Actions in Hamlet 

In Hamlet, the actions of the characters tend to have dire consequences for all in the suffocating Elsinore Court and many actions, however well thought out, have unintentional consequences and results. However, it is up for debate as to whether these actions all inevitably lead to the final tragedy, in which death has a ripple effect on many of the characters. 

Hamlet has many actions in the play that have unintended results such as the murder of Polonius which indirectly leads to Ophelia’s death. However, the statement can also prove true concerning Hamlet’s lack of action which also causes results that Hamlet doesn’t expect as he opted not to act. 

Initially when told about Claudius’ treachery by the Ghost he describes how he ‘may sweep to my revenge’ in Act 1 Scene 5, showing that his instinct takes over and quickly moves towards enacting revenge, despite this Hamlet doesn’t truly avenge his father’s murder until the last moments of the last act, in a hasty, unplanned act. Instead Hamlet decides to put on an act instead of actually taking action against Claudius as he describes in Act 3 Scene 2 how he ‘must be idle.’ The use of the modal verb ‘must’ highlights to the audience Hamlet’s insistence of procrastination and his unwillingness to act of instinct and instead overthink many of his actions. Hamlet took the decision not to act, so that there would be no unplanned results to his revenge, but it could be argued that Hamlet’s active decision to procrastinate, instead of act immediately (similarly to his foils), caused a tragedy of its own. 

However, it could also be argued that Hamlet’s actual act of revenge produced results that he not only intended but also expected, as the revenge code emphasises the fact that the revenger must eventually die as revenge is not in parallel with Christian morality which was very important in the 16^th century, meaning that Hamlet’s death in the final tragedy was not only inevitable but also unavoidable as his hamartia is what leads to his eventual downfall.  

The fact that the play is a revenge tragedy, automatically means that many of the actions of the characters are fated to lead to the final tragedy, which is death. Knowing that death hangs over the characters throughout the play, explains Hamlet’s transition from his anxiety and melancholy in the question ‘to be or not to be’ in Act 3 Scene 1 to the simple acceptance of death in ‘let be’ in Act 5 Scene 2. – The unpretentious nature of this line, which is unlike much of Hamlet’s speech throughout the play, emphasises Hamlet’s acceptance of and readiness for death as he moves towards the realisation that death is inevitable, and fate is unstoppable. 

Moreover, the actions of characters in the play allow them to become disposable, meaning that it’s only a matter of time before they die. Shakespeare shows this with the characters of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern who are both submissive – as shown by the simplistic line ‘we both obey,’ in Act 2 Scene 2 –  but incompetent, showing the audience that even their actions inevitably lead to the final tragedy as they soon become disposable and are unmercifully killed as they are of no more use to the other characters in the play. 

Shakespeare uses these characters to show the audience that he has orchestrated a world in which the repercussions of characters’ revenge stretch far beyond the victim showing that even if the characters’ actions did produce the intended results, the final tragedy was always going to be inevitable.

Shakespeare presents the character of Fortinbras, whose actions were inconsequential and somewhat on the periphery of the play, however, it could be argued that he was a singular character whose actions produced the exact result that he intended. 

Fortinbras is presented as a foil to Hamlet, who looks to Fortinbras as a model of how to behave as Hamlet describes that ‘to be great is not to stir without great argument […] When honour’s at the stake,’ after seeing how brave Fortinbras is in comparison to himself.  This line from Act 4 Scene 4, shows that one the one hand, Hamlet’s actions gave way to unintended results because Hamlet distracts himself by overthinking his actions, whereas Fortinbras acts without much thought as he distracts himself by conquering other lands, but also acts to avenge his father as he doesn’t need a reason to preserve family honour. 

Claudius, who commits many acts throughout the play does, produce many intended results, however his success is only in the short term, in contrast to Fortinbras whose results aren’t as instant, however they last long-term. Shakespeare uses the character of Claudius to show the audience the idea that all power fades over time and power in unrighteous hands will only result in tragedy, which is highlighted by the inescapable nature of the final tragedy. 

For Claudius, the final tragedy seems not only to be his death but also his fall from power, which – due to the nature of the revenge tragedy play – was inevitable. As he calls out ‘oh yet defend me friends, I am but hurt,’ in Act 5 Scene 2, the fact that Claudius maintains a façade until the culmination, emphasises to the audience the tragic nature of Claudius’ character as he is never able to receive redemption, proving the statement true as none of Claudius’ devious actions lead to his intended result, but every one of his actions inevitably leads to his death, the final tragedy.