Hamlet

Throughout history it has been an inherent part of the human condition to try and define ones role in society, whether by simply reflecting the role that is expected of them or by actively seeking to redefine this role in order to better fit ones self perception. Shakespeare explores both these paths to self-definition through the characters of Hamlet and Laertes, who both play the role of avenger, though they each carry out their role in a different way. Shakespeare explores these ideas with a number of dramatic and literary techniques, including revenge conventions, the use of soliloquy and the recurring theme of appearance versus reality. Hamlet took place in a time of great filial duty, a time before the birth of individualism, in a society which, in the words of literary critic Terry Eagleton, was one of ‘reciprocal human definitions.’ That is to say that ones identity is mirrored to him by society, but that this societal reflection is not necessarily the identity that a man perceives himself as having. Given this enduring need of individuals to define their role, one may rebel against the conventions of their role in order to redefine themselves. After old King Hamlet’s ghost bequeathed Hamlet with the duty of avenging his murder, Hamlet found himself enacting this role but also analysing and challenging it. This contrasts with Laertes who simply accepted this as his duty and sought to fulfill it after Hamlet mistakenly killed his father. Both characters embody the conventional traits of revenger, having a duty thrust upon them which they must carry out. In Elizabethan times however, the world was very much an eye for an eye, and as such the audiences demanded eventual justice for ones wrong doing – even if this wrongdoing was an inevitable part of their path to vengeance, such as Hamlet killing Claudius. Another key element of tragedies was the hero’s tragic flaw, or hamartia. It has been widely cited that perhaps Hamlet’s hamartia was his