Love in the Grave — Man is born Free, but everywhere, he is in Chains
The Tragedy of Youth, Generational Conflict in Hamlet
The most tragic image ingrained in my mind among the many devastating incidents in Hamlet is in Act 5 Scene 1 where all three main representatives of youth, Hamlet, Laertes, and Ophelia’s corpse are together within a dugout grave while the onlookers of the older generation watch them from above. The distinction of the outside and the inside of the grave is juxtaposed with the contrast between the older and younger generation and speaks provocatively to one of Shakespeare’s most grave messages in the play: dying youth and a deteriorating future. Hamlet is a reflection of the tragic side of our universe where youth cannot blossom into adulthood like the flowers that bloomed and withered with innocent Ophelia but can only survive by mimicking and mirroring their older generation’s corrupted nature. This method of survival ultimately leads to the damnation of the purest, most selfless quality found in man — love.
The purpose of this essay is to shine a different light on Hamlet’s character by unveiling his most true and natural identity apart from the ones that are forced upon him. Instead of portraying Hamlet as his father’s avenger, an identity enforced by the Ghost, my aim is to re-define Hamlet’s individuality apart from the shackles forced upon him by Hamlet Sr, the Ghost, and his nemesis, Claudius.
Love is one of the main defining characteristics of Hamlet. What distinguishes Hamlet’s love from the desirous, ambitious kind of love exerted by a character such as Claudius is its utmost selflessness. Hamlet’s love for his deceased father is selfless to the point that he is willing to give up his humanity by sacrificing self-love (love for the self) for the love he has for his father. Therefore, with this thesis as a basis for my argument, this paper will further explain how the society controlled by the older generation creates an ecosystem where it is impossible for one to survive while preserving his life and his conscience. Through the course of the play, Hamlet’s most noble quality, love, is manipulated by the older generation and is used against him. This, in turn, forces Hamlet to rip out values he once identified with himself.
The turning point in Hamlet’s life is his meeting with the Ghost because the “Ghost and Hamlet crystallizes the underground logic of the play” (Berry 211). After his contact with the supernatural and recognizing the horrid truth, Hamlet realizes that he has already passed the point of no return. The “Ghost is the instrument making the unconscious conscious, and also provides a displacement” (Bergmann 401). Thus, Hamlet’s character can be distinguished in two segments: before and after this meeting the Ghost. Before his encounter with the Ghost, Hamlet’s relationship with the royal guards is not a typical one between royalty and subordinates. When addressing the guards, Hamlet speaks with the sentiment that he “will requite your loves,” and when they reply in turn respectfully and quite rigidly, “[o]ur duty to your honour,” Hamlet replies as if to decline their mention of ‘duty’: “Your love, as mine to you” (1.2.253,256–257). Hamlet upholds the value of love over duty in his relationship to the soldiers. The potential of an ideal, revolutionary sovereign is revealed in this side of Hamlet’s character since he is a prince who would choose to be loved rather than feared by his subjects. Hamlet’s emphasis on the importance of love between himself and the soldiers is shown even in private, thus invoking sincere intimacy with his soldiers. This is contrasted to Claudius’ proclamation of “nobility of love” for Hamlet when they are in public only for the sake of appearances (1.2.110). Claudius is well aware that Hamlet is “loved of the distracted multitude” and attempts to prove his ‘nobility’ by pretending to love Hamlet like the others (4.3.4).
