Hamlet: Words Stronger Than Actions

Hamlet states ‘I will speak daggers to’ Gertrude. To what extent do you agree that Hamlet’s words are stronger than his actions?

As the protagonist of a Shakespearean tragedy Hamlet has to avenge his father’s ‘cold’ murder. Evidently this is not a role he fully embraces in the opening acts of the play and this is arguably his “tragic flaw” - Aristotle; inability to take physical action as a result of deep thought. As a Renaissance man this is perhaps no surprise as such men were educated in philosophy, history and the arts. For this reason Hamlet would have been aware of the role of the revenge hero, as well as the destiny one must face - death. Moreover, he would have been educated in the art and power of words, a skill which Shakespeare explores extensively.

Hamlet uses his words to make Gertrude confess her wrongdoings. Shakespeare uses metaphorical language when she states Hamlet ‘will speak daggers’ to his mother. This implies he wants his words to emotionally hurt his mother like a dagger physically would. Without drawing blood, an act Shakespeare shows the audience Hamlet is uncomfortable with from his reluctance to carry out the promise he has made to his father to revenge Claudius due to his thinking, Shakespeare creates a “one part wisdom and ever three parts coward” out of him; he is willing to cause pain and heartbreak in a bid to ensure his mother regrets her actions. In this instance Gertrude does not confess her wrongdoings but does admit that Hamlet’s words are ‘like daggers to [her] ears’, suggesting that his words are indeed stronger than previous actions against her.

When the audience is first introduced to Claudius in Act 1 Scene 2, he welcomes his subjects with a speech. The power of the words and language, which can manipulate and make a whole country “rotten” just like distractive actions would do is introduced.He briefly mentions his brother’s death and that it is “befitted to bear our hearts in grief”, however he quickly moves on to talk about his marriage. Claudius dismisses the idea of his marriage being incestuous and immoral since his brother only just died by moving past the subject quickly. He uses oxymorons like “with mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage”, as well as contradicting the idea of “befitted grief” at the start of the speech.

The audience is manipulated into missing the immoral side to his actions due to the oxymorons and he urges them into believing that nothing is wrong, he proves this when he tells them Fortinbras believes Denmark is “disjointed” when its not, even though it clearly is, as Shakespeare uses pathetic fallacy to introduce the audience to the disorder in the play. Shakespeare makes it clear that Claudius is a proficient speaker, just like Hamlet. Not only he fools the whole country into becoming king and prevents suspicion that he murdered his brother, but he also influences Leartes to take revenge on Hamlet with the hope that he will kill him by asking rhetorical questions like “to show yourself in deed your father’s son more than in words?”, this would make Leartes feel obliged to take revenge on Hamlet and give Claudius the answer he is willing to hear - Leartes will kill Hamlet and therefore get rid of the danger Hamlet presents to Claudius, eliminating the chance of being discovered as a murderer. Shakespeare highlights that Claudius is scheming against Hamlet when he offers Leartes to choose “a sword unbated”, obviously wanting Hamlet to receive a deadly wound.

Not only do Hamlet’s words pursue Gertrude to ask him to “speak no more” because they are able to hurt her, but he is also able to talk himself out of achieving his aim as a revenge hero when he gets the opportunity to kill Claudius. Even though he gets the incentive he was looking for (Claudius’ reaction to the play Hamlet has set up for him) in order to prove that the ghost of his father is not trying to trick him into doing an evil deed, but actually telling the truth, he is still able to persuade himself out of killing Claudius because his soul will not be “full of bread” because he had a chance to confess, unlike King Hamlet, therefore he will not suffer in the same way. In Shakespeare’s time people had superstitions that souls stuck in purgatory can be corrupt by the Devil and follow the Devil’s instructions of tricking people into doing evil , hence recruiting more souls for Devil’s hell.

