We left Hamlet, at the close of the First Act, when he had just received

his charge from the spirit of his father; and his condition was vividly

depicted in the fact that, within an hour of receiving this charge, he

had relapsed into that weariness of life or longing for death which is

the immediate cause of his later inaction. When next we meet him, at the

opening of the Second Act, a considerable time has elapsed, apparently

as much as two months.[54] The ambassadors sent to the King of Norway

(I. ii. 27) are just returning. Laertes, whom we saw leaving Elsinore

(I. iii.), has been in Paris long enough to be in want of fresh

supplies. Ophelia has obeyed her father's command (given in I. iii.),

and has refused to receive Hamlet's visits or letters. What has Hamlet

done? He has put on an 'antic disposition' and established a reputation

for lunacy, with the result that his mother has become deeply anxious

about him, and with the further result that the King, who was formerly

so entirely at ease regarding him that he wished him to stay on at

Court, is now extremely uneasy and very desirous to discover the cause

of his 'transformation.' Hence Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have been

sent for, to cheer him by their company and to worm his secret out of

him; and they are just about to arrive. Beyond exciting thus the

apprehensions of his enemy Hamlet has done absolutely nothing; and, as

we have seen, we must imagine him during this long period sunk for the

most part in 'bestial oblivion' or fruitless broodings, and falling

deeper and deeper into the slough of despond.

Now he takes a further step. He suddenly appears unannounced in

Ophelia's chamber; and his appearance and behaviour are such as to

suggest both to Ophelia and to her father that his brain is turned by

disappointment in love. How far this step was due to the design of

creating a false impression as to the origin of his lunacy, how far to

other causes, is a difficult question; but such a design seems certainly

present. It succeeds, however, only in part; for, although Polonius is

fully convinced, the King is not so, and it is therefore arranged that

the two shall secretly witness a meeting between Ophelia and Hamlet.

Meanwhile Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arrive, and at the King's request

begin their attempts, easily foiled by Hamlet, to pluck out the heart of

his mystery. Then the players come to Court, and for a little while one

of Hamlet's old interests revives, and he is almost happy. But only for

a little while. The emotion shown by the player in reciting the speech

which tells of Hecuba's grief for her slaughtered husband awakes into

burning life the slumbering sense of duty and shame. He must act. With

the extreme rapidity which always distinguishes him in his healthier

moments, he conceives and arranges the plan of having the 'Murder of

Gonzago' played before the King and Queen, with the addition of a speech

written by himself for the occasion. Then, longing to be alone, he

abruptly dismisses his guests, and pours out a passion of self-reproach

for his delay, asks himself in bewilderment what can be its cause,

lashes himself into a fury of hatred against his foe, checks himself in

disgust at his futile emotion, and quiets his conscience for the moment

by trying to convince himself that he has doubts about the Ghost, and by

assuring himself that, if the King's behaviour at the play-scene shows

but a sign of guilt, he 'knows his course.'

Nothing, surely, can be clearer than the meaning of this famous

soliloquy. The doubt which appears at its close, instead of being the

natural conclusion of the preceding thoughts, is totally inconsistent

with them. For Hamlet's self-reproaches, his curses on his enemy, and

his perplexity about his own inaction, one and all imply his faith in

the identity and truthfulness of the Ghost. Evidently this sudden doubt,

of which there has not been the slightest trace before, is no genuine

doubt; it is an unconscious fiction, an excuse for his delay--and for

its continuance.

A night passes, and the day that follows it brings the crisis. First

takes place that interview from which the King is to learn whether

disappointed love is really the cause of his nephew's lunacy. Hamlet is

sent for; poor Ophelia is told to walk up and down, reading her

prayer-book; Polonius and the King conceal themselves behind the arras.

