Hamlet And Eliot Over time many opinions have been formed about William Shakespeares 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 dont 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 Eliots 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. Eliots 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.