Hamlet’s Quietus Is Not Quiet

From MoreMatterWithLessArt.com (the best name for a Hamlet website I’ve ever seen) comes a spot-on commentary about that uber-famous speech from the most well-known play in existence.

These are not the words of a man contemplating suicide, but a man on the path of revenge questioning the assumptions of the society around him. Very simply, he questions the understanding that punishment in the afterlife should keep us from acting during our lifetimes. For really, there are no reports one way or the other. So why should we be bound to the perception of this heavenly law? Does it even exist, or has man made it so? He is asking not “should I or should I not commit an evil act?” but rather “is this act truly evil?” and analyzing the potential consequences of acting on his conclusion. A production of Hamlet should be informed by the specifics of the text, and themes concluded upon should draw from what its characters feel compelled to say. Yet so often and to the play’s detriment, the mistaken “universal” themes of Hamlet have informed the play and warped the words to create an uninspired and ultimately dishonest production. What a tragedy indeed.
The Myth of Hamlet

There are so many gross errors when the average person thinks about Shakespeare. My favourite is thinking that “Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?” means “Where are you, Romeo?” Argh! No: “wherefore” means “why”, and if you read the rest of the speech instead of focusing on the one line, you’d see that she wishes he could “be some other name”… not come to her.

But I digress.

I completely agree with this post because this speech is so often misinterpreted. “To die; to sleep; no more. And by a sleep to say…” Some argue that it should be said: “To die: to sleep no more.” There is no debate: Hamlet is not talking about never sleeping. (He’s not Macbeth). He’s comparing death to sleep, and saying that death is no more than a long sleep. Then he goes on to say that it should be a peaceful thing. By sheer context and punctuation, there is your proof.

Characterization is also a matter of big mistakes, even for experienced actors and directors. I personally think that Sir Andrew in Twelfth Night should not be a fop. Productions that have him prancing around effeminately miss the best jokes. That was a later invention that we got from the Comedies of Manners. Sir Andrew says, “I am a great eater of beef, and I believe that does harm to my wit.” Right there, I’m thinking: Football Player. Sir Toby and Mary play on Malvolio’s pretensions and turn him into a fop, why do you want two? Furthermore, isn’t it funnier to have a cowardly knight who is huge? A bodybuilder who doesn’t want to get into a fight because he’s big for show, without any fighting skill, is hilarious. It’s especially funny because Viola would be terrified of a guy like that — and he’s scared of anyone with a sword, even a girlish messenger. Comedy gold and I’ve never seen it yet. The next time I direct Twelfth Night, I promise you a seven-foot-tall behemoth for a Sir Andrew.

But I digress again.

What were we talking about?

Related:

• Free Sample: Hamlet’s Soliloque