Hamlet

Kaylee King Per. 2 Comic Relief Shakespeare’s element of comic relief in his plays provides more than just mere pieces of entertainment for the groundlings; it allows a break from the dense and sometimes evil continuity of the play. Comic scenes provide relief to the audience while building up the intensity from earlier scenes. Sometimes appearing out of place within the play, the scenes and characters are still significant roles in advancing the play. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet comic relief is supplied throughout the plot through the character of Polonius.

Polonius, a foolish old man with a lot to say, is able to produce the amount of relief necessary to his audience. With his long speeches and pleasing manner, Polonius sets a certain tone towards the entirety of the play. Time and time again he gives the old “when I was your age speech” and assumes the role of a parent to everyone, giving his unwanted and disregarded opinion. When a player about the death of Priam makes a deep and eloquent speech, Polonius interrupts by simply saying, “This is too long. ” This being said was entirely ironic because of the long and seemingly pointless speeches that Polonius dishes out to anyone able to hear.

Shakespeare’s use of Polonius as a comic character is significant towards the overall tone of the play. The depressing and death filled play needs a comic way to show its tragic nature through a sort of dark humor. Hamlet’s many remarks regarding death and old age towards Polonius is a prime example of this. Polonius being the foolish elderly man he is, provides an easy target for Hamlet so called ‘humor. ’ Jokes of murder and death, although humorous, provide an edge of darkness to the tone of Hamlet.

In this essay, I am going to write about the themes and techniques in the “Nunnery” scene in William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. All of the points I am going to cover have been expressed through different mediums for example in film and televised dramatic plays where the concept of Hamlet’s anger or use of nunnery is perceived to be different through artistic licence and also I will talk about the themes raised during the scene like corruption, deception, passion and betrayal

Throughout all the adaptations of the “Nunnery” scene, deception is a pivotal theme carried and sustained. The universal concept of deception in the scene is presented by three points. Hamlet is being spied on, by Claudius and Polonius. The reason for this is that they both become extremely suspicious of Hamlets current behaviour. They are convinced his new “madness” is not genuine. The way they go about spying by using Ophelia as a device to retract information for their own personal benefit is a way deception is conveyed.

Ophelia is lying to him; this is also a way the theme of deception is successfully carried through the scene, the fact that Hamlet himself lied to Ophelia as defence mechanism to catch out Ophelia’s lies and to reinforce the point that he has a far superior intellect. Another devices or technique that you could say that Shakespeare uses to create and maintain the deception in this scene is that, whenever Ophelia answers Hamlet, she lacks detail and tries to avoid and abetting questions and pretend as if the questions were never asked.

An example of this is when Hamlet asks “Ha, ha, Are you honest? Ophelia replies “My lord “. Again Hamlet asks “Are you fair “. And he receives this answer from Ophelia “What mean you lordship”. This is a clear example of her stalling or ‘beating around the bush’ as it were, to find time to come up with an answer that would bait her out as a spy and a liar. In every single Adaptation and dramatization of the play, the sense of fear and confusion in Ophelia’s voice is extremely apparent. In my opinion this fear she has originates from two possible scenarios.

Firstly; she is exposed as a liar. Secondly; she fails to gain any conclusive information from Hamlet and this would lead to the probability her father and Claudius wouldn’t be too pleased with her seeing as they put far too much effort in to this operation and its likelihood of success. I can say this because Claudius and Polonius both went to the extent of eavesdropping on Ophelia so no detail was missed and also to eliminate the possibility that Ophelia would fabricate some elements of her conversation/confrontation with Hamlet to protect him.

Corruption and betrayal are two themes that tie in with each other rather well. Corruption is far clearer and more apparent as it is carried throughout the whole play. It is present by the fact Claudius makes it his mission to destroy Hamlet, so he can keep the throne he longed for quite some time seeing as he killed his own brother to obtain it. The only way he can find out what Hamlet is thinking is by using Ophelia as a makeshift operative to extract the information they need. They do this as Ophelia is only person other than his mother he can fully trust.

However betrayal is more complex. It is displayed in the so-called “Turning point” of the Nunnery scene, there are several possibilities for this depending on the type of adaptation the main ones are: when Hamlet asks “Where’s you Father” and also when a noise (A sound made by either Polonius or Claudius) is heard by Hamlet. In the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet there is no noise but a shadow seen by Hamlet, also in the contemporary Ethan Hawke Version when Hamlet approaches Ophelia for a hug he feels the wire planted on Ophelia to spy on him.

