In Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” the line “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” (Act 1, Scene 4) resonates as a powerful indictment of the moral and political decay festering at the heart of the Danish court. Uttered by Marcellus, a guard, after witnessing the apparition of the late King Hamlet, this observation encapsulates the pervasive sense of corruption and disillusionment that permeates the play. As the narrative unfolds, this sentiment of rot and decay becomes a central theme, reflecting not only the personal chaos of Prince Hamlet but also the broader socio-political instability of Denmark. The ultimate demise of the Danish royal family is shown through acts of moral deterioration.
Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” is a complex play outlining the struggles between action and inaction, and the overall consequences of our choices. Our protagonist, Hamlet, faces immense challenges with despondency from the very beginning of this play which explains his intense sense of despair throughout his “to be or not to be” speech in Act 3, Scene 1. The “To be, or not to be” soliloquy, delivered by Prince Hamlet in Act 3, Scene 1 of William Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” stands as one of the most profound and philosophically rich passages in English literature. Hamlet contemplates the nature of his existence and the appeal of suicide as a means to escape the unbearable pain and frustrations of life. Through his questioning of the value of life in the face of suffering, betrayal, and the inevitability of death, Hamlet delves into the existential dilemmas that define the human condition. This speech not only provides deep insight into Hamlet’s character—his intellect, his profound melancholy, and his paralyzing indecision—but also encapsulates the play’s exploration of themes such as mortality, ethics, and the afterlife. When Hamlet faces the ghost who embodies someone resembling his father, he is told to avenge his death by killing his Uncle Claudius, the murderer claimed by the ghost. The “something rotten” is the overall health of the state, because it has been tarnished by Claudius’ crime and corruption.
The moral decline of Denmark in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” is triggered by Claudius’ regicide and his hasty marriage to Gertrude, his brother’s widow. These actions breach ethical boundaries and disturb the kingdom’s social harmony, casting a shadow of corruption across Denmark. Claudius’ takeover of the throne through deceit and his incestuous marriage to Gertrude not only defies moral and societal norms but also deeply unsettled Prince Hamlet. This marriage, seen as a betrayal of his father’s memory, symbolizes the widespread moral decay within the state. Thomas Westbrook argues, “This is a story of one person, Hamlet, who brings down the state, not a story of a corrupt state that falls by itself.”, which brings an interesting perspective to this story because he claims that Marcellus proclaimed “something is rotten in the state of Denmark” before the audience and Marcellus find out the king was murdered. This perspective proves Jay Dolmage’s “Disability as Evil” myth. In his essay, Westbrook says that “Hamlet destroys an otherwise flourishing Denmark” because he has previously considered suicide, his fixation on the Ghost, and threatens to kill people when they offer him advice. This viewpoint, supported by Jay Dolmage’s theory on societal perceptions of disability, suggests that Hamlet’s personal struggles and the kingdom’s moral crisis are inextricably linked. The tragedy, therefore, is not solely the result of overt actions by a single malevolent character but also the collective failure to address and rectify the underlying issues plaguing the state and its inhabitants. “Hamlet” thus serves as a timeless reflection on the nature of moral decay, responsibility, and the intricate dynamics between individual and societal health, challenging audiences to consider the broader implications of their actions and beliefs on the fabric of their communities.
Claudius, the usurping king of Denmark in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” emerges as a multifaceted character, particularly evident when he confesses to his heinous crime in Act 3, Scene 3. His admission, “O, my offence is rank, it smells to heaven; It hath the primal eldest curse upon’t, A brother’s murder,” not only underscores his awareness of the moral gravity of his actions but also intricately ties to the play’s overarching theme of moral deterioration. This confession reveals a moment of introspection and guilt, illustrating that Claudius is not merely a one-dimensional villain but a complex individual grappling with the weight of his sin. His reference to “the primal eldest curse” alludes to the biblical story of Cain and Abel, enhancing the theme of fratricide as a profound moral failing that disrupts the natural and divine order. This moment of vulnerability exposes the internal conflict within Claudius, suggesting that his consciousness of his moral failings contributes to the broader decay corrupting the state of Denmark. It reflects Shakespeare’s exploration of the complexities of guilt, power, and the consequences of moral compromise, adding depth to Claudius’ character and enriching the play’s exploration of moral deterioration. Through Claudius, Shakespeare delves into the nuanced reality that individuals can be both perpetrators and reflective souls, thereby weaving a rich tapestry of human frailty and the cascading effects of corruption.