“[G]entle and unforced” seems befitting of Hamlet’s personality as someone in a position of authority, but this worthy trait is transformed and perverted through the prince’s fateful encounter with the Ghost (1.2.123). There is a certain danger of the Ghost being an “animating spirit of Hamlet” (Berry 209). Hamlet forcefully insists that Horatio and Marcellus, his trusted confidantes, to swear to keep what they have witnessed a secret even after they promise not to tell the others of what they saw. A promise in faith from love and respect is not enough to satisfy Hamlet anymore. In contrast, Hamlet’s forcefulness feels almost threatening when he dangerously warns his men to “still your fingers on your lips” meaning that they will not be able to escape the consequences if they break their promises (1.5.195). Indeed, Hamlet’s sudden change in behaviour towards his friends is an exact mirroring of what the Ghost has done to Hamlet since it “speak[s] through Hamlet, that the double is a primal conflation of two selves” (Berry 211). Immediately, due to an evil force in nature, which is evidently what is, “rotten in the state of Denmark,” Hamlet repeats the act of removing someone’s autonomy (1.4.64). Hamlet forcing his friends to swear mirrors the way the Ghost imposes the undesirable mission of assassinating the king on Hamlet. Hamlet’s instant reaction when alone with the Ghost is his request to the spectre to “[s]peak” since he is “bound to hear” due to the binds of filial duty and obligation to his father, thus restricting his freedom (1.5.6). Hamlet has no other choice but to hear from the Ghost. The Ghost is also oddly “[a]rmed,” and this triggers a question of why a father would be ‘armed’ as if for war when coming to meet his loving son (1.2.227)? The armour represents defence and mistrust which portrays how even a close relationship between a father and son must be mediated with the constant fear of harm. This repetition of error resulting from the binds of social constructs and the loss of genuine trust is what I believe Marcellus means by ‘rotten’. This ‘rotten’ cycle will never end if even the most hopeful of the younger generation, an exalted prince with democratic ideals, will fall into the pits of the previous generation’s legacy of evils.
The Ghost also uses Hamlet’s love for his father in order to trigger him to violence and commit murder since the Ghost claims that Hamlet will act out of revenge “[i]f [he] didst ever [his] dear father love” (1.5.22). Therefore, Hamlet is forced to avenge his father because refusing to do so implies his disloyalty and dishonour. The Ghost manipulates Hamlet’s innocent love towards his father to satisfy his selfish desire to reclaim the honour that has been lost to Claudius. A strong emotion like love is dangerous and inescapable when utilized by wrong hands since “emotions claim the whole self” (Bergmann 404). Hamlet’s identity is simplified into a weapon whose sole aim is to retaliate against Claudius due to the Ghost’s perversion of his filial love and loyalty. The Ghost even blatantly comments how Hamlet is “apt” enough, for his “thoughts of love, / May sweep to [his father’s] revenge” (1.5.31,29–30) as if Hamlet is no more than a useful tool to damage Claudius. The Ghost and the ‘rotten’ forces that blanket Denmark have the power to poison even the noblest virtues such as selfless love from a son to his father.
Hamlet is well aware that he will not be alive for much longer. The clear distinctions between himself and Claudius become more unclear as the play progresses because the love within Hamlet’s heart gets tainted by a hateful motivation that is strong enough to spill blood. Hamlet allows himself to be manipulated by the Ghost because he has already given up his soul for the love he has for his father. Not only does Hamlet sacrifice self-love but he also gives up his romance with Ophelia, which has been a crucial part in forming his identity before his encounter with the Ghost. The love Hamlet shares with Ophelia is that of his youth, an honest expression that demonstrates a freedom of choice instead of force. Thus, this youthful love is included in “[a]ll saws of books, all forms, all pressures past, / That youth and observation copied there” which must be “wipe[d] away” since the Ghost’s “commandment all alone shall live” (1.5.100–101,99,102). One of the most pure forms of love expressed in Hamlet is the one shared between Hamlet and Ophelia, but their love meets a tragic end because they are in a society where true love is considered a weakness and an abstraction only to be mocked at. Polonius does not trust the legitimacy of Hamlet and Ophelia’s relationship and instead, laughs at it: “Affection, pooh!” (1.3.101).
