Analysis Of Hamlet A Sane Character In Shakespeare's Hamlet

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the title character is insane. He kills a person, sends two more to their doom, plans another’s death, and is both suddenly active and haltingly inactive at various points in Shakespeare’s play. Yes, in certain circumstances all of these may be enacted by a person of sane character, but any examination of the play will show that Hamlet is not a sane character. In the first act of Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet gives a speech about suicide, saying “Oh how this too sullied flesh would melt…Or that the Everlasting had not fixed His canon against self-slaughter…” yet contrasting sharply with this sorrowful desire for death is his anger towards his mother, whom he rants about in the same soliloquy. According to

The fact that he murders Polonius and has Rosencrantz and Guildenstern killed off as well (and in both instances, feels no remorse) proves that the quote means little. According to mayoclinic.org, someone suffering from antisocial personality disorder “…often disregard the rights, wishes, and feelings of others…yet they show no guilt or remorse.” Another common sign of antisocial personality disorder is that “Those with antisocial personality disorder tend to antagonize, manipulate, or treat others either harshly or with callous indifference.” Hamlet treats everyone just as described there, with the exception of Horatio and Marcellus. After all of this, Hamlet cannot simply say “I was only pretending,” and have others excuse his

However, if The Tragedy of the Prince of Denmark was nonfiction, Hamlet’s issues (such as claims to see and hear a ghost, his erratic and rude treatment of people, and all that death he caused) would result in him labeled a psycho- or socio-pathic manipulator and murderer. There are many varying supported views of the Prince of Denmark’s madness. People across the globe, despite being shown the same play, come to very different conclusions. If everyone wrote the same thesis and came to the same conclusion, these essays would become pointless. With so many different ideas and explanations, perhaps there is no right answer—the point of the play is to entertain, but also to make people wonder and