Hamlet (Shakespeare) Estudios Ingleses, Apuntes de Literatura inglesa

¡Descarga Hamlet (Shakespeare) Estudios Ingleses y más Apuntes en PDF de Literatura inglesa solo en Docsity! 1 1) INTRODUCTION Hamlet is considered nowadays the best well-known play by Shakespeare yet was not regarded as his best, nor as a particular enigmatic singular play until late 18th century when educated readers in Europe realised that there was something about this play that singularised. What outstands this play from the rest is its Intellectual complexity (philosophical ideas) and meta-theatrical quality (a play about a play). It looks as if it was a play where the protagonist was questioning his own entitlement, legitimacy to become the protagonist of his own play. What happens in Hamlet is that he does not want to play his role. Therefore, we see that this is a play about the relation between life and theatre, about the theatrical nature of human / social identity (social identity is artificial and conventional like a role in a tragedy). This may lead us to ask us: ‘Can we give up the play into which we have been thrown as players? That is renounce the role that we have been accorded by destiny?’ According to Freud, we have the role of sons and daughters; therefore, we are never free to become a singular person; we are trapped in the domus, the domestic family, in the “Familianroman”, which implies that we are all characters in a family romance; a story that pre-exists over us. Hamlet is a family romance since the domestic sphere is crucial. He is regarding his situation as a theatrical situation, his family as a cast of characters, and his experience as a literary experience (therefore: artificial, conventional, false). As a consequence, he is completely aware of the falsification of the familiar experience which was already scripted: it has been written beforehand and it must be obeyed and accepted. 2) FORMAL CLASIFICATION OF HAMLET Hamlet is a textual monstrosity that renders as non-generic, a threat to generic categorization (a play or something more than a play?) It could be considered: - A “Poem unlimited”. Hamlet is considered to be a long speculative philosophical poem. Also, a philosophical essay on the nature of the problem of human existence. (Shakespeare was influenced by Machiavelli, Montaigne, Giordano Bruno). There is something is Hamlet that anticipates the renaissance philosopher: René Descartes. - Also, a novel: the beginning of the novel in Europe is largely determined by Hamlet which supposed a strong influence. It is regarded as a novel because of the problem of psychology due to the fact that the novel was a literary device that capitalised on psychological introspection in order to facilitate the experience of psychological internalization, and Psychology is a fundamental problem in Hamlet (some critics consider it as THE problem). - Also, a tragedy. Aristotle considered that in a good tragedy you have to subordinate the psychology of a character, that is the “logos and dianoia” (language and thought), to the plot (called as “mythos”), that is the structure of the incident, which possesses a beginning, a middle and an end. For Aristotle the plot is the centre of the tragedy and everything in a tragedy must be subordinated 2 to it. But what would happen if the logos and the dianoia of a character become more prevalent than the plot itself? This is the case of Hamlet since the plot is subservient to the psychology of the character. Aristotle stated that we get to know a character through 3 basic elements: 1) dress, make-up (appearance), 2) language, by means of which we give our thoughts and emotions, 3) actions. This was central for Aristotle. As a consequence, he decided to name the term “character” as “ethos”, which in English derives to “ethical”. Ethos is what determines our ethical identity, and character and ethos are connected to what in Greek we call “pragma or pragmata”, that is “actions”; this means that our ethical identity is the actions we do, not the language nor the emotions; therefore, our actions determine our ethical attitude, that is our personality (we are what we do, not what we say or feel). In relation to Hamlet, this is Hamlet’s failure: he is a character who fails to do things, that is to accomplish the action that he has been awarded as the protagonist of his own play. Since Hamlet is a revenge tragedy (that is a conventional category given at the end of the 16th century which denoted a set of plays that were fashionable in which the story basically pivoted around the moment of revenge) but he fails to do the one thing he is to do, the play should be considered as a failed, aborted revenge tragedy. The hero procrastinates, that is delays his duty throughout the play. One of the reasons why he might delay the action of something is because you may have reservations, misgivings, doubts about the moral convenience about the action that he has to perform. However, the play changes its course with the death of Ophelia. 3) HAMLET AS A TRAGEDY OF ORDER / REVENGE TRAGEDY Hamlet is a tragedy of order because it is a parodic deconstruction of a revenge tragedy. A revenge tragedy was a Senecan form of violent tragedy that was organised around a plot of revenge in which the phenomenon of political usurpation was fundamental. In fact, Hamlet was a critic rewriting to the revenge tragedy: although it imitates it, it deviates. In a tragedy of order (which is what Hamlet is), we find: - Authority figure: order - Usurper: disorder - Avenger: order (who revenges by means of actions) This applied to the play, we identify: - Authority figure: King Hamlet (not completely dead since he appears as a ghost) - Usurper: Claudius - Avenger: Hamlet (the figure who gives name to the tragedy) The usurper kills the authority figure, breaking therefore with the order, and the crime is going to be revenged by the avenger, who restores the order. However, in Hamlet the 5 In the case of Romeo and Juliet we have Romeo and Juliet’s will (that is their desire to be together) fighting against the law of the domus and the polis. In the case of Hamlet, we have an individual, Hamlet, and a desire, and there are determining consequences that are going to narrow down, limit and contain his capacity of movement, his liberty; he is encapsulated in a family and a sate, which are 2 determining processes: the law of the family and law of the state. Furthermore, there is misfortune: 1) his uncle murders his father and marries her mother and 2) the ghost reappears and asks him to take revenge, this obligation is external. In conclusion, there are many things are conspiring against Hamlet’s freedom. On the second hand, humans have limited knowledge about what happens to them, that is the tragedy. Therefore, the experience of the tragedy is not only a contrast between the individual will and the determining process, but also a cognitive epistemological experience of limited knowledge. In other words, tragedies posit something that is beyond understanding. As a consequence, we cannot settle the effect of a tragedy, provide a solution to it and understand a tragedy. In Hamlet, we find that hamlet has an extraordinary intellectual capacity, causing the play not to be a good tragedy largely because Hamlet understands almost everything; his intelligence is odd and is able to reflect on those processes and internalize (i.e.: to dismantle their transcendental quality) the exterior (fate and the gods). In other words, Hamlet is a rationalist becoming an enlightment scholar who possesses a relativistic sceptical mind which makes him internalize and secularize everything that is transcendental. Therefore, he reduces everything to rational processes since everything to him is social, material and relative. This excess of intelligence generates an excess of understanding that goes against the interest in tragedies. But even if hamlet understands too much, he is going to be confronted at the beginning of the play with something mysterious, that is the ghost. We do not know if the ghost is real or imaginary due to the fact that it is seen not only by hamlet but by other characters. This could imply that the ghost is a collective delusion. It is also important to mention the fact that Hamlet is the only witness and the only person who speaks to the ghost; therefore, we should have to believe him. As a consequence, it looks as a realistic encounter between Hamlet and the ghost. However, if we go back to the previous idea of collective delusion, the encounter could be understood as a psychomachia: an internal psychological fight between the self (hamlet) and the super ego/ the consciousness (the ghost). 7) THE SPHERES OF THE TRAGEDY APPLIED TO HAMLET Hamlet is: 1. A cosmic tragedy because unnatural phenomena are present at the natural level: corruption, disruption, apparitions, ghost. 2. It is a political tragedy because unnatural phenomena are present: territorial war, civil war, usurpation. 6 3. It is a domestic tragedy because unnatural phenomena are present: fratricide and incest 4. But, overall, Hamlet is a psychological tragedy, that is a tragedy of the mind because there is an unnatural phenomenon at the level of the psyche: madness 8) ANALYSIS OF HAMLET We are framed in a: Nation-Sate (The larger community, The Polis) Denmark. Inside of which we find the Court of Elsinore (small community where we find soldier, courtiers, subalterns and the royal family). Inside of which we find the royal family (the Domus) the family of Hamlet. And inside the domus, we find the Psyche of Hamlet. Beyond Denmark we find nature (Cosmos). At the beginning of the play, we are outside, in the liminal space between the castle (symbol of the polis and domus) and nature; specifically in the walls of the castle of Elsinore. The walls are the platform (the upper side of the wall, the battlements) and, at the top of the walls of the castle, there are soldiers keeping their guard at night. Therefore, the Spheres that are at stake are: nature (represented by the night and the sea) and polis (represented by means of the sentinels who are officials of the state who work for the military protection of the state). Why are they there? Because there is a political problem; a sense of disorder at both levels, nature and polis. Political chaos is present in the form of war (between Denmark and Norway). This is the political frame of the play and it involves the fight between King Hamlet and King Fortinbras. These 2 statemen fought in the play’s past since they were competing for the possession of some territories. Who won? Hamlet, who died? King Fortinbras, and who is going to take revenge? The son of king Fortinbras. As a consequence, this figure has recruited a number of mercenaries to enter Denmark and reconquer a small part of land that considers to be legitimately part of the kingdom of Norway. Therefore, he is taking revenge on his father’s death and, as a consequence, behaving like a medieval warrior, epic hero. This is the background political situation and the reason why the sentinels are keeping watch. (In summary, at the beginning of the play we see soldiers in a defensive mood because there is a war; therefore, there is a political disorder) Furthermore, there is another dimension of political disorder in the play which has not been made visible yet, but that the ghost will foreshadow: a potential threat of civil war. At the beginning of the play there is already the ground of a civil war since the king was killed and the murdered now has become the king (patricide at the level of the domus and usurpation at the level of the polis). There is a political situation of disorder at 2 levels: the territorial war and the civil war. In addition, there is also a situation of disorder at the level of nature: the presence of the ghost (its appearance goes against the laws of nature; it demands an explanation). Horatio, Marcellus and Barnardo are going to discuss 2 situations of disorder, abnormal events: The territorial war and the appearance of the ghost. 