Values such as love, conscience, and compassion continue to be closely related to femininity and therefore devalued under a patriarchal regime. For example, Hamlet regards Gertrude’s love for Claudius with contempt: “frailty, thy name is woman” (1.2.146). Genuine affection for another is considered as a weakness that hinders exercising masculine action yet the strength of feminine virtues (love, conscience, compassion) is distinguished most notably in the male agent’s moments of weakness. During Claudius’ prayer scene, his conscience is acknowledged, and this scene reveals that no matter how much he tries to numb and ignore the voice of his conscience, the inner human weakness he subdued in order to rise to power still defines Claudius more than his vice. Claudius is a victor — he has the Crown and the woman he loves. Claudius has everything that Hamlet is deprived of yet in contrast to his success in the external world, the internal world of his soul is in complete ruin. This undeniable fact is an ague in which Claudius finds no cure or salvation. Conscience, to Claudius, is a “heavy burden,” and he remarks how “conscience does make cowards of us all” (3.1.55,84). Claudius’ weakness is, however, what makes him human instead of the devil that Hamlet makes him out to be. Claudius feels pain and fear because he is going against the vital component which marks his humanity and so does Hamlet throughout the play. This striking similarity between Hamlet and Claudius foreshadows the tragic transfiguration of Hamlet as he evolves into another Claudius in his quest to destroy his enemy. Like Claudius, who kills his brother to obtain the throne and Gertrude, Hamlet ruthlessly murders Polonius as well as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in order to achieve his goal. Hamlet is following the footsteps and walking on the same path that Claudius, or perhaps even Hamlet Sr., has already trod upon.
Hamlet’s downfall due to his refusal to embrace love and conscience by categorizing them as mere feminine weaknesses with a misogynist attitude (like the behavior of the men in his previous generation) is represented through Hamlet’s mistreatment of female characters. With the exception of Horatio, both Ophelia and Gertrude are most dearly loved by Hamlet, but instead of cherishing them, Hamlet’s sole focus on avenging his father blinds him from seeing and understanding the pain he causes them. It appears as if Hamlet loathes Gertrude due to his scathing remarks on her “o’erhasty marriage” (2.2.57). However, Smith’s claim goes to the extent that “Gertrude’s apparent betrayal of his idealized Hyperion father, not his actual death, has given rise to Hamlet’s melancholy state at the first of the play” meaning that his hostility towards Gertrude is that of disappointment and in no means similar to the downright malice he has for Claudius. Hamlet’s negative sentiments towards Gertrude originates from the trust and respect he once had for her. Still, Hamlet stubbornly chooses to prioritize his filial loyalty to his deceased father over the relationship with his living mother. Therefore, “self-destructive melancholia and fury at his mother’s behavior” for his father’s expense overrides the original loving relationship he once shared with her (Bergmann 408). Hamlet feels overly personal about the wrong Gertrude has done Hamlet Sr., even though in reality, Gertrude has never intended to harm Hamlet and loves him nonetheless as proven by her drinking from the poisoned cup to protect her son (5.2.243). The Ghost has inflicted a sense of unity between Hamlet and Hamlet Sr., an unhealthy, incompatible mixture of the living and the dead, which kills Hamlet by infecting his relationships with those in the realm of the living. In order to continue and preserve the bond he has with Gertrude, as mother and son, Hamlet must remove himself from the position of Hamlet Sr., but the Ghost’s interference prevents him from doing so.
From the broken ties between mother and son, Hamlet’s “generalized outrage at women increases and spreads” (Smith). As a woman, Ophelia is the main victim of this ‘outrage’ especially when Hamlet’s “sense of betrayal is soon further fed by the unexpected rejection of his love” (Smith). Ophelia is a manifestation of Hamlet’s “neglected love” in contrast to the filial love and obligation he is obsessed with fulfilling (3.1.179). Because Hamlet is so engrossed in someone who is already dead, a father whom he failed to save, he neglects the ones who are still alive — thus overlooking what is more important and worth saving in the present. Hamlet’s fixation on death and revenge triggers him to view Ophelia as a reflection of his mother like how he is a reflection of Claudius even though he has no valid reasons to support his unjust claim. This leads Hamlet to mistrust those who are alive and he “attack[s] what he perceives to be the brevity of woman’s love” (Smith). Hamlet also understands how his love for Ophelia will weaken his motivation for revenge since avenging his father’s murder will risk his life which deprives him of a future with Ophelia.
