Hamlet’s Delay as it Enables the Spread of ThatWhich is Rotten in Denmark
...nisms of his own mind. These mechanisms include the law, ethics, respect to his mom, and resect to the people of Denmark among other things. Even though some of these external reasons are out of his control, Hamlet could still slough them off and end the rottenness in the beginning, or end the spread of it after he demurs a couple times, by killing Claudius. Since none of these external things are physically keeping Hamlet from killing Claudius, Hamlet isn’t in jail or anything, he could still kill him despite these external preventions and end the spread of the rottenness. Hamlet actually doesn’t even get that many chances in which he could kill the King as the play goes. However, should he have really wanted to kill Claudius I’m sure that he, being as intelligent and deceiving as he is, could have come up with some sort of safe way in which to kill him without anyone finding out. Claudius did it to Hamlet’s dad so I’m sure that Hamlet, being just as smart and deceiving, could have come up with a way in which to do the same sort of thing to Claudius. Hamlet only has maybe three encounters I see with the King in which he could have just slashed his throat. Each one of these encounters, however, would have had to happen in front of a few other people, or witnesses. Another point, besides these missed opportunities, is that Hamlet could have fairly easily created an opportunity for himself should he have really wanted to kill Claudius. The first of these opportunities is in Act 2, Scene 2 when Hamlet walks in on a discussion between Claudius, Polonius, and the Queen while reading the book but this occurs before Hamlet is sure that Claudius killed his father. Hamlet comes up with the play within the play soon after this as a way of testing to see if Claudius really killed his father by portraying that scene in the play and looking at Claudius’ reactions. During the play within the play Claudius gets all upset which Hamlet notices as he says “What, frightened with false fire?”(Act 3. Scene 2. 252), since the scene portrayed within the play is just like how he killed Hamlet’s father, and gets up and leaves the room hastily. Now Hamlet knows that Claudius really killed his father so he’s off after him to get revenge: “Why let that stricken deer go weep…” (Act 3. Scene 2. 257). Then again in Act 2, Scene 3 Hamlet has another opportunity, probably the best one he’ll have in the play, in which Claudius is alone trying to pray and Hamlet is watching him. Hamlet could kill him hear without anyone even seeing. However, Hamlet comes up with what I think is an excuse saying: “Now I might do it… / …and so a’ goes to heaven, / And so am I revenged… / A villain kills my father, and for that, / I his sole son, do this villain send / To heaven.” (Act 3. Scene 3. 73-78). Here Hamlet is saying that he could kill him now but that would only send him to heaven, since he has just prayed and repented his sins, but this wouldn’t avenge his fathers death. Hamlet later decides that he will kill him “When he is drunk asleep, or in his rage, / Or in th’incestuous pleasure of his bed…” (Act 3. Scene 3. 89-90) so that he will go to hell. However, Hamlet never makes any progress towards actually killing Claudius in his incestuous sleep. Claudius sleeps every night incestuously (since he lays abed with his brother’s wife) yet Hamlet never sneaks into his room and pours poison into his ear. How hard could that be to pull off, especially for how sneaky and deceiving Hamlet is? Through a close reading of the play we see many chances for Hamlet to kill Claudius. We also know that Hamlet could also easily create an opportunity for himsel...