Summary Of Laura Bohannan's Interpretation Of Hamlet

Every culture has different way of thinking and interpretation of stories. The author, Laura Bohannan, had a dispute with her friends over understanding Shakespeare. Additionally she goes off to a remote village in Africa and happens to tell them the story of Hamlet, as it was easy to tell and to others thinking had only one interpretation. The author’s friend reported in which Shakespeare has been “a very English poet” and that people involving some other cultures could get her wrong in his literal definition. However, after having discussion to the elders, Bohannan realized that there are many ways to interpret Hamlet. In her article Hamlet, the story is open to many interpretations and that everybody understands it based on their culture norm and traditions. One interpretation of hamlet and it will be easy to make the Tiv tribe understand, too. However, she was proven wrong when the men and especially the elder raised several questions which made Bohannan question her own mind.
In her article, she began her story with the overall looking of Hamlet’s fathers ghost. She uses the word chief instead of a king or a ruler. For example, “Not yesterday, not yesterday, but long ago, a thing occurred. One night three men were keeping watch outside the homestead of the great chief, when suddenly they saw the former chief approach them.” (2) It demonstrates that Bohannan starts her story of Hamlet, the story starts with the chief who was dead. The word brought a lot of confusion in understanding the story. In addition, the idea of having a ghost was unfamiliar in the people’s eyes. They were persuaded the author had received her story completely wrong considering that the solely description for the soul could possibly be that it has been a great omen sent with a witch. Therefore, It is clear that how social construct their ability of understanding