7 ACT 1, SCENE 1 Long live the King! And liegemen to the Dane. ➔ It refers to the King Claudius What, has this thing appeared again tonight? ➔ “thing” ➔ “appeared”→ apparition and appearance (in opposition of being) ➔ The lexical choice reveals an epistemological doubt as to the identity of the thing itself. They do not know how to call it; it doesn’t fall into the symbolization of language. Horatio says ’tis but our fantasy And will not let belief take hold of him Touching this dreaded sight twice seen of us. Therefore I have entreated him along With us to watch the minutes of this night, That, if again this apparition come, He may approve our eyes and speak to it. ➔ “Horatio says ’tis but our fantasy And will not let belief take hold of him” → we get to see the attitude of Horatio towards the apparition of the ghost. Horatio’s rationalization of the problem is an attribution of imaginative delusion, hallucination, something that has been constructed on the brains of Barnardo and Marcellus. As a consequence, we see that Horatio is a sceptical rationalist character who doesn't believe in ghosts. He is called as "scholar" throughout the conversation because he attends to the university. Who believed in ghosts in the context of Elizabethan England? Catholics. It was characteristic of Catholicism to remain attached to believe in superstitious things such as ghost, saints, relics, etc. ➔ “Touching this dreaded sight twice seen of us.” → circumlocution (elusive manner to refer to something). Rather than saying “the ghost”, he says “dreaded sight”. ➔ “He may approve our eyes and speak to it” → that is Horatio become a witness and give credit to our experience (which is an experience of the eyes) and speak to the ghost. They (the sentinels) cannot speak to it because they are not scholars. 10 Words that we use to refer to the incomprehensible. In other words, from the very beginning, at the very core of the play there is sense of incomprehensibility, unintelligibility that we find at the natural level: the ghost, at the level of the polis: the situation of usurpation; at the level of the domus: fratricide and incest, and at the psychological level: hamlet's mind (which supposes the mystery of the play) In what particular thought to work I know not, But in the gross and scope of mine opinion This bodes some strange eruption to our state. ➔ “In what particular thought to work I know not,” → that is to say: ‘I do not know what particular intellectual argument to pursue, I have not thoughts for this.’ The failure of comprehension, understanding. ➔ “This bodes some strange eruption to our state.” → ‘This announces a disturbance, and element of disorder to our state’. The term “eruption” is a natural metaphor which refers to the natural phenomena of the volcan outbreaking. This corrupts the natural order of the island. Now the eruption is applied to the political state (i.e.: Denmark). This supposes a metaphorical expression that proves the connection between the spheres. Horatio interprets the appearance of the ghost as the anticipation, a prophecy of something that will happen in the future; but its appearance reflects something that has already happened that is the murder of the king and the incestuous marriage between Claudius and Hamlet’s mother. “State” understood in the political sense (= nation) or psychological sense (= condition). It anticipates the political and psychological disorder. Horatio’s speech provides a brief account of the reason why they are keeping watch. As a consequence, he needs to go back to the war between Norway and Denmark, providing us with a picture of military heroic epic behaviour carried out by Hamlet when conquering territories and winning the war. As a result of this, the king of Norway has the intention to reconquer those territories, being this the reason why the need to guard the castle. As we have mentioned, there is a depiction of the epic manly honour of King Hamlet, who was an aristocrat military medieval character that abided during his life the code of heroic ethos. The description of the personality of king Hamlet is important because prince Hamlet is not as his father. This has a dialectical, oppositional value. The meaning of Hamlet is what Hamlet is not. We begin to feel that the play is presenting us with a type: military warrior, embodied by King Hamlet, who prince Hamlet is not going to be. Is it a problem 11 for a father that his son is not like him? In the Elizabethan England it was (according to Freud this was considered as the family problem). Therefore, if the father is a hero, he this imposes his son to be a hero too. The prince Fortinbras turns into the king that Hamlet should have been (the symbolic value is that Fortinbras becomes the son that King Hamlet should have had). There is a symbolic replacement of roles. Hamlet is not that military warrior that the play is asking him to be. The presentation of the military situation and the conflict between Denmark and Norway at the beginning of the play has the capacity for the audience to lay out a dialectical scenario where the heroic conditions stipulate a masculine, military behaviour which Hamlet is going to refuse due to the fact that Hamlet is a renaissance intellectual fallen in a medieval war. The second part of the speech is dedicated to the depiction of epic manly honour of the prince Fortinbras: Now, sir, young Fortinbras, Of unimprovèd mettle hot and full, Hath in the skirts of Norway here and there ➔ “hot” a military kind of ardour ➔ “full” of pride, action, resolution, heroic decision. In the most high and palmy state of Rome, A little ere the mightiest Julius fell, ➔ Reference to the death of Julius Cesar (in fact, Shakespeare was writing a play about this figure at the same time as this) The ghost reappears again. Horatio tries 3 times to make the ghost speak. And then the ghost leaves when the cock crows, which is the sign of morning. So have I heard and do in part believe it. But look, the morn in russet mantle clad Walks o’er the dew of yon high eastward hill. Break we our watch up, and by my advice Let us impart what we have seen tonight Unto young Hamlet; for, upon my life, This spirit, dumb to us, will speak to him. Do you consent we shall acquaint him with it As needful in our loves, fitting our duty? 12 ➔ “So have I heard and do in part believe it.” → talking about the popular superstition about ghosts. ➔ “Let us impart what we have seen tonight Unto young Hamlet” → Horatio realises the explosive nature of the fact that the spirit is the previous father of Hamlet and that the spirit of the king was dressed in an armour. Therefore, we see that the apparition has a dual meaning: a political and domestic reason. In this request Horatio is going to create a confederacy of secrecy: he asking them to keep this news to themselves, being Hamlet the exception, due to the fact that Horatio realises the potential threat meant by the presence of the ghost and wants this information to be distributed wisely. Furthermore, this is the first time in play where it is made a reference to Hamlet. ➔ “This spirit, dumb to us, will speak to him.” → Horatio realises that if the ghost has failed to speak to them, it could be because the ghost wants to speak to Hamlet since he suspects, from the very beginning, the familial logic of the apparition; that if the ghost is there it is because there was a familiar problem more than a political problem. ACT 1, SCENE 2 We move from outdoors to inside doors. A solemn stately speech is going to take place by the head of the state (i.e.: the king). This is the principle of authority which is emblematised before the rest of the characters and the audience. He will summarise, just like Horatio, the political background of the war and the domestic background in the court involving the death of the king and the marry of the queen. By means of the character of Claudius, we hear an inside and hypocritical version of the political usurpation. His speech is full of hypocrisy, duplicity, falsity and dissimulation. We must note that when someone elevates the speech, there could be an undercurrent of falsity, which is what occurs here. The King, who has committed fratricide and incest, is in a state of anxiety and is afraid of a potential rise of suspicion on the part of his court; therefore, he wants to abate that suspicion by means of this speech, especially in the mind of Hamlet. Why? Because he is his potential avenger and a resented aristocrat since Hamlet also run for the presidency of the state due to the fact that Denmark was an elective monarchy, not hereditary. Therefore, if Claudius is now the king is because he has been selected; however, Claudius probably draw himself to power in an illegal manner. In summary, Claudius is afraid of Hamlet because of 3 reasons: 1) He is the son of his victim and the son of his partner; therefore, his potential avenger. 15 How is it that the clouds still hang on you? ➔ That is a metaphorical expression of saying: ‘how are you still sad?, why are you still mourning?’ ➔ The clouds are metaphorically in the heart making someone sad, and when that person cries, it starts to rain. Not so, my lord; I am too much in the sun. ➔ Another sharp, witty, sarcastic response ➔ “I am too much in the sun” has 2 meanings: 1) Means at the level of the metaphor that ‘there are no clouds overhanging on top of me because I am in the sun which implies that the clouds are dispersed and dispelled.’ The sun is the king; therefore, what he is implying is that he is excessively exposed to Claudius kingship and Hamlet suffers from it because I should have another sun, another king: my father. 2) Homonymy between sun and son. “I am too much in the sun” meaning ‘I am so much the son of my father that I am still crying.’ And he is “too much” a son means that he is excessively playing the role of being the son of his father. ➔ So, Hamlet presents himself as being a good son to his father and a bad subject of the new king, who is the bad sun. ➔ In conclusion, this is a witty pun that shows his resentment against his family situation that he seems not to accept and profoundly dislikes. Now, the queen is addressing the son, which is not common in the play. We must mention the fact that the mother is one of the greatest sources of anxiety for hamlet. Good Hamlet, cast thy nighted color off, And let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark. Do not forever with thy vailèd lids Seek for thy noble father in the dust. Thou know’st ’tis common; all that lives must die, Passing through nature to eternity. ➔ “nighted color,” → he is wearing black, (the colour of the night) because he is still mourning his father's death. ➔ “Good Hamlet, cast thy nighted color off, And let thine eye look like a friend on Denmark.” → she is asking him to stop the mourning of his father and to comport in a more friendly manner due to the fact that he has been behaving in a (emotionally speaking) uncooperative way. However, we can hypothesise that Hamlet may not been only mourning because of his father's death; his psychological motivation is the greatest problem in the play. The audience is always trying to identify the true motivations of Hamlet's 16 external behaviour (i.e.: how he speaks and dresses), but with hamlet we never know. ➔ “Do not forever with thy vailèd lids Seek for thy noble father in the dust.” → Hamlet is described as if he was walking around with the eyes closed, that is looking down, which is a characteristic of what a sad person does, seeking his father on the dust, that is the dead corpse of the father (‘pulvis eris et in pulverem reverteris’). This shows hamlet's excess of filial affection, which from the mother’s point of view seems to be odd, bizarre and abnormal. ➔ “Thou know’st ’tis common; all that lives must die, Passing through nature to eternity.” → she is mentioning the inevitable law of nature (which belongs to the sphere of cosmos; therefore, since it is a cosmic law, it cannot be escaped) What she is implying is that Hamlet is behaving in an unnatural, strange manner. [In Elizabethan times, it was common to die at 50, which was the age of King Hamlet; therefore, that is why his wife doesn’t seem his sudden death as something strange but part of the law of nature] Ay, madam, it is common. ➔ Abrupt dryness of his response “Seems,” madam? Nay, it is. I know not “seems.” ’Tis not alone my inky cloak, cool mother, Nor customary suits of solemn black, Nor windy suspiration of forced breath, No, nor the fruitful river in the eye, Nor the dejected havior of the visage, Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief, That can denote me truly. These indeed “seem,” For they are actions that a man might play; But I have that within which passes show, These but the trappings and the suits of woe. ➔ The bottom line is: ‘I am not like you, I am different’. ➔ ““Seems,”” → echoing what the mother said. 17 ➔ “I know not “seems.”” → what this statement implies is that he is always sincere, he doesn’t not play the game of appearance, he is not theatrical like his mother and the rest who are simulating, dissembling; they are fake. ➔ “cool mother”→ this is a reapproach. Hamlet is being reproached for having an excess of affection; however, he reproaches her for lacking affection. ➔ “Nor customary suits of solemn black,” → = ‘I am not playing the social theatrical game of mourning’ ➔ “Nor windy suspiration of forced breath,” → ‘I am not forcing my breath in a hypocritical manner’ as mourners or “plañideras” in Spanish, who were paid to attend to a funeral and cry for the deceased. This was seemed by Hamlet as a show of hypocrisy. Therefore, he is not forcing his breath, that is faking his breath, being insincere. ➔ “No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,” → metaphor of crying ➔ “Nor the dejected havior of the visage,” → dejected =sad, depressed, visage = face. ➔ “Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief,” → “seem” as opposed to “being”, “falsity” to “truth”, “form” to “substance/content/matter”, “seems” to “is”. Hamlet and Juliet are the spokesperson of sincerity, of truth. ➔ “That can denote me truly.” → he is posing the metaphysical problem of the externalization of human interiority, of a psychological truth. In other words, the problem raised here is: is it possible to bring out the truth in a way that it doesn’t diminish that truth? (According to Juliet, who stated the same theory as Hamlet, it was not possible: If you try to convert that excess [of love, in her case] into words, you falsify the excess.) ➔ “These indeed “seem,” For they are actions that a man might play;” → Hamlet is saying people can convey emotion in an insincere way, that we can fake our emotions and pretend. ➔ “But I have that within which passes show, These but the trappings and the suits of woe.” → ‘there is something inside me that cannot be shown, brought to the surface’ This statement is said in a theatrical context in which everything is shown. Actors in play must have something inside that must be brought outside, otherwise, if there is an excess of psychology in respect to what happens in the play, there will be a blackhole, something anomalous. In summary, Hamlet is saying that he is not an actor; he is earnest and honest. This is paradoxical because in the remain of the play, Hamlet is going to be forced to become the arch actor. Furthermore, he estates that has an excess of psychological interiority that cannot be fully expressed into external terms. O, that this too, too sullied flesh would melt, Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew, Or that the Everlasting had not fixed His canon ’gainst self-slaughter! O God, God, 20 ➔ “Must I remember?” → the ghost will ask him to remember. Memory is a crucial problem in hamlet; it always causes pain. “Must I remember?” refers to recalling the way his mother used to love his father. ➔ “Why, she would hang on him As if increase of appetite had grown By what it fed on”→ There is a paradox: the appetite grows as she eats more of the father, that is the sexuality that self-feeds. What it means in general terms is that his mother was sexually attracted to King Hamlet, which was legitimate and appropriate because it was Hamlet’s father. ➔ “And yet, within a month” → again his obsession: the speed with which his mother remarried. ➔ “(Let me not think on ’t; frailty, thy name is woman!),” → as if it was an afterthought, which suggest the spontaneity of his thought. “frailty, thy name is woman” is a misogynistic proverbial expression meaning that women are more fragile than men. ➔ “(O God, a beast that wants discourse of reason Would have mourned longer!),” → hamlet is comparing his mother to an animal devoid of reason and conscience. (Human Vs Non-human). One of the things that distinguishes human beings and animals is the ceremonial, ritual disappearance of the body by burying it under earth. ➔ “married with my uncle, My father’s brother, but no more like my father Than I to Hercules.” → it takes place a double comparison: Hercules is to Hamlet what king Hamlet is to king Claudius: a super human creature. Therefore, what he is implying is that he is not like Hercules, a heroic figure; he seems himself diminished. The same is suggested with his uncle: he is not like his father (nor is Hamlet himself), a super military epic honourable warrior. ➔ “O, most wicked speed, to post With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!” → “incestuous sheets” is a key word. This fact is haunting him in his conscience. In addition, he feels that the sinfulness of his mother has contaminated him. There is also the element of sexual jealousy: he may be so emotionally attached to the mother that he could not forgive the mother to love someone else since he would like his mother to love him. This anticipates the “Oedipus problem”. ➔ “for I must hold my tongue.”→ he must hold his tongue because other characters enter on scene. As we have seen, Hamlet gets carried away in his consciousness and language. In summary, Hamlet at the very beginning is extremely sad, and even mad; he falls into a morbid imagination with thoughts of putrescent, rottenness, depravity, lust. However, there is a possibility that he may be deceptively pretending to be sad to mislead the rest and enter their consciousness because he could be suspecting something. 21 Sir, my good friend. I’ll change that name with you. And what make you from Wittenberg, Horatio?— Marcellus? ➔ Friendship on Shakespeare’s plays are important since they suppose a space of revelation due to the fact that a good friend brings their authentic self out and alleviate pain. I would not hear your enemy say so, Nor shall you do my ear that violence To make it truster of your own report Against yourself. I know you are no truant. But what is your affair in Elsinore? We’ll teach you to drink deep ere you depart. ➔ “To make it truster of your own report Against yourself” → as we see, Hamlet completely trusts Horatio. (Sense of good friendship) ➔ “But what is your affair in Elsinore?” → he is surprised to see Horatio there. (Horatio was in an Erasmus) My lord, I came to see your father’s funeral. I prithee, do not mock me, fellow student. I think it was to see my mother’s wedding. ➔ Chiasmus: “your father’s funeral” VS “my mother’s wedding.”→ imply an anomic energy. ➔ These processes of fratricide and incest are institutionalized by means of the funeral and the wedding. Indeed, my lord, it followed hard upon. ➔ i.e.: The matrimony followed the funeral very shortly ➔ Horatio sensed hamlet's innuendo. Thrift, thrift, Horatio. The funeral baked meats Did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables. Would I had met my dearest foe in heaven Or ever I had seen that day, Horatio! My father—methinks I see my father. 22 ➔ “The funeral baked meats Did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables.” → those cold baked meats were used from one ceremony to the other because of the speed of the 2 events. The choice of reference to food is interesting because food may rotten and food that is rotting is an image of sin and corruption. As we can see, Hamlet’s mind is taken by a figuration of putrescence, flesh that goes rotten; therefore, sinful. In my mind’s eye, Horatio. ➔ Hamlet considers that he has seen his father in his mind; that is a mental vision. This proves that there is an internal life, experience apart from an external life, that is more important than the external experience. This is called the introspection. The mind’s eye is a protestant concept which is going to foreshadow the entire movement of rationalism. In addition, Protestantism meant in theology a turn inwards which turned to be fundamental in the movement towards the self that took place in Europe throughout the early Modern period. He was a man. Take him for all in all, I shall not look upon his like again. ➔ “He was a man.” Hamlet will always describe his father as an unreachable and unmatchable creature. The father is described as a man making not only a reference to the abstract human being, but also to the gender: he was a masculine man. He is described as an epic figure of heroic proportions. He is comparing himself to his father: he was a man but I am not. Therefore, it can be felt on this statement scents of: 1) antiheroic ideology: ‘I am not a heroic figure like my father.’ 