Cohen Martin 1996

8/14/2019 Cohen Martin 1996

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cohen-martin-1996 1/125

ANABSTRACTOFTHETHESISOF

MartinCohenforthedegreeofMasterofArtsinEnglish

presentedonNovember28,1995.

Title:Hamlet'sDelay:AnAttemptAtSynthesis

Abstractapproved:

RobertB.Schwartz

ThestudyofthequestionofwhyShakespeare'sHamletdelayskilling

Claudiusinrevengeforhisfather'smurderisexaminedinlightofthemajor

criticaltheoriesfromneo-classicaltomodernscholarship.Anexpanded

treatmentoftheworksofFredsonBowers,EleanorProsser,BertramJoseph,

andRolandFrye,isprovidedtoexaminetheElizabethanbackgroundofsocial,

political,andreligiousvalues.Theexperienceofpassionaterevengeonthe

humanpsycheoftherevengerisaddressedthroughanancillaryapproach

providedthroughtheworksoftheFreudiananalystErnestJonesandthe

psychoanalytictheoryofAviErlich.Thepurposeofthisstudyistoreviewthe

relevanttheoriesofHamlet'sdelay,andtoapplythewisdomgleanedfromsuch

anexaminationsoastocreateasynthesisthatmaybestanswerthequestion

ofwhyHamletdelays.

Redacted for Privacy



Thisstudysuggeststhat,althoughthevariousandsometimes

contradictorycriticaltheoriesofHamlet'sdelayprovideinvaluableinsightsinto

thenatureandmeaningofShakespeare'shero,nooneexplanationcan

reasonablyaccountforHamlet'sdelaythroughouttheentireactionoftheplay.

ThisstudywilltrytoshowthatHamletisatheatricalcompositeexhibiting

variouscomplexhumandimensions,delayingthekillingofClaudiusatdifferent

times,fordifferentreasons,inhisprogresstowardself-knowledge.



CopyrightbyMartinCohen November28,1995 AllRightsReserved



Hamlet'sDelay:AnAttemptAtSynthesis

by

MartinCohen

AThesis

submittedto

OregonStateUniversity

inpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementforthe

degreeof

MasterofArts

PresentedNovember28,1995 CommencementJune1996



MasterofArtsthesisofMartinCohenpresentedonNovember28,1995

Approved:

MajorProfessor,representingEnglish

ChairofDepartmentofEnglish

anofGraduateSchool

Iunderstandthatmythesiswillbecomepartofthepermanentcollectionof

OregonStateUniversitylibraries.Mysignaturebelowauthorizesreleaseofmy

thesistoanyreaderuponrequest.

MartinCohen,Author







I

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Iwouldfirstliketothankmychildren,Laura,Alexander,andPeter,for

yourpatience.Itrulyregreteachminutethisprojecttookmeawayfromyou.

loveyouall.

IoweaspecialdebttoProfessorRobertB.Schwartzforhisscholarly

directionandcommitmenttohelpmeaccomplishmentmygoals.

IamalsodeeplygratefultoProfessorsRichmondBarbour,LisaEde;and

MarkMoorefortheencouragementandsupporttheygavethroughoutmy

challengingjourney.Theirguidanceandsuggestionshelpedtoshapemy

thoughtsandideasandresultedinmanyimprovementsinthestudy'scontent,

development,andstyle.

Manythanksalsotothefriendsthatwereinterestedenoughinme,and

theproject,toreadandcommentonthemanuscriptinvariousstagesofits

preparation.AspecialthankyoutoSamZelmanwhogaveunselfishlyofhis

timetoproofreadandeditmywork.



DEDICATION

ToMyFather,

whoat88yearsold

isstillteachingme

aboutcourage

andjusthowpreciouslifeis.



TABLEOFCONTENTS

Chapter Title Page

1INTRODUCTION

II THECRITICALPROBLEM:ABRIEFHISTORY 7

7Neo-ClassicalCriticism9RomanticCriticism

HistoricalCriticism 19

RecentCriticism24

33III THESYNTHESIS

CreatingtheContext:TheBackground38ofBlood-Revenge

RevengeTragedy:TheDramaticFormandHamlet 59

79

Shakespeare's"RevengeTragedy" 63

ATimetableforDelay 65

TheEnormityoftheTask67

Hamlet'sBurdenofDoubt 69

ConscienceVersusHonor 74

Hamlet'sIntellectualandSensitiveNature 76

APrince'sDilemma TheIronyofAction 81

WhatShakespeareKnew 88

94IV CONCLUSION

V AFTERWORD:HAMLET'SDELAYREVISITED 101

104ENDNOTES

114BIBLIOGRAPHY



Hamlet'sDelay:AnAttemptatSynthesis

Hamletisaname:hisspeechesandsayingsbuttheidlecoinageofthepoet'sbrain.Whatthen,aretheynotreal?Theyareasreal

asourownthoughts.Theirrealityisinthereader'smind.ItiswewhoareHamlet. (Haz/itt,1817)

ChapterI

INTRODUCTION

AsurveyoftheliteratureonShakespeare'sHam/etalertsustothegreat

attentionpaidbycriticstowhatistermedHamlet'sdelay.Whatisbeingreferred

toas"delay"areHamlet'sactionsfromthetimeHamlethearsthe Ghost's

commandsforrevengetotheplay'sending.Thequestionsthenare,"Does

Hamletdelay?"and,"Ifhedoesdelay,whydoesHamletdelay?"Althoughthe

beliefthatHamletdelaysisnottheonlyassumptionthatismadetoaccountfor

thedurationoftheaction,thisstudywilladdressthoseapproachestotheplay

thatpresumeso.

"Accordingtomostcritics,"claimsJohnW.Draper,'thecrucialquestion

inthetragedyisthereasonforHamlet'sdelayinavenginghisfather'smurder"

(165).ThisisechoedbyNormanN.HollandwhenhesummarizesFreud's

psychoanalyticalargumentforthedelay:"ThebasicissueoftheplayFreudand

Jonessay(andso,theypointout,domanyliterarycritics) is:WhydoesHamlet

delay?"(164).EdmundWilsondeclares,"Theproblemofdelayisa

commonplaceofHam/etcriticism"(201).Itwouldbefairtoassume thatto

understandwhyHamletdelaysistounderstandmuchofwhatShakespeare



3

mentionsmanyofthecriticalapproachesthatthismysteryhasproduced.

Thesehypothesesarecategorizedfromadenialofanydelayatalltothe"box

office"viewthatinorderfortheplaytohavea decentlength,themurdermust

bedelayeduntiltheend.Thethreemostimportantapproachesexplainingthe

delay,hesays,hingeon[1]somethinginHamlet'scharacterorconstitution

"whichisnotfittedforeffectiveactionofanykind,"[2]thetaskitself"whichis

suchastobealmostimpossibleofperformancebyanyone,"and[3]some

"specialfeature"ofthetaskthatmakesit"peculiarlydifficultorrepugnant"to

Hamlet'ssensitivityandtemperament(26).Itwouldseemanecessityto

accuratelyidentifythecauseofthedelayinShakespeare'shero,"forthevery

essenceoftragedyisadequacyofmotivationinthemaincourseoftheplot"

(Draper165)soastoseparateitfrommelodrama.

ThefirstapproachmentionedbyJoneswasmadefamousbyGoethein

hisoftenquoted"costlyvase"passagedescribingHamlet'sfragility.Thisviewof

theplayasatragedyoftheintellect,wherecharacterisdeterminedbyinner

motivations,waselaboratedbyColeridgeand Schlegel.TheysawHamletas

excessivelyreflectiveandthinking"tooprecisely"onthemattertocarryoutthe

event.Thesecondviewfindsthedifficultyofthetasksooverwhelmingthat

Hamletcanonlydelaythedeed.ThepositionespousedbyWerderpointstothe

externalbarrierstoaccomplishingthetaskthatwoulddiscourageeventhemost

determined.TherevengetaskasconceptualizedbyWerderrequiresHamlet

notmerelytoslayClaudius,butalsotobringhimtopublicjusticeforhiscrime.



4

ForJones,thecauseforHamlet'sdelayisinthethirdcategory,"namely

insomespecialfeatureofthetaskthatrendersitrepugnanttohim"(45).He

arguesthatHamletisneverunclearaboutwhathisdutyis,"aboutwhathe

oughttodo;theconflictinhismindrangedaboutthequestionwhyhecouldnot

bringhimselftodoit"(48).Itistheunconsciousnatureofthecauseofhis

repugnancetohistaskthatholdsthekeytoHamlet'sproblemofdelay.Jones

pointsoutHamlet'sownwordsinhisseventhsoliloquytothiseffect:"Idonot

know/WhyyetIlivetosaythisthing'stodo,/SithIhavecause,andwill,and

strength,andmeans/Todo't" (4.4.35-38).2HamletsuffersfromanOedipal

complexorfixation:theunconsciousdesiretokillhisfatherandmarryhis

mother.Jonesargues,"Hamlet'sadvocatessay hecannotdohisduty,his

detractorssayhewillnot,whereasthetruthis thathecannotwill"(53).

Hamlet'slackofwillpertainsonlytothekillingofhisuncleandis"duetoan

unconsciousrepulsionagainsttheactthatcannotbeperformed"(53).

Thisstudywillattempttobringtogetherwhatarebelievedtobethe

relevant,andoftenconflicting,interpretationsoftheplaythatpresumedelay

intoasynthesisthatmostcomprehensivelyaccounts forHamlet'sdelayin

takingrevengeforhisfather'smurder.Bystacking,combining,integrating,and

rejectingvarioustheoriesofwhyHamletdelayskillinghisuncle,whatmaybe

gainedisapolyphony,amoreharmoniousviewofHamlet'sproblem.Thiswill

involveplacingtheheroinanElizabethancontext,analyzingHamlet's

characterasafunctionofthatmilieu,alongwithhismethodofdealingwith,



5

whatisforhim,aparadoxicalanddangeroustask.Althoughitisneverpossible

toknowthepreciseintentionofanartistasitpertainstohisorhercreation,

criticsconstantlystrivetounderstandthemeaningconveyedbythework.

Coleridgeaskes,"WhatdidShakespearemeanwhenhedrewthecharacterof

Hamlet?"(qtd.inFurness154).Heanswersbyassertingthatartistsneverwrite

withoutfirsthavingadesign;andinspeakingofShakespeare'sdesignfor

Hamlethesays,"Mybeliefis,thathealwaysregardedhisstorybeforehe

begantowritemuchinthesamelightasapainterregardshiscanvasbefore

hebeginstopaint:asamerevehicleforhisthoughts,--asagrounduponwhich

hewastowork"(154).Itisonlybythechallenging,andattimesdissonanttask

ofdiscoveringShakespeare'sdesignthatwecanhopetounderstandthe

significanceofHamlet'sdelay.Atfirstglancethisprojectmayappearaselusive

asHamlet'sownabilitytounderstandwhyhedoesnottakehisrevenge;

however,byprovidinganadequateaccountofthecomplexitiesinvolvedinthe

humandynamic,itishopedthatthisstudywillbecomeaviablework.In

addition,thestudywillendeavortobringtogetherwhatmayseemtobe

contrasting,andattimescontradictorytheoriesintoacoherentwhole,that,in

itsgestalt,issomehowgreaterthanthesumofitsparts.

Thisstudysuggeststhat,althoughthedifferenttheoriesofHamlet's

delayprovideinvaluableinsightsintothenatureandmeaningofShakespeare's

hero,nooneexplanationcanreasonablyaccountforHamlet'sdelaythroughout

theentireactionoftheplay.ThestudywilltrytoshowthatHamlet isa



6

theatricalcompositeexhibitingvariouscomplexhumandimensions,andthathe

delaysthekillingofClaudiusatdifferenttimes,fordifferentreasons,inhis

progresstowardself-knowledge.



7

Hamlethimselfhascausedmoreofperplexityanddiscussionthan

anyothercharacterinthe'wholerangeofart.Thecharmofhis

mindandpersonamountstoanalmostuniversalfascination;andhehasbeenwelldescribedas"aconcentrationofallthe interests

thatbelongtohumanity."Ihavelearnedbyexperiencethatoneseemstounderstandhimbetterafteralittlestudythanaftera

(Hudson1870)reatdeal.

ChapterII

THECRITICALPROBLEM:ABRIEFHISTORY

Neo-ClassicalCriticism

It'sacuriousfactthatforthefirsthundredandthirty-fiveyearsafterthe

productionofShakespeare'sHam/et,thereisnomention ofHamlet'sdelayin

anyofthescholarlycriticismoftheplay.JohnJump,inhisessay"Hamlet,"tells

usthatSomeRemarksontheTragedyofHamlet,publishedanonymouslyin

1736andattributedtoThomasHanmer,isthefirstdetailedcriticalstudyofthe

playwhereananalysisofdelayispresent.interestingly,beforetheappearance

ofthispiece,"play-goersandreadersseemednottohavesuspectedHamletof

procrastinating"(147).Hanmersayspointedly:

HadHamletgonerighttowork,aswecouldsupposesucha

PrincetodoinparallelCircumstances,therewouldhavebeenanEndofourPlay.ThePoetthereforewasobligedtodelayhis

Hero'sRevenge:butthenheshouldhavecontrivedsomegood

Reasonforit. (qtd.inJump147-48)

Seventeenth-centuryscholarlycriticismviewedHamletas"abitterlyeloquent

andprincelyrevenger"(Jump147).Itwasinthe middleoftheeighteenth

centurythatcriticsascribedtohim"agreatdelicacyandamoremelancholy



8

temperament,"buteventheydidnotconsiderhimtobe"lackingininitiativeand

resolution"(147).TakingHanmer'slead,scholarsofthelateeighteenth-century

begantospeculateaboutthe"goodReason"Shakespearemayhave

"contrived"forHamlet'sdelay.Theirsearchresultedindiscoveriesinavariety

ofplaces.

AmongtheNeo-Classicalcritics,SamuelJohnsoncouldserveasan

excellentexampleofhisperiod'sapproachtoHamlet.Johnsonisprimarily

concernedwiththeactionsofthecharacterandthemoralimplicationsofthose

actions.JohnsonsaysofHamlet,"IfthedramasofShakespeareweretobe

characterized,eachbytheparticularexcellencewhichdistinguishesitfromthe

rest,wemustallowthetragedyofHamletthepraiseofvariety.The incidents

aresonumerous,thatthearguementoftheplaywouldmakealongtale"

('EndnotetoHamlet"7).HepointsoutthatHamletdoeslittlethroughoutthe

playtodirecthisrevenge,andseeshimasan"instrument,"ratherthanan

"agent,"ofhisfate.HegoesontosaythatevenafterHamletisconvinced that

theKingisguiltyofkillinghisfather,"hemakesnoattemptto punishhim,and

hisdeathisatlastaffectedbyanincidentwhichHamlethasnopartin

producing"(JohnsononShakespeare1011).Johnsonalsocommentsonthe

theseemingcontradictionbetweenHamlet'snoblecharacterandhisdesireto

seeClaudius'soul"damn'dandblackashell"intheprayerscene:"This

speech,inwhichHamlet,representedasavirtouscharacter,isnotcontentwith

takingbloodforblood,butcontrivesdamnationforthemanthathewould



9

punish,istoohorribletobereadortobeuttered"(990).Alongwithitspraise

fortheemotionaldiversityandtheatricalityofShakespeare'splay,thiswasa

periodthatraisedtheissueoftheplaywright'sfailuretogiveanexplanationfor

Hamlet'sdelay,whichwouldoccupycriticalthoughtforthenexthundredand

fiftyyears.

RomanticCriticism

Thecrucialquestion,then,posedintheeighteenth-centuryand

dominatingnineteenth-centurycriticismofHamletwas,"WhydoesHamletdelay

killingClaudius?"Theanswerforcriticsinthisperiodcamefromtheexploration

oftheinnerworldofHamlet'spersonality.GoethefounditinHamlet'sdelicate

sensibility,presentingwhathasbeensubsequentlylookeduponasa

sentimentalimageof"[a]beautiful,pure,nobleandmostmoralnature,without

thestrengthofnervewhichmakesthehero,[that]sinksbeneathaburden

whichitcanneitherbearnorthrowoff"(qtd.inFurness273),subjectedtoan

intolerablefate.Hisfamousdescription,setdowninhisautobiographicalnovel

WilhelmMeister'sApprenticeship(1796),followsHamlet's:

ThetimeisoutofJoint:0cursedspite,

ThateverIwasborntosetitright!

Inthesewords,Iimagine,willbefoundthekeytoHamlet's procedure.TomeitisclearthatShakespearemeant,inthepresentcase,torepresenttheeffectsofagreatactionlaidupona

soulunfitfortheperformanceofit.Inthisviewthewholepiece

seemstometobecomposed.Thereisanoaktree plantedina

costlyvase,whichshouldhavebornonlythepleasantflowersin

itsbosom;therootsexpand,thejarisshivered. (qtd.inFurness

15)



11

[Hamlet's] character" (Quinn 16). Some of Coleridge's better known remarks

describe Hamlet as possessing "a great, an almostenormousintellectual

activity,andaproportionateaversiontorealactionconsequentuponit,"

representingthe"paralyzedintellectual"whocannotcarryforthhisrevengedue

tobeingexcessivelyreflectiveand"thinkingtoopreciselyontheevent"(qtd.in

Furness152-55).

InalettertoaMrs.Clarkson (1812),HenryCrabbRobinsonrelates

Coleridge'sstatedmoralofHamlet "Actionisthegreatendofall.Nointellect,

howevergrand,isvaluableifitdrawsusfromactionandleadsustothinktill

thetimeofactionispassedbyandwecan donothing."Robinsonpointedly

. . 'No,'saidI, 'itisadds,"Somebodysaidtome,Thisisa satireonhimself.".

anelegy"(16-17). Coleridgehimselfconfessed,"IhaveasmackofHamlet

myself,ifImaysayso,"andsharedwiththephilosopherprinceofDenmark

whatPralayKumarDebreferstoas"acommunityofspirit"(73).Thisbringsto

mindT.S.Eliot'sremarkthatColeridge"madeofHamletaColeridge"(Selected

Essays121).AccusedbyEliotofprojectinghisowncreativeimagination(rather

thanShakespeare's)ontothesubject,orattheveryleast,ofreadingmore into

thecharacterofHamletthanthetextwarrants,Coleridgeisplacedamong

thosecriticswhose"mindsoftenfindinHamletavicariousexistencefortheir

ownartisticrealization.. . themostmisleadingkind[ofcriticism]possible"(121).

Onemaytakethesestatementsas"evidenceoftheprevalentromanticstance

. ."(Deb73).(italicsmine)ofdiscoveringapersonalequationinaworkofart.



12

WithduerespecttoEliot,itisnotdifficulttorecognizethesimilarityof

temperamentandemotionalitybetweentheromanticartistandthepartof

Hamlet'spersonalitythatcontemplatedanetherealuniverse. Debdescribesthe

enormouslycomplexinfluencesexertedontheromanticartistoriginatingin"his

. . . liv[ing]inanwarenessofauniversealienatedfromhuman glories

unstableimaginativesphere,alonely,diminished,fallen angel,evolvinganart

ofstruggleandanguishinpursuitofatimelessideal"(74).Eliotregards

Coleridgeasa"realcorrupter,"asupplierofopinionorfancyratherthanfacts,

andraisesthequestionwhetherColeridge'scriticism ofHamletwas"anhonest

inquiryasfarasthedatapermit,"or"anattempttopresentColeridgeinan

attractivecostume?"("FunctionofCriticism"21-22).Whetheronecandevisea

truetesttoresolvesucharhetoricalstanceisopento conjecture,whatcanbe

emphasizedisthatColeridgehadmadeaconsistentattempttoanalyze

Hamlet'sinternalworld.WhatColeridgedidcloakhimselfwithwas Hamlet's

self-created,subjectiveworldofintellectualbrooding,vividimaginings,and

uncompromisingidealismthatalsocharacterizedthesensibility oftheromantic

artist.ThiswriterisnotconvincedthatColeridge'scriticismofHamletissimply

acaseofprojectinghiscreative imaginings,asEliotinsists,ontothecharacter

ofHamlet,ratherthanrevealingaspiritualcamaraderieortrueespritdecorps.

Inanycase,themoreimportantpointisthathereisyet anotherinstanceofan

influentialcriticaltheoryprovidingadditionalinsightintothemeaningof

Shakespear'shero,butnotaccountingforHamlet'sdelayinitsentirety.



13

Coleridge has been criticized for following a too narrow psychological path,

where Hamlet's entire motivation is directed from his inner life. According to this

view, Coleridge gives little consideration to how external events in the play

affectHamlet'sinternalmotivation,whichresultsinthe"reductioadabsurdum

ofRomanticcriticism:thePrinceofDenmarkwithoutHamlet'(Quinn17).

KarlWerder,inTheHeartofHamlet'sMystery(1875),sawHamlet's

difficultyinperforminghisdutiesattheoppositeextremefromcharacter

analysis.Heviewedhimasamancapableofdoinghisduty,but inhibitedby

causesexternaltohimself.Hamlet,inWerder'sview,doesallthatcanbe

expectedofarevenge-herotoaccomplishanimpossibletask.Speakingof

Hamlet'schallenge,Werderremarks,"Whetherornothewasnaturallycapable

ofdoingitisaquestionaltogetherimpertinent.Foritsimplywasnotpossible,

andthisforreasonsentirelyobjective.Thesituationofthings,theforceof

circumstances,thenatureofhistask,directlyforbidit . . ."(qtd.inFurness

354).WerderbelievesitwouldbeimpossibleforHamlettojustifyhisdeedto

thecourtandpeopleonthewordofaghost.Wouldtherenot havebeenan

uprising"atonceagainstHamlet,"Werderasks,"asthemostshamefuland

impudentofliarsandcriminals,who,togratifyhisownambition, hadwholly

withoutproof,chargedanother,theKing,withtheworstofcrimes,thathemight

committhesamecrimehimself?"(356).

Toaccountforthedelay,WerderseesHamlet's"real"taskas"nottocrushthe

Kingatonce,--hecouldcommitnogreaterblunder--buttobringhimto



14

confession,tounmaskandconvicthim:thisishisfirst,nearest, inevitableduty"

(357).Hegoesontoexplainthat

[w]hatHamlethasnearestatheart,aftertheGhostappearedtohim,isnotthedeath,but,onthecontrary,thelife,of theKing,

henceforthasdeartohimashisownlife!Thesetwolivesare the

onlymeanswherebyhistaskistobeaccomplished.Nowthathe

knowsthecrime,nowthatheistopunishit,nothingcouldhappen

tohimworsethnthttheKingshoulddie,unexposed,ndso

escapejustice! . . . Toatragicalrevengethereisnecessary,punishment,topunishmentjustice,andtojusticethevindicationof

itbeforetheworld.Andtherefore,Hamlet'saimisnotthecrown,

norisithisfirstdutytokilltheKing:buthistaskistojustlypunish

themurdererofhisfather,unassailableasthemurdererisintheeyeoftheworld,andtosatisfytheDanesoftherighteousnessof

thisprocedure.Thisisthepoint.(357-58)

HamletwasseennotastheprocrastinatorofGoetheandColeridge,butrather

adynamicherowiththeimpossibletaskofbringingthemurderertojustice.

QuinncallsWerder'swork"remarkableinitsanticipationofaprominent

twentieth-centuryviewoftheproblemofHamlet'sdelay"(19).

OneofthemostprominentscholarsofShakespeareancriticisminboth

thenineteenthandtwentiethcenturieswasA.C.Bradley.Hiscomprehensive

criticaltreatmentofHamletinShakespeareanTragedy(1904)tracesthe

historicalstagecriticismoftheplay,analysesthecharactersofClaudius,

Gertrude,andOpheliaaswellasHamlet'scharacter,andpresentsatheoryfor

Hamlet'sdelaygroundedinmelancholicdisgustandapathyrenderinghim

incapableofaction.

