Is Hamlet's hesitation a tragic flaw or does his revenge suggest more complexity?

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Hamlet’s hesitation is a very complex “nonaction,” and is not a tragic flaw at all, in the Aristotelian sense.  Hamlet cannot act on his own anger at his mother’s quick marriage, nor is the vision of his father’s ghost sufficient “ocular proof” for him to commit regicide (according to his – Danish – beliefs, the Devil can conjure up such images to draw humans into sins, such as murder).  All scholars agree that Hamlet’s hesitation is not a character weakness (even though Hamlet himself chastises himself for his hesitation: “ How all occasions do inform against me”).  There is a scholarly opinion, however, that Shakespeare did have a habit of personifying human characteristics in whole characters (Iago in Othello is considered an embodiment of jealousy, for example) and Hamlet could be one of those characters, but not of a flaw – rather, of man’s conflicting traits, responding to visceral emotions vs. responding to reason). The play works because the audience (or readership) shares the same hesitation as the main character.  To the naïve witness (someone who did not know the story of Hamlet before seeing a performance), the question of Hamlet’s action vs. inaction should be the spine of the dramatic experience.  You might start your examination of the play, then, by looking at how the "clues" to Hamlet's final decision build up.

Approved by eNotes Editorial
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Do you think that Hamlet’s hesitation can be seen as a "tragic flaw" or is Shakespeare’s presentation of his character more complex?

To answer your question you have to consider what causes his hesitation.  That could be one of his tragic flaws.  Does he hestitate because he is cowardly?  Becuase he over-intellectualizes?  Because it goes against his moral nature?  Once you decide then you really have the answer to your question.  His hestiation is the result, not the cause.

Last Updated on
An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Do you think that Hamlet’s hesitation can be seen as a "tragic flaw" or is Shakespeare’s presentation of his character more complex?

I would argue that Hamlet fits some of the qualities of a tragic hero, but I think Shakespeare wants to make Hamlet more complex than that.

Hamlet fits several of the characteristics of a tragic hero--he's born into nobility, he is well-liked, he meets a tragic demise. However, I don't know if you can argue that it's his hesitation or indecisiveness that causes his downfall or that he has a tragic realization. Usually, a tragic hero realizes his fault and that his tragic demise is a result of that. I also don't think that Hamlet has excessive pride, a usual characteristic of a tragic hero.

Hamlet's hesitation doesn't necessarily cause his downfall. True, if he had just killed Claudius when Hamlet first realized Claudius' guilt, Hamlet may not have met his own death. However, there would be less of a play or it would not be a play about Hamlet proving Claudius' guilt and deciding what to do with it.

Hamlet also deals with other conflicts, not just in regards to Claudius. He deals with his love (or lack thereof) for Ophelia, his relationship with his mother, his friendship with Rozencrantz and Guildenstern and their betrayal. Even though Hamlet may seem indecisive, he puts different plans in motion to make sure what he is doing (killing Claudius) is justified.

See eNotes Ad-Free

Start your 48-hour free trial to get access to more than 30,000 additional guides and more than 350,000 Homework Help questions answered by our experts.

Get 48 Hours Free Access
Last Updated on