IB English (first examination 2013)
PART 3 – GENRE STUDY
Notes prepared by Victoria Thau
Hamlet in context: Shakespeare’s tragedies
Written in 1601, in the most productive periods of his life, Shakespeare’s Hamlet echoes some of the themes and moral concerns of his other plays: human evil and human goodness; destructive human passions such as sexual lust, greed for power, ruthless ambition; redemptive forces such as love and loyalty; appearance hiding a darker reality; tensions between surface and depth; questions of individual will and agency in the face of fate and destiny; moral corruption; filial duty and its violation; bonds of friendship and their breaking; tension between a Humanistic philosophy and a Medieval one; conflict between and old world and a new world; conflict between the New Testament ethos of forgiveness, redemption and compassion and an Old Testament ethos of revenge; tension between scientific scepticism and the authority of the supernatural; tensions between reason, pragmatism, empirical enquiry and the unquestioned mystery of faith; the meaning of life in the face of death; chaos and order; the nature of humanity, etc
Cultural contexts: 16th & early 17th century EnglandRelationships between men and women are patriarchal and gender constructions reflect patriarchal values. Old Testament and New Testament Christian values, sometimes in tension, form the background of moral judgements. Notions of good and evil are defined by the patriarchal and religious contexts. Changes are occurring in the cultural climate, as Medieval and Old Testament notions of revenge and justice are beginning to be replaced by New Testament Christian notions of love, compassion, and redemption. Moreover good and evil are becoming less diametrically opposed and can be quite ‘nuanced’. Nature, illness, disease, etc still provide metaphors for inner moral states as well as political chaos and order. Humanism and the spirit of Science are becoming increasingly influential. Humanism emphasises the complexity of the inner self and individual control of destiny, challenging fate and divine authority. Sceptical doubt, rationality, empirical pragmatism, etc. champion proof and reason and work hand in hand with Humanistic notions of justice and moral life based on complexities of human psychology. Notions of fate work in tension with the affirmation of independent human agency, etc.
Literary context: Aristotle, Sophocles, Shakespearean tragedy, Italian ‘revenge’ convention and Morality plays
Hamlet is critically seen as a ‘tragedy’ as are plays such as ‘King Lear, ‘Macbeth and ‘Othello’. Shakespeare’s ‘tragedy’ draws on aspects of Aristotle’s notions of tragedy, which he saw perfectly exemplified by Sophocles’ ‘Oedipus Rex’. Elizabethan tragedy also often features a ‘flawed’ but nonetheless admirable central character, usually male, brought to ruin by aspects of his ‘nature’, his inner character. As well as debilitating flaws such as greed, power lust, uncontrolled rage, self – delusion, absence of self – knowledge, the tragic hero can be ambiguously constructed and we find much to admire. Moreover, we increasingly find psychological motivation for his character and motives. In the case of Hamlet’s his debilitating character flaw is seen to be his fatal indecision, lack of decisive and consistent resolve, and his failure to fulfil his duty in avenging his father’s murder. Compassion, deep thought, reason and sensitivity are obstacles to Hamlet’s decisive action. Such ‘flaws’ can be excused by reference to their being grounded in humanistic impulses and concerns. His delay, his troubled mind and his contemplative temperament spawn profound redemptive insights into the human condition. Such indecision or failure to carry out his filial duty may be seen as not only reasonably rational, but a compassionate and sensitive humanist’s repugnance to commit murder. Moreover, his ‘modern’ ‘scientific’ scepticism makes him reluctant to act until he is certain that Claudius’ has committed regicide, murdered the king, Hamlet’s father. Humanism and modern sensibility drive Hamlet to insist on objective proof, a forensically, rationally acquired certainty of his ‘uncle’s’ guilt. Over the life of the classical ‘tragic hero’ there hangs the ineluctable force of fate, while, ironically, the classical ‘tragic hero’ harbours a deluded sense of his control of his destiny. Hamlet is given a greater degree of individual agency, Shakespeare expressing his scepticism about determinism and fate. In ‘Hamlet’, Shakespeare also works with elements of Italian ‘revenge tragedy’, introduced to English theatre in 15th and 16th century, adapting it to his serve his own purpose. The convention of Medieval Morality Plays may also be seen to be influential. We need to ask, how these conventions work in the play and, more significantly, to what effect are they adapted?
