Searching for Certainty: Hamlet
Hamlet, a thrilling 4,000-line tragedy whose repute among Shakespearean fanatics, is only overshadowed by the fear it evokes in high-school English students. Sir William Shakespeare’s greatest piece of theatre, it is famous for its exploration of complex themes such as love, grief, family, and death.
However, to say that these themes are unique to Hamlet would be negligent. The theme of grief was exhibited in Julius Caesar, which was first performed a year before Hamlet, where Portia committed suicide as a result of her “impatience of [Brutus’] absence” (IV.III), and Octavius vowed not to let up his revenge “’till Caesar’s three and thirty wounds be well avenged”. The theme of family was demonstrated unmistakably in Twelfth Night, a play released two years before Hamlet, where Viola and Sebastian’s separation and eventual reunion acted as the backbone of the play’s storyline. So, Shakespeare’s tendency to explore complex themes evidently extended far beyond Hamlet, something only to be expected from the man considered by many to be the greatest writer in the English language. What I believe sets Hamlet apart from Shakespeare’s various other works is the plays’ ability to delve deeper into the fundamental motives and emotions of each character, as well as how they build irregularity in the play. For instance, even from the initial scene, the motive of Old Hamlet’s ghost is a mystery. Horatio is only able to speculate that his appearance “bodes some strange eruption to [his] state” (I.I.72) but is unable to go into further detail.
The opening line in Hamlet, though indirectly, already begins to illustrate the theme of uncertainty. The play commences with a question: “Who’s there?” (I.I.1) followed by a statement: “Nay, answer me. Stand and unfold yourself.” (I.I.2). This opening could be interpreted as a comment on the play’s overall identity, with Barnardo’s comment representing readers asking how they should understand its significance. This is met with an equally puzzling response: “unfold yourself” which I believe to be the play’s response to this comment. By flipping the initial question, Shakespeare is asking the audience to answer the questions themselves, potentially indicating that the play is open to multiple interpretations, linking to the uncertainty that plagues Hamlet during the entirety of his time on stage. Speaking of Hamlet, since his introduction to the story, in which he reveals to the audience his analytical (or tiresome, depending on how much you like Shakespeare) personality through his first soliloquy, we have been all too aware of his dislike of uncertainty in the form of unknown motives. Gertrude’s “o’er hasty marriage” (II.II.57) is a source of confusion for both inhabitants of Hamlet, and literary fanatics. I could easily write an entire essay on the ambiguity of her motives (which I believe were outlined well in Tamara Tubb’s article), put simply, though, Gertrude’s ambiguity acted as a source of frustration and confusion for Hamlet.
In his meeting with Old Hamlet’s ghost, we are exposed to the first example of Hamlet’s motive to act with certainty. During their reunion, Hamlet is informed that his father was, in fact, murdered by his uncle, and was guilted into promising to “sweep to [Old Hamlet’s] revenge” (I.V.31). If you can overlook the apparition of a dead man, the plot seems fairly straightforward. The murder of Old Hamlet is no longer veiled, and Hamlet’s role to “revenge his [father’s] … murder” (I.V.25) has been spelled out for him, about as clearly as possible using Shakespearean language. Therefore, you would expect that from this point in the play, Hamlet’s attention is turned entirely to how he will enact the murder. Despite his call to action, though, Hamlet begins yet another brooding soliloquy. This time on the topic of revenge, and how badly he is failing at it (I believe Kenneth Branagh’s rendition of the soliloquy captures the frustration that this failure to act caused Hamlet: Kenneth Branagh as Hamlet- Soliloquy 2 ). In the soliloquy, Hamlet identifies that he has a “motive and… cue for passion” (II.II.546), but that he is still unable to act, almost “unpregnant of [his] cause” (II.II.554). The reason for Hamlet’s refusal to act up leading up to this scene is unclear. It is possible that Hamlet’s lack of action was caused by his feeling of disconnect from his cause, which he outlines in his soliloquy. In saying that, he may also be uncertain whether his action is truly required, and so he aims to confirm that revenge is appropriate. That would, in and of itself, be an example of a motive to act with certainty. The certainty, in this case, being that Hamlet’s action is warranted. During the soliloquy, he also becomes aware of the possibility that “the spirit that [he] has seen may be the devil” (II.II.585–586), and therefore that he requires “grounds more relative” (II.II.590) to act in revenge. This again links to the motive I mentioned previously, involving his certainty that his action is justified. As I will explain further, Hamlet’s motives are not limited to revenge. Of course, one of his motives is to obey his father’s posthumous wish to “revenge his most foul and most unnatural murder”. This was made abundantly clear by his dramatic calling upon the host of heaven (to hold him to his promise of revenge), as well as his steadfast loyalty to his father’s image throughout the play. My point is that the reasoning for Hamlet’s postponement of actions is his desire to act with the certainty that his outcome is appropriate (or in this case, required at all).
