To be or Not to be

Algernon Charles Swinburne starts his essay by defending Hamlets character's inmost nature characteristics, claiming that "irresolution or hesitation or any form of weakness" was not Hamlet. I mainly agree with the author when he states that Hamlet is more of a thinker than someone who takes action, after all the character could not make up his mind to deliberate any action after four whole acts. Also Hamlet is referred to as someone who has "ready-witted courage and is cool-headed", which as the author implies is only relevant when the character is in practical need. Having prior knowledge to such a unique and brilliant writer, Shakespeare constantly delivers meanings and messages to the audience via the characters, which in this case it is obvious the message is to think before we act.

Pros and Cons

In the text written by August Wilhelm Von Schlegel, the Hamlet character is deeply criticized. He starts off by praising Hamlet, saying he is "of a highly cultivated mind, a prince of royal manners, endowed with the finest sense of propriety..." and simply stating all of the characters good features, which I would have to agree with. The text takes a turn when Von Schlegel critiques Hamlet's hypocrisy with himself, and states the characters thoughts as he believing he has "but one part wisdom and ever three parts coward. I would agree with the author when he says that Hamlet is to hard on himself, but maybe he is that way because he is such a thoughtful person. Perhaps every decision Hamlet makes, if any, is based on a thorough chain of thoughts. One of the characters main issues is that he has no firm believe either in himself or in anything at all, maybe as a result of his deep thoughts, ultimately ending in his proclaimed loss of sanity.