The play Hamlet by Shakespeare and the novel Crime and Punishment by Dostoevsky certainly aren’t works that would traditionally be seen as having similarities. Sure, there are some similarities, for example the two respective main characters both commit murders and they both are brooding and obsessive. Nevertheless, they are from two different time periods, they are two separate genres, and they are not often compared. However, as I have read both of these works recently, a certain theme struck me as being similar between the two.

A major theme in Hamlet seems to be the preoccupation with death, and whatever comes after death. Many of the actions in the book seem to revolve around this central theme. Shakespeare seems to suggest that every human being, however powerful they may be in life, is subject to the higher authority of eventual death. 

The threat of death and everything that comes after it influencing human decisions can be clearly seen when Hamlet nearly kills Claudius.  Hamlet decides not to kill Claudius when he has the chance to because he believes Claudius is praying.  Hamlet decides not to send Claudius “to heaven,” and instead decides to kill him when he is doing “some act that has no relish of salvation in’t,” in order to “trip him that his heels may kick at heaven.” It’s clear that the thought of his uncle having an easier time than his father did after death has a large effect on Hamlet.  This instance demonstrates how the central theme of death and the thought of what might lie after it pervades human decision making.

Another scene that clearly demonstrates this is the scene in the graveyard. Hamlet notices a skull, and remarks that it may have been “the skull of a lawyer.” Hamlet goes on to ask why the lawyer suffers “ this rude knave now to knock him about the sconce with a dirty shovel.” This satirical comment encapsulates death’s role as an equalizer and a force that every human, no matter how powerful or intelligent, is required to reckon with. However powerful or intelligent the lawyer may have been, in his death he can do nothing to prevent his skull from lying in the dirt.

In Crime and Punishment, I think that Dostoevsky was trying to say something that in a way is similar to the theme of death in Hamlet. In Crime and Punishment, Raskolnikov commits the murder of a crooked pawnbroker and her sister. His rationale is that he wanted to see whether he was one of the great men in history who could overstep the natural moral guidelines that humans are bound by. He thinks that certain men are “Napoleons,” in that they can freely take actions which, if committed by ordinary men, would have been condemned as evil and wrong. As the story progresses, it becomes clear that Raskolnikov will not be able to skirt the natural consequences of his action.  He eventually resigns himself to the fact that he must suffer to expiate for his crime, realizing that perhaps the “Napoleon” archetype of his imagination is not even a real thing. I believe the point of this is to say that there is a greater power that exists with boundaries that if overstepped, will bring inevitable consequences. This seems to be similar to how Shakespeare views death, as an all powerful force that everyone must reckon with, whether they realize it or not.