InhisdiscussionofShakespeare'stragicperiod,BradleyrelatesJulius

CaesartoHamlet"BothBrutusandHamletarehighlyintellectualbynatureand



15

reflectivebyhabit"(63).Callingthem"good"menwho,whenplacedin"critical

circumstances,"exhibit"asensitiveandalmostpainfulanxietytodoright"(63),

hesaysthattheirfailuretodealsuccessfullywiththeirrespectivesituationsis

ratherduetotheir"intellectualnatureandreflectivehabitthanwithanyyielding

topassion"(82).Thus,bothplaysmaybeconsidered"tragediesofthought,"

whereasBradleyattributesthetragicfailuresofLear,Timon,Macbeth,Antony,

andCoriolanustoboutsof"passion."Bradleycontendsthatmoralevil"isnot

sointentlyscrutinisedorsofullydisplayed" inthetwoearlierworks(64).

Shakespearedoesnotoccupyhimselfwiththemoreextremeformofevil,

which"assumesshapeswhichinspirenotmeresadnessorrepulsionbuthorror

anddismay"(83),whichheisdirectedbyinOthello,KingLear,andMacbeth.

HemakesthepointthatitisHamlet'scharacterthatisthecauseofthedelay.

HesaysthatLaertesandFortinbras,bothinparallelsituationsofhavingtheir

fathersslain,andbothbentonrevenge,showagreatcontrastincharacterto

Hamlet:"ForbothFortinbrasandLeartespossessinabundancetheveryquality

whichtheheroseemstolack,sothat,asweread,wearetemptedtoexclaim

thateitherofthemwouldhaveaccomplishedHamlet'staskinaday"(71).4

Intracinghistoricalstagecriticism,Bradleysaysthatmostspectators

haveneverquestionedHamlet'scharacterorwhatcausedhimtodelay.Bradley

reiteratesthatitwasnotuntil1730thatHanmerremarkedthat"thereappears

noreasonatallinnaturewhythisyoungprincedidnotput theusurpertodeath

assoonaspossible"(qtd.inBradley71).Bradleycounters,"[B]utitdoesnot



16

evencross[Hanmer's]mindthatthisapparent'absurdity'isoddandmight

possiblybeduetosomedesignofthepoet"(71).Hanmerexplainedthe

"absurdity"bysayingthatifHamletfollowedhisnature,theplaywouldhave

endedatthebeginning.Bradleypointsoutthat"Johnson,inlikemanner,

noticedthat'Hamletis,throughthewholepiece,ratheraninstrumentthanan

agent,'butitdoesnotoccurtohimthatthispeculiarcircumstancecanbe

anythingbutadefeatinShakespeare'smanagementoftheplot"(72).Rejecting

theobviouscriticismofShakespeare'sstage-craft,butmorso,thedismissalby

criticsoftheimportanceofcharacter,BradleyreferstoHenryMackenzie,the

authorofTheManofFeeling(1780),asthefirstcritictoaimatdiscerning

Shakespeare'sintention:"Weseeaman,"Mackenziewrote,"whoinother

circumstanceswouldhaveexercisedallthemoralandsocialvirtues,placedin

asituationinwhicheventheamiablequalitiesofhismindservebutto

aggravatehisdistressandtoperplexhisconduct"(qtd.inBradley72).5

ForBradleythecentralquestionofdelaycanbeattributedtoHamlet's

character.BradleyespousesthetheorythatHamlet,shakenbyhismother's

indiscretionsbysoquicklyforsakinghisfather'smemoryandhastilymarrying

hisuncle,hadlapsedinto"aboundlesswearinessandasicklongingfordeath"

(96).Heisalreadystrickenwithadisablingmaladyevenbeforeheis

commandedbytheGhosttokillClaudius.Hamletisafflictedwithaconditionof

melancholicapathy,orwhatmodernpsychiatrymightlabelafullblown clinical

depressionthatrendershimincapableoftakingaction.AccordingtoBradley,



17

Hamlet'sfearsthattheGhostmaybeanevilspecter,andhisreligiousreasons

forrefusingtokillhisuncleatprayers,arenomorethanrationalizations.

Hamlet,himself,doesnotunderstandwhyhedelays,andhecontinuallytriesto

justifytohimselfwhyhedoesnotact.AlthoughBradleyhasbeenaccusedof

over-burdeningtheconceptofcharacter,andofnotconsideringElizabethan

thoughtorShakespeare'sstage,"itisclearthatherepresentsthelastgreat,

possiblythegreatest,expressionofthenineteenth-centuryviewofShakespeare

asthemastercreatorofcharacter"(Quinn23).

HamletdoescometowhatNietzschetermed"understanding,"which

leadstoarecognitionoftheabsurdityofhisattempttosetthingsright.

Nietzsche'sinterestinginsightthatDionysiacmanresemblesHamletin

principle,asthe"dark,mysterious,irrationalagentofthewill"(Quinn20),

appearsinhisessayontheoriginsandnatureofGreektragedy,TheBirthof

Tragedy(1872).Hesays,

bothhavelookeddeeplyintothenatureofthings,theyhaveunderstoodandnowareloathtoact.Theyrealizethatnoactionoftheirscanworkanychangeintheeternalconditionofthings,andtheyregardtheimputationasludicrousordebasingthattheyshouldsetrightthetimewhichisoutofjoint.Understandingkillsaction,forinordertoactwerequiretheveilofillusion;suchis

Hamlet'sdoctrine,nottobeconfoundedwiththecheapwisdomofJohn-a-Dreams,whothroughtoomuchreflection,asitwereasurplusofpossibilities,neverarrivesataction.What,bothinthecaseofHamletandofDionysiacman,overbalancesanymotiveleadingtoaction,isnotreflectionbutunderstanding,theapprehensionoftruthanditsterror. (51-52)

Thisattainmentof"truth,"orseeingthroughthe"veilofillusion,"isan

intellectualdoctrineinoppositiontoSchegel'sRomanticversion.InNietzche's



18

view,Hamletisnolongerencumberedbyhisintellectualwanderings(hisveil

lifted)whichservedtodelayhiskillingClaudiusSchlegelholdingthatHamlet

neverarrivesatactionbecauseheisendlesslyconsumedbyanintellectual

searchforunderstanding.AccordingtoNietzsche,itistheveryintellectualact

ofunderstanding(thattakingactionintheworldispointless)thatkeepsHamlet

fromhisrevenge.Hamletexpresseshisattainmentoftruthbyunmaskinghis

"veilofillusion"toHoratioinhis"divinegrace"speechwhenhesays,"There'sa

divinitythatshapesourends,/Rough-hewthemhowwewill--"(5.1.9-10).

HamletcomestounderstandthatnoactionhecantakewillchangeGod's

eternalplan.Intheend,HamletchoosestobeGod'sagent,acceptingHis

providence,andwaitsinreadinessfordivineguidancetoaccomplishhis

revenge.

IncontrasttoNietzche,JosephQuincyAdams,inhiseditionofHamlet

(1929),characterizesHamletasanidealistwhodoesnotunderstandoraccept

theshortcomingsofhumankind.Hamlet,inAdam'sview,becomesdisillusioned

withthehumanconditionand,asaresult,becomesmelancholicandthus

unabletoact.Adamsholdsthat"Shakespearelaysheavyemphasisonthe

bindingnatureofrevenge;itisaduty,asacredobligation"(211).Hegoesonto

definepreciselywhatrenderstheplay'sherohelplessinthefaceofaction:

"Hamletisovercomewithanuttersicknessofsoulthatmakesalleffort

impossibleforhim.. . . Inotherwords,heisagainsinkingintomelancholia"

(218-19).ItisHamlet'smentaldisease,withitsgeneralconditionofdepression,



19

thatcauseshimgreatdifficultymakingadecisionandsummoningtheenergyto

acttoaccomplishhistask.WecanseemuchofBradley'stheoryofmelancholy

asthecauseofHamlet'sdelayinAdams'work,butAdamsexpandsand refines

Bradley'sthesis.ForAdams,theclimaxoftheplaycomesintheclosetscene

markingthebeginningofHamlet'srecoveryfrommelancholia.Althoughhis

recoverycomestoolatetosavehislife,hediesasoldier'sdeathinpursuit ofa

noblecause.

HistoricalCriticism

Thenineteenth-centurypreoccupationwiththecriticalquestion,"Why

doesHamletdelaykillingClaudius?"wasagainbeingaddressedinthe

twentieth-century,thistimebyasetofcriticsusingan"historical"methodof

analysis.Simplyaskingthequestion,ofcourse,presupposesthatHamlet

delays,thathe,himself,isthecauseofthedelay,andthatheshouldkill

Claudiusinthefirstplace.

Aleadingcriticoftheperiod,E.E.Stoll,challengedtheassumptionof

delayasacreationoftheRomanticcriticsandtheirentirecriticalapproachto

theplay.HeaccusedthemofseparatingHamletfromtheplayand

Shakespeare'sworkfromitscontemporaries.InhisHam/etAnHistoricaland

ComparativeStudy(1919),heproposesstudying"thetechnique,construction,

situations,characters,andsentimentsoftheplayinthelightofother playsin

whichconstructions,situations,characters,andsentimentsappear"(1).Stoll



21

implyareinterpretedinaccordancewiththemeaningwhichtheycanbeshown

tohavehadforhiscontemporaries"(11).JosephcontendsthatHamlet'sdelay

inkillinghisuncle,hisentiremannerofbehaviorasaRenaissanceprince,

wouldhavebeenacceptabletoanElizabethanaudience.Hamlet'sdistressed

mentalstate,hismelancholyatthebeginningoftheplay,isanormalreaction

to"theparticularlyrepulsiveformwhichevilhastakeninDenmarkwitha

hypocriteasKing,andincestcelebratedasholymatrimony,withnovoice

raisedinprotest,butfromallsidesapprobation"(103).TheElizabethan

audience,inJoseph'sview,wouldhaveconsideredthegrievingofabereaved

son,cheatedofhisthrone,anddishonoredbyamotherhedearlyloved,a

normalreactionandunderstandablymelancholic.Josephsays,"Hereareno

seedsofhesitancy,thisisnotthebreedinggroundofanindecisionandinability

torevenge"(104).Heconcludesthatthemoreoneknowsaboutand

understandstheattitudesandvaluesofthecivilizationoutofwhich

Shakespearecomes,thebetterthepossibilityofunderstandingHamletandthe

appearanceofdelay.

Anunusual,andhighlyinterestingapproachtodelayinHamletwas

takenbyG.R.Elliot,inScourgeandMinisterAStudyofHamletasTragedyof

RevengefulnessandJustice(1951).AlsospeakingintermsofanElizabethan

Hamlet,ElliotsawtheembodimentofRenaissanceconscienceasthecauseof

Hamlet'sdelay.ElliotgoesevenfurtherseeingHamletandClaudiusequally

delayingthedeathoftheotherwhichresultsineachother'sdemise. ThePlay



22

within-the-playconfirmedClaudius'guiltinHamlet'seyes,andconvinced

ClaudiusthatHamletknewhekilledhisfather.Elliotmaintainsthat"bothmen

hadbeensummonedbytheiroppositefatestotakedefinitiveaction;andboth

hadfailedtodoso"(xvi).Hegoesontosaythattheunderlyingmotives for

bothcharacters'delays"[are]anungodlybuttruehumanmixtureofambitious

prideandobscureconscience"(xviii).HamletrecoilsfromkillingClaudius

becauseofhis"respectforthekingship. . .[that]makeshimhatetodowhathis

unclehasdone:assassinatethesovereignoftherealm"(xxii).Accordingto

Elliot,Hamletadmits"theessentialcauseofhisprocrastinationhasallalong

been'conscience'(5.2.68). . . [b]uthis'mind'seye'(1.2.185),otherwiseso

keen,wasblindedtothatawebyhisproud,personal,revengefulhatredofthe

newincumbentofthatoffice"(xxiii).Elliotmakesadistinctionbetween"black,

faltering,revengefulness"(evidentintheprayerscene)and"righteousrevenge"

(HamletassumingthemoralpostureasGod'sministerintheduellingscenefor

thetaskofexecutingtheking).AsElliotsoaptlyputsit:"In thefirstact

Claudiuscertainlydeservestobekilled;butonlyinthelastactdoesHamlet

deservetokillhim"(xxv).AlthoughHamlet'sprideisthesourceofhisproblem

throughouttheplay,hefinallyachievesthemind-settokillthekingin'perfect

conscience'asanactofimpersonaljustice,takinghis"punishment"as

heaven's"scourgeandminister."ElliotdisagreeswithBradley'sconceptthatthe

playisacharacterstudyandclaimed,rather,thatitembodiesRenaissance

Christianhumanisticthought.



23

Inherjustificationforthehistoricalapproach,HelenGardner,inThe

BusinessofCriticism(1959),tookthepositionthatalthoughElizabethans

soundlycondemned"murder[as]unethicalandprivaterevengesinful"(37),the

religiouspoliticsofpreservingtheProtestantreignofElizabethtookprecedence

overGod'sprerogative.SheviewsHamletasamanof"intellectualintegrityand

moralsensibility"(37),buthasdifficultyfindingconsistencybetweenthefactof

Hamlet'sdelayandtheplay'sendingwhichstronglysuggeststhatHamlet

departedwell,successfullysettlinghisscore.Toresolvethisdilemma,Gardner

fallsbackonthehistoricalfactthatShakespearedidnotinventtheplotof

Hamlet.ShegoesontosaythatShakespeare,himself,hadtodealwithwhat

BradleypointedoutasHamlet's"makingamessofthings,"aswellasthe

"satisfaction"Johnsonbelievedtheaudiencefeelsattheendoftheplay(40).

GardnerholdsthatthevillainintheRenaissancerevengetragediesistheagent

ofhisowndestructionaswellastheinitiatoroftheaction.Althoughthehero-

revengeriscastintheroleofwaitingfortheopportunity hisvictimwill

unintentionallyprovide,thisdoesnotanswerthequestion"WhydoesHamlet

delay?"Hamletistypicaloftheconventionalrevengeherointhathehashis

waitingrole,but"Hamlet'sagonyofmindandindecisionarepreciselythethings

whichdifferentiatehimfrom. . . theconsciencelessandtreacherousvillain"(46)

oftheblood-revengetragedy.



25

theBradieyanmethodofanalyzingthecharacterofHamletbylookingintohis

mindtoexplainhisbehavior.Hamlet,inBradley'sview,disgustedwiththe

corruptionoftheworld,theliesandbetrayalsheexperiencesbytheoneshe

lovesmost,suffersaparalysisofwilltoact.Jonesarguedthatitisthe

unconsciousnatureofthetaskthatisrepugnanttohim,manifestingitselfin

theformofanOedipalcomplex.Theinabilityofthewilltoact,in Jones'view,is

thekeytoHamlet'sdelay.Jones'conclusion,albeitdeveloped fromthe

perspectiveofaprofessionalpsychoanalyst,bearsacloseresemblancetothe

paralysisofwillbroughtonbytheperceiveddisgustandapathydescribedby

Bradley'sconceptionofHamlet'ssuffering.

AnotherimportantpsychoanalyticstudyofHamlet'sdelayevaluated

Jones'workbuttookadifferentdirectionfocusingonHamlet'ssearchfora

strongfatherfigure.AviErlichinHamlet'sAbsentFather(1977)maintainsthat

Hamlet'sfatherwas,forthemostpart,anabsentparent,bothphysicallyand

emotionally,throughoutHamlet'slife,requiringHamlettosearchforastrong

fatherfigurewithwhomtoidentify.ErlichcontendsthatFreud'sattributingan

OedipalcomplextoHamlet,resultinginHamlet'sidentificationwithClaudius,is

anunsatisfactoryinterpretationofHamlet'sdelayinkillinghisuncle.Erlich

arguesthatHamlet'sdilemmaderivesfromhimlackingastrongfatherinhis

life,ratherthanfromanyunconsciouswishtokillthatfather.Erlich furthertries

toshowthatHamletwantshisfatherbackmorethan hewantstohavebeen

theonewhokilledhim,thatheisunabletoacknowledgethis becauseitmeans



26

acceptingthathisfatherwasfinallyweakandvictimized.Ontheconscious

level,Hamletmustpretendthathisfatherwasstrongandgood,a"radiant

angel,"butontheunconsciouslevelhehasincorporatedanimageofaweak

fatherwho"stealsaway."Thisresultsinambivalence,indecision,andasecret

wishthathisfatherkillClaudiushimselfandtherebygivehissonaclear model

ofpurposefulactionintheworld(23).

ErlichpointsoutthatmostliteraryandpsychoanalyticcriticsseeHamlet's

delayingthekillingofClaudiusintheprayersceneassimplyanother

convenientrationalization.Hecountersthisargumentbyassertingthatby

Hamlet'sdelayingClaudius'sdeathhecan"fantasize"asituationwherebyhe

couldtrustGodtodoHiswork:"Hamletdoesnotactintheprayerscene,I

think,becauseheunconsciouslywantshisfathertoact.Hedesperatelyneeds

astrongfatherwho,likehispunitiveGod,willdamnClaudiustohell"(31).

Anearlierwork,less"scientific"butequallycomprehensiveinits

descriptionofthecomplexityofhumannatureandtheelusivecharacterof

HamletisWhatHappensinHam/et(1936)byDoverWilson.Thestudy

describesagenuinelyElizabethanHamlet.WilsonviewsHamletasafictitious

characterandnotarealperson.Itisalsohistoricalinthatheseesthe play

fromtheperspectiveoftheElizabethanaudience.Wilsonsuppliesthereader

withabundantdetailofwhatlifewaslikeforanElizabethan,remindingushow

intenselyawareShakespeare'saudiencewouldhavebeenofClaudiususurping

thecrown,Gertrudebeingguiltyofincest,andthattheGhost mightbeanevil



27

spirittemptingHamlettohisdestruction.Byinsistingupon theambiguous

positionoftheghost"attheendofthefirstact,the Elizabethanaudiencecould

nomorebecertainofthehonestyofthe Ghost . . . thantheperplexedhero

himself"(84).Wilsonbringsourattentiontotheexternaldifficultiesconfronting

Hamletandarguesthathisdelayisprudentuptoapoint.Theissueof

madness["Hamletassumesmadnessbecausehecannothelpit."(92)]was

seenbyWilsonasareasonfordelayandwould"beacceptedasaconvenient

disguisewhilehewasmaturinghisplans"(92).WilsonholdsthatShakespeare

wantsustofeelthatHamletis,ontheonehand,a simpleprocrastinatorwhois

tobeheldaccountableforshirkinghisduty,whileatthesametime,he

contendedthatthissameprocrastination"isduetothedistemper,isinfactpart

ofit"(224).Wilson'semphasisonexternalfactorsplacedinHamlet'spath,and

hisownprocrastination,arepresentedinthelightoftheElizabethanstage.

The"newhistoricism"approachtocriticism,asitrelatestoRenaissance

literature,hasarisenasrecentlyasthe1970sinEngland,andhasbroughta

newvigorandenthusiasmtoliterarydiscourse.AccordingtoJonathan

DollimoreandAlanSinfield,leadingspokesmenforthenewhistoricism

movement,"acombinationofhistoricalcontext,theoreticalmethod,political

commitmentandtextualanalysisoffersthestrongestchallenge"tothestudyof

theliterarytextinhistoricalcontext(vii).Theygoontosay

[a]playbyShakespeareisrelatedtothecontextsofitsproduction

totheeconomicandpoliticalsystemof Elizabethanand

JacobeanEnglandandtotheparticularinstitutionsofcultural

production(thecourt,patronage,theatre,education, thechurch).



29

thatwemayhavecomefull-circlefromSomeRemarksontheTragedyof

Hamlet(1736)inthatthemostrecentscholarlydiscussionofHamlet'sdelayis

conspicuousbyitsabsence.

AnenormousamountofcriticismhasbeenwrittenonwhyHamletdelays

killinghisuncle,andnosinglestudyorreviewwillbeabletopresentan

exhaustivelistorsummary.However,anyattempttoreviewthecriticalhistory

ofHamlet'sdelaywouldneedtoincludeatleastthosestudiesthatexhibitthe

majortrendsandtheoriesoftheseventeenththroughthetwentiethcenturies.

Suchareviewneedstobeginwiththefirstessaythatdealtcriticallywiththe

playwhichwaspublishedanonymously(1736)andattributedtoThomas

Hanmer,sinceitwasevidentlythefirststudytobringHamlet'sdelaytothe

attentionoftheplay-goerandscholar.Eighteenth-centuryscholarlycriticism

generallyviewedHamletasanhonorableandprincelyrevenger.Dr.Johnson

hadgreatadmirationforHamlet,butalsogravereservationsintermsofneo

classicalprinciplesofstructureandpoeticjustice.Therewaspraiseforthe

play'svarietyandtheatricality,butitwasalsoaperiodthatfailedtoprovidean

answerforHamlet'sdelayinkillingtheKing.

Thenineteenth-centuryRomanticcriticsassumedthatHamlet'sdelay

wasconsistentwithhischaracter.Itwasanageofexplorationoftheinner

worldofpersonalityandlay-analysis.Itmadeitsmostprominentmarkwith

Goethe'senduringpictureofHamletasadelicatevase,andwithColeridge's



30

mostinfluentialviewofHamletasaparalyzedintellectual,aviewthathad

lastedwellintoourowntime.AlthoughColeridge,Goethe,andSchlegel

dominatednineteenth-centurythoughtwithinterpretationsinwhichcharacter

andactionaredeterminedbyinnermotivation,thereweredissentingvoices.

WerdertooktheoppositeviewarguingthatHamlet'sdelaywasduetoexternal

eventsratherthanfrominternalones.HesawHamlet'staskasnotmerely

revenginghisfatherbutbringinghisfather'smurderertopublicjustice.Bradley

pointedouttheweaknessesinalltheseviewsandconceptualizedoneofhis

ownbasedonapsychologicalmaladyverynearourmoderndefinitionofclinical

depression.BradleysawHamletafflictedwithaprofoundmelancholicdisgust

andapathybroughtonbyhismother'shastymarriagetohisuncle.Nietzsche's

comparisonofHamlettoDionysiacman,inhisessayontheoriginsandnature

ofGreektragedy,allowedhimtoemphasizethewaybothlookdeeplyintothe

natureofthingsandasaresultofunderstandingtruthanditsterror,theyare

loathtoact.ThepsychologicalnatureofHamlet's"understanding,"thatno

actionhecantakewillchangeGod'seternalplan,isexploredinthe inner

recessesofman'spsyche.WesawmuchofBradley'stheoriesintheworkof

AdamswhocharacterizesHamletasanidealistwhobecomessodisillusioned

withthehumanconditionhecannotact.

Bradley'sexplorationoftheinnermantolocatethecauseforHamlet's

delay,whichbecamesoinfluentialwithhiscontemporaries,metnotable

oppositionfromthoseproponentsofhistoricalcriticism.Thebasicassumptions



31

of the Romantic period challenged by Stoll, Joseph, Elliot, arid Gardner were

the abstracting of the character of Hamlet into an independent existence

separate from the play and the conversion of Elizabethan stage conventions

intopsychologicalinsightsonthepartoftheplay'scharacters.Thehistorical

perspectiveacceptedHamlet'sdelayaspartofthetrappings,adramatic

device,oftheElizabethanrevengetragedyandcontrolledbythecodesand

conventionsofthatage.ContrarytothebeliefsofRomanticcritics,

psychologicalmotivationwasnotaviablereasonforHamlet'sdelay,anddelay

wasnotaproblemfortheaudiencecaughtupin theswiftactionoftheplay.