Major characters
Hamlet
Claudius
Gertrude
Polonius
Ophelia
Laertes
Horatio
Minor characters
Rosencrantz
Guildenstern
Fortinbras
Horatio
Marcellus
Barnardo
The players
Fortinbras
Osric
The grave - diggers
Guide to character analysis
The play’s main characters are psychologically and morally complex. In all of Shakespeare’s plays, characters must be explored as ‘sites’ for the play’s exploration of ideas, themes, its view of humanity, its philosophical ideas and its values. As well as their psychological realism, the characters are emblematic and symbolic entities, representing moral states, ideas and philosophical notions. Characterisation, in the play, often works in pairs, doubles, offering dramatic contrasts and meaningful parallels.
Clearly, all characters will need to be explored in terms of inner factors such as: states of mind, feelings, thoughts, core psychological features, developments, evolution or degeneration, core moral traits, ideas and attitudes held by character, values, relationships with other characters; inner tensions or conflicts; conflict between other characters; states of mind, range of different ‘selves’, range of assumed personas and disguises, inner conflicts, tension between surface and inner state; are they tragic of figures of pathos; roles in the moral scheme thematic interests and Shakespeare’s views of human life; parallels and contrasts with other characters; language features of characters, such as defining motifs; defining imagery; defining settings; defining actions; defining style of address
Point - form guide to character analysis
- States of mind
- Philosophy
- Attitudes
- Beliefs
- Values
- Feelings
- Thoughts
- Intellectual state
- Passions
- Inner conflicts and tensions
- Conflicts and tensions with other characters
- Fragmented self
- Different aspects of self
- Moral nature and moral trajectory: growth, stasis or degenerations
- Motivations and psychological states
- Tragic?
- Pathos?
- Parallels and contrasts with other characters
- Language features of character development, such as defining motifs; defining imagery; defining settings, etc
- Defining actions; defining style of address, etc
Role in thematic development
Role in the moral scheme of the play
Role in the play’s view of human nature
Role in the play’s philosophy
Find Key quotes and scenes
Note: not all characters will be as or complexly or deeply developed as Hamlet. Indeed, Hamlet is often seen as the most complex, enigmatic and ‘modern’ character in all of Shakespeare’s plays.
Dramatic Elements
Elements of drama will be explored in the context of their contribution to the play’s moral and philosophical vision, thematic developments and characterisation
Narrative line and Plot
How does plot details and action advance our understanding of the characters, themes and vision of human life our understanding of the characters, themes and vision of human life?
Structure
Note the following: juxtapositions, contrasts, parallels, dramatic irony, fore – shadowing, repetitions, patterns of imagery, recurring motifs, etc and how they are used to advance our understanding of the moral life and the psychology of the characters, the play’s themes and philosophical vision of human life?
Dramatic irony
Carries foreshadowing; may work as irony against character indicating an illusory or ignorant state, such as control of destiny; it often carries tragic patterns; carries notions of fate and inexorable march of destiny, etc.
Settings
Time, place, and circumstances work metaphorically. For example, day night reflect hope, clarity, goodness, etc. night might denote confusion, darkness of the human soul; external events such as war and peace may reflect on moral and cosmic states; open and enclosed spaces may denote states of mind or reflect themes; intimate places such as bedrooms and closets are reserved for intimacy; symbolic use of places such as graveyard, gardens, ponds, etc may convey themes of death and loss; etc
Language as a dramatic device.
Prose passages, simple language often denotes strong feelings or down to earth characters High flown, blank verse, iambic pentameters, elaborate poetic language often denotes higher class and may carry lofty themes
Common language, colloquialism often denote lower class or down to earth character
Asides and soliloquies may have a range of effects: convey a solitary nature, secrecy, fear disclosure, meditation, interiority, take audience into confidence, garner sympathy, establish a complex paradoxical relationship with audience, a form of dramatic irony, etc.
