Hamlet Criticism :: Literary Analysis, Shakespeare, Classics

In &8220 village Literary Remains, Samuel Taylor Coleridge describes Hamlet as an intricate planner who&8217s thought process is slow and methodical. He describes Hamlet as someone having &8220Supercilious activities&8230of the principal, which, unseated from its healthy relation, is constantly diligent with the world within, and abstracted from the world with verboten&8230throwing a mist over altogether common-place actualities. Cooleridge is explaining the situation that Hamlet seems to always be in his own magic trick world when it comes to thinking about things that argon going on in his life. Hamlet appears to be very caught up in his own thoughts that he doesn&8217t have the time or ability to carry out his plans efficiently and effectively. Cooleridge contrasts Shakespeare&8217s use of a tragedy in Hamlet to the play MacBeth. Cooleridge shows that Hamlet proceeds in his schemes with the utmost slowness, while MacBeth has a pace that is crowded and moves with breathless rapididty. These two plays with themes of Greed and Revenge are both rooted in the same systems of belief but are carried out in totally different directions. Cooleridge goes on to say that ne plus ultra is usually only found in one&8217s mind and is rare if impossible to find in reality. This is again shown through the fact that Hamlet&8217s planning seems to take a backseat to luck and constituent as the others end up dying from the poison, which they had planned to use against Hamlet. Cooleridge overly stresses the inconsistency of Hamlet and his plans for revenge throughout the play. One minute the sense of hearing believes that he cares greatly for Ophelia, and the next minute we see him showing a sort of disrespect for her at her funeral.