MorerecentcritcismsawtheBradleyanviewofcharacteranalysistaken

toitsextreme:apsychoanalyticalinterpretation,initiatedbyFreudandrefined

byhisEnglishdiscipleErnestJones.BradleyheldthatHamlet,disgustedwith

thecorruptionoftheworld,isafflictedwithaconditionofmelancholicapathy

andthereforecannotact.Hedoesnotunderstandwhyhedelaysandtriesto

justifyhisbehaviortohimself.Jonesdescribedtheunconsciousnatureofthe

taskthatisrepugnanttoHamletasanOedipalcomplexandisthereasonfor

hisdelay.ErlichchallengedJones'OedipalinterpretationinwhichHamlet

identifieswithhisuncleandsaidhisconditionstemsratherfromHamletlacking

astongfatherinhislife.Wilsonhashada particularinfluenceonmodernstage

productionswithhisdescriptionofagenuinelyElizabethanHamlet,which

emphasizedthewordsandactionsoftheplaythatview Hamletasafictitious

characterandnotarealperson.AsWilsonsoaptlyputit, "Hamletisa



33

CLAUDIUS Whatwouldyouundertake Toshowyourselfyourfather'ssonindeed

Morethaninwords?

LAERTES Tocuthisthroati?h'church.

CLAUDIUS Noplaceshouldmurdersanctuaries,Revengeshouldhavenobounds.

(Hamlet4.7100-105)

Chapteriii

THESYNTHESIS

AlthoughtheaudienceattheGlobeTheaterinorabouttheyear1600

mayhaveatfirstechoedHoratio'sincredulouscomment, "What,hasthisthing

appearedagaintonight?"(1.1.21)whenfacedwithyetanothercrustyghostto

hauntthebattlementsofanotherrevengetragedy,theywouldsoonbefaced

withaneventbothstatelyandmajestic.ThestandardghostsoftheLondon

stagebeforeHamletwereexemplifiedinAWarningforFair Women,aplay

datingfromabout1599,wherewehearthat

afilthywhiningghost,Laptinsomefoulsheetoraleatherpilch,Comesscreaminglikeapighalf-stickt,

Andcries"Vindicta!revenge,revenge! (qtd.inRolandFrye25)8

ThomasLodgereferstoaclearlySenecanghostinWit'sMiserie(1596)

"cr[ying]somiserablyattheTheatorlikeanoisterwife,'Hamlet reuenge"'(qtd.

inWilson56).The"thing"inquestioninShakespeare'splay, bothmysterious

andsinister,"conveysadignityneverbeforeseeninaspecteronthe

Elizabethanstage"(Frye25).Andablood-revengetragedy,inShakespeare's



34

hands,wastransformedintoatheatricaleventfarsurpassinganypresented in

thatgenre.

Tounderstandthepopularityofrevengetragedies,andtheauthorswho

groundthemoutwithenthusiasm,wemustlooktohowtheyappealedtotheir

audience.Revengetragediesintheirtraditionalformwereexpectedtobeboth

melodramaticandexcitingpiecesoftheater.Theformulawaslaidoutby Kyd

andassiduouslyfollowedbytheplaywrightsoftheperiod.FredsonBowers,in

ElizabethanRevengeTragedy,pointsoutthatrevengewastaken quite

seriouslyas"acriminalpassion"(20)bytheElizabethans.Playwrightsintheir

endeavortocreatehightragedypresentedtheirheroes9as"normalpersons

caughtupbydemandsoftentoostrongfortheirpowersandforcedintoa

courseofactionwhichwarpsandtwiststheircharacterandmayleadevento

thedisintegrationofinsanity"(110).Theappealoftherevengetragedy,then,

liesintwoaspectsofthisdramaticpassion.Inthefirst,the universal

perspective,thesituationofrevenge"providedanactionthathadthepotential

ofraisingthehero'sstorytotragicproportions"(Halletand Hallet6).Aeschylus'

heroinTheEumenides,whoisseekingtounderstandthemeaningofhisneed

torevengewhilefrustratedbytheinjusticeofitall, "becamefortheplaywrights

anemblemofManhimself"(6).Asecondmoreparticularaspectrevealingthe

passionofrevengeonthehumanpsyche"providedafoundationforcharacter

delineationwhichisprobablyinsurpassable"(6).Theaudienceswereintrigued

bytheemotionsproducedbypressuresexertedontheheroandrespondedto



35

the passionate changes created in human experience as it struggled with the

burdensofrevenge.

Nomatterhowtheaudienceoftoday,orthemodernscholarfor that

matter,interpretstheplay,itremainsanuniqueaestheticexperienceandan

endlesssourceofenjoyment.itisbecauseHamletissuchanexceptionalpiece

Ofartthatitlendsitselftoanumberofviableinterpretations,encompassing

bothcomplimentaryandcontradictoryviewpoints,andconnects withwhat

Prossercallsour"instinctiveresponses."Butevenifitistruethata

contemporaryaudiencemayjustifiablyapplyitsownfeltsensetothe

understandingoftheplay,influencedbythemoresandvaluesreflectedinits

culture,itdoesnotchangethefactthatthisisnotthe experiencethat

happenedforShakespeare'saudience.AsT.A.Spaldingpointedoutin

ElizabethanDemonology,(1880),

Itisimpossibletounderstandandappreciatethoroughlythe

productionofanygreatliterarygeniuswholivedandwrote in

timesfarremovedfromourown,withoutacertainamountof

familiarity,notonlywiththepreciseshadesofmeaningpossessedbythevocabularyhemadeuseof. . ., butalsowiththecustoms

andideas,political,religious,andmoral,thatpredominatedduring

theperiodinwhichhisworkswereproduced.Withoutsuchinformation,itwillbefoundimpossible,inmanymattersofthefirst

importance,tograspthewriter'strueintent,andmuchwillappearvagueandlifelessthatwasfullofpointandvigourwhenitwas

firstconceived;or,worsestill,modernopinionuponthesubject

willbesetupasthestandardofinterpretation,ideas willbeforced

intothewriter'ssentencesthatcouldnotbyanymannerof

possibilityhavehadplaceinhismind,andutterlyfalseconclusionsastohismeaningwillbetheresult.Even themanwhohas

hadsomeexperienceinthestudyofanearlyliterature, occasionallyfinds

somedifficultyinpreventingthecurrentopinionsofhisdayobtruding



36

themselves upon his work and warping his judgement; to the general

reader this must indeed be a frequent and serious stumbling-block.

(qtd.inJoseph22)

Ofcourse,theobviousproblemintryingtorestoreanElizabethanperspective

ishowtoemptyourheadsofthecontemporarymind-setsthatdriveusto

interprettheplayintermsoftheeventsofourowntime.1°Theredoesnotseem

tobeasatisfactoryanswertothisproblem,except,perhaps,totrytobringthe

problemtotheforefrontofourawareness,atleasttemporarily,sothatwecan

allowwhatweknowabouttheElizabethanperiodtopermeateoursensibilities

andaffectourfeelingsinthesamedirectionastheShakespeareanaudience.

Josephremindsusthatpopulardrama,whetherinShakespeaie'sdayorour

own,"dealswithsimple,clear-cutissues,easilyperceivedbyordinarypeople,

whoexpecttobeentertainedinthetheatrewithplotsthatholdtheattention,

withcharacterswhoholdtheinterest,allorganizedinsuchawaythatasthe

playprogressesitisnotdifficulttotraceathemeandtorecognizeimplications

whichhaveabearingoutsidetheimmediatecontextoftheaction"(25).

Perhapsthisisanoversimplification,butthereiswisdominwhatJosephsays.

Anotherwayofviewingtheproblemfacingthetheater-goerorscholarin

hisorherapproachtotheinterpretationoftheplayistakenbyRobertB.

SchwartzwhenhetalksabouthowHamlet,playingarole(asanactormight),

establishesanewcontextbysimplyplayingtherole.Schwartzpointsoutthat

"whattheobservershouldrealize. . . isthathismodeofobservationcreates

newconditionsthatmodifyhispointofview:thatheonlyappearstobe



37

observing what is happening, and that those events thatfollowtheobservation

areinpartconditionedbyhispresence"(124).nInthissense,wecannot

separateourselvesfromourpreconceivedideasand knowledgeoftheplay;

theybecomepartofour"new"experienceoftheplay,conditionedbyour

presence.Itistruethatwereallyhavelittlecontroloverhowweareaffectedby

aworkofart,andwecannotdisarmouremotionalresponsethatwillinturn

colorourunderstandingofwhatweareseeing.Italsomakessensethatour

sensibilitiesareaffectedbywhatweknow,andasstatedabove,themorewe

canaccepttheperspectiveofanElizabethanaudience,themorewecanbe

movedbytheculturalandliterarycontextinwhichShakespearewrote.Draper

saysthatanadequatesolutiontotheproblemofHamlet'sdelaymustentail

"someexplanationthatthroughouttheplaymusthavebeenobvioustoan

ElizabethanaudienceandthatShakespeareemphasized inthedialogue"(187).

AlthoughDrapermayberightinsayingthattheexplanationmustmakesense

toanElizabethanaudience,itisnotclearhow"obvious"thesolutionwaseven

tothem.Further,wemighttrytoreservejudgmentonthemeaningofany

particulareventinHamletuntilweevaluatehowanElizabethantheater-goer

mighthaveresponded,foralthoughmanyofShakespeare'sthemestranscend

time,andcontainuniversalgeniusforalltime,Hamletwaswrittenforthe

Elizabethanstagepresumablywithparticularintentionsinmind.12Itisoneof

thetasksofthisstudytoattempttobringsome ofthosepossibleintentionsto

light.



38

HamletisanElizabethancharacter,notamodernman.Shakespeare

mayhavebeenageniusaheadofhistime,andmayhavedrawnHamletasa

"medievalmanteeteringonthebrinkofthemodern"(Prosser250),butHamlet

wastheproductofaRenaissancemindcreatedfortheinterestandenjoyment

ofanElizabethanaudience.Hamletisastageinvention,notahumanbeing;

whileliterature,theater,andlifemayoverlap,theyarenotoneandthesame

thing.Hischaractercannotbetreatedaspartofa livingpersonwithadistinct

historythatcanaidusinunderstandinghispresentbehavior.Hamletcannotbe

studiedlikeanaturalevent,oracase-studyofadysfunctionalsyndrome.

Specifically,HamletistheheroofaElizabethanrevengetragedy,apopular

genreoftheperiod,andourtaskisto understandthenatureoftheblood-

revengetragedyasitwasperformedontheShakespereanstage.Thiscanbest

beaccomplishedbyfirstexaminingthepositiontheconceptofblood-revenge

occupiedwithinElizabethanethicalthoughtandpractice.

CreatingtheContext:TheBackgroundofBlood-Revenge

Thedevelopmentofblood-revenge,whichwasuniversallypresent

amongprimitivepeoples,wasverymuchaliveduringtheElizabethanperiod.

Crime,asweknowittoday,didnotexistbefore theestablishmentoflawsand

regulationsbytheState.PriortotheseStateconventions,toredressaninjury

inflicteduponone'sperson,"theonlypossibleactionfortheprimitiveindividual

wasadirectrevengeuponhisinjurer"(3).FredsonBowers,inElizabethan



39

RevengeTragedy.1587-1642,identifiesthiskindofactofviolencenotasa

crimebutasa"personalinjury"and"thefirstmanifestationofaconsciousness

ofjustice,forprivaterevengewasthemightiest,theonlypossibleforminwhich

awrongcouldberighted"(3).RevengewasaconditionthatFrancisBacon

insightfullylabelled"akindofwildjustice"(qtd.inBowers 3).

Inasocietywhere"mightmakesright,"ifan individualwasphysically

unabletostrikebackathisinjurer,heremainedwithoutvengeance.Withthe

growthofsocializationandtheformationofgroups,acorresponding

consciousnessof"forcetoright"developedasitpertainedtoaddressingone's

injury.Andwhenthefamilyunittookholdundertheheelofaseverepatriarchal

system,"therighttorevengewasnolongeramatterofchoice,butabinding

obligation"(4).Theterm"vendetta"wasemployedtodescribea"truecollective

justice,whichmakesanobligationofaright,"(4)andenforcementoftheduty

waschargedtoanymemberofthefamilytokillanyothermemberofa

murderer'sfamily.Althoughrevengewasstilloutsideanyformallegalsystemof

justice,itremainedasadutytothenearestrelativeoftheslainpersonto

retaliate."Thereissomepower,"saysBowers,"whetherofmilitaryautocracyor

ofpublicopinion,whichprescribesbounds" (4).Thesebounds,orprescription

foramorestandardizedpunishmentofparticularinflictedinjuries,areplaced

withinthelawsof"talion,"thebiblicalconceptof"aneyeforaneye,"thesuiting

ofthepenaltytotheoffense.WiththemigrationoftheGermanicAnglo-Saxons

toEngland,theconceptofthe vendettaincorporatedanewaspectofthecode



4U

ofblood-revenge:asystemofwerge/dKinsmenofthepartyresponsibleforan

injurywereofferedtheoptionofpayingareparation,withthefamilyofthe

victimresponsibleforcollectingthispayment.Thealternativewasfamily

warfare"knownasfaehthe,orfeud"(4),anditwasagaintheright,ifnotthe

obligationoftheinjuredfamily,toexactrevenge.

Feudingwasbroughttoahaltbythegrowthinpowerofthemonarchy

demandingtoshareinthewergeld.Asearlyasthelateseventh-century,the

Kinghadashareofthedamagesbasedonthesuppositionthatanoffense

againstasubjectwasanoffenseagainsttheState.Responsibilityforthecrime

andpaymentofthewerge/dgraduallynarrowed,andbythetenth-century,"the

liabilityforamurderwasfixedsquarelyontheshouldersoftheslayeralone,

andhiskinsmenwereallowedtorepudiatethecrimeandtheirshareofthe

wergeld'(6).Takingprivaterevengewasconsideredanexclusivecrimeagainst

theStateandoutlawedafterthefirsthalfofthefourteenth-century.

TheNormancodeofstatejustice,broughtbyWilliamtheConqueror,

introducedtheprocedureoflegalappealstoEngland.Throughthisprocedure,

thewidow,oramaleheir,couldprosecutethevictim'smurderer.Althoughthe

appealsprocedureabolishedthewergelt,it"retainedthespiritoftheoldblood-

revenge,forthenearestofkinhadtotakeup thesuitagainstthemurdererand

frequentlytofightitoutwithhiminthedirectrevengeofjudicialcombat"(7).

Murderersweregiventheoptionoftrialbyjury,butunderstandably,most

murdererspreferredjudicialcombat.Thissystemofappealswascommon



42

"theinterpretationofpremeditatedmaliceputbythelawupontheirrevenge"

(10)aswell.ThepracticewasevidentlyrampantenoughforJamesi(1603

1625)tocommand,"OurlouingeandfaithfulSubiectes . . .vponpayneofour

highedispleasure . . . thatfromthistymeforwardetheypresumenotvpontheir

owneimaginationandconstructionofwrong. . toaduentureinanysorteto

ryghte(astheycallit)ortoreuenge(astheLawefindesit)theirownquarrels"

(qtd.inBowers10-11).Revengeforthemurderofarelativewasconsidereda

murderasanyothermurderwithmaliceaforethought.Bowerspointsoutthat

"noevidencecanbefoundinElizabethanlaw[that]allowedformotiveor

extenuatingcircumstancesinanymurderwhichwastheresultofsuchmalice

andpremeditationaswasownedbyanavengerofblood"(11).Itwasbecause

Elizabethansinheritedprivatejusticefromanearliertime,atimeoflawlessness

whenrevengewasaright,that"theyweredeterminedthatprivaterevenge

shouldnotunleashageneraldisrespectforlaw"(11).Elizabethanjusticemeted

outpunishmenttoavengerswhotookthelawintotheirownhands,justasit did

totheoriginaloffender,toassurerespectforEnglishlaw.

Withtheestablishmentofastatesystemofjustice,condemnationof

pri toreenge clerics ndmorlistsin nglndscowlfoundmomentum

until,"intheGod-fearingElizabethanage,itexercisedaforcesecondtonone

intheconstantwaragainsttheprivatelawlessnessofthetimes"(12).Ina

newlyorderedChristiansocietytheMosaiclaws,takentolegitimizeblood-

revengeinbiblicalterms,werebeingoverthrown. ThomasBecon's(1560)



4 3

argumentagainstrevengetypifiedthemoralclimate:"Todesiretobe

revenged,whenallvengeancepertainethtoGod,ashesaith,'Vengeanceis

mine,andiwillreward . . . thistodoyeareforbidden!"(qtd.inBowers13).

WithinvokingthewordofGodasexpresslyforbiddingprivaterevenge,"itwas

onlynaturaltobelievedamnationawaitedthosewhodisobeyed"(13).Many

religiouswritersoftheperioddenouncedtheideathatGodcouldbefavorable

towardsuchaheinousenterpriseandpredicted"adoubledeath,ofbodyandof

soul"(13)fortherevenger.Themoralistarguedaswellthataperson'shonor

wasdecreasedbytheactofrevenge,"since'thehonourthatiswonnebyher,

hathanillground. . . . Honourisathingetoonobleofitself,todependofa

superfluoushumour,sobaseandvillainous,asthedesireofvengeance ism

(JohnEliotinBowers14).Alongwiththelossofhonor,theargumentwent, the

mindoftherevengerwouldalsosuffertormentandagonyforthe unjustdeed.

Therewasalwayssmolderingoppositiontoofficialeffortsatreform.

ViolenceandpersonalrevengeflourishedduringtheMiddleAges,atimewhen

"royaljusticewasmoreanamethanapower"(15).Theblood-thirstfor

vengeanceforslainrelativeswasrampantaftertheWarsoftheRoses.This

ageofmassviolencegavewayinTudortimestoindividualviolentactswhere

"personalcharacter,withitsinheritanceoffiercenessandindependence,had

notchanged"(16).Thearistocracy,pridingitselfonitsindividuality,nourished

redressbypersonalrevenge:"Openassaultandtheduelwerecurrent

practices,andforthosetootimidtotakethelawintotheirown handstherewas

nolackofprivatebravireadytostab" (16).Thesheddingofbloodinthestreets



44

wasnotanuncommonoccurrenceaspublicexecutionswereafamiliarofficial

function:TheElizabethanwhoattendedpublicexecutionsasanamusementwasusedtothesightofbloodandwouldscarcelyflinchfromitonthestage.Rather,hewoulddemandit,forhewaskeenlyinterestedinmurdersforanyothermotivethansimplerobbery.Murdertoexpediteatheftwaseasilyunderstandable,

andtheoffenderwaspromptlyhanged;yetmurderfordifferent

motivesexcitedtheElizabethanaudience'scuriosity.Anessentiallyreligiousperson,theElizabethanregardedmurderas

theworstofallcrimes--withdeath,tohisRenaissancespirit,the

ultimatedisaster. (16)

ThetypicalElizabethan'srationaleforacceptanceofamurderbasedonthe

passionofthemomentcanbeattributedtothe"characteristicEnglishhatred

ofsecrecyandtreachery"whichtypifiesactsofvengeance,and

"[p]remeditated,secret,unnaturalmurder. . . struckachordofhorror"

(17).Althoughthistraditionof"fairplay"wasreinforcedwithanironhand

byElizabeth(1558-1603),fearingthatthewholesaleretainingofbravibyher

noblesmight"sowtheseedsofrevolution,"politicalmaneuveringandincessant

grudgeskeptprivateactionsmolderingthroughoutherreign.Gardnerhighlights

theframeofmindofthedraftersoftheBoardofAssociation of1585,andthe

thousandsofElizabethansthatsignedit,whenshesays,

Theypledgedthemselves'inthepresenceoftheeternal and

ever-livingGod,'whomtheyknewtohaveclaimedvengeanceashisprerogative,that,intheeventofanattackonElizabeth'sperson,theywould'prosecutetothedeath'anypretended

successortoherthronebywhom,orforwhom,suchanact

shouldbeattemptedorpermitted.Theyswore'totakethe

uttermostrevengeonthem. . . byanypossiblemeans. . . for

theirutteroverthrowandextirpation.' (36)



45

ItwasmadeclearthatifElizabethwasassassinated,hercousinMaryStuart,

andsonJamesasabeneficiarytothecrime,shouldbemurderedwhetheror

nottheywereapartytothekilling (36).Moralscrupleswerenotconsidered

here,evenfromlaw-abidingandGod-fearingpeople;theybelievedthat"the

safetyofthecountryandthepreservationoftheProtestantreligionhungonthe

singlelifeofElizabeth"(36-37).'Toeaseherinsecurity,nodoubt,Elizabeth

sentcourtierstoprisonfordisobeyingherordersagainstprivateduels.Inspite

ofherdiligence,inthelastyearsof Elizabeth'sreign'therapiersupplantedthe

sturdierswordastheEnglishweapon,honorgrewmorevaluablethanlife,and

theword'valiant'tookonanewmeaning.Thisprivateduel,thoughinterdicted,

becamethemosthonorableandpopularElizabethanmethodofrevenging

injuries"(30).ButitwaswithJames'rulethatblood-revengeflourishedagainin

England.JamesbroughtwithhimScottishfollowerswithapassionforpersonal

revengethatresultedinan increaseofviolenceamongtheEnglish. Initially,

becauseoftheresentmenttheEnglishheldagainsttheScottish"invaders,"

muchoftheprivatequarrelingwasbetweentheScottishandtheEnglish.

AlthoughtheinfluenceoftheScottishtraditionofpersonalrevengewas

considerableinitsimpacton"theattitudeoftheaudienceatElizabethan

tragedies,theEnglishmanwasfullyconsciousoftheworkingsofrevengeinhis

ownmidst"(20).Revengeoncemorebecamesoseriousaproblemthatethical

andreligiousprotestagainreachedahighpitch.



46

Bowerspointsoutthat"longnursing"ofrevenge,whichis"opposedto

Englishsentimentandusage,"sentaLordSanquiretothegaiiowsin1607.The

caseinvolvedthehiring,monthslater,oftwoassassinsbySanquiretokilla

fencingopponent,Turner,inrevengeforTurnertakingSanquire'seyewhilethe

twomenpracticedwiththefoils.It isprobablethatSanquirewouldhavebeen

pardoned"ifhehadkilledTurnerhimselfandwithoutdelay"(30).Bowers

contendsthat"Suchamurderous,long-continuedrevengewasevidently

consideredunusual,forEnglishpracticeconfineditselfingeneraltoimmediate

assaultorformaiduel. . ."(30).

WiththeemphasisoncourtlifeunderJames,wherebribery,cunning,

jealousy,andcompetitionforroyalfavorwereawayofcourtierlife,personal

honorrequiredalmostdailyvindication,and"themosttrivialcausescouldexcite

bloodshed"(31).Itisinthiscontext,wherethecodeofhonorwastheruleof

theday,thatduellingtoupholdhonorbecameaseriousprobleminEngland.

Thisbeliefwasupheldbypopularconsent,evenamongthosewhoagreedwith

itsunlawfulness,likelybecauseofthefearofbeinglabelledcowards.The

followingisalistofargumentssupportingtheduelasthemeanstosatisfythe

desireforpersonalblood-revenge:

[1]Iftherewerenoduels,allpersonswoulddrawtheirswords

whohaveaninterestintheinjuredperson'shonor[i.e.,collective

revenge];[2]Thefearofdamnationkeepsmenfromindulgingin

unjustquarrels;[3]Ifanactislawfulformany,itislawfulforone:

armieschallengeoneanotherandsoshouldindividuals;[4]Since

lawsvalueprivatehonornofartherthanconcernsthepublic

safety,theindividualmustrevengehisowndishonor;[5]Thelaws

ofknighthoodbindallmentorevengean injury;[6]Sincenoone



47

shalljudgeofhonorbuthimwhohasit,thejudgesofcivilcourts

(whoarebaseintheirorigin)areunfittedfortheduty;[7]Soldiers

arereasonablemen,yetwecondemnacustomwhichtheyhave

broughtinandauthorized;[8]

Manymurdersarecommittedwhich

areundiscoveredbylaw;ifprivatemenwereallowedtopunish

thesewiththesword,murderswoulddecrease.Thislastshows

thatthedesireforpersonalblood-revengewasbynomeansdead

inEngland.(CottonMS,in Bowers33).

Withaworseningsituationprogressingtothestatusof"aseriousmenace,"

Jamesfinallyissuedaproclamationagainstduellingin1610,followedbyhis

elaborateEdictof1613.Many

subsequentattemptsweremadetostampout

theduelofrevenge,butwithoutsuccess;thepracticecontinuedunabated

underCromwell,andCharlesII,lastingwellintothenineteenth-century.

