The theme of revenge creates doubt whether it will occur or not in Act III Scene iii. The audience will though be able to sympathise and understand why Hamlet chose to not murder Claudius when he had the chance. This is because it was believed in the Elizabethan period that if you died when praying you would go ‘to heaven’. The irony of this is that Claudius felt so trapped in this guilt he is unable to ‘make assay’ and pray. He has to ask his ‘stubborn knees’ to bend as he is so deep in his guilt. This shows the audience that Hamlet could indeed of killed Claudius and have sent him to hell and gives them an insight into the fact that Shakespeare is going to make it so Hamlet never gets his revenge. This scene is dramatic from the start because of its setting. Hamlet would have been performed in an extremely religious era so just seeing a church would suggest a dramatic event was going to occur. Many members of the audience would be God fearing making the effect even more dramatic. Hamlets soliloquy allows the audience an in-look into his deeply emotional character. The Elizabethan audience would therefore get a greater understanding of the restraint he is under. Rhetorical questions would help the audience empathize with Hamlet allowing them to have a feel of his dramatic situation. The audience feel the anxiety Hamlet is never going to get revenge but would understand Hamlets logic for not getting it. Yet dramatic irony lets them know Claudius’s thoughts ‘remain below’ as he is trapped in his own guilt. Claudius’s soliloquy is also extremely dramatic with ‘offence’ repeated throughout it, which he refers to his murderous ways as. His soliloquy includes lots of confused rhetorical questions allowing the audience an insight into his character as well.
Whilst Hamlet reveals to Gertrude the cause of her late husbands death another form of revenge is examined. Act III Scene iv is pivotal because it is the starting point of Laertes wanting revenge on Hamlet because he kills Polonious. The Ghost reappears in this scene reminding Hamlet of the revenge and ‘blunted purpose’ of the ‘visitation’, which he is yet to get. The Ghost also reminds Hamlet that he was not supposed to tell Gertrude about the murder or involve her in any way.
Hamlet states how warped his life has become in very simple terms to his mother making everything seem more real. He informs his mother that her new ‘husband killed a king’. This is dramatic for the audience because they would recall that the Ghost enforced that Hamlet would not reveal this murderous story to his mother. The Queen acts clueless to this revelation and her naivety shows a form of dramatic irony because the audience knows and understands something she is oblivious to. The reoccurrence of the Ghost creates a dramatic effect towards the end of this scene as it becomes apparent that it has probably been present for the entire scene and is watching Hamlet’s actions and trying to remind of the revenge he must achieve. By having Gertrude unable to see the Ghost she assumes Hamlet is mad when speaking to it. This creates dramatic effects because the audience know that Hamlet is not mad and talking to his father, yet Hamlet’s staged madness seems to become a large part his mother’s worries.
The original audience of Hamlet would have had different views and responded differently towards the theme of revenge to how a modern day audience responds to revenge. This is due to how beliefs and rules have changed over time. Murder was not seen as law binding in the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods but as something immoral and against god’s teachings. In a modern society the audience would see murder as law binding and the consequences as a prison sentence.
Not many people in a modern day audience would take into account how god would punish them. God is not seen as such a threat on people in a contemporary society as he was in the era when Hamlet was written. Revenge in general was considered ‘That, which is past is gone and irrevocable’ and futile, this shows what Francis Bacon believed revenge to be. Francis Bacon was an intellectual and heavily involved in the Protestant movement. What he believed was trusted to be correct by a majority of people at the time of Hamlet. The audience when ‘Hamlet’ was originally shown would have not thought wrongly of the murders either this is because laws could not be enforced so effectively.
Francis Bacon also believed that Revenge should be left to god, as he knows if it is morally acceptable or not. He believed that only bad things could come out of men playing god. They believed that everyone would eventually get what is owed to them. A modern day audience considers when Laertes tells Hamlet about the fact that he is attempting to get revenge on him pointless. Revenge is supposed to be secretive rather than out in the open. The period in, which Hamlet would have been watched believed differently. They thought that the ‘desirous party should know whence it cometh: this is the more generous’. This shows how differently the original audience would probably have responded to Hamlet compared to a modern day one.
Hamlet in the Elizabethan and Jacobean may have been considered a cautionary tale and a moral would have been very clear after the audience watched it. The audience because of this would feel more connected to the play. In this era people do not connect to Hamlet on the same level because the issues are not all relevant nowadays. Hamlet is enjoyed as tragedy and on an entertainment level.
Issues linked with revenge are revealed through the characters, language and imagery. Shakespeare uses many images of disease throughout the play. The disease of madness is shown through Ophelia and Hamlet’s ‘document in madness’. This imagery is an ominous sign that revenge is going to occur later in the play. The images of disease can also be perceived, as ‘something is rotten in the state of Denmark’ and the moral distinguish of the society. Francisco exclaims that he is ‘sick at heart’ giving the play an inauspicious beginning and a clue to the remainder of the story. Anne Barton believes that the ghost of Hamlet shows dramatic imagery when shown in the play. The audience are undecided to if he is an actor or ‘an agent of hell impersonating the dead king’. If the audience believes the ghost to an impersonator the whole reason for Hamlets revenge would be fraud.
