Hamlet Post Structuralist Lens Essay
Hamlet Through a Post-Structuralist Lens
EQ: How does ambiguous language reveal deeper truths about the characters in Hamlet?
Prior to Act 4, Hamlet has murdered Polonius, and now he has to face the consequences of his actions. At the end of act 4 scene 3, Hamlet tells Guildenstern “The body is with the king, but the king is not with the body. The king is a thing,” and Guildenstern asks, “A thing, my lord?” to which Hamlet replies, “Of nothing” (IV.ii.24-27). There are many possible interpretations of this interaction, and a post-structuralist interpretation urges us to consider all of the meanings.
One interpretation of the passage could be that “the body” represents the people of Denmark, and the king, Claudius, is not with them because he is selfish and only cares about gaining power, which could be seen as an empty desire since power …show more content…
serves no higher purpose. This interpretation reveals Hamlet’s deep rooted anger towards Claudius, and his anger is not just because of his father’s murder, but also because he has not proven himself to be a good ruler.
Another interpretation of this interaction could be that in the first phrase, “the body” is Polonius’s dead body and “the king” is Hamlet’s father, who is in hell. The second part of Hamlet’s declaration could still be about Claudius not caring about the Danes’ wishes, and “nothing” could reference Claudius’s lack of moral judgement because he seemingly murdered his brother without a second thought just to gain fame, wealth, and power. Through this reading, we learn that Polonius went to hell for spying on Hamlet, and Claudius remains a selfish, immoral king.
A third interpretation of this scene could be that Polonius’s dead body is with Claudius, and Hamlet’s father, the old king, is no longer with the people of Denmark because he is now a ghost made of nothing.
Personally, I think this reading of the passage makes the most sense because Claudius was very concerned when he heard of Polonius’s death and he wanted to make funeral arrangements, and because Hamlet’s father continues to haunt him, so he is constantly reminded of the strange reality he lives in. This interpretation reveals that Claudius deeply cared for Polonius and Hamlet continues to grieve his father’s death, even though he has a plan to exact revenge upon Claudius.
Post-structuralism allows us to view one passage through many interpretations, and this lens encourages us to accept all possible readings. Within the interaction between Hamlet and Guildenstern, there are many interpretations that all provide a new insight into the deeper motives behind several characters’ actions. By accepting and using multiple interpretations, we are able to glean a more nuanced and detailed understanding of Shakespeare’s
characters.
EQ: How does ambiguous language reveal deeper truths about the characters in Hamlet?
Prior to Act 4, Hamlet has murdered Polonius, and now he has to face the consequences of his actions. At the end of act 4 scene 3, Hamlet tells Guildenstern “The body is with the king, but the king is not with the body. The king is a thing,” and Guildenstern asks, “A thing, my lord?” to which Hamlet replies, “Of nothing” (IV.ii.24-27). There are many possible interpretations of this interaction, and a post-structuralist interpretation urges us to consider all of the meanings.
One interpretation of the passage could be that “the body” represents the people of Denmark, and the king, Claudius, is not with them because he is selfish and only cares about gaining power, which could be seen as an empty desire since power …show more content…
serves no higher purpose. This interpretation reveals Hamlet’s deep rooted anger towards Claudius, and his anger is not just because of his father’s murder, but also because he has not proven himself to be a good ruler.
Another interpretation of this interaction could be that in the first phrase, “the body” is Polonius’s dead body and “the king” is Hamlet’s father, who is in hell. The second part of Hamlet’s declaration could still be about Claudius not caring about the Danes’ wishes, and “nothing” could reference Claudius’s lack of moral judgement because he seemingly murdered his brother without a second thought just to gain fame, wealth, and power. Through this reading, we learn that Polonius went to hell for spying on Hamlet, and Claudius remains a selfish, immoral king.
A third interpretation of this scene could be that Polonius’s dead body is with Claudius, and Hamlet’s father, the old king, is no longer with the people of Denmark because he is now a ghost made of nothing.
Personally, I think this reading of the passage makes the most sense because Claudius was very concerned when he heard of Polonius’s death and he wanted to make funeral arrangements, and because Hamlet’s father continues to haunt him, so he is constantly reminded of the strange reality he lives in. This interpretation reveals that Claudius deeply cared for Polonius and Hamlet continues to grieve his father’s death, even though he has a plan to exact revenge upon Claudius.
Post-structuralism allows us to view one passage through many interpretations, and this lens encourages us to accept all possible readings. Within the interaction between Hamlet and Guildenstern, there are many interpretations that all provide a new insight into the deeper motives behind several characters’ actions. By accepting and using multiple interpretations, we are able to glean a more nuanced and detailed understanding of Shakespeare’s
characters.