Further more, Hamlet contains several scenes, key to its portrayal of the revenge theme. In act one, scene five Hamlet follows the supposed spirit of his father and is informed of his fathers murder “I am thy fathers spirit…sleeping in mine orchid a serpent stung me”. This scene conveys the task of revenge being set, the whole of the play hinges on this event. The imagery within this scene is also telling. Old Hamlet is dressed in battle fatigue, thus symbolizing him as a war-king; the audience having been informed of the war he started against Old Fortinbras. This suggests that Old Hamlets position in hell is right and not solely due to him being unable to confess before his untimely death. This suggests repercussion on whether or not Hamlets’ soul will actually be damned, having not confessed but essentially living a good life. If the nature of damnation does in fact relay solely on whether or not one has lived a good life, and not whether or not one has confessed ones sins, then it is possible Hamlet has gone to heaven, thus Shakespeare can be seen to be subverting the ideas of religion within the revenge tragedy genre. Young Fortinbras comments “Bear Hamlet like a solider”, in death Hamlet is viewed as a hero, in this context it is not difficult to assume he has escaped damnation
The theme of kingship is continued in Act two, scene two. We are presented with an image of Claudius, which is in direct contrast to the one presented of his predecessor. Talk of Claudius averting war with Young Fortinbras, shows the new king to be one which favour’s diplomacy to war. Surely such a king is more advantageous for Denmark than a bloodthirsty leader like the image we are presented of Old Hamlet. This furthers the question of whether Hamlet has enough moral justification to take a life, especially one that is so beneficial to the country. This scene is also important as the first signs of Hamlet feigning madness are demonstrated to the audience.
In act three, scene two the feature of a play within a play is portrayed. Claudius is outraged by what he sees “Give me some light. Away”. Hamlet interprets Claudius’ reaction to the play as unequivocal proof of his guilt. This a crucial turning point in the play. Up to now Hamlet has been unsure of whether or not to perform his ‘duties’. That he is assured by Claudius reaction (poor evidence in hindsight) may illustrate Hamlets degradation by the mission he has been set. “I’ll take the ghost’s word for a thousand pound”
In Act three, scene four the death of Polonius can be seen to serve multiple purposes. In its most insignificant form it leads Ophelia further into the madness, which eventually leads to her death. Also it demonstrates how the revenge plot has affected Hamlet “A bloody deed. Almost as bad as kill a king and marry his brother.” He has killed, in cold blood and without provocation, the father of his love and yet seems to show little remorse. Can Hamlet still be seen as the hero of the play when he himself is placed in the same situation as Claudius? Polonius’ death introduces a secondary revenge plot. Laertes now has to avenge his father’s death, inviting the audience to compare Laertes and Hamlet as revenger. The alleged actions of Claudius have provoked a cycle of revenge plots, in which all involved are led to their deaths.
The penultimate scene of the play affects the resolution of the three revenge plots. Hamlet and Laertes both achieve revenge, in doing they so they sacrifice their earthly bodies and possibly their eternal souls. Young Fortinbras revenge on Denmark for his country as he and his armies easily occupy, thus turning previous defeats on their head. Both Hamlet and Laertes at the beginning of the play were both well-liked and talented men; Hamlet had the possibilities of becoming king bestowed upon him. Yet at the end each die as a murderer who is damned to Hell. Hamlet in this form can be seen as a severe commentary on the idea of revenge, that it is the role of God to act upon those who have wronged, not the individuals’.
A modern audience may read Hamlet in ways different to that of a Jacobean counterpart would have viewed it in. Themes of religion are very strong in the play, and while an Elizabethan audience may have had a strong belief in the concepts of divine retribution, a modern audience may be less convinced by this. Religion is not as central to modern life as it was in the era the play was written. Thus issues such as deeds on earth having direct consequences on a persons’ fate in the afterlife- a crucial part of the genre, lessen in their importance.
