Closer
To analyze the psychological intricacy of the individual’s perspective on personal beliefs in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, one must take a closer look at the titular character. Suspended by the death of his father by the hands of the wretched King Claudius, Prince Hamlet is driven to the avenging of this violation, also by that of the incest between his own mother and the surviving king. What unfolds is a conspiracy against the young prince that has Claudius dressing up in plastic and pulling strings upon the discovery that Hamlet shows no intent to follow along as planned. Hamlet must then counteract with a play of his own, a play within a play, to mirror the injustices of the first- because to unravel a truth, both sides must be examined, one prevailing, the other proved wrong by contradiction, or “Reductio ad absurdum” (from Latin, meaning “reduction to the absurd”). Hamlet feels he must dissolve this ambiguousness, for in his mind’s eye, rationalization comes in the deepest dwelling of the human soul. These are parted into two polar opposites, best represented in the dichotomy of Apollo (god of light) and Dionysus (god of intoxication). According to Fredrich Nietzcshe in his book “The Birth of Tragedy”, these two elements form the very grounds of tragedy as they are fated to betray one another, naturally indifferent to the other’s needs. Hamlet shares characteristics with each of these gods; therefore, a middle ground opens up, though at the same time it is contradictingly absolute. This is the enigmatic nature of the nihilistic Hamlet. These perspectives shape his beliefs and drives him to fulfill his tasks.
In Greek mythology, the Apollo god represents order, the perfection of the individual, healing, creation, and the preservation of beauty, among others. Although Hamlet’s methods of revenge are questionable, his goals do indeed reflect the purity of Apollo’s stature. He desires to establish order, to set right what has been wronged,...