This seems to constitute the central part in Hamlet. Critics seem to cling to this detail, as if trying to save the status of Hamlet as a typical tragedy of revenge. From the definition of tragedy, there should be a flaw in the character of the main hero, who is a great personality that is engaged in a struggle that ends badly. If Hamlet had no flaw, what kind of tragic hero is he? No doubt, Hamlet is a tragic drama, because many characters lose their lives. It is just the play wouldn't lose its tragic tone if Hamlet was an ideal hero instead of tragic one, which is e

xactly the case. If all critics realized this, maybe today we wouldn't have that much trouble trying to understand Hamlet's character, just like many people never raised any questions concerning Hamlet's delay. It is not obvious to most but for a few it is which causes this confusion concerning the character that was created by Shakespeare for a common observer.

He is known in the kingdom as a brilliant fencer, and shows his skill in the match with Laertes, after which he is able to cut the king and take the glass of poison from Horatio's hand, all that while dying of deadly poison. What then is the reason for his delay of action? Hamlet is very brave and impulsive Prince, but the plot seems to prevent him from finding an "external model or a simple solution for conduct," so that he must depend more on thinking, and less on acting. He realizes that killing a King is a great crime. In seventeenth century, kings have divinity about them, and hurting a king from that period cannot compare to hurting a politician today.

His friends are strong enough to break off their restraining hold, and follow the mysterious apparition. Also in the Queen's closet he follows his impulse and puts his sword to action. In the battle with the pirate ship, he manages to win over the whole crew without anyone's help.

Hamlet is the only Shakespeare's tragic hero who doesn't have a tragic flaw, which makes him an ideal hero, instead, a tragic one. Hamlet the play still is the revenge tragedy, for Hamlet never lived to see the full revenge. Yet still despite his delay he proved in the end there was a method behind his madness. This made it clear that Hamlet truly was an ideal hero.

The proof of this is in the last scene - even after Laertes speaks out and lets everyone that was present know that the match and poison were only King's plan, the crowd yells, as if having an instinct to defend their King: "Treason! Treason!” Even if it weren’t that punishable to assassinate the King, Hamlet

Some topics in this essay:
King Understanding, Claudius Shakespeare, Hamlet Critics, King Hamlet's, , Looking Hamlet's, Hamlet Shakespeare's, Ancient Greece, King Hamlet, ideal hero, Treason Treason”, hamlet's delay, ideal hero instead, hero instead tragic, hero instead, instead tragic, tragic hero, hamlet kill, little detail, tragic flaw, proof scene, hamlet delay,