And Hamlet enters, so deeply absorbed in thought that for some time he

supposes himself to be alone. What is he thinking of? 'The Murder of

Gonzago,' which is to be played in a few hours, and on which everything

depends? Not at all. He is meditating on suicide; and he finds that what

stands in the way of it, and counterbalances its infinite attraction, is

not any thought of a sacred unaccomplished duty, but the doubt, quite

irrelevant to that issue, whether it is not ignoble in the mind to end

its misery, and, still more, whether death _would_ end it. Hamlet, that

is to say, is here, in effect, precisely where he was at the time of his

first soliloquy ('O that this too too solid flesh would melt') two

months ago, before ever he heard of his father's murder.[55] His

reflections have no reference to this particular moment; they represent

that habitual weariness of life with which his passing outbursts of

emotion or energy are contrasted. What can be more significant than the

fact that he is sunk in these reflections on the very day which is to

determine for him the truthfulness of the Ghost? And how is it possible

for us to hope that, if that truthfulness should be established, Hamlet

will be any nearer to his revenge?[56]

His interview with Ophelia follows; and its result shows that his delay

is becoming most dangerous to himself. The King is satisfied that,

whatever else may be the hidden cause of Hamlet's madness, it is not

love. He is by no means certain even that Hamlet is mad at all. He has

heard that infuriated threat, 'I say, we will have no more marriages;

those that are married, all but one, shall live; the rest shall keep as

they are.' He is thoroughly alarmed. He at any rate will not delay. On

the spot he determines to send Hamlet to England. But, as Polonius is

present, we do not learn at once the meaning of this purpose.

Evening comes. The approach of the play-scene raises Hamlet's spirits.

He is in his element. He feels that he is doing _something_ towards his

end, striking a stroke, but a stroke of intellect. In his instructions

to the actor on the delivery of the inserted speech, and again in his

conversation with Horatio just before the entry of the Court, we see the

true Hamlet, the Hamlet of the days before his father's death. But how

characteristic it is that he appears quite as anxious that his speech

should not be ranted as that Horatio should observe its effect upon the

King! This trait appears again even at that thrilling moment when the

actor is just going to deliver the speech. Hamlet sees him beginning to

frown and glare like the conventional stage-murderer, and calls to him

impatiently, 'Leave thy damnable faces and begin!'[57]

Hamlet's device proves a triumph far more complete than he had dared to

expect. He had thought the King might 'blench,' but he does much more.

When only six of the 'dozen or sixteen lines' have been spoken he starts

to his feet and rushes from the hall, followed by the whole dismayed

Court. In the elation of success--an elation at first almost

hysterical--Hamlet treats Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who are sent to

him, with undisguised contempt. Left to himself, he declares that now he

could

drink hot blood,

And do such bitter business as the day

Would quake to look on.

He has been sent for by his mother, and is going to her chamber; and so

vehement and revengeful is his mood that he actually fancies himself in

danger of using daggers to her as well as speaking them.[58]

In this mood, on his way to his mother's chamber, he comes upon the

King, alone, kneeling, conscience-stricken and attempting to pray. His

enemy is delivered into his hands.

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.[59] That would be scanned.

He scans it; and the sword that he drew at the words, 'And now I'll do

it,' is thrust back into its sheath. If he killed the villain now he

would send his soul to heaven; and he would fain kill soul as well as

body.

That this again is an unconscious excuse for delay is now pretty

generally agreed, and it is needless to describe again the state of mind

which, on the view explained in our last lecture, is the real cause of

Hamlet's failure here. The first five words he utters, 'Now might I do

it,' show that he has no effective _desire_ to 'do it'; and in the

little sentences that follow, and the long pauses between them, the

endeavour at a resolution, and the sickening return of melancholic

paralysis, however difficult a task they set to the actor, are plain

enough to a reader. And any reader who may retain a doubt should observe

the fact that, when the Ghost reappears, Hamlet does not think of

justifying his delay by the plea that he was waiting for a more perfect

vengeance. But in one point the great majority of critics, I think, go

astray. The feeling of intense hatred which Hamlet expresses is not the

cause of his sparing the King, and in his heart he knows this; but it

does not at all follow that this feeling is unreal. All the evidence

afforded by the play goes to show that it is perfectly genuine, and I

see no reason whatever to doubt that Hamlet would have been very sorry

to send his father's murderer to heaven, nor much to doubt that he would

have been glad to send him to perdition. The reason for refusing to

accept his own version of his motive in sparing Claudius is not that his

sentiments are horrible, but that elsewhere, and also in the opening of

his speech here, we can see that his reluctance to act is due to other

causes.

