In William Shakespeare’s classic tragedy Hamlet, the question is often raised whether Hamlet is truly mad, or if there is indeed method in his madness. The answer to this question can be found in Hamlet’s ability to be both a thinker and a master of plot.
Hamlet’s method in madness is seen in his references to Greek mythology, such as “Hyperion to a satyr” and “but no more like my father than I to Hercules” (Act I, Scene ii). These references show that Hamlet is well educated, and therefore, analyzes a situation and decides what action to take, although, as also seen, Hamlet does more thinking than acting. Another reference to Hamlet’s intellect is in the fact that he has gone away to school, probably to a well-respected university. The reader learns of this fact when Claudius denies Hamlet’s request to return to school so that he can keep him under close eye in Denmark.
As a result of Hamlet’s intellect and superior thinking over his peers, after seeing his father’s ghost, Hamlet puts on a play himself, making the other characters (all but Horatio) believe that he is truly mad. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern believe Hamlet’s madness comes from his ambition to be king. These two gentlemen are, perhaps, the furthest from the true reason for Hamlet’s madness. Because of his death wish in his first soliloquy, and the way he procrastinates in doing his duty, it can clearly be seen that deep down inside, Hamlet has no desire to be king. Hamlet’s mother, Queen Gertrude, believes she has caused her son’s madness with her hasty marriage to his uncle. Although this marriage has made Hamlet angry because he cannot believe what his mother has done, it has not affected him enough to make him absent of rational thought, as is seen in Hamlet’s deliberate, conspiring actions throughout the play, including the play-within-a-play Hamlet has the traveling players put on in an attempt to “catch the conscious of the king”.
Coinciding with the assumptions of the other characters that Hamlet is mad, the king’s lord chamberlain, Polonius, believes the cause of Hamlet’s madness to be Hamlet’s love for Polonius’s beautiful daughter, Ophelia. Polonius’s assumption is the closest to reality of all of the characters in the play, for the only thing that actually affects Hamlet’s sanity in the play is his love for Ophelia. This can be seen in his anger when she gives him back the things he gave to her in Act III, Scene I. Although Hamlet denies his love for Ophelia, saying, “You should not have believed me; for virtue cannot so inoculate our old stock, but we shall relish of it: I loved you not”, his love for Ophelia can be seen in his playfulness with her before the actors play out his father’s murder in Act III, Scene II. Even though Hamlet is trying to appear irrational in his thoughts and speech, it can be seen that he really does care for Ophelia. The most evident scene of his love for Ophelia is when Hamlet and Horatio see her funeral procession in Act V, Scene I. Hamlet comes out of hiding in front of both Laertes and Claudius, after having killed Polonius and being thought dead in England, despite the danger he could have faced, to see Ophelia one last time before she is buried. This scene is one of the only ones in the play where there is not method in Hamlet’s irrational thought and action. After fighting off Laertes, Hamlet confesses, “I loved Ophelia: forty thousand brothers could not, with all their quantity of love, make up my sum.” Claudius’s reply to this is, “O, he is mad, Laertes.” For the only time in the play, Claudius is correct about Hamlet’s madness.
Despite the fact that Hamlet is truly irrational over Ophelia’s death and his loss, the examples of his method in madness clearly outweigh this one occasion. Hamlet’s madness is all part of his plan for revenge. He reveals this part of his plan to Horatio in saying, “How strange or odd soe’er I bear myself, as I perchance hereafter shall think meet to put an antic disposition on.” Hamlet goes on to tell Horatio to never doubt his sanity. This “antic disposition” has long been a topic of critical debate. I believe that Hamlet’s antic disposition throughout the play, is, in fact, truly part of his plot for revenge and does not portray his true, sane self. The only deviation from this plot is Hamlet’s appearance at Ophelia’s funeral. If Hamlet had still been truly sane and in control, only putting on an act here in this one instance, Hamlet would not have shown himself and would have struck against Claudius when he wasn’t expecting it. But, again, except for this one occasion, Hamlet’s madness is all part of his plot for revenge.
There are many examples of Hamlet’s methodical madness throughout the play. The first solid example of Hamlet’s antic disposition is seen when Hamlet enters the library of the castle, reading a book in Act II, Scene II. The conversation that Hamlet has with Polonius here portrays Hamlet as irrational and absent of his wit. Hamlet carries on about his book and about life and time to Polonius. Hamlet portrays himself to be mad here because he knows that Polonius is close to Claudius and Polonius will tell Claudius that he believes Hamlet is mad. Hamlet does this because if Claudius thinks he is mad, then he will not think of him as a potential threat, thus making getting revenge for Hamlet’s father’s death much easier.
The next example of Hamlet’s antic disposition is seen in Act II, Scene II, while Hamlet and Ophelia are waiting for the play Hamlet has staged to begin. Hamlet’s false madness is clearly seen in how he acts towards Ophelia in the following passage:
HAMLET. Lady, shall I lie in your lap?
OPHELIA. No, my lord.
HAMLET. I mean, my head upon your lap?
OPHELIA. Aye, my lord.
HAMLET. Do you think I meant country matters?
