PROMPT: Critic Roland Barthes has said, Literature is the question minus the answer.

Write an essay in which you analyze a central question Hamlet raises and the extent to which it offers answers.

Literature, in itself, is a form of art. Like all forms if visual art, literature is created through the abstractions and understandings of human creative skill and imagination, typically posing questions about human nature and the conflicts that plague people in spiritual, emotional, fictional, and authentic realms, and possess the ability to leave open the interpretations of those who read, listen, and watch. The tragedy of Hamlet is the drama of the young prince of Denmark, Hamlet, whom, under the persuasion of an apparition that appears to him, must determine whether to seek revenge upon his uncle and avenge his father's, late King of Denmark, death. Hamlet is both illustrious and praised for its ability to pose questions that are still relevant today. Now, while the play may pose some insightful inquiries concerning the idea of life and death and the mechanics behind one's morals concerning the topic, it is mainly left to the reader to interpret the extent to which the piece offers answers to Hamlet's infamous question of, "To be or not to be", that is, whether one should live through life and suffer, or to die and face the consequences of what lies after death. What point is there to live when in the end, The character that Hamlet portrays is one that has captured the attention of various audiences primarily due to fact that, amongst his most noticeable character traits, Hamlet is not only obsessively contemplative upon the actions he takes in the play but he is exceedingly indecisive. It is his indecisiveness however, that causes Hamlet to pose the questions that we, today, are able to contemplate. The question still remains however, why exactly did Hamlet hesitate in acting revenge when Hamlet was so quick to proclaim I have swornt. It is possible that Hamlet was the person with the least amount of right to contemplate death, and rather, his entire motives were driven by those of selfish reasons. Perhaps, then, Shakespeare was using Hamlets famous If that were the . In any case, it wouldnt have been the first time that Shakespeare has mocked the higher class and their impulsive desires, most seen in Romeo and Juliet.

It does not outright say the thoughts of the men within the army, considering they are all only mentioned in passing, there is a level of understanding that these men may have be certain as to the fact that it was possible that death awaited them on the other end of battle. If thats the case, why exactly did Hamlet, whom had no real known threat posed upon him, hesitate in seeking revenge when he had countless times to react? In fact, Hamlets only real reason to kill both Laertes and Claudius was in an act of impulsiveness under pressure, that being, his getting stabbed before he could react. Again, what exactly is Shakespeare trying to tell the reader about life? Hamlets suffering, while cruel and in no circumstance desirable, is nothing compared to that of the men being sent to a pointless battle. When put into thought, Hamlet was a prince who had derived from a rich family. Hamlets life was anything short of the comfortable lifestyle accompanied with that of someone who was rich. So exactly, how did Hamlet really suffer? It

could be possible that Shakespeare didnt want to show life through the eyes of honest, noble men but rather selfish, flaw-filled beings. In any case, the only person who survived in the play was Horatio, a character who was portrayed with the east amount of flaws as the others, in fact, Horatio was portrayed as loyal and trustworthy. Horatio surviving may have been a mere plot device in order to re-account Hamlets tale, but then again, it could be Shakespeares way of showing that life should be granted to those who are honest and kind and while there may be suffering, as seen amongst the soldiers sent off to war, it is better to live an honest life in pain than to Shakespeare provided the question and where he may have been able to provide an answer, he chose to leave the gap suspiciously empty. In fact, there are many central, key facts in Hamlet that are left unknown to the reader. It is possible that Shakespeare wanted us to explain his works ourselves, to ask our own questions and provide our own answers. In any case, Shakespeare gave us, as readers, a true question without an answer. Being published in 1604, it is a wonder why Hamlet, possibly Shakespeares most well-known and praised work, is still read today. Perhaps it is the sole reason that the reader is never given an answer. We, like Hamlet himself, are uncertain, and are forced to question the inner workings of the play. No matter what the case, at the end of the day, we may never be truly certain as to whether it is better to be or not to be.