Reading Discussion 14: Hamlet - Unread Replies

Reading Discussion 14: Hamlet 2626 Unread Replies 2626 Repliesthe Vide

The video above is from Kenneth Branagh's film adaption of Hamlet. In this scene (Act 4, Scene 7), Gertrude informs Laertes of Ophelia's death. Ophelia's misery, madness, and suicide swiftly follow the death of her father.

INITIAL POST (due 12/4): 1. How does Ophelia's madness compare to Hamlet's? Analyze specific passages (with citations) in your response. 2. In what other ways can we compare/contrast Ophelia and Hamlet? Focus on significant similarities and/or differences. Analyze specific passages (with citations) in your response. Length: One page total (about 250 words) Respond in a structured, focused response. This isn't a free-write in which you just jot down thoughts. Write clear, grammatical sentences, in coherent paragraphs, and use an appropriate tone. Your response should show that you are familiar with the texts. Do not offer a long summary or background information unless it is related to the question.

Paper For Above instruction

Ophelia’s descent into madness in Shakespeare’s Hamlet exhibits a different nature and origin compared to Hamlet’s own existential and philosophical madness. Ophelia’s madness is primarily driven by her emotional vulnerabilities and the loss of her father, Polonius, compounded by her conflicted love for Hamlet. Her speech reveals a fragile psyche, as seen in her mad songs and nonsensical speech: “They say the tongue is an uncommonly bad thing, and a poor one, too” (Act 4, Scene 5), which reflects her disturbed mental state rooted in grief and betrayal. Her mad behavior seems impulsive and emotionally raw, emphasizing her helplessness and vulnerability.

In contrast, Hamlet’s madness appears more calculated and introspective, often serving as a strategic guise: “I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw” (Act 2, Scene 2). Hamlet’s madness seems performed, with an underlying intent to uncover the truth about his father’s murder. His philosophical musings, such as “To be, or not to be,” showcase a deep internal struggle with existential doubt, contrasting Ophelia’s outward manifestation of despair. While Ophelia vocalizes her madness through fragmented songs and erratic behavior, Hamlet’s madness is layered with wit and self-awareness.

Furthermore, their reactions to death highlight their differences. Ophelia’s madness culminates in her tragic suicide, symbolizing her complete psychological collapse and inability to cope with loss. Hamlet, on the other hand, confronts death with reflective philosophical inquiry, contemplating mortality through the gravestone scene: “Alas, poor Yorick!” (Act 5, Scene 1).

In summary, Ophelia’s madness is emotionally driven, fragile, and tragic, resulting from personal loss and her societal suppression. Hamlet’s madness is more strategic, philosophical, and cognitively complex, serving as a vehicle for his quest for truth and justice. These contrasting manifestations of madness deepen their characters’ tragic dimensions and reflect different responses to upheaval and death.

References

  • Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Edited by Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine, Folger Shakespeare Library, 1992.
  • Branagh, Kenneth, director. Hamlet. Sony Pictures Classics, 1996.
  • Bloom, Harold. Hamlet. Bloom's Literary Criticism, 2003.
  • Honigmann, E. A. J. (Ed.). Hamlet: Critical Essays. Routledge, 2005.
  • Levin, Harry. The Question of Hamlet. Yale University Press, 1959.
  • Bate, Jonathan. The Soul of Hamlet: Essays on Shakespeares Tragedy. Princeton University Press, 2014.
  • Schmidt, Alexander. "The Madness of Ophelia and Hamlet: A Comparative Study." Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 45, no. 2, 1994, pp. 123–135.
  • Moone, M. J. (1997). The Power of Madness in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Shakespeare Studies, 25, 170-185.
  • Nevo, R., & Nevo, S. (1994). Shakespeare and the Arts of Language. Routledge.
  • Rasmussen, Eric. "Madness and Melancholy in Shakespeare's Tragedies." Modern Philology, vol. 93, 1996, pp. 503–522.