Over time many opinions have been formed about William Shakespeare’s work
Hamlet. Yet through the quagmire of confusion surrounding the tragedy none have
spoken than T.S. Eliot. Eliot sees hamlet as somewhat of an artistic failure due
to its confusion between the main plot and the main character. In his analysis
Eliot recalls the work of other authors who have talked the subject of Hamlet.
He states that many authors connect with Hamlet and don’t come to realize
their own creative potential. These men come to think of the drama as a classic
and therefore see it as an extension of there own artistic ability. Eliot also
realizes that in the case of Hamlet interpretation is futile and that only
criticism is relevant. Interpretation comes with a certain understanding of the
nature of the work and a basis on the history surrounding the tragedy. Through
searching and digging many scholars have found the historical relevance behind
Hamlet, but Eliot’s belief is that the public as a whole was to be left
ignorant of this information and in turn was not meant to fully understand the
full scope of the play. Eliot’s idea is valid and it has many good points, but
I tend to disagree with him. It is true that much of the story line in Hamlet is
confusing and that the emphasis shifts numerous times from the actual plot to
the actions of the main character, but I find that to be what draws me towards
the story. The play is time less to me, but not for this time. For those people
who lived in the Elizabethan era it may have been a little more straightforward,
but to us it seems to have lost its hold and our understanding.