Ideas about enduring relevance
Hamlet, the late
16th century
Shakespearian tragedy shows a binary society still relevant to today. Hamlet’s
royal court, for all appearances, is a perfectly polished, dignified microcosm
of royal society. Despite this appearance, the reality of the court revolves
around Machiavellian intrigues, murder and, particularly on the part of Hamlet,
the vacillation between plans and ideologies. The royal court for all
appearances, follows exactly what the society of the time expected by
continuing in an apparently stable manner despite the tragic death of the King.
The reality of the situation, however, is ‘gross and rank in nature’, and
combines murder with the manipulation of the entire court to appease one man’s
base desire for power and privilege. Hamlet himself appears at the opening of
the play, to be an educated Renaissance man. Despite this as complications
arise Hamlet is seen to vacillate between his educated ideology and performing
for the court or his base human desires and performing an act of revenge.
Underlying this, are familial and religious values constantly exacerbating
previously imagined issues that are still relevant today.
The appearance of the court
is nothing more than a guise for the misdeeds that lie beneath it and are
expressed through monologues. Act 3 scene 2, the Mousetrap Scene, depicts this
binary opposition between appearance and reality through the use of the play
within a play. The dialogue between the Player King and Player Queen contains
much superfluous language; in fact lines 140-145 can be condensed to one line of
the same effect. The use of redundant language reflects the ideas of superiority
within the court, and the use of circumlocution in Claudius’ machinations and
justifications. The dialogue continues, with constant and repeated professions
of love and loyalty,“None wed the second but who killed the first”. The use of a
simple continual couplet rhyme indicates the folly of those who the players are
portraying, as it was a common convention of Shakespeare that comical characters
were written in verse. Hamlet interweaves himself between the appearance of the
play and the reality it portrays, by continuing with small verse after the
abrupt end of the play. The rhyme scheme changes, to an ABAB scheme, and is
juxtaposed against standard prose, inferring Hamlet’s internal war with the
binary oppositions of appearance and reality.
The values of maintaining a dignified
appearance in the court are still relevant today. The Elizabethan feudal
hierarchy granted an elevated position to those of the royal court and thus the
court were expected to be removed from the baser human instincts. Throughout the
play, the intentions of characters are only truly revealed through monologues.
The Mousetrap scene reflects this as despite the obvious and overt professions
of love and loyalty, the Player Queen marries the Poisoner, voiding her promise
to the Player King. The Poisoner reveals his true intentions through a monologue
on stage, regarding his plans to usurp the crown. This idea of a public and
privet persona is entirely relevant today, particularly with those who are in
positions of power and influence. The persona one puts forth to the world is
seldom a genuine reflection of the individual and, just as people in positions
of power today emulate what is expected of them, Hamlet and the Royal Court
simply appeared to behave as their society expected them to.
The reality of the court is
clear from the outset of the play. Hamlet’s soliloquy in Act one scene two uses
the metaphor of an “unweeded garden that grows to seed” to reflect the
underlying ruthlessness and disintegration of the court. The soliloquy develops
into a contrast of the previous court under King Hamlet and the present court
under King Claudius. The juxtaposition of (INSERT TECHNIQUE HERE) …
. The metaphor/simile of “Like Hyperon to a satyr” further develops this
idea by juxtaposing two metaphors, King Hamlet as Hyperon and King Claudius as
the satyr, to further show the strengths and weaknesses of the two kings by
(EXPLAIN). Furthermore, Hamlet gives much the same critique of his mother,
juxtaposing her against Niobe, a Greek goddess of grief who lost her entire
family. Hamlet comments that his mother shed false tears for his father, and
married far too swiftly.