EleanorProsser,inHamletAndRevenge,examinesconventional

Elizabethanattitudestowardrevengeandaudienceresponsetorevengeinthe

playsoftheperiod,specificallyinrespecttoShakespeare'sHamlet.She

challengesthetraditionalassumptionsthatrevengewastobeacceptedasa

"sacredduty"inHamlet,andthat"theplay'srevengecodereflectedatheatrical

traditionthatwasfranklyopposedtoallreligious,moraland legaltenets"(xi).

ShebasesthesechallengesonherChristianinterpretationoftheplaythat

viewsan"oldbarbaricstory"inthelightofaChristianframework.Prosser

attemptstonegatetheevidence,presentedbyBowersandothers,ofa

counter-codechallengingtheofficialpositionagainstrevengeheldbythe

ChurchandState.Objectionistaken,forexample,tothefrequentlycited

evidencesupportingthecodeofhonoramongthenobility,throughreferences

totreatiesondueling."Duelingneverbecameathreattoorder,"statesProsser,



48

and"wasnotrecognizedasaseriousprobleminEnglanduntilafterthe

accessionofJamesiandtheinfluxoftheScots"(14).Thereisnoevidence

thattheargumentsofferedbyproponentsofduelingwereevencommonly

accepted:"Butevenifduelingwerewidelyacceptedasmorallyjustifiable,such

evidencewouldbeirrelevanttotheimmediateproblemoftherevengeplay--the

privatekillingofadefenselessman.Duelingisahighlyconventionalizedformof

opencombatbetweenopponentsofequalrankandtraining,equallyforewarned

andforearmed.Noapologistforduelingeverarguesthatoutrightrevenge

murderisjustified"(14).

Prosserasksthefundamentalquestionshesaysanyserious

investigationofHamletmusteventuallyface:"HowdoesShakespeareintend

hisaudiencetoregardtheethicsofprivaterevenge?"Shemaintainsthatthis

moralissue"underliesthebasicdramaticquestionoftheplay,"thatoneneeds

todecidewhetherthecommandoftheGhostis"morallybinding,"andifblood-

revengewasan"unquestionedduty"basedontheconventionalmoralideasof

Shakespeare'stime(3).JosephQuincyAdamsmakesthefollowingassertion

concerningthetraditionalattitudeoftheElizabethanaudiencetowardblood-

revenge:

Thenotionthatitwasmorallywrongforasontoavengehisfather'smurderespeciallyamurderconceivedundersuchcircumstancesasrepresentedintheplay--wasnotentertainedin

Hamlet'stime . . . Andhenceitwasheldthatrevengeforamurderedfatherwassolemnlybindingontheson--especiallyanonlyson.Wemustbecarefulnottoimportintotheplaymodernconceptionsofethicalpropriety.Tothepeopleofhisowntime,andeventotheaudienceoftheElizabethanage,Hamletwas

calledupontoperforma"dread"[=sacred]duty.(211)



49

Althoughthebeliefthatthelawwoulddenytheinheritancetothesonwho

wouldnotavengethedeathofhisfatherwasapopularideainEngland,no

suchlawexistedinfact.Becauseason'simpotencetoavengehisfatherwas

consideredsogreatalossofhonorinItaly,thecodeofdenialofinheritance

waswrittenintotheircivillaw.ThissameattitudewasheldinEnglandas

evidencedbythewritingsofEarlofNorthamptonondueling:"theciuilelaw

deniesthefathersinheritancetothesonwhichwillnotreuengethedeath ofhis

father"(CottonMS,inBowers38).TheElizabethanaudience'sbeliefthatthe

lawdidexistinEngland,"combinedwiththepleaoftheduelists fortherightof

blood-revenge,showsaverystrongundercurrentfavoringprivatejusticefor

murderinElizabethantimes,asympathywith(and'nativeknowledge of)

blood-revenge,andapersistenttraditionbywhichtheson,orheir,musttake

personalcognizanceofthemurderofhisancestor"(Bowers39).

Elizabethanaudienceswereasinfluencedbytheirtraditionofblood-

revengeastheireducationinreligionandethics.Therewasalwaysatensionin

theaudiencebetweentheirsubmissiontoGod'slawforbiddingrevengeand

theirnativetraditionfavoringrevengeunderspecialcircumstances,"especially

oftheheir'slegaldutytorevengehisfather. . ."(40).Therewouldhavebeen

fewintheElizabethanaudiencewhowouldnotsympathizewith therevenger

whohadnorecoursewithinthelaw;"fewElizabethanswhowouldcondemnthe

son'sblood-revengeonatreacherousmurderwhomthelawcouldnot

apprehendforlackofproperlegalevidence"(40).AccordingtoBowers'theory,



50

therevengerbeginswiththesupportoftheaudienceandsustainsthat

sympathyunlessthegoodcauseturnstotreachery.

Thecodeofpersonalhonorforagentlemanunquestionablyoutweighed

anyethicalorreligiousconsiderationsasitpertainedtorevengingapersonal

injuryperpetratedagainsthim.ThecommonEnglishmandidnotrenounce

revengeoutofhandonmoralgroundseither.Itbecameuntenableonlywhen

entangledinthetreacherousanddespicableactsthatmightaccompanythe

revenge.Itwas"themethodandnottheactitself" (37)thatwasatissueinthe

mindsoftheElizabethanaudienceastheyviewedstage-revenge.

AcountertheoryofaudienceattitudeispresentedbyLilyB.Campbell.

Shestates"therewasapersistentcondemnationofrevengeintheethical

teachingofShakespeare'sEngland,acondemnationwhichwaslogically

posited[onthebiblicalinjunction,'Vengeanceismine,Iwillrepay,saiththe

Lord']andlogicallydefended"(qtd.inBowers35).Thissecondviewprevented

anethicallyandreligiouslyeducatedaudiencefromcondoningthemotivesof

revengeonthestage.ThisethicaldilemmaistakenupbyProsser.She

acknowledgestraditionalassumptions,notablythoseofBowers,thatalthough

Elizabethanorthodoxycondemnedblood-revenge,"mostcriticsstillholdthatthe

averageElizabethanbelievedasonmorallyboundtorevengehisfather's

death,"andthatapopularcodeapprovingrevengewasmore influentialthan

thatoftheestablishedorthodoxy(4).Prosseradmitstothepersuasivenessof

theargument,butgoesontosay,



51

Thepresentinvestigationsuggests,however,thatthe"popular"attitudetowardrevengewasfarmorecomplexthanhasbeengenerallyassumed.Popularliteratureanddramaticconventionsindicatethattheorthodoxcodedidhavewidespreadinfluence.At

thesametime,theyindicatethattheaveragespectatorata

revengeplaywasprobablytrappedinanethicaldilemma--a

dilemma,toputitmostsimply,betweenwhathebelievedand

whathefelt. (4)

Prosserpresentsawealthofevidencetosupporthercontentionthat

Elizabethanmoralists"condemnedrevengeasillegal,blasphemous,immoral,

irrational,unnatural,andunhealthy--nottomentionunsafe. Moreover,notonly

didrevengeviolatereligiouslaw,morality,andcommonsense,itwasalso

thoroughlyun-English"(10).SheattemptstoshowthattheElizabethan

audiencewouldnotcondoneasonrevenginghisfather'sdeathasanobligation

ofhonor,andthatHamlet'sreasonforrefusingtokillClaudiusatprayerscould

beviewedasanobleact.Inshort,shechallengestheassumptionthatHamlet's

audienceviewedrevengeasamoraldutysupersedingallethical

considerations.ReferringtotheGhost,sheasks,"Wouldaspiritofhealthlaya

sacreddutyonabelovedsonthatleadstothedestructionoftwoentire

families?"(xii).

ProsserchallengesBowers'assertionthat"fewElizabethans. . . would

condemntheson'sblood-revengeonatreacherousmurdererwhomthelaw

couldnotapprehendforlackofproperlegalevidence"(qtd.inProsser17).

Bowerssupportshisargumentwithquotations fromGentillet,whoargues

againstMachiavelli'spositionthataprincecankillamanwithoutfearof

revengeaslongashedoesnotconfiscatehislandsandgoods,basedonthe



53

same grounds as would the Establishment. "On this issue," Prosser concludes,

"Bacon was in complete accord with the best minds of his day. Law, Church,

State, and accepted morality were unanimous in their condemnation of private

revengeunderanycircumstances"(21).

Englishlawnevergrantedjustificationformurder,nomatterhowextremethe

circumstances:notforthemostbrutalmassacre,orforthepersonalexecution

ofamurdererwhofoundfreedomthroughtheeffortsofacorruptmagistrate.

Englishlawallowedonlyoneexception:instantretaliationforaninjurywas

judgedmanslaughter,onthegroundsthatitwasunpremeditated,andinthe

Elizabethanperiodmightbeforgivenbyroyalpardon.Tobeconsidered

maslaughter,thekillighadto eaimmediatereactio toimmediatei jury.

Anydelayatallindicatedpremeditation,andElizabethanlawdefinedmurderas

unlawfulkillingbyasaneadultwith"maliceprepense."

Althoughthesemoralforceswerecompelling,Bowersbelievesthatthey

aretoorigid,anddonotaccountforthegeneralviewsofaudiences,or

dramatists,onstage-revenges.Heassertsthatthesympathiesoftheaudience

wereswayedbyseveralsituationsinvolvingrevenge.Hefirstdescribesthe

situationwhere"retaliationforbaseinjuries"wasinvolved.TheSanquire

murder,arevengeforseriousinjury,wouldgainmoresympathythanmurder

forjealousyorgain,butwouldloseanyadvantageintheheartsoftheaudience

whenfocuswasplacedonitscowardiceanddishonorablemethods.Themost

justifiablereasonforrevengewasformurder.Itshouldberememberedthat



54

blood-revengeformurderwasstillillegalandpunishablebylawasanyother

murder.Itwasalso,ofcourse,viewedasanoffenseagainstGod'swill.Bowers

says,however,that"thereismuchevidenceofanElizabethansympathyfor

blood-revenge"(37)survivingfromEngland'smoretumultuousrecentpast.

Althoughrevengewasofficiallycondemnedineveryquarter,exceptionwas

madefor"treacherous"murder.Theimplicationisthatpersonalrevengehad

beensanctionedwhenalackofevidencepreventedaconvictionofthe

murderer,or"incasesnotcoveredbylaworwhichcouldnotbeprovedinthe

courts"(38).

AfurtheracceptableconditionforrevengealsoapplicabletoHamletis

thejustifiableuseofforce.BowerscitesWilliamPerkins,"whosebookscarried

weightwitheveryElizabethan,"toarguethattheuseofforceinself-defense

waslawful"whenviolenceisoffered,andtheMagistrateabsent;eitherfora

time,andhisstaybedangerous;oraltogether,soasnohelpecanbehadof

him,noranyhopeofhiscomming.Inthiscase,Godputstheswordintothe

privatemanshands"(qtd.inBowers36).Thisisanexplicitreferenceto

Hamlet'scause,thatis,whenjusticeisunprocurablebylaw,revengebecomes

"allowable"inthemindsoftheaudience.Theunderlyinglogicbeingprivate-

vengeancebecomesameansofmaintaininglawandorder,andthat"the

privilegeofblood-revengewouldstrikemorefearintotheheartsofmurderers

thanthecumbersomeandoftenfaultyprocessofthelaw,whichcouldnot

alwaysdiscoverandpunishtheslayer"(37).Prossersaysthat"afaulty



55

inference"isdrawnfromthecontinueduseofPerkins'statement,"'Godputs

theswordintotheprivatemanshands'whenthemagistrateisabsent,"toargue

thattheuseofforceinself-defensewaslawful.'WhatPerkinsseemsto

supportisan"instantaneousreaction--theinstantaneousrepulseofviolencein

selfdefense"(20).ThisisquitedifferentfromBowers'positionthattherewere

circumstanceswhenrevengewasconsideredallowable.

Prosseranalyzes(tovariousdegrees)twenty-onenon-Shakespearean

revengeplayspresentedontheEnglishstagefrom1562to1607.She

concludesthatShakespeare'saudiencedidnotview"blood-revengeinthe

theaterasa'sacredduty"(70),andShakespeare'scontemporariesdidnot

"automaticallyassumerevengetobeadutyofbothpietyandhonor"(74).

Strikingevidenceispresentedforthecondemnationofrevengeamongthe

revengetragedieswrittenandperformedduringthisperiod.Shesays,

Thedominanttheatricaltraditionseemsunmistakablewhenweconsiderthewitnessofsixvirtuouscharacterswhoexplicitlyrejectrevenge,fiveoriginallyvirtuouscharacterswhoturnvillainwhentheyembarkonacourseofvengeance,seventeenout-and-outvillain-revengers,andmanyotherswhosethreatsoradviceto

pursuerevengeareclearlyjudgedasevil. (71)

Theissueofrevenge,inProsser'sview,wasreallynotanissuetotheaverage

playwrightortohisaudience:"Theissuewassettled.Revengewasasin

againstGod,adefianceoftheState,acancerthatcoulddestroymind,body,

andsoul--andthatwasthat"(72).Althoughtheissueofrevengemayhave

beensettledforthe"average"playwright,shedoessay,"Ittookaprofound

mindtocutthroughacceptedplatitudesandstruggleanewwithquestionsthat



56

hadlongsincereceivedofficialanswers. . ."(72).Shedoesnotconsiderany

ofShakespeare'scontemporarieswhohadwrittenrevengetragediestobeany

morethan"practicalmenofthetheater"(72).Shegoesontoevaluatethe

revengemotifsfoundinShakespeare'splaysanalogoustothesituationfaced

byHamlet.Specifically,therevengemotifthatrunsthroughtheseriesofplays

shediscussesisthesurrendertorevenge"seenasthesurrenderofreason,the

surrenderatleasttodangerousrashnessandatthemosttoactualmadness"

(93).ProssertriesnottopresentShakespeareasaninflexiblemoralistsending

hisrevengertohellwithexpediency.Tothecontrary,shesays,"Atagiven

momentinaplay--themomentwhenRomeostabsTybalt,whenCoriolanus

defiesthescreamingmob,whenHotspurventshisrageatpersonalinsult--we

oftensympathizewiththeveryactionthatlater,whenwearereleasedfrom

emotionalinvolvement,weseeinperspective"(94).AndalthoughShakespeare

showssomecompassionfortherevenger,hisplaysbearouttheassertionthat

revengeisGod'swork:leavehimtoheaven!

ProsserconcludesthatHamlet'srevengehadneverreceived

Shakespearemoralapproval,andthatthe"instinctivereactions"of

Shakespeare'saudiencewasthatHamlet'srevengewasnotgiventhesame

moralapproval.Assumingthattheliteratureofthetimesusedtheconventional

ideasthatappealedtotheiraudiences,inProsser'sviewtherewaspopular

disseminationfortheofficialcondemnationofrevengeintheElizabethanperiod.

Incontrast,Prosserconcedesthatintheperiod"historyrecordsthatbrawling



57

increased, dueling began to capture interest, lawsuits flooded the courts, and

the revenge tragedy flourished" (23). The obvious question is how accurately

did these Establishment pieties reflect the popular attitude, and the attitude of

Shakespeare'saudience?Prosseracknowledgesboththecontradictionsofthe

twentieth-century--"ravagedbywarandprejudice,"whilepreaching"peaceand

equality,"andthesixteenth-century--"tornbyreligiousandpoliticaldissension,"

whilemoralizingendlessly"itsbeliefinnaturalorderandharmony"(24).These

aresuitableexamplesofagesinrebellionagainsttheirownmoralityandethical

standards.ProssergoesontosaythatalthoughShakespeare'saudiencemay

havesympathizedwiththerebel,"wemustnotmaketheerrorofequating

sympathywithmoralapproval"(33).Sheoutlinestheargumentsforman's

instinctivedriveforrevengeforanunderstandingoftherevengetragedy:

Fewaudiencesinanyagewouldbeunsympathetictoabasicallygoodmanwhohazardshislifeinadefiantbattleagainstevil.Fewwouldfailtounderstandanattractiveyoungherowhofeelshemustasserthismanhoodwhenheistauntedwithcowardice.Fewwouldfailtorespondtotherebelwho,immobilizedbythe"No's"ofcivilanddivinelaw,rejectspassiveenduranceasthehighestgoaltowhichmancanaspire. (33)

ShegoesontosaythatalthoughthetypicalElizabethanmayhavestrongly

sympathizedwitharevenger,hedidnotdisregardtheethicalandreligious

preceptsinwhichhewasgrounded.Prosserasks,"Isitnotatleastpossible

thattheElizabethanaudiencecouldinstinctivelyidentifywiththerevengerand

yet--eitheratthesametimeorlater,whenreleasedfromemotional

involvement--thatitcouldjudgehimtoo?"(34).



58

Whenpresentedwithsomuchcontraryandconflictingevidence

concerningpersonalrevenge,oneishardpressedtounderstandtheattitude

Shakespeare'saudiencewouldbringtoit.Wemayexpectthatwithasocietyin

transitionandwhereideaswereevolving,noclearpositionhadyetemerged

concerningtheplacepersonalrevengeoccupiedintheculture.Whatisclear,

however,isthatthelegalsystemforbadetakingthelawintoone'sownhands,

andtherewereabundantmoralandreligiousobjectionstoblood-revenge.The

questionremains,didthesocietyatlargegenerallyholdtheseofficialviews

againstrevenge,ordidthey,inspiteoftheseofficialprohibitions,condone

revengeundercertaincircumstances?DidShakespeare'saudience,then,agree

withtheofficialpositionagainstpersonalrevenge,ordidtheyholdthathonor

wasmoreimportantthanconscience?Theanswers,ofcourse,arecloudedwith

rhetoricfrombothsides.

Prossermakesaninterestingpointwhenshecharacterizesthesixteenth-

centuryasanageinrebellionagainstitselfintermsofitsmoralandethical

standards.Innewhistoricistterms,cultureisportrayedasaself-generating

phenomenonwhichiscontinuouslyinventingitself.Asstatedpreviously,there

canbeno"singlepoliticalvision"attributabletoaculture,andwhenappliedto

Renaissancesociety,nosinglepositiononpersonalrevengewouldhavebeen

heldbytheentirepopulation.Therewaslikelyadominantviewencompassing

the"sacredness,"or"sacrilege,"oftakingpersonalrevenge,butthereseemsno

surewaytoknowwhatthatviewwas,orifShakespeareevenwentalongwith



59

it.WhatwedoknowisthatHamlet'sdelayisareflectionof,oratleastan

elementin,thatdebate:thereisampletextualevidenceforHamletweighing

bothsidesofthequestionofrevengeinhissoliloquiesandspeeches.Itisthe

feelingofthiswriterthatbecauseoftheunstableandchangingclimateofthose

times,thereligiousandmoralprohibitionsagainstrevenge,touchingupon

mattersofconscienceandhonor,werebeingdebatedbyShakespeare's

audienceaswell.

Shakespeare'sHamlet,couldhavecreatedinitsaudiencewhatD.G.

Jamescalls"thenewdoubt"(qtd.inHibbard2),whichwascharacteristicofthe

Renaissanceerosionofmedievalvalues,where"oldcertaintiesandlong

establishedwaysofthinkingbegantocollidewithnewdoubtsandrevolutionary

modesofthinking"(Hibbard5).Theplay,centeringonthetransformationofits

maincharacter,mayhavebeenwrittentoproducesuchacollision.

RevengeTragedy:TheDramaticFormandHamlet

WhatisthedramaticformoftheElizabethanblood-revengetragedyand

howdoesShakespeare'sHamletfitintothisgenre?Revengewasseenasan

irresistiblepassionimposedbydestinyonindividualswhohadnopartinthe

originalmurder.Itbecame"anagonizingbutinescapableburden,"andthe

revengeplaywasthefirsttoshowhowa"greatcharactercouldbeovercome

byeviltidesoffeelingintheactofopposingthemandbedriventobreakdown

ormadness"(Maregson,qtd.inHalletandHallet4).Therevengetragedy



60

exploitedtheatmosphereofmelodramaticuncertaintyandsuspense."The

principalinterestintherevengehero"saysRolandFrye,inTheRenaissance

Hamlet,"concernedthefascinatinghorrorshewoulddeviseinreturnforthe

horrorswhichhadbeeninflictedonhim,andalsotheMachiavellianintrigues

andcounter-intriguesemployedalongtheway"(168).Shakespearegavehis

audiencesfullmeasureofsuspenseinthetheatricaltraditionheinherited.Ifhe

hadgivennomore,Shakespeare'sHamletwouldbeasmemorableastheother

"fascinatinghorrors"ofthegenre;but,ofcourse,wearegivenagreatdeal

more:

Shakespearehasgivenussuspenseofthreekinds:thesuspenseinherentinthetraditionoftherevengeplayitselfplusthesuspenseofvariationsuponthatformsothattheaudiencewasoftenkeptwonderingwhetherthePrinceeverwouldachieverevengeatall,and(offarmorelastinginterest)thesuspenseofprobingtheultimatemysteriesofhumannatureanddestiny.Allofthisdonewithapoeticpowerandphilosophicaldepthwhichgoesbeyondmerelytopicalandtime-boundconcerns.(168)

ThesuspensemanifestsitselfasHamlet'sdeliberationsonthesemysteriesof

lifeinthecontextofthemoral,religious,andpoliticalconcernsofhistime.Lee

ThorncharacterizesthethemeShakespeareadoptedforHamlet'sprogression

throughthemysteriesoflifeasa"riteofpassage,"andholdsthatthe"dramatic

concern(asopposedtoitsreligious,moral,andphilosophicalimplications)"of

TheSpanishTragedy,forexample,"iswhetherandhowtheobstaclesof

circumstancescanbeovercome"(127).Hegoesontosay,"Hamlet'sdramatic

concerniswhetherandhowtheobstaclesofcharactercanbeovercome"

(127).



61

WhatwastheframeofreferencethetypicalElizabethanbroughttothe

playconcerningHamlet'sdelayinrevenginghisfather'sdeath?TheGhost's

commandtoHamlettotakerevengewas"considerablymoreambiguousin

1600thansomeliteraryhistoriansandcriticshaverecognized"(Frye11).Frye

believesthecomplexitiesinherentinHamlet'sproblemofrevenge,either

challengingthereligiousandmorallawsoftheperiod,orriskingcondemnation

fromthesameElizabethanaudienceforignoringthesupernaturalcommandof

revenge,havenotbeenfullyappreciatedbymodernscholarship.Evenwhen

HamletlearnsthattheGhost'sreportwasproventrue,anElizabethanaudience

wouldstillnotagreeonacourseofactionfortheunfortunatePrince:

Hamletsurelyhasanobligation,butanobligationwhichwouldhavebeensubjecttodiametricallyoppositeinterpretations.SomeElizabethanswouldhaveheldthatheismorallyboundtoacceptClaudiusasdefactoking,despitethefactthatheisaneviland

tyrannousruler,whereasotherswouldhaveseenitashisdutytopurgetherealmofatyrannoususurperandestablishhimselfasrightfulkinginsuccessiontohisfather.(Frye11-12)

TheaudiencetowhichShakespearewishedtoappealwouldnothavebrought

tothetheaterauniformsensitivityandmoralcodethatwouldelicit"theproper

response"totheproblemsHamletfaces.Prosser,ontheotherhand,doesnot

suggestthatarejectionofrevengeonmoralgroundswouldautomaticallycall

forthanemotionalrejectionbytheaveragetheater-goer.Sheadmitsthatthe

themeofrevengewasanenormouslyappealingonetotheElizabethanlivingin

anageofsuchuncertainty,fraughtwithviolence,andshackledwithacode that

requiredhimtodonothing.Shesaystherevengerwasan"ideal"characterto



62

identifywith,

amanlikehimself,surroundedbyevilandboundbythelawsof

Godandmanthatsaid'Thoushaltnot'ateveryturn;buthealsosawanexceptionalmanwho,unlikehimself,somehowassertedahiddenpotentialinhiswillfulrebellionagainstestablishedorder,inhisdefiantrefusaltoletcorruptiongounpunished.(72)

ProsserholdsthatitwasprobablethatElizabethanaudiences,caught-upinthe

immediateexcitementoftheplay,wouldlatercondemnthoseveryactionsthey

showedstrongsympathytoward.AccordingtoFrye,itisthroughHamlet's

soliloquiesthatShakespearevirtuallyanalyzes,scrutinizes,andsynthesizesall

alternatives,andtheirpossibleconsequences,whichmayhaveoccurredtothe

thoughtfulElizabethanattendingtheplay.Andbyplay'send,"Hamletwould

haveearnedthedramaticadmirationofmostmembersofanElizabethan

audience,whetherornottheyagreedwithhisparticularviewsandhiscourseof

action"(14).ItisbywayofthisperspectiveofexaminingElizabethan

uncertaintiesandambiguities,andthroughthe"flawed"mirrorofthehistorical

period,thatwemustapproachtheproblemofHamlet'sdelay.

