Friendship plays two significantly different roles within the Shakespeare tragedy Hamlet. I believe that Shakespeare believes that friendship is either complete and utter loyalty between the friends or disloyalty that results from ones wish to gain acknowledgment from superior beings, such as the king. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were swayed by the superiority of the king and the power that he holds. They drifted from being the classic childhood lifelong friends of Hamlet and became spies for the king regarding the apparent madness of Hamlet. These two “friends” of Hamlet were going behind his back in order to gain the approval of the King. It is ironic that these two disloyal friends ended up being sent to their death via Hamlet’s devious plans. Horatio on the other hand is a true loyal friend. He was willing to die with Hamlet at the end of the tragedy. He was with Hamlet throughout the entire tragedy and supported him. He was a great friend to Hamlet, a true friend. He did what he was asked and loyally supported him in his endeavors. He hadn’t abandoned Hamlet at the first signs of Hamlet’s madness. Another friendship that ended in disloyalty was between the King and Laertes. They seemed to be friends when the created the plan to kill Hamlet. Their friendship originated from their hatred of Hamlet and the need for both of them to take part in the plan to kill Hamlet. After their plan failed and backfired, Laertes threw the King under the bus. The supposed friendship had been based only off of the needs of the individual, which happened to be the same idea of killing Hamlet (but for very different reasons).
The role of friendship within the tragedy Hamlet takes on a very peculiar form. The friendship either originated from the desire for ones own advancement by sacrificing friendship for selfishness (as in the King and Laeretes, as well as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s relationship with Hamlet) or the desire to help others with self improvement and problems (as in Hamlet and Horatio’s relationship). Shakespeare has a very particular view on friendship and this is evident within his tragedy of Hamlet.
I completely agree with you and I think you have a great basis for your essay. One point you might add is how Polonius and Claudius were good friends because Polonius wanted to get the King's approval and he wanted the King to like him. It wasn't a true friendship and in the end both had terrible deaths, so you could argue that disloyal friendships end bad. Otherwise you have a ton of good points to make a good essay.
ReplyDeleteLove this idea, definitely an interesting topic. I think could expound more on the idea of the origins of true friendship vs. false friendship. The lust for power drives falseness and results in spying and lieing and violence whereas the true origin of just outright kindness and loyalty ends in peace. . .i don't know, just a thought but I like the topic immensely.
ReplyDeleteThis is a really good topic! I definitely agree with your points. From your blog i can tell that you have decided to divide the friendships into good and bad. My suggestion is that you add Ophelia in the essay and discuss how her friendship was a genuine one with Hamlet but in the end everything denied their friendship and turned it bad. So it's a mix of both. Overall, i think your examples really pinpoint your topic!
ReplyDeleteJessi,
ReplyDeleteAs evident from the comments above, I think you have a topic that will resonate well with your readers. Now, you need to shape this topic into a thesis--one that somehow makes an argument regarding how Shakespeare wants us to view true friendship (and, in this regard, a 'compare and contrast' structure that deals with R & G on the one hand, and Horatio on the other would likely serve you well). It's not for nothing that in the final scene, Horatio survives (to clear his friend's name) even as it is announced that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead.