Walley 1933

Shakespeare's Conception of Hamlet
Author(s): Harold R. Walley

Source: PMLA, Vol. 48, No. 3 (Sep., 1933), pp. 777-798
Published by: Modern Language Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/458341
Accessed: 22-12-2015 01:01 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
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.
Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 01:01:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
XL
SHAKESPEARE'S CONCEPTION OF HAMLET
W HAT was Shakespeare'sconceptionof Hamlet?That is the ques-

tion. It is one whichinevitablyresolvesitselfintoa reconstruction
of the materialsat his disposal, the dramaticproblemswith whichhe
had to deal, and the means wherebyhe soughtto satisfycontemporary
dramatictaste. For such a reconstruction modernscholarshipprovides
abundant information about both the theatricalpracticesand intellec-
tual interestsof the time and Shakespeare'shabits as a craftsman.In
particularshouldbe notedhis exceptionalpreoccupationwithcharacter
portrayaland the scrupulousmotivationof action; his conformity with
changingtheatricalfashion,yet at the same time his reluctanceto pi-
oneerin experiment;his sensitive,ifsketchy,acquaintancewithmatters
of contemporary interest;and his successas a skilledand inspiredadap-
terratherthanas an innovator.In theapplicationofthisknowledgetwo
principlesare fundamental.First,Hamletmust not be viewed in isola-
tion, but in close conjunctionwith the theatricalenvironmentwhich
produced it. Second, Shakespeare must be recognizedas primarilya
practicalplaywright,a businessman of the theaterwithobligationsto
fulfill,specifictheatricalconditionsto meet,and an audience to divert.
For therest,it is a pleasantexercisefortherecreativeimaginationto try
to thinkoneselfinto Shakespeare'smind,to face the problemof Hamlet
as he facedit, and to tracethesolutionas he musthave foundit.
I
Shakespeare'sHamletis a philosophicalmelodrama.Theatricallyit is
one ofhis mostspectacularplays. For all its discursiveness
it is crammed
with action of the most sensational sort. Ghosts walk and cry "Re-
venge1" Murderis foullydone. Conspiratorsplot and counterplot.Two
charactersgo mad. A queen is terrified
nearlyto death.A play breaksup
in a near-riot.An insurrectionbattersthe palace gates. A brawl dese-
cratesa suicide'sgrave.A duel explodesinto murderand generalbutch-
ery. There are poison, incest,war, and debauchery.This is not closet
drama forthephilosopher'sstudy;it is blood and thunderforthepopu-
lar stage.
Nevertheless,Hamlet is also one of Shakespeare's most thoughtful
plays. Permeatedwith moralizingand philosophicalspeculation,it pre-
sents in its centralcharactera most elaboratepsychologicalstudy. As
forthe readertheseare unquestionablythe most enduringelements,so
to the elucidationof these criticismhas devoted most of its attention.
777
778 Shakespeare's Conceptionof"Hamlet"
Indeed, not infrequently is it impliedthat theplay existsfortheexpress

purpose of expoundingShakespeare'sviews on life and death, or that
theplay is primarilya peg upon whichto hang the characterof Hamlet.
Such a view, however,scarcely squares with the known practice of
Shakespeare,or, forthat matter,of any successfulplaywright.The one
play of the period which openly advertiseditselfas a philosophical
characterstudy-Chapman's Revengeof Bussy D'Ambois-was an in-
gloriousfailure.Contrastwiththistheextraordinary popularityofHam-
let,and one may see how much of it dependsupon the scrupuloussub-
ordinationof thoseveryphilosophicalelementswhichmake Chapman's
play so insufferably dull to the modernreader.To Shakespeare,doubt-
less, both characterstudyand philosophicalspeculationwere distinctly
subsidiaryto plot and stage business;and in the excisedversion,which
must have been necessaryforstage presentation,theyprobablyinter-
feredlittlewiththemorecongenialbusinessofswiftmelodrama.'
As a stage piece Hamletis composedof certaindefiniteelements.It
presentsthe storyofa dispossessedprince,who,summonedto avengehis
father'smurder,eventuallycarriesout the commissionand in doingso
loses his own life.There is a ghostto demandrevengeand thusprompt
the action.There is a play withintheplay used to verifythe murderer's
guilt; an attemptto betrayHamlet by meansofhis personalfriendsand
a woman whomhe loves; a plot againsthis life,whichhe foils;a scene
in whichHamletviolentlychargeshis motherwithherperfidy and causes
in hera changeofheart.Thereis Hamlet's slayingofa meddlesomecoun-
sellor,and the subsequentmadnessand suicideofhis daughter;a grave-
yard scene marked by melancholymeditation;and finallya fencing
match which develops into a trap and involves a general slaughter.
These are thesalientfeaturesofthestory.
The principalcharacterand themesare closelyallied. Hamlet is pre-
sentedas a sensitivegentlemanscholardisillusionedin his social contacts
and oppressedwiththe villainyand futilityof life.This disillusionment
crystallizesin his horrorat the wickednessof his mother.For the pur-
pose offacilitatinghis revengehe feignsmadness.But thismadnessis of
a peculiarnature.It is not a mentalcollapse,like that of Ophelia,but a
sortof supersanity.It revealsitselfin his conductwithfoolsand those
whomhe distrusts.Its chiefcharacteristics are fantasticimaginationand
phraseology,a calculated irrelevancyof comment,and sardonic wit.
Such abnormalityas it possesses is comprisedin Hamlet's morbidob-
1 It is worthnotingthat,althoughGabrielHarvey mightobserve"his Lucrece,and his
tragedyofHamlet,PrinceofDenmarke,have it in themto please the wisersort,"theprin-
cipal referencesto incidentsin Hamletare to Hamlet's mad conduct,the ghostthat cried
"Revenge!" and the skull episode of the graveyardscene.
Harold R. Walley 779
sessionwitha fewrestricted preoccupations.The peculiarityofHamlet's

madness is that, no matterhow insane his ravings may seem to his
hearers,withoutexceptionthey contain doubleentendre and make per-
fect sense fromHamlet's point of view. The method is substantially
that whichunderliesthe contemporaneous intellectualconceit;namely,
the surpriseassociation of apparentlyincongruouselementslinked by
a submergedchain of thought.Thus whatevermadnessHamlet exhibits
is an integralpartofhisownmentalattitude.
This mental obsession, which issues in the evidences of Hamlet's
supposed madness,is intimatelyconnectedwith two other important
featuresof the play. Hamlet is much concernedwith his inabilityto
carryforwardhis revenge.This delay is essentialto the plot; that it is a
delay forwhichHamlet is himselfresponsibleShakespearemakes clear
throughout.2 Much, however,as Hamlet endeavorsto understandthe
reason,he is incapable of explainingit to himself;it is an ingrainedpart
ofhis character.This reluctanceto act is merelythe reverseof Hamlet's
preoccupationwith thought.He is given much to melancholyand to
pessimisticmeditationswhichplay a largepartin thedrama and set the
tonefortheplay. For theyare steepedin a profounddespair.To Hamlet
lifeis compactoffollyand vice. It is a tale ofvain strivingand frustrated
endeavorwhoseend is no morebut dust and worms'meat. It is a prison
to be fledthroughsuicide,wereit not fora fearof wakingfromdeath's
sleep. This feelingimpregnatesHamlet's thought. It dominates his
conductand is thedirectingforcebehindhis speeches.
These are theessentialfeaturesof the tragedywhichShakespearecre-
ated. But since it is practicallycertainthat Shakespeare'splay is a re-
workingof an older Hamlet,the questionnow arises,to what extentis
Shakespeareresponsibleforhis portrayalof Hamlet? Althoughthe old
play has been lost in the revision,one cannot attemptan estimateof
Shakespeare'spartin Hamletwithoutrecourseto thisplay,forobviously
he labored under distinctrestrictionsimposed by the traditionalma-
terials.The situationis bothaided and perplexedby the existenceof the
mangledfirstquarto and the Germanversionof Hamlet,Der Bestrafte
Brudermord, or FratricidePunished, on the basis of which Professor
H. D. Grayhas erecteda mostingeniousreconstruction ofthe old play.3
2 Shakespearefirstplaces the responsibilityforinactionsquarelyupon Hamlet through
his carefulcontrastswithClaudius and Laertes,clinchingthe pointin Hamlet's refusalto
killthe King at his prayers.He thenemphasizesthe factthateven Hamlet is aware ofthis
responsibility,especiallyin such speeches as ii, ii, 576-616 and iv, iv, 32-66 (Neilson's
text).
3 "Reconstructionof a Lost Play," PhilologicalQuarterly, vii (1928), 254-274.-For the
presentpurpose it is unnecessaryto enterinto controversyover the interrelations of the
various versionsof Hamlet.It is generallyagreedthat both the firstquarto and Fratricide
780 Shakespeare's of"Hamlet"
Conception
Most valuable,however,in estimatingShakespeare'smaterialis thever-

sionoftheHamlet storygivenin Belleforest'sHistoiresTragiques(1576).
That Shakespeareused this version,whichis the source of his model,
thereis no necessityforassuming.Althoughhe may have consultedit,
the probabilityis that those elementswhichShakespeare'splay shares
withBelleforestalso appearedin theearlierplay.
Belleforest'stale providesthe essentialoutlinesof the Hamlet story.
It representsHamlet as a princedefraudedof his kingdomby a mur-
derousuncleand incestuousmother.It states that Hamlet feignedmad-
ness in orderto save his life and give opportunityfor revenge.It re-
counts the King's suspicion and the three familiarmethods used to
betrayHamlet: theattemptedbetrayalby a womanwhomhe loved, the
trap in the Queen's chamberpreparedby an officious counsellorwhom
Hamlet slew,and the tripto England. In theseaccountsit also provides
theprototypesofPolonius,Ophelia,Horatio,Rosencrantz,and Guilden-
stern. In addition it tells of Hamlet's accusation of his mother,her
subsequentrepentanceand promiseto aid his revenge,and the ultimate
accomplishment of thisin the destructionof the King and his court.In
its generaloutlinesthisis the storywhichShakespearehas dramatized
and which,therefore, one may presumehe foundalso in the old Hamlet.
But thereare certainimportantdivergencesfromShakespeare'splay.
Hamlet is acquaintedfromthebeginningwiththemannerofhis father's
death and has a sound reason in self-protection forfeigningmadness.
Also, he does not meethis death in accomplishinghis revenge. Finally,
he is a man of determinedaction who kills his uncle as soon as he can
circumventthe King's vigilance.
Among elementsof Shakespeare's tragedynot suggestedby Belle-
forestare a numberwhichin all probabilitywerealso in the old Hamlet.
one mayassumethatHam-
Sinceit is necessaryto give dramaticfinality,
Punishedincorporateprimitivefeaturesnot in Shakespeare'sfinalversion.Whetherthese
derivefromthe old Hamletdirector froma preliminary revisionby Shakespeare,the ele-
mentsrepresentedwere probablyin the pre-Shakespeareanplay. For if Shakespearedid
reviseHamlettwice,thefirstrevisionmusthave beensufficiently perfunctoryto givereason
fora secondwithina briefinterval.For myself,I can findno convincingevidenceformore
than a singlethoroughrewritingof the play, probablyin 1601-02 (See my forthcoming
article, "The Dates of Hamlet and Marston's The AMalcontent," The Reviewof English
Studies). This, withcertainminorrevisionsforpublication,I believeembodiedin the sec-
ond quarto text.
As forthe authorshipof the lost Hamlet,althoughNashe's reference in 1589 is inconclu-
sive,thepreponderanceofevidencepointsto Kyd. The play resemblesKyd's knownwork;
it reflectscertainofhis favoritedevices; and, in the absence of definitecontradictoryevi-
dence,similardramaticpredilectionsand techniqueprovidea strongbasis of probability.
Even though,as has been suggested,the old Hamletbe by an imitatorof Kyd, the result
forour purposeis the same.
let's death was introducedin this play. Structurallythreeof the most

importantadditions are the ghost, the play scene, and the finalduel
scene. Now the ghost was certainlyin the old play; it is referredto
That the play and the denouementalso belongedto Kyd's
specifically.4
Hamletis mostprobable.In the firstplace, both are fundamentalto the
plot and are sensationalhighlightsof the play; secondly,theyare both
stronglycharacteristicof Kyd. In addition,both are ratherawkwardly
motivatedin Shakespeare and suggestsurvival froman earlierform.
The play, forinstance,Shakespearedragsin by thehair.Its introduction
is fortuitous.It serves no necessarypurpose beyond one of theatrical
effect.Nor does it assist Hamlet's revenge;ratherthe contrary.But in
The Spanish TragedyKyd uses a similarplay scene,and in comparable
circumstancesHieronimorequiresconfirmation of his suspicionsbefore
proceedingwithhis revenge,as does Hamlet.
The finalduel whichprecipitatesthetragedyis equally incongruousin
Shakespeare'splay. It does not grow out of the precedinglogic of the
tragedy.Hamlet's conductthroughout thesceneis well-nighinexplicable
in the lightof what has immediatelypreceded.In otherwords,it would
seemthathere,too, Shakespeareis adaptinghis own tragedyto a ready-
made scenario.The assumptionis supportedby thefactthatthedenoue-
mentis filledwithKydian characteristics. The ingenioustrap is similar
to that in The Spanish Tragedy.Claudius's scheme of eliminatinghis
tool,Laertes,is paralleledin both TheSpanish Tragedyand Solimanand
Perseda.The trickof the poisonedwine is similarto the killingof Soli-
man by Perseda's poisoned kisses. Finally, the multiplicityof killings,
climaxedin FratricidePunishedby the wantonstabbingof Phantasmo
forno reasonat all, is in thetypicalKyd vein.
Nashe, in his Epistle to Greene'sMenaphon(1589), speaks of "whole
Hamlets, I should say handfulsof tragical speeches." One may well
imaginesuch speeches,pennedby Kyd forthe ravingsof mad Hamlet
or lunaticOphelia,fromthesamplesassignedto Hieronimoand Isabella.
Indeed Ophelia's lunacy is rathercloselyparalleledby that of Isabella.
Her suicide,too, seemsto be an echo of Kyd.s In any eventShakespeare
I Lodge, in Wit's Misery (1596) refersto the "ghost which cried so miserablyat ye
Theator,like an oisterwife,Hamlet, revenge." Hamlet's swearingof his companionsto

secrecyand the echoes of the ghostmay also have been part of the original. There is a
somewhatsimilaroath-takingin Soliman and Perseda,i, iii, 164 ff.
6 In the matterof Ophelia's suicideShakespeareis ambiguous.Act v, i, 250-255 implies
at any rate a reasonablesuspicionof suicide; the Queen's account (iv, vii) suggestsacci-
dent. FratricidePunished(v, vi) specificallystates that"Ophelia wentup a highhill,and
threwherselfdown,and killedherself."The wholeconfusionsuggestsa pre-Shakespearean
suicidelike that ofIsabella. Hamlet's own contemplationofsuicidemaybe a vestigeof the
old play. Hieronimosimilarlyconsiderskillinghimself.
doubtlessfoundsome suggestionsforHamlet's soliloquiesin his model,

particularlyforthosedealingwithHamlet's delay. That theearlyHam-
let delayedhis revengeis impliedby the plot. The Hamlet of Fratricide
Punished likewisechafes at his delay. So also does Hieronimoin The
Spanish Tragedy,whileBel-Imperiaspecificallyrebukeshimforit. But
the situation differsfrom that of Shakespeare's Hamlet. Hieronimo
chideshimselfwithoutjust cause. As soon as he discoversand verifiesthe
identityofhis son's murderersand exhauststhepossibilitiesof ordinary
justice,he immediatelytakesmattersintohis ownhands. Even withthe
interludeof his madnessthereis actuallylittleloss of time.Similarlyin
FratricidePunishedHamlet is delayedby externalcauses,by lack ofop-
portunity,because the King is surroundedby guards.The delay of the
pre-ShakespeareanHamlet was probably of this order. But the delay
ofShakespeare'sHamlet decidedlyis not.
The action of Hamletconsistsof two parts: the aggressionof Hamlet
leading to his vengeance,and the counterplotting of Claudius. Of the
counterplots, three-the trapbaited withOphelia,theinterview withthe
Queen, and the voyage to England-are primitiveelementsand formed
part of the Ur-HIamlet. The last of theseinvolvesthe curiousincidentof
Hamlet and the two banditsfoundin FratricidePunished.It is possible
that this grotesquescene may be merelya Germanaccretion.On the
otherhand, the trickeryand the tone ofgrimcomedyare strikingly like
those of the scene in whichPedringanomeets his fate in The Spanish
Tragedy,and the subsequentdiscoveryof theletteris like the discovery
ofPedringano'sletterwhichconfirms Hieronimoin his revenge.
Anotherpart of the King's counterplot,however,has no source in
Belleforest.This is the part contributedby Laertes. But this episode
mustsurelyhave belongedto thepre-Shakespearean Hamlet.In thefirst
place, it is an integralpart of the denouement.Unlessone assumes that
Shakespeareis responsibleforthe tragicconclusionof theplay, whichis
mostunlikely,one mustaccept thepreliminary action as part of the old
play. Furthermore, theingenuityoftheplot and themelodramaticfunc-
tionofLaertesare quitein keepingwithKyd's technique.
There still remainthreedetails of the play whichrequireattention.
In Belleforest,the Queen, afterHamlet's censure,repentsand promises
to aid him. This she does. In the firstquarto thispromiseis repeated.
But nothingcomesofit, and in thesecondquarto Shakespearehas care-
fullyexpungedthe promise.The indicationwould seem to be that here
someactionhas droppedout. Again,one is led to believein Shakespeare's
play that Hamlet and Ophelia love one another.This factis assumedby
Laertesand Polonius,and is verifiedby Hamlet and Ophelia themselves.6
I Hamlet,i, iii, 99 f., and v, i, 292-294.
Polonius says that Ophelia has been givingHamlet much of her time,7
and Ophelia reportsa crucialvisit of Hamlet.8But, withthe exception
of one scene betweenHamlet and Ophelia, nothingis made of thislove
affair.Indeed, Shakespearehas shiftedthe wholeemphasisof Ophelia's
functionand in doingso has killedany romanticpossibilities.Neverthe-
less, theprototypeofOphelia in Belleforestloves Hamlet and warnshim
oftheplot againsthim,and in FratricidePunishedOpheliais an innocent
pawn in the King's duplicity.Moreover,Kyd's plays give a prominent
place to thelove element.It is centralto both The Spanish Tragedyand
Soliman and Perseda. Bel-Imperiaactivelyaids Hieronimoin avenging
herlover'sdeath,and Persedaaloneplans and executeshervengeancefor
thedeathofErastus.One wondersifit is too muchto supposethatKyd's
Hamletmade moreofthelove interestthandoes Shakespeare.
Finally, thereis the matterof Fortinbras.This princeis mentioned
by Belleforestas a kinsmanof Hamlet. He is referredto ratherun-
expectedlyat theconclusionofFratricidePunished.But in Shakespeare's
play he has a ratherimportantpart. He threatensan invasion at the
openingof the play and is the subject of an embassy.Aftera treatyhas
been arranged with him, Hamlet later witnesseshis army's march
throughDenmark.At the end of the play Hamlet appointshimhis suc-
cessorto thecrown,and Fortinbrasarrivesin personto take thesituation
in charge. Now all this is foreignto the themeand circumstancesof
Shakespeare'splay. Fortinbrassimplycontributesnothingto thedrama.
The reason forhis appearance in the play at all has puzzled morethan
one studentof it. The mostplausibleexplanationis that the Fortinbras
materialrepresentsfossilremainsof part of the old play whichShake-
speare discarded.9A consultationof The Spanish Tragedyand Soliman
and Perseda affordsample evidenceof Kyd's fondnessformartialplots
and politicalcomplicationsas well as fora backgroundof international
controversy forhis specificstoryofintrigue,love,and revenge.The Kyd-
ian prologue to Fratricide Punished,furthermore, supportsthis hy-
pothesisin its promiseof a storyratherdifferent fromShakespeare's
Hamlet.'0
7 Ibid., I, iii, 91-93. 8 Ibid., II, i, 75 ff.
9 ProfessorGray (loc. cit.) has workedout some implicationsof this hypothesiswhich,
however,need not be accepted whollyforpurposesof the presentdiscussion.
10This prologuewithits personified Nightand its FuriesresemblesKyd's prologuesand
chorusesto The Spanish Tragedyand Soliman and Perseda.Like themit foretellsthe kind
of action to follow.In part Night addressesthe Furies thus:"Thereforebe ready to sow
the seeds of disunion,minglepoison withtheirmarriage,and put jealousy in theirhearts.
Kindle a fireof revenge,and let the sparksflyover the wholerealm; entanglekinsmenin
thenet ofcrime,and givejoy to hell,so thatthosewhoswimin thesea ofmurdermaysoon
drown."
The foregoingsuggestionsneed not be taken too seriouslynor given

undue weight.It is enoughif theysuggest,what is otherwisequite rea-
sonable, that certaindetails of action were droppedwhen Shakespeare
recast the old Hamlet.That this probablyhappenedis indicatedby one
furtherpeculiarityof the play. The counterplotsof Claudius supply
much of the action,but the play is singularlylackingin acts of aggres-
sionon Hamlet's part. Withtheexceptionofpresentingtheplay Hamlet
does absolutelynothingto further his revenge.Whatevermay have been
Shakespeare's interestin a passive protagonist,Kyd's charactersare
quite the opposite.His plays are filledwithrapid-fire action. What in-
terestedhim was not subtle portraiture,but theatricalsituation,swift
intrigue,melodramaticdeed, and resoundingdeclamation. What is
more,the tragediesof the early period whichproducedthe firstHamlet
werecharacteristically ofthistype. Any otherkind of Hamletwould be
an anachronism.
One may now summarizesomethingofwhat Shakespeare'smodelwas
like. It dealt witha dispossessedprincecalled upon forvengeanceby the
ghost of his murderedfather.This princefeignedmadness to protect
himselfand furtherhis revenge.He used a play to verifythe ghost's
statements.He soughtan opportunityto kill his uncle,but had firstto
elude his guards." He loved the lady Ophelia,but throughthislove was
nearlysnared to his destruction.He visitedhis motherto expostulate
withherand succeededin winningher to assistancein his plans; but in
doingso killedtheeavesdroppingPolonius.He was sentto England,but
en routeescaped theplot againsthislife,discoveredtheperpetrator, and
disposedofhisintendedmurderers. MeanwhileOpheliabecamemad and
killed herself.Her brotherheaded an insurrection,but was diverted
against Hamlet. Hamlet returnedto be trappedinto a fencingmatch
Surely this implies more than the restricteddomesticdisturbanceof Shakespeare's
Hamlet.The concludingremarksof Horatio bear the same significance: "Alas! what has
not this kingdomsufferedforever so long fromhard wars? Scarcelyis therepeace but
internaldisturbance,ambition,faction,and murderfillthe land anew."
The situationmay be suggestedin the wordsof Hieronimo(iii, xiii,39 ff.):
"No, no, HIieronimo, thou must enioyne
Thine eies to obseruation,and thy tung
To milderspeechesthen thyspiritaffords;
Thy hart to patience,and thyhands to rest,
Thy Cappe to curtesie,and thyknee to bow,
Till to reuengethou knowwhen,where,and how."
With this contrastHamlet's (iv, iv, 43-46):
"I do not know
Why yet I live to say, 'This thing'sto do,'
Sith I have cause and will and strengthand means
To do't."
whichprecipitatedthe tragedy.And somewherethreadingthroughthe

