Through some parts of the play, yes.
If eyes are the windows to the soul, the ears are the door.
His original disposition, revealed in Act I, set him up to be deceived, yet how much of this manipulation was not from himself? Major motifs in the play include poison, ears, and slaves. I do not believe that Hamlet could be free of the chains of madness anymore than he could be free from the lying and deception around him.
There was such a disparity between his actions, physical needs, etc. and his ideas. This frustrated him, and yes, I believe it drove him mad, yet he was not mad at the point of death, because by then, he had found a way to overcome the disconnection. Maybe connections to Platonism can be found?
It was around this major turning point in the play in regards to his character that we find out Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead [ ;-) ].
I find it interesting that Hamlet uses the Mousetrap to verify the words of the ghost, yet in his soliloquy “How all occasions do inform against me…” he has clearly changed and on one level admires the greatness in “finding quarrel in the straw when honor’s at the stake,” and paying prices, no matter how great, for a “fantasy or trick of fame.” Although, I will admit, it can be argued that Shakespeare purposefully took it out of the play, but otherwise, is Hamlet manipulating his “cause?”
Sorry this comment is not very conclusive, I am writing a paper right now and am still developing my ideas.
Any thoughts?
%20342/54x54/cropped/avatar.JPG "Yorrick"){kind=avatar}
Post Comments