"Hamlet," by William Shakespeare, is one of the most widely read dramatic works of the English language. It has gained critical acclaim as a great classical work of literature and has appeared within multiple interpretations, making Hamlet an extremely provocative story transcending cultural significance and appeal through generations. Shakespeare's use of symbolic ideologies have been further explored and analyzed through the perspectives of Trevor McDonald, and I have formed my own opinions in relation to the ideas of conflict between human ambition and conscience, and the innate human need of finding truth and meaning. Through the conventions of this revenge tragedy, philosophical notions and emotional turmoil are presented to hence create meaning and value to the reading audience.
In a sense, Hamlet highlights the conflict between ambition and conscience to therefore make present the individuals internal struggle. Hamlet is "duty bound to avenge his fathers death"- as stated by Trevor McDonald, to which he faces an internal conflict with his pursuits to follow through with the task laid upon him. "Am I a coward? Who call me villain?.I am pigeon liver'd and lack gall". The use of rhetorical question intensifies Hamlets feelings, where metaphor allows the reader to sympathize with him as he begins to become "corrupted by the evil nature of the task layed upon him" (T. McDonald). This expression of inner emotion as witnessed through soliloquy, expresses greater understanding of Hamlets inner emotions and personal outlook on his situation. This has caused some critics to associate his behavior and delay in avenging his father's death, to that of a coward, as expressed in the analysis of Trevor McDonald. It would appear that this 'cowardly' behavior is further highlighted when Hamlet is contrasted to Leartes who hastily "storms into the Kings presence careless of moral peril and eternal penalty, vowing to dare damnation" over the murder of his father (T.