storywere the affairsof Fortinbras,possibly allied with the revenge
schemesofHamlet.
Hamlet himselfwas doubtless an aggressiveavenger,intriguingto
create an opportunityforhis revenge.He was probablyan heroiclover
and a warrior,in his momentsofsorrow,despair,resolution,indignation,
and madnessgivingvent to the windyand classical "tragicalspeeches"
whichKyd admired.'2But above all he was a manofaction,a good hater,
one given to wantonblood-lettingand a grimsatisfactionin slaughter.
He was doubtlessquite capable of deferringthe King's murderuntilhe
mightbe dispatchedwhen "about some act that has no relishof salva-
tion in't," and, when the bloody businesswas ended, of gloryingin his
act. As the Hamlet of FratricidePunishedcomplacentlyputs it: "Now
is my soul at rest,now that I have revengedmyselfon my enemies!"
Quite different the youngprincewho criedout in his dyingbreath:
0 goodHoratio,whata woundedname,
Thingsstanding shalllivebehindme!...
thusunknown,
Reportmeand mycausearight
To theunsatisfied.
Somethingof this sort must have been the play whichcame to Shako-
speare'shandsforhis revision.
II
Somewherearound the beginningof the seventeenthcentury,for
whateverreason,theEnglishstagerevivedits interestin theold tragedy
ofblood and revenge.Perhapsrevivalsof TheSpanish Tragedyor theold
Hamletapplied the spark.At any rate,a new dramatistfollowingin the
footstepsof Kyd, JohnMarston, set the fashionin Antonio'sRevenge.
At about the same time Shakespeareput on the boards his medleyof
classical history,chronicleplay, ghosts, and revenge,Julius Caesar.
Soon appeared a revisionof The Spanish Tragedywithadditionsby Ben
Jonson,and Chettle'sluridmelodramaof crimeand revenge,Hoffman.
The vogue continuedover a number of years in such plays as The
Revenger'sTragedy,Tourneur's The Atheist'sTragedy,and Chapman's
Revengeof Bussy D'Ambois, to reach a culminationin Webster's The
WhiteDeviland The DuchessofMalfi.In themidstofthisreignofterror
came Shakespeare'srewriting ofHamlet.
12 It is not impossiblethat Hamlet's melancholy in the
may have existed embryonically
old play. Both Hieronimoand Erastus enjoy referring to theirmelancholy,whichwith
themis simplygriefor discouragement.
All these plays are very similarin character,'3derivingmuch from

Kyd's inspirationand more fromhis technique. Highly sensational,
they all revolve about crimeand intrigue,and abound in blood, lust,
and debauchery.They usuallyhave as protagonista revenger, frequently
of a melancholyand meditativeturn,and a ghostor some equally grisly
substitute.Finally, they are ratherobvious, loosely constructedmelo-
dramas with little pretensionto profundityor the analysis of human
nature. Although Shakespeare's Hamlet undoubtedlyinfluencedthe
later plays, the typical patternmay be foundin Marston's Antonio's
Revenge, and fewoftheplaysgo farbeyondthis.
To meet thisnew taste Shakespeareundertookthe revisionof Hamlet
for the Lord Chamberlain'smen. Now, the revisionof a play has no
pointexceptas it attemptsto bringthatplay up to date, to make it con-
formwith new standards of taste. Unquestionablythis was Shake-
speare'spurpose.ApparentlyHamlethad sharedtheperennialpopularity
of The Spanish Tragedy;it was, in otherwords,a play worthreviving.
But Elizabethandramahad progressedrapidlysincethedayswhenHam-
let was firstwritten.Indeed, contemporaryreferencesto both it and
The Spanish Tragedyhave a certainpatronizingjocularitysuch as one
uses in recallingan old popular favoriteredolentof simplerdays and
simplerminds.Thus Jonson,in the inductionto his Bartholomew Fair,
observesof plays of this vintage: "He that will swear Jeronimoor An-
dronicusare the best plays yet shall pass unexceptedat here,as a man
whosejudgmentshowsit is constant,and hath stood stillthesefive-and-
twentyor thirtyyears." It is quite possible that HamletprecededThe
Spanish Tragedy,and with its old-fashionedSenecanismseemed both
more antiquated in style and less adequate in theatricaleffectiveness
than the later play. In any event Shakespeare'scompleterewritingof
the play is eloquent testimonythat it would not do in its originalform.
Indeed, the rewriting,I suspect, was undertakenless because Shake-
speare scentedin the storyan opportunityforthe creationof immortal
art thanbecause he realizedthat contemporary standardsof taste could
not be satisfiedwithless thana recastingoftheplay fromthegroundup.
The recastingof the play, however,presenteddifficulties fromthe
start. As a matterof fact,a less promisingstoryfromwhich to make
great tragedycould scarcelybe found.In the firstplace, the material
is not reallytragicat all. For that matter,neitheris the materialof the
contemporary revengeplays. They are franklymelodramasofblood and
intrigue,becomingtragediesonly by virtue of the hero's death. The
13A comprehensive
studyof theseplays and theirrelationto Hamletis givenin A. H
Thorndike's"The Relation of Hamlet to ContemporaryRevenge Plays," PMLA, xvii
(1902), 125 ff.
charactersare shadowy,the emotionsstagy,and the plays as a whole

deficientin those largerimplicationsone expects of true tragedy.Not
onlyaccordingto modernnotions,but also accordingto the best critical
theoryof Shakespeare's day, genuine tragedyconcernsitselfwith the
passionand overthrowofa noblesoul. It is concernedwithfeelingrather
thanwithaction,and its coreis character.But therevengeplay is a play
primarilyofaction,ofintrigue,ofobjectivelytreatedepisodes,ofspecific
rather than universalfortunes.That the chief practitionersvaguely
recognizedthe shortcomings of the type is indicatedby theirhabit of
piecing out the crude plot with frequentspeeches of lamentationor
moralizing.Furthermore, thetypicalprotagonistis anythingbut a tragic
figure.He is an intriguer,one who plots underhandedlyand stabs in the
dark. By any moral standard he is scarcely distinguishablefromthe
Machiavellian villain. He succeeds as the hero of a revengeplay only
because theappeal ofsucha play is not tragic.
A second difficulty arisesfromthe details of the plot. Even to a neo-
phyte the barrennessand inconsistencyof the storyare obvious. The
usual revengeplay is markedby a bewilderingmultiplicityof intrigue.
Not so Hamlet.Here a son is commandedto avenge a murderedfather;
he pledgeshimselfto the deed; and he does it. That is all thereis to it.
Furthermore, in the averagerevengeplay thenecessityforplanningand
carryingout revengedoes not arise until near the middle of the play.
This is the case of The Spanish Tragedy,Antonio'sRevenge,and The
Revenger'sTragedy.Hoffmanintroducesa double revenge motif,the
secondpartofwhichalso beginslate. In TheRevengeofBussy,Chapman,
laboringunderthe same difficulties as Shakespeare,endeavorsto escape
the dilemmaby introducinga subsidiaryand not very pertinentplot.
As has frequently been pointedout, Kyd, whenhe inventedthe ghost
forHamlet,gained a tremendousopeningforhis play but killedhis plot.
For at once the storyfailedto hold together.In theoriginalstoryevery-
one knewof the murderof Hamlet's fatherand suspectedhis designof
revenge.Thus his feigningof madness was a quite natural device for
preservinghis life,and the delay in circumventing his uncle's vigilance
onlyto be expected.But withthe advent of the ghostthe crimebecame
secret.The excuse forfeigningmadnessdisappeared;indeed,instead of
protectingHamlet, the pretenseactually betrayed him to suspicion.
Moreover,now Hamlet was launched upon his careerof vengeanceby
solemnpledgeat theverystart,and subsequentdelay becameincompre-
hensible.
Unmalleableas thesedetailsmightbe, theywereessentialto thestory.
Withoutdelay the progressfromthe ghost's commandin Act i to the
executionofvengeancein Act v is impossible.Withoutmadnessofsome
788 Shakespeare's
Conception
of"EHamlet"
sortHamlet would not be Hamlet. These difficulties Kyd had solved in