The incident of the sparing of the King is contrived with extraordinary

dramatic insight. On the one side we feel that the opportunity was

perfect. Hamlet could not possibly any longer tell himself that he had

no certainty as to his uncle's guilt. And the external conditions were

most favourable; for the King's remarkable behaviour at the play-scene

would have supplied a damning confirmation of the story Hamlet had to

tell about the Ghost. Even now, probably, in a Court so corrupt as that

of Elsinore, he could not with perfect security have begun by charging

the King with the murder; but he could quite safely have killed him

first and given his justification afterwards, especially as he would

certainly have had on his side the people, who loved him and despised

Claudius. On the other hand, Shakespeare has taken care to give this

perfect opportunity so repulsive a character that we can hardly bring

ourselves to wish that the hero should accept it. One of his minor

difficulties, we have seen, probably was that he seemed to be required

to attack a defenceless man; and here this difficulty is at its maximum.

This incident is, again, the turning-point of the tragedy. So far,

Hamlet's delay, though it is endangering his freedom and his life, has

done no irreparable harm; but his failure here is the cause of all the

disasters that follow. In sparing the King, he sacrifices Polonius,

Ophelia, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Laertes, the Queen and himself.

This central significance of the passage is dramatically indicated in

the following scene by the reappearance of the Ghost and the repetition

of its charge.

Polonius is the first to fall. The old courtier, whose vanity would not

allow him to confess that his diagnosis of Hamlet's lunacy was mistaken,

had suggested that, after the theatricals, the Queen should endeavour in

a private interview with her son to penetrate the mystery, while he

himself would repeat his favourite part of eaves-dropper (III. i. 184

ff.). It has now become quite imperative that the Prince should be

brought to disclose his secret; for his choice of the 'Murder of

Gonzago,' and perhaps his conduct during the performance, have shown a

spirit of exaggerated hostility against the King which has excited

general alarm. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern discourse to Claudius on the

extreme importance of his preserving his invaluable life, as though

Hamlet's insanity had now clearly shown itself to be homicidal.[60]

When, then, at the opening of the interview between Hamlet and his

mother, the son, instead of listening to her remonstrances, roughly

assumes the offensive, she becomes alarmed; and when, on her attempting

to leave the room, he takes her by the arm and forces her to sit down,

she is terrified, cries out, 'Thou wilt not murder me?' and screams for

help. Polonius, behind the arras, echoes her call; and in a moment

Hamlet, hoping the concealed person is the King, runs the old man

through the body.

Evidently this act is intended to stand in sharp contrast with Hamlet's

sparing of his enemy. The King would have been just as defenceless

behind the arras as he had been on his knees; but here Hamlet is already

excited and in action, and the chance comes to him so suddenly that he

has no time to 'scan' it. It is a minor consideration, but still for the

dramatist not unimportant, that the audience would wholly sympathise

with Hamlet's attempt here, as directed against an enemy who is lurking

to entrap him, instead of being engaged in a business which perhaps to

the bulk of the audience then, as now, seemed to have a 'relish of

salvation in't.'

