School
Book Report provides book reports in all formats
including APA, MLA, CHICAGO / TURABIAN styles.
Below is a sample book report named "HOW
WAS HE AS A LEADER?". Click on the desired
style in which you want to view the report.
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)
