Both Hamlet and Oedipus are known as overwhelmingly tragic literary figures who eventually had to face their demise due to their tragic flaws. Guided by a strong motivation, both characters demonstrate significant resilience in pursuit of their goals. However, despite Oedipus’ willingness to face the terrible truth told by the prophet, Hamlet’s resilience is infinitely more powerful since, unlike Oedipus, Hamlet is not a champion or crusader for the truth in his nature. Since Hamlet completing his plan to reveal Claudius’ betrayal is much more uncharacteristic of him than Oedipus’ fleeing from the truth, nor is it morally ambiguous, Hamlet should be recognized as a more resilient character.
To compare the resilience of the two characters, scrutinizing their nature and core characteristics will be required first. Hamlet might be considered melancholy and cynical, yet he is nothing short of determined and brave. For instance, he does not hesitate to talk to a ghost despite the menacing presence of tee latter: “Be thy intents wicked or charitable,/Thou com’st in such a questionable shape/That I will speak to thee” (Shakespeare lines 47-49). Likewise, hamlet does not hesitate to confront Claudius, whom being naïve in his nature, he previously discarded as a murderer of the king: “Here, thou incestuous, murderous, damned Dane,/Drink off this potion. Is thy union here?/Follow my mother” (Sophocles 358). The willpower and insistence that Hamlet demonstrates by setting a trap for Claudius and the queen and implementing his plan prove that Hamlet’s resilience is outstandingly strong.
In comparison, Oedipus lacks willpower of a similar caliber, preferring to run away from his fate rather than face it directly. As soon as the notorious prophecy of him murdering his father and marrying his mother is made aware to him, Oedipus runs away from his foster parents, being under the assumption that they are his likely victims: “Children, the seed, the sower and the sown,/Shame to his mother’s blood, and to his sire/Son, murderer, incest-worker” (Sophocles 27). Therefore, Oedipus’ resilience wavers in the situation that requires him to confront his fears. Thus, Oedipus can be regarded as a less resilient character.
One could argue that Oedipus’ decision to continue living while bearing the brunt of shame and disgrace after blinding himself represents greater resilience than the one shown by Hamlet. To a certain extent, Hamlet’s decision to part with his life could be defined as having a lesser degree of stubbornness and inner strength to face the consequences of his actions. Eventually, Hamlet chooses to die by drinking the poison: “As th’art a man,
Give me the cup. Let go; by Heaven, I’ll have’t./O good Horatio, what a wounded name,/Things standing thus unknown, shall live behind me” (Shakespeare lines 312-313). Therefore, Hamlet’s resilience is impressively high as he continues to pursue the goal that is against his nature in order to honor his father’s name and avenge his death.
In contrast, Oedipus does not resort to suicide as a means of escaping responsibility and decides to live with the consequences that he has inflicted upon himself. As soon as the outcomes of his reckless actions are revealed to him, he prefers to blind himself instead of embracing the moral reprehensibility of his actions; “His voice rose, and again, again, the strong/And stabbing hand fell, and the massacred/And bleeding eyeballs streamed upon his beard” (Sophocles p. 27). The decision to blind himself, while seemingly being the indication of the sheer depth of his pain, also demonstrates his inability to manage this pain. Instead, he uses blindness as a means of buying himself some solace in exchange for the physical pain and maiming himself: “Agony./Delusion, Death, Shame, all that eye or ear/Hath ever dreamed of misery, is here.” (Sophocles 27). Thus, Oedipus’ resilience falters in the specified scene.
Admittedly, Oedipus also demonstrates impressive resilience when facing difficulties emerging in his path. However, most of the obstacles that he chooses to overcome, as well as the means that he selects to address them, are primarily physical in nature. For example, apart from choosing to gouge his eyes out, which represents a physical injury as a response to his emotional turmoil, he also confronts other challenges in a similar manner. The described approach to opposing the challenges that arise in front of him is opposed to the one that Hamlet undertakes in order to address his conflict. For instance, to make Claudius confess to the murder of his father, Hamlet creates an elaborate play that is supposed to help reveal the murderer (Shakespeare). In turn, Oedipus physically detaches himself from his family when being under the false assumption that he poses a threat to his parents (Sophocles). Thus, the extent of Oedipus’ resilience is lower than that of Hamlet.
The described difference in characters’ willingness to pursue their goals can be attributed to their design and nature. For the most part, Hamlet is portrayed as melancholic and inert to the point of being passive: “Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer/The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” (Shakespeare lines 65-66). The specified character trait suggests that maintaining resilience and insisting on his intention to avenge his father requires a significant effort from him. In turn, Oedipus is depicted being in action: “I will, wife. I have more regard for thee/Than these. – Thy brother plots to murder me” (Sophocles p. 41). Thus, the instances in which Oedipus does demonstrate resilience do not produce the same effect since they show lesser character growth. Despite being more proactive and passionate, Oedipus also falters significantly in regard to essential choices, such as the need to face his fate, which makes him overall less resilient than Hamlet.
Due to the nature of Hamlet’s stubbornness and resilience, which are entirely out of character for him, as well as the morally correct stance that he takes compared to Oedipus, Hamlet should be considered a more resilient character. Hamlet’s insistence on avenging his father demands that Hamlet should overcome personal limitations and seek action, which stands in contrast to Oedipus, who, instead, betrays his character by choosing the comfort of denial. Moreover, from an ethical perspective, the choice that Hamlet makes is infinitesimally nobler, which suggests that Hamlet must make an effort to do0 the right thing as opposed to choosing the easier path. Therefore, while Oedipus might seem more persistent in his attempt to remain oblivious to the fate predicted for him, his resilience has an undeniably passive nature. In turn, Hamlet chooses to act and makes a substantial effort to do so since the specified choice disagrees with his very nature. For these reasons, Hamlet should be regarded as a more resilient character than Oedipus.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William. (1870). “Hamlet.” Project Gutenberg, 1870. Web.
Sophocles. “Oedipus, King of Thebes.” Project Gutenberg, ca. 430 B.C. Web.