Imagery is used to distinguish reality from illusion and allows the audience to see a clearer version of what is occurring. The imagery constructs particular versions of reality and gives views of characters. Act III scene iv uses imagery to attempt an explanation on how Claudius is probably just using Gertrude and has managed to ‘cozeened her’ at ‘hoodman blind’. This shows the audience that Claudius has deceived Gertrude and made her emotions change, allowing him to marry her. Hamlet hopes this imagery will show Gertrude how Claudius has betrayed her. Unfortunately this goes against how the ghost asks Hamlet to get revenge on Claudius at the start of the play.
Laertes and Hamlet are the two main characters linked to revenge throughout ‘Hamlet’. They are in the same situation, with Hamlet stating ‘by the image of my cause I see the portraiture of his’. The audience watching will expect them to deal with their revenge in similar ways but as the play continues to is clear to see this is wrong. Laertes is the stereotypical person getting revenge he is quick to assume Claudius murdered his father and goes to seek him with a ‘riotous head’ and only one thing on his mind. Hamlet alternatively spends most of his time contemplating revenge and deciphering how he shall get it on Claudius.
Hamlet and Laertes characters show the two extremes of how people would achieve revenge. Laertes shows that he will ‘dare damnation’ to get revenge on his father, whilst Hamlet launches into a soliloquy starting ‘to be or not to be’. This shows that Hamlet has to think over all his stages of revenge, whilst Laertes will die for his family honour. The audience would decide that Laertes character is stronger than Hamlets due to his ability to make quick decisions making him a typical character from a revenge tragedy.
Fortinbras’s character is also very similar to Hamlets and Laertes. He is the prince of Norway who’s father was killed in combat. Fortinbras is similar to Laertes in the concept that they both seize the opportunity to get revenge at the first possible moment. He is ‘of inapproved mettle hot and full’ showing that he has a lot of passion to get revenge. Fortinbras attempts to move into Denmark from the ‘skirts of Norway’ the moment he feels that Denmark is becoming a ‘lawless’ country.
Fortinbras is the only character that achieves his revenge in a conventional sense. He has walked into the court of Denmark to find the monarchy dead and the country vulnerable, in ‘havoc’ and believes that he has’ some rights of memory’ to the ‘kingdom’ of Denmark. Even though Hamlet achieves revenge over Claudius by murdering him he specifically did not want to die, whilst getting his revenge. This was clear through him not wanting to know ‘that we know not of’. Laertes gained his revenge completely even though he was killed. This is because he stated that he would ‘dare damnation’ to get revenge. He got the most desired type of revenge because he physically killed his father’s murderer.
The tone that the characters use when speaking can change the interpretation of the words. The desire that Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras have for revenge can be shown through how they pronounce their lines and how they act upon the stage. Shakespeare made the characters speech more dramatic to hear by having a structure of the intelligent characters speaking in verse and the characters with less importance speaking in prose. Even though this structure is not consistent it brings dramatic effects to the play.
Shakespeare uses many hyperboles in Hamlet to express his feelings of revenge and make the revenge exaggerated and therefore seem more necessary. Hamlet declares that he will ‘wipe away all the trivial found records, all saws of books’ just to get revenge for his father. This hyperbole shows the audience the extremes Hamlet will go to get revenge and how immense his desire is. It also shows how he has become disillusioned with main humanity.
Bernard Lott believes that ‘when Hamlet’s speeches are straightened out the evident complications of phraseology and syntax remain to sense reflection of the inner turmoil in his soul’. This is clearly shown in Hamlets ‘to be or not to be’ soliloquy. Soliloquies in general show a characters innermost emotions but Hamlet’s show a new depth to his character. A side of him is shown the analyses situations and shows that he thinks too much but does not act upon his thoughts. This shows that Hamlet has to contemplate situations completely and is very cautious. Hamlets cautiousness is shown by his inability to kill Claudius outright and how he has to delve deeper by rein acting the murder.
Having revenge prolonged throughout the play gives the audience higher anxiety levels, as they are unsure if Hamlet will actually gain revenge over Claudius. Shakespeare cleverly intervenes Laertes revenge into the play allowing the two perspectives to be taken on how a person gets revenge. Fortinbras is also an character in that sense because if can be imagined that he opposed to Hamlet had a straightforward plan of how he would get revenge, which took into account the right situation and time. Fortinbras not only comes off as the only sophisticated character in this sense but as the one who had his revenge got for him. This can be interpreted that he did get revenge as will go on to rule Denmark or that he did not physically kill Hamlet so did not get his revenge.
