Thursday, September 29, 2011

Hamlet Question #2

Is Hamlet's death at the end of play inevitable? (Do not answer "yes because all tragedies end this way.")

47 comments:

Orange Seven said...

Yes. If Fortinbras had invaded, and Hamlet was still alive, Fortinbras would have killed Hamlet before taking the throne. In the situation that Hamlet actually died in, Fortinbras would parade around the body with honor. If Laertes killed Hamlet, Fortinbras would have killed the entire royal family. Hamlet had to die.

Anonymous said...

Yes because he was preparing for death and when you prepare for death you are willing to die at anytime.
-Sarah Annibali

Kat Laraia said...

Yes, Hamlet acted to slowly on his plan of murdering the king, and the king got to him before hamlet could make up his mind on what to do. As seen with the foil characters , fortinbras and Laertes acted quickly and Fortinbras was successful.

BenCruciIsAwesome said...

no, if he would have acted decisively and killed claudius, he would have been king, and not have died.

Dillon Lewis said...

Yes because of the impending invasion of Fortinbras. He would have been killed by the army. Not to mention he's already suicidal, and the guilt of his mother's death and Opehelia's suicide would have driven him to kill himself.

Megan Stolte said...

Yes because of the way he handled the plan to kill Claudius. He hesitated and was too indecisive which by the end caught up with him.

Matt Skorski said...

Yes, he would have died as Claudius didn't care for Hamlet and only tolerated him because he couldn't openly kill him in the beginning. I am sure that even if Hamlet didn't meet the ghost and start his plan to kill Claudius the King would had plotted to kill Hamlet eventually. With Hamlet out of the way Claudius had no challenge to the throne.

StephRubright said...

Yes, his death was imminent because of the way he handled each and every situation that was brought before him. He was second-guessing himself every step of the way, always acting slowly and unsure of himself as well.

Z.R.Bedford said...

No, if Hamlet killed Claudius sooner then later when he had the chance, he would have not had to fight Laertes and he wouldn't have been poisoned. If he was not questioning himself he could have evaded Claudius's plan to kill him

Maura Calnon said...

I believe that even if Hamlet was not poisoned, he would have been so destroyed over his mothers and Ophelia's death that when Fortinbras came to take over Denmark he would have let them kill him.

Anonymous said...

Yes because even if Claudius had not had the sword poisoned I think Hamlet would have killed himself after he saw all of his friends and family and Ophelia die.
Kelly

Anonymous said...

Yes, this is because Hamlet waited to long to take his revenge on the King. This caused the King to plan to put Hamlet to death. Also, Fortinbras began to plan his revenge on Denmark.

Anonymous said...

Yes. As the play progresses, Hamlet comes to accept death more and more. In the end, there is too much evil against Hamlet. The King wants him dead, Laertes wants him dead, and Fortinbras probably would have destroyed him as well.

-Sully

Anonymous said...

No, if Hamlet would have acted on his emotions earlier and taken care of the revenge without making big deal about it like his fathers ghost had said then he never would have been killed.

-Josh S.

Anonymous said...

In all scenarios the situation Hamlet found himself in would end in death. Even if he would have initially killed Claudius and become king Fortinbras would have killed him when taking over Denmark. If he didn't act at all he would have been killed by Fortinbras again.
KYLE

Anonymous said...

I think so because there was an invading army that would have killed hamlet to get the throne.

JENNA PALMER said...

Yes, because he waited too long to plan his revenge and was far too hesitant. Hamlet should have expected that someone would be plotting against him also, but he didn't think about that. He should have used his anger right away and not waste time, like how fortinbras acted right away.

Aurora Walker said...

No, because was to hesitant unlike fortinbras who is now king. if he would have acted quickly he could have lived and become king of denmark.

Ali said...

Yes deffinately. The drama he caused throughout the whole play made it obvious, especially since him and claudius had a problem. Claudius was the king and extremely powerful. He also was a horrible person and not hamlet's real dad so he would kill him whenever he got the chance.

Sara Gebre said...

Yes because Laertes was determined to get his revenge and even though he did not feel it was right at the end Claudius still wanted it done at the end

Anonymous said...

Yes, because he was literally going crazy. He was not the same person anymore, and he would have just caused more harm to everyone.

MARISSA CARANGELO

EmilyM said...

yes because his flaws and his feelings toward revenge would eventually end to his death, it was unavoidable.

Anonymous said...

No, if he actually did what he was supposed to in a timely manner, then he would have successfully killed Cladius and became king himself. His death was avoidable.

Ellie T.

Sarah said...

yes because he was so set on killing the King and he was bound to find out about this. Which is why the king made a plan to kill Hamlet.

Ben Miller said...

