William Shakespeare's play Hamlet is one of the greatest and most well-known tragedies of all time. In the play, it is argued that Laertes and Hamlet are perfect examples of character foils. A foil is a character whose values are different from those of another character. An important purpose of a foil is to show contrast to another character. Usually, the characters experience similar events in the story, which is the case with Laertes and Hamlet. Both Laertes' and Hamlet's father was murdered, but the actions of the two after the murder were very different. Laertes and Hamlet are perfect examples of character foils because Laertes is decisive when aiming to get revenge, while Hamlet is not, and because Hamlet is passive throughout the play,
…show more content…
During the play, Hamlet finds out his father has been murdered by his uncle, Claudius. Claudius takes over as the king of Denmark, and after Hamlet is told by the ghost of his father that Claudius is responsible, Hamlet becomes infuriated. The ghost instructs Hamlet to get revenge on Claudius, saying “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder” (1.5.25). If Hamlet was decisive, he would have taken action immediately and brought his uncle to justice. Instead, Hamlet was indecisive and opposed to take any action at all. He forces the other characters in the play to believe he is going insane and then has to put on a play to accuse Claudius for his sinful acts. None of these actions are strong enough to make Claudius repay for what he has done. On the other hand, when Laertes hears about his father's death, he hurries home from France and is ready to get revenge on the murderer, who, ironically, happened to be Hamlet. Hamlet takes the entire play to get revenge, while Laertes returns to Denmark to get revenge as soon as he hears about his father's murder. Laertes displays his desire and decisiveness for revenge when he says, “And so have I a noble father lost... But my revenge will come” (4.7.25-29). The contrast of Laertes wanting revenge more than Hamlet in a similar situation comprehensible shows the two of them as strong
During the play, Hamlet finds out his father has been murdered by his uncle, Claudius. Claudius takes over as the king of Denmark, and after Hamlet is told by the ghost of his father that Claudius is responsible, Hamlet becomes infuriated. The ghost instructs Hamlet to get revenge on Claudius, saying “Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder” (1.5.25). If Hamlet was decisive, he would have taken action immediately and brought his uncle to justice. Instead, Hamlet was indecisive and opposed to take any action at all. He forces the other characters in the play to believe he is going insane and then has to put on a play to accuse Claudius for his sinful acts. None of these actions are strong enough to make Claudius repay for what he has done. On the other hand, when Laertes hears about his father's death, he hurries home from France and is ready to get revenge on the murderer, who, ironically, happened to be Hamlet. Hamlet takes the entire play to get revenge, while Laertes returns to Denmark to get revenge as soon as he hears about his father's murder. Laertes displays his desire and decisiveness for revenge when he says, “And so have I a noble father lost... But my revenge will come” (4.7.25-29). The contrast of Laertes wanting revenge more than Hamlet in a similar situation comprehensible shows the two of them as strong