Hamlet and democracy

[Anonymous No.19817830]

Any thoughts on this? Claudius, Young Fortinbras, etc are all pretty rational and fair. Was Hamlet’s dad a tyrant? And then Hamlet “votes” for Fortinbras at the end after his father was slain in a coup d’etat and he spent the whole play trying to revenge his perhaps justly killed father? Thought? I’m probably retarded but I want to actually discuss literature

[Anonymous No.19817841]

Democracy is stupid either way.

[Anonymous No.19817926]

>>19817841
You’re stupid either way out of your mother you came

[Anonymous No.19818131]

>>19817830
Been a long time since I've read Hamlet but I don't remember anything about democracy in it

[Anonymous No.19818873]

>>19817830
I'm reading it currently, and I would say that any answer to your question would be conjecture - it's basically beside the point of the play. What would it add for his father to have been as much?
>>19818131
There are multiple references to the King's "election".

[Anonymous No.19818894]

>>19817841
historicism is retarded

[Anonymous No.19818917]

>>19817830
Coriolanus has much more than Hamlet to say about democracy. Harold Bloom says it's Shakespeare's most political play.

[Anonymous No.19818973]

>>19818917
Am i the only one who dislikes the narrative structure of a lot of Shakespeare's historical plays? he consistently puts the climax at act 3 and then lets the play limp on for another two acts before finishing. Coriolanus is the biggest example.

[Anonymous No.19819000]

>>19818973
>Shakespeares plays limp on after the act III climax
I don't feel that way. act IV shows us the consequences and act V the end of the story. most movies try to cramp the climax into the finale or final act, some ten minutes before the credits and then you get like one scene wrapping the thing up. Shakespeare did it right.

[Anonymous No.19819008]

>>19817830
Well lots of Shakespeare's Jacobean plays have veiled challenges to Divine Right since James I was such a tyrant and Divine Right was beginning to lose legitimacy. I'll be honest I never noticed it in Hamlet, but there's probably a grain of truth there. I'm not sure if your evidence points to Shakespeare being a fan of democracy, moreso that he advocates for balanced leadership.

[Anonymous No.19819091]

>>19817830
>original king is blind to the threat of his brother
>brother gets to be illegit king through murder and immoral marriage
>new king gets bested by the moral superior and legit prince Hamlet
>Hamlet becomes king for a minute
>Hamlet is blind to the threat of Norway
>Norway's king gets to be Denmark's king
if anything, Shakespeare favours meritocratic aristocracy.

[Anonymous No.19819693]

A lot of critics say that Shakespeare’s work contains all of humanity. It helps that we know little about him. We can view his work unbiasedly and the bard was very nuanced.

[Anonymous No.19820006]

>>19818873
Saying the the King is democratically elected requires a leap towards a new understanding of what democracy could be

[Anonymous No.19820776]

>>19817830

Hamlet is about the irreconcilability of moment and possibility, or intentions / desire and deeds. And there's something about the distinction between the ancients and moderns too. Hamlet's mother (Gertrude?) cannot perceive the ghost of old Hamlet because she is a woman, thus cannot think abstractly. Freud notes this about men and women, that woman are more compliant while men are more resistant to what he calls the "reality principle". Hamlet suffers from a surplus of will which reality could never satisfy

[Anonymous No.19821268]

>>19820776
It’s crazy how many themes there are in a play that could be read in a day

[Anonymous No.19821288]

>>19821268

Shut the fuck up. What I said is the most clear and general theme of the play. But there's smaller notes which are nonetheless important

[Anonymous No.19822535]

Last bump