Mother's Consent: The Key to Hamlet's Vengeance

The Maternal Consent Theory: Understanding Hamlet's Delay

The procrastination problem in Shakespeare's play "Hamlet" is the central problem of the play and it has always been a matter of discussion among critics. It is also known as the problem of delay in Hamlet. The delay is caused by Prince Hamlet himself in the execution of revenge after the Ghost of his father reveals to him that he did not die a natural or accidental death but he was deliberately murdered by his brother Claudius (uncle to Hamlet). The Ghost of his father urges him to avenge his murder. Hamlet solemnly swears to avenge his father’s murder. But two months have passed and Hamlet does nothing except self rebuke. Why this delay? This is the question of questions and constitutes the central problem of the play. Critics have debated the reasons for this delay, with some suggesting external difficulties. such as Claudius being heavily guarded, the need for public justice, and the Ghost's authenticity. Some others suggest internal difficulties lying in the psyche of Hamlet and still others suggesting that there is no delay at all. It was quite interesting when I went through these theories and it led me reexamine the problem and the result was that I too came into possession of a theory. Let us first examine all these theories one by one and then at the end I will discuss my own theory. 

There is No Delay at All

Before we move forward to examine these theories, we have a hurdle that we must clear. It is that we must first decide whether there was a delay or not. Some critics like M. Robertson say that there has been no delay at all. Hamlet did act fast but the events beyond his control took place one after and he could do nothing. The Ghost scene is followed by the Play Scene and immediately after the play scene, he is sent to England on voyage. 

The Delay is Very much There 

But a majority of critics agree that there has been considerable delay on the part of Hamlet in the execution of his action. Hamlet himself accepts that the delay has been done. So the delay is there. Here again the critics differ on the reason behind this delay. There has been a wide divergence of views about the reasons for this delay. According to some the cause of delay lies in external difficulties.

The Delay was Caused by External Difficulties

Let us revisit some raw facts that give us definitive clues regarding the delay caused by external difficulties. The first important fact is that Hamlet does not exclusively trust the Ghost. He believes that the Ghost is right but he wants  to confirm the truth by other means also. The Play Scene is the result which confirms that Claudius is guilty. Another important fact that we must notice is that Hamlet does not want to kill Claudius by deceit. He wants to kill him while he is involved in worldly affairs so that he may go to hell. That is why he did not kill Claudius when he was praying to God. And also he wants to prove him guilty before killing. He is sent to England after The Play Scene and his killing of Polonius by mistake. He is caught in the web of events and when he finally comes to action, it is already too late. 

This theory sounds very nice but it lacks evidence. Nowhere in his soliloquies does Hamlet mention this difficulty. External difficulties don’t hold ground. If he had felt external difficulties, he must have mentioned them. He has acted fast against external difficulties. He does not delay in confirming whether his uncle is guilty or not. Confirmation is done and the stage is set for the revenge but the audience find Hamlet reproaching himself for inaction. Revenge is still not taken.

The Delay was Caused not by Hamlet but by Shakespeare

To rationalize the reproaches by Hamlet, we have another set of critics like Professor E. E. Stoll who says that the delay is not on the part of Hamlet but the delay has been created by Shakespeare himself. The soliloquies  of Hamlet need to be examined carefully because he reproaches himself for inaction. It is Shakepeare who puts off the revenge and to save the story, he lets the hero heap upon himself reproaches for his inaction; to save the character he counteracts the effect of these by his own words, those of others, and the whole impression of his conduct. Of course, this argument is beautiful because it is the dramatist who controls and  plays all the characters. But simply saying that Shakespeare has done the delay does not end the game. This argument does not close the chapter. The question still remains what the intention of Shakespeare was and how he wanted to paint the protagonist and whether the protagonist delayed the action.

The Delay was Caused by Internal Difficulties

The argument goes on and comes on the platform of internal difficulties. A set of critics argues that the delay was caused by internal difficulties that existed in his mind or psyche. But again, critics have different theories regarding internal difficulties. According to the "conscience theory," propounded by Ulrishi, Hamlet's moral nature prevents him from immediate revenge. Hamlet has full justification to take revenge but the Christian in him struggles with the natural man. Actually, a Christian does not take revenge but he leaves it to God because a revenge may start a chain reaction of revenges. Such a small divine voice draws him towards another way. However, since Hamlet repeatedly expresses his determination to avenge his father, it makes this theory less plausible.

