Hamlet Blog 1

Prompt: To what extent is Hamlet's quest for revenge justifiable in terms of the situation presented? Why or why not?

Based off of knowledge from Act 1, Hamlet's quest for revenge is justifiable enough by his father's death. In the final scenes of Act 1, the reader and Hamlet learn of his father's death being a murder, and not from a natural cause of death. Evidence about this murder can be seen from when the ghost states, "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder." (1.5._) The ghost is telling Hamlet to seek revenge for his father's death. Personally, I do believe that the situation in its entirety (from our knowledge so far) allows for Hamlet's quest for revenge to be justifiable, mostly because there is suspicion and knowledge that Claudius kills Hamlet for the crown and to trickily marry Queen Gertrude of Denmark. From this knowledge that Hamlet receives/already knows, he would be making his father's real cause of death known to everyone in Denmark. For the reasons of knowledge about Claudius and making his father's death known throughout Denmark, the terms are justified for seeking revenge on his father's death.