Hamlet Response

Hamlet is most certainly a troubled character faced with a complex moral dilemma, much like what the average Christian describes as a trial. Growing up in a society of Christian values and studying theology at college, he knows what is considered right and what he should really do. However, just as Laertes points out, it's not really about him, it's about the state of Denmark. I think Foster really highlights Hamlet's internal conflict when he says "Hamlet's inaction in this scene is not a result of cowardice or even of a perception of moral ambiguity but rather the very thoroughness of his commitment." Sure, he's overcome with emotion and depression from the death of his father and his mother marrying so quickly to his brother, which isn't necessarily incestuous but seemingly wrong. Us as readers can understand his pain and suffering, but the idea of killing King Claudius isn't just out of spite, it was a request given from the ghost of his father as an act to save Denmark. At the end of the day, Hamlet isn't a slave to his own heart and ambition, he's a slave to Denmark, the country that he will rule soon (well, *would rule, if he hadn't killed himself). Being a prince leaves him to rid emotions and thoughts of himself and those around him (like Ophelia) and to simply do what is most beneficial for the kingdom, even if that means hurting people in the process. Since he is pretty sensitive, I don't know if he'd be strong enough to actually be able to handle the entire kingdom himself.