The contrast between seeming and being can be seen most prominently in the state of Denmark itself. We are introduced to the country at first by the speech Claudius gives in scene ii. In scene ii, Denmark seems to be in perfect order as the royal family is strong and all business is taken care of. Under this appearance, however, the country is in disarray. Following King Hamlet's death, Prince Hamlet, the rightful heir to the throne, does not become King. In the Elizabethan period, an interruption in the line of succession would be considered sinful as Kings are seen as divine protectors of the country, with their lineage blessed by god to rule. The fact that Claudius is instead king hints at the country's instability, although it may seem Denmark has a strong king. Secondly, the royal family seems to be perfectly fine as the King and Queen are happily married and are respected by the people. In the Elizabethan period, however, Gertrude's marriage to Claudius, her late husband's brother, is considered incestuous and also sinful. This contrasts with the appearance of stability in their relationship and further shows the contrast between Denmark's seemingly stable government and the chaotic reality of the play.
The next and most easily spotted occurrence of the contrast between appearance and reality is with Shakespeare's first long speech in front of the court in scene ii. Gertrude, after seeing Hamlet still dressed in full black, tells him to stop seeming so depressed. This provoke's Hamlet's first speech. In the speech, Hamlet contrasts seeming and being and states the he does not only appear to be in grieve, but is. Unlike the rest of Denmark, Hamlet remains in grieve of his father's death and fully expresses his grieve through his clothes and actions. This is the where Shakespeare introduces the idea of appearance and reality in the play. Hamlet's speech emphasizes the contrast between him and the rest of Denmark, specifically Gertrude and Claudius. We begin to question Gertrude's true motives as to whether she only appears to love Claudius in order to protect Denmark and Hamlet, or she actually does love Claudius and is in fact, an "incestuous beast".
This dichotomy between appearance and reality raised in Act 1 causes us to question almost every aspect of the play. This universal possibility of a facade that characters put on forces us to analyze the play from multiple different possibilities, making multiple different interpretations possible.
This raises the question if every character in the play is duplicitous, even our beloved hero Hamlet. It feels kind like a "Can we trust the narrator" situation. If every character had a facade, then what stops the play from being completely outside of what we've been reading so far? What if Claudius is the good guy? Or maybe I'm going too far. It's a very interesting topic.
ReplyDelete