Ontheassumptionthattheplaycanbebestunderstoodthroughthe

filterofanElizabethanlens,theissueofhowthatlensistobefocusedstill

needstobeaddressed.Shoulditbeturnedinthedirectionofseeinghowthe

ElizabethanaudienceviewedHamlet'ssituation,consideringtheirattitudesand

expectationstowardblood-revenge,orinadirectionthatShakespeareurged

themifdifferentfrompopularbelief?Althoughriddledwithdisagreementamong

thecritics,themorepracticalcourseistheformer;thelatterispurespeculation.



63

Shakespeare's"RevengeTragedy"

JosephBrodsky,inanessayforTheNewYorker,evaluatedRobert

FrostasthequintessentialAmericanpoetofAmericanLetters.Brodsky

recountsthatatabanquetgiveninNewYorkontheoccasionofthepoet's

eighty-fifthbirthday,inathoughtfulandmemorabletoast,LionelTrilling,who

Brodskylabeledthemostprominentliterarycriticoftheperiod,declaredFrost

"aterrifyingpoet."Brodskythenmadeacleardistinctionbetweenterrifyingand

tragic."Tragedy,"Brodskynoted,"isalwaysafaitaccompli,whereasterror

alwayshastodowithaticipatlo , withma'srecogitio ofhisow egative

potential--withhissenseofwhatheiscapableof"(70).

Shakespeare'sHamletmaybearevengetragedy,butShakespeare

showshimselftobe"aterrifyingpoet"aswell.Hamletisterrifiedthathemay

discoverthepotentialevilinhisownheart.

Thereisconsiderablylessdistinctionbetweengoodandevilfor

Shakespeare'stragicheroasthereisfortheheroesofthetraditionalrevenge

tragedy.Hamletismadetofacemoraljudgmentsaboutissuesthatwere far

fromagreeduponinRenaissanceEngland.AsFryeassuresus,"The Prince

wasinvolvedinwhatwouldin1600haveseemedanextraordinarilyand

fascinatingcaseofconscience"(171).Thiswasnottrueforcontemporary

revengers,whetherfromthepensofMarston,Kyd,Tourneur,orother

playwrightsofthegenre.Thementalityofthetraditionalrevengeherowas

confinedtosavagevengeance.Agreatdealofcontemplationwashardly

necessaryfortheaccomplishmentofhistask.Incontrast,Shakespeareviewed



64

"men'sactsnotasexertionsmadeuponexternalobjectsbutasresultsof

internalstruggles"(Lewis81).Tomorefinelytunethedistinction,Laertes,the

conventionalvillian-revengerinShakespeare'splay,is"promptedtohisactions

bynothingmorethanhisowncravings.Asasymbol,herepresentsthataspect

ofrevengewhichoriginatesinthepsycheoftheindividual"(HalletandHallet

6).Hamletistheconventionalhero-revengerwhoisplacedonthepathof

revengebyforcesoutsidehimself,andisambivalentabouttheefficacyofthe

roleheiscastin.Asamatterofcourse,littleisever"conventional"in

Shakespeare'shands,andLaertesisnotsimplyavillian-revenger,andHamlet

theconventionalhero-revenger.Laertesis"averynobleyouth"(5.1.214)who

cravesrevengefromdeepinhispsyche;Hamlet,althoughextremely

ambivilant,exhibitsthesamepsychicurgetorevengeasdoesLaertes,apoint

morefullydevelopedlaterinthestudy.ThetheatricalformofShakespeare's

revengetragedythusbeguiledtheaudience,alongwithHamlet,todeliberate

overwhatshouldbedoneabouttheGhost'sstoryandhowtherevengeshould

beaccomplished.

ItisacceptedthatShakespeare,asdidhisfellowplaywrights,"borrowed"

ready-madeplotsmakingonlyslightvariationsinthestorylines."Themakingof

plot-materialwasnothisbusiness.Whathedidfeeltobehisbusinesswasthe

realizationofcharacter"(Lewis77).Shakespeare'srevengetragedyhad

borrowedgenerouslyfromBelleforest'shistoricalaccount2ofaNorselegend.It

drawsalsofromtheUr-Ham/etthatintroducedaghostcommandingHamletto



66

oftimethroughouttheplay.WecanassumethatHamlethadbeenatschoolin

Wittenbergatthetimeofhisfather'sdeathandrushedhomeforthefunera1.3

WecanexpectthatthefamilythereforewaitedseveralweekstoburytheKing.

Hamletspeaksofhisfatherbeing"Buttwomonthsdead-naynotsomuch,not

two-"(1.2.138)duringhisfirstsoliloquy.Thisoccasionedthefirstpublic

appearanceoftheroyalfamilysincethedeath.Wecanalso inferfromthis

speechthatthemarriage(andcoronation)tookplaceaboutamonth4afterthe

death,but,"follow[ing]hardupon" 1.2.179), perhapsnomorethanaweekafter

thefuneral.Itwouldappearthatthememoryoftheincestuousmarriageisas

"green"asthatof"Hamletourdearbrother'sdeath" 1.2.1-2).

ThenextmentionoftimepassingisinActIIwhenHamletasksthe

Playerstoenact The Murder of Gonzagoandarrangesfortheplaytobe

performedthenextnight:"We'llha'ttomorrownight"(2.2.528).Thisallowsusto

seethattheeventsofthethirdactfollowbyoneday. InActIIIOpheliainforms

usthat"'tistwicetwomonths"(3.2.119)sinceHamlet'sfatherdied.5Wewould

needtooconcludethattwoadditionalmonthshavepassedwhenwehearof

Ophelia'sfreighteningencounterwithHamletnearthestartofActII.Hamlet

killsPoloniustheeveningoftheperformanceofthe"Mousetrap"andisshipped

offtoEnglandthenextmorning.Hislastmentionofdelayiscontainedinhis

"Howalloccasionsdoinformagainstme"soliloquy(3.8.32-66)justbefore

departingforEngland.Hamletgivesuphispursuitofpersonalvengeancewhile

onboardthepirateshipbyplacinghisfaithinGod'sprovidencetoaccomplish



67

hisends.Itwouldappearthatafterthisjunctureintheplay,Hamletisnolonger

botheredbydelayprickinghisconscience,butthisdoesnotchangethefact

thathisfatherisstillunavenged.BradleytellsusthatbetweenHamlet's

embarkingonhisvoyageand"theremainderoftheplaywemustagain

supposeaninterval,thoughnotaverylongone"(113).Theeventsthatbring

onthemultipledeathshavealreadybeenputintomotionbyHamlet'sdecision

nottokilltheKingatprayers.HamletkillsClaudiusintheduellingscenewithin

threemonthsofthetimeheiscommandedtodosobytheGhost.Althoughthis

timeintervalisunacceptablylongforthosewhoholdthatHamletwasobligated

todothetask"immediately"uponacceptingthecommandoftheGhosttokill

theKing,itwouldnotbeaninappropriatedelayforthosewhoviewitasthe

taskofaRenaissancePrinceinHamlet'ssituation.6

TheEnormityoftheTask

TounderstandwhyHamletdelaystheimmediatekillingofhisuncle,itis

importanttounderstandthefullscopeofthetaskthattheGhostrequiresof

Hamlet.WhatarethecircumstancesthatHamletfindssodifficultandthattake

onsuchtragicconsequences?Wilsonasks,"Isnotthecross intolerable?Would

itnotcrushustodeath?"(44).Afterbeingliterallybroughttohiskneesbythe

griefthrustuponhimbytheGhost'sgraphicdescriptionofhiswretched

situation,Hamletstaggersunderanevengreaterload--thetaskthatheiscalled

upontoperform.WilsonmakesthepointthattheGhost,althoughdemanding

revenge,doesnotspecify"how."7Hesimplycommands,



68

If thou didst ever thy dear father love-

Revengehisfoulandmostunnaturalmurder.(1.5.22&24)

Wilsoncontinues,"thatisthegistofit.Revenge,buthow"(45).Itappearsthat

theGhost's"Buthowsoeverthoupursuesthisact"(1.5.83),amountstohisfull

instructionstoHamlettocarryouthisrevenge.WhattheGhostdoesprescribe

asparameters8forrevengeare,first,thattherebeanendtotheroyalbedof

Denmarkbeing"acouchforluxuryanddamnedincest"(1.5.82).Thesecond

commandisalsoclear:

Taintnotthymind,norletthysoulcontrive Againstthymotheraught-leavehertoheaven, Andtothosethornsthatinherbosomlodge Toprickandstingher. (1.5.84-87)

TheGhostseemstobeasconcernedwithriddingtheStateofitspollutionin

awaythatwouldspareGertrudefromscandalandrescuethefamilynameas

withkillingClaudius.Wilsonstatesitsuccinctly:"ThesalvationoftheQueenby

therescuingofherfromtheseductionsofherparamourisasstrongamotive

withtheGhostasthevengeanceitself,whichisafteralltheonlymeansof

rehabilitatingthefamilyhonour"(46).Wilsonfurthercontendsthatitwouldbe

impossibletobringClaudiustopublicjusticewithoutimplicatingGertrudeand

exposingherto"exactlythesituationwhichtheGhosthadcommandedHamlet

toavoid.LifewouldhavebeenimpossibleforGertrudeundersuch

circumstances.. . . Theawfulsecretwasafamilyaffair,inwhichthewhole

honouroftheHouseofHamletwasinvolved"(47&48).Itwasdifficultenough

forGertrudetohastilyenterintoanincestuousmarriage,whichwaspublic



69

knowledge;itwouldhavebeenimpossibleforhertobearthepublicscornof

beingregardedanaccompliceifitwereknownthatClaudiuskilledherhusband.

AsWilsonrelates,"Thefactswere,indeed,soblackagainsther,thatHamlet

himselfsuspectshercomplicity,andhissuspicionsevenleadhimtoentertain

thoughtsofexactingvengeanceuponheraswellasherconsort"(47).Hamlet,

itshouldberemembered,doesnotintendthekillingoftherulingsovereignto

bealsoanactofself-annihilation.Heseekstofindawaytoaccomplishhis

revengewithoutfurthersoilinghisfamily'shonor,andlikeLaertes,tokeephis

"fairnameungorged"(5.2.196).Adamsconcursthat"Thekillingofhisuncle,

therefore,mustfirstbecarriedoutwithsafetytohimself,andthenatonce

justifiedtoapartisanCourtandtothewholepeopleofDenmark"(226).The

difficultyofthistaskisgreatlyincreasedbyHamlet's"obligationtokeephis

motherfrombeingimplicatedintheexposuresthatnecessarilywouldfollow"

(226).And"[t]oalltheotherburdenswhichfatehadpiledupontheheroalast

andcrowningonewasadded,theburdenofdoubt"(Wilson49).

Hamlet'sBurdenofDoubt

WhatcanbeoccupyingHamlet'smindafterhehasrecoveredfromthe

traumaofconfrontinghisfather'sspirit?Hamletcouldconceivablyhavekilled

ClaudiusthenightofhisencounterwiththeGhost.Heputsoffimmediate

revengeandbideshistimebecauseheisnotconvincedthattheGhostis

tellingthetruth.TakenbysurprisebytheappearanceoftheGhost,Hamlet's



70

immediatereactionisfear:"AngelsandMinistersofgracedefendus!"(1.4.18),

incontrasttoHoratio's,"Look,mylord,itcomes"(17).Shakespearegivesus

Hamlet'sfirstindicationofhisimpendingdelaythatwilltormentthecharacter

untilhisarrivalbackfromhissailingadventure.WehearHamlet'sfearfulcries

astheGhostenters:

Bethouaspiritofhealthorgoblindamned, Bringwiththeeairsfromheavenorblastsfromhell, Bethyintentswickedorcharitable, Thoucom'stinsuchaquestionableshape ThatIwillspeaktothee.(1.4.19-23)

Hamletthendisplaysaposturethatdeniestheportendeddangerofaspirit

thatcouldhavebeensentbythedevil.HoratioandMarcelluspleadwithhim

nottofollowit,butovercomebyhismelancholy,andengulfedinthepassionof

themoment,HamletrationalizeswhyhedoesnothesitatetofollowtheGhost:

Why,whatshouldbethefear?Idonotsetmylifeatapin'sfee,Andformysoul,whatcanitdothat,Beingathingimmortalasitself? (1.4.45-48)

HibbardtellsusthatHoratio,inhis"Whatif"speechthatimmediatelyfollows,

describesElizabethanpopularbelief"thatthedevilsoughttowinsoulsforhell

bytemptingmenintotakingtheirownlivesandbyprovidingthemthe

opportunityfordoingso"(n.183).Hamlet'sdenialofhisfear isbroughtonby

theunderstandabletumultandfervoraccompanyingtheappearanceofhis

father'sspirit.Asaresult,hisjudgment"wax[ing]desperatewithimagination"

(1.4.62)becomesimpaired.TheElizabethanHamlet,likeHoratioandMarcellus,

wouldbeacutelyawareofthedangernotonlytohisphysicalbeing,butalsoto

hissoul.



71

Hamlet'sactionsaremotivatedbyresignation,andbyalackofregardfor

hisownlife.Horatio'sandMarcellus'attemptstopreventHamletfromfollowing

theGhostaregreetedbyHamletwithakindofhysteriathatbeliesthedanger.

Here,somesay,wearewitnessingtheactsofafearlessmanwhobreaksfree

ofhiscaptors,threatening,"Byheaven,I'llmakeaghostofhimthatletsme"

(1.4.60)Isitanactofbravery,arationalandresoluteactofamanwhose"fate

criesout"tohim,orareweseeingadesperatemanwhohasgivenuponlife

andfeelshehasnothingmoretolose,becausehehasalreadylosteverything

ofvalue?9Althoughthismaynotbeanactofbraverythatidentifiesthe

spontaneousreactionofatragichero,itdoesforeshadowtheheroicaspectof

Hamlet'scharacterhedisplayslaterintheplay:9

TheGhostcommandsHamletto"revengehisfoulandmostunnatural

murder"(1.4.24).Hamletfirstappealstoheavenforassurance,and

acknowledges"thepossibilityoftheGhost'sinfernalorigin"(Hibbardn. 190):

0allyouhostofheaven!0earth!Whatelse?AndshallIcouplehell?0fie! (1.4.91-92)

HamletdismisseshisspontaneouscastigationoftheGhost'squestionable

command,hishellishthoughts,with"0fie!"andswearstoremember the"poor

ghost."Herearetheseedsofdoubtthataresowntogerminatethelong debate

inHamlet'smindonwhethertheGhostis"aspiritofhealthorgoblindamned."

Thefearofkillinganinnocentmanonthewordofaspirit, whosecounselhas

notbeenprovenforgoodorill,ispartoftheenigmatic burdenthatkeeps

HamletfromactingtokilltheKing.11



72

AlthoughHamlethadgreetedthepossibilityofspeakingtotheGhost"though

hellitselfshouldgape/Andbidholdmypeace"(1.22.248)withenthusiasmand

energy,heisalsoawarethatheisputtinghissoulindanger.Hecannotbe

sureiftheGhostisgoodorevil,andmustwait forconfirmationofClaudius'

guiltthroughhisownadmission.Caughtupintheemotionsofthemoment

wherealldoubtsaresweptasidebyhisloveforhisfatherandhishorrorand

pityforhisfather'sspirit,HamletmakeshispromiseofrevengetotheGhost.

Whenhismomentarypassionsubsidesand"astheinterviewrecedes,itseffect

weakens,thecertaintygrowsdimmer,moreweightisgiventothepossibility

thatthespiritmayhaveassumedthepleasingshapeofthedeadkingto damn

hisson.AndthelongerHamletwaits,thegreatergrowbothhisdoubtsandhis

scornofhimselffornotacting"(Joseph106).

Asstatedpreviously,theGhost'scommandstoHamlettotakerevenge

wouldhaveevokeddifferinginterpretationsinRenaissanceEngland.According

toscholars,thereligiousandcivilcodesagainstpersonalrevengeversusthe

riskofcondemnationfromthesamemoralcomplexitiesforignoringthe

supernaturalcommandofrevengewouldbeasourceofgreatanxietyforthose

unfortunateenoughtobefacedwithsuchadilemma.AndevenwhenHamlet

satisfieshimselfthattheGhost'sreportwasproventrue,hestillwouldnotbe

convincedofadecisivecourseofaction.Washemorallyboundtoacceptan

evilandtyrannousruler,orin"perfectconscience/[to]quithimwiththisarm"

(5.22.68-69)tostopthespreadoffurtherevil?Hamlet's"uncertaintyofposition,

especiallywhenjoinedwiththequestionablenatureandpurposeoftheGhost,



73

makesHamlet'sproblemintenselychallenging,andperhapseveninsoluble"

(Frye12).

Hamlet'sremorseisfirstopenlyexpressedinhisthirdsoliloquyafterhe

leavestheplayers.Itisthefirsttimeheverballyacknowledgesthatthespirit

mightbeSatan.Inthefirsthalfofthesoliloquyheberateshimselfunmercifully

fornotonlyputtingofftherevenge,"but[for]hisignobleconductinfeigning

madness25sothathebecomesanobjectofpity,andderision . . .."(106-7).As

apossibleconsequenceofhismelancholy, HamletbelievesthattheDevil,who

"isverypatetwithsuchspirits/Auseshimtodam him"(2.2.597-99).Itis

clearthatthePrincemusthave"grounds/Morerelativethanthis"(599-600)to

actonhispromisetorevengehisfather'sdeath.JosephtellsusthatHamlet's

delaytothispointistheactionof

anysensiblemanwhoholdsthedoctrinepreachedbyrenaissance

churches;heisterrifiedofhell.Noonecanblamehimlogically for

hesitatingtoimperilhisimmortalsoul,yethisownsenseofhonourmakeshimashamed:hehateshisinactivity,squirmsandragesathisignobility,andallthemoreintenselybecausenomatterhowhardhonourmaypullinonedirection,hecannotmovewhilethefearofdamnationisheldbeforehimbyhisconscience.

(108)

Motivatedmorebyhisconscienceandreligiousconvictionsthanbythesocial

andlegalcodesoftheperiodprohibitingrevenge,"heisterrifiedbyhis

conscienceintowaitinguntiltheGhost'sclaimsandassertions havebeen

provedtrue"(108).



75

Campbellpointsoutthatpurposebornoutof"violent"passiondoesnotlast.

Resolveiswornawaywhenthepassionofthemomentsubsides.Aclear

exampleiswhenHamletisremindedbytheGhost,"towhet[his]almost

bluntedpurpose."HamletaskstheGhostifhisvisitationistochidehistardy

son,

That,lapsedintimeandpassion,letgobyTh'importantactingofyourdreadcommand?(3.4.100-103)

Hamletexperienceswhatisforhimgriefsoafflictingthatheconsiders

endinghislifetoeasehispain.Oncerejectingsuicide,Hamletcanpurge

himselfofitsdisablingeffectsonlybyabandoninghimselftohispassions.He

canonlyactinstinctivelywhenhisreasonisovertakenbyhispassion.He

cannotsustainapledgetorevengethatwasbegottenoutofimpulsivenessand

disorder.Althoughhisnoblenatureviewsrevengeashismoralobligation,his

actionsaretemperedbyRenaissanceconscience.Hibbardcontendsthat"the

qualityofHamlet'smindthatisinsistedonthroughouttheplayisitsnobility. . .

[Shakespeare]thuspresentstheherowiththedilemmathatisattheheartof

revengetragedy:howisthenobilityofthesuccessfulavengertobe

preserved?"(n.190).Hamlet'sself-preservationamountstomomentarylurches

into"enterprisesofgreatpithandmoment"(3.1.87)borderingonmadness(a

temporaryinsanitytobesure),whichactsasacatharticreleaseoftensionand

anxiety.

AclearcontrastcanbemadetoLaerteswhoassumestheroleof

avengerwithrelativeease.Asafoiltotheplay'shero,withpassionate



76

commitmentandfierydetermination,Laertesrepresentstheyoungaristocratic

noblemanwhotreasureshonor--honoringhisgoodnameabovereason.15And

oncehishonorissoiled,hisunbridledpassionwillstopatnothingtoexact

revenge.IfHamletwereLaertes,Claudiuswouldbedeadinthetimeittookto

runfromthebattlementstothethrone-room. ButunlikeLaertes,16whoisableto

overcomeconscienceandgivefullregardtohonor,Hamletispreoccupiedwith

both;hecannotpursueonewithoutbeingplaguedbytheother:"Honour

demandsvengeance,conscienceterrifieshimintowaiting"(Joseph116).

Waitingbringsonlycontempt;thereisnohonorinsufferingsilently,andyet,

Hamletcannotactuntilhehassatisfiedhisconscience,hisinnervoiceofmoral

judgment.Iffearingeternaldamnationforcommittingthesinofmurderona

spirit'suntestedwordisanactofconscience,"Thusconsciencedoesmake

cowardsofusall"(3.1.84).

Hamlet'sIntellectualandSensitiveNature

HamletperceivestheGhost'schargesagainstClaudiusontwolevels.He

becomespersonallyresponsibletorevengehisfather'smurder,andhealso

mustcorrectthehistoricalwrongofwillfulregicide.Hamletmusttakeonboth

personalandpoliticalresponsibilitythatseemsanoverwhelmingtask.He

laments,"Thetimeisoutofjoint.0cursedspite,\Thatever Iwasborntosetit

right!"(1.5.196-97).AsaRenaissancescholar,Hamletisledtoself-examination

todiscoverifheisabletoperformpremeditatedmurder,aviolencethatis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/reason.15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/reason.15



77

againsthisnature.Heiscaughtbetweentheboundsofanassignedimperative

torestorehonortothetarnishedthroneofDenmarkandhiscontemplativeand

philosophicalnature;itisableakstrugglebetweenactionandintellect.Itwould

followthatamaneducatedasaliberalhumanistwouldattempttoapproachhis

plightthroughreasonratherthanemotion.Hamlet'sappealtoreasontobring

balancetothebestialinman'snatureisexemplifiedinhis"Whatapieceof

workisman,hownobleinreason . ."speech(2.2.300-04).Hamlet'shigh

regardforreason"wasinkeepingwiththeChristianepistemologyofthe

sixteenth-centuryasithelpedtoformtheEnglishRenaissanceand

Reformation"(Fryen.340).BeingaRenaissanceprince,hewouldseekto

combinebothactionandthoughtfulness,asOpheliarecallsthenoblePrince:

Thecourtier's,soldier's,scholar's,eye,tongue,sword;Th'expectancyandroseofthefairstate,. . .. (3.1.152-53)

HamletisawareoftheRenaissanceidealofcombiningthewarlikequalityof

MarsandthereasonandunderstandingofMercurythathehadseeninhis

deadfather:

AneyelikeMars,tothreatenandcommand,AstationliketheheraldMercuryNewlightedonaheaven-kissinghill-

AcombinationandaformindeedWhereeverygoddidseemtosethissealTogivetheworldassuranceofaman.(3.4.58-63)

Fryemaintainsthat,"bothimplicitlyandexplicitly,Hamlet'ssoliloquiesrecordhis

effortstoachieveasimilarresolution"(175).Andinhisattempttocombinethe

attributesofbothMarsandMercury,HamletmustlooktobothHoratioand



78

Fortinbras as foils to "achieve thought without cowardice, and decisiveness

without recklessness" (175). Although his struggle against his rashness, his

killing the wrong man in his mother's bed-chamber, begins a train of events that

ultimately ends in his own destruction, his struggle against his perceived

cowardice occupies a good deal of his thoughts. This preoccupation with being

overtaken by fear, thus paralyzing his will to act, first appears at the conclusion

ofActTwowhenhecriesout,"AmIacoward?"(2.2.559).Hamletalsotalks

abouthiscowardiceinhis"Tobeornottobe"soliloquy,andhislastsoliloquy

inActIVwhenhereflectsonFortinbras'warring:

Now,whetheritbe Bestialoblivion,orsomecravenscruple Ofthinkingtoopreciselyonth'event-Athoughtwhich,quartered,hathbutonepartwisdom Andeverthreepartscoward.. . (4.4.31-35)

Hamlet'sthoughtsaboutcowardiceappeartobeamanifestationofhisinability

tounderstandwhyhedoesnotact:

. . . Idonotknow WhyyetI livetosaythisthing'stodo, SithIhavecause,andwill,andstrength,andmeans

Todo't. (4.4.35-39)

Hebringsupthesubjectofhis"cowardice"asapossibleanswertohisdelay

solelytorejectit.Heknowsheisnotacoward,andthereinforcementofthis

ideaisimportanttohiswoundedego.Herewecanespeciallyappreciate

Hamlet'sdifficulttaskofunitingthescholar,aMercuricman,"nobleinreason,"

withtherashnessofthesoldier,with"aneyelikeMars,"intohonorableaction,

takentogetherasoneprimarycausefordelayingrevenge.



