Let’s review Aristotle’s concept of tragedy. Based on Aristotle’s principles, “a tragic hero is a character of noble stature and has greatness. The character must occupy a position of ‘high’ status. In addition, he must also embody nobility and virtue as part of his character.”1 It is very evident in the play that Hamlet comes from a royal and honorable family. He is actually a prince, son of the late King Hamlet and Queen Gertrude. Therefore, he is noble, because he is the one who serves the most to be next on the throne.

Second, “Although the tragic hero is pre-eminently great, he is not perfect. Otherwise, the rest of us mere mortals would be unable to identify with the tragic hero. We should see in him or her someone who is essentially like us, though perhaps elevated to a higher position in society.”1 Hamlet is a wealthy and royal prince; however, despite his high or exalted position in society, he also has his own imperfections. He also deals with the typical problems that ordinary people also experience. He also has confusions about life. He also feels anger and tends to be skeptical like ordinary people. Most importantly, he is also capable of loving and being hurt, like ordinary people are capable of do and feel.Therefore, the audience can empathize with Hamlet supported by such characteristics.

The next criterion of the Aristotelian tragic hero is: “The hero’s fall, therefore, is partly his own fault, the result of his free choice, not of accident or villainy or some malign and domineering fate. In fact, the Tragedy is usually brought about by some error in judgment or some character flaw that contributes to the hero’s lack of perfection. This error in judgment or character flaw is known as hamartia and is generally translated as “tragic flaw” (although some scholars argue that this is a mistranslation). The character’s hamartia implies arrogance (defined as a kind of arrogant pride or overconfidence).” As seen in the play, in ACT III SCENE i, the prominent line is “To be or not to be”.2

To be or not to be? That is the question-

If it is more noble in the mind to suffer

The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

or take up arms against a sea of ​​anguish,

And, opposing them, put an end to them?2

This failure has resulted in different undesirable consequences. Consider these circumstances: Hamlet has shown that Claudius is the true murderer of his father, through his reaction during the play “The Murder of Gonzago” (as seen in ACT II SCENE ii). However, in ACT III SCENE iii, when Hamlet already had the opportunity to kill Claudio, he did not take it and changed his mind with the reason that if he kills Claudio while he is praying, he will go to heaven. In the same way, in ACT III SCENE ii, in the confrontation with Gertrudis, he had killed Polonius, thinking that he was Claudio (ACT III SCENE iv). In return, deeply grieved by the death of her father, Ophelia finally drowned herself in the river, as seen in ACT IV SCENE vii. Looking at it from a wiser perspective, if Claudius had already been killed in the first place, Hamlet might already have been very successful with revenge on him. Consequently, Polonius, who was not to die, could have lived, as well as his daughter Ophelia. Furthermore, Hamlet could have lived longer and better, since his fight with Laertes would not have been possible without Claudius. It can be seen in ACT IV SCENE vii that Claudius encouraged Laertes to take revenge and kill Hamlet.

Due to his tragic flaw, Hamlet had faced some hardships. These misfortunes were also included in Aristotle’s description of a tragic hero: “The hero’s misfortune is not fully deserved. The punishment exceeds the crime.”1 Hamlet died in battle with Laertes, after being poisoned by the sword, ( ACT V SCENE ii ) and the worst thing is that the people he loved and cared so much had died, his love interest, Ophelia (ACT IV SCENE vii) and his own mother, Gertrude (ACT V SCENE ii).

Lastly, based on Aristotle’s concept of a tragic hero, “The fall is not a pure loss. There is an increase in consciousness, a gain in self-knowledge, some discovery on the part of the tragic hero.” 1 Although Hamlet had died, and lost his loved ones, it was not a loss of mother. Before dying, Laertes had informed Hamlet that it was all Claudius’s plan:

It is here, Hamlet: Hamlet, you are dead;

No medicine in the world can do you good;

In you there is not half an hour of life;

The treacherous instrument is in your hand,

Unbeaten and poisoned: bad practice

has turned against me, behold, here I lie,

never to rise again: your poisoned mother:

I can’t take it anymore: the king, the king is to blame. 2

This incited him to fight and he forced Claudio to drink the cup of poison and the villain died. This justifies the increased awareness, knowledge and discovery of the tragic hero: he had known the truth before it all came to an end. Most importantly, in any case, Hamlet was able to achieve his main objective: to kill Claudius through poison (ACT V SCENE ii). Therefore, in the end, he managed to take revenge on his father, King Hamlet.

In essence, Hamlet, as represented in the work and based on the characteristics mentioned above, can be considered a tragic hero. Catharsis occurs when the audience can feel signs of relief when Claudius finally died, fulfilling Hamlet’s mission for revenge.