It was clear to readers that Hamlet’s emotions were left in disarray (possibly to the point of madness), after the loss of his father. His “nighted colour” (I.II.68) and gloomy temperament blatantly demonstrated Hamlet’s grief. However, more than the loss of his father, Hamlet also had to deal with the knowledge of Claudius’ treachery (after meeting the ghost of course), Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s duplicity, and Gertrude’s treacherous remarriage. These underlying motives leave Hamlet in an extremely vulnerable position, so I suppose that the uncertainty surrounding Hamlet as the play went on, could have caused him to lose trust in his surroundings. Ultimately leading to his questioning of whether each action’s outcome could be depended upon. Although there is no single answer to this question, seeing as it is generated from Hamlet’s psychology, it is very possible that Hamlet’s micromanaging of his actions to ensure trust in their outcomes is his way of replacing the role of “reliability” in his relationships with others.
Act 3 Scene 3 presents viewers with another example of Hamlet’s motive to act with certainty. Hamlet was already able to “catch the conscience of the king” (II.II.592) by recreating his father’s murder in front of Claudius during Act 3 Scene 2. Subsequently satisfying his aforementioned motive of acting with certainty, and ensuring that he would be morally correct in killing Claudius (which may still have been ambiguous at the time from a legal point of view). He decides to move forward with his decision, and luckily enough, is presented with an opportunity at once. This is the second, more glaring moment in the play where Hamlet’s motive to act with certainty makes itself clear.
Hamlet Soliloquy 6: Act 3 Scene 3
Now might I do it pat now he is praying,
And now I’ll do it, and so he goes to heaven.
And so am I revenged, that would be scanned.
A villain kills my father; and for that,
I, his sole son, do this same villain send to heaven.
O, this is hire and salary, not revenge.
He took my father grossly, full of bread -
With all his crimes broad blown, as flush as May.
And how his audit stands, who knows save heaven?
But in our circumstance and course of thought,
’Tis heavy with him, and am I, then, revenged;
To take him in the purging of his soul,
When he is fit and seasoned for his passage?
No.
Up, sword, and know thou a more horrid hent:
When he is drunk asleep or in his rage;
Or in the incestuous pleasure of his bed;
At gaming, swearing or about some act
That has no relish of salvation in it.
Then trip him, that his heels may kick at heaven,
And that his soul may be as damned and black
As hell, whereto it goes. My mother stays,
This physic but prolongs thy sickly days.
Hamlet’s sixth soliloquy, ironically, takes place behind Claudius’ back, an apt metaphor for the idea being discussed. Somehow Hamlet has convinced himself of the notion that Claudius, while praying, is “fit and seasoned for his passage” (III.III.86) to heaven, and in comparison to his father, whose crimes were “broad blown, as flush as may” when he was killed, Claudius would be given a free pass to heaven. In Hamlet’s mind, killing a man who was to Old Hamlet “like a mildew’d ear” while praying would be a gift. This scene is quoted regularly as an example of Hamlet’s crippling inability to act, which is fair, seeing as Claudius was, literally, kneeling in front of Hamlet and admitting to his crime. During the scene, Hamlet elevates the concept of revenge to consider how Claudius will be judged in the afterlife, which then meant that he could not be certain his idea of revenge would be fulfilled. Contrasted with characters such as Laertes and Fortinbras, whose routes to revenge were hardly as awkward, Hamlet’s motive to act with certainty appears extremely tedious. Interestingly, in comparison to Hamlet’s second soliloquy, this instance of inaction does not frustrate Hamlet. He is not berating himself for his lack of action. Rather, he is wholeheartedly convinced that this is the ideal route to revenge. Again, there is not a clear answer as to why his outlook on his own procrastination changed so swiftly. It could be due to the differing circumstances under which these situations took place. Hamlet may have felt more dedicated to his cause, even convincing himself he wasn’t acting for the sake of his father, thus justifying his inaction. Hamlet may also be showing signs of madness at this stage in the play (which is another topic too large to fit in this essay but could justify some of his actions later in the play).
Hamlet’s character was able to give the audience insight into the effects of constant uncertainty. For Hamlet, as stated, that uncertainty caused him to lose trust in his surroundings, and eventually, lose trust in his actions. Although we probably will not find ourselves in the centre of a hidden murder, though one can never be sure, we will all have to cope with the perils of being made to act without the certainty that the desired outcome will come about, because that’s life. Just recently, the world was plunged into one of the great uncertainties of this century, and though we may not have realised it, we were forced to act without the certainty that we would be safe. I am speaking, of course, about the COVID-19 pandemic (but I can see a case being made for Donald Trump’s regime to be classified under that category as well). During the pandemic, we have experienced a similar phenomenon as that which I believe Hamlet underwent. The uncertainty of case numbers, infection rates, and where the nearest hotspot was located is all-consuming, so it wasn’t uncommon to feel uncertain whether you were safe in your workplace, on public transport, or the few other places we were allowed to visit during stage 4 lockdown. Unfortunately, though, there were times where we couldn’t deliberate on whether to go to school even though there have been 25 new cases daily for a week, and we had to act despite our lack of trust in our surroundings, which I find similar to Hamlet’s position in the play.
In all, my stance on Hamlet as a play is extremely positive. I believe that it utilised the ulterior motives of each character very well, to sow the idea of uncertainty in reader’s minds, as well as in Hamlet’s. As for The Prince of Denmark himself, I find his character to be slightly tedious at times, but understandably so. After all, as I have discussed, his character relies on his actions to provide him certainty, wherein in his story he has none. That is why I believe he fails to act in so many crucial situations, and therefore why I find him so intriguing.
