Hamlet would like nothing more than to kill his uncle along while keeping moral vindication. Unfortunately, because of his deviation from the simple use of the mind to the animalistic realm of instinct, he fails at both. As Claudius committed morally unjustified murder, Hamlet does not wish to repeat the same thing during his quest for revenge. This wish was ill-fated as he did kill Polonius without any justification. Polonius makes noise when he hears that Hamlet is being aggressive towards Gertrude, and in response to the loud noise from an unseen place, Hamlet stabs the wall. Just a few seconds later, the queen asks Hamlet what he did, and Hamlet responds, “Nay, I know not” (3.IV.27). This implies that Hamlet temporarily lost complete control of his mind, and simply pounced at the arras out of fear and impulse. While Hamlet may have had a deep set value of right and wrong and justice, these were overtaken in a minute by an instinctual response. Thus, instinct is more powerful than any value.
Throughout the play, Hamlet seems to be procrastinating and holding in his feelings and emotion. While some would argue that this is a direct result of Hamlet’s quest for the truth and him finding the right time to exact his revenge, he himself admits it to be a result of “the deer in headlights” affect. He was so scared that he was afraid to act. After speaking to Fortinbras, Hamlet gives a soliloquy in which he reveals his feelings on his inaction. After basically saying that a man who is too scared to take action is a beast (4.IV.35), he continues on a course of self degradation. Hamlet then says,”A thought which, quartered, hath but one part wisdom ever three parts coward” (4.IV.40). Thus, for every thought that he comes across, they are one fourth human wisdom and three parts instinctual fear, and to Hamlet, fear is three times as powerful as wisdom is. Also, at multiple points in the soliloquy, Hamlet lists the virtues of man held by no other creature such as “strength”, “will”, and “large discourse”, but they all go unused. He recognizes himself that a possible reason for this is “bestial oblivion” (4.IV.35). In summary, the demise of Hamlet or all humans is not his lack of intelligence, willpower, or strength, but the reversion to primal emotion.
While Hamlet was ruined by the wrath of fear, Laertes is set under the commanding influence of the predatory desire for flesh. At first, Laertes was interested most in avenging his father’s death, but as human emotion gave way to the need to kill, his courses of action changed. Claudius, who proved to be very keen in his observance of Laertes’ downward spiral, fabricates a story about a Norman fighter who told him how adept Laertes was with the rapier. Completely without reason, Laertes believes Claudius. As reason would be an obstacle on the road to killing, Laertes goes along with Claudius. This feeling is does not only take form inside Laertes, but also is represented in his speech. Unlike Hamlet who in his soliloquies states his desire for vengeance, Laertes presents a far more graphic account laden with wild flesh references. Three times, Laertes describes blood and even goes as far as telling the court that he wishes to “slit Hamlets throat in a church”. Laertes’ unbridled animalistic rage eventually leads to his death, as he did not properly think out what he was doing. He was simply a pawn of Claudius.
Claudius could be seen as the epitome of what is human. In business, he is incredibly calculated, cold, clever, and intelligent. He rules with an iron fist always acting in his self interest. Emotionally, Claudius experiences love and greed, which appears to be his god. With all this said, Shakespeare does show that as far from a beast as one may be, there is still a tiny morsel of irrationality within all of us, and this can bring us down. During Hamlet’s mouse trap, Claudius witnesses the murder of a king by his nephew with the use of ear poison. As Hamlet had intended, Claudius’ instinct for self preservation took over and he was enveloped in fear. This was so overwhelming that all he could do was rise in a state of speechlessness. As minute as this slip-up was, it did prove his guilt to Hamlet which lead to further escalation of the murder plots, and eventually to Claudius’ death. Thus, Shakespeare is saying that no matter how wise, clever, and intelligent we are as humans, a tiny episode of faltering into an abyss of primal impulsivity can lead to the gravest consequences.
Hamlet can definitely be characterized as a play of deceptions, but which of these “traps to catch woodcocks” are successful is definitely in accord with Shakespeare’s general message. The deceptions that involving withholding information does not work out such as both instances of Polonius hiding behind a curtain. Also, Claudius’ attempt to use Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as spies is quickly recognizable. All of these attempts can be characterized as man using wit to overcome another’s mind. Unfortunately, the mind is not the vulnerable part of the human, instinct is. Two successful ploys, Hamlet’s mouse trap and Claudius’ ability to coerce Laertes to do his dirty work both play off of this notion. They assail the human where he is most weak, and end in triumph.
Humanity has achieved greatness far beyond any other group to inhabit the Earth. Technology, society, intelligence, and understanding may be the qualities that have given us a new level of existence, but no matter to what heights they take us, we are still but another species of animal with all the same instincts and flaws. In essence, that is what makes humans human. We are vulnerable to that which our minds cannot explain. Shakespeare recognizes this, and in his celebrated play, Hamlet, this message is broadcasted loud and clear: that humans do indeed have an Achilles heal. We truly are no different than anything else that lives.
