What Lies In Revenge

As I turn the last page, read the last lines and learn the last words everything begins to spin and shift inside my mind as the so much expected unraveling of the story comes much too abruptly. We did expect revenge to take place in spite of Hamlet's denial, but so much? If one has but a mediocre understanding of Shakespeare and his work, a tragedy is definitely expected incorporating death and murder, but even for this genius it is too much. The whole play revolved around this final moment which "tied" it al together, and so its implications may not be assumed hastily. In the end, rare it is for those who live and not those who perish under sword, lunacy and treachery.

Hamlet by his wound, Laertes succumbing to his own weapon, the King a victim to his own hypocrisy, Ophelia a casualty in the limbo of love and so many others come to the end by their own means. In answer to previous intrigue about revenge, it is made clear that the driving force behind the whole play is revenge itself and not the natural consequence of one's acts. This revenge is clearly expressed by Hamlet when he uncovers the truth about the sword "envenomed too! Then, venom, to thy/ work."(Act5, Scene2, 351-353). It is, after all, a story about revenge, its consequences and its forms of application up to its ultimate degree. And it is no smart revenge as may be argued possible by some, but an animalistic and savage revenge which, it ints course to hurt an individual, requires such sacrifice as mathematicians would deem unprofitable.

Such a disturbing plot provides little comfort at its closure, taking us to question the intentions behind it. When so much is said and so many thought come to an end before a sword, leaving no one alive to give meaning to the history, what is the message? There are some obvious possibilities. First, some may argue that mere entertainment must not include a teaching but merely distract its audience which the play accomplished, but that somehow falls short of my standards. On the other hand, it is evident that even when everyone dies the play becomes one of the most praised works of all times, demonstrating how art can outlive its creator, but I suspect thats not it. If considering how revenge is an evil force, the conclusion could be evidence of how living by such parameters leads to no satisfaction, and how such feeling is valid but failure to overcome it is pointless. Finally, another interpretation may be driven by history and how so much power and greed came to destroy families and whole reigns as a warning to future leaders.

In literature there a variety of interpretations and, in a way, each of the previous may be valid an so are many others. It is curious however, how we spend our days reading between lines and analyzing every word and every situation in our endeavor to grasp the every detail to end in so much nothingness. And I am not mentioning nothingness as mere a description of ideas for in nothingness much lies inscribed. It is just curious how a pattern emerges where, when stories end in general death and hope is vanished from the script, the audience only looks upon the logical reasons for it to happen and leaves it at that. When, to the contrary, characters remain and stories end, we are given the invitation to imagine, so suppose, to go beyond what is fed to us.