OPHELIA. I think nothing, my lord.
HAMLET. That’s a fair thought to lie between maids’ legs.
OPHELIA. What is, my lord.
HAMLET. Nothing.
OPHELIA. You are merry, my lord.
HAMLET. Who, I?
OPHELIA. Aye, my lord.
HAMLET. O God, your only jig-maker. What should a man do but be merry? for look you, how cheerfully my mother looks, and my father dies within’s two hours.
OPHELIA. Nay, ‘tis twice two months, my lord.
HAMLET. So long? Nay then, let the devil wear black, for I’ll have a suit of sables. O heavens! Die two months ago, and not forgotten yet? Then there’s hope a great man’s memory may outlive his life half a year: but by ‘r lady, he must build churches then; or else shall he suffer not thinking on, with the hobby-horse, whose epitaph is, ‘For, O, for, O, the hobby-horse is forgot.’
Hamlet’s exchange with Ophelia is not something a respectful gentleman of his wits would say to a lady in public, especially one with which he is actually in love. Secondly, Hamlet says his father “died within’s two hours” even though Hamlet clearly knows how long it has been. Hamlet uses the aspect of non-realization of time having long been associated with madness to help make his false madness more believable. When Hamlet talks of the memory of his father, he is taking a shot at Claudius, but he knows Claudius will play it off because he thinks Hamlet is mad. Because Hamlet knows Claudius could not take harsh action against a man who was insane, Hamlet decides to go through with his plan to see how Claudius will react when he sees the actors reenact Claudius murdering his brother, King Hamlet. This example of intricate thinking further supports the idea that Hamlet is actually sane throughout the play.
The third solid sample of Hamlet’s antic disposition is seen in Act IV, Scene III, when Hamlet goes to see Claudius after killing Polonius:
KING. Now, Hamlet, where’s Polonius?
HAMLET. At supper.
KING. At supper! where?
HAMLET. Not where he eats, but where he is eaten: a certain convocation of public worms are e’en at him. Your worm is your only emperor for diet: we fat all creatures else to fat us, and we fat ourselves for maggots; your fat king and your lean beggar is but variable service, two dishes, but to one table: that’s the end.
KING. Alas, alas!
HAMLET. A man may fish with the worm that hath eat of a king, and eat the fish that hath fed of that worm.
KING. What dost thou mean by this?
HAMLET. Nothing but to show you how a king may go a progress through the guts of a beggar.
Through this passage, Hamlet further convinces Claudius of his madness via the heartless, grotesque manner in which he speaks of Polonius’s body and the worms, furthering his disgusting thoughts through the beggar eating the worm that are of the corpse of the king.
Additionally, the closing scene of the tragedy shows that Hamlet, despite the fact that he has been poisoned by the “anointed sword” and is quite distraught to have learned that he is facing certain death, still manages to hold his wits and not only seek revenge for his father, but also his mother and himself. Earlier, in Hamlet’s fifth soliloquy, he decides not to kill Claudius at that time because Claudius has been cleansed of his sins through prayer. In the end, Hamlet keeps his wits about him to kill Claudius while Claudius’s conscience is stained with sin because his plotting has led to the death of Laertes, Hamlet, and Gertrude. With such sins on his soul, Hamlet knows that in killing Claudius, he will be sending him to an afterlife far from Heaven.
Hamlet’s sanity can also be clearly seen when he insists that Horatio does not follow in the ancient Roman tradition of a best friend dying with a fallen man. Hamlet says, “I am dead; Thou livest; report me and my cause aright...To tell my story”, asking Horatio to live to tell his tale and clear his name of Claudius’s death so that it will be known that Hamlet killed Claudius to avenge his father’s death at Claudius’s hand.
The strongest example of Hamlet’s sanity in the final scene, however, comes when he says, “But I do prophecy the election lights on Fortinbras.” This statement shows that Hamlet has taken into consideration the fate of the Danes and the state of Denmark, which will face a power vacuum because of the deaths of Claudius, Hamlet, and Gertrude. Hamlet makes sure, in his final moments, to leave the fate of Denmark in the worthy hands of Fortinbras. Were he truly mad, Hamlet would not have been concerned with the fate of his land and his people during his final moments of life.
Yet another example of Hamlet’s sanity throughout the play comes from the six soliloquies that occur amid the seemingly mad acts of Hamlet. These soliloquies, through which Hamlet tells how he feels and what he is thinking, are extremely rational and pass for the thoughts and feelings of a sane, justifiable man.
Further support of the concept of Hamlet’s antic disposition being just an act can be found in Sally Bauman’s article, “Hamlet Now”, where classic Shakespearean actor Derek Jacobi states, “[Shakespeare] had taken the plot of a revenge play...and into that genre he had inserted something completely radical – characters who are deeply investigated psychologically.” This statement portrays Hamlet as a character not suited for dramatic revenge, but as an intellectual who was very capable of plotting and meticulously carrying out his revenge.
These examples of Hamlet’s intricate thinking and sane, justifiable acts in the face of eminent death support the belief that Hamlet’s madness was an act, and not true madness.
