РефератыИностранный языкMeMethod In The Madness Essay Research Paper

Method In The Madness Essay Research Paper

Method In The Madness Essay, Research Paper


In both Hamlet and King Lear, Shakespeare


incorporates a theme of madness with two characters: one truly mad, and


one only acting mad to serve a motive. Themadness of Hamlet is frequently


disputed. This paper argues that the contrapuntal character in each play,


namely Ophelia in Hamlet and Edgar in King Lear, acts as abalancing argument


to the other character?s madness or sanity. King Lear?s more decisive distinction


between Lear?s frailty of mind and Edgar?s contrived madnessworks to better


define the relationship between Ophelia?s breakdown and Hamlet?s “north-north-west”


brand of insanity. Both plays offer a character on each side ofsanity,


but in Hamlet the distinction is not as clear as it is in King Lear. Using


the more explicit relationship in King Lear, one finds a better understanding


of therelationship in Hamlet.


While Shakespeare does not directly pit


Ophelia?s insanity (or breakdown) against Hamlet?s madness, there is instead


a clear definitiveness in Ophelia?s condition and aclear uncertainty in


Hamlet?s madness. Obviously, Hamlet?s character offers more evidence, while


Ophelia?s breakdown is quick, but more conclusive in its precision.Shakespeare


offers clear evidence pointing to Hamlet?s sanity beginning with the first


scene of the play.


Hamlet begins with guards whose main importance


in the play is to give credibility to the ghost. If Hamlet were to see


his father?s ghost in private, the argument for hismadness would greatly


improve. Yet, not one, but three men together witness the ghost before


even thinking to notify Hamlet. As Horatio says, being the only of theguards


to play a significant role in the rest of the play, “Before my God, I might


not this believe / Without the sensible and true avouch / Of mine own eyes.


(I.i.56-8)”Horatio, who appears frequently throughout the play, acts as


an unquestionably sane alibi to Hamlet again when framing the King with


his reaction to the play. ThatHamlet speaks to the ghost alone detracts


somewhat from its credibility, but all the men are witness to the ghost


demanding they speak alone.


Horatio offers an insightful warning:


What if it tempts you toward the flood,


my lord, Or to the dreadful summit of the cliff That beetles o?er his base


into the sea, And there assume some other horrible formWhich might deprive


your sovereignty of reason, And draw you into madness? Think of it. (I.iv.69-74)


Horatio?s comment may be where Hamlet gets


the idea to use a plea of insanity to work out his plan. The important


fact is that the ghost does not change form, butrather remains as the King


and speaks to Hamlet rationally. There is also good reason for the ghost


not to want the guards to know what he tells Hamlet, as the playcould not


proceed as it does if the guards were to hear what Hamlet did. It is the


ghost of Hamlet?s father who tells him, “but howsomever thou pursues this


act, / Taintnot thy mind. (I.v.84-5)” Later, when Hamlet sees the ghost


again in his mothers room, her amazement at his madness is quite convincing.


Yet one must take intoconsideration the careful planning of the ghost?s


credibility earlier in the play.


After his first meeting with the ghost,


Hamlet greets his friends cheerfully and acts as if the news is good rather


than the devastation it really is.


Horatio: What news, my lord?


Hamlet: O, wonderful!


Horatio: Good my lord, tell it.


Hamlet: No, you will reveal it. (I.v.118-21)


This is the first glimpse of Hamlet?s ability


and inclination to manipulate his behavior to achieve effect. Clearly Hamlet


is not feeling cheerful at this moment, but if helets the guards know the


severity of the news, they might suspect its nature. Another instance of


Hamlet?s behavior manipulation is his meeting with Ophelia while hisuncle


and Polonius are hiding behind a curtain. Hamlet?s affection for Ophelia


has already been established in I.iii., and his complete rejection of her


and what hastranspired between them is clearly a hoax. Hamlet somehow suspects


the eavesdroppers, just as he guesses that Guildenstern and Rosencrantz


are sent by the King andQueen to question him and investigate the cause


of his supposed madness in II.ii.


Hamlet?s actions in the play after meeting


the ghost lead everyone except Horatio to believe he is crazy, yet that


madness is continuously checked by an ever-presentconsciousness of action


which never lets him lose control. For example, Hamlet questions his conduct


in his soliloquy at the end of II.ii, but after careful considerationdecides


to go with his instinct and prove to himself without a doubt the King?s


guilt before proceeding rashly. Even after the King?s guilt is proven with


Horatio aswitness, Hamlet again reflects and uses his better judgement


in the soliloquy at the end of III.ii. before seeing his mother. He recognizes


his passionate feelings, but tellshimself to “speak daggers to her, but


use none,” as his father?s ghost instructed. Again, when in the King?s


chamber, Hamlet could perform the murder, but decides notto in his better


judgement to ensure that he doesn?t go to heaven by dying while praying.