Language style in dialogue may reflect the character’s state of mind and psychology; reflect character’s moral nature, eg. Hamlet’s metaphors and lofty language reflect his fine virtues and his complex humanity; it may signify character contrasts, oppositional views and / or moral nature
Character’s state of mind and transition can also be conveyed by language rhythms: even, rough, measured, sharp, lyrical, mellifluous, fragmented, etc
Opposition in language style and imagery: eg. H’s refined lyricism and profound mediations on human existence contrasts P’s pretentious, self regarding philosophising, his rhythms capture the self – indulgent, purposeless meanderings of his mind; imagery as a reflection of human psyche
Language imagery includes: imagery of nature, wholesome nature, corrupted nature, unweeded gardens, wild nature, controlled nature, disease, illness, madness, distortion, fragmentation, water, flowers, herbs, plants, sexuality, birds, animals, chaos, order, etc
Metaphors, similes, symbols, synecdoche, personifications, etc. convey feelings, moods, states of mind, moral character, psychology, themes, values, philosophical perspectives, etc.
Allusions carry insights into moral and psychological constructions of character and may also carry irony
Key words used by characters, eg. Time, disease, nature, garden, plants, flowers, etc. may carry insights into the moral and psychological construction of the character
Language imagery and rhythms may carry thematic developments, as well as insights into moral humanity, the play’s ‘world’, and Shakespeare’s play’s attitude to life
Themes such as moral corruption, fragmentation, deep disturbance, chaos, order, balance, etc are often conveyed in language rhythms and imagery
Rhyme: rhyming couplets often denote moralistic precepts, clinch a point of view, stress an idea, sound a triumphant note, carry dramatic irony, etc
Alliteration, assonance; onomatopoeia may intensify the tone, mood and feelings of the speaker
Themes
Revenge
Action and contemplation
Moral and political corruption
Life and art
Order and chaos
Power
Individual agency and forces of destiny
Love and loyalty
Bonds and violation of bonds
The nature of humanity
Meaning of life
Men and women
Other?
Key questions
- What are the dominant ideas/themes/concerns explored by the play?
- What does the play show about a particular set of ideas / themes concerns?
- How do themes/interests/ideas/views of the human condition emerge from the play’s deployment of dramatic features, such as characterisation, language [imagery metaphor, allusions, similes, symbolism], settings, actions, structure, and dramatic irony, etc?
- What positions does the play endorse, view sympathetically, ambiguously, criticise, and / or redemptively?
- What view of and attitudes to the human condition does the play convey?
Revenge, medievalism, modernism, humanism, action and contemplation
As a medieval gentleman and a loyal son, one part of Hamlet’s moral dilemma reflects the law of the Old Testament, an eye for an eye’ justice. His moral duty is to avenge his father’s death. Representing and urging Hamlet to just revenge, the honourable now deceased King Hamlet, now a ghost sentenced to walk the earth, passionately recounts the horrific circumstances of his death. The ghost of Hamlet’s father reconfirms what Hamlet intuitively feels in his own ‘prophetic soul’: his uncle and now step – father has murdered the king, Hamlet’s father, his own brother and with ‘indecent haste’ married the king’s widow, Gertrude. Claudius, the present king is guilty of the ‘primal’ sin, a brother’s murder [here Shakespeare alludes to the Old Testament story of Cane and Abel], regicide, a sin against the law, ‘heaven’, god and humanity and according to Hamlet, ‘incest’. Hamlet’s conflict, to act or not to act, can be seen as a conflict between a morality based on Old Testament law, medieval gentleman’s morality of dignified and righteous revenge, on the one hand and the law of forgiveness, a New Testament Christian precept, an aspect of 15th century Humanism and modernity.
