Hamlet and Othello Essay

The twain turn of eventss by William Shakespe atomic number 18, juncture and Othello, glow the rebirth philosophical system, with its most important trains- realness, peripateticism and Humanism, especi solely(prenominal)y in their treatment of gracious spirit and sympathetic condition. The works of the both philosophers Plato and Aristotle, which formed the basis of the two endeavours that similarlyk the soma of their initiators, were reinterpreted by many scholars of the Medieval and uncanny rebirth period, and of the later periods.Platonism and Aristotelianism were opposed philosophies in their showtime articulation. The Platonists believed that there is a universe of abstr work ons, the pure macrocosm of compositions. The fictitious characteristics of the corporal objects, formed an swipe gentlemans gentleman, which was moreover, the true word. For example, the Platonist school of thought implied that the corporeal earth was besides a reflection of the perfect universe of discourse of ideas, that is, a beautiful object is solely the reflection of the idea of stunner.Aristotle revised these ideas that Plato had starting time initiated, and proposed an opposed view, which was based on an observational way of knowing the world, and which constituted the initiatory ill-treat towards natural science.The two doctrines referred evidently to both ontological and epistemological facts more or less the world.On the other hand, the renascence humanitarianism which was actually the most characteristic doctrine for this period, emphasized the nobility of human temperament, and the places of human intellect and spirit, sequence joining the two briny philosophies Platonism and Aristotelianism.As Brian Copen comportr and Charles Schmitt ascertained in their conversion Philosophy, both Platonism and Aristotelianism presented many problems for the humanists and for the theologians as tumefy, c ar, for illustration the transm igration of somebodys and other beliefs which seemed incompatible with ChristianityWhy should an up mobile scholar or bureaucrat sympathize with Platos elitism? Were humanists not degraded by his scorn for poets and rhetoricians? Platos protagonism of communism and advertisement of homosexuality invited governmental and social complaint. Even his renowned righteousness seemed out of tune with a philosophy that make matter eternal, the human soul preexistent and migratory, and the gods and demons many, powerful, and worthy of worship. As the Renaissance came to know Plato better, discussion of his thought could not have been other than complex and divided, and the literary argument had been prepargond by an anti-Platonic tradition coarse sustained by pagans and Christians alike. As early(a) modern thinkers developed new modes of rendering unknown to antiquity and the Middle Ages, Platos compatibility with Christianity re master(prenominal)ed the leading question. (Copenhaver, 129)However, many of the ideas of the two philosophies were all kept or reinterpreted as the main philosophical views at the time of Renaissance, and this is truly well reflected in the plays of William Shakespe be.In hamlet, which is whiz of Shakespeares plays that most approaches a metaphysical view of human nature seems to hover in its essential purport upon the brim separating Platonism from Aristotelianism. One of the greatest dilemmas in village is that of individual trans work on.Shakespeares prince of Denmark is called upon to revenge the murder of his father. As critics have spy repeatedly, on of the most essential and telling things in the play is settlement question when he has to take definite run against the murderer. One of the essential differences surrounded by the humanists who advocated Platos theory and the one(a)s who adopted Aristotelianism, was that between the thoughtful life that was characteristic of the Platonic movement and that of activ e life as presented by Aristotle. Various philosophers of the Renaissance took up one or the other of the two doctrines, and support either reflexion or exerciseFicinos work () also laud the brooding life and professed an ascetic condescension for the material world not in keeping with the pragmatic interests of the civic humanists. notwithstanding to see the Aristotelian Argyropoulos as sentiency of the active life and the Platonist Ficino as illusionist of brooding quietism is too simple. For one thing, Argyropoulos seems to have intended no activist propaganda in his teaching, and, even more important, Ficinos theory of the contemplative life kept his philosophy attractive to the politically and economically restless Florentines who supported him.Always urging the rising slope of the soul, Ficino presented the contemplative life as the utmost step in a power structure of human save that led heap to surpass the active life without utterly denying it lived well, the active life becomes a step on the way to escaping matter and conjunction with God. It was the genius of Neoplatonism to open channels between the reverent and the mundane that transcended the world while preserving it as a platform for mounting to the godhead. (Copenhaver, 144)crossroads seems to be a contemplative character altogether, for whom the ideal world of abstract moral values constitutes the guiding principle. When he is faced with the baseness of the many crimes that fall out in his own family, he postpones pickings work on and revenging his father. Moreover, the revenge takes place roughly accidentally at the end of the play.            His hesitance in front of these material problems is relevant for his Neo- Platonic frame of thought            How all occasions do inform against me,            And spurring my dull revenge. What i s a man            If his head good and market if his time            Be further to sleep and feed? A beast, no more.            Sure he that made us with such large discourse,            spirit before and after, gave us not            That capableness and godlike reason            To fust in us unusd. (Ham. IV. 4. 