Hamlet challenges the conventions of revenge tragedy by deviating from them. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay - Sydney Bolt, 1985 The typical Elizabethan theatergoer who attended the first production of Hamlet in 1604 would have had clear expectations. The conventions of Elizabethan revenge tragedy, initially dating back to the Roman poet Senecahad, were already well established. Subsequently, Thomas Kyd established the "Kydian Formula", a structure that includes all the elements of a typical revenge tragedy, when he published The Spanish Tragedy in 1586. The event that fuels the plot of Kyd's work is a murder, committed by a future King, who is thus placed beyond the reach of the law. The ghost of the victim, returning from Purgatory to order his son to avenge his death, acts as a chorus throughout the opera. His son pretends to be crazy and presents a silent show in court so that he can be sure of the murderer's guilt. This play, full of melodrama and rhetoric, ends with the death of almost all the characters, including the murderer, the son, and the son's accomplice. In Hamlet, Shakespeare adheres to all the salient elements of Kyd. I would therefore like to challenge Bolt's claim that Shakespeare departs from the conventions of revenge tragedy. In fact, I would suggest that Shakespeare actually transcends these conventions, producing something far more powerful than a traditional conventional revenge tragedy. Shakespeare builds on the structure of a conventional revenge tragedy and creates a psychological drama, focusing on the protagonist's tortured personality and his motivations, rather than the act of revenge itself. Shakespeare uses Hamlet's soliloquies to convey the instability and depression of his protagonists. In Act I, Scene II, he exclaims, "Oh, would this too solid flesh melt," for he sees all the ways of ordinary life as simply "tired, stale, flat, and unprofitable." Shakespeare uses the image of a "weedless garden" as a metaphor for Hamlet's existence: both the garden and Hamlet's life are full of worthless things that practically leave him breathless. From this torturous desperation and insecurity comes his indecision, even regarding his own desperation: "To be or not to be - that is the question." Hamlet's dilemma of whether or not he should end his life is followed by a sequence of rhetorical questions: whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take up arms against a sea of ​​troubles , and oppose finishing them? These questions further Hamlet's philosophy on suicide and his uncertainty about his situation. Indeed, there seems to be very little coherence in Hamlet's life; his father was murdered and his mother (in ignorance) married the murderer; his lover, Ophelia, "denied him access", at his father's suggestion. The fact that both women in his life seem to have rejected him obviously fuels his burning misogyny. In Act I, Scene II, he exclaims "Fragility, thy name is woman!" In Act III, Scene I, the tension between Hamlet and Ophelia is evident from the beginning. She addresses her as "Good my lord," but what dominates the conversation is Hamlet's discussion of his loss of faith in women. Abandoning verse for wild prose, Hamlet's rambling speech communicates to the audience that he believes that all women (he uses the address "yourselves") are insidious deceivers; that "jig", "ambling", "lisp", "nickname God's creatures" and make their "unrulyness" their "ignorance". Hamlet later expands on his hatred for thewomen when he confronts Gertrude with her sins: "Like killing a king and marrying his brother." With his violent and repellent imagery of what he sees as incestuous conduct on the part of the Queen ("He will do nothing but flay and film the ulcerous place, while the rancid corruption, undermining all within, Infects invisible") not only greatly shocks his mother ( "O Hamlet, you have broken my heart in two") but, implicitly, also condemns all women. In Act I, Scene VI, Hamlet talks to Horatio and despises not only Claudius, but also the Danish nation for their "custom" of throwing great "feasts". He disapproves of the Danes' way of celebrating because he considers this a disappointing flaw for the country, giving this idea to a man a bad name, saying that if a man is born from nature he will have a fundamental flaw that will bring him down as he grows up. This idea causes the audience to feel pity for Hamlet as, in hindsight, they know that he is actually describing himself when he talks about this man. In keeping with the traditions of revenge tragedy, Shakespeare provides Hamlet with a fatal flaw, but ironically the flaw is the inability to fulfill what his father's ghost asks him to do so that the hero does not take revenge would have greatly surprised the Elizabethan public. In Act III, Scene III, Hamlet is presented with a perfect opportunity to kill Claudius when he apparently finds him praying in the chapel ("Now I might do it well"), but ultimately decides against it, a decision perhaps vindicated. of his scholarship. The student Hamlet's fatal flaw comes from the way he begins to think carefully and consider the consequences of committing the murder. Indeed, in his soliloquy, Hamlet says "that he would be scanned" and begins to contemplate his actions. In line with the prevailing religious beliefs of the time, Hamlet sincerely believes that if he kills Claudius while he is praying, Claudius' soul