Etzold Hamlet Critical Analysis

In contradiction to Prince Fortinbras’ claim, Hamlet would have been a disastrous King because of his inconsistent mental state, inability to put thought into action, and persistent acts of rage.
Bradley, A.C. (2004). Hamlet. In Harold Bloom (Ed.), Bloom’s major literary characters: Hamlet (pp.15-28). Broomall, PA: Chelsea House Publishers.
This anthology provided insight into the various perspectives of famous literary critiques. The anthology was edited by acclaimed critic, Harold Bloom. Bloom is the American literary critic and Sterling Professor of Humanities at Yale University. The work includes several perspectives on Shakespeare’s Hamlet, and specifically A.C. Bradley. Bradley was an English literary scholar, best known for his views on Shakespeare. The article’s purpose is to examine the motives behind Hamlet. The article emphasizes rage, and indecision. The article

Etzold is a popular writer in Germany and participates in several events around the world. Recently he gave a TEDx Talk about storytelling. Etzold has a clear directive, to try and spread his techniques of approaching literary criticism. This source deals with the intricacies of leadership, specifically in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Etzold’s journal article is unique from the other sources, in that it associates the development of Hamlet, with Shakespeare’s underlying message of leadership. Etzold addresses different archetypes in several of Shakespeare’s famous works. His interesting categorization of leadership skills includes the careerist, the patriarch, the diehard, the philosopher, the manipulator, and the bulldozer. He addresses Hamlet directly in the section regarding manipulators, which includes famous character Marc Antony. Throughout the article, Etzold uses a fresh perspective on a topic that repeats that same themes over and over