Sample " HOW WAS HE AS A LEADER? " ( APA format )

Sample " HOW WAS HE AS A LEADER? " ( Chicago / Turabian format )

[Writer’s Name]
[Instructor’s Name]
[Course Title]
[Date]
Hamlet "How was he as a leader?"
What characteristics appear in mind when you reflect on qualities of a leader, or any ruler for that matter? A leader’s requirements are to be very dependable, truthful, hard working, fair, just, merciful and bright. Particularly where there is a king, as in the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, because a king is in charge of the entire society. He has to keep in mind all of his subjects as he makes tons of judgments every day.
Hamlet demonstrated to a better leader because throughout the play he established how smart he was, how he considered things out before acting, how he questions things to find the truth and how he is a superior person than Claudius.
Hamlet possessed many qualities that would have made him a appropriate king. First of all, his father was the king, so he was royalty and perceptibly had some information of what a king needed to do. Second, he was a smart person. He considers every action, practices for the reaction, and also weighs the results. Hamlet questions things from the very commencement when he asks Horatio why he has come. Horatio replies that he has come for Hamlet’s father’s funeral, but Hamlet says in reply “I pray thee, do not mock me, fellow-student; I think it was to see my mother’s wedding”(Shakespeare, 1601). Horatio then tells us that Hamlet is correct. This series of events shows how Hamlet has a capability to find the truth and how he questions things to make sure they are the reality, an example of a good leader.
Hamlet needs to avenge his father’s death by killing Claudius. But Hamlet is aware of his feelings and that is why he tells Horatio, “I prithee, 3 when thou sees that act a-foot, even with the very comment of thy soul observe my uncle: if his occulted guilt do not itself unkennel in one speech it is a damned ghost that we have seen, and my imaginations are as foul as Vulcan’s stithy” (Shakespeare, 1601). This is a great example of Hamlet knowing his boundaries, he has asked the just and open-minded. “Hamlet baffles the dealing of the justice of Fate, and also the death plotted for him by his uncle. His weapon, in both cases, is his justice, his precise scrupulousness of mind, the niceness of mental balance which gives to all that he says the double-edge of wisdom. It is the faculty, translated into the finer terms of thought, which the ghost seeks to make real with bloodshed. Justice, in her grosser as in her finer form, is concerned with the finding of the truth.”( Masefield, 1911)
Even when Hamlet talks to the ghost and finds out that his father was assassinated by the one that now holds the crown, Claudius, he questions that to be sure that it wasn’t a deception or that the ghost wasn’t lying. Hamlet says later in the play, “The spirit that I have seen may be the devil; and the devil hath power to assume a pleasing shape; yea, and perhaps out of my weakness and my melancholy, as he is very potent with such spirits, abuses me to damn me”(Act II, Scene 2). Hamlet is really saying I cannot totally consider this ghost even though it may look like my father, I must find out for myself. This absolutely questioning approach, which may seem stupid but is actually a very good thing, demonstrates distinction of a good leader.
In Hamlet’s situation, the fact that he had a opportunity to murder Claudius but didn’t, could be envisioned as a colossal mistake and the climax of the play. If Hamlet had been able to decide about the murder of his uncle there, instead of delaying until later on in the play in which eventually everybody that is most of the main characters would have died, the entire play would have concluded before it really had started. Therefore, that would have been the climax of the play and no one else would have died. “Now might I do it pat, now he is praying: and now I’ll do’t. And so ‘a goes to heaven; and so am I reveng’d. That would be scann’d: a villain kills my father; and for that, I, his sole son, do this same villain send to heave. Why, this is hire and salary, not revenge.” (Shakespeare, 1611) But Hamlet, true to his character, was incapable to make that decision worrying his Uncle passing away to Heaven instead of Hell where he believed he ought to be. “While Hamlet is continuously conflicted about the issues of death and the afterlife, morality, and violent retribution throughout the play, the ghost of his father sees the situation as nothing more than a case of crime deserving punishment, a concept so simple yet effective that the constantly philosophical Hamlet cannot fully grasp it and is ultimately destroyed by it.”(Stevenson, 2000) The occasion where Hamlet is making up his mind between murdering his uncle/father or not murdering him is not the only time he was indecisive. Even, in the final scene of the first act, Hamlet demonstrates his deathly imperfection. “Angels and ministers of grace defend us! Be thou a spirit of health or goblin damm’d, bring with thee airs from heave or blasts from hell, be thy intents wicked or charitable, thou com’st in such a questionable shape that I will speak to thee: I’ll call thee Hamlet, King, Father, royal Dane: O, answer me!” (Shakespeare, 1611)

Works Cited
Masefield, John. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Shakespeare. New York: Holt, 1911
Stevenson, Tommy: Haunted: Hamlet's Relationship With His Dead Father. March 24, 2002
Shakespeare, William: Hamlet: Oxford Univ. Press. First published: London, 1603 (first quarto) and 1623 (firstfolio)