2) political frustration: ‘I am never going to be a king like my father.’ 3) Foreshadowing of his lack of masculinity (effeminacy): ‘I will never own that kind of manliness.’ ➔ “I shall not look upon his like again.” → Hamlet’s recognition of the passing away of a heroic age, of gigantic military creature. Furthermore, a dig at Claudius he will never be like his father. For God’s love, let me hear! ➔ Hamlet is eager to know. It is an if Hamlet was expecting this to happen. It seems as he would have fantasied about his father coming back because he sensed that something was wrong. 25 ACT 1, SCENE 4 On this scene, we find the characters of Hamlet, Horatio and Marcello having a conversation about the misbehaviour of the Danish court as they wait on the platform for the apparition of the ghost. Hamlet is complaining about the noise, fuss and agitation that they are making underneath adopting therefore a puritan behaviour: he doesn’t like drinking nor dancing. Now, we move to the moment in which the ghost enters. It takes place the confrontation between father and son (a domestic problem) Angels and ministers of grace, defend us! ➔ This is an invocation of an exorcism. Be thou a spirit of health or goblin damned, ➔ He is enumerating the possibilities of what the ghost could be. Thou com’st in such a questionable shape That I will speak to thee. ➔ ‘I will speak to you because I want to know who you are behind that questionable shape; I want to know the matter/substance behind the form’ (opposition between form and substance, ornament and matter). I’ll call thee “Hamlet,” “King,” “Father,” “Royal Dane.” O, answer me! ➔ Since the ghost has adopted the figure of his father, Hamlet has decided to call it with the names attributed to him. ➔ “Hamlet,” “King,” “Father,” “Royal Dane.” →The social roles. The arbitrariness of the names. Let me not burst in ignorance, ➔ “ignorance”→ this is one of the parts that conforms the tragedy according to Reiss’ definition of the Tragedy: the limited knowledge. ➔ Hamlet wants to know. It takes place a gothic and macabre description 26 Making night hideous, and we fools of nature ➔ “we fools of nature” → meaning: humans with limited knowledge. We are the instruments of external forces: nature or fortune [reminder of Romeo’s fortune's fool] With thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls? ➔ i.e.: transcendental Ghost beckons. ➔ to summon, to signal hamlet to follow him. The ghost wants to speak to him privately It beckons you to go away with it As if it some impartment did desire To you alone. ➔ It is a domestic secret It will not speak. Then I will follow it. ➔ He is saying: ‘The ghost wants to speak to me alone, he won’t' speak if you are here.’ Which might deprive your sovereignty of reason And draw you into madness? ➔ The first explicit intimation in the play of the threat of madness. My fate cries out ➔ This is a stoic internalization and acceptance of his fate [remembering of Romeo] He waxes desperate with imagination. ➔ Horatio realises that it looks like as if Hamlet, at the moment of talking with the ghost, was under an imaginative delusion of his own self (maybe because he has anticipated this moment many times). ➔ Imagination plays an important role on this place since it may lead to madness. 27 Something is rotten in the state of Denmark ➔ “rotten” connects with the Hamlet’s soliloquy: “The world is an unweeded garden” the rotten things of nature possess the garden of world. “rank” is the adjective used in the soliloquy to describe putrescence and rottenness, an idea which reappears here again. ➔ Something that is rotten it is corrupted at the natural, the political and domestical level. ACT 1, SCENE 5 Hamlet and the ghost talking to one another. The ghost has beckoned Hamlet in order to provide him information of private nature which concerns 2 basic things: the political situation (i.e.: usurpation [Claudius’ crime as an act of political usurpation]), as a consequence, Hamlet is being asked to come as a candidate to the throne; the domestical situation (i.e.: fratricide and incest), as a consequence, Hamlet is being asked to revenge his father’s death. As we can see, there is a sense of secrecy built in the scene. In Hamlet, we will find several moments where there is a restrictive distribution of information which creates a sense of constant conspiracy leading to the formation of communities of secrecy. We can distinguish: 1) Claudius and the rest: about the crime 2) Barnardo, Hamlet, Marcellus and Horatio and the rest: about the ghost 3) Hamlet and the Ghost and the rest: about the murdering and the revenge. In the case of Hamlet, we see that 2 communities of secrecy overlap. Mark me ➔ i.e.: look at me My hour is almost come When I to sulf’rous and tormenting flames Must render up myself. ➔ The morning is coming and, as a consequence, spirits must hide and go back to the purgatory, where they suffer the flames. Pity me not, but lend thy serious hearing To what I shall unfold. ➔ ‘I want you to listen to what I am going to say,’ ➔ He is the voice of father, of the super ego, of the consciousness 30 Hamlet’s mind a shadow is going to obscure his approach to the mother and make him believe that the mother contributed. Furthermore, there is an insistence from the ghost’s part in emphasising that there are 2 crimes: the murder and the adultery. However, the mother is only responsible of the second one. This is the moment in which the audience realises that we are in a tragedy of revenge. In a tragedy of order, we have the crime and the avenger replacing the usurper and restoring the order. This is the basic and conventional plot. As a consequence, this is what enter in the horizon of expectations of the audience (i.e.: the prejudices that we have as an audience when we are confronting a literary work whose logic we understand in advance.) However, Shakespeare introduced a change in the revenge tragedy: rather than having the protagonist act as an avenger in a straightforward manner, what Shakespeare is going to do is to delay the act of revenge in a manner that is inconceivable for the logic of the convention, which demanded that the revenge must take place. Hamlet’s delay may be connected with the fact that an erotic revenge (his mother’s adultery) has been inexorably tangled with the political revenge (his uncle’s fratricide). The problem of the play is the delay, which is caused because he is always doubting; he is a speculative mind considering always the different sights of a situation, and this infinite act of deliberation produces a paralysis of action. That is to say Hamlet becomes mentally very active and physically very inactive. This is his problem: He is constantly rationalising his inaction, giving himself reasons and motifs for not taking revenge. One of the arguments he provides in order to delay his revenge is that the ghost may be dishonest; therefore, he needs to verify the ghost’s words. How will he do this? He will produce a play within a play which performs a similar crime to that that has taken place. And in doing so, Hamlet will pay attention to the king’s reaction to the fratricide in order to verify the ghost accusation. The search for the proof is a rationalization; a psychological mechanism to delay what is inevitable. This excess of thought over action is what characterises Hamlet. Ay, that incestuous, that adulterate beast, ➔ “Adulterate” → the word can stand for 2 meanings: 1) adj applied to someone who commits adultery 2) adj applied to something that is corrupted (the sense that is applied in this speech) If we remember, “corrupt” is one of the semantic ideas in the play: in the first soliloquy, Hamlet speaks about things that are “rank and gross in nature”, “the world is an unweeded garden” reappear when Bernardo says “There is something rotten in the state of Denmark” and the rottenness of the weeds reappears in the “Lethe wharf”. Therefore, according to T.S. Eliot, in Hamlet’s imagination there is an obsessive recurrence of images of rottenness which were probably spinning around the basic crime/sin: the wife’s adultery. So, there is an imaginative connection between “adultery” and “adulterate (as corrupt)”: the adultery is not 31 committed by the uncle, but by the wife. Therefore, is a contamination of responsibility, because if the wife is adulterous, he is adulterate, if she is corrupt, he is also corrupt. Ay, that incestuous, that adulterate beast, With witchcraft of his wits, with traitorous gifts— O wicked wit and gifts, that have the power So to seduce!—won to his shameful lust The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen. ➔ He is not necessarily saying that the responsible is exclusively the seductor. ➔ “The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen.” → this line arises a question: Was the wife seeming-virtuous before or after the act of seduction? What we can declare with certainty is that the ghost is accusing his wife of being a virtuous seeming queen, of being dishonest, pretending to be virtuous (being as opposed to seeming). However, the problem is that the ghost is ambiguous as to the nature of wife’s guilt. Therefore, if the ghost assumes that the queen is not virtuous, the implication is that the relation between Claudius and the queen had been going on for quite a while before the murdering. This will be problematic for Hamlet since he feels humiliated by the dishonour the disruption of the marriage has taken place and that the marriage of his parents was a fake. In addition, there is a shade of implication and suspicion emerging, which is the possibility of bastardy. But, howsomever thou pursues this act, Taint not thy mind, nor let thy soul contrive Against thy mother aught. ➔ At the end of its long speech, the ghost tells hamlet not to be violent against the mother. ➔ Furthermore, it tries to exonerate the mother form the crime of murder, but not from the crime of lust and adultery. Now, the ghost leaves and Hamlet is left alone, talking to himself in a soliloquy that looks as a dialogue. 32 In this distracted globe. Remember thee? ➔ “distracted globe” → refers to his mind. “distraction” is a word that in the Elizabethan English meant “madness”. Therefore, madness is described as a displaced mind; a mind that is elsewhere. I’ll wipe away all trivial, fond records, ➔ i.e.: ‘I will erase all those banal memories in order to leave space to remember you.’ And thy commandment all alone shall live ➔ “thy commandment” that is ‘your order’. ➔ The ghost commandment is to take revenge and remember me, which are basically the same. (remember comes from: re-member, i.e.: to bring all the images of that something together). Therefore, the ghost is asking Hamlet to keep his memory alive. ➔ A commandment is an injunction to memory. And memory has a lot to do with imagination. So, the ghost is saying that the son will solely become a real pragmatic warrior if he has the intellectual imaginative capacity to keep the father in his mind as an “idée fixe”. However, if the “idée fixe” of your mind is your father, that can lead to an unhealthy state of mind. The father behaves as the super ego, the voice of authority, therefore, the voice of consciousness, and is representing the principle of reality and the moral law. And, according to Freud, if you remember the father, you do not grow up as a normal person; therefore, in order to go on living, to become psychologically a healthy adult, you have to metaphorically ‘kill’ him and enjoy the principle of pleasure. O most pernicious woman! ➔ Here, we see again his obsession with the mother. He is blaming the mother despite what the ghost has told him not to do so. O villain, villain, smiling, damnèd villain! ➔ The villain is the uncle. That one may smile and smile and be a villain. ➔ Here, there is a difference between what we see and what we are (appearance in opposition to being). This signals falsity, hypocrisy from Claudius’ part. (Remembering of the beginning when he spoke: ““Seems,” madam? Nay, it is. I know not “seems.””) 35 To put an antic disposition on) ➔ i.e.: to behave in a strange manner ➔ So, what he is saying is that ‘if you from now on see me behaving in a strange manner, never say that I am putting a show; don't give me away, because this is a calculated strategy in my part: a scheme.’ As a consequence, “antic disposition” becomes, from this moment, one of the most problematic concepts in the play because Hamlet is going to put on this antic disposition in some moments in which we can recognise that he is acting wildly in a deliberate manner, but in other cases we cannot distinguish if his wild behaviour is because of the antic disposition or because of something else. The antic disposition is a mad behaviour, and the problem is: how many madnesses are there in Hamlet? The answer is that we do not know which level of madness is being activated when; we never know whether Hamlet is truly mad or pretending to be mad. However, we must mention the fact that if he pretends to be mad in a sophisticated manner and succeeds, it is because he is already a little bit mad. In hamlet we see what we could call a natural madness and an artificial madness. Example of antic disposition: page 264-5. Hamlet is putting on a scene of wild behaviour in order to look like the common figure of the unrequited lover. This madness is artificial. However, if we return to the act 1, scene 2, page 205-6-7-8, he is already behaving in a wild manner [‘tis an unweeded garden that grows to seed, things rank and gross in natur possess it merely’]. Therefore, again, it arises the question of was hamlet already mad before he decided to act madly or was he already putting an antic disposition? And if so, why would he do that? The first antic disposition may have been a reaction against the mother showing her that he was unhappy with the matrimony. But the problem remains, with hamlet we never know whether we are in natural madness or artificial madness. In addition to this, there is a third possibility: complete mental health, that is somebody who is so intelligent that is pulling the screens of his own behaviour in ways that are impenetrable for others. Sometimes madness is an excess of reason, which could be the case of Hamlet himself. ACT 2, SCENE 2 The king and the queen suspect that Hamlet is mad, and they think that his madness is due to rejected love. This theory Ophelia somehow confirms by explaining to his father what kind of reaction Hamlet had when he entered the room and when she has tried to give him back the letters and the gifts. Throughout the act 2, it takes place conversations about Hamlet’s transformation; that is, if Hamlet was already melancholy at the beginning of the play, he is even more melancholy and wilder at this point. 36 Take this from this, if this be otherwise. If circumstances lead me, I will find Where truth is hid, though it were hid, indeed, Within the center. ➔ The idea that truth is hidden. That truth is psychological: the motif of hamlet’s strange behaviour. How may we try it further? ➔ How can we find out? At such a time I’ll loose my daughter to him. Be you and I behind an arras then. ➔ As if the daughter was an animal (patriarchal idea of possession, property). This is a reification of the daughter. ➔ They are setting hamlet up, and Ophelia is going to be used as the bait in the hook. She is instrumentalized to set up a situation that is going to be spied. ➔ “Be you and I behind an arras then.” → So that we can confirm that he is in love with her. ➔ The plan is that the king, the queen and Polonius will overhear the conversation between Hamlet and Ophelia (paranoid surveillance espionage). This creates a scene inside a scene (it is metatheatrical) Hamlet now enters the scene. While Polonius is having a conversation with Hamlet, the queen and the king will spy them. This is not what they have planned; nevertheless, they want to see what he has to say. Throughout this scene, Hamlet will speak in a deliberately enigmatic manner. His speech is full of metaphors, equivocation, word-play, vague ambiguous rhetorical. And Polonius will not follow the train of his thought. Do you know me, my lord? ➔ Polonius asks: ‘Do you know my identity?’ ➔ Why? Because they are afraid that the transformation is radical and he is completely mad, and a mad person may not be able to identify another person. ➔ So, what we see is that Polonius is testing Hamlet’s stand of understanding, of intelligence, of reason. Excellent well. You are a fishmonger. ➔ Fishmonger: 1) someone who sells fish; 2) in the Elizabethan time, a “fishmonger” had a bawdy meaning: a bawd, pimp (un chulo); that is somebody who uses women to obtain benefit by prostituting them. Therefore, the implication 37 is that selling fish is that you are selling women. (We must mention the fact that the association between fish and women was strong in the Elizabethan era). ➔ Therefore, the implication is that Polonius is a bawd selling his daughter: Ophelia. ➔ Why does Hamlet say this? Maybe because Hamlet has overheard this final part of the conversation where Polonius says that he will lose his daughter. So if Polonius is going to lose his daughter is because he is reifying her; he is turning Ophelia into a prostitute. Then I would you were so honest a man. ➔ Hamlet is being ironic since a fishmonger, in the figurative sense, is dishonest since he makes money through dishonest means; the dishonesty implying largely the dishonesty of the women whose virtue is going to be endangered by selling their bodies. For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion—Have you a daughter? ➔ “—” this implies that he doesn’t want to end that figurative line. ➔ “For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog,”→ if hamlet is the “sun”, the “dead dog” is Ophelia, which is “breed[ing] maggots”, that is in a process of putrefaction, which is connected with the idea of corruption. This idea connects with Hamlet’s first soliloquy “the world is an unweeded garden grown to seed.” We see an obsession of the idea of rottenness and corruption. Why would Ophelia be a dead dog breeding maggots under the sun? Because, in Hamlet’s ideology, something that is rotten (dead dog) is corrupted and she is corrupted since she lacks in virtue and honesty due to the fact that she has been turned into a prostitute by the fishmonger, that is the father: Polonius. ➔ “being a good kissing carrion” → this is an afterthought. The dead dog is “a good kissing carrion”. “Carrion” is dead flesh. So, the dead flesh of the dead dog (the flesh of the prostitute [i.e.: Ophelia]) is “good kissing”, that is good to be kissed by somebody who is also corrupted. The implication is that the corruption of the dead dog is a sexual corruption that has to do with a contact between bodies. This connects with the previous idea of the fishmonger: prostitution. ➔ The following line confirms the identity of the dead dog as Ophelia: “Have you a daughter?” Let her not walk i’ th’ sun. Conception is a blessing, but, as your daughter may conceive, 40 Were you not sent for? […] I know the good king and queen have sent for you. ➔ This shows the paranoid feeling that dominates the play; Hamlet’s prevailing sense of suspicion and mistrust. My lord, we were sent for. ➔ They admit the fact that they were sent for. […] I have of late, but wherefore I know not, lost all my mirth, forgone all custom of exercises, and, indeed, it goes so heavily with my disposition that this goodly frame, the Earth, seems to me a sterile promontory; this most excellent canopy, the air, look you, this brave o’erhanging firmament, this majestical roof, fretted with golden fire—why, it appeareth nothing to me but a foul and pestilent congregation of vapors. What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable; in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god: the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals—and yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me, no, nor women neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so. ➔ Hamlet provides a reason why they have been sent for: to find out about his madness. ➔ The conversation is in prose, which is strange because Guildenstern and Rosencrantz are courtiers and have education; therefore, it should be in verse. However, the fact that it is in prose introduces the comic element. ➔ Hamlet will give an explanation about why they were sent for, and, in the course of the explanation, Hamlet is going to give a description about his state of mind/spirit. Can we trust what hamlet is going to say or not? It is difficult to know because he may be pretending since he knows that if they were sent, they will 41 report what they have talked with him. So, this speech may be part of an antic disposition, an expression of insincere feelings in order to mislead the queen and king, or maybe a honest expression of sincere feelings. ➔ “I have of late, but wherefore I know not” → this shows his lack of motivation. He acknowledges the unmotivated nature of his spleen (i.e.: grave emotion, sadness, melancholy). ➔ “forgone all custom of exercises,” → i.e.: abandoned all physical exercises. Normally a prince will do physical exercise (duelling, horse riding, dancing maybe). What it implies is that he is so sad that he has stopped practicing and lost happiness. ➔ “it goes so heavily” i.e.: to be burden by some kind of oppression ➔ “with my disposition” i.e.: my state