Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=pamla. .
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Pacific Coast Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
TOBE ANDNOTTOBE
THEARCHETYPALFORMOFHAMLET
HARVEYBIRENBAUM
court of Denmark. The third part, from our Act IV, scene vi, consists
of Hamlet's return and the culmination of his destiny. His state is
now the poise of integratedstrength:"thereadinessis all."
At the end of Part One, Hamlet has undertakena commitmentto a
voice from the absolute, which has spoken to him personally from
beyond death and from beyond the scope of conscious, rational, and
pragmatic consideration, from beyond the grasp of Horatio's, of our,
"philosophy."It has come as a friend and father, claiming an obligation
to mortality. But as Hamlet realizes the necessity of this commitment,
he realizes also its sense of impossibility. Part One ends with repulse
from life abruptly felt and solidly voiced. Part Three begins with this
negative field overcome,or reversed.The questionremains,what happens
through Part Two? Most interpretations of the play do focus on this
problem in an inverted form: why does nothing happen, why doesn't
Hamlet kill the King? On a deeper level, however, positively put, the
question is arguably the most important in the world: How do we get
from No to Yes? What is the relation between to be and not to be?
Surely it is not a matter of simple choosing but a problemto be worked
out naturally through a dramatic process. Through Part Two, Hamlet
is busily doing what he should be doing, and the process carries us
where we need to be going with him, so that the end comes as no sur-
prise to us but as the only consummationto be wished.
The plotting of Part Two consists of an intensely played duel
between Claudiusand Hamlet. The king sends forth agents, extensions
of his power, to encounter Hamlet and expose him: first Ophelia, then
Gertrudeand Polonius, then Rosencrantzand Guildenstern,and finally
Laertes. A look at the early Hamlet stories in Saxo Grammaticusand
Belleforest, the sources of the Ur-Hamlet play which Shakespeare
apparently has adapted, makes clear the folkloric structure-a cycle
of testing ordeals-which remains in Shakespearebeneath the psycho-
logical sophistication. Saxo's hero, Amleth, whose genius is the crafty
daring of the traditional Trickster combined with a preternatural
degree of honesty, has been playing a highly sustained game of lunacy
by asserting cryptic truths that his companions cannot penetrate.
According to folkloric logic, his trickery can be dealt with only by
countertricks, so the king, Feng, first has Amleth beset with a girl,
the charmingly crude prototype of Ophelia, in order to challenge his
naturalinstincts:
Pacific CoastPhilology 21
Feng's third attempt to trap Amleth is more severe, for Amleth must
now be killed without letting the young man's mother or grandfather
learn of the king's responsibility for the deed. The Prince is sent to
Britain, accompaniedby retainers carrying instructions that he is to be
slain, and Amleth alters the letter. Before he actually kills the king,
Amleth plays a fourth trick. Arriving home from England to discover
his own last rites being celebrated in the banquet hall, he gets all
the assembled courtiers feeble with drunkenness, brings the wall
hangings down upon them, and burns the palace. This whole maneuver
is replaced in the play by the duel with Laertes, another trap laid by
the king which is boundto recoiluponhim.
Shakespeare'sversion is in each instance far more refined than Saxo's,
yet happily it has not lost all of the original extravagance. We are
still given, in Hamlet, a heroic impetuosity that is indifferent to a kind
of moral delicacy. What is more to the point, we still have the series
of tests, made in fact more complex, and its significance remains
basically the same. Claudius tries to trap Hamlet in a climactic series
of encounters, with no explicit concern at first for what he will do
afterwards.Fromeach encounter,Hamlet emerges stronger,and he finds
himself one step closer to the King himself. As Laertes falls, accusing
Claudius, the King and the Prince are ready to meet face-to-face
in the mutual death which marks the ultimate failure of the one
and the ultimate successof the other.
In the meantime, Hamlet has also countered Claudiuswith his own
test, the play of 'The Mouse trap."This also serves no direct practical
purpose. Hamlet has no reason to doubt the ghost's veracity: his
rationale is unconvincing, rather like an afterthought, serving merely
to give the impression that there is some logical reason. The whole
device, furthermore,leads Hamlet nowhere except to the closet scene
and a voyage toward England. But dramatically, rhythmically, the
device weakens Claudius and strengthens Hamlet. We are exhilarated
for Hamlet as we watch the King's discomfiture. Besides the crime
depicted, the very artificiality of the playlet serves as an accusing
metaphor.A player-kingsits upon the throne of Denmark.Emotionally,
'The Mousetrap"is a dress rehearsal for the actual kill, a preparatory
step that will make the real confrontation all the more climactic.
It is an advance in the combat between the two men, also, on the
level of communication.Though they must still fight without direct
Pacific CoastPhilology 23
Ourindiscretionsometimeserves us well
When our deep plots do pall, and that shouldlearn us
There'sa divinity that shapesour ends,
Rough-hewthem how we will. (V,ii,8-11)5
Would we respect Hamlet more if he were to walk in on Claudius
cold-bloodedlyand strike him dead at a planned moment? A Laertes
or Fortinbras could do that, but something more, something less
successful, is required of Hamlet. Efficiency is not a tragic value,
because survival is not the goal. The hero's action must grow out of
his feeling, as the limbs of a tree grow from the trunk. They must
be organicallycoherent,expresseionsof immediateexperience;they must
be dramaticallymeaningful. As Karl Jaspers writes of Hamlet, he must
be "at one with this own violence."6Thus the manner of his own
death is far more than a disaster consequent upon his hesitation.
