Response Paper — Hamlet

Richard van Oort
ENGL 366B

Response Paper — Hamlet

In a paper of no more than 500 words, write a response to one of the following questions.
Double-space, number each page, and include a word count at the end of your paper.

If you have not read the FAQs for the response papers, please do so. The FAQs can be found at
the course website (http://web.uvic.ca/~rvanoort/engl366.html).

1. The ghost is a key character in the play. But you have to be careful with ghosts. They’re not
always very reliable. What do you make of this one? Is he an “honest” ghost? Or is he rather
a “goblin damned”? Who sees the ghost? Who hears him? Why doesn’t the ghost cut to the
chase and appear to Hamlet first? Why begin by hovering ominously but silently in front of
a few guards and Horatio?

2. Why are the guards so anxious at the beginning before they see the ghost? Horatio is
accompanying Bernardo and Marcellus to witness “this thing.” Many people consider
Horatio to fulfill the role of the skeptic; thus the fact that he also witnesses the ghost gives
credibility to the guards’ story. But take another look at the scene and ask yourself if this
theory makes sense. Is Horatio a detached observer? What is his interest in these events?
What exactly is he doing in Denmark? And why is he so very well informed about Danish
history? The more you think about Horatio, the more puzzling he becomes.

3. Who is the central figure of 1.2? How would you stage this scene? To whom are Hamlet’s
first words addressed? To himself, to Claudius, or to the court? Why? And why does the
king take such a long time to get around to acknowledging Hamlet?

4. What irritates Hamlet in 1.2? Toward whom is his resentment directed? Look closely at
Hamlet’s first soliloquy: “Oh, that this too too sullied flesh” (1.2.29-58).

5. What is the point of 1.3? Why does Laertes warn Ophelia away from Hamlet? Look closely
at the language he uses. Why is Hamlet associated here with “contagious
blastments” (1.3.42)?

6. Take another look at Hamlet’s first encounter with the ghost in 1.4. Why does he react the
way he does? Why does the ghost lead him away from the others? Why does Hamlet
threaten Horatio and Marcellus? Consider what the ghost says to Hamlet. What are these
“foul crimes” he speaks of? What are these “secrets of his prison house”? Why is this so
horrible and terrible? To what exactly is the ghost referring?

7. The ghost goes on to say: “The serpent that did sting thy father’s life / Now wears his
crown” (1.5.40-41). Note Hamlet’s response: “Oh, my prophetic soul!” (1.5.42). What’s
prophetic about Hamlet’s soul? Did Hamlet already suspect the crime? Why? Was there any
evidence for it? Does the ghost itself constitute evidence?

1

8. The ghost says “Brief let me be” and then goes on for another 30 lines ranting about the
royal bed of Denmark being a couch for luxury and damned incest. Where have we heard
this kind of vituperative language before? Who else imagines the queen’s bed in this way?
Could this be significant?

9. We know Hamlet has a knack for conversing with ghosts, or at least with this ghost (he
succeeds where Bernardo, Marcellus, and Horatio have failed). But what about plays? He
seems to have a thing for these too. Certainly, the high point for Hamlet coincides with the
arrival of the players. He seems buoyant and jubilant, released from his normal suspicion
and paranoia. Why? And why does he have the player king recite the speech about Pyrrhus
(2.2.465-518)? Take a closer look at the imagery of the speech. What so excites Hamlet
here?

10. Almost immediately after the player’s Pyrrhus speech, Hamlet delivers his third major
soliloquy (“Oh, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!” [2.2.550]). What exactly is Hamlet so
upset about? Is it the fact that he hasn’t avenged his father yet? But it doesn’t seem quite that
simple. He’s wondering why he, the son of a murdered father, can’t seem to summon the
same passion as the player, who has just made it all up. But even more, he seems to be upset
that nobody is listening to his story. He wants to “amaze indeed / The very faculties of eyes
and ears” (2.2.564-64). So he decides to put on a play. “The play’s the thing” (2.2.605). (The
thing? Remember Horatio: “What, has this thing appeared again tonight?” [1.1.25]). Most
people think that the “Mousetrap” play is Hamlet’s way of determining Claudius’s guilt so
that Hamlet can deliver justice with a clear conscience. Hamlet even says: “I have heard /
That guilty creatures sitting at a play. . . have proclaimed their malefactions” (2.2.590-94).
Hamlet is looking for a reaction alright. And he certainly is looking for signs of guilt in
Claudius. But does he want justice? Or to put the same question differently, if he wants
justice, why does he put on a play? And why does he insist on keeping Claudius’s crime a
secret?