79

APrince'sDilemma

Fryegivesabriefsummaryofthehistoricalconditionsandpressuresa

sixteenth-centuryprinceofHamlet'spositionwouldhavebeenfacedwith:[1]

UnderearlyTudordoctrineallresistancetoestablishedauthorityinEngland,

"eveniftyrannicalandabusive,"wasforbidden.Apassiveacceptanceofthe

inheritedstatusquowasenforced.Inaddition,Elizabethandoctrinepublicly

recognizedaquitedifferentstandardforforeignprincesfromthoseapprovedin

AnglicanEngland.[2]Attheotherextreme,ScottishCalvinismadvocated

"all-outoppositiontoatyrant,urgingallofsocietytotakeuparmsanduse

whateverforcenecessarytodefeatandoverthrowtheunjustauthority."[3]A

thirdpositionwasfosteredbytheHuguenotmagnates.Simplystated,itwasthe

soleobligationofaprinceoftheblood,and"onlywhencertainofhisground

andofhisconscience,"toinitiateactionagainstatyrant(168).17Itiswithinthis

contextthatShakespeare'saudiencewouldhavejudgedHamlet'sconfronting

hisdifficult,confusing,andcontradictoryalternatives.Thetakingofanother'slife

inpremeditatedmurder,andespeciallythelifeofaking,isunderstandably

agonizing.ForHamlet,whoisaRenaissanceprince,themostnaturalreaction

wouldbetohesitate,tocometotermswithhisemotionsandthinkabout the

problemasrationallyaspossiblebeforetakinganyaction.Thisiswhathe

does.Hedelaysanyrashattempttostrikeoutathisuncleand devisesaplan

toverifythathisuncleisguiltyofregicide.HamletfirstconcealstheGhost's

chargesfromHoratio,Bernardo,andMarcellus,andswearsthemtosecrecy



80

aboutseeingtheGhost.Healsoplanstoputonan"anticdisposition"totryto

disguisehisintentionstodiscoveriftheGhostistellingthetruth.18Itisclear

thatafterHamlet'semotionssubside,heisnotsurethatwhathewitnessedwas

ofheavenortheworkofthedevil.FromtheverybeginningoftheplayHamlet

triestorestrainhiscompunction,theanxietyarisingfromhisguilt,totake

immediateactionasmightbeexpectedofasonwhenhediscoversthathis

fatherhasbeenmurdered.

TheGhosthauntsHamlet'sreveriesandpenetrateshisdeepestthoughts

togoadhimintoaction.Thesemomentsofmeditationandcontemplation

becomefilledwithself-recriminationsandflagellation.Heforceshimselfto

confrontthedivisioninhisnaturethatiscausinghisturmoil.Hamlet's

soliloquiesbecomebothexercisesinreasontodecideuponacourseofaction

andconfessionalstopurgehisextremefeelingsofguilt.Hefillshislifewith

wordsbecausehecannotbringhimselftoact,whiledirectinghisbuilt-upanger

andtensionstowardothers.Hamlet,believingOpheliahasbetrayedhim,

displaceshisrepressedfeelingsofhostilityontoherinanoutpouringofabuse.

Hisinterchangewithhismotherwhenheassertshisneedtobecruel"onlyto

bekind"(3.4.167),appearstohavelittlekindnessinit.Hissoliloquiesmaybe

seenasoverlyreflectiveatmomentswhencircumstancesappeartocallfor

moredecisiveaction,buttheyalsoservetoexciteHamletintorenewed

commitment,atleastmomentarily.Fryecontends,"Hamlet'sresponseisto

deliberate,inthefullsenseofweighingandevaluatingthealternativesbefore

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/truth.18

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/truth.18



81

him,andaboutthatherepeatedlyexpressesguiltfeelingswhichcannotbe

ignored"(171).Althoughhepointsoutthefunctionofdelayandtheguiltit

engendersinHamlet'scharacterization,Fryewarnsnottoexaggerateitsoverall

importance:"Hamlet'sinactionirritateshimandmayderivativelyirritateus,but

delayinaprinceisnotnecessarilyabadthing"(171).FryecitesGiovanni

Botero,anauthorityonsixteenth-centurystatesmanship,whoadvises,". . .a

rulershouldavoidextremesbutshouldbe'deliberateandjudicious, inclining

rathertoslownessthantohastebecauseslownesshassomeaffinitywith

prudenceandhastewithrashness"(qtd.inFrye171).

TheIronyofAction

Hamlet'snextdelaycomeswiththeappearanceoftheplayers.He

devisesaschemetoprovokeClaudiustoexposehisguiltashewatchesaplay

Hamletentitles"TheMousetrap."Elatedwiththeresults,Hamlet,thenon his

waytohismother'schambers,comesacrossClaudiuspraying.Erlich,arguing

thatHamlet'sdilemmaderivesfromthelackofastrongfatherinhis life,helps

toillustratehisthesisthroughananalysisoftheprayerscene.Hetellsusthat

Hamlet"wisheshisfatherstrongenoughtopunishClaudius"inaspeechthat

"dredgesup"toconsciousnesstherepressedmaterialfromhis"secretself"

(28).ThefatherErlichreferstoisnotKingHamletorevenhissufferingspirit,

but"God,theuniversalfatherfigure"(29).BysubstitutingGodforKingHamlet,

Erlichmaintainsthat"wehearHamletunconsciouslywishingthathisfather



82

wereabletodohisownrevenging"(29).Thephrase"hireandsalary"isthe

lynch-pinonwhichhisreadingofHamlet'sthoughtsrests.ErlichsaysHamlet

believesthatbykillingClaudiushimself,hewouldbenobetterthanahired

mercenarywhoseonlyconcernistogetthejobdone.Thiswouldrequirethat

KingHamlet,tooweaktodothedeedhimself,musthireanassassin.In

Hamlet'smind,"JustasHamletwantstoseeGodthefatherasthecrucial

punisher,healsowouldlikehisownfathertobeabletopunish,andheimplies

thathisfatherhasabdicatedtheresponsibilitybyhiringandsalaryinghisson"

(30).ErlichpointsoutthatmostliteraryandpsychoanalyticcriticsseeHamlet's

delayinkillingClaudiusintheprayersceneassimplyanotherconvenient

rationalization.HecountersthisargumentbyassertingthatbyHamlet's

delayingClaudius'sdeath,hecan"fantasize"asituationbywhichhecouldtrust

GodtodoHiswork:

NowisnotagoodtimebecauseGodwouldbehandcuffedbyHisownrulesand,accordingtoHamlet'storturedtheology,HewouldhavetopardonClaudius.HamletneedsaGodandafather

whoisnotsotolerantof"incestuous"criminals. . . Hamletdoes

notactintheprayerscene,Ithink,becauseheunconsciouslywantshisfathertoact.Hedesperatelyneedsastrongfatherwho,likehispunitiveGod,willdamnClaudiustohell. (30,31).

ErlichmaintainsthatthisisborneoutattheendoftheplaywhenHamlet

returnstoDenmarkwithabeliefinGod's"specialprovidence"toaidhiminhis

revenge.

ErlichlookstoOttoRank19fortheinterestingargumentthatHamlet,wanting

tocatchhisuncleinthesamesinfulstateKingHamletwascaught inwhen



84

atthismoment:wewanthimtowait"(Andrews85).Thewaitingisnotformoral

orreligiousforbearance; theKing"mustlivenowsohemay diebetter--thatis,

moredramaticallylater" (85).HamletkillsClaudiusintheduellingscene,a

sequenceironicallyarrangedbyClaudiustokillHamlet.UnlikeLaertes,who

confesseshispartinthetreacheryandacknowledgesthejusticeofhis

situation,Claudiusmakesnoacknowldgementofhiscrimesanddies

impenitent.Hamletseeingthereis"norelishofsalvation"inClaudius'death,

feelsconfidenthehasexactedajustrevenge.

Hamlettakeshisfirstphysicalactiontorevenge,thinkingitisClaudius

hiddenbehindthearras,bymistakenlykillingPoloniusinafitofpassion.21

Ironically,itisHamlet'sveryattempttostrikeoutagainstClaudiusandachieve

hisgoalofvengeancethatbringsonhisowndestruction.OntheElizabethan

stage,"blooddemandedblood;"andhishandsstainedwithinnocentblood,

Hamletwas"thereafteradoomedman"(Bowers,"MinisterAndScourge"741).

HamletisdetainedandthensenttoEngland.Itisonthismysticalvoyage,a

voyageofdiscoveryandtransformation,thatHamletcomestotermswithhis

problemofrevenge.Stilluncertainandfilledwithindecision,itisnotuntil

HamletreturnstoDenmarkinActV"thathisuncertaintieshavebeenresolved,

andtheconsciencehehassopainfullyconsultedisnowfullycommittedtoa

singlejustanddecisiveaction"(Frye176).Hecomestotermswithdeathinthe

graveyardscenerealizingthatallthingsmustdieandthatClaudiuswillalso

meethisfate.22Itisherein thegraveyardthatHamletacceptstheconditionof

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/passion.21

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/passion.21



85

beinghuman.Henotonlyacceptsdeath,butheacceptslifeaswell,naked,

andfreeofhisself-absorptionandwildimaginings.Alongwiththemysteriesof

lifewithwhichHamlethassolongstruggled,

[t]hemysteryofevilispresentedhere--forthisisafterallthe

universalgraveyard,where,astheclownsayshumorously,he

holdsupAdam'sprofession;wheretheschemingpolitician,the

hollowcourtier,thetrickylawyer,theemperorandtheclownand

thebeautifulyoungmaiden,allcometogetherinanemblemofthe

world;whereeven,Hamletmurmurs,onemightexpecttostumble

on"Cain'sjawbone,thatdidthefirstmurther."(Mack58)

ItisnotuntilHamletgivesupthepursuitofrevengeandturnstoprovidence

forhelpthathecanrelievethegreatpressureattachedtothemagnitudeand

difficultyofhistask.Indoingso,Hamlet,"integrat[ing]dyingastheunavoidable

partoflifewithwhichitends,becomescapabletherebyofreshapinghis

attitudetowardthefuture"(Eissler241). ItisnotthatHamlethas"suddenly

becomereligious;hehasbeenreligiousallthroughtheplay.Thepointisthat

hehasnowlearned,andaccepted,theboundariesinwhichaction,human

judgment,areenclosed"(Mack56).HenolongerseekstoplayatGod,taking

theillsoftheworldonhisfragile shoulders,butlearns"therearelimitstothe

beforeandafterthathumanreasoncancomprehend"(57).Hereleaseshimself

fromhisgreatburdensandleavestheprobleminGod'shandsashewaits

calmlyforthedivineplanforpunishingthewickedtounfolditself.Hamlet's

answerbeingcenteredinhisrelianceonChristianprovidence,heisconvinced

thatClaudiuswillmeethisdeath throughGod'sjustice.("There'sadivinitythat

shapesourends,/Rough-hewthemhowwewill-"(5.2.10-11)123Insteadof



86

seeinghimselfasa"scourgeandminister,"hediscoversthatbyacceptinghis

placeinGod'sprovidentialplan,therevengewilltakecareofitself:

There'saspecialprovidenceinthefallofasparrow. Ifitbenow,itwillbenow.Ifitbenottisnottocome.Ifitbenottocome,

now,yetitwillcome.Thereadinessisall. (5.2.166-69)

InhisspeechtoHoratio,weseeHamlet"asamanwhoisfreeofneurotic

doubts,nolongerdividedwithinhimself,andwithamentalitythatmakeshim

capableofactingdirectlyonreality" (Eissler412).Andrewsisdirectwhenhe

says,"Hamletseemsas readytokillasClaudiusseemsripetodie"(90).In

orderforHamlettobeGod'sinstrument,heneedstoprepare,toreadyhimself

toaccepthisroleinthedivine plan.Itmaybeareadinesstodieforajust

cause,butitisalsoareadinesstoliveaspirituallifethatreflectsa stateof

graceandtruth.Ironically,Polonius'advice,"Thisaboveall--tothineownselfbe

true"(1.3.78),touchesontheessentialtruththatShakespearehasHamlet

discover.Henolongertriestomanipulatetherevengeonhisown,norinitiate

anyfurtheractiontokillClaudius.HeispreparedtoallowClaudius'deathto

comeaboutasitwill.AstheGravediggersays:"Butifthewatercomestohim,

anddrownhim,hedrownsnothimself"(5.1.16.)24Hamlet,bynotactively

pursuingrevenge,butallowingthesituationtopresentitselftohim,wouldnot

aforethought,Claudius'death.bepremeditating,withmalice

Hamletappearstoshownoconcernforhisinactivitynow;itisnolonger

anissueforhim."Hehascomefromthe'now'ofpassion,"saysAndrews,"to

. . .?to'Letbe'"(91).Thisisnotthe'now'oftranquilacquiesence--from'Tobe



87

tosaythatrevengehaslostanyurgencyforHamlet,"[Nutsinceamanmaykill

andbekilledinthetimeittakestosay'one,'there isnoreasontohurry"(Fly

270).Hamletnolongerfeelsresponsibleformakingrevengehappen,or

delayingitforthatmatter.HehasrelinquishedtheseresponsibilitiestoGod.It

isHamlet'sjobtopreparehimselffortherolehehasbeenchosentoplayin

Claudius'send.Hamletfullyintendstoactwhentheopportunityismade

availabletohim.Hamletbelievesthathistaskofrevenge,beinginGod's

hands,25isinevitable,andClaudius'sdeathwillcomeinduetime:tothis

"favour"Claudiusmust(also)come.HamletisresoluteinhiswordstoHoratio

aboutClaudius:

Hethathathkilledmykingandwhoredmymother,

Poppedinbetweenth'electionandmyhopes,Thrownouthisangleformyproperlife,

Andwithsuchcozenage is'tnotperfectconscience

Toquithimwiththisarm?(5.2.66-70)

Hamlethasevolvedtoastateofacceptanceofhimselfandhismortality.He

neverfearedforhisphysicalsafety,whetherinthetakingofhisownlife,or

dyinglikeasoldierinbattleforanoblecause;killinghadalwaysbeenforhima

questionofconscience26basedonhumanisticthoughtandChristiandoctrine

thatcondemnprivaterevengeasimmoralandun-Christian.Hamlethasnow

cometotermswithhisconscience,acceptingthathissoulwillbedamnedifhe

"let[s]thiscankerofournaturecome/in furtherevil"(5.2.70-71).Hamlethas

cometoareconciliationbetweenhistruenatureandhisresponsibilitytohis

father'smemorythroughtheperceivedomnipotenceofthesupernatural.Inthe



88

contextofapsychoanalyticalframework,BernthalsuggeststhatHamletgives

uphisstruggletofindhis"self"and "stopsviewinglifeasariddleinneedofa

solution"(49)."Inrelinquishinghissearchfortheself,"Bernthalcontinues,

"Hamletparadoxicallybecomesmorereal--morecenteredandpowerful--than

heeverwas.Inhisfinalwillingnesstoletgoofhisself,hefindsit"(49).Hamlet

hasovercomehishesitationtokillClaudius,catchinghimatthemomentof

publicguilt,notasanassassin,butasan instrumentofGod'swill:aministerof

heavenchosentocarryoutHisjustice.

WhatShakespeareKnew

Shakespearehaspresentedanextraordinarycharacter inHamlet,what

Rosenbergcalls"asocialphenomenon,. . . themostpolyphonicofdramatic

characters"(92).NorthropFryedescribesthecomplexityofHamlet'smindasa

"completeuniverseinitself,rangingfromhintsofadivinitythatshapesour

endstoamelancholysenseoftheunbearableloathsomenessofphysicallife,

andwhoseactionsrangefromdelicatecourtesytoshockingbrutality"(Foolsof

Time39).HerewehavethetrueRenaissanceman, the"manforallseasons,"

themanWilsoncalls"oneofthegreatestandmost fascinatingof

Shakespeare'screations;astudyingenius"(219).Ifanytheatricalinvention

couldfulfilltheexpectationsofthehumanisticspiritoftheRenaissance,it

shouldbeShakespeare'sHamlet.Andyetwhenmanispushedtohislimits,his

backfirmlyagainstthewail,Shakespeareknewthateventhemostnoblemay

resorttobaserinstinctstoattainrelief.AsLewiscontends,Shakespearehas



89

presented"anadmirablyheroicyouthdriventovengeancebyanirresistible

impulse"(90).27

Atthemomentofbeinginformedofhisowndeath,Hamletkillsinthe

throesofunmitigatedrage,committingwhatmustbeconsideredamortalsinin

theeyesoftheChurch.WithHamlet'sconsiderabledeliberationsinhis

soliloquies,withtheknowledgeofhisfatherbeingtaken"[w]ithallhiscrimes

broadblown,asflushasMay"(3.3.80-81)whosespiritisnowsufferingthe

tortuousfiresofhisprison-house,andwithdelayingClaudius'deathuntilhe

findshimin"someact/Thathasnorelishofsalvationin't . . . thathissoulmay

bedamnedandblack/Ashell"(3.3.92-95),Hamlethadtobestrickenwith

"bestialoblivion"todiscardthedamnableconsequenceshissoulwouldincurfor

killingClaudiusundersuchcircumstances.HamletisafflictedwithwhatElliot

calls"hate,proudhate(forhisuncle),closetothevery'heart'ofhiscomplex

'mystery"(102-03).Man'sreasontakesabackseattohispassion,andhe

experienceswhatProssercalled"thesurrenderofreason,thesurrenderat

leasttodangerousrashnessandatthemosttoactualmadness"(93).

Whileundergreatstress,manwillstrikeoutfromthepartofhispsyche

(the"id"inFreudianterms28)thatcontainshismostprimitiveinstincts.The

savagerythatHamletdisplaysinhisextremeabuseofOphelia,hisattackon

hismotherinherchamber,hisruthlessnesstowardRosencrantzand

Gildenstern,andhiscruelwordsfortheprayingKing,thatJohnsonfound"too

horribletobereadortobeuttered,"canallbe attributedtoamindcorruptedby



90

thoughtsofrevenge.Hamlet'smindis"tainted"and"thinkingdoesmake itso"

(2.2.248).intheElizabethanperspective,theevilnatureofpersonalblood-

revengeseizestherevenger'smindandsoulandproducesthoughtsand

actionsthatleadtoprofoundtragedy;Hamlethascometohisdiscoveryofhis

fatetoolate.29AccordingtoBowers,"AnyhumanagentusedbyGodtovisit

wrathandtoscourgeevilbyevilwasalreadycondemned"("Ministerand

Scourge"743).Hamlet's"disclaimingfromapurposed(italicsmine)evil"

(5.2.186)tofreehimfromblameformistakenlykillingthewrongman,would

stillbepremeditatedmurderinthefirstdegree.3°ItwasstandardElizabethan

religiouspractice,Bowersmaintains,thatGodpunishedsin by"arousingthe

conscienceofanindividualtoasenseofguiltandremorse,whichmightin

extraordinarycasesgrowsoacuteastoleadtomadness"(743).Perhapsthe

"soredistraction"HamlettellsLaerteshewaspunishedwithwasthis

"madness."Hamletproclaimsitasmadnessanddeniesthatwhathehaddone

wasinhistruenature:

WhatIhavedone Thatmightyournature,honour,andexception Roughlyawake,Ihereproclaimwasmadness. Was'tHamletwrongedLaertes?NeverHamlet.

IfHamletfromhimselfbeta'enaway, Andwhenhe'snothimselfdoeswrongLaertes, ThenHamletdoesitnot,Hamletdeniesit. Whodoesitthen?Hismadness.(5.2.176-83)

Itwouldfollowthatthe"purposedevil"forvengeanceagainsthishateduncle

hadtakenoverHamlet'sarmaswellashissoul.Hamletmustpayforhis

indiscretions,hisdeadlyerrorsofvengefulpassion,withhisownlife"for



91

Heaven'sdispleasureathisprivaterevenge"(Bowers,"MinisterandScourge"

746).Gardnerreflectsontheironythatthevillainoftherevengetragedyis

unawarethathe"inviteshisdestroyertodestroyhim"(44).Thegreaterironyis

that"[o]nceinvited,theherodescendswithalacritytothemorallevelofhis

opponent.Thevengeancewhenitcomesisashideousastheoriginalcrime,or

evenmorehideous,andthemoralfeelingsoftheaudienceareconfused

betweensatisfactionandoutrage"(44).

Hamletundergoesmaturation,acharacterchange,thatallowshimto

achievehisgoalofkillingClaudius,butnotnecessarilyas theactofrevengefor

hisfather'sdeath.ThroughwhathebelievestobeGod'sdivineguidance,

HamletentersaduelingmatchwithLaertesandendsupdefendinghimself

againstClaudius'streacherybykillinghisattackers.Itmaybehelpfultobriefly

repeatthesequenceofeventsthatbringsclosuretoHamlet'sproblem:With

Laertes'confessionthat"theKing'stoblame"forthepoisonings(5.2.274),

HamletseeksrevengeforbeingpoisonedhimselfbystabbingClaudiuswiththe

envenomedsword:"Then,venom,tothywork"(275).ItislikelythatHamlet

doesnotintendtomortallywoundClaudiuswithhissword,butwishesClaudius

todieofthesamepoisonthatwasusedon him.31AfterHamletstabshim,

Claudiusexclaims,"0,yetdefendme,friends,Iambuthurt"(277).Hamlet

thentakesrevengeforhismother'smurderbyforcingClaudiustodrinkfrom

thepoisonedcup.ItmaybeassumedthatsinceOldHamletwasalsopoisoned

byClaudius,Laertes'"Heisjustlyserved;/Itisapoisontemperedbyhimself"



92

(282-84) might symbolically apply to revenge taken for Hamlet's father's being

poisoned as well, although Old Hamlet is never mentioned in the scene.

itisthemannerinwhichHamletkillsClaudiusthatdistinguisheshimas

arevenger.First,itmustbemadeclearthatClaudiusisunarmedand

defenselessagainsthim.If,forexample,Hamlet'sswordwasfreefrompoison

andthecupfromwhichhismotherdrankwasempty,itisunlikelythatHamlet

wouldhavekilledtheKingashehasrefrainedfromdoinguntilnow.Hamletis

innoimminentdangerfromClaudiusandhasnofurtherreasontodefend

himselfagainsthim.HamletisalreadypoisonedandinformedbyLaertesthat

heisdoomed.ClaudiusisrenderedhelplesswhenLaertesconfesseshis,and

theKing's,treachery.KillingClaudiustwice,sotospeak,whenHamletcould

havesparedhislifeandbroughthimtolegaljustice,emphasizes

Shakespeare'sdeterminationtoshowusrevengeasanextremelypowerful

agentofhumannature.Hamletcontinuestoresistthelegalmechanismsofthe

period,notbecausehebelievehecannotbesuccessful,--heisobviously

awarethatnoone,nottheKing'sguardsnoranymemberoftheStatehas

movedtoprotectClaudius--butbecausehemustabidewithaprimitive

responsivenesstothebeastialpartofhisnature.Elizabethansbelievedthat

"revengeisadesiretorequiteanevilreceivedbyreturninganevil"(Bowers,

RevengeTragedy35),"whichhathsomecolourtoworkeiniurie,foriniurie"

(NordeninBowers35).WecanseethatHamlet,caughtinthepassionofthe

moment,succumbstothetraitthatalliesamoralmantohisbeastialnature,



94

Alittleboycapturedafly.BeingacuriouschildHetooktheflyapart,TryingtounderstandhowItwasputtogether.Well,hepulledtheflyintopieces,Andhadthewings,andthelegs,Andthebody,andthehead. . .

