It could be said that Hamlet is not a play of inaction, but a play of providence and fate. Shakespeare seems to purposefully initiate action through inaction to show how certain events act as a catalyst for the eventful finale

... Hamlet is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind. How much is Hamlet a play of inaction? Some critics have stated that the appeal of Hamlet to the audience is his many human weaknesses, the most notable being his indecision. His deliberations and procrastinations are particularly high-lighted when he is faced with the task of revenge. The law and Christianity, around the early seventeenth century, were clear in condemning personal revenge as an attempt by man to arrogate the prerogatives of God. Hamlet's contradicting feelings toward avenging his father and avoiding breaking the law and going against Christianity were most likely felt by the Elizabethan audience also, which would have been made up of many Christians, namely, Protestants. Catherine Belsey stated: ...The act of vengeance, in excess of justice, a repudiation of conscience, hellish in its mode of operation, seems to the revenger (and the audience)

want to read more? →