We notice in Hamlet, at the opening of this interview, something of the

excited levity which followed the _dénouement_ of the play-scene. The

death of Polonius sobers him; and in the remainder of the interview he

shows, together with some traces of his morbid state, the peculiar

beauty and nobility of his nature. His chief desire is not by any means

to ensure his mother's silent acquiescence in his design of revenge; it

is to save her soul. And while the rough work of vengeance is repugnant

to him, he is at home in this higher work. Here that fatal feeling, 'it

is no matter,' never shows itself. No father-confessor could be more

selflessly set upon his end of redeeming a fellow-creature from

degradation, more stern or pitiless in denouncing the sin, or more eager

to welcome the first token of repentance. There is something infinitely

beautiful in that sudden sunshine of faith and love which breaks out

when, at the Queen's surrender,

O Hamlet, thou hast cleft my heart in twain,

he answers,

O throw away the worser part of it,

And live the purer with the other half.

The truth is that, though Hamlet hates his uncle and acknowledges the

duty of vengeance, his whole heart is never in this feeling or this

task; but his whole heart is in his horror at his mother's fall and in

his longing to raise her. The former of these feelings was the

inspiration of his first soliloquy; it combines with the second to form

the inspiration of his eloquence here. And Shakespeare never wrote more

eloquently than here.

I have already alluded to the significance of the reappearance of the

Ghost in this scene; but why does Shakespeare choose for the particular

moment of its reappearance the middle of a speech in which Hamlet is

raving against his uncle? There seems to be more than one reason. In the

first place, Hamlet has already attained his object of stirring shame

and contrition in his mother's breast, and is now yielding to the old

temptation of unpacking his heart with words, and exhausting in useless

emotion the force which should be stored up in his will. And, next, in

doing this he is agonising his mother to no purpose, and in despite of

her piteous and repeated appeals for mercy. But the Ghost, when it gave

him his charge, had expressly warned him to spare her; and here again

the dead husband shows the same tender regard for his weak unfaithful

wife. The object of his return is to repeat his charge:

Do not forget: this visitation

Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose;

but, having uttered this reminder, he immediately bids the son to help

the mother and 'step between her and her fighting soul.'

And, whether intentionally or not, another purpose is served by

Shakespeare's choice of this particular moment. It is a moment when the

state of Hamlet's mind is such that we cannot suppose the Ghost to be

meant for an hallucination; and it is of great importance here that the

spectator or reader should not suppose any such thing. He is further

guarded by the fact that the Ghost proves, so to speak, his identity by

showing the same traits as were visible on his first appearance--the

same insistence on the duty of remembering, and the same concern for the

Queen. And the result is that we construe the Ghost's interpretation of

Hamlet's delay ('almost blunted purpose') as the truth, the dramatist's

own interpretation. Let me add that probably no one in Shakespeare's

audience had any doubt of his meaning here. The idea of later critics

and readers that the Ghost is an hallucination is due partly to failure

to follow the indications just noticed, but partly also to two mistakes,

the substitution of our present intellectual atmosphere for the

Elizabethan, and the notion that, because the Queen does not see and

hear the Ghost, it is meant to be unreal. But a ghost, in Shakespeare's

day, was able for any sufficient reason to confine its manifestation to

a single person in a company; and here the sufficient reason, that of

sparing the Queen, is obvious.[61]

At the close of this scene it appears that Hamlet has somehow learned of

the King's design of sending him to England in charge of his two

'school-fellows.' He has no doubt that this design covers some

villainous plot against himself, but neither does he doubt that he will

succeed in defeating it; and, as we saw, he looks forward with pleasure

to this conflict of wits. The idea of refusing to go appears not to

occur to him. Perhaps (for here we are left to conjecture) he feels that

he could not refuse unless at the same time he openly accused the King

of his father's murder (a course which he seems at no time to

contemplate); for by the slaughter of Polonius he has supplied his enemy

with the best possible excuse for getting him out of the country.

