Human Morality in Hamlet and The Oresteia

When placed in a situation out of one’s control, the individual freedom of choice is apprehended, often leading to cognitive dissonance followed by a resolution in which an ultimate decision is made based on a consolidation of personal ethics. However, such resolutions are not achieved easily. In both William Shakespeare’s tragedy Hamlet and Aeschylus’ classical trilogy The Oresteia, the progression of human morality is examined through the protagonists, who are subjected to psychological conflict as they struggle to consolidate their own sense of morality in their pursuits of vengeance.
In Hamlet, the motif of a young prince forsaken of his father, family, and rationality, as well as the resulting psychological conflicts develop. Although Hamlet’s inner conflicts derive from the lack of mourning and pain in his family, as manifested in his mother’s incestuous remarrying to his uncle Claudius, his agon¬1 is truly experienced when the ghost of his father reveals the murderer is actually Claudius himself. Thus the weight of filial obligation to obtain revenge is placed upon his shoulders. However, whereas it is common for the tragic hero to be consistent and committed to fulfilling his moira,2 Hamlet is not; his tragic flaw lies in his inability to take action. Having watched an actor’s dramatic catharsis through a speech, Hamlet criticizes himself, venting “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… [can only] unpack my heart with words” (Hamlet 2.2.611-614). Seeing how the actor can conjure such emotion over simple speech, Hamlet is irate at his lack of volition and is stricken with a cognitive dissonance in which he cannot balance. The reality and ...

... middle of paper ...

...xternal factors that influence society. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Aeschylus’ The Oresteia, such factors and their drastic influences on Hamlet and Orestes were examined, as they struggled to develop their own sense of morality in situations with tragic consequences. Although the higher morality triumphed over the lower morality in the end, such conclusions cannot be completely objectified. Mankind is perpetually seeking moral approbation from themselves and from others, and therefore the morality of today is constantly changing as time progresses. Therefore, what may have been morally apropos in the past, cannot be generalized to fit society’s morals of today, and society’s morals of the future. Thus, as society advances towards the future, the moral questions and struggles Orestes and Hamlet faced might very well be a conflict society must inevitably contend to.