Open Prompt Six

2008. In a literary work, a minor character, often known as a foil, possesses traits that emphasize, by contrast or comparison, the distinctive characteristics and qualities of the main character. For example, the ideas or behavior of a minor character might be used to highlight the weaknesses or strengths of the main character. Choose a novel or play in which a minor character serves as a foil for the main character. Then write an essay in which you analyze how the relation between the minor character and the major character illuminates the meaning of the work.

William Shakespeare's Hamlet tells the story of Hamlet, the prince of Denmark, and the crisis he is thrown into when asked to kill his uncle to avenge his father's death. Paralyzed by indecision, Hamlet waits too long, and by the time he is ready to act it is too late. Fortinbras, the prince of Norway, acts as a foil for Hamlet. Unlike Hamlet, Fortinbras is capable of making a decision and following through with it. This difference highlights Hamlet's inability to act, and shows how being unable to make decisions can have dire consequences.

Throughout the play, Hamlet struggles to make decisions, and most importantly the decision of whether or not he should kill Claudius. Initially, Hamlet doesn't want to kill Claudius until he has proof that Claudius actually killed Old Hamlet. However, after his reaction to the play, it is clear that Claudius is guilty, and Hamlet still does nothing. He constantly debates the morals of killing either the king or himself, but never actually commits to one or the other. He consistently finds ways of delaying any actions he might take, like when he refuses to kill Claudius because he is praying and could end up in Heaven. By the time Hamlet finally resolves to kill Claudius, Claudius has already made the plans that will leave the entire court dead, making Hamlet's newfound decision-making abilities worth very little. Hamlet's tendency to deliberate rather than act results in the deaths of most of the royal court of Elsinore.

Fortinbras, on the other hand, is more than able to act decisively. Upon learning of the reason for his father's death, the prince of Norway springs into action, determined to seek vengeance. While he may be a bit overhasty in his decision making, he at least is capable of making a decision to begin with, unlike Hamlet. He sends troops towards Denmark, and while Claudius is able to reason with the young king the action is still taken. Fortinbras arrives at Elsinore in time to be crowned king, an ending that leaves hope for Denmark with its new, decisive leader.

Compared to Fortinbras, Hamlet seems even more indecisive and weak. He is constantly debating the morals and possible consequences of any decision he might make, and once he decides something he rarely follows that decision with action. Fortinbras, on the other hand, is capable of the decisive actions that Hamlet simply cannot achieve. Where Hamlet's indecision leads to the death of most of Elsinore's court, Fortinbras' decision-making results in him taking the crown of Denmark. Fortinbras' decisions highlight Hamlets lack thereof. His success makes Hamlet's failure even more obvious and effectively shows the perils of indecision.