However in the Kozintsev version this “Turning point” arrives much earlier it is not as climatic and chronic as the other adaptations. This discovery made by Hamlet in all its forms opens up the dormant suspicions and reservations of Ophelia thought up by Hamlet. The reason why his suspicions were dormant was that Hamlet generally is a very melancholy young man who has been prevented from attending university, his father dead and he knows who killed him and he’s now married to his mother as we all know. Hamlet always wears both black or unexciting dull colours like brown, grey and a very dark crimson in his clothing.

The fact is, Ophelia is after all, his girlfriend and possibly a potential wife therefore she is a person of a great importance in his life. If Hamlet had let her in his life, he clearly would have never expect edto have been betrayed by her at all. Seeing as Hamlet is an extremely complex and possibly insane character so This causes his unstoppable rage which in itself is another theme in the Nunnery scene, which is carried till the end where he storms out while he shouts that he know he is subject to espionage and he is being lied to. “God ath given you a face and you go and make yourself another”. He isn’t happy about it (evidently) and he threateningly tells Ophelia to go to a nunnery. “To a nunnery go! ” Love and Passion in a sexual/relationship context, are two other themes that drive both Ophelia and Hamlet to do things, react or act a certain way in the Nunnery. The truth is that they are both in love but because of the complications in the environment in which they live and also the constant interference of their relationship by other people, such as Ophelia’s father Polonius. No my good lord, but I did as you command, I repel his letters and denied his access to me“. These are the instructions Polonius handed to Ophelia much before the Nunnery Scene in act 2 scene 1. Starting from “Turning point” Hamlet uses his love for Ophelia as a weapon against her several times. An example of this is when he says: “I loved you not“, “I did love you once” and “I say we have no mo marriages”.

Hamlet does this because he has previously shown his inner character to Ophelia by trusting her and to show that he actually angry he must use a weapon that Ophelia can see through or expect and also a weapon that he has used against her before especially his love for her as she never doubted. The theme of passion however is portrayed in Hamlet’s anger, his reaction shows his disappointment in Ophelia, by shaking her and gripping her tightly and in some adaptations e. g. the Branagh and Lawrence Olivier version Hamlet physical strikes her.

This is the one of the clearest indications of the intensity of the love they both shared and the loved they were denied. The set and the setting play a major part in intensifying the themes explained above throughout the Nunnery scene. The generic setting or basis of all the setting in the scene for all the adaptations is Elsinore Castle, the locations that are most commonly used are the court yard or a large hall. In the BBC version takes place in a very enclosed space, strangely this is one of the only version where visually it Hamlet shows absolutely no anger at all and show compassion rather to Ophelia and pities her.

However in the other entire version I have seen the setting helps creates a hostile and fragile environment, where hamlet is able do use the acoustic to project his voice and also ironically to aid Claudius and Polonius to eavesdrop. In most versions the Openness as space in which the scene takes place creates a sense of exposure and insecurity for both characters especially for Ophelia as she is trapped both physically by Hamlet and mentally/emotionally by her Claudius and Polonius because she has to complete her ‘mission’ assigned to her. Another Technique used in the Nunnery scene is the dialogue and the conflict within it.

These techniques are the main aspect of the theme of deception and betrayal; this is what carries these to themes through the scene and therefore the rest of the play. As mentioned the use of rhetorical questions and sarcasm especially in Hamlet’s tone. For example: “That is you be honest and fair your honesty should admit no discourse to your beauty” this is a clear example of Hamlet’s sarcasm and rhetorical question. The trigger for all this form of communication is the sudden addressing of Hamlet in a formal way when they never talk in that way.

The conflict in the dialogue also helps to know Ophelia is lying. “My honoured lord, you know right well you did …….. Take these again for the noble mind , rich gifts wax poor when givers prove unkind”. The combination of assonance and alliteration in Ophelia’s line fails to make her spontaneous and genuine it rather makes it sound rehearsed and fake. Also after Ophelia’s failed attempt to deceive hamlet in think he gave the remembrances. His response “Ha, ha are you honest? ” shows his far superior intellect.