his customaryfashion.Since unfortunately Hamlet had nothingto do,
he builtup theintrigueofhis uncle.Inconsistencieshe ignoredor glossed
over. And the delay he bridgedwithSenecan monologuesand theatrical
devices.For objectivemelodramaconstructedforimmediatesensational
effectthis dramaturgydid well enough.But forserioustragedythe in-
congruitieswerefatal. Somethinghad to be done at least in the way of
motivation.
Worse, however,than the precedingdifficulties is the fact that the
Hamletplot,as Shakespeareinheritedit, is not fundamentally dramatic.
It is a plot singularlydevoidofthatconflictand clash ofopposingforces,
whetherinternalor external,requiredof effective drama. In the original
Belleforestversiona somewhatepical narrativeculminatesin a single
sensationalscene. In the versionKyd passed on to Shakespearesome
effortis made to pit Hamlet against the King in an externalconflict.
In neitherformis therea hintof internalstruggle.But even Kyd's ad-
justmentis weak, since a satisfactoryoppositionfails to materialize.
Hamlet's plan of aggressiveaction remainsnebulous,his executionlag-
gard. The King, beinguncertainofand unacquaintedwiththenatureof
his peril, is little more than a tentativeantagonist.Both are fighters
warilyseekingan adversaryin a fog. And the catastropheis confused
and largelyaccidental.Even iftheplot is interpreted as a battle ofwits,
withthe King thrustingsomewhatblindlyand Hamlet parrying,there-
sult is no moreimpressive.Hamlet comesofffeeblyas a hero,especially
an Elizabethan hero,in a proceedurewhichis hardlydignified.Such a
plot mightdo well enoughin a comedyor a crude melodrama,but for
serioustragedyit is incongruous.This becomesunmistakableas the con-
test reaches its climax,when Hamlet encountersthe King at prayer.
Here the anticipatedclash fizzlescompletely.With respectto the pre-
Shakespeareanplay this fiascois not only incomprehensible, it is dis-
tinctlybad drama.
Now thereare threeways by whichsuch difficulties may be avoided.
One is to obscure them. That Shakespearefollowedthis methodocca-
sionally is apparent to anyone who reads his plays. Every dramatist
does; it is one of the tricksof the trade. But it is a methodwhichdoes
not admit of universalapplicationunless the resultis to be chaos. The
two remainingmethodshave to do withmotivation,and thus withuni-
fication.Even the most incongruouselementscan be woven togetherif
withinthe limitsof the dramaticillusionthey can be motivatedcon-
vincingly,especiallyifthevariousstrandsofmotivationcan be shownto
possess a logical unity.This motivationcan be effectedmostreadilyby
the inventionof new incidentsto accountforthe major situationsof the
HaroldR. Walley 789
play. But here Shakespearewas seriouslyrestricted.He was not writing

a new play; he was rewriting an old play. Some minorincidentsmight,
of course, be suppressed;some triflingadditions mightbe made; the
emphasismightbe shifted.But thesubstanceoftheplay was wellknown,
was popular,was in shortHamlet.It couldnotbe materiallyalteredwith-
out destroyingthe play. And it was the substanceof the play that was
wrong.It needed reconstruction fromthe foundation.
The alternativemeans of motivationis throughcharacter.Any series
of incidentsmay be lent convictionif it can be shown that theyarise
naturallyfroma convincinginterplayof character.That is, a play may
be constructedby buildingincidentsaroundgivencharactersor by trim-
mingcharactersto fitgivenincidents.In the case of Hamletthe process
was prescribedby the material:characterhad to be fittedinto the al-
readyexistingplot. Since,however,Hamletwas to be tragedyand tragedy
necessitatesintenseconcentrationupon a singlecharacter,the problem
inevitablybecame one of constructinga singlecharacterwhichwould
unifytheplay. This problemis preciselytheone which,we find,Shakes-
peare dealt with.
I said earlierthat Shakespeareis notableforthe unusuallyscrupulous
motivationof his plays. This fact can be verifiedmerelyby consulting
them,and is emphasizedby comparisonof themwith the plays of his
contemporaries. I may now add that Shakespeare'sfavoritemethodof
achievingsuchmotivationis throughcharacter.Doubtless he adopted
the methodas best suited to dramatizingready-madestories.At any
rate, by the time of Hamletit was a well-establishedpractice.He had
used it successfullyin his historyplays and his majorcomedies.In Julius
Caesarhe had transformed a loose seriesof excursionsand alarumsinto
a compact and subtle studyof charactercontrastsleadingup to an in-
evitable denouement.Perhaps the best illustrationof the lengthsto
whichShakespearewas willingto carryhis methodis providedby the
ingeniousbut confusingr6le of Shylockin The Merchantof Venice.
The creationofa characterto reconcilethecontradictions oftheHam-
let story,however,was no mean task. He had to be a suitableherofora
tragedy,particularlyan Elizabethantragedy,whichmeantan admirable
hero. No futilevictim,no psychopathicweaklingwould do at all. He
had to be a herowho would commandthe respectof his audience. Pro-
fessorStoll has takenpains to show'4that untilthe nineteenthcentury
he was such a stage hero withoutflawor blemish.On the stage today,
however Hamlet may arouse one to pity or sorrow,he certainlydoes
not appear feeble,incompetent,or unworthy.Whateverthe nature of
his tragedy,he himselfremainscomprehensible, sympathetic,and ad-
14 E. E. Stoll, Hamlet; an Historicaland Comparative
Study(1919), pp. 8-13.
790 Shakespeare's of" Hamlet"
Conception
mirable.In orderto be this sort of hero Hamlet could scarcelybe the

unscrupulousplotterof conventionalrevengetragedy.Indeed, he could
not if he would: the plot of the play provideshim with no intrigue.
Moreover,the paramountinterestof a tragichero is passion,not deed.
Yet a purelypassive characteris hazardous to effectivedrama of the
lengthyElizabethantype.Also whatoftragicconflict? In the old Hamlet
the externalconflictwas feeble,the internalrudimentary.Drama had
to be lodgedsomewherein the new characterinterpretation.
Finally,the characterhad to be sufficientlycomprehensive to include
the awkwarddetails of plot. He had to motivatethe delay in revenge
withoutsacrificing his heroiccharacter.He had to "put on an antic dis-
position" withoutrenderinghimselfcontemptible;for the madness of
tragedy,even in feigning,must be of an orderapart. Edgar may play
the fool,but not Lear. Upon the new Hamlet,furthermore, devolvedthe
necessityof explainingthe play scene, the avoidance of the King at
prayer,and the scourgingof the Queen's soul. What sort of character
wouldexplainsuch a storyand meettheapprovalof Shakespeare'saudi-
ence? And what appeals to contemporary taste could supplementKyd's
crude devices in piecing out the plotless plot? This was the problem
Shakespeareset about solving.
III
Since it may be assumed that the revisionof Hamletwas designedto
bringit intoline with contemporary taste,let us fora momentexamine
the evidencesof that taste. Near the turnof the centuryElizabethan
drama underwentsome strikingtransformations whichsolidifiedduring
the subsequentdecade. Apart fromchangingtaste in general,much of
the directresponsibility forthis may be attributedto the activitiesof
threeinfluential dramatistswho roseto eminenceduringtheperiod:Ben
Jonson,JohnMarston,and GeorgeChapman.These menwereall schol-
ars, classicists,satirists,and moralists,and broughtto the drama a new
spirit,realistic,analytical,censorious,and disillusioned.The prevailing
attitudeof thisspiritwas sceptical,critical,satirical.It reflecteda rest-
less dissatisfaction withexistingconditions,if not withthe fundamental
structureof life.In mood, dependingupon the natureof its subject,it
frequently descendedto bittercynicismor profounddespair.'5
With this change in generaltempercame corresponding innovations
in dramatic art. Intriguebecame the backbone of both comedy and
tragedy.The increasedinterestin characterportrayaladapted itselfto
the "humorous"representation popularizedby Jonson.Awakenedmoral
16 See the presentwriter'sdiscussionin the introductionto Early Seventeenth-Century
Plays, ed. by H. R. Walleyand J. H. Wilson (Harcourt,Brace, 1930),especiallypp. 12-20.
earnestnessgave to comedy the satiricalreproofof Aristophanesor a