11. Fast forward to the play scene (3.2). This is a complicated scene and difficult to read
because of all the things happening on stage. But you really need to imagine it unfolding in
your mind. It’s too easy to say, “Oh, yeah, I get it. Claudius sees the ear-poisoning thing and
gives the whole game away. Now Hamlet has his motive and cue for passion.” Before you
can make that argument you need to consider this question: Why doesn’t Claudius react to
the dumbshow? Why does it take a retelling of the same story this time with all sorts of
interjections from Hamlet himself to get a reaction from the king? And what exactly does
Hamlet say about this one Lucianus who comes to murder the king? Now ask yourself what
Claudius is reacting to. Consider also the difference between our view of this scene and the
onstage audience’s view of this scene. What do they think Claudius is reacting to? And
where does this leave us with respect to the question of Claudius’s guilt? It’s almost as if
Hamlet wants Claudius to think the way he thinks. Incidentally, how did Claudius murder
his brother? Ear poisoning seems like a pretty unique murder method, one rich with
narrative implications. (Think of that other ear-poisoner, Iago.) And where did Hamlet get
the idea of ear poisoning. (Don’t say he got it from the ghost. Why should we trust that
thing?)

2

12. The “To be or not to be” speech (3.1.57-90) is Hamlet’s fourth major soliloquy. What is it
about? Is it really just about suicide? Hamlet seems to be working with a couple of
oppositions that fold one into another. The first is being and not being (which could map
onto living and dying, but need not). He seems to be referring to action versus inaction.
Should he arm himself against a sea of troubles? Should he kill Claudius? Will that achieve
“being,” greatness, and immortality? (Remember Henry V.) Hamlet seems to be saying that
being (in the center) is great, but it’s also a lot of bloody work and you usually die trying
(like “brave York” in Henry V). So perhaps it’s better to grunt and sweat under a weary life
(a life of being on the periphery, which is, of course, the same as not being: nobody notices
a nobody). Anyway, reread this speech. It’s suffused with resentment, which shouldn’t
surprise us.

13. After the “To be or not to be speech,” Hamlet encounters Ophelia. She has been “planted”
there by Claudius and Polonius who wish to test Polonius’s theory that the cause of Hamlet’s
melancholy is his (thwarted) desire for Ophelia. Hamlet begins civilly enough, but he
quickly unleashes a torrent of invective on the poor girl. Defenders of Hamlet cling to
Polonius’s theory like a life raft. Hamlet is upset because Ophelia has rejected him. She is
now adding insult to injury by returning his “remembrances.” The poor man must be beside
himself! But seriously, who rejects whom? What evidence is there to suggest that Ophelia
has the upper hand in this relationship? Why does Hamlet enter her “closet” (2.1.79) take
her by the wrist, peruse her face, raise “a sign so piteous and profound” (2.1.98), and then
walk slowly away from while staring at her fixedly? Is he acting? Is he sincere? Is it possible
that Ophelia represents a part of Hamlet that is slowly being killed off by him? Why do you
think this scene takes place directly after the “To be or not to be” speech?

14. Compare Hamlet and Claudius in the prayer scene (3.3). Does Hamlet overhear Claudius?
That seems unlikely given that the stage direction says that Hamlet enters after Claudius has
uttered his soliloquy. Why doesn’t Hamlet kill Claudius? He says that he doesn’t want to
send Claudius to heaven. Is that the only reason? Could Hamlet be using this reason as an
excuse? Consider also the iconography of the scene. A defenseless may praying while
another stands behind him with sword raised to kill. Where do your sympathies lie? Is
Claudius sincere in his attempt to pray?

15. The “closet” scene. Tons of Freud has been heaped on this scene. But you can see why. The
language is bordering on the pornographic. “Nay, but to live / In the rank sweat of an
enseaméd bed, / Stewed in corruption, honeying and making love / Over the nasty
sty!” (3.4.93-96). Why is Hamlet so obsessed with this particular image of Claudius and
Gertrude? Is this how you imagine your parents, even if one of them might be a step-parent?
What so upsets Hamlet about his mother? Freud thought he was acting like the jilted lover.
Is that plausible? And why does Hamlet insist on showing her the two portraits? Does the
gentleman protest too much? What do you think the two brothers would look like side by
side? Would they appear so very different?

16. Why does the rabble cry “Laertes shall be king!”? Are we covertly being invited to make a
comparison between Hamlet and Laertes? Come to think of it, Hamlet and Laertes are a bit

3

like brothers. But their trajectories are the inverse of one another. Laertes leaves but Hamlet
stays. Is Laertes a contender for the throne? Is Hamlet? What about young Fortinbras?
Somewhat ironic, isn’t it? After losing it all thanks to a winner-take-all contest with old man
Hamlet, the loser’s son has it virtually handed back to him on a plate thanks to all the
intrigue and back-stabbing taking place in the Danish court.
17. Why does Hamlet leap into the grave with Laertes? He protests that he loved Ophelia more
than Laertes ever did. How seriously can we take Hamlet at this point? How many times in
the play has Hamlet confessed his love for Ophelia before this moment? But if Hamlet is
merely acting or ranting about love, then what motivates his rant? Is he imitating Laertes?
But why would he want to do that?
18. The closing lines of the play are given to Fortinbras, who says that had Hamlet lived to
become king who would “have proved most royal” (5.2.400). Would Hamlet have been a
good king? What evidence is there to suggest that he would have been better than Claudius?
What evidence is there to suggest that he would have been worse?

4