of mind. ➔ The constant problem in Hamlet is to discover the motivation of his disposition. ➔ “that this goodly frame, the Earth” → he is pointing out the landscape surrounding the castle (this scene takes place in an outdoor stage) It suggests a Ptolemaic understanding of the universe which consisted on the earth framed in the centre of the universe, planets, the sun and a last sphere of fixed stars, also called heaven or firmament. Copernicus, Galileo, Bruno objected this understanding of the universe and proposed the conception of infinite universe. Shakespeare is writing at the beginning 17th century, in a moment in which there is a cosmological transition: one paradigm is being followed by another paradigm, and the Copernican paradigm is going to replace the Ptolemaic paradigm. Shakespeare probably believed that the world was infinite, but because he was writing a medieval play, Hamlet must believe in the Ptolemaic understanding of the universe. ➔ “seems to me a sterile promontory;” → “una montaña estéril” He is criticising, undermining the praise of the earth that was so common amongst the humanists. ➔ “this most excellent canopy, the air, look you, this brave o’erhanging firmament, this majestical roof,”→ there are 3 appositions referring to the same concept “the air”, “this brave o’erhanging firmament” and “this majestical roof”. They refer to what there is above the earth, which is the air, the firmament and the roof. The “roof” is a metaphor; to say that the firmament is a roof means that there is a limit (Ptolemaic understanding). ➔ “why, it appeareth nothing to me but a foul and pestilent congregation of vapors” → “una masa fétida, horrible y pestilente de vapores” This is an undermining of the humanism. We can also identify the constant metaphorical field of rottenness that domains Hamlet's mind ("pestilent") ➔ “What a piece of work is a man” the Ptolemaic universe and Humanism was geocentric and anthropocentric. According to the Ptolemaic medieval humanism, the human was the very centre of the universe. However, Hamlet is countering, attacking this humanist celebration of the earth and the human being as the centre of the universe. ➔ “how noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable; in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god” → 42 here, he is analysing all the facets of the human being: the mind, the body, the soul, etc. ➔ “how like a god: the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals” the 15th century Italian philosophers, specifically Pico Della Mirandola, popularised the idea of Neoplatonism according to which the human being is the most accomplished object of the universe because is the only one who is free. Whereas the rest of objects in the universe have a predetermined identity, the human being must create itself; that is what we call self-fashion. Greenblatt will denominate this ability as the “capacity for self-invention”. This introduces another idea: the human being is empty; that identity is a project. ➔ “yet” → it is a conjunction that presents a contrast by means of which hamlet will attack the previously seen humanist idea. ➔ “what is this quintessence of dust?” This is Hamlet’s nihilistic and sceptical definition of the human being (pulvis eris et in pulvis reverteris). He is basically rejecting the thesis of neoplatonic philosophers and attacking the celebration of the human being in earth. The Christian religion proposes the idea that life in earth is horrible, and ordeal and that the real life is after death (“in hac lacrimarum valle” bible). Hamlet's nihilistic attitude is taking a catholic turn. Catholicism took 2 turns: before the reformation and after the reformation. After the reformation, a movement started called “The Counter-reformation” was an ultra-catholic movement that reminded people of their misery of life in earth, a constant memento mori (reminder of death). Hamlet is a counter-reformation play: there is a constant celebration and reminder of death (which we also find in the work of Montaigne: reminder that we are going to die; and in the work of Heidegger: the human being is a being that is constantly destined towards death and must be reminded of his own mortality) Hamlet foreshadows this idea in his first soliloquy (the counter reformation reminder that we are going to die) which vanishes the optimistic Neoplatonism of early renaissance. Why does he adopt a negative perspective about humans? Because his mother, according to him, has not behaved correctly. ➔ “Man delights not me, no, nor women neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so.” → “Man” referring to human kind. “nor women neither” he is playing with the previous word “man” stating that neither men or women delight him. However, it shows a misogynistic attitude. In the remainder of the conversation, we see the reaction to the arrival of the players (It supposes the moment of climax in the play). They are members of a company from “the city”, which implies London, not Denmark (which would make more sense). This could be understood as a deliberate mistake in order to introduce a very interesting meditation on the stake of the theatres in the city of London. The conversation that takes place is about theatre and the best technique for acting. There are different techniques, for 45 And can say nothing— ➔ He is acknowledging that fact that he is being passive, he is not obeying to the commandment of his father. Am I a coward? ➔ He is addressing himself and constructing his thoughts in the act of thinking. ➔ This is a sign of modernity, since this implies the victory of reason over the mediaeval world of the heroic warrior. ➔ Hamlet is embodying the world of enlightment which supposes the rejection of heroic passion. I should have fatted all the region kites With this slave’s offal. ➔ that means that he should have killed already Claudius, committed his revenge. Bloody, bawdy villain! ➔ Claudius is accused of 2 crimes: bloody → murder, bawdy →incest Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, ➔ Who is prompting hamlet to his revenge? His father who is in the purgatory, between heaven and hell. ➔ He is talking in a literal manner: it is an afterlife image. Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words ➔ He is describing himself as a whore and is comparing himself to a woman, this shows his misogyny. What it implies is ‘I have become effeminate; I have become woman because I can't act’ ➔ Rather than acting (heroic medieval world), he is speaking (world of reason). (pragma and logos) Hum, ➔ It begins a moment of Speculation ➔ Turning point, beginning to consider a new idea. They have proclaimed their malefactions; ➔ Malefactions: crimes 46 ➔ Empathetic identification, on the one hand, between the actor and the character, and on the other hand between the audience and the actor. And Hamlet is going to consider that the latter one is useful for his scheme. I know my course ➔ ‘I know what I am going to do’ ➔ It suggests Determination The spirit that I have seen May be a devil, and the devil hath power T’ assume a pleasing shape; ➔ He is reconsidering the identity of the ghost and therefore delaying his duty. ➔ As a consequence, he has to prove his identity by means of his new devised plan. Out of my weakness and my melancholy, As he is very potent with such spirits, Abuses me to damn me. ➔ He is apparently in a sincere fashion speaking about his own weakness and melancholy. This proves that there seems to be a natural ground of madness; that his natural melancholy may be unmotivated. ➔ This original state of melancholy is what justifies his contemptus mundi, his misanthropy. ➔ Hamlet is acknowledging the fact that he is mad and gloomy in a natural manner that cannot fully explain. The play’s the thing Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the King. ➔ The king is trying to catch hamlet's consciousness and hamlet wants to catch his conscience → reciprocity. ➔ ‘The play will be the thing in order to catch his conscience.’ ACT 3, SCENE 1 ‘To be or not to be’ soliloquy. Use of enjambment: the reading of the line is followed in the next line. In doing that, we follow the flow of thought, that is the stream of consciousness. And in doing that, by speaking to ourselves, we generate introspection, consciousness This is perhaps one of 47 the most memorable instances of introspection in western literature. Hamlet is constructing his own consciousness in the act of thinking. This soliloquy can be described as a proto-existentialist speech, riddle, quibble or enigma. It has to do with existence, with the bare factor of being, rather than not being. This takes us to Sartre, who discussed about this topic on his work "Being and Nothingness". In a way, Sartre claimed that Hamlet was the beginning of this problem ‘To be’ (being) ‘or not to be’ (nothingness). Why are we here? This is the most important question in philosophy. Is hamlet preoccupied with the meaning of his existence? To some extent, yes. (go to speech with Ophelia): “that it were better my mother had not borne me” it is not as being dead, but being unborn; in other words, in not having being. Hamlet is contemplating the possibility of his not being conceived, not having ever existed (this is much more primordial than simply ceasing to exist). This soliloquy is about death, what happens to us when we die; is about moral conscience. Unfortunately for Hamlet, who is a rationalist, because of the culture in which he lives, the predominant belief is that when we die, we don’t cease to exist; and he knows that by “fact” because he has seen the ghost of his father which comes from the purgatory. Therefore, it must exist a hell and heaven to which the soul goes in the afterlife. However, Hell is not a place, is a psychological state: hell is remorse in the survival of the soul. And this is what terrifies Hamlet: the prospect of the survival of the moral conscience. But why? Because a ghost is a remorseful soul and he doesn’t want to become a ghost. But why does Hamlet feel remorse? Because he is not able to pursue the command of his father (i.e.: to take revenge). To be or not to be—that is the question: / Whether ’tis nobler in the mind → heroic mythos of epic behaviour, the warrior behaviour. to suffer /The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, → to bear, to tolerate the arrows of fortune. Fortune as the goddess that is inflicting harm on human beings (remember Machiavelli) Or to take arms against a sea of troubles → Machiavelli says that virtue is out capacity to respond to the external assail of fortune. So, what he is saying in this line is whether he should become active, fight his misfortune and finally become an avenger. And, by opposing, end them. → to put an end to the problems of my father To die, → to die is to sleep (metaphorical elaboration) to sleep— / No more—and by a sleep to say we end / The heartache → to end the emotional pain and the thousand natural shocks → the bodily illnesses That flesh is heir to—’tis a consummation / Devoutly to be wished. → what is devoutly wished? To die. 50 what kind of suffering we have to confront in life, but we do not know what do we have to confront after death. Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, →this is the clearest explanation of Hamlet’s behaviour that we can find in the play. Hamlet is a coward because of his conscience. He is self-diagnosing himself, he is aware of this. And thus the native hue of resolution → the natural colour of action (i.e.: out capacity to act) Is sicklied o’er → i.e.: is covered, sheltered. with the pale cast of thought,→ our pale consciousness, our tendency to think too much, because when we think too much, we become uncertain, hesitant, doubtful (which is Hamlet’s problem, which he acknowledges. This is metaconciousness). What he is basically saying is that human beings cannot return to nature, because we already think, therefore, we are in a step beyond nature and we enter the realm of culture, reason and there is no way back. And enterprises of great pitch and moment / With this regard their currents turn awry / And lose the name of action. → the problem is action, is doing. Who is the character in the play that behaves and acts in a determinant manner? Fortinbras. He is the man of action, hamlet instead is the man of conscience. —Soft you now, /The fair Ophelia.—Nymph, in thy orisons Be all my sins remembered. →he is assuming that Ophelia prays, and hamlet is talking about his sins. If she prays for his sins, in catholic religion, she can remit the suffering of his soul in order to guarantee the access of that person to heaven. So pray is a way of unburdening the soul from the suffering of a potential torment in hell. Hamlet is potentially positioning himself dead and Ophelia praying for him, just as his father is dead and he has to do something for him. Good my lord, / How does your Honor for this many a day?/ I humbly thank you, well./ My lord, I have remembrances of yours / That I have longèd long to redeliver. / I pray you now receive them. → she is giving the presents back No, not I. I never gave you aught. → Hamlet is playing with Ophelia in a perverse manner. He is putting an antic disposition. My honored lord, you know right well you did, /And with them words of so sweet breath composed / As made the things more rich. Their perfume lost, /Take these again, for to the noble mind → she considers that Hamlet’s mind is a noble mind, and she is going to repeat that twice. Rich gifts wax poor when givers prove unkind. → remember “a little more than kin, but less than kind” There, my lord. /Ha, ha, are you honest? →this is exactly what Hamlet mentions to Polonius in their conversation. Why would hamlet ask Ophelia if she is honest or not? Because he is resentful due to the fact that she has accepted to be instrumentalized by her father. 51 Throughout this conversation, Hamlet is going to be cruel towards Ophelia. What he basically says is that women are prostitutes and we men are vicious; we are all evil. His misanthropy comes forwards in this speech and tortures her with that recommending her to go to a nunnery. In conclusion, Hamlet is psychologically torturing Ophelia. Is he doing it sincerely or is he putting on a show? Probably, he is putting an antic disposition but he should have been more cautelous since his mistreatment of Ophelia is going to have a psychological effect on her, which, combined with the murdering of her father, will cause the death of Ophelia. It is because of her death that Hamlet changes his mind; from being pragmatically inactive and mentally active, after seeing the consequences of his perverse psychological treatment of Ophelia, he becomes pragmatically active and decides to take revenge on his father’s death. After their conversation, Ophelia is left alone, where she speaks to herself and opens up about her feelings for Hamlet. She loves hamlet and even described him as “the best human being in Denmark”. ACT3, SCENE 2 Sir, I lack advancement. → this is one of the few moments in the play in which we see hamlet complaining about the failure of his political ambition. He wanted to become a king, but he lacked “advancement”, that is promotion. In act 3, scene 2, line 355, Hamlet is speaking with Guildenstern. He is complaining about the attempt that everyone is making to discover his inside (secrecy of his inside). In 3.2.378, the moment in which the king has raised and ran out of the room where the performance is taking place. He has gone to the chapel. Hamlet is both happy and agitated since he has realised that he has confirmed the guilt of the uncle and therefore, he must venge his father. Throughout this soliloquy Hamlet is going to gather energy and conviction in order to become the avenger. Soft, now to my mother. → now to my mother’s room O heart, lose not thy nature; let not ever /The soul of Nero enter this firm bosom. → Nero murdered his mother. Let me be cruel, not unnatural. /I will speak daggers to her, → I am going to use words as daggers, but I will not harm her physically; I’m not going to kill her, but I am going to be cruel to her. (Oedipus complex). Why is Hamlet not going to kill his mother? Largely because of his father’s commandment. ACT 3, SCENE 3 The king is left alone in the line 36. The king kneels down and begins to pray. O, my offense is rank, → full of sin and corruption. 52 Then, hamlet enters and considers the possibility of killing his uncle. However, he decides not since he becomes aware of the fact that the uncle is praying, so if he kills him, he will not go to hell. Therefore, he decides to torture him psychologically. ACT 3, SCENE 4 Hamlet may be in love with his mother and extremely disgusted by the fact that she is engaged in a sexual relationship with the uncle. And this is what the conversation is going to be about. ‘How could you marry my uncle, if you are married to my father who was much better than my uncle?’ One of the important things that are said is when hamlet reveals to the mother that his father, his former husband, has been killed and she didn’t know it. Her response shows that she didn’t know and that she wasn’t guilty of his death, she was not an accomplice. ACT 4, SCENE 2 Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are following order to find the body of Polonius, who is dead since Hamlet killed him by accident and decided to hide the body. My lord, you must tell us where the / body is and go with us to the King. → they are taking him prisoner by the crime he has committed, but first, the need the body for evidence. The body is with the King, but the King is not / with the body. The King is a thing— → He is being enigmatic, talking as a riddle. This line has an uncertain meaning and is deliberately obscure. We could consider the medieval theory of the king's 2 bodies: that is the real body and the embodiment of the community. Therefore, he may not be talking about the body of Polonius, but of the king. If that is the implicature, the body is with the king means the real body, but the king is not with the body means that that the king is not with the community of Denmark, he is a politically illegitimate embodiment of the people. It could be understood as a subversive accusation on Hamlet's part towards the king. He is accusing somehow the king of not being legitimate embodiment of the state. ACT 4, SCENE 3 The king is speaking directly to hamlet asking about Polonius’ body. Hamlet is deliberately speaking in an enigmatic manner by means of using a parabolic allegorical story. Not where he eats, but where he is eaten. → the body of Polonius is being eaten by worms SITUATIONS OF DISORDER There is a political situation of disorder at 2 levels: the territorial war and the civil war. In addition, there is also a situation of disorder at the level of nature: the presence of the ghost (its appearance goes against the laws of nature; it demands an explanation). GHOST BELIEFS Who believed in ghosts in the context of Elizabethan England? Catholics. It was characteristic of Catholicism to remain attached to believe in superstitious things such as ghost, saints, relics, etc. A ghost in Elizabethan England could be several things: 1) The spirt of the deceased person which comes: a) to aware the family of some hidden treasure in order to disclose it, b) to aware the family of a disastrous event; 2) The ghost is not the spirit of the deceased person but a demon pretending to be the spirit of a deceased person; Satan playing a trick on us, and if this the case you need a scholar to communicate with him since the demon speaks in dead languages such as Latin or Greek. The beliefs shown here by the characters were beliefs shared by the audience. Therefore, Shakespeare to a certain extent, is playing with the gullibility and credulity of the audience. TYPES OF USURPATIONS The ghost is usurping the night, which implies a usurpation at the level of the nature; however, there are 2 more usurpations: 1) at the level of the polis: the brother killing the king to become the new governor, 2) and at the level of the domus: the brother killing the father of Hamlet and becoming the husband Hamlet’s mother. EMPIRICISM Only that we can testify through our senses is true. In fact, this is a kind of belief that became popular due to Francis Bacon. What we see here is Horatio making a profession of empiricism. “STRANGE” The strange is the alien, the uncanny. There are words in our languages that we use that seem to denote what cannot be understood, categorised. Words that we use to refer to the incomprehensible. In other words, from the very beginning, at the very core of the play there is sense of incomprehensibility, unintelligibility that we find at the natural level: the ghost, at the level of the polis: the situation of usurpation; at the level of the domus: fratricide and incest, and at the psychological level: hamlet's mind (which supposes the mystery of the play). THE MEANING OF THE GHOST Horatio interprets the appearance of the ghost as the anticipation, a prophecy of something that will happen in the future; but its appearance reflects something that has already happened that is the murder of the king and the incestuous marriage between Claudius and Hamlet’s mother. ‘MILITARY WARRIOR’ TYPE There is a depiction of the epic manly honour of King Hamlet, who was an aristocrat military medieval character that abided during his life the code of heroic ethos. The description of the personality of king Hamlet is important because prince Hamlet is not as his father. This has a dialectical, oppositional value. The meaning of Hamlet is what Hamlet is not. We begin to feel that the play is presenting us with a type: military warrior, embodied by King Hamlet, who prince Hamlet is not going to be. Is it a problem for a father that his son is not like him? In the Elizabethan England it was (according to Freud this was considered as the family problem). Therefore, if the father is a hero, he this imposes his son to be a hero too. The prince Fortinbras turns into the king that Hamlet should have been (the symbolic value is that Fortinbras becomes the son that King Hamlet should have had). There is a symbolic replacement of roles. Hamlet is not that military warrior that the play is asking him to be. The presentation of the military situation and the conflict between Denmark and Norway at the beginning of the play has the capacity for the audience to lay out a dialectical scenario where the heroic conditions stipulate a masculine, military behaviour which Hamlet is going to refuse due to the fact that Hamlet is a renaissance intellectual fallen in a medieval war. Hamlet will always describe his father as an unreachable and unmatchable creature. The father is described as a man making not only a reference to the abstract human being, but also to the gender: he was a masculine man. He is described as an epic figure of heroic proportions. He is comparing himself to his father: he was a man but I am not. Therefore, it can be felt on this statement scents of: 1) antiheroic ideology: ‘I am not a heroic figure like my father.’ 