And Then There Were None

Hamlet exemplifies the model of a Shakespearean tragedy. While there is not a cut and dry formula, Hamlet complies closely with the general elements that constitute a Shakespearean tragedy. Shakespeare's rubric for tragedy follows that of Aristotle closely. The play's central character must be a tragic hero, such as Hamlet. In addition, the tragic hero must be someone great to draw pity and feeling from those watching. Hamlet is the son of one of the mightiest men Denmark has ever behold, and the Hamlet is the heir to the throne. As Hamlet describes his father: "So excellent a king, that was to this / Hyperion to a satyr; so loving to my mother / That he might not beteem the winds of heaven / Visit her face too roughly" (1.2.143-146). The stakes would not be as high if the tragic hero were a mere surf because an entire nation's future wouldn't hold in the balance. The play must be about one individual. Tragedy is experienced by an individual and often arises from a shifting of perspectives within one's head and isn't a tangible, outer physical force. Nor can it a group of people simultaneously experiencing the same tragedy with the same emotions. Hence, the play focusing on an individual. Furthermore, with adherence to the model of a Shakespearean tragedy, there must be hope, ambition, or an element of determination within the protagonist. Hamlet is ambitious and determined to avenge his father's death. However, the hope or ambition must encounter disaster or roadblocks. Hamlet works his way through a tangle of lies and schemes to exact his eventual revenge on Claudius.  Another component that qualifies Hamlet as a Shakespearean tragedy is Hamlet's use of soliloquies. The audience naturally forms ideas and to some extent sympathizes with the tragic events the protagonist experiences, but a soliloquy allows Hamlet a chance to share feelings intended to draw pity and sadness from the audience. Hamlet's most famous soliloquy is beautifully worded and tastefully dark: "To be or not to be---that is the question:" (3.1.64). Finally, there is catharsis. Catharsis is the reason why we are drawn to tragedies despite knowing that we will be saddened. When done correctly, the end of the tragedy will have an intense emotional impact on the audience but also leave them in a calm state because all the hot emotion has already been spent earlier in the play. In Hamlet, this is most nearly when almost all the major characters die tragic deaths in the last scene. This massacre of a sort begs the question, why is it so tragic? In the case of Hamlet, it is deaths of everyone we are taught to love and hate, when the deaths themselves are unnecessary. The most tragic part of Hamlet is that all the murders in the last scene could have been prevented. For example, Claudius carelessly poisons a glass of wine intended for Hamlet but sloppily allows Hamlet's mother to drink it instead. Gertrude drinks from the poisoned glass and Claudius reacts calmly with an aside: "It is the poisoned cup. It is too late" (5.2.319). Everything expounded on just begins to scratch the tangible, understandable surface of that which constitutes the essence of a Shakespearean tragedy.

To Be OR Not To Be

Before adding the videos, I would like to point out that the overwhelming majority of people who say "to be or not to be" in regular life haven't a clue as to what it means! This video is of a man who takes his Shakespeare very seriously. He puts emphasis on the more "intense" words, and he makes a substantial effort to not break eye contact. He doesn't seem to grasp the meaning of what he is saying because he forces the emotion and doesn't build up or cool down, he stays consistent through his speech. Also, he appears distinctly angry! Hamlet may be emotionally volatile while ranting, but anger isn't the chief emotion. Hamlet sinks himself into an intense, manic depression and expresses it through an eloquent outpouring of words.

The second video is well done. Both videos are independent projects and done by regular people, but that is why they are so interesting. The readers' interpretation of Hamlet is what matters the most. Hamlet in the second video is played by a guy who is obviously not an actor, but should consider being one. He is detached and pondering, or pensive, with his words. The words flow and appear to be the actor's thoughts, not mere lines. I do not imagine Hamlet as an angry, overly tense man burning through dialogue, but as an intelligent, depressed man pondering life and death. The actor in the second video portrays Hamlet in a far better way than any I've seen before.

"What an ass am I!"

Hamlet believes himself to be pathetic, an ass if you will. Hamlet says, "what an ass am I!" then continues to dig himself into a deeper hole of self-pity. He rants about prompts from Heaven and Hell urging him to avenge his father, but recognizes himself as coward for not doing so. Also, he compares himself to kitchen slaves as Hamlet and the slaves both rant about their heartaches through melodramatic delivery of words. Hamlet's single line, "what an ass am I!" illustrates his inner turmoil very accurately. Claudius' alleged crime was only told to Hamlet recently by a manipulative ghost; reservations with murdering his uncle and king seem normal. But Hamlet doesn't see it that way. He considers his actions, or inaction, cowardice because he blindly believes in the ghost of his deceased father. Hamlet's hesitation to assassinate his kin manifests itself as weakness in Hamlet's mind. This weakness, or cowardice, provides fuel for Hamlet to bury his head in the sand and ignore logic and charge ahead with plans to murder his uncle.

This is how I picture Hamlet while he wallows in self-pity.