Shakespeare's image of Hamlet

Text/Ma Jiajun

In Hamlet, Shakespeare highly summarizes the realities of life in England around 1600 AD, exposing the darkness of British society at that time and attacking the shameless crimes of the feudal ruling class. At the same time, it has created the image of Hamlet, a brilliant humanist, and showed Shakespeare's high level of theatrical artistic talent, which is of great significance in the history of world culture.

The story of this play was first mentioned in the Danish chronicler Gramaticus's History of Denmark (around 1200). In the story of the young prince who kills his uncle in revenge for his father, the idea of the moral category of the Middle Ages is expressed. The story was adapted by the French writer Belfer in the 1570s; subsequently, Shakespeare's contemporary English playwright (rumored to have been Thomas Gide) wrote a play about Hamlet (circa 1589), which was staged in London. Shakespeare used this theme in 1601 to create Hamlet, and the author used a new humanistic perspective to deal with the problem of the prince's revenge, turning the bloody revenge drama into a tragedy that made a high social and philosophical generalization of the contradictions of the times. This high level of generalization is reflected in the play through the central character Hamlet and his activities. The author's humanistic ideas are mainly reflected through this image.

Hamlet was a prince of Denmark in the 12th century. However, the writer deliberately sent the 12th-century people to study at the University of Wittenburg in Germany, which was the bastion of humanism in the 16th century, and read the book "Utopia" written by the 16th-century English writer Thomas Moore. This "error of the times" shows that Hamlet was in fact spiritually typical of the Renaissance humanists. This is a very good figure in all of Shakespeare's plays.

The term "humanist" here is used in a borrowed sense. The humanists of the Renaissance were primarily scholars of humanities who studied theology. These scholars, who are well versed in all kinds of learning, oppose the control of religious theology over the human spirit, affirm the rational pursuit of secular life on earth as human rights, and thus spread the idea of resisting theocracy with human rights, using humanity against Shintoism, and replacing fatalism with human nature, breaking the feudal confinement of the Middle Ages, and objectively facilitating the struggle of the banner of capitalist producers. We are accustomed to translating the humanism of the 18th and 19th centuries into humanism, and the humanism of the 14th and 16th centuries into humanism to show the difference in the content of the times.

When we say that Hamlet is the archetype of the humanist, we do not mean that he is a humanist in the true sense of the word, but that he has the ideological spirit of the humanist, and that his struggle is synchronized with the struggle of the humanists at that time.

Engels said in his introduction to the Dialectics of Nature: "This is the greatest and most progressive change that man has ever experienced, an age in which giants were needed and produced—giants in the capacity of thought, enthusiasm and character, in versatility and erudition." ...... At that time, there was hardly a single famous person who had not traveled long distances, could not speak four or five languages, and did not radiate light in several professions. ...... They are characterized by the fact that they are almost all in the movement of the times, living and active in the actual struggle, fighting on one side or another, some with tongue and pen, some with swords, some with both. Hence the integrity and strength of the character that makes them perfect. (1) Hamlet is spiritually close to leonardo da Vinci, Dürer, Machiavelli, and Luther. Shakespeare, through the mouth of Gaffelia, praised Hamlet as "the hero of the first century, the eyes of the court, the tongue of the scholar, the sword of the soldier, the expectations and flowers of the nation, the mirror of fashion, the model of elegance, the center of worldwide attention". Indeed, Hamlet was a man of many talents. From his relationship with the dramatists, his attitude towards the gravediggers, and his dealings with the guards, it can also be seen that this is a prince loved by the broad masses of the people.