32-39)It becomes obvious from Hamlets computer address that his reflections regarding human condition and human nature are based on main principles of both Humanism and Platonic persuasion man is seen alternately by Hamlet as a superior creation endowed with godlike reason and a beast, whose main concerns are its primary inescapably. That is, Hamlets own ideas nigh the world and roughly man, which are e ssentially rattling(a) and Platonist, meet with an obvious obstacle in the material world, where he sees the baseness of character of both his uncle and his mother. An even more touching example of how he is repelled by the idea of a purely material world in which the spiritual realities he believes in are hardly perceptible is his foul condemnation of Ophelia, whom he blames without proof for the feebleness he sees in his own mother.Hamlet ponders himself on his own hesitation in when he is supposed to take action, and realizes that his swinging comes from what he calls thinking too hardly on the event ( Ham. IV. 4. 41), that is to say, his own contemplative nature and the need to understand early and meditate on the event, as well as to judge it, prevent him from winning action. At the end of the monologue however, he determines that his thoughts be bloody or be nothing worth( Ham. IV. 4. 66), that is, he chooses action over contemplation, as he feels he is compelled by the events to mend things and do rightness to his fathers death.Thus, it weed be said that Hamlet has to take action and reestablish the ethical order in the world, which had been so terribly disturbed by the crimes which took place in his family. This structuring of the events reflects the Renaissance philosophical context of use, which blended Platonism with Aristotelianism and Humanism. inaugural of all, according to the Platonists man should tend to contemplation of the ideal world, and live in the purer world of the spirit, not be limited to the material one. The protagonists in Hamlet, that is the king and the queen, have sinned against these precepts by giving in to desire of power and to lust. The fact that Hamlet feels that he needs to take action is in correct with the humanist idea that man contribute reestablish the divine order and that, in order to do that, he must(prenominal) play the part that is required of him in the material world.Thus, the two worlds- the mate rial and recondite are not completely separate, and the Renaissance man believed that the spiritual perfection can be reached through action as well, insofar as this would imply reestablishing the divine order.In Othello, similar ideas appear near individual action. Othello too is called upon to take action against what he believes was the betrayal of his wife Desdemona. However, the first significant difference between Hamlet and Othello is that the latter(prenominal) is a moor, that is a glowering man, of a different race and religion.The Renaissance views on the subject of race are very significant in the context of the play, and are reflected especially in Othellos character, which appears to be the very opposer of that of Hamlet.If Hamlet is of a contemplative nature, given to musings about the nature of man and his place in the world, Othello is a rough, impulsive man who acts without hesitation, but also, acts when he shouldnt.He is easily deceived by Iago and therefore h e believes him when he tries to travel to him with false ideas about Desdemonas love. Thus, Othello, who like Hamlet, can be said to work out an act of revenge, actually does something which is useless and, moreover, unjust. Othellos character is also evident at the end of the play, after he kills Desdemona and confesses the manner in which he loved her one that loved not wisely, but too well (V.2.340). Thus, his own statement reveals the nature of his impulsive and tempestuous character and emotions he was capable of true and strong love, although he did not love wisely.This proves essentially that Hamlet and Othello are two opposite characters, both acting in the name of revenge, although for different reasons, Hamlet in his start out at reestablishing the moral order and Othello in the name of love. However, if Hamlet hesitates to take action for most of the play, and moreover, chooses the device of the staged play to commence his revenge, that is, another intellectual, conte mplative device, Othello takes action without judging the events for himself, but being only influenced by what Iago was telling him. Othello is a soldiery character in a way, who is given to take action and fight            leave-taking the tranquil mind farewell marrowFarewell the plumed troops, and the big warsThat makes dream virtue 0, farewellThe royal banner, and all quality,Pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious warAnd O you mortal engines, whose rude throatsTh perpetual Joves dread clamors counterfeit,Farewell Othellos occupations gone. ( Othello, 3.3.347-57)It is interesting to pecker that both Othello and Hamlet may be paralleled to Cervantes hold out Quixote.Hamlet lives interiorly in a Platonic world, which could be likened to Don Quixotes confusion of the books of romance with actual reality. Don Quixote lives in the world of the stories he has read, and moreover, those stories are chivalric romances, that is stori es of quest and exemplary workings which aim at mending the world and which are always fraught with symbolical meaning. But, he needs to accomplish the industrial plant that fill his fantasy, and although it cant be said that he does so, he does act. In Don Quixote thus, action is itself unreal, since his chivalric works are not what he believes they areWere those mud walls in thy fantasy, Sancho, quoth Don Quixote, where or thorough which thou sawest that never-enough-praised gentleness and beauty? They were not so, but galleries, walks, or sound stone pavementsor how call ye em?of rich and royal palaces. (Cervantes II, 489)The chivalric romances which are Don Quixotes faith are also that of Othello in a way, because of the latters military character, and his search for adventures. Othellos love for Desdemona also has something of the chivalric about it. Thus, all the three characters, Hamlet, Othello and Don Quixote state the same Platonist and Aristotelian dilemmas of contem plation and the spiritual versus action and the material.