2) political frustration: ‘I am never going to be a king like my father.’ 3) Foreshadowing of his lack of masculinity (effeminacy): ‘I will never own that kind of manliness.’ The father embodies not only the principle of the paternal law but also the law of the old, epic and heroic society dominated by the heroic code of epic honour, which is based on principles of revenge, that was passing away and to which the father belonged as a member of the aristocracy. However, this society was in contrast with a new society that was secular, more modern and more republican. Therefore, Hamlet is a modern character thrown into an ancient play. The idea of personal revenge is connected to the idea of duel, which both are archaic remainders of a passed heroic world; a reversion to a prelegal, pre-constitutional way of acting which is very attractive for this kind of misleading manliness. CLAUDIUS UNEASINESS The King, who has committed fratricide and incest, is in a state of anxiety and is afraid of a potential rise of suspicion on the part of his court; therefore, he wants to abate that suspicion by means of this speech, especially in the mind of Hamlet. Why? Because he is his potential avenger and a resented aristocrat since Hamlet also run for the presidency of the state due to the fact that Denmark was an elective monarchy, not hereditary. Therefore, if Claudius is now the king is because he has been selected; however, Claudius probably draw himself to power in an illegal manner. In summary, Claudius is afraid of Hamlet because of 3 reasons: 1) He is the son of his victim and the son of his partner; therefore, his potential avenger. 2) Because Hamlet can suspect of their cuckoldry, adultery and cheating due to the fact that his mother married to quickly, implying that his mother has been in a relationship with the brother of his husband for some time. In addition, Hamlet can even suspect a potential threat of bastardy, being Hamlet therefore Claudius’ son. In fact, Laertes mentions this threat because if you are not able to take revenge on the loss of your family’s honour, it shows a weakness that is comparable to bastardy. 3) Because Hamlet is a resentful courtier that has been left out from the throne when he was the most entitled figure, the best suited candidate to the throne. MIRROR CHARACTERS It is important to note that before we are given information about Hamlet, we receive information about Fortinbras and Laertes, who are kind of mirror characters, Hamlet’s foils: young men who Hamlet could imitate to become a better hero, and they are presented as mirror images of Hamlet (they are all same age). Therefore, Hamlet is, in a NOT TYPICAL REVENGE TRAGEDY In a tragedy of order, we have the crime and the avenger replacing the usurper and restoring the order. This is the basic and conventional plot. However, Shakespeare introduced a change in the revenge tragedy: rather than having the protagonist act as an avenger in a straightforward manner, what Shakespeare is going to do is to delay the act of revenge in a manner that is inconceivable for the logic of the convention, which demanded that the revenge must take place. Hamlet’s delay may be connected with the fact that an erotic revenge (his mother’s adultery) has been inexorably tangled with the political revenge (his uncle’s fratricide). WHY DOES HE DELAY HIS ACTION? The problem of the play is the delay, which is caused because he is always doubting; he is a speculative mind considering always the different sights of a situation, and this infinite act of deliberation produces a paralysis of action. That is to say Hamlet becomes mentally very active and physically very inactive. This is his problem: He is constantly rationalising his inaction, giving himself reasons and motifs for not taking revenge. Rather than acting (heroic medieval world), he is speaking (world of reason). (pragma and logos) FATHER AS THE SUPER EGO A commandment is an injunction to memory. And memory has a lot to do with imagination. So, the ghost is saying that the son will solely become a real pragmatic warrior if he has the intellectual imaginative capacity to keep the father in his mind as an “idée fixe”. However, if the “idée fixe” of your mind is your father, that can lead to an unhealthy state of mind. The father behaves as the super ego, the voice of authority, therefore, the voice of consciousness, and is representing the principle of reality and the moral law. And, according to Freud, if you remember the father, you do not grow up as a normal person; therefore, in order to go on living, to become psychologically a healthy adult, you have to metaphorically ‘kill’ him and enjoy the principle of pleasure. ESCHATOLOGY THEOLOGY Heaven and Earth marking the eschatology, which is the area of theology which is concerned with death, judgement, and the soul's and humanity's ultimate fate. The order it proposes is: Heaven Earth Purgatory Hell The implication is that in this eschatology geography there are more things than those that are accepted by rationalist sceptical philosophers. THE PROBLEM OF MADNESS Hamlet is going to put on this antic disposition in some moments in which we can recognise that he is acting wildly in a deliberate manner, but in other cases we cannot distinguish if his wild behaviour is because of the antic disposition or because of something else. The antic disposition is a mad behaviour, and the problem is: how many madnesses are there in Hamlet? The answer is that we do not know which level of madness is being activated when; we never know whether Hamlet is truly mad or pretending to be mad. However, we must mention the fact that if he pretends to be mad in a sophisticated manner and succeeds, it is because he is already a little bit mad. In hamlet we see what we could call a natural madness and an artificial madness. In addition to this, there is a third possibility: complete mental health, that is somebody who is so intelligent that is pulling the screens of his own behaviour in ways that are impenetrable for others. Sometimes madness is an excess of reason, which could be the case of Hamlet himself. WHY IS OPHELIA “CORRUPTED”? Because, in Hamlet’s ideology, something that is rotten (dead dog) is corrupted and she is corrupted since she lacks in virtue and honesty due to the fact that she has been turned into a prostitute by the fishmonger, that is the father: Polonius. MACHIAVELLI’S FORTUNE Shakespeare picked up the idea that Fortune is a strumpet form Machiavelli, who very explicitly developed it in his worked named “The Prince”. He describes Fortune as a prostitute that seduces young men, trapping and rendering them unable for military action. This is a misogynistic source. PTOLEMAIC PHILOSOPHY It suggests a Ptolemaic understanding of the universe which consisted on the earth framed in the centre of the universe, planets, the sun and a last sphere of fixed stars, also called heaven or firmament. Copernicus, Galileo, Bruno objected this understanding of the universe and proposed the conception of infinite universe. Shakespeare is writing at the beginning 17th century, in a moment in which there is a cosmological transition: one paradigm is being followed by another paradigm, and the Copernican paradigm is going to replace the Ptolemaic paradigm. Shakespeare probably believed that the world was infinite, but because he was writing a medieval play, Hamlet must believe in the Ptolemaic understanding of the universe. The Ptolemaic universe and Humanism was geocentric and anthropocentric. According to the Ptolemaic medieval humanism, the human was the very centre of the universe. However, Hamlet is countering, attacking this humanist celebration of the earth and the human being as the centre of the universe. SELF-FASHION the 15th century Italian philosophers, specifically Pico Della Mirandola, popularised the idea of Neoplatonism according to which the human being is the most accomplished object of the universe because is the only one who is free. Whereas the rest of objects in the universe have a predetermined identity, the human being must create itself; that is what we call self-fashion. Greenblatt will denominate this ability as the “capacity for self-invention”. This introduces another idea: the human being is empty; that identity is a project. COUNTER-REFORMATION IDEOLOGY Hamlet's nihilistic attitude is taking a catholic turn. Catholicism took 2 turns: before the reformation and after the reformation. After the reformation, a movement started called “The Counter-reformation” was an ultra-catholic movement that reminded people of their misery of life in earth, a constant memento mori (reminder of death). Hamlet is a counter-reformation play: there is a constant celebration and reminder of death (which we also find in the work of Montaigne: reminder that we are going to die; and in the work of Heidegger: the human being is a being that is constantly destined towards death and must be reminded of his own mortality) Hamlet foreshadows this idea in his first soliloquy (the counter reformation reminder that we are going to die) which vanishes the optimistic Neoplatonism of early renaissance. NATURAL LIFE VS SOCIAL LIFE We must distinguish between natural life and social life: 1) Natural life is authentic and true and belongs to the realm of being. 2) Social life is artificial and false and belongs to the realm of Seeming. Where is it placed Hamlet? From the very beginning Hamlet is on the second (we are all born in the realm of seeming, what we may call the theatricalization of existence, since life in community is artificial. But he claims to be in the first type of life (natural, authentic). He cannot escape and return to a natural state since it is not possible. Once we enter the order of the symbolic, there is no way out (Lacan).