Butwonderedwheretheflyhadgone.

(ASufiTa/e)

ChapterIV

CONCLUSION

"Hamletisaplayofchoices"(Cohen1),andforreadersoftheplay,time

allowsmanyinterpretationstobeconsideredatonce.Asreaderswecanweigh

diverseandcontradictorymeaningsofcharacterandactionuntilwecomeupon

asatisfactoryunderstandingoftheplay. Readersoftheplaycan,attheir

leisure,bringoneofthemanyinterpretationstobearonaparticularspeechor

behaviorthatfitswiththeoverallmeaningtheyhavegiventotheplay.The

interpretationcanbereconsideredandchangedastheyprogressfurtherinto

theplayanddiscovernewandconflictingmeaning.Withtime,wemightread,

andre-read,knowingthat"[Onaminutethereistime/Fordecisionsand

revisionswhichaminutewillreverse"(Eliot4)beforesettlingonasuitable

interpretation.Notsofortheater-goers;theydonothavethisluxury.The

interpretationhasbeenchosenbythetheatercompany,andiftheinterpretation

iswellconceived,unified,andcoherent,andtheplayiswell rehearsedand



95

polished,thereshouldbelittleconfusiontothemeaningoftheirproduction.

Eachtheatricalproductionisadistinctsetofchoicesthatcompriseasingle

interpretation.Thedirectorandtheactorsmustchooseaninterpretationthat

yieldsthecharactersconsistentandbelievable.AndsinceShakespearehad

writtenhisplaysforastageaudience,andnotforcriticsandscholars,themost

sensibleapproachtothemeaningoftheplaymightbehowitrelatedtoits

Elizabethanaudience;wemusttrytounderstandHamlet'sdelaysinthislightas

well

Ifweabidebyouropeningdefinitionofdelay,whichaccountsfor

Hamlet'sactionsfromthetimehehearstheGhost'scommandsforrevengeto

theplay'sending,wemustconcludethatHamletdoesdelaykilling Claudiusfor

themurderofhisfather.Thisisnottosaythathisdelaysareunwarranted,

unjustified,orinsupportable.ItsimplymeansthatHamletdidnotkillhisuncle

onthenighthewascommandedtotakerevengebyhisfather'sghost,but

waitedalmostthreemonthstoaccomplishhistask.Hamlet'sdelaysare only

noticeabletoHamlet,forthemostpart,throughthefirsthalfoftheplay.

Claudius,andtheaudience,becomeawareofHamlet'sdelaysprimarily

becauseofHamlet'sowndistressingreactionstothem.Hisprocrastinationsare

duetovariouspersonalitytraitsandseveralexternalevents operatingwithin

thecontextofHamletbeingaRenaissanceprince.Heis gravelyaware

throughouttheplaythathehasnottakentimelyactionagainstClaudiusandis

plaguedbyguiltforhisdelays.Howeverguilt-ridden,heisunpreparedtokill



96

Claudiusuntilcertainconditionsofconsciencearesatisfiedinhisownmind.

Althoughthevarious,andsometimescontradictory,criticaltheoriesofHamlet's

delayprovideinvaluableinsightsintothenatureandmeaningofShakespeare's

hero,thereisnosingleexplanationthatcanreasonablyaccountforHamlet's

delaysthroughouttheactionoftheplay;nosingleexplanationcanaccountfor

thecomplexityofthehumanpsyche.Hamletisneitherentirelytoosensitivenor

highstrung,intellectualnorcontemplative,normelancholythroughout,although

hedisplayssomethingofallthesetendenciesduringthecourseoftheplay.

Shakespearehasshownusmuchintheplaythatisinconsistentwithanyof

theseinterpretationsstandingonitsown.

InthelightofGoethe'sfinding,Hamletisextremelydelicateinsensibility,

theimageofadelicatevase,andheistooweaktoaccomplishhistask.

RepresentedbyGoetheas"[a]beautiful,pure,nobleandmostmoralnature,

withoutthestrengthofnervewhichmakesthehero,itsinksbeneathaburden

whichitcanneitherbearnorthrowoff"(qtd.inFurness273).Hamlet,then,is

subjectedtoanintolerablefate.ConcerningHamlet'sdeliberation,Schlegel

calledtheplay,a"tragedyofthought. . . crippl[ing]thepowerofacting,"while

ColeridgeespousedanarrowpsychologicalinterpretationwhereHamlet'sentire

motivationisdirectedfromhisinnerlife.Goethedidnotaccountforthe

incidentsofinnerstrengthandbraveactions33Hamletundertakesthroughout

thecourseoftheplay,andSchlegelandColeridge,although identifyingan

importantaspectofHamlet'spersonalityaffectinghisdelaying,didnotconsider



97

how external events in the play affect Hamlet's internalmotivation.Coleridge's

positionthatHamlet'sdelaywascausedbyhisexcessivereflectionsparalyzing

hiswilltoact34addsgreatlytoourknowledgeoftheman,strengtheninghis

caseforintellectasacontrollingfactorinHamlet'scharacter,butitdoesnot

fullyaccountforHamlet'sdelays.BradleyarguedthatHamletisamelancholic

personalitypronetodepression,andhismother'sbetrayalissoshockingthatit

propelshimtoward"bewilderedhorror,thenloathing, thendespairofhuman

nature"(95).Hamlet,plaguedbyhismelancholiccondition,thereforecannot

bringhimselftotakedeliberateactionstorevengehisfather'sdeath.

Hamletiscertainlymelancholicwhenwefirstmeethim,buthiscondition

dissipatesasHamletprogressesthroughtheplay--Howelsecouldoneaccount

fortheenergy35Hamletacquiresafterheis commandedtorevengehisfather's

death?Itisclearthatnoonelabelcanbe appliedtoaccountcomprehensively

foralltheemotionalandpsychologicaldynamicsthatareatplayinHamlet's

delays.CommentingonthelackofaunifiedtheorytoaccountforHamlet's

behaviorthroughouttheplay,H.N.Hudsonholds,"Itiseasytoinvestwith

plausibilityalmostanytheoryrespectinghim,butveryhardtomakeanytheory

comprehendthewholesubject;andwhileallareimpressedwiththetruthofthe

character,nooneissatisfiedwithanother'sexplanationofit"(qtd.inFurness

178).

AlthoughShakespeareremovedthephysicalbarrierstomakeClaudius

accessibletoHamlet,ShakespearealsocomplicatedHamlet'staskbycreating,



98

(1)thecomplexandambiguousrelationshiptriangleinvolvingHamlet,Gertrude,

andtheGhost,(2)Hamlet'ssymbioticrelationshipwithhismother,afusion that

alertedFreudandJonestoemploytheirOedipalhypothesis,36and(3)Hamlet's

spiritual,religious,andpoliticalphilosophiesevolvinginresponsetochangesin

Renaissancethoughtandopinion.Eachoftheaboveinterpretations,mosaics

spunthroughdifferentmethodologiesandsupportabletovaryingdegrees

throughthetext,canbetterservetoenrichouroutlookratherthansufficeasa

unifiedtheorytoaccountforHamlet'sdelays.Itseemsmoreappropriatetosay,

Hamletdelaysondifferentoccasions,andfordifferentreasons,inhisattempt

toresolvehisdilemmaofrevenge.

Hamletisamystery,orbetteranillusion"whoisatoncemadandthe

sanestofgeniuses,atonceaprocrastinatorandavigorousmanofaction,at

onceamiserablefailureandthemostadorableofheroes"(Wilson229).Andit

ispreciselyhissensitive,contemplative,melancholic,andimpulsive tendencies

vyingforprominenceintheforefrontofhispersonalitythatplaceshiminsucha

hopelessquandary.Hamletcannotsustainhismoodslongenoughtotake

decisiveactioninanyofthedirectionshisreluctantmindwould takehim.

UnliketheherooftheUr-Hamletwhowas"primarilyapersonified

cravingforrevenge,. . . belongingnottoreallifebuttotheconventionalworld

oftheoldrevengetragedy"(Lewis89),forShakespeare'shero"the

conventionalstandardsoftherevengetragedywouldbethrownoverboard"

(90).IfwearetojudgeHamletbythesestandards,thenhemust befound



100

dutyanddestinyheisinvolvedinthosetragicdilemmaswithwhichourownageissoterriblyfamiliar.Forhowcanmansecurejusticeexceptbycommittinginjustice,andhowcanheactwithoutoutragingtheveryconsciencewhichdemandsthatheshouldact?

(50)

"InthemakingofHamlet,"Wilsonconcludes,"Shakespeare'staskwasnotto

produceabeingpsychologicallyexplicableorconsistent,butonewhowould

evoketheaffection,thewonderandthetearsofhisaudience,andwouldyetbe

acceptedasentirelyhuman"(220).Shakespeare'sHamletisthefinestexample

ofsuchaliterarycharacter.Hamletisacharactersprungfromaplaywright's

imaginationandcreatedintheserviceofpoetryanddramatictensionto

entertainand,perhaps,instruct.Althoughhemaybeinconsistentasaliving

man,Hamlethasbeen,consistently,aherooftragicstatureintheheartsof

audiencesforthepastfourhundredyears.



101

Iwasaccompanyingafriendonalongjourney.Shortlyon the

way,/tookandpeeledaroundfruit./offeredmyfriendaportion

tosharewithme.Helonginglybitintothewedge,butgrimaced

withsharpannoyance."Thisisaterribleorange,"hefinallyblurtedout. "That'snotanorange,"/retorted,"it'sagrapefruit!"Recovering,hetookanother

biteandsaidhappily,"Whataperfectlyfinegrapefruit"

Thetreeofheisalsofilledwithgrapefruits.Ifyouarea/waysset

fororanges,youwillinevitablybedisappointed.

(BasedonapsychotherapeuticmetaphorcontributedbyPeterN.Alevizos,Ph.D.)

ChapterV

AFTERWORD:HAMLET'SDELAYREVISITED

HowwoulditgoifShakespeare,oramoderndirector,begantheplayin

themiddleofActV,perhapsatthepointwherethepresentstagedirections

indicate:"EnterClaudius,Gertrude,Laertes,Osric,and alltheState,and

Attendantswithfoilsandgauntlets,"afterline170?Allwouldgoonexactlyas

written,butafterHoratio's,"Andletmespeaktotheunknowingworld/How

thesethingscameabout"(331-32),we"flashback" tothebeginningoftheplay

andcontinuefromthereasifHoratiowasre-tellingthewholestory.[Mightnot

thisbeclosetowhereHoratiowouldhavetobeginHamlet'sstorytoattemptto

explain"totheunkowing/Howthesethingscameabout"(5.2.332-33)?]What

wouldthisaccomplish?Iwillnotvouchforits theatricaleffect(althoughitmight

turnoutsurprisingwell),butintermsofHamlet'sdelay,itwouldaddressmuch

scholarlycriticismofHamletputtingoffhiskillingofClaudiusinrevengefor



102

murderinghisfather.ItwouldsimplymeanthatHamletwouldbepresentedat

onceasamanwhodoesnotdelay,but immediatelyactstorevenge.This

wouldsignificantlychangethecomplexionofthecharacterofShakespeare's

hero.Here,sincehisfatherisnotmentioned,Hamletistheprimaryrevengerof

hismother'sdeathatthehandsofClaudius.37AlldoubtinvolvingtheGhost's

accusationsthatplaguedHamletthroughouttheplay wouldnotbeatissue.

Claudius'scrimesagainstHamletand(indirectly)againstGertrudearepublic

events,andHamletknowshiscourse.Thescenarioremains:Laertesconfesses

his,andtheKing'streachery(althoughwehaveyettofindoutwhyanattempt

onHamlet'slifeisbeingmade),andallthecourtierscryout,"Treason!

treason!"(5.2.276).Hamlet,inrevengeforhisownpoisoning,stabsClaudius

withhisenvenomedpointandcharges,"Then,venom,tothywork"(275).Being

onlywounded,theKingshrieks,"0,yetdefendme, friends,Iambuthurt"

(278).Hamlet,nowinrevengeforhismother'sdeath,forcesthepoisondrink

downClaudius'sthroatwith,"Followmymother"(279).Thepointhereisthatif

appropriatereasonstodelaydonotexistinHamlet'smind,hehasnotthe

slightesthesitationtoact.Hereacts"instantaneously"toacrimeinprogressin

ourtheoreticalscenario,takingthelawintohisownhands,andbecomesthe

revengerofhisown,andhismother's,murder.

Intheend,thereasonstokillClaudiusin theduellingscenehave

supersededHamlet'soriginalreasonofavenging thedeathofhisfather.

Certainly,onecanseeinHamlet'ssuitingtheactiontotheword:"Here,thou

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/Claudius.37

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/Claudius.37



103

incestuous,murd'rous,damnedDane"(5.2.276),hisreferencetohisfather's

deathandtheincestthatsurroundsit.Onecanalsoviewthefactthatbecause

poisonwasusedinthedeathsofbothOldHamletandClaudius,aconnection

canbemadefromtheoneactofrevengetothe other.Lookingbackfromthis

perspective,onemightbetterrecognizethatuntiltheclosingmomentsofthe

play,HamletwasjustifiedindelayingClaudius'deathforthe crimeofkilling

Hamlet'sfather.ItmakesequalsensethatHamletneverrevenges,oronly

indirectlyrevenges,hisfather'sdeathbecausethemurdereriskilledbyhimin

revengeforanothercrime.



104

ENDNOTES

FryerelatesthatwhenhewasanundergraduatehisShakespeareteacher1.

assignedtheessaytopic,"MinorProblemsinHamlet,""bywhichhemeant

allthe'problems'excepttwo:howmadwas Hamlet,andwhydidhedelay?"

(OnShakespeare84).

2. AllreferencestoHamletaretakenfromTheOxfordShakespeareeditedby

G.R.Hibbard.

3.HamletfollowstheGhost,verballysparswithhisuncleateveryturn,

emotionallytormentsOpheliaandhismother, stabsPoionius,gingerly

sendshisschoolfriendstotheirdeath,isfirsttoleapuponthepirateship,

andconfrontsLaertes,firstinOphelia'sgraveandlaterinadueltothe

death.Bradleyremarksthatthe"sentimentalview""ignoresthehardness

andcynicismwhichwereindeednopartofhisnature,butyet,inthiscrisis

ofhislife,areindubitablypresentandpainfullymarked"(81).

4.Wemustkeepinmind,however,that thirtyyearshavepassed,according

tothegravedigger,sincethedeathofFortinbras'fatheratthehandsofOld

Hamlet.IthastakenFortinbrasaconspicuously longperiodoftimeto

determinethatthepresentisripeforhisrevenge.

5.AppearinginTheMirrror,April18,1780,(quotedbyFurness,Variorum

Hamlet11,148.)

6.QuinnpointsoutthatTrillingin"FreudandLiterature,"acritiqueofthe

psychoanalyticalposition,holdsthatFreudandJones donothavethe

groundstorelatetheplaytoShakespeare'slife,andthe"meaningofart

cannotbereducedtotheintention,consciousorunconscious,ofitsauthor,

evenassumingthatonehasproved,asDr.Joneshasnot,thatsuchan

intentionwasthere"(39).

7.Themajorstudiescitedare,CharlesA.Hallett,andElaineS.Hallett.TheRevenger'sMadness:AStudyofRevengeTragedyMotifs(Lincoln,Neb.,

1980),RolandMushatFrye.TheRenaissanceHamlet.Issuesand

Responsesin1600.(Princeton,1984),PeterMercer,HamletandtheActing

ofRevenge(IowaCity,1987),andArthurMcGee,TheElizabethanHamlet

(NewHaven,1987).

8. Allfurtherreferenceto"Frye"willdesignatetheworkofRolandFrye.

9.Bowersreferencesthese"heroes"ofHamlet,TheSpanishTragedy,

Antonio'sRevenge,andTitusAndronicus,asinvolvedwith"problemsoflife



105

I

anddeathandofthemysteriesofasoul intorment"withthetheme,

"justiceformurder"(110).

10.Gardnermakesthepointthat"IntryingtosetHamletbackinitsownage,

seemtohavefoundinitan imageofmyowntime"(51).Perhapsbecause

ofShakespeare'sgenius,thiscan'tbeavoided.

11.SchwartzacknowledgesNorman Rabkin'sanalogytoHeisenberg'stheory

ofquantumphysicsaspartofRabkin'sdiscussionof"complementarity"in

ShakespeareandtheCommonUnderstanding(NewYork,1967),2.

Heisenbergdevelopedatheoryoftheprincipleofindeterminacy,or

uncertaintyasitrelatestomeasuringthepositionandvelocityofan

electroninmotion.Itrelatesthattheenergygivenoffbyarayoflight

neededtoilluminatetheelectron,causesittochangevelocity.Thevery

meanstakentomeasurethepositionoftheelectron,changesthat

position.

12.Wilsonholdsthat"[Shakespeare] wroteforalltime;buttocastourhistoric

sensebehindusaswereadhimistodohimmuchwrong" (59).

13.SeeRosencrantz's"Thesingle andpeculiarlife"speech(3.3.11-23)which

emphasizestheprofoundinfluenceamonarch'sdeath,"ceaseofmajesty,"

hasonallunderhisorherreign.

14.ThequoteBowersusesindicates, inProsser'sview,apostureofself-

defenseandnotrevenge.ProsserquotesPerkinstoillustratehisethical

positiontowardkilling,whichfostersan absenceofmaliceanddesirefor

revenge:I. Itmustbedoneincontinentandforthwithsosooneasever

violenceisoffered.Foriftherebedelay,anditcomeafterward,it

losesthenameofajustdefence,& becomesarevenge,arising

ofprepensemalice,astheLawyersusetospeake.ILTheremust

beanintention,nottorevengeprincipally,ortokill,butonlyto

defendhimselfe.III.Theremustbeajustandequallproportionof

weapons;thereforeitisnojustdefencetoshooteanakedmanthroughwithamusket,orotherpieceofordinance,whenheoffers

violence""CasesofConscience," TheWorksofWilliamPerkins,

London,1613,li,120.(InProssern.20)

15.Thestoryoftheplaydates backtothetwelfthcenturyScandinavian

legendaryhero,Amleth,whoappearedinSaxoGrammaticus'Historiae

Danicae.Thistaleofblood,commontoNorsesagaandincorporatingthe

hero'sassumptionofan"anticdisposition,"wasretoldbyFrancoisde

BelleforestinthefifthvolumeofhisHistoirestragiquesin1570.Although

theeventsoftheplotsmayvaryslightly,theimportantthreadthatweaves



106

themintoShakespeare'sthemeistherevengestory.Saxotellsan"heroic

taleoftheheroicageinnorthernEurope"(Hibbard9)wherethePrinceof

hisstoryfulfillshisdutyofavenginghisfather'smurderwithoutthe

slightestvacillationfromhiscommittedpath.UnlikehisRenaissance

counterpart,thereis"neveradoubtastowhathemustdo,hemovesinexorablytotheaccomplishmentofhispurpose" (9).

Belleforest'saccountoftheactionissimilartoSaxo's,withseveral

additionsthat,accordingtoHibbard,"leavetheirmarkonShakespeare's

tragedy"(10).Theseinvolveincest,thesuspicionthatGertrude"inspired

themurderinordertoenjoythepleasuresofheradulterousrelationship

withFengonwithoutrestrictionsorrestraint,"andtheideaofAmlethasa

"victimofmelancholy"asawayrenderinghim"highlysensitiveto

impressionsfromwithout"asitrelatestotheideaofdivination,which

Belleforestapparentlyhaddifficultywith.AsaChristianwriter,hecould

notapproveofpersonalrevenge,andprefaceshisstorywiththe"Argument"thathewrotehistorybasedonmoralandreligious

grounds,whichHibbardcharacterizesasthe"providentialideaofhistory

dominantatthetimehewaswriting"(11).Hibbardgoesontosaythat

Belleforestdeducedthatthe"greatestlessonto belearnedfromthepast

isthatthoughGod'svengeancemaybeslowitisabsolutelysure"(11).

ThereismorereasontobelievethereasonablenessofHamlet'sdelay

inthepreviousstoriesofSaxoandBelleforestbecauseitwaspublicly

revealedthatClaudiushadkilledHamlet'sfatherandusurpedthecrown.

Thedelay,however,derivedexclusivelyfromexternalevents.Hedidnot

facetheproblemofaghostrelayingthe information.Inthepreviousaccounts,ClaudiusmurderedHamlet'sfather,andaccordingtotraditionit

isthesacreddutyofthesontoavenge hisfather'sdeath.Anydelaywould

nothavebeenbaseduponHamlethavingtoprove,atleasttohimself,

thatClaudiuscommittedthecrime.

16.ClaudiusurgingHamlettoremainatElsinoreinsteadof"goingbackto

schoolinWittenberg"(1.2.113)wouldindicatethatHamletintendedto

returntoschool.

17.Hamletmakesthreeseparate referencestoamonth'stimeinthissoliloquy.

18. Untilthispointinthethirdact,theaudiencewouldnotknowthattwo

monthshavegonebysinceHamlet'sfirstappearance,andbeingcaught

upintheswifteventsoftheplaywouldtakelittlenoticeofHamlet'sdelay.

19. Itshouldberecalledthatithastaken Fortinbras,whosomecriticsbelieve

tobearolemodelforHamlet,agood30yearstofindtherightopportunity

toattemptto"avenge"hisfather'sdeath.

ItshouldberememberedthatFortinbras,whoisthoughtofasanavenger,20.alongwithLaertes,isprimarilyconcernedwithretainingthelandsthat



107

weretakenfromhisfatherbyOldHamletwhoisalreadydead.There is

noindicationinthetextthatFortinbrasisatallinterestedinkillingHamlet

forhisfather'sdeed.

21.Hamlethashisowndictatesto whichhemustadherethatarecontrolled

byhismoralnatureandsenseofhonor,strictures,itseems,thatarenot

compatiblewiththeGhost'stimetableforrevenge.

22.WhatmayalsobeatworkheretopropelHamletforwardishis

unconscious,orintuitiveperceptionofwhattheGhostwillsay,evidenced

byhislateroutcry,"0mypropheticsoul!"(1.5.40)whentoldthathisuncle

murderedhisfather.

23.Thereisalsoanelementhereofimpulsivenessandrashness,whatHamlet

referstoashisbeing"passion'sslave,"whichneedstobedistinguished

fromtrueheroism.

24.ThepointiswellmadebyClaudiustoLaertesinthefollowing interchange:

CLAUDIUS GoodLaertes,

Ifyoudesiretoknowthecertainty Ofyourdearfather'sdeath,is'twritinyourrevenge

That,sweepstake,youwilldrawboth friendandfoe,

Winnerandloser? Nonebuthisenemies.