The values, or lack thereof,
of the royal court are entirely derived from base human desires. The need for
power engenders the regicide that is at the crux of the play. The need for
revenge drives the climax of the play, with Hamlet determined to avenge his
father, and Laertes his. It is suggested repeatedly throughout the course of the
play that it was base sexual desires that drove Gertrude to remarry so quickly,
though it may also be suggested that it was to maintain her power and status in
the society. These desires are exacerbated by the familial responsibilities and
religious duties that Elizabethan society expected be paid. These two
overriding values engender the vacillation of Hamlet that continues for four
acts. Hamlet questions, constantly, whether ones duty to one’s father can
override ones duty to one’s God. This question arises after the Ghost asks that
Hamlet avenge him by murdering Claudius, though that is against one of the Ten
Commandments.
Hamlet, as a man, is still
highly relevant to modern society. Hamlet is a man caught in the conflict
between two binary ideologies of Enlightenment and he fulfilment of base human
desires. This conflict is engendered by the death of and visitation by his
father and is exacerbated by the demands of the society that he must maintain.
As a man born to privilege in the Elizabethan feudal hierarchy, it was expected
that Hamlet project an air of dignity and stability which his “antic
disposition”undermines entirely. Hamlet’s eventually fatal mistake of projecting
the wrong appearance force Claudius to manipulate his machinations once more in
order to maintain that which his title demanded, sanity and dignity.
In modern society, the
public appearance and private reality have grown from an idea to an ideal. The
ingrained mores that what is private must be hidden and kept from those outside
your immediate circle directly relates to Hamlet and the correlating
machinations of Hamlet and Claudius. The theme of usurping power through
subterfuge is also highly relevant to today’s corporate and political world,
with the change of power occurring through preference rather than open systems.
Hamlet’s struggle between religion and duty is less understandable in modern
society as the influence of the church is not as poignant as it once was. This
is largely due to the advent and rise of popular science and technology as well
as the secular society.
Despite Hamlet’s Elizabethan
context, the values and idea that drive the play are still relevant today,
however warped to apply to modern, capitalist lifestyles. Societal duties and
expectations continue to exacerbate binary expectations, such as appearance and
reality. The constant vacillation of Hamlet is understandable and relevant to
today’s society as Hamlet is merely a man caught between two world philosophies,
much as modern society as a whole is caught in a precarious balance between
conflicting ideologies.
16th century
Shakespearian tragedy shows a binary society still relevant to today. Hamlet’s
royal court, for all appearances, is a perfectly polished, dignified microcosm
of royal society. Despite this appearance, the reality of the court revolves
around Machiavellian intrigues, murder and, particularly on the part of Hamlet,
the vacillation between plans and ideologies. The royal court for all
appearances, follows exactly what the society of the time expected by
continuing in an apparently stable manner despite the tragic death of the King.
The reality of the situation, however, is ‘gross and rank in nature’, and
combines murder with the manipulation of the entire court to appease one man’s
base desire for power and privilege. Hamlet himself appears at the opening of
the play, to be an educated Renaissance man. Despite this as complications
arise Hamlet is seen to vacillate between his educated ideology and performing
for the court or his base human desires and performing an act of revenge.
Underlying this, are familial and religious values constantly exacerbating
previously imagined issues that are still relevant today.
The appearance of the court
is nothing more than a guise for the misdeeds that lie beneath it and are
expressed through monologues. Act 3 scene 2, the Mousetrap Scene, depicts this
binary opposition between appearance and reality through the use of the play
within a play. The dialogue between the Player King and Player Queen contains
much superfluous language; in fact lines 140-145 can be condensed to one line of
the same effect. The use of redundant language reflects the ideas of superiority
within the court, and the use of circumlocution in Claudius’ machinations and
justifications. The dialogue continues, with constant and repeated professions
of love and loyalty,“None wed the second but who killed the first”. The use of a
simple continual couplet rhyme indicates the folly of those who the players are
portraying, as it was a common convention of Shakespeare that comical characters
were written in verse. Hamlet interweaves himself between the appearance of the
play and the reality it portrays, by continuing with small verse after the
abrupt end of the play. The rhyme scheme changes, to an ABAB scheme, and is
juxtaposed against standard prose, inferring Hamlet’s internal war with the
binary oppositions of appearance and reality.
