A Comparison Of Rulers In Hamlet And Brave New World

A state takes on the aspects of its rulers, this is one of the fundamentals of leadership, but what if the leader is flawed and corrupts the aspects of the state, the state will take on those traits as well. The works of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World both showcase rulers that are deeply flawed and because of those flaws they are cast down from leadership having maimed their country. A state without a ruler who acts as a moral compass is predestined to fall into chaos and be opposed by the people, ultimately the only way of restoring balance to the nation will be a change in leadership.

Hamlet follows the trials of prince Hamlet trying to avenge his father's murder at the hands of his brother Claudius, throughout

the play Claudius is always in a position of power over Hamlet and is always the presiding ruler until the very end. With Claudius’s reign being a constant throughout Hamlet one can directly attribute his actions to the decline of Denmark itself. Claudius, in his desperation to purge his country of Hamlet and maintain his public persona, completely abandons his duties as the de facto ruler of his country and instead spends his efforts plotting to have Hamlet executed in England or arranging duels to have Hamlet killed. Claudius ignores his duties to such an extent that he allows Fortinbras to cross Denmark's lands with their army as shown when Fortinbras sends his captain to greet Hamlet “ Tell him, that by his license Fortinbras claims the conveyance of a promised march over his kingdom” (4,4) this admittance by Fortinbras that he had been granted permission to march his army shows that Claudius, who has been shown as a cunning and intelligent man, is quite simply not putting effort into his kingly duties. A Brave New World also comments on the effects of an ineffective leader with it’s Director. The Director is a character designed to uphold the social standards in his world and maintain the ideals of the government, a duty that he fails because of the revelation that he has a son. With this failure the Director allows that floodgates to be opened on public opposition to the status quo with people that openly live divided from the designated path such as John being held up as distinguished figures. Ultimately the state corrects itself by re-indoctrinating its people into its ideals and crushing the opposition of John by getting him to, much like the Director, sacrifice the ideals he was supposed to live by.