Respected Shakespearian scholar Harold Bloom subtitled his last work on Shakespeare, The Invention of the Human (1998). In this he is correct on many levels. Hamlet could be viewed as a modern existentialist. He is also fatalistic and secular. Hamlet’s keen intellect and insight combined with his dignity for the human soul place him in quite a dilemma. His uncle Claudius, the king of Denmark, has married his mother, Gertrude, after murdering his father, the former king, Hamlet. Despite feeling accursed he was ever “born to set things right”, Hamlet’s cognition with respect to human nature forces him to take revenge in a manner most would find surprising. For before he can choose his manner; Hamlet must endure a great deal of deliberation. As Scott (74) notes, Hamlet uses personal meditations “to make sense of his moral dilemma.”
Hamlet is a student. Upon returning to Denmark he encounters the ghost of his father. Before doing so, his loyal friend Horatio asks him why is not afraid to go to the ghost. Hamlet’s reply informs us that he is fatalistic about his “mortal coil” with a strong belief in the eternal nature of the spirit, “Why, what should be the fear? I do not set my life in a pin’s fee; And for my soul, what can it do to that, Being a thing immortal as itself? It waves me forth again: I’ll follow it” (Shakespeare 1076).
Hamlet is not afraid and understands mortality is inevitability for all human beings, but he believes the spirit is immortal. Hamlet’s encounter with the ghost of his murdered father explains why things are “rotten” in Denmark. At this point, we might expect most people in Hamlet’s position to immediately murder Claudius. However, Hamlet is indecisive about his course of action because he knows enough about human nature and himself to guide his actions with reason over passion. This leads us to his famous soliloquy and lamentable questions, “To be, or no...