didactic seriousnesstending toward tragi-comedyor drame,and to
tragedya distinctlyethicalcast. Stylisticallytherecame into favorthe
pungentaphorismand the monologueor soliloquyofmoralizingmedita-
tion. The popular themeswere those of domesticand social complica-
tionsand the ramifications of lust. Cuckoldry,seduction,and adultery
became the center of interestfor both comedy and tragedy.For the
firsttime women came to occupy a prominentplace in the dramatic
scheme,but womenseennotromantically but throughtheeyesofmascu-
line disillusionment.The philosophicalattitudeof theseplays, ifit may
be called that, is one of cynicismleading to hopelesspessimismor its
alternative,an individualisticstoicismbased upon the ancientRoman
virtuesthen so much admired.For it was an age schooledin Juvenal,
Martial, and Persius which sat at the feet of Seneca, Plutarch, and
Epictetus.
To this taste Shakespearewas obligedto adapt Hamlet.As we have
seen, the obvious point of departurewas the characterof Hamlet him-
self.But how should he be representedso that he mightbe convincing
and sympatheticto the contemporaryaudience? Patentlyas a typical
Elizabethan gentleman-a courtier,a soldier,and a scholar;intelligent
and sensitive;one givento patronageof the arts,practiceof wit,a rea-
sonable interestin abstractphilosophyand practical moralizing.Such
is Shakespeare'sHamlet. But now arose the problemof madness.How
was such a tragichero to assume the role of madman? Popular comic
clownagewas out of the question. Not even an Elizabethan audience
could becomeexercisedover the tragicplightof a foolwho set the table
on a roar throughoutmost of the play. But the madnesscould scarcely
be representedas tragicraving,for this would be to deny its feigned
characterand misrepresent its purpose. Any emotionbuilt up by such
an interpretation would be false and a betrayalof the audience.
A hint forthe solutionwas already in Belleforestand was doubtless
reflectedin Kyd. There Hamlet's feigningwas markedby wittycom-
ments which aroused admirationin the discriminating. The solution
would be foundif Hamlet's feigningcould be representedas fantastic
wit,cleverin itself,but creatingthe impressionof madnessthroughthe
follyand obtusenessof others.Here the protagonistsuffersno diminu-
tionofdignity;theshrewdnessoftheaudienceis flattered;and whatever
thereis of foolishnessis foistedofl on othercharacters.The hero is en-
dowed withall the subtletyof the intriguerof melodrama,but, sincehe
speaks a riddlingtruthmisinterpreted by folly,he escapes the obloquy
ofdeliberatedeceitand villainy.This was alreadythemethodofMarston's
Antonio,and Shakespearehimselfhad usedit in Feste ofTwelfthNight.
792 Shakespeare's
Conception
of"Hamlet"
The adoptionof fantasticwit as the means of deludingfollyand vice

affordedsplendidopportunity forthat satireand railingwhichthe audi-
ence had come to enjoy in theplays of Jonson,Marston,and Chapman,
and the recentwar of the theaters."This is the strainthat chokes the
theaters,"says Lampatho in Marston's What You Will:
That makesthemcrackwithfull-stuff'd audience;
Thisis yourhumoronlyin request,
Forsoothto rail;thisbringsyourearsto bed;
Thispeoplegapefor;forthissomedo stare.
Thissomewouldhear,to cracktheauthor'sneck;
Thisadmiration and applausepursues;
Whocannotrail?"
It will be rememberedthat Shakespeare'sown Jaques loved to sit and
"rail against our mistressthe worldand all our misery."'7Now if this
propensitycouldbe joinedwiththenecessityforthecustomary"tragical
speeches" and both be essentiallyrelated to the characterof the pro-
tagonist,not onlywould therebe a gain in dramaticunity,but the inci-
dental delay in action would seem less like meremarkingtime. These
idiosyncraciesare attributesof a somewhateccentriccharacter,there-
foreto an Elizabethana humorouscharacter.Althoughhumorousrepre-
sentation is most naturallyadapted to comic portraiture,there was
neverthelessone verypopularhumorwhichmightlend itselfto tragedy,
namely melancholy.
Melancholywas not merelya popular,nay, as Burtonwould have us
believe,a well-nighuniversalhumor;it was a veryfashionablehumor.
As Jonson'sgull, Matthew,explains:
Oh,it's youronlyhumor,sir! yourtruemelancholy breedsyourperfect fine
wit,sir.I am melancholymyself,diverstimes,sirand thendo I no morebut
takepen and paperpresently, and overflow you halfa score,or a dozenof
sonnetsat a sitting.18
Moreover,althoughJaques expatiateson the varietiesof melancholy,'9
it was the recognizedhumorof the scholar.20It was also the peculiar
humorof thatcharacteristicfigureto whomMarstondevoteda play and
the age the name of the malcontent.21The malcontentfigure,withhis
6 iII, ii, 165-172. 17 As You Like It, iII, ii, 295-296.
18 EveryMan in His Humour, III, i. lg As You Like It, IV, i, 10 ff.
20 The academicplays, The Pilgrimage toParnassus and The ReturnfromParnassus, are
filledwithreferencesto the notoriousmelancholyof the scholar'slot.
21 Much of Hamletcould be explainedas simpleimitationif it could be shown,as Pro-
fessorStoll believes,that Marston's The MalcontentprecededShakespeare'sHamlet.The

evidence,however,points to the contrary.(Cf. my article,"The Dates of Hamlet and
Marston's The Malcontent,"referred to above.) A detailed studyof the malcontentfigure
in its relationto contemporary dramaand thespiritoftheage is containedin a forthcoming
monographby the presentwriter.
connotationsof moraland philosophicalperturbation,diseased mental-