Deception is a key theme within Shakespearean drama, whether it be tragedy, history or comedy. It is often the cause of a lot of turmoil, especially within Twelfth Night, as there are many romantic difficulties due to the art of disguise. However Shakespeare does not always use deception to cause romantic problems, he shows the act of deceit in many different lights, as is done in Hamlet, for example. Claudius lies to everyone about the murder of Hamlet’s father and as a result is guilt ridden, saying “O heavy burthen”, so it seems that Shakespeare often intends to portray deception as wicked, but does the audience agree with this concept?

For surely some good must come from the great extent of trickery. Twelfth Night is an ideal play to discuss this, as although the chicanery causes a lot of distress, this is evened out by the happy ending we would not receive when discussing a tragedy such as Hamlet. It seems this play is reasonably unbiased. When we first hear of Viola’s disguise there is immediate foreshadowing as she says “what else may hap” (I, ii, 60), surely hinting that a lot shall occur due to the extent of her deception, and we have to wait just two scenes to hear of this.

We initially learn how Viola’s disguise will cause grief as she tells us in an aside “myself would be his wife” (I, iiii, 39-41), the audience immediately knows that this is an intricate dilemma, as not only is Orsino her employer, but he also believes her to be a man. This is surely wicked, as Viola’s love cannot yet be returned, on the other hand if Viola had not disguised herself then she may not have met, and fell in love with, Orsino. The happy ending does not occur until the end of the play, so there is a lot of hardship for Viola to endure before her wishes are eventually fulfilled.

In Act two Viola tries desperately to give Orsino an idea of her love for him, telling him that the person she loves is “of your complexion” (II, iiii, 24), during this conversation Viola’s dialogue is in blank verse, showing that she is unable to express her true love for him, this is another example of the cruelty of deception as it is extremely difficult for someone to conceal their love for someone who is constantly in their presence, the audience would relate to this as similar, less dramatic occurrences can often happen in real life.

In the final Act of the play Viola’s disguise unravels, and to her ecstasy her femininity is received graciously. Orsino tells her “you shall from this time be your master’s mistress”, this is an extremely successful ending for Viola, so it seems her disguise (previously the bane of her life) has finally brought her good fortune. Therefore, in these circumstances, deception has been wicked, only to eventually be rather gratifying. Viola’s love for Orsino is not the only problem emanated from her fai??ade, as it also causes a woman to fall in love with her.

Olivia is immediately struck by Cesario’s effeminate way of thinking and she says that Cesario “do give thee five-fold blazon”. This is a dilemma as Cesario (being female) cannot return this love, and viola’s realisation of this love causes her to acknowledge the sheer brutality of the effects of her pretence. She expresses her distress with a soliloquy, saying “she were better love a dream”. So Viola now believes deception to be a cruel thing, and at this point the audience would tend to agree.

We have not yet seen any happiness come from beguilement, so we result in agreeing with Viola, however melodramatic her opinion may be. As a result of all this Olivia is put through much heartbreak, and she acknowledges this saying “so I did abuse myself” (III, I, 95 – 107), she evidently knows that her love for Cesario is an enigma, although she does not yet know that she is being deceived. So even when characters are unaware that they are being fooled the effects of this trickery can still have treacherous outcomes.

Olivia is deceived further still when she, in thinking he is Cesario, marries Sebastian in haste, so that her “most jealous and too doubtful soul may live at peace”. This may currently be seen by the audience as wicked, due to the fact that Olivia does not know the man she is marrying. However this accidental marriage turns out to be a happy one, as when Cesario is uncovered as Viola Olivia is grateful for the misunderstanding and, as far as we know, goes on to love her new husband Sebastian.

This is a clear example of when deception is quite the opposite of wicked, as Olivia originally fell in love with Viola, who Sebastian (being her twin) is supposedly the male version of, and as Olivia does not think of herself as gay, this unlikely coincidence – brought upon by deception – is an extremely successful one. Maria instigates the manipulation of Malvolio through means of deception, and the consequences of this prove very wicked on his behalf. First, he humiliates himself in front of his colleagues. They watch on, making comments such as “fie on him, jezebel! while he fantasises, with no clue that they are watching. This is surely wicked as Malvolio works himself into an emotional frenzy, causing himself to believe that he loves Olivia, and worst of all that she returns this love. The foolery doesn’t stop here, as they take the chicanery as far as they possibly can before they are eventually caught out. Feste even chooses to ridicule Malvolio while he is imprisoned; deceiving him further still he says he is Sir Topaz. He attempts to convince Malvolio he is insane, saying “thou art more puzzled than the Egyptians in their fog”.

This is severely malicious and causes Malvolio much distress. He acknowledges this, saying “there was never a man so notoriously abused”, this clearly shows how deception is a hurtful, ruthless thing, especially when used upon cruel intentions. Incidentally, Malvolio is the only character who does not receive a happy ending. He leaves with a passionate line, saying “I’ll be revenged on the whole pack of you! “, yet to our knowledge his vengeance is not resolved, as this is the last we see of him throughout the rest of the play.

Viola’s disguise even causes herself to be deceived, as there is much confusion concerning herself and Sebastian. This almost causes Viola to be forced into duelling with a man, a fight she would surely lose. Viola knows this and says “pray God defend me! “, it is surely wicked that her disguise may cause such an unfair fight. On the other hand, it is her disguise which also causes her to be saved from the battle ever occurring. As Antonio thinks she is Sebastian and consequently attempts to fight for her, saying “I take the fault on me”.

So yet again deception is the cause, yet also the remedy for a problem, therefore making it difficult to form an opinion on whether or not deception is wicked. More trouble is to come however, as the confusion between Viola and Sebastian continues to cause difficulties. There is a slight quarrel between Antonio and Viola as he thinks she has his money, he says “do not tempt my misery”. We are lead to think more arguments will occur due to disguise, but the problem is quickly solved as Antonio calls Viola Sebastian, and the confusion begins to unravel.

This is another example of how deception can be the problem which, when resolved, ends up causing a lot of good. It is much like a white lie – sometimes wickedness must be performed in order to do good overall. The whole plot of Twelfth Night depends on the continuous theme of disguise and deception, without it the play would have no foundations on which to grow. How is it that such a crucial factor of the play can be seen as wicked? It is only in Act Two that Viola comments on this, saying “disguise, I see thou art a wickedness”, therefore surely her opinions may alter since then.

At the end of the play she does not seem to have such a bitter perspective on the subject, as it turns out that everything has worked to her advantage. Surely, to decide on whether or not something is wicked, you must decipher the outcomes of it, and whether or not it has been beneficial to the people involved. At the end of the play everyone (except for Malvolio) is happy, Viola and Orsino are in love, as are Olivia and Sebastian. These are the main characters within the play, so these are the ones we should be concentrating on, and the excessive use of deception has obviously worked to their advantage.

Admitted, disguise and deception cause a lot of trouble throughout the play, and at times can be seen as very wicked. But the overall effects of this are not wicked, in fact they are quite the opposite! If Shakespeare intended for deception to be seen as a cruel thing, then it is doubtful that he would have made this a romantic comedy. For if he aimed for the audience to have such a pessimistic view on the play, he surely would have made it a tragedy, therefore making the effects of deception obviously bad.

I do not think that Shakespeare intends for his audience to see deception as a wicked thing, therefore I do not think they do. Overall I would tend to agree with Viola that disguise is a wickedness, however I believe that Twelfth Night is an exception to this opinion, as although it did cause the characters a lot of grief, this concluded to be a very happy ending, typical of the plays genre. Also I can pick fault with Viola’s opinion as she says that the disguise itself is a wickedness.

I believe that it is not the disguise that is wicked but of course the nature in which it is used, in the circumstances of this play disguise is used to protect Viola and it is not intended to cause any harm. In my opinion this means that it is not wicked, however had she used deception with cruel intentions – much like Maria – then I would have to agree that it would be a wickedness. Some wickedness may have occurred due to beguilement, bit I think the audience would agree that overall, when referring to Twelfth Night, the act of disguise is not wicked.

Individual Analysis Hamlet

A Freudian angle of throughout the scene Claudius depicts a personality that evaluates situations and makes choices out of desire without much concern for consequence. Although Claudius does show a little bit of concern for consequence, he generally acts from an “inner-child” psyche. In the scene, Claudius plots with Laertes and acts quickly out of a sense of DESIRE and makes a plan to kill Hamlet. Demonstrated in the lines; “A sword unbated, and in a pass of practice, Requite him for your father. ” And “I will do’t. And for that purpose, I’ll anoint my sword. I bought an unction of a mountebank, So mortal that, but dip a knife in it, Where it draws blood no cataplasm so rare, Collected from all simples that have virtue Under the moon, can save the thing from death That is but scratched withal. I’ll touch my point With this contagion, that if I gall him slightly It may be death. ”.

In these lines, Claudius and Laertes plan to kill hamlet by sharpening a fencing blade and dousing it with a poison that will cripple upon contact. This is clearly a representation of a psyche that acts rapidly out of an intense sense of desire. Although Claudius will often display act from a sense of the “ID” or “inner-child”, he also demonstrates, albeit relatively minimal compared to the previous example, a concern for consequence. At the beginning of the scene, he explains to Laertes his reasoning for not prosecuting Hamlet for the death of Polonius, Laertes’ father. Depicted in the lines; “Oh, for two special reasons, Which may to you perhaps seem much unsinewed, But yet to me they are strong. The queen his mother Lives almost by his looks, and for myself. My virtue or my plague, be it either. She’s so conjunctive to my life and soul, That, as the star moves not but in his sphere, I could not but by her. The other motive Why to a public count I might not go, Is the great love the general gender bear him, Who, dipping all his faults in their affection, Would, like the spring that turneth wood to stone, Convert his gyves to graces”. Claudius claims that because of the fact that his mother is completely devoted to him, and the idea that the general public loves him so much; the prosecution would end up hurting him more than it would Hamlet. He cannot live without Hamlet’s mother, so he cannot make the prosecution. Claudius displays a small fraction of his psyche that acts as the “super-ego” and evaluates situations based upon the consequential outcome.

It was day like any other day, one that revolved around me and my wants and needs, but all that was about to change. The sun was shining through my bedroom window of the small two bedroom apartment that was shared between me and my roommate. The day was a nice enough day for all to enjoy. With temperatures in the 80’s and not a cloud in the beautiful Carolina blue sky, who wouldn’t want to enjoy a day like that? Not me. Not when I was nine months pregnant, with only seven days till doom’s day and whale (yep, spelled it that way on purpose) past the 25-35 pounds suggest by my doctor that I should gain.

I was sick from not being able to stomach even the thought of food, which was unusual for me and was starting to have some pains in my abdomen but had brushed it off, thinking it was due to the nausea. It didn’t take long to realize that the baby I was carrying was ready to meet me when the back pains started to become regular and more intense. As I laid on the beautifully crafted gold and burgundy comforter that was spread over my bed, I started to fell pressure in my lower back. It was as if someone was taking dull knives and running them deep in to my muscles along the top of my tailbone.

There was no doubting the fact that my labor had started when I got up and noticed that same elegant comforter was now forever stained. My water had broke causing the pains to bring me to my knees. With tears in my eyes, I was ready for some relief from the pain and wanted to get to the hospital in order to get an epideral(wonderful things that make you numb from the waist down). It didn’t take long to get to the hospital, especially since the ride was in an ambulance. Thanks to my roommate who dialed 911 in a moment of panic; hers’ not mine, she deemed it necessary to dail 911 and request assistance.

If that is what you would call a request, screaming at the top of your lungs at the 911 dispatcher. The pain had become unbearable and I was forever thankful when I was told by the mid-wife that it was time to start pushing the baby out. Two minutes later at 12:37pm on a bright Tuesday afternoon, my daughter was born. She seemed so small and fragile but the effect was immeasurable. Lynssa Grace Girma Adugna, 6lbs. 5oz. 20 1/5in. Her hair was so shiny that it looked brown with touches of gold thrown in here and there. Her eyes were such a deep, dark blue that they look like the ocean at night.

She was breathtaking. When our eyes met for the first time I felt my heart skip a beat. As I held that tiny bundle, that was just as much a part of me as I was a part of her, my mind was in awe of how much I immediately felt such an overwhelming amount of love for her. The kind of love that I felt in that moment was instant and was more intense then any emotion I had every felt. I never knew that this kind of love was possible, to be able to love something or someone the way that I loved her. I knew then that I would go to any lengths to make her happy and to give her everything that she every needed.

I swore to give her my absolute best and I meant every word. My entire existence had been meaningless up until then, or at least everything I had every accomplished felt like it failed in comparison to her, my daughter. I had never knew that there was an emptiness in my heart until this completeness replaced where there once was a void. When my daughter came home the “real world” begun. I traded nights with the girls for a night with the most important girl, and nights out with friends, to midnight feedings and diaper changes. These times were stressful without a doubt.