By rejecting the pure love he once shared with Ophelia, Hamlet is alienating himself from human feelings, warmth, and affection which were once poignant values that constituted him in the past. As a result, Ophelia symbolizes a significant part of Hamlet’s identity that is neglected when it should have been kept close and dear to his heart in order for him not to repeat the murderous deeds of Claudius. The female qualities exuded by both Gertrude and Ophelia are compassion and sympathy. Gertrude weeps profusely when she informs the others of Ophelia’s death, and unlike Laertes who expresses his anger outwardly, Ophelia chooses to inflict self-harm instead of taking revenge against Hamlet for breaking her heart and stabbing her father because she is a character with a good nature incapable of harming anybody. If Hamlet have chosen to keep these qualities represented by the female characters of the play, he would have felt immense remorse and guilt for accidentally slaying Polonius and never would have decided to put his friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, to their deaths.
Returning back to the image of the younger generation in the grave, I impose Hamlet’s famous question on the trio: “To be, or not to be — that is the question” (3.1.57). When applied to the situation of the three tragic members of the younger generation, the question conveys a dark tragedy — whether to be vicious and survive or to remain virtuous through death? Hamlet and Laertes almost fight against each other to the death in Ophelia’s grave. Laertes chooses ‘to be’ — to live in order to avenge his father and sister. Ophelia has chosen ‘not to be’ — she protects her soul from corruption by drowning away from a world so corrupted. Hamlet is an ambiguous mix of the two. Physically, he continues ‘to be’ by plotting his revenge against Claudius, but on the other hand, Hamlet seriously contemplates suicide and muses over his damnation in a world that seems to work against his favour: “How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable / Seem to me all the uses of this world” (1.2.133–134). Unlike Laertes, Hamlet is aware of the cruel situation he is forced upon, and his procrastination of the revenge can be perceived as futile attempts to save his soul, regain his father’s lost honor by killing Claudius, and yet survive while maintaining the distinction of good and evil between himself and Claudius. But Hamlet’s tragedy stems from one of the most poignant messages of the play — in order to fight against a monster and win, one also must turn into a monster.
By identifying this tragedy not only in Hamlet but also in Laertes and Ophelia, we must understand that Hamlet is not a tragedy for Hamlet but for all of us. There is numerous evidence where Hamlet is acknowledged to represent the Denmark nation as the Crown Prince. The sovereign is the nation in Hamlet’s universe since “[t]he cease of majesty / Dies not alone” and “[n]ever alone/ [does] the King sigh, but with a general groan” (3.3.15–16,22–23). Then, the tragic universe of Hamlet is a representation of our universe where the younger generation is forced into adulthood where violence is chosen over embrace and the extrinsic benefit of selfishness trumps over the intrinsic value of selfless love. We leave our innocence to be buried in a grave as we progress towards our future, like how Hamlet and Laertes trudge upwards to their fated doom with Ophelia’s corpse still remaining in the grave, dead and silenced.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William, and George Richard Hibbard. Hamlet. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008.
Bergmann, MS. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly: The Inability to Mourn and the Inability to Love in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. 78 Vol. Psychoanalytic Quarterly Press, 2009. Web. 17 Mar. 2017.
Berry, Ralph. “Hamlet’s Doubles.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 2, 1986, pp. 204–212., www.jstor.org/stable/2869958.
Smith, Rebecca. “A Heart Cleft in Twain: The Dilemma of Shakespeare’s Gertrude.” Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Dana Ramel Barnes, vol. 35, Gale, 1997. Literature
Resource Center, Originally published in The Woman’s Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare, edited by Carolyn Ruth Swift, et- al., 1980.