I think it was inevitable, because Leartes and the King were both out to kill him and would have done so one way or another. Also, with the invasion of Fortinbras he most likely would have died had the king and Leartes failed.

Michelle Ault said...

Yes, Hamlet procrastinated too much on his purpose that other characters were given the chance to take the power to hurt others.

Makenzie said...

Hamlet's death is inevitable. He sets himself up in such a bad position that he can't escape. He's trapped between his promise to his father, his morals, his indecision, and everyone else's plans so that he can't escape the thing he's afraid of. Eventually everything will come crashing down resulting in his demise.

Savanah Swinehard said...

Yes, because Hamlet didn't accept death until later in the play where everything around him was starting to turn against him. Once Hamlet killed Polonius, his fate was set in stone.

Emily Burke said...

yes because his flaws were unavoidable and he accepted death so he was ready for it

Olivia Gill said...

I believe that if he had killed Claudius at the right time then he could have lived. But there is a chance that Fortinbras would decide to invade Denmark and perhaps he would have killed Hamlet to take the thrown. So, in my opinion, his "inevitable" death is questionable. So many other things could have happened if Hamlet had made quicker decisions or if he chose not to take revenge in the first place.

Wade Davis said...

No, I don't believe it was inevitable. His plan for vengeance should have been enacted much sooner. He could have ascended the throne, rooted out any of Claudius's potential allies, and consolidated his power and come to some agreement with the ambitious Fortinbras.

Erica Mellinger said...

Yes because Fortinbras army is invading. Hamlet is also surrounded by the death and is not strong enough to continue living without the love from his mother or Gertrude.

Nikki Griffin said...

Yes because Hamlet had finally accepted death allowing him to be able to die. No matter what happened, he knew something was wrong with the fencing match. He went in with the mind-set that he didn't care if he died, he just wanted to do what his father requested.

Andrea Kronthal said...

yes, because Hamlet accepted his own death along with him not acting on his plan right away.

Courtney Miller said...

Yes, Hamlet knew one day that he was going to die so he just thought what about now. If he would have just killed the king right after he was told to he would have became the king and would not have deied.

Anonymous said...

No. Hamlet could have killed Claudius early in the story and taken the throne without having to get killed. Without his indecisiveness, he wouldn't have most likely killed Polonius in Gertrude's room and Laertes wouldn't have flipped out and killed Hamlet.

T.J. Cole

Tori "the cat" K said...

Hamlet's death was inevitable because he could not ignore his father's plea to avenge him. if he had tried to ignore it, his father would have continued to pester him. SO YES. If it weren't for his father, the events to come would not have happened.

Mark Fryer said...

yes, because if he wasn't killed by Laertes, he would have been killed when Fortinbras invaded so that he could be king.

Fletcher Karper said...

I think if Hamlet would have killed Claudius very early in the play he would have had a chance of surviving Fortinbras' raid assuming he didn't get accused of unjust murder before hand.

Auralia and Jared said...

No because if hamlet did not have his tragic flaw of procrastination and killed Claudius earlier on then none of this would have happened and he may have lived.

Megan Skorski :) said...

Hamlet's death is inevitable because regardless of if he died or not, Fortinbras would have killed him and taken over the throne because Hamlet is a little sissy and can't commit to a life of revenge and murder.... like his father always wanted

Kyleigh gingrich said...

yes, because he was on a destructive path and if he wouldn't have killed the king he would have perhaps committed suicide because of Ophilia's death and his own madness

Alex Popko said...

Yes it was inevitable because either Hamlet or Fortinbras had to die... Either way someone had to die... Fortinbras had an army ready therefore Hamlet stood no chance. It might have been possible for Hamlet to be standing when Fortinbras arrived but I believe Fortinbras would have still killed him or took him captive...

Sean Parker said...

Yes, when hamlet is on his way to england and he changes the letter so rosencrantz and guildenstern are to be killed instead then he could stay in england and be free but he chooses to try to face Claudius and Laertes which leads to his downfall.

Brian R. said...

I think that his death at the end was inevitable. This is because he is too afraid to act and probably would not have killed Claudius no matter how many opportunities he was given. He would have either been put to death by Claudius, killed himself out of depression, or grown old and died at the end because he could not convince himself to do what he needed to do.

Kaitlynn Marinelli said...

No because everything can be avoided. Killing Claudius efficiently would have prevented Hamlets entire death.

Andrew Keck said...

Yes because Hamlet continually avoided the task of killing Claudius, and dug himself into a deeper hole each time he procrastinated. This caused many of the characters to begin to plot against Hamlet. Eventually, it is certain that one of these characters would kill Hamlet, or that he would take his own life over the grief of his family struggles and his inner debate over whether or not to kill Claudius