Although all I needed to make them worth the work was a glimpse of her smile. Which she would give while she was sleeping. I am told that babies are dreaming about angels when they smile like that. These late nights were hard to handle when they were followed with early morning wake up calls which gave way to a morning full of much needed errands. My life was no longer my own. Life now circled around this tiny little human which I was trusted to take care of . Before Lynssa came along, I was not the one who you could find in a church pew on Sunday. You did good to see me on the holidays such as Christmas and Easter for that matter.

Now that I was responsible for someone else’s mortal soul, it seemed very important to get back in church and to teach her the same values that were instilled in me. So now you can be sure where to find me on Sunday. I wanted to be sure to incorporate Christian values and beliefs into my child’s heart and mind, and the only way to do that was to but them back into mine. Even though my child is very young and not likely to remember these times, somehow I still believe that it is important to behave a certain way. I also changed not only my outlook on life but also my outward appearance as well.

I begin thinking in ways that would have never come to mind before had my daughter never been born into this world. There was not only the fact that I was a mother now that changed me but also the fact that I was the mother of an impressionable young girl was what affected me in a way that I never though possible. I wanted her to be everything that was good and right about me and none of what was wrong with me. I decided that the best way to teach her these things was to lead by example, and with a little hope and a lot a prayers she would follow. I needed to be the mother that my child could be proud of.

Nobody’s perfect and I sure do have a long way to go before I can even be close to being where I want to be in life. I am still learning. Learning new things everyday. Changing for the better a little everyday is my goal. To always be that person, striving to be the best mom, wife, daughter, sister, friend and student that I can possibly be. That’s who I am. I would never be the person that I am today if I had not received an award so great as that of motherhood. Word do not express how thankful I am everyday when I see my daughter is growing and becoming a little lady.

When I finished read Laura Bohannan’s essay “Shakespeare in the Bush” I felt that I was smiling. Can you beat it: Elizabeth Bowen-Smith (who will became Laura Bohannan later), intelligent student of Oxford university, sits on the calabash, drinks beer and explain the story of Hamlet to group of tribesmen. Some of them are a very experienced, old person who knows things. It seems that Laura met very interesting company: they are bilingual (but their English is much worse than their native Tiv language (Tiv-Batu sub-group of the Bantoid branch of the Benue-Congo subdivision of Niger-Congo)), they know only own culture and believe that people in all world are the same.

This concept of “universal understanding” brought her audience to idea that this young European girl (because all whites should be Europeans) do not remember this history exactly. She made a lot of mistakes and some details of Hamlet history were so strange for Tiv traditions that they were even fain to acknowledge that Europe is really another world. Bohannan told about Hamlet in very simple words and Tiv understood Hamlet plot, but very generally.

Different cultural backgrounds not only make the Tiv and Bohannan have very different interpretations of Hamlet status (“son of chief”) or the general ideas of life and death. But the Tiv people interpreted several specific aspects of the story much differently than the modern Western culture. Almost from the beginning of Bohannan’s tale, tribe members interrupted to question and disagree with her about most of the key elements in the story. There was the appearance of Hamlet’s father’s ghost, Claudius’ marriage to Gertrude, the fact that Hamlet couldn’t marry Ophelia, Hamlet’s madness, Polonius’ death, Ophelia’s drowning death and the poison for after the final duel.

The ghost of Hamlet’s father appeared in the castle to inform Hamlet of the truth about his death. The most of modern people could easily explain what is a ghost. The Tiv thought otherwise. The tribesmen scoffed at the notion that Hamlet’s father is a ghost because they don’t believe that any individual part of human personality survives after death.

Tiv culture believes in witches and witchcraft, and then Hamlet’s father image must have been a zombie sent by witches as an omen. I like this passage from Bohannan’s essay: “The old men muttered: such omens were matters for chiefs and elders, not for youngsters; no good could come of going behind a chief’s back; clearly Horatio was not a man who knew things” (Bohannan).

It seems that witches and their magic power were reality for Tiv people. You know that their religious beliefs were centered around the concept of akombo, defined as magical forces and their emblems. Between concepts of “ghost” and “akombo” we have intercultural gap. These words cannot be translated to other language without loosing some sense. Any translation is approximation only. For full understanding people should be members of certain society.

Let’s go on. In the story of Hamlet, Hamlet’s uncle, Claudius, marries Hamlet’s mother, Gertrude. This marriage was only two months after Claudius’ brother, the King, was killed. The modern Western culture feels that this marriage was incestuous. It also took place too soon after the death of her husband. The Tiv, however, found no problem with it. It was a custom for the natives for the brother of a deceased man to marry his wife. This way, the fields could be taken care of and the farms could be managed.