An interesting point that was abundant in Hamlet and the Odor of Mortality, explains “Above all, the suggestion of noisome odors reminds us that aspect of evil which Shakespeare seems most concerned to emphasize in Hamlet: the evil residing in the soul of one man cannot be contained there, nor can a single sin be without far-reaching consequences. Insidiously, irresistibly, it spreads into a whole society, just as the reek generated by a mass of putrid flesh bears infection to man who breathes it.” This quote summarizes the journal by how Shakespeare goes into depth about the smells around Denmark during this time. This perspective sheds light on how Shakespeare intricately uses the imagery of decay and foul smells not merely as a reflection of physical death but as a potent symbol of moral decay. The quote encapsulates the notion that the moral corruption initiated by a single individual, like Claudius, extends beyond personal guilt to infect the broader community, mirroring the spread of disease through noxious smells. This thematic exploration suggests that evil acts and their repercussions are not isolated but have the capacity to permeate and deteriorate the moral fabric of society. Shakespeare’s detailed attention to the odors surrounding Denmark serves as a powerful metaphor for the insidious nature of corruption, emphasizing its ability to spread and impact a community in profound ways. “Hamlet” delves into the consequences of moral decay, portraying it as an infectious force that, once unleashed, has far-reaching and devastating effects on the entirety of society.
The moral corruption of the state mirrors Hamlet’s psychological descent. Hamlet’s soliloquies, a window into his soul, reveals a young man with despondency. His famous contemplation of suicide, “To be, or not to be: that is the question” (Act 3, Scene 1), reflects his existential crisis. Hamlet’s indecision shows his moral integrity with the task of avenging his father’s murder, a task that necessitates embracing the very corruption he despises. Hamlet provokes unasked questions about death within his speech, which further proves his decaying mental health throughout the play. Hamlet
Work cited
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1irXCbe5Tqmz9eXQYrdbuT70ZGKdK8FYB/view
https://www.lsj.org/literature/essays/hamlet_corruption
Westbrook, T. (n.d.). Thomas Westbrook Something is Rotten. https://wilson.fas.harvard.edu/files/jeffreywilson/files/thomas_westbrook_22_something_is_rotten_in_the_state_of_denmark_but_not_what_you_think22_close_reaading.pdf
Hamlet. (n.d.). https://chsenglishap4.weebly.com/uploads/2/2/5/7/2257880/hamletnotes.pdf
Altick, Richard D. “Hamlet and the Odor of Mortality.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 2, 1954, pp. 167–76. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2866587. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
Johae, Antony. “Wole Soyinka’s “Hamlet”: The Rotten State of Denmark Revisited.” Research in African Literatures, vol. 38 no. 4, 2007, p. 61-69. Project MUSE, https://doi.org/10.2979/ral.2007.38.4.61.
Davis, Tenney L. “The Sanity of Hamlet.” The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 18, no. 23, 1921, pp. 629–34. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2939352. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
Kirsch, Arthur. “Hamlet’s Grief.” ELH, vol. 48, no. 1, 1981, pp. 17–36. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2873010. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
Spinrad, Phoebe S. “The Fall of the Sparrow and the Map of Hamlet’s Mind.” Modern Philology, vol. 102, no. 4, 2005, pp. 453–77. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.1086/433209. Accessed 21 Feb. 2024.
Sprockets and Springes 