An important part of the conflict, the tension between the Feudal Medieval world and the budding Humanism of the 15th / 16th century is symbolised by the dead king Hamlet’s call for Hamlet to avenge his ‘foul murder’ and Hamlet’s reluctance to do it. The old king represents Medieval justice, an Old Testament heroic moral world of decisive action while Hamlet’s ‘aversion to action’ represents a modern world. His preference is for deep intellectual musings, reliance on reason, the inner life, self - scrutiny, intimate self – questioning, certainty based on objective empirical proof rather than faith, scepticism, all part of a new Humanism. Humanism and modernity place humanity, individual psychology and states of mind at the centre of interest. Modernism sanctions a sceptical intellect. Medievalism favours an absolute moral universe, expressed in the swift, heroic and courageous action of the characters such as Laertes and the Fortinbras. It allows for the authority of the faith, supernatural, belief in ghosts, etc. .
Thus the theme of the morality of revenge as a honourable and integral moral response and conduct can be broadened to engage with themes such as the competing ethics of action and contemplation, as well as tension between humanism, modernity and traditional medievalism. Clearly, despite his resolve to ‘set it right’ Hamlet is not a medieval gentleman of swift and decisive action, but a modern humanist, preferring contemplation, deep thought, and philosophical speculation on the nature of humanity [‘what a piece of work is man’]. Shakespeare draws a dramatic contrast with the characterisations of Laertes and Fortinbras: the instant recourse to revenge and action of the loyal son of Polonius and loving brother of Ophelia and the courageous defence of a principle of a Fortinbras. Thus the moral tension between Medievalism and Humanism / Modernism is another way of articulating the conflict between an ethos of ‘action’ and ‘contemplation’.
Hamlet judges himself according to the ethos of action and revenge. His guilt and self - castigation testify to it. His Humanism compels self - scrutiny rational scepticism, a profound self – insight. The soliloquy [Act 2 scene 2] partly articulates Hamlet’s ethical quandary: to act, to revenge a murder or to allow sceptical reason to rule. The moral dilemma is between knightly honour of a Medieval Christian gentleman, on the one hand, and a Humanist philosopher, on the other. The soliloquy begins in self - questioning, self – loathing, self - disgust [‘what a rogue … ‘]. A man of honour needs to act, rather than languish in vacillating torpor. With such spirited self - scrutiny Hamlet questions his religious teachings, his scepticism opening out to radical doubts about the certainty of a life after death, eternal existence provided by a religious frame – work. He represents the new scientific spirit. Hamlet needs reason and objective proof before he can revenge himself. Again, the tension is between old and new worlds. Family honour, traditional notions of justice and his faith in the ghost’s pronouncements are challenged by a need for objective proof, negating the authority of faith. Christian goodness, compassion, forgiveness are set against the honour of a medieval warrior. While Hamlet admits he is called upon to restore a ‘moral balance’, his deepest instincts rebel against it, and while the ‘nobility of spirit calls for action’, his finer sensitive soul recoils from it. Despite his admission of Claudius’ ‘infamy’, Hamlet’s humanity, his sprit of rationality insists on proof.
Where do Shakespeare’s values lie? The play’s Humanism admires the inner life, self - reflection and moral self - scrutiny. Even Claudius is allowed redemptive moments of moral self – awareness. Hamlet constantly reflects upon the human condition. Macbeth, the killer of a ‘goodly’ king is admired for his poignant self – reflection, following his wife’s death. Indeed, Harold Bloom, an eminent literary authority on Shakespeare, critic credits ‘Hamlet’ with the ‘invention’ of the modern humanistic consciousness. So while Hamlet’s modern, humanistic radical scepticism stands in the way of decisive action. His deepest melancholy and indecisions generate profound insights into the nature of humanity. George Bernard Shaw sees the character of Hamlet as a humanist and the play’s values equally humanistic. He argues that had Shakespeare pursued his humanistic moral preferences to the end, he would not have allowed Hamlet, the character to send his two [disloyal] friends to their death, as he does fulfilling a older, more primitive impulses.
Is the moral tension resolved by the play? How? Does the play support medieval notions of justice? Humanism?
What other moral dilemmas are explored in the play, explored through the characterisations and actions?
Corruption: moral degeneration, disruption of moral order, disturbed intellect, disordered judgement and mental instability [madness]