Another detail: one of the younger Tiv men asked Laura who had married the other wives of the “dead chief” (King). When she told that the King had only one wife they were surprised. “But a chief must have many wives! How else can he brew beer and prepare food for all his guests?” (Bohannan). Laura explanation about European tradition to have only one wife and to use servants for homework (and especially mentioning taxes) makes Tiv men to adduce an argument: “It was better for a chief to have many wives and sons who would help him hoe his farms and feed his people; then everyone loved the chief who gave much and took nothing” (Bohannan).

As you remember, in the Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet could not marry his true love, Ophelia, because he was royalty and she a commoner. The Tiv disagreed with this also. They felt that the marriage should be permitted because since Hamlet was royalty, then he could shower Ophelia’s father, Polonius, with gifts and money. This seemed to be very rational to the Tiv, although it seems to be an odd to the modern Western culture.

Since Hamlet was not permitted to marry Ophelia, he went mad. In the western tradition the positive imaging of love madness appeared probably in troubadours’ songs, probably in more ancient times. But for African tribe it was impossible to attribute madness to unhappy love affair. The Tiv felt that Hamlet’s madness was attributed to more serious cause – to witchcraft. They said her that “only witchcraft can make anyone mad, unless, of course, one sees the beings that lurk in the forest” (Bohannan).

Laura did the best to explain relations between Hamlet, his uncle and his mother. These episodes of the play were absolutely unclear for Tiv people. They had several arguments for their position. Hamlet scolded his mother for her sin but man should never scold his mother. Hamlet wanted to kill Claudius who killed his father but nobody can kill or attempt to kill his elders (in Tiv traditions). Tiv men said Hamlet should have contacted his father’s friends to avenge the murder of King but do not try and avenge the murder himself.

I found no Tiv reactions (and no explanation by Laura) to the moment when Hamlet went to kill Claudius but found him praying. He did not kill him because he believed that killing Claudius while in prayer would send Claudius’s soul to heaven. We know that Tiv do not believe in the beyond. So this motive should not be clear for them. Laura missed this episode. May be she felt that she had no chances to explain this for her audience? She also did not tell about Hamlet’s words about Polonius’ murder “Heaven hath pleased it so / To punish me with this, and this with me” (Hamlet, III.iv.157–158) and about Polonius’ body “The body is with the king, but the king is not with the body” (Hamlet IV.ii.25–26).

When Hamlet killed Polonius, Ophelia’s father, she was so distraught after hearing about this that she committed suicide by drowning herself. The Tiv were strongly opposed to this. They felt that only witches could make someone drown because water alone cannot hurt someone. “It is merely something one drinks and bathes in” (Bohannan). They understood that Ophelia’s brother, Laertes, killed her to sell her to the witches because he ran out of money.

Also, at Ophelia’s funeral, Laertes jumped into her grave to say his last goodbye. Hamlet then jumped into the grave to say his last goodbye, also. The Tiv thought that Laertes was trying to steal the body so he could sell it to the witches. Since Hamlet jumped in, then he saved Ophelia’s body from being sold. They felt that Laertes wanted to kill Hamlet because he prevented him from selling Ophelia’s body. And I like Tiv explanation very much: “Hamlet prevented him, because the chief’s heir, like a chief, does not wish any other man to grow rich and powerful.” (Bohannan)

About understanding the duel between Hamlet and Laertes. King Claudius gave Laertes a poisoned rapier (probably Laura translated it as “machete”) so that Hamlet would die even if he was just scratched by the sword. Laertes has his sword poisoned in an effort to do Hamlet in once and for all. Claudius wanted Hamlet dead because he knew the truth about his father’s death. Just in case Hamlet survived the battle, a glass of poisoned wine was waiting for the victor.

The wine unfortunately fell into the wrong hands, and Hamlet’s mother drank it and died. The modern Western culture believes that the wine was intended for Hamlet in case he survived the duel. The Tiv believe otherwise. They felt that the wine was intended for the victor of the match, either Hamlet or Laertes. They thought that it would be used to kill Hamlet because he knew true about the murder of his father, or it would be used to kill Laertes so no one would know about the conspiracy between him and Claudius to kill Hamlet.