The values of maintaining a dignified
appearance in the court are still relevant today. The Elizabethan feudal
hierarchy granted an elevated position to those of the royal court and thus the
court were expected to be removed from the baser human instincts. Throughout the
play, the intentions of characters are only truly revealed through monologues.
The Mousetrap scene reflects this as despite the obvious and overt professions
of love and loyalty, the Player Queen marries the Poisoner, voiding her promise
to the Player King. The Poisoner reveals his true intentions through a monologue
on stage, regarding his plans to usurp the crown. This idea of a public and
privet persona is entirely relevant today, particularly with those who are in
positions of power and influence. The persona one puts forth to the world is
seldom a genuine reflection of the individual and, just as people in positions
of power today emulate what is expected of them, Hamlet and the Royal Court
simply appeared to behave as their society expected them to.
The reality of the court is
clear from the outset of the play. Hamlet’s soliloquy in Act one scene two uses
the metaphor of an “unweeded garden that grows to seed” to reflect the
underlying ruthlessness and disintegration of the court. The soliloquy develops
into a contrast of the previous court under King Hamlet and the present court
under King Claudius. The juxtaposition of (INSERT TECHNIQUE HERE) …
. The metaphor/simile of “Like Hyperon to a satyr” further develops this
idea by juxtaposing two metaphors, King Hamlet as Hyperon and King Claudius as
the satyr, to further show the strengths and weaknesses of the two kings by
(EXPLAIN). Furthermore, Hamlet gives much the same critique of his mother,
juxtaposing her against Niobe, a Greek goddess of grief who lost her entire
family. Hamlet comments that his mother shed false tears for his father, and
married far too swiftly.
The values, or lack thereof,
of the royal court are entirely derived from base human desires. The need for
power engenders the regicide that is at the crux of the play. The need for
revenge drives the climax of the play, with Hamlet determined to avenge his
father, and Laertes his. It is suggested repeatedly throughout the course of the
play that it was base sexual desires that drove Gertrude to remarry so quickly,
though it may also be suggested that it was to maintain her power and status in
the society. These desires are exacerbated by the familial responsibilities and
religious duties that Elizabethan society expected be paid. These two
overriding values engender the vacillation of Hamlet that continues for four
acts. Hamlet questions, constantly, whether ones duty to one’s father can
override ones duty to one’s God. This question arises after the Ghost asks that
Hamlet avenge him by murdering Claudius, though that is against one of the Ten
Commandments.
Hamlet, as a man, is still
highly relevant to modern society. Hamlet is a man caught in the conflict
between two binary ideologies of Enlightenment and he fulfilment of base human
desires. This conflict is engendered by the death of and visitation by his
father and is exacerbated by the demands of the society that he must maintain.
As a man born to privilege in the Elizabethan feudal hierarchy, it was expected
that Hamlet project an air of dignity and stability which his “antic
disposition”undermines entirely. Hamlet’s eventually fatal mistake of projecting
the wrong appearance force Claudius to manipulate his machinations once more in
order to maintain that which his title demanded, sanity and dignity.
In modern society, the
public appearance and private reality have grown from an idea to an ideal. The
ingrained mores that what is private must be hidden and kept from those outside
your immediate circle directly relates to Hamlet and the correlating
machinations of Hamlet and Claudius. The theme of usurping power through
subterfuge is also highly relevant to today’s corporate and political world,
with the change of power occurring through preference rather than open systems.
Hamlet’s struggle between religion and duty is less understandable in modern
society as the influence of the church is not as poignant as it once was. This
is largely due to the advent and rise of popular science and technology as well
as the secular society.
Despite Hamlet’s Elizabethan
context, the values and idea that drive the play are still relevant today,
however warped to apply to modern, capitalist lifestyles. Societal duties and
expectations continue to exacerbate binary expectations, such as appearance and
reality. The constant vacillation of Hamlet is understandable and relevant to
today’s society as Hamlet is merely a man caught between two world philosophies,
much as modern society as a whole is caught in a precarious balance between
conflicting ideologies.