It is the process by which the hero blends into his destiny, achieving
a tragic fulfillment.
ii
The progressivecycling of the plot in Hamlet dramatizesthe deepen-
ing involvementwith life mortally.Another level of the same process is
enacted subjectively, primarily through the soliloquies. We are used to
thinking of them as meditationpieces or as symptomsof the Elizabethan
disease of melancholy, which retard the action by rationalizing its
supposed paralysis. But following the cyclical logic of myth and
tragedy, the way from No to Yes is necessarily down into No: the
way out is in. The soliloquies and the running current of Hamlet's
feelings - expressed in conundrums,.jibes, and asides - carry
him deeper into that state of tortured disgust with his being that
surfacedclearlyat the end of Part One.
The soliloquies are all exercises in self-laceration,probingthe nerves
of Hamlet's self-hatred with merciless intensity. Who calls him coward
and villain, breaks his pate across, gives him the lie i' the throat
as deep as to the lungs? No one but himself - and various critics
5
Quotations from Hamlet follow the Signet edition, edited by Edward Hubler
(N.Y., 1963).
6
Karl Jaspers, Tragedy is Not Enough (Archon Books reprint, Hamden, Conn.,
1969),p. 64.
Pacific CoastPhilology 25
who confuse feelings with facts. The soliloquies are a dramatic activity
and the projection of a state of mind. They complement Hamlet's
advances against Claudiuswith their emotional equivalent, an advance
into the essential psychic pain of the self turned bitterly against
itself. Although the situation is grotesque, it is enormously pathetic.
It is the unconscious center, we may suspect, of all tragic feeling.
Exploringthe structureof such feeling without masochistic pleasurebut
with a profoundand curioushonesty, even with ingenuousness,Hamlet
achieves a paradoxicalstature exactly where the ego least expects it,
in the deathlikefeelings of impotence,nausea,and despair.
In the "soliloquyof the question," "To be, or not to be," Hamlet's
concern for a life after death can be understood in neither Christian
nor Stoic terms. We understand it only in terms of the state of
mind that he projects in the speech itself. His concern is for a living
dread, in this world, which puzzles the will, projectingonto the afterlife
the very feeling about life he is trying to escape from, "the heart-
ache, and the thousand natural shocks / That flesh is heir to." The
feelings that we fear to dream are the feelings we already have.
What Hamlet would dream in eternal sleep is his own weary self-
disgust and the bitterness to be.
The concluding passage of the soliloquy should be read with an
emphasisthat carriesthe force of his feelings forwardinto an appropriate
generalization.
Thusconsciencedoes makecowardsof us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sickliedo'erwith the pale cast of thought,
And enterprisesof great pitch and moment,
With this regardtheir currentsturn awry
And lose the name of action. (III,i,83-88)
It is not an eccentric berating his peculiarities or an invalid lamenting
his disease, but a focal character acting as the voice of the play,
moving from his own symbolic experience into a truth that embraces
us all, the truth of a "cowardice"that is our common tragic plight.
'Thought" is not intellection, "conscience"is not moral qualms; both
are equivalent terms for what Hamlet has just been doing - thus -
for the experience of the "dread"that is his own feeling about his
mortal life. The terms are defined dramatically by the speech, in
26 ToBe andNot ToBe
fact by the whole play. Similarly, the famous passage in the soliloquy
on Fortinbras (IV,iv,32ff.) about the "cravenscruple / Of thinking too
precisely on th'event"should be read in terms of "thinkingtoo precisely
on th'event a thought which, quartered, hath but one part wisdom
and ever three parts coward,"the problem being not the manner of
thinking but the "thought," which is the experience of fear itself.
Even so, Hamlet's sentence moves beyond this explanation of his state
to rest upona more solid certainty:
I do not know
Why yet I live to say, "Thisthing'sto do,"
Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means
To do't. (43-46)
What is most important for us is that we sense dramatically,by what
Hamlet does, that what he calls "thinking" we might better call
feeling, and the particular kind of feeling which is the consciousness
of ones own predicament. What Hamlet is particularly conscious of
here, and most troubled by, is that he is in a state of not knowing,
suspendedin vacuity.
We can say then that Hamlet feels too much rather than that he
thinks too much. If we do, however, we then have to ask: too much
for what? Too much to kill the King forthwith? But we have seen
that it is not enough for Hamlet to kill the King; he must kill
him in such a way that the act expresses a state of consciousness
worthy of a tragic hero. In fact, the intensity of Hamlet's feelings
and his commitment to them is largely what binds him to us.
The vivacity of his spirits, the acuity of his mind, the integrity of
his ideals, the bitterness of his angry grief, and the gratuitous cruelty
of his self-punishmentare all absolutely inseparable. Because he sees,
he feels; because he feels, he sees. We are trapped again by the paradox
that underliestragedy:what gives vitality takes life.
In his praise of Horatio, Hamlet implies that he himself is what he
calls "passion'sslave." Horatio represents to him an ideally balanced
spirit, beyondthe anguishof tragedy:
... thou hast been
As one, in suffring all, that suffers nothing,
A man that Fortune'sbuffets and rewards
Hast ta'enwith equal thanks... (III,ii,67-70)
Pacific CoastPhilology 27