Contrast and comparison between “helmet” by Shakespeare and “prince” by Machiavelli

Name

nInstructor

nCourse

nDate

nContrast and comparison between “helmet” by Shakespeare and “prince” by Machiavelli

nIntroduction

nThe two novels by Machiavelli and Shakespeare describes the approaches which leaders use to gain power and also maintain that power. The book by Shakespeare describes the story of a young man who suffers after the murder of his father who was the king hamlet of Denmark. His uncle killed his father. King Claudius kills his brother in order to acquire power from early king Hamlet and so that he can marry Queen Gertrude. The young hamlet is extremely furious when he realized that his father murdered, and his mother has married King Claudius. The king is extremely corrupt and uses unorthodox means to remain in control. On the other hand, the prince by Machiavelli explains the political environment in Italy. The author of this book describes the characters of leaders in the current government in Italy. The author makes controversial statement when he supports and advocate for the characters of dictators such as Caesar Bolgia in the Roman Empire who is corrupt, uses trickery means to acquire power and he has a totalitarian government. However, Machiavelli explains characters of principled leaders, which are based on moral virtues and respect. The papers highlights the comparison and contrast between the two books

nThe play by Shakespeare is a revenge story because hamlet seeks to avenge his father murder after the murder by his uncle. With the phrase, that something must be rotten in the state of Denmark; the author explains the behavior of the king of Denmark who kills his own brother. The ghost of hamlet father reveals to him that he was poisoned by his uncle. This makes hamlet to decide to revenge to both queen Gertrude and king Claudius. However, the king senses that hamlet is a serious threat to his administration and he organized hamlet murder when he will send him to England, but hamlet avoids the traps. Claudius organized a fight between hamlet and Laertes in order to kill him. However, hamlet stabs the king with a poisoned sword and the two dies on the same day. Young Fortinbras becomes the new king of Denmark. On the other hand, the prince begins with a reference to Lorenzo de Medici the prince of Roman Empire. Machiavelli suggests that a prince must strive to rise to power through his own merit and with his own arms. Creating connections with people, friends, righteous luck and other peoples arms makes it easy to rise to power but maintaining this newfound power will be difficult. The author devotes a chapter to explain Caesar Borgia who had risen to power through connections with people as well as through his fathers help. Caesar Borgia was crafty enough to create his own niche though he then ended up failing at the end. Machiavelli also condemns princes who rise to the throne through crime and refers to them as wicked. According to the author, relying on mercenaries and auxiliaries for troops is a serious mistake to the leaders. Prince should lay strong foundations on strong arms and good laws, and if those are lacking prince will not be relevant. Reputation is also a crucial factor to consider in leadership as Machiavelli explains that most leaders lie to the subjects.

nIn the book the prince, the author explains the theme of lies and deceits. The character by the name Borgia turns into trickery. He was exceptionally skilful at disguising and tricking people. This prince is similar to king Claudius of Denmark who tricks his brother to take poison in order to attain power. Cesar Borgia elaborates that people at one time or the other must turn to trickery and deceptive means of attaining and retaining power. This is in contrast with Shakespeares claims that there should be values of leadership, which advocates for proper governance and moral virtues. The author explains that people need to be like a fox that utilizes trickery in order to avoid the traps of the law. Machiavelli loves the character of Caesar though he is a dictator. He says that Italy needs someone like Borgia to unite it. Machiavelli claims that there are two ways of attaining power. This is either by using fraud or by force. Machiavelli declares that both ways are best and wholly unworthy of leader. The forceful way of acquiring power typifies the lion and fraud because since it seems to belong to the cunning fox. To the author, by contrast, it seemed to use virtues; ways to acquire power is not enough. There are two ways of behaving; one suited for man while the second suited for animals. Machiavelli advises the prince that the first approach is always not sufficient; therefore, they need to use the second approach for them to succeed. He claims that what the prince need to do is chose which animal to imitate. He states that a prince will emerge victories if he ‘chooses among lion and fox beast because they will supplement his manly decency with the useful arts of fraud and force. The author further asserts this concept when he explains the historical perspective of roman emperor Septimius Severus. Firstly, the author claims that the roman emperor was ‘a man of perfect virtue. Furthermore, he also states that Severus exceptional character were those of ‘a exceedingly tricky fox and supremely savage lion. These qualities made the emperor be feared and to gain respects among the people. This according to Machiavelli will be sufficient in dealing with the people and will also help Lorenzo de Medici in administration and will unite the people. He declares that kings should avoid everything that makes them hated by their subjects hence they will be able to rule without preservation towards their friends or their enemies. On the other hand, Machiavelli proposes that rulers must acquire a excellent reputation while doing whatever wrong act that demand them to do in their positions (prince, 18)

nShakespeare in his book, hamlet describes the lust, fraud use of force by the king Claudius. The king is lustful, shrewd and conniving, and he is always in contrast with other male character in the play. He uses trickery means to kill his brother in order to attain power. He also uses totalitarian author for him to remain in power. This similar to Caesar Borgia in Prince by Machiavelli who is a dictator and always used trickery and force means in order to acquire and retain power. Shakespeare explains that when King Claudius sensed that his kingdom authority is in danger, he planned for the murder of hamlet when he ordered him to be taken for exile in England. King Claudius main aim is to retain power. He is also a corrupt, and his main political weapon is his skills to manipulate and trick other people through his skillful use of language. The king also takes Gertrude as his wife after killing her husband as a strategic move to assist him win the power away from Hamlet after the death of his father. The king always used the craftiness like that of a fox to gain powers. He even advises Laertes to use poisoned sword to kill hamlet other than allowing him to use two swords to kill hamlet. However, his force fails him at the end when he is killed by hamlet. This is similar with Machiavelli argument that true leadership must be built on strong moral virtues and principled governance.

nConclusion

nIt is crucial for leaders to make smart decisions while in power to avoid negative consequences. Dictators such as king Claudius and Caesar Borgia have no place in the current world because they do not govern through justice and rule of law. They use force and trickery in expense of favourable policy and respect of human dignity. Leaders such as Lorenzo di Medici and old king hamlet are outstanding examples of exemplary leaders that we need in contemporary society. Therefore, rule of law always pays instead of dictatorial authority.

nWork cited