To answer this question, this essay will focus on the play in its context first: How did the Elizabethan society think about vendetta, and which typical revenge tragedies did they already know? What were the main features of the typical revenge tragedy? In the second part I want to examine to what extent Shakespeare adhered to these genre conventions and what he changed.

Excerpt

Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)

Introduction
Elizabethan Society and Revenge
Conventions of Revenge Tragedy
Analysis of Hamlet
Hamlet's Madness and Actions
Competition Between Villain and Avenger

Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)

This essay aims to explore the extent to which Shakespeare's Hamlet incorporates and modifies the conventions of revenge tragedy. It investigates Elizabethan societal attitudes towards revenge, defines the genre conventions established by Seneca and Kyd, and analyzes how Shakespeare adheres to or deviates from these conventions in Hamlet.

Elizabethan societal views on revenge and vendetta
Genre conventions of revenge tragedy as established by Seneca and Kyd
Shakespeare's adaptation and modification of revenge tragedy conventions in Hamlet
Hamlet's character development and psychological portrayal
The role of the play-within-a-play and its impact on the narrative

Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)

Introduction: This introductory section sets the stage for the essay, outlining the central question of how Shakespeare incorporates and modifies revenge tragedy conventions in Hamlet. It establishes the essay's structure, indicating a two-part approach: first exploring Elizabethan attitudes towards revenge, and second, analyzing Shakespeare's treatment of the genre.

Elizabethan Society and Revenge: This section delves into Elizabethan England's complex relationship with revenge. It highlights the historical context of vendetta, noting its acceptance in earlier times and the Christian attempts to discourage it. The essay discusses the legal prohibition of private revenge in Elizabethan England, while acknowledging the societal understanding of the emotional impetus for revenge. The section draws on scholarly works by Bowers and Prosser to illuminate the audience's complex response to revenge plays, situating them as both familiar and foreign.

Conventions of Revenge Tragedy: This part defines the genre conventions of revenge tragedy, primarily drawing on the works of Seneca and Thomas Kyd. It details Seneca's influence, characterized by phases of ghostly apparition, the avenger's internal struggle, and the act of revenge itself. Kyd's The Spanish Tragedy is identified as a significant influence on Shakespeare, focusing on the father's duty to avenge his son's murder. Key characteristics of Kydian revenge tragedy are highlighted: the ghost's urging of revenge, the avenger's hesitation and potential madness, bloody action throughout the play, the Machiavellian villain, and the possibility of the avenger's death even after achieving revenge. The role of irony and the play-within-a-play as a catalyst for action are also examined.

Analysis of Hamlet: This section initiates a close analysis of Hamlet, examining Hamlet's personality and actions in relation to the established conventions of revenge tragedy. It begins by citing the ghost's appearance and its demand for revenge, establishing the play's central conflict. The section lays the groundwork for a deeper exploration of Hamlet's internal struggles and his delayed response to the ghost's command, linking this to the Kydian formula of hesitation.

Hamlet's Madness and Actions: This chapter delves into Hamlet's feigned and potentially genuine madness. It examines his decision to feign madness and the events leading up to his accidental killing of Polonius, which marks a significant turning point in his mental state. The analysis highlights the bloodiness of the play, directly linked to Polonius' death and its consequences. The chapter also covers Hamlet's adherence to other minor characteristics of the Kydian formula, such as his wearing black, his scholarly pursuits, and his pervasive melancholy.

Competition Between Villain and Avenger: This section focuses on the dynamics between Hamlet and Claudius. The essay discusses Claudius's plotting against Hamlet with Laertes and contrasts it to typical revenge tragedies, emphasizing the audience's initial uncertainty about Claudius' guilt. It analyzes Claudius's confession in Act III, highlighting his transformation from a flat character into a more complex and potentially sympathetic figure. This section contrasts Claudius' complexity with the stereotypical Machiavellian villain frequently found in revenge tragedies.

Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)

Shakespeare, Hamlet, Revenge Tragedy, Elizabethan Drama, Seneca, Kyd, Vendetta, Genre Conventions, Madness, Delay, Ghost, Machiavellian Villain, Play-within-a-play, Blood Revenge, Moral Ambiguity.

Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Language Preview of Hamlet and Revenge Tragedy

What is the purpose of this document?

This document provides a comprehensive overview of an essay analyzing Shakespeare's Hamlet within the context of Elizabethan revenge tragedy. It includes a table of contents, objectives and key themes, chapter summaries, and keywords.

What are the key themes explored in the essay?

The essay explores Elizabethan societal attitudes towards revenge, the conventions of revenge tragedy established by Seneca and Kyd, and how Shakespeare adapts and modifies these conventions in Hamlet. It also examines Hamlet's character development, psychological portrayal, and the role of the play-within-a-play.

What are the main sections of the essay?

The essay is structured as follows: an introduction; a section on Elizabethan society and revenge; a section defining the conventions of revenge tragedy; an analysis of Hamlet; a chapter on Hamlet's madness and actions; and a final section focusing on the competition between Hamlet and Claudius.

How does the essay analyze Elizabethan society's view on revenge?

The essay investigates the historical context of vendetta in Elizabethan England, noting its acceptance in earlier times and the Christian attempts to discourage it. It discusses the legal prohibition of private revenge while acknowledging the societal understanding of the emotional impetus for revenge.

What are the key conventions of revenge tragedy according to the essay?

The essay identifies key conventions established by Seneca (ghostly apparition, the avenger's internal struggle, the act of revenge) and Kyd (The Spanish Tragedy): the ghost's urging of revenge, the avenger's hesitation and potential madness, bloody action, the Machiavellian villain, and the possibility of the avenger's death even after achieving revenge. The role of irony and the play-within-a-play are also highlighted.

How does the essay analyze Hamlet's character?

The essay analyzes Hamlet's personality and actions in relation to revenge tragedy conventions. It examines his feigned and potentially genuine madness, his delayed response to the ghost's command, his actions leading to Polonius' death, and his adherence to other Kydian characteristics (wearing black, scholarly pursuits, melancholy).

How does the essay compare Hamlet and Claudius?

The essay focuses on the dynamics between Hamlet and Claudius, contrasting Claudius' plotting with typical revenge tragedy villains. It analyzes Claudius' confession and transformation from a stereotypical Machiavellian villain into a more complex figure.

What are the keywords associated with this essay?