In many of William Shakespeare's plays, the main character is made to make decisions based on the ironic situations he faces. Very often, these decisions ultimately lead to their downfall. In William Shakespeare's Hamlet, the author uses both situational and dramatic irony to facilitate his characters' downfall. In this tragedy, Shakespeare illustrates this irony through Hamlet's sexual tension for his mother, the irony surrounding Laertes' role in relation to Hamlet as well as the situational irony surrounding Claudius' role. As the play progresses, this becomes evident through Hamlet's jealousy. for Gertrude's love for Claudius creates a situational irony that drives the plot. He is in love with Gertrude because she is his mother, and in his eyes she can do nothing wrong. However, this changes when he is forced to compete with Claudius for her affection, as he fears his possible abandonment. He is jealous of their love. Although her actions are innocent in their intent, it is clear that her emotions are manifesting in a sexual way to Gertrude. This sexual tension is realized through Hamlet's reaction to his mother's marriage. It is claimed that he cannot bear to see Gertrude with another man because in his eyes she does not deserve anyone's love but his own. He is disgusted by this, and it is claimed that when "Hamlet learned of the marriage, his whole soul was filled with nausea at the thought of rushing to 'incestuous sheets'" (Dolpher 343). Her nausea is a physical manifestation of jealousy of Gertrude's relationship with Claudius. Hamlet has a sincere and innocent love for his mother while Claudius desires Gertrude for her physical qualities. This is unacceptable for Hamlet...... middle of article...... it is obvious that the downfall is conveyed by the author's use of irony as well as by situations that foreshadow the future of the piece. Works Cited Anglican, Evalin "The Role of Women in Shakespeare." Shakespearean Reference Library. Ed. Jonathan D. Lavenport, Reference Volume 2. Oxford: UXL, 2012. 413-272. Print. Anderson, David. “Analysis of Shakespeare’s characters” Ed. Rutherford and Leraine. Break. Vol.5: Detroit: UXL, 2004. 244-252.Print.Dolpher, Crayne. “Emotional Involvement in Shakespeare” Shakespearean Reference Library Ed. K. Lee Lerner and Brenda Wilmoth Lerner. Delaware: Jstor, 2005. 197-199. Internet. January 15, 2014. Evans, Michael. “Shakespeare and the ego” Journal of literary analysis of Shakespearean works Ed.Miller M.Cambell. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2003. 347-348. Print.