The most difficult question in Hamlet is the madness of the hero. Whether the bonds of sanity are really over passed by Hamlet or not. Almost all the critics have dealt with the character of Hamlet and have given their opinions and can be grouped into two. Let us judge their opinions and then analyse the problem ourselves. There are certain critics who believe that Hamlet is definitely mad and his madness is real. George Farren, a nineteenth century critic, says that “the death of his father, the hasty marriage of his mother, over throw of his royal hopes, all these working on mind predisposed to gaiety imparts a tinge of melancholy to it.” Dr. Raj, a medical man, writing in “The American Journal of insanity” remarks: “The manner, of which Hamlet speaks of and to the ghost, while administrating the oath of secrecy to his friend, is something more than the reaction of a mind after experiencing extraordinary emotions.” According to these critics there are definite signs of madness in the play. His actions and behaviour after meeting ghost, his meeting with Ophelia, with pale face, piteous look and eccentric behaviour, his loss of mental balance after the success of Mouse Trap, his emotional behaviour at the funeral of Ophelia, his conversation with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, after he has dictated them as spies of king, are the sure signs of his madness. Prof. Nicoll says in his book: “It is quite natural that the shocks to Hamlet’s inner nature should tend to destroy his sanity.” On the other hand, there are extreme critics who hold the view that Hamlet is not mad at all and his madness is definitely feigned. Sinder, a nineteen century critic, says that Hamlet is not mad at all. He possesses the finest sides of character and intelligence. He no doubt, has weakness, deficiency of will power, melancholic colour in his feelings, unsound reasoning etc. All these are true but do not make out a case of madness. Lowell, another famous critic of Shakespeare, is of the view that if Shakespeare himself, without going mad, could so observe and remember all the abnormal symptoms as to able to produce in Hamlet, why should it be beyond the power of Hamlet to reproduce them in his self. If Hamlet is mad then what about Shakespeare?” Stopford Brooke in “On ten plays of Shakespeare” remarks, all men of genius are mad, genius itself is madness. If genius is madness Hamlet was mad.” A German critic Vischer says: “Hamlet is just as insane as all men of genius are.” When we read the play, we feel that in peculiar circumstances Hamlet becomes subject to emotional outburst and abnormal behaviour. After meeting the ghost, Hamlet utters the words which should put an end to the whole controversy. “As I perchance here after shall think meet To put an antic disposition on…..” Here arises a question for what purpose he puts on an antic disposition. Whether he remains successful in his aim for which he adopts madness? Let us seek answer to these questions. Before going deep, it should be clear that feigning of madness was a part of the convention of the revenge plays. Hamlet may adopt madness to carry out his purpose- the execution of revenge, without alerting his enemies. The king has never been convinced of his madness. Even Polonius, who sets Hamlet’s madness, confuses that: “Though this be madness, yet there is method in it.” Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who tackle with Hamlet also say: “Nor do we find him forward to be sounded, But with a crafty madness.” Only the two ladies, in the play, believe in his madness- Ophelia and his mother. His mother believes in his madness even after she is told by Hamlet: “Ecstasy! My pulse as yours doth temperately keep time, 1

And, makes as healthful music. It is not madness That I have uttered. Bring me to the test.” There can be no convincing proof of his sanity than these words to his mother. He is ever sane and good in his talk with Horatio. His talk with players is sensible. A sure proof of his sanity is his plot for the death of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. A man out of his senses could not have plotted the death of two comrades. Some critics run away with the idea that Hamlet was not actually mad in the beginning. He adopted madness in the beginning and went completely mad later on. They refer to Hamlet’s emotional confession of love with Ophelia at her funeral. He says: “I loved Ophelia, forty thousand brothers Could not, with all their quantity of love Make up my sum.” His confession of love which he expresses at such a grave and serious occasion of funeral procession is quite insane, extravagant, and exaggerated. When he utters his love in graveyard, all people standing there, consider him mad. Even his mother says: “This is mere madness.” The King also says: “0, he is mad, Laertes.” In fact, when he sees Ophelia dead, he gets an emotional shock. Suddenly he forgets his adopted madness and at once comes to his grounds. He only expresses his true, deep and secret love for Ophelia, and nothing more. A deep study of the play shows that his encounter with the ghost, his talks with Horatio has an intellectual quality in it. His conversation with his school-fellows, players and with himself is quite sane. He only adopts madness in the presence of those whom he wishes to deceive. He does not have any secret plot to fulfill, during his madness. He adopts madness for two reasons: First, he adopts it for protection. In sane condition the king may consider him as danger to his throne. Secondly, he adopts madness as a defense mechanism. It is to accept a pretended state in order to protect oneself against the real madness. Hamlet can cool down his fiery and violent emotions during his madding condition and can relieve the pressure of his mind. Hamlet takes on the adopted madness and keeps it up till the end even though his device does not help him in his plan materially. Thus we can say that Hamlet adopts madness only to protect himself physically and mentally. He does not adopt madness to fulfill any plot, or evil design against anybody. Neither is it true that he adopts madness in the beginning and later on goes completely mad. Hence we may say that actually he was not mad and his madness was feigned.

Written&Composed By: Prof. A.R.Somroo M.A.English&Education. 0661-610063.


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.