The sustenance of any system demands the implementation of values that, at certain times, transcend those of that particular system and perhaps at other times, are conspicuously ignored. Ensuing from the absence of such values, however, is the inevitable downfall of such a system. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has always intrigued scholars and critics by its contentious discourse, and it continues to do so. In Hamlet, Shakespeare dramatizes the crisis of moral corruption and the subsequent dysfunction of state by creating a world much like contemporary ones. Thus, providing critics and scholars with an akin basis to analyze the unfathomable nature of the play. As a result, The Tragedy of Hamlet is considered by many, the most mature and complex …show more content…
In Hamlet’s most famous soliloquy, in which he reveals his suicidal contemplations, he says, “To be, or not to be, that is the question: / Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer / The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles” (3.1.56-58). Assuredly, in the same manner that Hamlet’s ‘mind’ becomes sick as a result of Claudius’ sick ‘mind’, Knights argument, that a sick soul such as Hamlet’s cannot heal but only infect, is a justifiable argument that depicts the malignant nature of corruption amongst the top political elite. The ethical dilemmas that plague Hamlet are dramatized by Shakespeare throughout the play. In Act 3, Scene 4, Hamlet kills Polonius, thinking he has killed Claudius. To this deed, Gertrude exclaims, “O, what a rash and bloody deed is this!" (3.4.28) – and it is. Intuitively, Hamlet should engage in self-criticism but, he does not. Hamlet, instead, adopts a deterministic mindset in that, since his action is motivated by a cause external to his will, he should not be held morally responsible for his bloody deed; rather, his mother, being the external cause, should be. Hamlet’s disregard of having blood on his hands, and the blood of the wrong person, marks the crisis of his moral decline. Hamlet’s behaviour, moreover, reveals none bu¬¬t the state of his morality, which is evidently in the wrong. Hamlet’s unfair treatment of others further demonstrates his apparent moral corruption. Hamlet, throughout the play, is notorious for condemning others for sins they have not committed; obscuring his inexcusable cruelty with his feigned immorality. Hamlet’s tendency to find the inexistent faults in others leads him no resort in the faculty of morality but rather, he resorts to immoral ends to justify means. An example of this, although many abound, is his hasty killing of his loyal friends, Rosencrantz and