will go straight to Heaven. At any other time, Claudius would have gone to Purgatory, where Hamlet's father now resides, as he did not receive absolution for his sins before he was murdered. However, if Hamlet had been the conventional avenger his Elizabethan audience expected, he would not have stayed long enough to fully understand the consequences of his actions; he would have preferred to kill Claudius as soon as he had the chance. Hamlet's awareness of his fatal flaw makes him even less of a conventional revenge hero; in his soliloquy in Act III, Scene I, he declares: "Thus conscience makes cowards of us all." He calls himself a "rogue slave and peasant"; while the Actor is distressed simply by having acted in the silent play ("And all for nothing!"), Hamlet himself is unable even to evoke the same emotion. He hypothesizes: what would he do if he had the reason and inspiration for the passion that I have? It would flood the stage with tears. Hamlet feels guilty for his inability to do so, calling himself "not pregnant with my cause." He asks himself, "Am I a coward?", interjecting his soliloquy, already punctuated by exclamations such as "O revenge!", with broken sentences and lines that dissolve into a single syllable, "Ah!". Hamlet's inner turmoil over his inability to act is only accentuated when Shakespeare juxtaposes the protagonist's situation with two similar situations in which the heroes actively seek revenge. In Poland, Fortinbras fights to regain a tiny, worthless "piece of land"; Hamlet compares himself unfavorably and accuses himself (rightly) of "thinking too precisely about the event." He believes it is a sign of greatness to "find a quarrel in a straw" (over a trivial matter) "[w]hen honor is at stake." He realizes that hishonor is much more at stake than Fortinbras's, yet he is willing to "let everyone sleep". Fortinbras's activity seems to spur him to action ("Let my thoughts be bloody, or worth nothing!"), but after this point there is no more evidence in the play to suggest that he is plotting to kill the king than before. .The second contrasting character that Shakespeare offers is Laertes. After Hamlet kills his father, Polonius, and is indirectly responsible for Ophelia's madness ("desperate terms") and death (as she most likely committed suicide), Laertes, spurred on by the Machiavellian Claudius, desperately seeks revenge. Laertes is furious with Claudius when he learns of his father's death and immediately rushes back to Denmark to avenge the terrible insult to his honor. Shakespeare presents us with the powerful symbolism of "The Ocean, which overlooks his list" - the rising tide of Laertes' "rabble" rapidly covering the seashore, and continues the sense of tense urgency with Laertes' aggressive dialogue: "That drop of blood that is calm, proclaims me a bastard." Laertes refuses to calm down, protesting that to do so would deny his status as his father's son. When Claudius tells Laertes of his desire that Hamlet be killed by "accident", to ensure that Gertrude does not suspect anything Laertes immediately offers himself as the "organ" of Hamlet's death. Although Claudius manipulates him, Laertes plays an active role in formulating the conspiracy, himself conceiving the idea of ​​poisoning the already "unsharpened" sword; So strong is his desire for revenge that he would even be willing to kill a childhood friend. However, Hamlet, the hero of unconventional revenge, cannot himself kill a man who killed his father and then immediately married his mother! When Claudius questions him about what he would be willing to do to avenge his father's death, Laertes' response is violent and unequivocal: "To cut his throat in church". This, ironically, parallels Hamlet's earlier failure to kill Claudius in the church, as seen in Act III, Scene III. Laertes' aggressive response reveals that he is a man of action, and therefore a medieval man. Hamlet, on the other hand, is very much a thinker; a Renaissance man. I think it is entirely consistent with Shakespeare's approach to transcending the elements of revenge tragedy that, instead of keeping Hamlet as a conventional Senecan-style revenge seeker, he sculpts a contemporary figure. Shakespeare presents a protagonist who, far from being a conventional Roman Catholic, is actually part of a new human race. Hamlet attends university in Wittenberg, Germany, the cradle of Martin Luther's Protestantism and the Reformation. Shakespeare also creates a humanist quality in Hamlet, with his thirst for knowledge and a concern for the complexity of man's personality ("What a work is man"). By creating a college-educated Renaissance humanist, Shakespeare distinguishes Hamlet from other vengeful heroes such as Hieronimo in the Spanish Tragedy and Laertes, thus emphasizing Hamlet's nonconformity. Please note: this is just an example. Get a customized document from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Some critics argue that the final scene of the play sees Hamlet transformed into the conventional revenge hero he has always aspired to be, as he kills Claudius in a fit of passion. Indeed, it is certainly true that the final scene, in which the stage is strewn with bodies, conforms to the traditions of conventional revenge tragedy. The Elizabethan public would have gone home satisfied! However, Shakespeare's treatment of revenge in Hamlet is unusual because, although revenge is clearly the subject that.