Gertrude In Hamlet
Gertrude is a very minute character in Hamlet, yet the same cannot be said about her impact on the action of the play. Certain audiences view Gertrude in different ways, some sympathise with her as a character, and see her actions as empowering towards women as a whole, letting loose of the social conventions of the Shakespearian era, in addition to being a caring mother. However, I feel there are two options that can be seen here concerning Gertrude as a person, and neither of them are positive, as the only two plausible ways in which her character can be based on is a manipulative plotter, or one who is simply invested in her own ignorance. Considering her lack of concern for the social conventions of the time, alongside poor ways of dealing
…show more content…
On the surface my repudiation of Gertrude as anything other than a manipulative plotter may seem a brash claim; at least it does until we are met with the way she confronts Claudius in Act 2 Scene 2. Her line ‘thanks Guildenstern, and gentle Rosencrantz’ (2:2:34) is used either to correct what Claudius said just before her, or is simply her mistaking between Rosencrantz and …show more content…
Despite this, she makes no effort to console Hamlet, and merely accepts the very brief ‘well, we shall sift him’ reply that is given by Claudius. This means one of two things: that she is unable to think or speak for herself, or able to speak up but unwilling. Considering that she had already corrected Claudius earlier in the play, it thus follows that this line was not one that showed her as a victim of powerful individuals as she has already proven earlier that she is not a mindless sycophant. When we are to consider that her son has been horrifically upset to the point where he is bordering on insanity, and the reason for this is because of Gertrude’s marriage to his brother only two weeks after the death of his father (for whom he had the greatest admiration) yet still felt no need to console him, I would argue that by her inaction what she did was indicative of a manipulative plotter. Not only this, but her status as a tragic heroine is dispelled, as simply allowing one’s own flesh and blood to suffer is the direct antithesis of what it means to be a tragic heroine: ‘a character
On the surface my repudiation of Gertrude as anything other than a manipulative plotter may seem a brash claim; at least it does until we are met with the way she confronts Claudius in Act 2 Scene 2. Her line ‘thanks Guildenstern, and gentle Rosencrantz’ (2:2:34) is used either to correct what Claudius said just before her, or is simply her mistaking between Rosencrantz and …show more content…
Despite this, she makes no effort to console Hamlet, and merely accepts the very brief ‘well, we shall sift him’ reply that is given by Claudius. This means one of two things: that she is unable to think or speak for herself, or able to speak up but unwilling. Considering that she had already corrected Claudius earlier in the play, it thus follows that this line was not one that showed her as a victim of powerful individuals as she has already proven earlier that she is not a mindless sycophant. When we are to consider that her son has been horrifically upset to the point where he is bordering on insanity, and the reason for this is because of Gertrude’s marriage to his brother only two weeks after the death of his father (for whom he had the greatest admiration) yet still felt no need to console him, I would argue that by her inaction what she did was indicative of a manipulative plotter. Not only this, but her status as a tragic heroine is dispelled, as simply allowing one’s own flesh and blood to suffer is the direct antithesis of what it means to be a tragic heroine: ‘a character