Critics disagree on Hamlet’s character. Some see him as noble and heroic, while others accept Hamlet’s evaluation of himself as proud, revengeful and ambitious. The one thing all scholars unanimously agree upon is that Hamlet is a multi-faceted individual who is, while noble, also arrogant, revengeful and ambitious. This is the dilemma that Rosenberg (1992) feels lies behind the drama and puzzle of Hamlet which in turn makes choosing a character that can adequately play Hamlet’s role very difficult: “There have been gentle Hamlets, fierce hamlets, intellectual Hamlets, passionate hamlets, sophisticated Hamlets, naïve Hamlets, melancholy Hamlets; spirited Hamlets, and more” (Rosenberg,1992) each trying to capture and create the perfect Hamlet. Not only must actors adapt Hamlet’s character to their own, and, therefore, the individual perceives Hamlet according to his own image, but the actors themselves have a difficult time interpreting the intent of Hamlet’s actions. Rosenberg (1992) observes that “in every single scene in which Hamlet appears… choices must be made.” Why, for instance, did Hamlet withdraw from killing Claudius in the prayer scene; why do his objectives shift from returning at once to Wittenberg? The diversity of Hamlets character affects his ability to properly rule his country. He needs to not be so focused on his personal life. Hamlet is a very multi-faceted person who is noble but is too proud, revengeful and ambitious. Thus it is his downfall and prolongs his countries turmoil. Different authors have portrayed Hamlet in different ways. Goethe has portrayed him as too delicate for the task of revenge, whilst Freudians see him as repressed and tormented by Oedipal urges. Still others see him as the perfect example of nobility fearful that he may be doing the devil’s work (Rosenberg, 1992) and feminists view him as sexist (Howard, 2003;