Without a belief in the supernatural it is possible to form the view that Hamlet was actually mad, the vision of his fathers ghost an image in his own head “this is the very coinage of your brain”. The madness could have been brought on from a mixture of his fathers’ death, the incestuous marriage between his uncle and mother and furthered by Ophelia rejecting him. This theory has evidence within the play to support it. Hamlets main proof of Claudius’ guilt is his reaction to the play within a play. Yet Claudius was viewing a play that would bring into disrepute the image of royalty; naturally he would have been shocked. Also his confession, which Hamlets stumbles in upon, could have been Claudius asking for forgiveness for marrying Hamlets mother rather than killing his father. Equally a parallel with Ophelia can be drawn. She goes mad in the play with two main factors driving it: the death of her father and Hamlet rejecting her. Both of these factors happen to Hamlet himself, so it is possible they have driven him to madness as well. However as Ernest Jones concludes, “The precise nature of his love is a little obscure” as “the extravagance of the language used…suggests a morbid frame of mind. ” Thus a picture can be drawn of, less of an honourable protagonist more a confused, uncertain one. This can be shown through Hamlets conscious and guilt free ability to send Rosencratz and Guildernstein to their certain death and his inability to make up his mind, what J.Dover Wilson referred to as “Hamlet’s Quibbling”. Had the guards not seen the ghost of Hamlet’s father it is quite possible the audience could come to the conclusion that it is indeed a figment of his own imagination, that Hamlet killed off his own father driven by oedipal jealousy.
In this, a different context the reasons for revenge can be re-examined. Hamlets only reason for revenge, if his father were not murdered, would be Claudius marrying his mother. Thus creating further connotations of Hamlet having an Oedipus complex, which Shakespeare quite possibly hints at throughout the play, Claudius states “The queen his mother lives almost by his looks”. This creates three different strands of revenge in the play: Hamlets jealousy, Laertes vengeance on his fathers murder and Young Fortinbras’ seeking to right a wrong on his nation.
Overall Hamlet works so well within the Jacobean Revenge Tragedy because as it was written towards the latter days of the genres popularity, Shakespeare was able to mix together the traditional and successful parts of the genre such as the device of the play within a play, the setting of a foreign court, the use of a ghost to start the story off, and the cloak of madness amongst others. Also he was able to dispense with factors, which hindered the story being told in a dramatic prose, such as the usual narration of the ghost. However Hamlet works so well outside the genre because the focus Shakespeare maintains on the story. Unlike King Lear, Hamlet is kept to a narrow story with little room for subplots, the stories surround the main theme and connect with it. In doing this Shakespeare can not only allow the main revenge plot to flourish but also help keep audience attention on finer details, how the act of revenge spawns a cycle of death and craving for further revenge. This is where Hamlet succeeds, the plot is not so linear as to only concentrate on the effect revenge has on Hamlet but also those around him, and how his actions and determination lead to others with the same desire as he: the desire for revenge. Shakespeare examines how religious theory can intervene with the naturalistic urges produces by pride and the ideas of blood ties.
In Hamlet Shakespeare created a study of revenge, which can be read in numerous ways. In a modern context it can be seen as a study on sexuality and the violence, which can be produced from this. Also it can be read as a comment on the fallibility of religion, the bible teaches “eye for an eye” yet also teaches that vengeance is something only God can carry out. How can Hamlet be sure whether or not he should carry out the deed of killing his uncle if his religion fails to give a unified message? To its contemporary audience it could have been seen as a statement on desire for revenge, that it can only lead to a bloody end -what comes around goes around”. However it could also have been read as a religious statement, that in following the ten commandments you are assured a place in heaven and that straying from this righteous path can only lead to damnation, no matter what the validity of your motives. “Revenge mine sayeth the lord”
Word count: 2002
Bibliography:
Shakespeare: Hamlet, A Selection of Critical Essays - edited by John Jump
The Cambridge Encyclopedia – edited by David Crystal
Hamlet – edited by Harold Jenkins
