How Is Hamlet A Good Leader
Grace File
Mr. Dainty
AP English 11
13 March 2014
Hamlet - To Be the Prince..or Not To Be the Prince
“It is essential, therefore, for a Prince who desires to maintain his position, to have
learned how to be other than good and to use or not use his goodness as necessity requires” (40
Prince). There are many views on what a good leader may be. In Hamlet, written by William
Shakespeare, there is a loss of a great leader who is replaced by a not so great leader. Niccolo
Machiavelli’s text, The Prince, includes a list of traits that he thought a Prince should possess. An
argument made is whether Claudius or Hamlet would make a better Prince. Both of which, use
their power to try and make a better good; however, …show more content…
However, this is where Claudius
meets Machiavelli’s traits. Machiavelli believes that it is acceptable for a Prince to do whatever
is needed to keep his title, and that is what Claudius attempted to do. He believes in the means to
an end, which ended up failing in his favor.
Although Hamlet’s plan to get revenge on Claudius did not go the way he planned, he
proved in the end that he possesses many of the characteristics Machiavelli believes a Prince
should have. Hamlet showed that he obtained nobility, bravery, and strength. Machiavelli states
that a good Prince should be observant of the men he has around him. Hamlet was more than
aware of the men around him and proved that when he took matters into his own hands to find
out if Claudius really killed his father. Also, Hamlet showed he was wise when he forged the
letter in order to kill Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who were out to kill him. A place where
Hamlet falls short in the Machiavellian traits was being merciful. For good reason, Hamlet did
not have any mercy for Claudius. This trait is where both men fall short.
Both Hamlet and Claudius meet and fall short of Machiavelli’s qualities that he
Mr. Dainty
AP English 11
13 March 2014
Hamlet - To Be the Prince..or Not To Be the Prince
“It is essential, therefore, for a Prince who desires to maintain his position, to have
learned how to be other than good and to use or not use his goodness as necessity requires” (40
Prince). There are many views on what a good leader may be. In Hamlet, written by William
Shakespeare, there is a loss of a great leader who is replaced by a not so great leader. Niccolo
Machiavelli’s text, The Prince, includes a list of traits that he thought a Prince should possess. An
argument made is whether Claudius or Hamlet would make a better Prince. Both of which, use
their power to try and make a better good; however, …show more content…
However, this is where Claudius
meets Machiavelli’s traits. Machiavelli believes that it is acceptable for a Prince to do whatever
is needed to keep his title, and that is what Claudius attempted to do. He believes in the means to
an end, which ended up failing in his favor.
Although Hamlet’s plan to get revenge on Claudius did not go the way he planned, he
proved in the end that he possesses many of the characteristics Machiavelli believes a Prince
should have. Hamlet showed that he obtained nobility, bravery, and strength. Machiavelli states
that a good Prince should be observant of the men he has around him. Hamlet was more than
aware of the men around him and proved that when he took matters into his own hands to find
out if Claudius really killed his father. Also, Hamlet showed he was wise when he forged the
letter in order to kill Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who were out to kill him. A place where
Hamlet falls short in the Machiavellian traits was being merciful. For good reason, Hamlet did
not have any mercy for Claudius. This trait is where both men fall short.
Both Hamlet and Claudius meet and fall short of Machiavelli’s qualities that he