Hamlet question

Ironically, Polonius has the definitive line in the play: "Though this be madness, yet there is method in't." I think Hamlet begins his act with full intent of controlling his madness as an act to fool Claudius and his followers, but eventually becomes obsessed with revenge, loathes himself for his lack of action, and feels guilty for his mistreatment of Ophelia. I really think Hamlet is incapable of controlling his ruse until it becomes difficult for him (as well as the reader) to tell when he is "playing" and when he is really losing it.

He's a player and absolute genius...with some craze lol

I'm not sure that there is as clear a distinction as that. Sometimes what you are and what you do are blurred. He may be somewhat unbalanced from the events (how could he not be, if you really consider his position?) and still acting crazy to be able to have the freedoms to do and find out what he feels he needs to, which in turn may be pushing him ever further over the edge. And perhaps not. My reason for thinking it's a little of both is that he manages to fall into depression and even madness when he is alone, but also manages to be completely sane at times, neither of which would happen if it was either all an act or if he was completely insane.

I've long felt that with some tweaking, Hamlet could be played as a comedy. I know that is heresy to the great Shakespeare fan club, but set Hamlet in modern times and think about how many drugs, therapists, government agencies, etc. would be interjected into the lives of the cast of characters. Certainly Hamlet himself would be taking a laundry list of drugs and seeing a counselor several times a week. I'd also like to see it done as a Chinese sword flick, with choreography like Crouching Tiger and epic sword fights. Maybe it's because I've seen the play at least 20 times and would really enjoy a totally new approach.

Hamlet is, somewhere deep inside, a good person. We see him as a kind-hearted, troubled protagonist at the beginning, but as the story developes, so does his meanness. He started as a positive character, but the grief over his father`s death and the betrayal of his mother led him to do what he has done. Still, we can see how Laert reactes(who is in a completely same position when his father gets killed) and it is completely opposite from Hamlet`s reaction. At first, Hamlet is hesitant about carrying out his revenge, because he wants to make sure he is doing the right thing. We see him arguing with himself and wondering >To be or not to be?<, meaning to save his soul or not. Throughout the whole play, regardless of all the bad things he does (such as using the naive Ofelia for his own selfish goals), he remains one of the most positive characters. However, he`s not a flower at all. He manipulates people, plays with their feelings and eventually ends up killing Ofelia`s father and the king. Although, naturally good and kind-hearted, all the things that had happened change Hamlet into a revenge-hungry, angry and manipulative person who learns to deal with problems in a way he had never used before and allows himself too much freedom doing certain things and plotting a web of lies that would lead to his own soul being on shaky moral grounds.

HAMLET I am but mad north-north-west: when the wind is
southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw.

i believe Hamlet was "feining" much of his madess however considering all he has been thru there is no way the man could be completely sane yet he had enough of his wits about him to use it to his advantage As polonus was quoted there was method to his madness, thats why i believe hamlet was a great manipulator, I mean the guy created an entire play to catch the quilty concious of his uncle, and that would take a lot of manipulation.. that being said no one can truely say that the ghost was not a vison of hamlets imagination so the fact that hamlet is mad is without question but mad men have been known to manipulate and Hamlet crazy or not is a very perceptive and intelligent man, even if he is a bit on the crazy side (the loss of a love one is not an easy thing to bear especially when you suspect your own family to be the killer then to top it of with now hes intimate with your mom and guess what hes the new king instead of you, yeah it would sure drive me crazy)

Hamlet is not a lunatic, he's pretending to be one so that his uncle/step-father will leave him alone. If he's uncle/step-father think that he's sane then his next inline to be dead.

The ( unnatural death) of his father, late King of Denmark, made him totally another person. He treats his lover, Ophelia, badly, he acts madness to find out the real reason behind killing his father. Meeting his father’s spirit also gives him a huge shock when telling him what has really happened. Although the royal family believe that he is insane, but he loses many chances to revenge his father’s death.

I would say Hamlet was probably suffering from post traumatic stress, having a ghost that looks like your recently deceased father appear to tell you that your uncle killed him and your mother is sleeping with the enemy and to add to that you must avenge your fathers death without knowing if the ghost is telling the truth and then being unable to trust anyone around you because 1) your mother is looking really suspicious right about now 2) some of your friends are spies for your uncle who has usurped your position and is now king 3) your girlfriend's father is the traitorous kings right hand man and is plotting with him against you 4) if you implicate Horatio your best friend he might be in danger if he knows all the hard facts 5) anyone could be a spy. Basically all that is enough to totally traumatise a person, I don't think Hamlet is insane but he is definitely both in shock and deeply distressed/traumatised.

Stephen Roth's Hamlet: The Undiscovered Country argues that Hamlet is not 30 but 16 or 20 years old at the most. I liked his book and his argument because Hamlet as an emotionally volatile teenager made a lot of sense to me.

I think that it can really depend on how the director wants to portray the character, in the long run.

That being said, I think that it starts off as an act that becomes more real further in the play. It's amazingly easy to trick yourself into making something you know that's a lie into a truth.

I think the majority of Hamlet's "madness" is acting, but to spend so much time plotting revenge, you have to be a little bit genuinely mad.

Quite a few teachers in my city have pinpointed the moment when Hamlet sees the ghost of his father in his mother's chamber and Gertrude does not see it as the moment when Hamlet crosses the line from feigning madness to actually being temporarily insane (or they read it pinpointed in books). Once hearing this from students I tutor (yep, they educate me!), I have been viewing the play in that way myself. I love that there are so many truths and angles of interpretation all simultaneously possible and sensible. It's why it has become one of my favourite plays to attempt to unravel! I feel like I am always learning more each time we read it. Thanks for this fascinating thread! Looking forward to hearing more views!

Hamlet is depressed and tortured by the death of his father and the desire to avenge him drives him over the edge. He's not just a player in a play, he is a flawed character.

No, he`s not a lunatic but close to having a nervous breakdown. No, he`s not making it up to get his way. Why do you think everyone is a manipulator?