A few thoughts on "Hamlet"

Hamlet and Horatio in the Cemetery
by Eugene Delacroix (1798-1863)

I have very successfully been avoiding Hamlet.

This is partially because it is too big of a subject for a blog post and partly because I love it so much. I know I'm not going to be able to explain why and sound rational.

I wonder how many years people have dedicated to studying, interpreting, and performing Hamlet. I bet the total would be staggering.

Is it worth the obsession we have with it?

The Play-scene in Hamlet
by Daniel Maclise (1806-1870)

I think Hamlet is largely about the complexity of human nature. Hamlet, himself, is extremely complicated and the subject of wide and varied conjectures (both in the play and the four-hundred years since it was first performed).

This was a problem for Hamlet too. Most of his soliloquies center around his inability to understand himself or his actions.

It is astonishing that today we accept Hamlet as a hero and his mission commendable. While Hamlet is certainly a likable character and I consider it natural to sympathize with him, this doesn't mean we should agree with what he is doing.

Shakespeare wasn't trying to create a role model.

Revenge tragedies were extremely common in Elizabethan England and taking vengeance oneself was universally condemned in the theater. It could be possible Shakespeare would go against this pattern, however, Hamlet condemns himself with several of his speeches. (For instance his reasoning in Act III, Scene 3 is startling as well as his quiet dispatch of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and lack of remorse over Polonius.)

Hamlet and Ophelia
by Dante Gabriel Rosetti (1828-1882)

It could also be a indication of Shakespeare's own conclusion when the only characters standing are Horatio and Fortinbras.

Horatio is the moral stability of the play and Fortinbras is the only son who does not take revenge into his own hands.

(There is some debate here. Branagh's interpretation has Fortinbras storm Elsinore and then take the throne. I suppose the play can be taken this way, but the last we heard of Fortinbras he was obeying the counsel of his uncle. Personally I think it would be horribly unfair for Fortinbras to get away with revenge while Laertes and Hamlet are dead on the floor. I know that doesn't sound very scientific, but Branagh is the only thing I've seen/read that interprets it this way. It makes me suspect that he is a little to fond of shattering glass.)

Here is a beautiful paragraph from Brightest Heaven of Invention by Peter Leithart.

"Hamlet" thus presents a negative view of redemption. Denmark is a fallen world, needing to be set right. Instead of showing us the Redeemer, however, Shakespeare shows us the folly and danger of man's efforts at self-redemption and especially redemption through violence. Time out of joint is not set right by the wrath of men. It is not the grasping of the first Adam who secures redemption but the patient suffering of the Last Adam. Those who seek vengeance do not prosper. The crown usurped by the serpent is finally worn by one who rejected revenge. And the meek inherit the land."

I think Hamlet raises a lot of questions without answering all of them. I don't think Shakespeare was just having a bad day. He knew exactly what he was doing and exactly what questions he wanted us to think about.

I know it is rather cliche to love Hamlet, but I am quite certain I will not get tired of it until the day I die. :-) It is by far my favorite Shakespeare play. I believe it is one that can be studied for a very, very long time...

I know these thoughts are all very incomplete, but I look forward to hearing yours.

I shall cudgel my brains no more about it (for the moment).

Miss Pickwickian

Further Reading-

There is a lot of very interesting stuff on Hamlet. Here are a few links online I came across earlier. I'd love to hear about other books or essays you found helpful.

-This is an interesting post by Alan Vanneman. The contrast between nine of the film versions is very helpful and some of the discussion on the themes and the plot of the play are interesting.

Over all, Vanneman has little confidence in Shakespeare and the consistencies of the play, which seem to make him miss the point. This is sad, but watching him talk himself out of Hamlet's conclusions and unanswered questions is amusing.

(He is strongly opinionated and doesn't mind using some off color language to get his point across.)

-Hamlet Works has a lot of reading material on the play and characters with several thought provoking essays.

-Shakespeare Online has some interesting ideas here.

-Although Peter Leithart's most organized thoughts on Hamlet can be read in Brightest Heaven of Invention there are two later blog posts that I found particularly fascinating.

Hamlet: Act 1

More on Hamlet

Other thoughts on Hamlet can be seen here.

King Lear - William Shakespeare :-)

King Lear Admonishing Cordelia by Henri Fuseli

We were all set up to study King Lear in highschool, but something happened and we didn't. After reading Deep Comedy I knew I simply had to make it a priority. :-)

So I read it.

I tried to read it straight through without looking at any notes or criticism the first time round. Then I watched the latest movie version, reread the play, reread the portion in Deep Comedy that talks about King Lear, and then investigated some other interpretations. It was extremely interesting.

I'm really glad I worked through it on my own to start with.
I've never really done that with a Shakespeare play, and it was very good. And I didn't get too confused. :-) And I was able to figure who was bad and who was good all on my own! Yeah!

So, anyways...I really liked it. Even more than I thought I would.

Here's a few lines from the play

Edmund 1.2.118-128

"This is the excellent foppery of the world, that when we are sick in fortune-- often the surfeits of our own behavior-- we make guilty of our disasters the sun, the moon, the stars, as if we were villains on necessity, fools by heavenly compulsion, knaves, thieves, and teachers by spherical predominance, drunkards, liars, and adulterers by an enforced obedience of planetary influence; and all that we are evil in by a divine thrusting-on. An admirable evasion of whore-master man, to lay his goatish disposition to the charge of the star."

Albany 4.2.

"This shows you are above,

You justicers, that these our nether crimes

So speedily can venge! But, O poor Gloucester!

Lost he is other eye?"

Edgar 5.3

"The weight of this sad time we must obey;

Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.

The oldest hath borne most: we that are young

Shall never see so much, nor live so long."

Squibbing

Deep Comedy has some really interesting, concise stuff on this play, and even if there weren't a hundred other reasons to read it, you should for Leithart's interpretation of King Lear.

Here's a chunk...

"In an important sense, this pattern of frustrated optimism is a sign of the effect of deep comedy on tragic drama. The play is filled with the unrealized possibility of restoration, redemption, resurrection, in a way that an ancient tragedy could never be. Ancient tragedy took place in a world where resurrection was unknown, where death was the end, but the world of King Lear is potentially a far happier place. The fact that this potential is not realized enhances the feeling of waste."

I wish I could quote all he has to say, but instead here's a paragraph from the conclusion.

"If ancient comedy is haunted by the fear of death, Christian tragedy is haunted by the hope of resurrection. A tragic vision of life makes ancient comedy sad; real hope of a new life in the Christian comic view of things makes Christian tragedy all the more poignant."

Christian tragedy is haunted by the hope of resurrection. I love that.

So I guess I don't have anything very profound to say about King Lear...Not surprising, I'm afraid. But I certainly recommend reading it and thinking about it. :-)

I'd love to hear your thoughts and any good film recommendations. I've watched the 2009 Trevor Nunn/Ian McKellen version (review to come).

Thanks for reading,
Miss Pickwickian