The Sentimental Theory

Then comes the "sentimental theory" placed by Gothe. The learned critic argues that Hamlet's sensitive and delicate temperament hinders him from committing the act. Hamlet possessed a lovely, pure, and most moral nature but without strong nerves. He sinks beneath a burden and he cannot be so cruel and rash to kill his uncle. Still, this theory overlooks Hamlet's moments of ferocity and determination which are inconsistent with a weak character and we cannot say that he didn’t possess strong nerves. It is true that Hamlet is a sensitive, cultured young man, but he is by no means a weakling or a coward. At times he can be callous, cruel and ferocious like in the graveyard scene.

The Weakness of Will Theory

Similarly, the "weakness of will" theory, advocated by Coleridge, suggests that Hamlet's excessive speculation and overthinking lead to inaction. According to this theory, Hamlet's delay is caused by irresolution and the irresolution is the outcome of a speculative habit of mind. Whenever he faces a problem, he goes on thinking about it for a long time. The excess of thought or speculation brings about irresolution and cripples the power of action. This theory gives a more convincing explanation. Hamlet is essentially a scholar and a philosopher. He has a wider range of imagination and keener powers of reflection. But this theory raises a question whether it is impossible for a poet or a scholar or a philosopher to be also a man of action. Practically, it is very much possible to be both a philosopher and a man of action. Hamlet too has both the qualities. There is nothing to support that he is not a man of action. While this theory holds merit, it fails to understand Hamlet's character.

The Melancholy Theory

However, the emotional side of Hamlet’s character cannot be completely ignored and this leads us to the "melancholy theory," proposed by Bradley. It  appears to offer the most compelling explanation. Actually, Hamlet has deep seated malady that resulted from the moral shock that he received. Hamlet's moral sensibility suffers a great shock when he discovers his mother's hasty remarriage and betrayal. This causes a state of melancholy, leading to a disgust for life and hesitancy in decisive action.Hamlet was not endowed with melancholy by nature. He developed it under the stress of circumstances. He had built up a sacred image of love and loyalty in his mother who was an emblem of ideal womanhood to him. Hamlet’s noble idealism is completely shattered to pieces at his father’s murder by his uncle and hasty remarriage of his mother with the murderer of his father. He develops a morbid state of melancholy and this melancholy is responsible for the delay and the final tragedy. 

Hamlet Wanted His Mother's Consent to kill Claudius

But before we could reach a conclusion, I can say that I have one more theory. I have named it Maternal Consent Theory. According to my theory, the cause of delay lies in his will to gain mother's consent before killing Claudius. Hamlet was very much ready and he could execute the revenge any time. He was not an inch hesitant. In the closet scene, he kills Polonius thinking that it was Claudius. This event is a proof of his readiness to kill Claudius. But he lacked something like supplemental moral support to execute the murder of his uncle. On the surface he was unable to understand what it was. But deep in his mind, he very much wanted his mother to join hands with him. He criticized his mother for sleeping with Claudius. He tried to convince his mother that it was incest. When he failed in convincing his mother, his mind was filled with melancholy. His mother’s hasty remarriage with Claudius had already given a severe blow to his moral sensibility, yet directly or indirectly he was attached to mother. Claudius did not dare to kill Hamlet openly due to mother and son attachment. The Play Scene was intended not only for Claudius but it was intended for Gertrude, his mother also. He wanted to confirm whether she was also involved in the murder of his father. But he comes to know that she is unaware of the truth. Hamlet wanted his mother to know that Claudius was the murderer of his father. The play had two intentions. The one is already known to us. The other was intended to let Gertrude realize that Claudius was the murderer of her husband. But unfortunately, Gertrude did not suspect Claudius and the play was only a half success. He kept on making efforts by all possible means to take his mother into his confidence and thus take her on his side. These efforts distracted him from his goal of killing Claudius and the delay was caused. He was aware that when he killed Claudius, he would have to face the wrath of his mother. He tried his best to win confidence of his mother. Later on, his mother did join his side and he did kill his uncle but it was too late. The final verdict to kill Claudius comes from his mother.

The Conclusion

In summary, the delay in Hamlet's revenge can be attributed to the emotional side of his mind. Some people may attribute it to development of melancholy, triggered by his shattered moral ideals and subsequent emotional turmoil. This state of mind leads to excessive contemplation, indecision, and the ultimate tragedy of the play. But however Hamlet’s wait to take his mother into his confidence is not less convincing but rather we can say that this is the theory that is most convincing.