However, a stereotypical revenge hero would not think his actions through and be more impulsive and “cut his throat in a church” as is ironically claimed by Leartes, moreover Claudius himself says “revenge has no bounds”; if Hamlet would act according to that statement Claudius, ironically, would be dead. In this scene Shakespeare gives the audience an example of Hamlet’s ability to manipulate emotions (of others, as well as his own). Consequently the viewer is left unsatisfied because this takes Hamlet further away from taking action necessary to fulfil the destiny set out for him by the ghost and Shakespeare as he sets ‘Hamlet’ to be a revenge tragedy from the start when we are introduced to the death of King Hamlet and the disorder in the Kingdom of Denmark through the use of pathetic fallacy “’tis bitterly cold”. This dissatisfaction is increased when Claudius admits that “his thoughts remain bellow” therefore his prayer was in vain and his soul is still “full of bread”. This wipes out Hamlet’s justification for the audience. With this Shakespeare shows that as the play unfolds, words become the driving force for the actions and the outcome. In many ways, most character’s perception of reality has been moulded by their connection to language, oftentimes to tragic ends as Claudius led Hamlet to a tragic end with his conversation with Leartes.

Arguably, Ophelia was also led to her death to some extent due to words. She is surrounded by characters who are dismissive to her, mainly her father who (according to Hamlet) treats her like a “fishmonger”. This could be used as a technique Hamlet uses in order to confuse Polonius and make him believe in his “antic disposition” or it could be interpreted as a pimp because Polonius makes his daughter go to Hamlet to find out what is going on with him without her consent. This shows his lack of care for her and that he is prepared to ‘sell’ to get the information he wants. Shakespeare portrays Hamlet as quite abusive to Ophelia, who believes he is in love with her, increasing the level of sympathy for her from the audience because he insults her which could have compound to the reasons that led to her death, most likely suicide as well as Hamlet murdering her father. Perhaps Shakespeare does this in order to show that the combination of words and actions could be the most powerful and in this case destructive. His nagging repeating command “to a nunnery” instead of becoming a “breeder of sinners” could make some viewers believe that Hamlet genuinely is losing his mind because of his increasing speed of speech and lack of control this displays, also lack of structure. This could show that Hamlet is losing the power he had over his words and uses them as an excuse to avoid murdering Claudius.

Also this could be displayed when he speaks to Horatio later in the play and falls out of verse, even though Horatio is his close friend and he doesn’t have to pretend therefore expected to speak in verse, moreover he admits to Claudius he was pretending to be insane after Claudius discovers that Hamlet has murdered Polonius, however Hamlet still falls out of verse after his confession, suggesting he has actually lost his mind because he can’t contain the structure of his speach. The action of killing Polonius allows Claudius to send Hamlet away without prosecution from both, his wife and the public. This links in with the idea of “poisoning the ear of Denmark” - it could be seen that Claudius turned Elsinore into a Machiavellian court with his deceit, where a father is prepared to be a “fishmonger” for his own daughter in order to gain the King’s sympathy. This creates an idea that because a metaphorical “serpent” now wears a crown, the whole Kingdom is affected.Moreover, the reason he wears a crown is because he physically murdered King Hamlet. One could argue that his words and ability to persuade is the reason he stayed in power as shown in Claudius’ first speech.

Unlike Claudius, who’s “thought’s remain below”, Hamlet has been regarded as a deep thinker by numerous critics. Hazzlit states “his ruling passion is to think”, but has Shakespeare created a character with deep thoughts or one that shields himself from actions with the use of words and his words, just like Claudius’ are platitudes? ‘Hamlet’ has more soliloquies than any other Shakespearean plays. This certainly identifies the importance of words and thought in ‘Hamlet’, however it is Hamlet’s action of killing Polonius that arguably causes Ophelia’s death and the importance of the last scene, where the structure of his language is noticeably changed and he uses short, sharp sentences instead of long, philosophical speeches that distinguish the outcome of the play. However, Claudius’ death could not be achieved with words alone, no matter how prominently he would use them. Even though he achieves the aim to hurt Gertrude, she never confesses as he wishes her to. In think, even though his words are important and change the course of the play mainly by delaying his actions, his actions are stronger because they cause the tragic outcome and allow him to fulfil his revenge, even though his words manage to delay it.