drives him into madness.
The marked change in Hamlet’s sense of morality is a clearer indication of his mental
state than any of his rantings. His soliloquy upon sighting the army of Fortinbras shows a distinct
change in character. Hamlet says, “O, from this time forth / My thoughts be bloody or be nothing
worth!” (4.4.67-68). At this point in the play, he is frustrated that he still has not accomplished
the task given him by the spirit of this father. Therefore, the image of thousands of men prepared
to give their lives for a meaningless war causes Hamlet to chastise himself for his lack of action.
This scene shows a man abandoning his moral core in order to become a man driven only by
swift action.
A major blow for Hamlet is the death of Ophelia. When he discovers Ophelia has
apparently committed suicide, Hamlet is overwrought. While many believe his reaction stems
from his deep love for her, Hamlet’s own culpability in her death is a more likely cause. Ophelia
was already in a troubled state of mind because of Hamlet’s behavior and rejection of her. When
Hamlet kills her father Polonius, Ophelia has lost two of the most important men in her life and
dies quickly thereafter. Consequently, Hamlet is faced with the fact that he is responsible for the
deaths of two people, but Claudius still lives.
Just after the funeral of Ophelia, the audience sees two sides of Hamlet. First, Hamlet
speaks to Horatio about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and says, “Why, man, they did make love
to this employment. / They are not near my conscience. / Their defeat / Does by their own
insinuation grow” (5.2.57-59). This passage reveals the new, harsher Hamlet who views the

6. Avery 6
deaths of his former friends with a complete lack of emotion. Yet moments later, a glimpse of
the kind Hamlet appears as he shows sympathy for Laertes. Hamlet remarks, “But I am very
sorry, good Horatio, / That to Laertes I forgot myself, / For by the image of my cause I see / The
portraiture of his. I’ll court his favors” (5.2.75-78) Here, Hamlet is identifying with Laertes as
the son of a murdered father. Some scholars use this passage as proof of Hamlet’s madness,
arguing that Hamlet seems to have forgotten that he is the murderer of Polonius. This, however,
is not the case. Hamlet truly empathizes with Laertes. He knows he is the reason that Laertes is
now without a father and a sister. These two passages show that while Hamlet has become a
darker soul, there is a thread of the good Hamlet trying to gain control and keep his situation
from becoming worse.
Nevertheless, by the time Hamlet finally kills Claudius, his quest has become an utter
failure. Many lie dead or dying as a direct result of his inability to act swiftly. This moment is
brilliantly portrayed in Kenneth Branagh’s 1996 film Hamlet. As Hamlet hurls his sword across
the throne room, nailing Claudius to the chair he gained in murder, he has become a man acting
purely on rage. The rage, however, seems to be directed at himself as much as it is against
Claudius. As Hamlet exacts revenge and ends his task, his world has collapsed and he is on the
verge of death.
As he is dying, however, Hamlet again tries to take control of the situation. Realizing
Hamlet is near death, Horatio is overwhelmed. He exclaims, “I am more an antique Roman than
a Dane. / Here’s yet some liquor left” (5.2.312-13) and attempts to drink the remaining poison.
Hamlet stops him and urges him to tell his story. Clearly, the story must be told. Nevertheless,
Hamlet’s saving of Horatio is his dying attempt to leave at least one important person in his life
alive. With his dying breath, Hamlet is able to look upon Horatio knowing his dear friend will

7. Avery 7
not be another victim of the disaster he has created. It is, however, an extremely small
accomplishment. Hamlet’s final moments are excruciating as he reflects on the devastation of
almost everything he has touched since the appearance of the ghost.
Hamlet’s madness was truly his destiny. There was no other path. From the moment the
ghost appeared to him, Hamlet was on a path to destruction. Everything he did, especially his
feigned antic disposition, led to dire consequences. The overwhelming tragedy of the play is that
a good man had to become a bad man to perform an act he felt was demanded by honor. That
change, combined with Hamlet’s perfectionist nature, resulted in his madness. As sad as the
story is, the audience loves Hamlet because of his struggle and weakness. If Hamlet had killed
Claudius right away, there simply would have been no story. Fortunately for the world,
Shakespeare wrote Hamlet as a tragic hero who is destined for madness from the very beginning.
His tale of a man who causes much death because of his inability to kill one man has perplexed
and entertained audiences for hundreds of years and will certainly continue to do so for many
hundreds more.

8. Avery 8
Works Cited
Bloom, Harold. Introduction. Bloom’s Major Literary Characters: Hamlet. Ed. Harold Bloom.
Philadelphia: Chelsea House, 2004. 1-7. Print
Davis, Tenney L. “The Sanity of Hamlet.” The Journal of Philosophy 18.23 (1921): 629-34.
JSTOR. Web. 7 Nov. 2013.
Elliott, G. R. Scourge and Minister: A Study of Hamlet: A Tragedy of Revengefulness and
Justice. Durham, NC: Duke UP, 1951. Questia. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.
Greene, Thomas. “The Postures of Hamlet.” Shakespeare Quarterly 11.3 (1960): 357-66.
JSTOR. Web. 7 Nov. 2013.
Hamlet. Dir. Kenneth Branagh. Castle Rock, 1996. Film.
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Literature for Composition.
Ed. Sylvan Barnet, William E. Cain, and William Burto. 9th ed. New York: Longman,
2010. 908-1011. Print.
Sheridan, Thomas. Journal excerpt. Boswell’s London Journal: 1762-1763. Ed. John Boswell.
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1950. 233-35. Rpt. in Shakespeare Criticism. Ed. Laurie
Lanzen Harris. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale Research, 1984. 83. Print.