Besides, he has so effectually warned this enemy that, after the death

of Polonius is discovered, he is kept under guard (IV. iii. 14). He

consents, then, to go. But on his way to the shore he meets the army of

Fortinbras on its march to Poland; and the sight of these men going

cheerfully to risk death 'for an egg-shell,' and 'making mouths at the

invisible event,' strikes him with shame as he remembers how he, with so

much greater cause for action, 'lets all sleep;' and he breaks out into

the soliloquy, 'How all occasions do inform against me!'

This great speech, in itself not inferior to the famous 'To be or not to

be,' is absent not only from the First Quarto but from the Folio. It is

therefore probable that, at any rate by the time when the Folio appeared

(1623), it had become customary to omit it in theatrical representation;

and this is still the custom. But, while no doubt it is dramatically the

least indispensable of the soliloquies, it has a direct dramatic value,

and a great value for the interpretation of Hamlet's character. It shows

that Hamlet, though he is leaving Denmark, has not relinquished the idea

of obeying the Ghost. It exhibits very strikingly his inability to

understand why he has delayed so long. It contains that assertion which

so many critics forget, that he has 'cause and will and strength and

means to do it.' On the other hand--and this was perhaps the principal

purpose of the speech--it convinces us that he has learnt little or

nothing from his delay, or from his failure to seize the opportunity

presented to him after the play-scene. For, we find, both the motive and

the gist of the speech are precisely the same as those of the soliloquy

at the end of the Second Act ('O what a rogue'). There too he was

stirred to shame when he saw a passionate emotion awakened by a cause

which, compared with his, was a mere egg-shell. There too he stood

bewildered at the sight of his own dulness, and was almost ready to

believe--what was justly incredible to him--that it was the mask of mere

cowardice. There too he determined to delay no longer: if the King

should but blench, he knew his course. Yet this determination led to

nothing then; and why, we ask ourselves in despair, should the bloody

thoughts he now resolves to cherish ever pass beyond the realm of

thought?

Between this scene (IV. iv.) and the remainder of the play we must again

suppose an interval, though not a very long one. When the action

recommences, the death of Polonius has led to the insanity of Ophelia

and the secret return of Laertes from France. The young man comes back

breathing slaughter. For the King, afraid to put Hamlet on his trial (a

course likely to raise the question of his own behaviour at the play,

and perhaps to provoke an open accusation),[62] has attempted to hush up

the circumstances of Polonius's death, and has given him a hurried and

inglorious burial. The fury of Laertes, therefore, is directed in the

first instance against the King: and the ease with which he raises the

people, like the King's fear of a judicial enquiry, shows us how purely

internal were the obstacles which the hero had to overcome. This

impression is intensified by the broad contrast between Hamlet and

Laertes, who rushes headlong to his revenge, and is determined to have

it though allegiance, conscience, grace and damnation stand in his way

(IV. v. 130). But the King, though he has been hard put to it, is now in

his element and feels safe. Knowing that he will very soon hear of

Hamlet's execution in England, he tells Laertes that his father died by

Hamlet's hand, and expresses his willingness to let the friends of

Laertes judge whether he himself has any responsibility for the deed.

And when, to his astonishment and dismay, news comes that Hamlet has

returned to Denmark, he acts with admirable promptitude and address,

turns Laertes round his finger, and arranges with him for the murder of

their common enemy. If there were any risk of the young man's resolution

faltering, it is removed by the death of Ophelia. And now the King has

but one anxiety,--to prevent the young men from meeting before the

fencing-match. For who can tell what Hamlet might say in his defence, or

how enchanting his tongue might prove?[63]

Hamlet's return to Denmark is due partly to his own action, partly to

accident. On the voyage he secretly possesses himself of the royal

commission, and substitutes for it another, which he himself writes and

seals, and in which the King of England is ordered to put to death, not

Hamlet, but Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Then the ship is attacked by a

pirate, which, apparently, finds its intended prize too strong for it,

and makes off. But as Hamlet 'in the grapple,' eager for fighting, has

boarded the assailant, he is carried off in it, and by promises induces

the pirates to put him ashore in Denmark.

Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth · 第 10 / 40 段