ity,and politicaldisaffection,
was particularlyappropriateto theexigen-
cies of both contemporary taste and Shakespeare'splot material.Simi-
lar figureswere familiarin Dowsecer of Chapman's HumorousDay's
Mirthand in Antonioand Feliche of Marston's Antonioplays. Kyd's
tragicheroes had a touch of melancholy,as possibly did theoriginal
Hamlet. Shakespearehimselfhad introduceda melancholyDon John
into Much Ado, an Antoniointo Merchantof Venice,and into As You
Like It a Jaques whosepredilectionsare strikingly like thoseof Hamlet.
Finally,such a melancholyprotagonistwould be psychologicallycom-
prehensibleand entirelyrespectableto the age, whilehis attributesof
eccentricmannerism,sardonic wit, somber speculation,and irregular
emotionalismwould appear both naturaland proper.
The determination to make use ofa melancholyprotagonist, however,
aided materiallythe escape fromanotherdilemma.As stated before,
afterthe introductionof the ghost,the device of feignedmadnessbe-
came not onlyuseless,but positivelyinept.It merelysucceededin arous-
ing the King's suspicions.This incongruityShakespearemet,firstofall,
by ignoringit. Hamlet is allowed to give noticeof his schemeand even
to put it into execution.But beforeits follyis allowed to dawn on the
audience Shakespearesaves himselfand his heroby a neat shiftof em-
phasis. In the traditionalstory the question in the King's mind is
whetherHamlet is sane or not. In Shakespeare'splay this questionis
not whetherHamlet is mad, but what lies at the root of his madness.
Despite thedevicehe adopts,Hamlet is leftno fool.Mad, ormelancholy,
he appears, but his verymelancholyis ambiguous.Dependingupon its
originit may be eitherdangerousor innocuous;that is what the King
must discover.And thisis preciselythe dilemmawhichClaudius recog-
nizes.
For melancholyat the beginningof the seventeenthcenturyhad ex-
actly this ambiguity.The ancientand traditionalmelancholywas the
well-knownlove melancholy.But the philosophicalmelancholy,the
melancholyof weltschmerz, was a phenomenonnew in the publit eye.
Althoughthe originswere quite different, the manifestations mightbe
similar.As was natural,the Elizabethansconfusedthe two themselves.
Polonius, of course,has no doubts. Is he not the completesentimental
conservative?This is the distractionoflove. But Claudius is not so cer-
tain. "Love! his affections
do not thatway tend." That is whatperplexes
him.And so, althoughtheinterpretation has shifted,the device of mad-
ness stillaccomplishessomethingofits originalpurpose.
Howeverwell Shakespearemay have succeededin explainingthe con-
duct of his protagonistin termsof melancholy,therestillremainedthe
awkwardgap betweenthe promiseof revengeand its fulfillment. No
matterwhat explanationbe given forthe delay, the fact remainsthat

theatricalsuccessdemandedbotha dramaticjustification and a progres-
sive flowof action to cover the interval.These in the conventionalre-
venge play were suppliedby elaborate intrigue.But, as we have seen,
to act as the engineerof intriguehas perilsforthe tragicprotagonist.
Furthermore, the Hamlet storyprovidesits herowithno intrigue;he is
the object of the King's intrigue.Here Shakespearemade a virtueofne-
cessity.He allowedtheresponsibility, and theobloquy,oftheintrigueto
remainwithClaudius, whileHamlet becameto a certainextenta passive
figure.Thus Hamlet emergesnotas a wilyschemerbut as a manoffrank,
generousnature.In addition,attentionis divertedfrommereaction on
his part to the more appropriatetragic matter of reaction. This is
Shakespeare'smethodin most of his great tragedies,notablyin Othello
and King Lear. The mechanicsof intrigueare carriedon by subsidiary
characters;the protagonistrevealshis reactionto them.The exception,
of course,is Macbeth.But here Shakespeareis dealing with a villain
hero,to whomintrigueis quite appropriate,and the tragicproblemis es-
sentiallydifferent.
The retentionof Kyd's intrigueplot, however,did not obviate the
two major defectsin it: namely,that it emphasizedClaudius at the ex-
pense of Hamlet, and that the action suppliedwas episodicand merely
filledin the time withoutmateriallyadvancing the plot. The solution
which Shakespeare found was one he had used beforein Romeo and
Juliet-the emphasisofpathos and dignityin his protagonistby cumu-
lative isolation.In HamletShakespeare'stask is to give unifiedsignifi-
cance to the incidentsof the openingacts. Contemporarydrama in its
fundamentalbias was sceptical and disillusioned.The malcontent,or
melancholyman,was a productofdisillusionment. It naturallyfollowed
that, if Hamlet was melancholy,he was disillusioned.His expressed
sentimentsmake clear that this was Shakespeare'sview. But, viewed
fromthisangle,the intriguesof Claudius-involving the personswhich
theydo-afford an unparalleledopportunityforlogical tragicmotiva-
tion. The emphasisis shiftedfromthe actions of Claudius to the reac-
tionsofHamlet. Moreover,thesereactionsare coordinatedin a climactic
seriesso as to motivatebotha dramaticconflictand Hamlet'ssubsequent
conduct. One by one he is disillusionedin his naturalhuman relation-
ships-with his mother,with the King, with the integrityof age and
positionin Polonius,with his schoolfellows, with the woman he loves,
witheven the validityof his father'sghost22-untilhe is obsessedwith
22It will be noted that Hamlet's doubt of the ghost comes as a climax to the distrust
inspiredby his previousdisillusionments. Thus Shakespeare is able to suggesta logical
motivefortheotherwiseincongruousplay scene.
HaroldR. Walley 795
the vice and follyof humanityand the futilityoflife.These disillusion-

mentsare familiarto plays of the period,and the conclusionsare quite
consistentwith the attitudeof not only contemporary drama but non-
dramaticliteratureas well.
Thus Shakespeareendowedhis hero witha disillusionment and pessi-
mismcommonto theage and sufficiently characteristic
ofhimselfduring
the periodof his tragedies.Hamlet anticipatesthe truthwhenhe cries:
The timeis outofjoint:0 cursedspite,
That everI wasbornto setit right!
One whohas lostfaithin theworthoflife23 is thelast personto becomean
effectiveagent of reformor to restorejusticeto a worlddevoidofjustice.
To thisextentHamlet in Hamlet's situationis a misfit.But reluctanceto
revenge,24 whileit may explaindelay,is feeblestufffordrama. Shakes-
peare was stillwithoutadequate conflictfordrama and withpractically
none of that soul struggleexpectedoftragedy.Having made hisprotag-
onist a relativelypassive figurewith respectto externalaction,he was
necessarilycommittedto internalconflict,to, in otherwords,the clash
of opposinginterests,impulses,or desires.The question now arises-
whatconflictofsuchnaturewouldbestcapitalizetheimmediateinterests
of the audience?
Shakespeare'sstorysupplied him with the congenialelementsof in-
fidelity,lust, and crime. Contemporarydrama was preoccupiedwith
thesesubjects. But one ofits mostcuriousaspectsis the attitudeof sus-
picion and vindictivenesswhich,in contradistinction to earlierdrama,
it maintainstowardwomen.Marston'smalcontentexclaimsin a charac-
teristicpassage:25
WVomen! nay,Furies;nay,worse;fortheytorment onlythebad, but women
goodand bad. Damnationof mankind! . . . 0, thatI couldrailagainstthese
monsters innature,modelsofhell,curseoftheearth,women!thatdareattempt
anything, and whattheyattempttheycarenothowtheyaccomplish; without
all premeditation
orprevention; rashin asking,desperate in working,impatient
in suffering,
extremein desiring,
slavesuntoappetite, mistresses
in dissembling,
onlyconstantin unconstancy, onlyperfect in counterfeiting:
theirwordsare
feigned,theireyesforged, theirsighsdissembled, theirlookscounterfeit,
their
hairfalse,theirgivenhopesdeceitful,theirverybreathartificial: theirbloodis
theironlygod; bad clothes,and old age, are onlythedevilstheytremble at.
ThatI couldrailnow!
23 As evincedin evenhis openingsoliloquy, " 0 that thistoo too solid flesh."I agreethat
Shakespearedoes not palterwithhis audience,but thatinformation conveyedin soliloquy
is to be acceptedat its facevalue.
24 By reluctanceI do not mean to implythat Hamlet doubts the righteousness of his
obligation.Of thishe is at all timesentirelyconvinced. 26 TheMalcontent, I, ii, 85 ff.
796 Shakespeare's Conceptionof" Hamlet"
Marston's tragedyof Sophonisba,dealingas it does witha faithfuland