I think that the main point of Bohannan’s essay was to illustrate that different cultures interpret things differently. What we accept is influenced by our own cultural and linguistic values. Both interpretations of Hamlet are correct according to the cultural values of the two different cultures. (May be Tiv opinion is more correct because they proposed for Laura to tell them some more stories of her country.

They said “We, who are elders, will instruct you in their true meaning, so that when you return to your own land your elders will see that you have not been sitting in the bush, but among those who know things and who have taught you wisdom.” (Bohannan)) It seems that the author intentions is not a matter. If our interpretation is different than that of the author, but the story still influenced our life, then that is all that matters. Word is just symbol and everyone can understand it how he can. But if you want to communicate with other people you should learn their culture and to speak their language.

References:

Bohannan, Laura (1971), from Conformity and Conflict: Readings in Cultural Anthropology, eds. James P. Spradley and David W. McCurdy Boston: Little Brown and Company. <http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~idris/Essays/Shakes_in_Bush.htm>

Ethnographic Atlas of the Center of Social Anthropology and Computing. University of Kent at Canterbury

<http://lucy.ukc.ac.uk/EthnoAtlas/Hmar/Cult_dir/Culture.7874>

William Shakespeare. Hamlet The Oxford Shakespeare.1914

<http://www.alma.edu/students/students/02merosa/hamlet/hamlet_fulltext.htm>

William Shakespeare uses many types of literary devices to describe the very principle of Hamlet’s true battle. Hamlet compares himself to a “peasant slave” and to the talented actor, whom could give a convincing performance without feeling the true emotion. After his visit with the ghost (his supposed father), he has been dedicated to the idea of plotting revenge of his uncle-father. Although, it is difficult for Hamlet to perform this horrific act, because of his disgust of the emotionless scheming revenge.

Lastly, for Hamlet to try and convince himself to follow through with this scheme, he arranges a trap to have Claudius unknowingly reveal that he is guilty. In the beginning of Hamlet’s soliloquy, he compares himself to a “rogue and peasant slave”, which points out that Hamlet is frustrated with himself. In this metaphor, Hamlet feels terrible that the actor could shed more emotion, and force his soul to feel made up feelings in a work of make-believe.

The use of visual imagery is used when Hamlet describes his acting, “That from her working all his visage waned, tears in his eyes, distraction in his aspect, a broken voice, and his whole function suiting…” Here Hamlet is amazed by how easily the actor could show such emotion, and he even says “what would he do, had he the motive and the cue for passion that I have? ” He knows that actor would be even more tremendous if that was the case, because the use of a hyperbole is noted when he says, “He would drown the stage with tears and cleave the general ear with horrid speech. After stating the above facts, Hamlet then looks at himself and sees himself as pathetic.

His reflection of himself, describes that he is an unattractive, uncourageous mischief and protests that he primarily just mopes around and has no motivation to plot revenge and doubts his ability to achieve it. Another literary device utilized is the rhetorical questions he asks himself, “Am I a coward? Who calls me a “villain”? Breaks my pate across? Plucks off my beard and blows it in my face? Tweaks me by the nose? Gives me the lie I’ th’ throat as deep to the lungs? Again doubting himself for his lack of motivation. A bit of foreshadowing also takes place after these questions, when he asks another rhetorical question, “who does me this? ‘Swounds, I should take it…” which could possibly take place later on in the play, that someone will call him out, and there is only one reason why someone would; his revenge on Claudius. Hamlet creates a conflict with himself deciding whether to go or not to go through with this horrific scheme, but he reminds himself that his father’s life has been stolen so he must seek his revenge.

Hamlet is planning to have the “players play something like the murder of [his] father before [his] uncle” that he can “observe his [his uncle’s] looks” to judge his guilt. Hamlet concludes to himself that “[he] know [his course]” of what to do if his uncle “do blench” or flinch. Shakespeare uses personification on the word murder, for he states that “murder, though it have no tongue, will speak with most miraculous organ”, referring to the situation of murder being able to speak through the actors.

This is significant because it is a step forward towards Hamlet’s plot of revenge. Although, Hamlet may believe that “the spirit that [he] have seen may be the devil and devil hath power t’assume a pleasing shape”, this symbolizes the use of hell imagery and portrays the theme eye of the beholder. The devil can be very convincing and can disguise itself as something or someone we desire and enjoy. So, with that being said Hamlet concludes that “[he’ll] have grounds more relative than this. The play’s the thing wherein [he’ll] catch the conscience of the king. ”