>As Hamlet tells Guildenstern in II.ii., “I am but mad north-north-west:


when thewind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw.” This statement


reveals out-right Hamlet?s intent to fool people with his odd behavior.


This is after Polonius?enlightened comment earlier in the same scene, “though


this be madness, yet there is method in?t.”


Compare the copious evidence against Hamlet?s


madness with the complete lack of evidence for Ophelia?s sanity after her


father?s murder. Her unquestionable insanityputs Hamlet?s very questionable


madness in a more favorable light. In IV.v. she is quite obviously mad,


and unlike Hamlet there seems to be no method to her madness.All Ophelia


can do after learning of her father?s death is sing. Indeed, Hamlet?s utter


rejection of her combined with this is too much for her, and she doesn?t


sing amourning song at the beginning of IV.v, but rather a happy love song.


Later, when she meets with Leartes, she


says to him:


There?s rosemary, that?s for remembrance;


pray you, love, remember. And there is pansies, that?s for thoughts.


Leartes: A document in madness, thoughts


and remembrance fitted.


Thought and afflictions, passion, hell


itself, She turns to favor and to prettiness. (IV.v.179-89)


While the Queen tells Leartes that an “envious


sliver” broke and flung Ophelia into the river wearing a headdress of wild-flowers


(compare the mad Lear?s crown ofweeds), the clowns in V.i. confirm the


reader?s suspicion that she did not die so accidentally:


I


s she to be buried in Christian burial


when she willfully seeks her own salvation? (V.i.1-2)


Here lies the water; good. Here stands


the man; good. If the man go to this water and drown himself, it is, will


he, nill he, he goes, mark you that. But if the water cometo him and drown


him, he drowns not himself; argal, he that is not guilty of his own death


shortens not his own life. (15-20)


Ophelia?s breakdown into madness and inability


to deal with her father?s death and Hamlet?s rejection is dealt with neatly


and punctually. There is little evidence againsther madness, compared to


Hamlet?s intelligent plotting and use of witnesses to his actions. Thus,


by defining true madness in Ophelia, Shakespeare subtracts from theplausibility


of Hamlet?s supposed insanity.


Comparing the juxtaposition of insanity


and questioned sanity in King Lear reveals another use of this device by


Shakespeare. In King Lear the lines are drawn moredistinctly between sanity


and insanity, allowing a sharper contrast between the play?s two versions


of madness. Edgar?s soliloquy in II.iii. communicates his intent to actand


dress as a mad beggar:


… Whiles I may scape


I will preserve myself, and am bethought


To take the basest and most poorest shape That ever penury, in contempt


of man, Brought near to beast. My face I?ll grimewith filth, Blanket my


loins, elf all my hairs in knots, And with presented nakedness outface


The winds and persecutions of the sky. (II.iii.5-12)


There is no question of Edgar?s intent


here, and when they see this ?Bedlam beggar? in action, the audience is


aware that it is Edgar and that he is not really insane. Asin Hamlet, the


contrived madness is more spectacular than the true madness. Edgar changes


his voice, tears his clothes, and babbles on like a genuine lunatic seeming


incontrivance more genuine than Lear, the genuine maniac.


Just as Ophelia?s breakdown is believable


because of her father?s death and her rejection from Hamlet, Lear?s old


age accounts for his frailty of mind and rash, foolishdecisions. The reader


is given no motive for Lear to tear his clothes off like a raving maniac


or wear a crown of weeds and babble like a fool other than his old age


andincapability to deal with his inability to act rationally. He realizes


after being told for most of the play that he is being a fool that perhaps


his advisors are right. Only atthis point, it has long been clear to the


reader that his madness is due to senility.


In these two plays, Shakespeare uses the


dimmer light of reality to expose the brighter light of contrivance. Hamlet


and Edgar are dynamic, animated, and absurd in theirmadness, making Lear?s


and Ophelia?s true madness seem realistic rather than absurd. Hamlet and


Edgar both explicitly state the contrivance of their madness, whileLear


and Ophelia do not. Further, Hamlet and Edgar both have motive behind leading


others to believe they are insane. Although both are under severe pressure


andemotional strain due to their respective situations in each play, they


both show a remarkable amount of intelligent, conscious, and rational decision-making


in efforts toresolve their situations. In this way, they are sharply contrasted


with the mad Lear and Ophelia, whose insanity is not questioned by themselves


or other characters ineither play. Neither after displaying madness make


any rational decisions that would lead the reader to believe in their sanity.


Thus, the argument that Hamlet is trulymad refutes his ability to act rationally


and discounts the dramatic device of Ophelia (as Lear is to Edgar) as a


contrapuntal example of true insanity.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: Method In The Madness Essay Research Paper

Слов:1840
Символов:12472
Размер:24.36 Кб.