virtuouswoman,is ironicallyentitledThe Wonderof Women.With rare
exceptionswomenare representedas eitherweak delinquentsor positive
monstersof vice. Shakespeareusually takes the morecharitableview-
"frailty,thy name is woman!"-but there also is Lady Macbeth. At
any rate, thereis a noticeablechangein Shakespeare'swomenat about
theturnofthecentury.WhenShakespearewishedto createan admirable
woman he endowedher withcharm,wit,and integrity.The womenof
Hamletare otherwise;Ophelia may have charm,but she is notablydefi-
cientin the otherrespects,whileHamlet's motherlacks all three.
This disillusionment and vindictivenessHamlet shares with his age.
Althoughsupportedby the perfidyof Ophelia,it focusesupon Hamlet's
mother.And at thispoint it affordedShakespearethe tragicconflicthe
needed. In his firstsoliloquy Hamlet reveals the horrorand despair
evoked by his mother'sprecipitatemarriage,and makes clear his un-
fortunateplight: "But break, my heart; forI must hold my tongue."
It is the majorconcernofhis life,but about it he can do nothing.To this
is immediatelyadded the information and demand of the ghost. Ham-
let's dilemmais now worse.He is pledged to avenge murdermostfoul;
but of the two implicatedpersonsHamlet is bound, both by previous
preparationand natural reaction,to findhis motherthe more repre-
hensible.For to her formerunseemlyhaste is now added adulteryand
suspicionof complicityin the murder.But Hamlet's earlierimpotence
is confirmedby the expressinjunctionof the ghost that he do naught
to harm his mother.The tragicconflictis nicelybalanced. On the one
side Hamlet's strongestmotive for action springsfromhis mother's
guilt. It is to the incestuousmarriagethat he returnsagain and again
in the play. It is the sourceof his bitterestreflections.But in thisdirec-
tionall outletforactionis effectively blocked.On the otherside Hamlet
is definitely committedto the avengingof a deed whichby comparison
takes on onlya secondarysignificance. It is the Queen who has wounded
his fatherand himselfmostgrievously.But his revengemustbe directed
at the King. No wonderthat Hamlet poses the problemto himself:
How standI then,
That havea father kill'd,a mother stain'd,
Excitements ofmyreasonand myblood,
Andletall sleep?26
It is inevitablethattheexcitement
ofthereasonshouldyieldto theexcite-
mentof theblood. Shakespearemakes the pointclearin the close juxta-
positionof the scene in whichHamlet comes upon the King at prayer
26 Hamlet,iv, iv, 56-59
HaroldR. Walley 797
and theimmediatelyfollowingone in the Queen's chamber."Now might

I do it pat," reasontellsHamlet in the first;but he evades the issue. I-n
the second, although deflectedfromhis appointed purpose, Hamlet
achieveshis vengeanceupon his mother.It is the emotionalcrisisof the
play. At its peak it is necessaryfor the ghost to interveneand turn
Hamlet back to his course.
Now in this scene Shakespearemade an importantrevision.Instead
of utilizingit to win over the Queen's assistance to Hamlet's revenge
scheme,as in the early play, Shakespeareutilized the scene to bring
about theQueen's repentance.The pointis obvious.What Hamlet needs
to make possiblehis revengeis not materialaid but peace of mind,the
allayingofthe spiritualconflictthroughassuranceofhis mother'schange
ofheart.Thereaftertheconflictvanishes.If it is truethatHamlet shows
no greatenthusiasmforhis revenge-his world-weariness findsgraveyard
meditationsupon vanity more congenial-yet afterthe scene with his
motherhe betraysno furtherindecisionor vacillation. He is capable
of discharginghis English adventurewith level-headeddirectnessand
roundsout his revengewithunequivocalthoroughness.
One finalmatterrequiresbriefmention.Hamletis a tragedy,and as a
tragedyinevitablycarries with it some ethical connotations.As we
stand in our discussion,Hamlet is a hero placed in an unfortunate
dilemmawho perishesas a result.He is a good man overthrown by evil
throughno particularfaultof his own,and therebyjustice is outraged.
But both Elizabethan tragedyand tragicaltheoryare essentiallymoral
and vindicatejustice.As Elizabethanmoralphilosophysaw theproblem,
lifemightbe bad but thereweretwo ways of confronting it. One might
succumb to passion, and so become the victim of one's emotions;or
one mightbe guided by reason,and so rise above life.The way of pas-
sion led to disasterand despair;the way ofreason,whileperhapsno less
pessimisticin its conclusions,at any rate led to the haven ofStoic self-
sufficiency.
This conceptionseems to be rooted in Hamlet. Psychologicallyhis
melancholyis the productof ungovernedpassions. His dilemmais op-
positionofreasonableaction and irresistible emotion.His self-scourgings
are the result of reason endeavoringto assert itselfover passion. His
tragedyis' the disasterwroughtby too greatemotionalsensitivity.This
fact Hamlet himselfseems to realize and Shakespearemakes clear, es-
pecially in the carefulcontrastwith Horatio and the speech in which
Hamlet pays his tributeto that Stoic virtuewhichis his antithesis:
Sincemydearsoulwas mistress ofherchoice
Andcouldofmendistinguish, herelection
Hathseal'dtheeforherself;
forthouhastbeen
798 Shakespeare's Conceptionof "Hamlet"
As one,in suffering
all, thatsuffersnothing,
A manthatfortune's buffets and rewards
Hast ta'enwithequal thanks:and blestare those
Whosebloodandjudgment areso wellcommingled,
That theyarenota pipeforfortune's finger
To soundwhatstopsheplease.Givemethatman
Thatis notpassion'sslave,and I willwearhim
In myheart'score,ay,in myheartofheart,
As I do thee.27
In the foregoingdiscussionI have been primarilyconcernedwith
Shakespeare'sconceptionof Hamlet.I have not endeavoredto tracethe
fullramifications of that conception,but have triedto clarifythe major
problemswhichconfronted him and point the way to theirsolutionas
he musthave arrivedat it. Minor details will,I believe,be seen to fall
into line logicallywith this solution.Much, of course,has necessarily
been leftunsaid. I shall be satisfiedif I have been able to lend a degree
of convictionto the view that,rightlyunderstood,Hamletis not at all
an esotericmystery, but ratherthe normalproductofa competentplay-
wright,workingout a practicalproblemof dramaticcraftsmanshipin
termsofaudienceappeal and thenaturalinterestsofhis times.
HAROLD R. WALLEY
Ohio State University
27 Hamlet,In, ii, 68 f. A recent
illuminatingaccountofElizabethan and
psychological
philosophicaltheories aboutthepassionsin theirrelationto thedramamaybe foundin
L. B. Campbell's 1930.
Shakespeare'sTragicHeroes:Slaves ofPassion, Cambridge,

Walley 1933

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Walley 1933

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Walley 1933

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shakespeare's Conception of Hamlet

Author(s): Harold R. Walley

SHAKESPEARE'S CONCEPTION OF HAMLET

W HAT was Shakespeare'sconceptionof Hamlet?That is the ques-

Indeed, not infrequently is it impliedthat theplay existsfortheexpress

sessionwitha fewrestricted preoccupations.The peculiarityofHamlet's

Most valuable,however,in estimatingShakespeare'smaterialis thever-

let's death was introducedin this play. Structurallythreeof the most

Theator,like an oisterwife,Hamlet, revenge." Hamlet's swearingof his companionsto

doubtlessfoundsome suggestionsforHamlet's soliloquiesin his model,

The foregoingsuggestionsneed not be taken too seriouslynor given

whichprecipitatedthe tragedy.And somewherethreadingthroughthe

All these plays are very similarin character,'3derivingmuch from

charactersare shadowy,the emotionsstagy,and the plays as a whole

sortHamlet would not be Hamlet. These difficulties Kyd had solved in

play. But here Shakespearewas seriouslyrestricted.He was not writing

mirable.In orderto be this sort of hero Hamlet could scarcelybe the

earnestnessgave to comedy the satiricalreproofof Aristophanesor a

The adoptionof fantasticwit as the means of deludingfollyand vice

fessorStoll believes,that Marston's The MalcontentprecededShakespeare'sHamlet.The

connotationsof moraland philosophicalperturbation,diseased mental-

matterwhat explanationbe given forthe delay, the fact remainsthat

the vice and follyof humanityand the futilityoflife.These disillusion-

Marston's tragedyof Sophonisba,dealingas it does witha faithfuland

and theimmediatelyfollowingone in the Queen's chamber."Now might

You might also like