AERTES CLAUDIUS Willyouknowthemthen?(4.5.140-46)

IfitwerenotforClaudius'mentalagilityandshrewdmanipulations,

Laertesmayhaveindeedkilledthewrongman!

25.AlthoughShakespearehasbeencriticizedforunwiselyretainingHamlet's

feignedmadnessfromhispredecessors,Hamletputtingonan"antic

disposition"servesasanaptemotionalsafety-valveforhisnearhysteria.

26.Thiscanbecontrastedwith Laertes'rejectionofhisconscience,"Andyet

almost'gainstmyconscience" (5.2.248),infavorofhishonortokeep

hisname"ungored".

27.ThemotifofjoyandgriefispresentedatthestartoftheplaywithClaudius'

"Withmirthinfuneralanddirgeinmarriage,/Inequalscaleweighing

delightanddole. . ."(1.2.12-13).Theplaydrawstoaclosedwith

Fortinbras,"Forme,withsorrowIembracemyfortune"(5.2.340).

28.Inanotherdisplayofthepowerof"honor,"HamletforbidsHoratiotodrink

fromthepoisonedcuptocommitsuicideattheplay'send.Horatio



108

compareshimselftoan"antiqueRoman"seekinganhonorabledeath"in

preferencetolifeonconditions[he]regardedasdishonourable"(Hibbardn.

351).Hamlet,forhispart,instructsHoratioto"reportmeandmycause

aright"tonotleavea"woundedname"behindhim(5.2.292and297).

29.Laertes'excessivegriefresultsinragenevertemperedbyreason;he

doesn'trequireexcessivepassiontoact,hisragealwayssmoldersandcan

flareupattheslightestprovocation.

30.AccordingtoFryethereissufficient evidencethattheElizabethanaudience

wouldviewClaudiusasatyrant.Fryeprovidesaninterestingdiscussionon

the"rightofofficials,noblesandprincestoresistandevenopposea

tyrant"(71)aspartoftheongoingpoliticaldebateinElizabethanEngland.

Notably,ThomasBilson,whowasassignedbyElizabeth"thedifficulttask

ofbringingthetraditionalTudordoctrineofnon-resistanceintolinewiththe

newrealitiesofthefifteen-eighties"(71),assertedthatsincetheEnglish

monarchyishereditaryandnotelected"hemustbeendured"and"maynot

bedeposed,"addingthatifanelectedmonarch"showshimselfunworthyof

theregiment"hemaybedeposedbythosewhoelectedhim(Bilsonin

Frye73).ItiscuriousthatShakespearedoesnotinformtheaudienceuntil

ActVthattheDanishmonarchyiselected.HereHamletcomplainsto

HoratiothatClaudius"Poppedinbetweenth'electionandmyhopes. . ."

(5.22.67).Obviously,Hamletisaware,fromthebeginning,ofthepolitical

arrangementofthegovernment.

31.Hisfeignedmadnessturnsouttobea miscalculation,raisingonly

suspicioninClaudiusthatthereissomethingbehindHamlet'sstrange

behavior.(Seealson.25,page113)

32.OttoRank,"Das'Schauspiel'inHamlet,"Imago,4(1915),41-51.

33. Iowethispoint,alongwiththeusefulMacduffexample,toProfessor

RobertB.Schwartz,EnglishChair,OregonStateUniversity.

34.Hamletbelieveshimselfatthemercyofhispassions.Toilluminatethis flaw,HamletspeaksofHoratioasajustandwell-balancedmanwhom

HamletequateswiththeStoicidealinthefollowinglines:

Forthouhastbeen

Asone,insuff'ringall,thatsuffersnothing,

AmanthatFortune'sbuffetsandrewards

Hathta'enwithequalthanks. (3.2.60-63)

Hamletgoesontosaythatitisinaman likeHoratiothat"bloodand

judgement(passionandreason)aresowellcommingled"(3.2.65).Hamlet

isconvincedheisaslavetohispassionsand,unlikeHoratio,hisactions



109

areuncontrollableanddangerous.InthegraveyardscenewhereHamlet

leapsintoOphelia'sgraveinafitofpassiontograpplewithLaertes,he

makesitclearinhiswarningtoLaertesthat"Ihavesomethinginme

dangerous,lWhichletthewisestfear"(5.1.252-53).

35.Deathhasalwaysbeenin Hamlet'sconsciousness:Claudius's

pronouncementaboutlosingafather,Hamletreferringtomanasa

quintessenceofdust(2.2.304),andhis ruminatingaboutdeathinhis

soliloquies.ItisespeciallyevidentinhisspeechtoClaudiusinwhichhe

describes"howakingmaygoaprogressthroughthegutsofabeggar"

(4.3.31)toemphasizeman'smortality. Hamletcomestoafullrealizationof

theinevitabilityofdeathinthegraveyardsceneaspartofGod'srevelation.

36.Hamlet'sstatementcanbeseen inpsychoanalytictermsassublimation,a

redirectionofHamlet'sprimitiveimpulsestosociallyacceptablebehavior,

asanattempttosatisfyhisneedforastrongfatherfigure.

37.Thestatementwasgivenin justificationforOpheliabeingthevictimofa

drowningratherthanasuicide.Thereaderisalsoremindedthat premeditatedmurder,ormurderwith

maliceaforethought,wasconsidered illegalinElizabethanEngland,and

thattheonlypossibleprivateretaliationtoleratedwastheinstantaneous

reactiontoaninjury.Thelatterwasjudgedasmanslaughterandafelony,

butcarriedthepossibilityofroyalpardon,whereasprivaterevengewas

considereda"retaliation,"andcouldneverbeconsideredforredemptionin

theeyesofthelaw.

38.WealsoseeinHamlet'sattitude themoreorthodoxElizabethanposition

heldbytheChurchandStateupholdingthecodethatthemostwickedof

sinnersmustbelefttodivinejudgment,"leavingallvengeancetoGod,

whichsaith:'Vengeanceismine"(Becon inProsser13).Hamletallows

himselftobe"ruled"bytheHeavenlyFatherwithheartfeltassurancethat

hewillbethe"organ"ofhisownpeace.[See(4.3.60-62),whereClaudius

giveshisassurancethatLaerteswillbetheinstrumentofHamlet'sdeath.)

39.LewispointsoutthatHamlet's questiontoHoratioofwhetheritis rightto

kill("is'tnotperfectconscience/Toquithimwiththisarm?)wasnot

includedintheFirstQuarto,butwrittenaspartofhisrevisionoftheplay

fortheSecondQuarto(29-30).Hamletwasplaguedfromtheonsetwith

questionsofconscienceaboutwhetheritwashisplacetopremeditate

killinganotherhumanbeing,whetheritwas"rightforhimtotakeupon

himselfthevengeanceoftheEternal"(29).Possiblywantingtoemphasize

Hamlet'sconcernwiththeambiguityattachedtothemoralscruplesofsuch

adilemma,Shakespearerevisedhistexttoincludeanaddedobstacle:



110

WasHamletboundtokillClaudius?JustasHoratiohasnoresponseto

Hamlet'squestion,Shakespeare'saudiencewassure tobetter

appreciateHamlet'sdifficulties.

40.HowfarcanShakespeare'splaybeseparatedfromthetraditionalblood-

revengetragedywhenwerealizehehadincorporatedeightviolentdeaths,

incestandadultery,amadwoman,andaghost,whowhileKing,had

sufferedadeathofindescribablehorror?

41.TheFreudianid,commonlyrepresentedastheultimatehedonist,governed

onlybythepleasureprinciple,"isregardedasthedeepestcomponentof

thepsyche,thetrueunconscious"(Reber339).Itisdescribedas"the

primitive,animalistic,instinctualelement,apitofroiling,libidinousenergy

demandingimmediatesatisfaction"(339).Theseatofourrashand

irrationaldesires,societyexpectsustokeepthisprimitivesideofour

natureundercontrol.

42.ThesamecanbesaidofLaertes. InthescenewhereClaudiusrevealshis

plantokillHamletweseeinLaertesmanycharacteristicsofacommon

blood-revenger.Laertes,believinghehasasacreddutytoavengehis

father'sdeath,becomesovercomewiththepassionofrevenge.Heresorts

totreacherousmeanstoaccomplishhisends.Inhisoverwhelminggrief

hecries,Tohell,allegiance!vows,totheblackestdevil!

Conscienceandgrace,totheprofoundestpit!

Idaredamnation!(4.5.131-33)HeissoincensedwithHamletforkillinghisfatherthathewould

undertake"tocuthisthroati'thechurch!"(4.7.103).Hebringsapoison

fromFrancetoanointhisswordaspartofhispremeditationtotake

revenge.Laertessuppresseshisconscienceandachieveshisrevenge.

Consequently,heis(alongwithClaudius)"hoistwithhisownpetard"

(3.4.207).Laertes,however,acceptshisjustfateasthehonorablemanhe

is:"Iamjustlykilledwithmineowntreachery"(5.2.261).Itisduetohis

naturalgoodnessthatnobleLaertesispermittedtoconfesshismisdeeds

andexchangeforgivenesswithHamlet.Anditisduetotheevilnatureof

revengethatagoodlymanwillproclaimitsignoblecause.

Laertesisamanofnoblecharacterwhobecomesapawnofevil

becauseofhispassionatedesireforrevenge--itpoisonshisgoodnessand

turnshimintoapoisonerofothers.

43.Seemydiscussionofmurderversus manslaughteraccordingto

Elizabethanlawonpages40-41 and52.

44.SeeMorganforwhathecallsa"conscience"theoryoftheplaywhereby

HamletdoesnottakepersonalrevengebykillingClaudius,but"slightly



111

HamletdoesnottakepersonalrevengebykillingClaudius,but"slightly

wounds udiuswiththepoisonedswordpoint,thecourtrushesto1

Claudius'defenseasHamletdropsthesword--andwatchesmutelyashe

offersClaudiusthepoisonedcup.Eventuallytakingthecup,Claudius

drinks--and'kills'himself"(48).

45.Attheriskofoversimplifyinganobviouslycomplexidea,Iwouldliketo

suggestthatperhapsHamletmayhavehadlittlechoicebuttorespondthe

wayhedidtohisemotionallydifficultsituation.Hamlet'sdelayinghis

revengemaybeseenasaneffortbytheegotorestraintheidfrom

dischargingquantitiesofenergyintheformofexcitementandtension

buildinginHamlet'spsyche.Thedelayswouldsignifytheid'ssubmissionto

theinfluenceoftheegotomaintainahomeostasis,orconstancy,inthe

faceofthegreatdisturbancesHamletwasforcedtoencounter.Becauseof

theincreasingstrengthoftheemotionsthatwereforcedintorepression,

smallamountsofenergyhadtobedischargedordisplacedfromone

objecttoanotherwhenthepressurebecametoogreatfortheegoto

control.AccordingtoHall,inAPrimerofFreudianPsychology,Freudtook

thepositionthattheidistheprimarysubjectivereality,theinnerworldthatexists

beforetheindividualhashadexperienceoftheexternalworld.

Notonlyaretheinstinctsandreflexesinborn,buttheimages

thatareproducedbytensionstatesmayalsobeinnate.This

meansthatahungrybabycanhaveanimageoffoodwithout

havingtolearntoassociatefoodwithhunger.Freudbelieved

thatexperiencesthatarerepeatedwithgreatfrequencyand

intensityinmanyindividualsofsuccessivegenerations

becomepermanentdepositsintheid. (26-27)

Itwouldholdthat,inpsychoanalyticterms,theid,archaicfromthe

standpointofbothracialhistory(onethinksofJung'sconceptofthe

CollectiveUnconscious),andtheindividual'slifeexperiencesdemands

gratificationforblood-revenge,anacceptablepartofourprimitivenature,*

passeddownthroughHamlet'swarriorlineageandthroughtheemotional

catharsisitprovidesHamlet'sownpsyche.Andeventually"[t]hingsfall

apart;thecentrecannothold;/Mereanarchyisloosedupontheworld,/

theblood-dimmedtideisloosed,andeverywhere/Theceremonyof

innocenceisdrowned"(Yeats,"TheSecondComing").

*Thehistoricalaccountofblood-revenge,summarizedearlierinthispaper,

Ibelieve,supportsthiscontention.

46.SeeNote3onpage104.

47.Draper(seeChapterxi)takesgreatpainstoshowthatHamletwasnotan



112

prince-philosopherwouldmakeHamletan impossibletragichero"(167).

DraperholdsthatHamletisnotinnatelyincapableofaction,and"though

Shakespearemighthavemotivatedhisdelaybyrepresentinghimastoo

studious,thedramatistinactualfactdidnotdoso,and,hadhedoneso,

HamletwouldhavebeenafarlessappealingfiguretotheElizabethan

audience"(173).

IdonotunderstandhowBradleycanattributetheconditionofmelancholia48.toaccountforHamlet'senergyaswellashislethargy.Hedescribeshis

energyas"thosequickdecidedactions"thatproduce"healthyimpulses"

(99).Ifindnoevidencethattheabovearesymptomsofmelancholia.

Todaythetermwouldreferto"apronounceddepressionwithfeelingsof

forebodingandageneralinsensitivitytostimulation"(Reber428).Infact,

whenamajordepressiveepisodeis

diagnosedwithMelancholicfeatures,

thepatientsuffers,(1)alossofpleasureinalloralmostallactivities,(2)a

lackofreactivitytousuallypleasureablestimuli(doesn'tfeelmuchbetter,

eventemporarily,whensomethinggoodhappens),and(3)possible

excessiveorinappropriateguilt(DSM-III,215).

49.Withduerespecttotheefforts ofFreud/Jones,Erlich,andotherswho

haveventuredforthwithfullblownpsychoanalyticalinterpretations,itisnot

likelythatacompetentdiagnosticianwouldbeabletocometoany

reasonableconclusionsbaseduponthelimitedinformationaboutHamlet

(orShakespeare)availableintheplay.iAsa illustratio ofthedifficultyofthetaskofdiagosiseve

clinicalpracticewhereinformationaboutthepatient'shistoryandpresent

functioningisassumedmoreavailable,Iwouldliketodescribetwo

recognizablesyndromesexhibitingmuchofthesamesymptomsthat

Hamletdisplayswhileinhispursuitofrevenge.Themultiplepersonality

syndromeisdefinedasa"disorderinwhichtheusualintegrityofone's

personalitybecomessofractionatedthattwo (ormore)relatively

independentsubpersonalitiesemerge" (Reber458).Wecanbest

understandtheconditionasanabnormality ofdegree,ratherthanofkind.

Peoplenormallyshowdramaticchangesinbehavioralstylesundervarious

socialinteractionsandroles;"thepathologicalconditionismarkedbycircumstancesinwhichthesevariedmanifestationsofselfbecomeso

bifurcatedthatthesenseofunderlyingintegrityislost"(458).Itisakindof

hysteriawithusualsymptomsoffunctionalparalysis,butusedfiguratively

forthe"senseofacripplingorlossofeffectivenessofcognitiveprocesses"

(514).Hysteria(nowcalledhistrionicpersonalitytype),beingageneral

classification,hasanarrayofsymptomsdifficulttodiagnose.Somethat

havebeencitedmostofteninclude,hallucinations,sleepdisorderand

dissociation.(Themultiplepersonalityisgenerallyincludedunderthe



113

categoryofdissociativedisordersas ishysteriaintheDiagnosticand

StatisticalManual)Thelackofunderstandingofthedisorder"may, quite

possibly,beduetothefactthatthereisnosingledisorderhereatall.Inall

likelihoodwhatwehaveisavarietyofmaiadaptivebehaviorseachof

whichexistsmoreorless independentlyoftheotherswiththehysterical

syndromeexistingonlyinthemindofthediagnostician"(337).Onethinks

ofaColeridgeanattemptatinterpretationhere.

Perhapsachallengingareaforfurtherresearchwouldbean

interpretationofHamlet'sdelaybasedondistinguishingamanic-depressive

psychosis/bipolardisorderfromtheabove.

Isay"primarily"becausebywoundingClaudiuswiththepoisonedsword,50.

Hamletisalsorevenginghisowndeath.IfHamletisonlythinkingabouthis

mother'spoisoning,havingnoregardforhisowncircumstances,hewould

forgostabbingClaudiusanduseonlythepoisoneddrinktokillhim.

ThereisalsonoindicationinthetextthatHamletwasthinkingofhis

fatherwhenhestabbedClaudius.Onemighttakethepositionthatitwould

bequiteimpossibleforHamlettonotthinkofhisfatherat thismoment

afterallhisdeliberationaboutrevengethroughouttheplay.Inour

hypotheticalsituation,withtheaudiencenotbeingawarethatHamlet's

fatherhasbeenmurdered,itmakessensetokeepourattentiononthe

characterspresentinthescene.Whenwecomebackfullcircletothis

pointintheplay,wethenmightspeculateonwhetherHamletevertakes

revengeonClaudiusforthemurderofhisfather.



114

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AmericanPsychiatricAssociation.DiagnosticAndStatisticalManualofMental

Disorders,3rded(DSM-I11).Washington,D.C.:AmericanPsychiatric

Association,1980.

Adams,JosephQuincy,ed.Hamlet.ByWilliamShakespeare. Boston:Houghton

Mifflin,1929.

Andrews,MichaelCameron."HamletandtheSatisfactionsofRevenge."Hamlet

Studies3(Winter1981):83-102.

Bowers,Fredson.ElizabethanRevengeTragedy:1587-1642Mass:PeterSmith,

1959.

---."HamletAsMinisterAndScourge."PMLA70(1955):740-49.

Bernthal,Craig."'SelfExamminationandReadinessinHamlet.Hamlet Studies7

(1985):38-51.

Bradley,A.C.ShakespeareanTragedy,NewYork:St.Martin'sP, 1985.

Brodsky,Joseph."OnGriefandReason."TheNewYorker26 Sept.1994:70-85.

Campbell,LilyB.Shakespeare'sTragicHeroes:SlavesofPassion.NewYork:Barnes

&Nobel,1960.

Cohen,Michael.HamletinMyMind'sEye.London:UGeorgiaP,1989.

Deb,PralayKumar."ColeridgeOnHamlet."Ham/etStudies.NewDelhi:VikasP.House,1989,73-79.

Dollimore,Jonathan.PoliticalShakespeare:NewEssaaysinCulturalMaterialism.Ed.,

JonathanDollimoreandAlanSinfield.Ithaca:CornellUP,1985.

Draper,JohnW.The"Hamlet"ofShakespeare'sAudience.NewYork:Octagon,1966.

Eissler,K.R.DiscourseonHamletandHAMLET NewYork:InternationalUP,1971.



115

Eliot,T.S."HamletAndHisProblems." SelectedEssay.7977-7932.NewYork:

Harcourt,BraceAndCompany,1932,121-26.

1932.NewYork:--."The FunctionofCritism."SelectedEssay:1917Harcourt,BraceAndCompany, 1932,12-22.

--."The LoveSongofJ.AlfredPrufrock." TheCompletePoemsandPlays:

1909-1950.NewYork:HarcourtBraceJovanvich,1971.

Elliot,G.R.ScourgeandMinister:AStudyofHamletasTragedyof

RevengefulnessandJustice.DukeUP, 1951.

Empson,William.EssaysonShakespeare.DavidB.Pine,Ed.Cambridge:

CambridgeUP,1988.

Erlich,Avi.Hamlet'sAsetFather ewJersey:Priceto UP,1977.

Fly,Richard."AccommodatingDeath:TheEndingofHamlet."Studiesin English

Literature,1500-190024(1984):257-74.

Frye,Northrop.NorthropFryeonShakespeare.RobertSandler,Ed.New

Haven:YaleUP,1986.

Foo/sofTime.Toronto:UTorontoP,1967.

Frye,RolandMushat.TheRenaissanceHamlet:IssuesandResponsesin

1600.New Jersey:PrincetonUP,1984.

Furness,HowardHorace,ed.Hamlet.ByWilliamShakespeare.2vols. Fifth

Edition.ANewVariorumEdition_Vol. III.Philadelphia:J.B.Lippincott,

1877.

Gardner,Helen.TheBusinessofCriticism.London:OxfordUP,1959.

Greenblatt,Stephen.InJonathanDollimore,PoliticalShakespeare:New

EssaaysinCulturalMaterialism.Ed.,JonathanDollimoreandAlan

Sinfield,4-5.Ithaca:CornellUP, 1985.

Hall,CalvinS.APrimerofFreudianPsychology.NewYork:MentorBooks,

1954.

TheRevenger'sMadness:AStudyofHallet,CharlesA.,andElaineS.Hallet. RevengeTragedyMotifs.Lincoln: UNebraskaP,1980.



116

Hibbard,G.R.ed.OxfordShakespeare:HamletByWilliamShakespeare.New

York:OxfordUP,1994.

Holland,NormanN.PsychoanalysisandShakespeare. NewYork:McGrawHill,

1964.

Jones,Ernest.HamletandOedipus.NewYork:W.W.Norton,1949.

Joseph,Bertram.ConscienceAndTheKing.London:ChattoAndWindus,

1953.

Johnson,Samuel."EndnotetoHamlet."Joseph G.Price,ed.HamletCritical

Essays.NewYork:Garland,19867-8.

---.JohnsononShakespeare.TheYaleEditionoftheWorksofSamuelJohnsonVol.VIII.NewHaven:YaleUP,1968.

Jump,John."Hamlet."StanleyWells,ed.Shakespeare:SelectedBibliographical

Guides.NewYork:OxfordUP,1973.145-158.

Lewis,Charlton.TheGenesisofHamlet,NewYork: Kennikat,1967.Maregson,

Alfred.InCharlesA.Hallet,andElaineS.Hallet. TheRevenger's

Madness:AStudyofRevengeTragedyMotifs.Lincoln: UNebraskaP,

1980.

Mack,Maynard."TheWorldofHamlet."JosephG.Price,ed.HamletCritical

Essays.NewYork:Garland,198639-58.

Morgan,DavidC.H."'Whenmercyseasonsjustice'How(andWhy)Hamlet

DoesNotKillClaudius."Ham/etStudies8(Sum/Win 1986):47-78.

Nietzsche,Fredich.TheBirthofTragedy(1872). NewYork:DoubledayAnchor,

1956.

Prosser,Eleanor.HamletAndRevenge.London: OxfordUP,1967.

Quinn,Edward,JamesRuoff,andJoseph Grennen.TheMajorShakespearean

Tragedies.NewYork:Collier-Macmillan,1973.

Reber,Arthur,S.ThePenguinDictionaryofPsychology.NewYork:Viking

PenguinInc.,1987.

Robinson,HenryCrabb.InShakespeareanCriticism.Ed.T.M.Raysor.London:

Everman'sLibrary,1960.



11Y

Rosenberg,Marvin.TheMasksofHamlet Newark:UDelawareP,1992.

Schlegel,AugustWilliam.ACourseofLecturesonDramaticArtandLiterature

(1808),trans.JohnBlackandA.J.W.Morrison.London:G.Belland

Sons,1876.

Shakespeare,William.Hamlet.Ed.JosephQuincyAdams.Boston:Houghton

Mifflin,1929.

---. Hamlet.Ed.HowardHoraceFurness.ANewVariorumEdition,FifthEdition

Vol.III2vols.Philadelphia:J.B. Lippincott,1877.

---. Hamlet.Ed.G.R.Hibbard.NewYork:OxfordUP,1994.

Siegel,PaulN."Hamlet,Revenge!:TheUsesandAbusesofHistorical

Criticism."ShakespeareSurvey.Ed.,StanleyWells.Cambridge:UP,

1993,15-26.

Stoll,ElmerEdgar.Hamlet-AnHistoricalandComparativeStudy.Minneapolis:

UMinnesota,1919.

Schwartz,RobertB.Shakespeare'sPartedEye:Perception,Know/edgeand

MeaningintheSonnetsandPlays.AmericanUniversityStudiesSeries

IV,EnglishLanguageandLiteratureVol.114.NewYork:PeterLang,

1990.

Thorn,Lee."KydCapsRevenge:HamletasRiteofPassage." S&WNo.1

(1988):126-129.

Cohen Martin 1996

Documents

Transcript of Cohen Martin 1996