At the beginning of the script, Hamlet has pure and beautiful ideas about the world and about life. He felt that heaven and earth were a great frame, that the sky was a beautiful tabernacle inlaid with golden fire dots, and that "what a remarkable work man is!" How noble is reason! How infinite the power is! How well-groomed and well behaved! On action, how angelic! On wisdom, how much like the gods! The essence of the universe! The primate of all things! However, this humanistic ideal of affirming the role of man is in a profound contradiction with reality. His father died, his mother married again within two months, and his throne was usurped by his uncle. He was exposed to a dark reality, and he doubted the value of "man." In the second half of the above-mentioned monologue affirming "man", he says, "But in my opinion, what is this life made of clay?" Human beings cannot intrigue me." His thoughts are in contradiction. At first he wanted to avenge his personal vendetta. But the enemy is the representative of the dark forces of society, and feudal rule makes society an abyss of suffering. He recognized that the world "is a prison with many confinement rooms, cells, and dark cells, and Denmark is the worst of them", and that "the times are completely out of touch". This elevation from personal hatred to a high degree of social consciousness is logical. Some people say that Hamlet is only revenge, but how can he say that he has to shoulder the heavy responsibility of "reorganizing the situation"? This is added by the author. In fact, those are also in line with the logic of the character's personality. For: (1) It is precisely because of his personal vendetta and personal misfortune that Hamlet no longer sees the world with an innocent eye, and no longer sees everything in the world as wonderful. Since then, he has paid more attention to the darkness, injustice and unfairness of society. It's a natural thing. Hamlet indignant that "who is willing to endure the lashing and ridicule of the world, the humiliation of the oppressor, the cold eyes of the arrogant, the misery of despised love, the extension of the law, the tyranny of the officials, and the contempt of the little man who has worked so hard to win" is the result of his actual life observation. It cannot be said that this is a copy of the sixty-sixth of Shakespeare's Sonnets: "The bored straw bale is dressed up in a well-dressed dress, the pure faith is unfortunately betrayed, the golden crown is shamefully worn on the head of the walking dead, and the virginity is humiliated by the mob", but the poet summarizes. If we think that Hamlet's indictment of darkness was fabricated and transplanted by the poet, then Hamlet has become a "microphone", not an accusation of character. It should still be recognized truthfully that it is Hamlet's observation and indictment of social darkness in the spiritual development. (2) Hamlet's personal enemy is precisely the enemy of the people, the feudal tyrant, the general representative of the dark forces. Therefore, his revenge for personal gain is linked to the reorganization. (3) Hamlet was a humanist. It is true that the core of the humanist doctrine is the individual, but Hamlet cannot be regarded as an extreme individualist in literature hundreds of years later. The advanced humanists of the Renaissance did not all contribute and struggle for social progress for purely selfish purposes. His ideals, wills and actions, though limited, were indeed sincere. Hamlet's willingness or compelled to shoulder the burden of regrouping, combining the revenge of his father with the transformation of reality, is a demonstration of the preciousness of Hamlet's humanistic spiritual character.

Of course, Hamlet's sublimation of his ideological will to go from revenge to transforming reality is not straight and smooth. He felt the strength of the dark forces, and he felt the thinness of his own power. His inner contradictions were intensifying, and he even thought of the question of "survival or destruction". The inner contradictions of humanism are intertwined in his inner contradictions: "To be noble, should we swallow our anger to endure the violent fate of the stone attack?" Or stand up against the boundless distress and sweep it clean? From Hamlet's inner contradiction, we can also say that his indictment of darkness and determination to fight are the constituent elements of the character' personality, rather than the poet's super-logical responsibility of the times paid to him in order to elevate the character or filled in the mouth of the character with the rhetoric of many poets.

Hamlet is determined to stand up against the inner struggle, and this resistance is accompanied by an inner struggle. The kind of internal struggle and determination to resist Hamlet into two stages, and considering the latter to be the result of the former, is bound to separate the interweaving and fusion of the internal conflict of the character's personality and the conflict between the character's external behavior and the conflict of the reactionary forces. Heavily the former, Hamlet is seen as a weak coward, and the resistance to the end is regarded as blind movement. Heavier than the latter, Hamlet is regarded as a warrior. The dialectical development concept of stage theory replaces the complex dialectical unity of the contradiction between the spirit and the action of the characters, as well as the contradictions within each of them.

Hamlet is both a thinker and an actor. He was alone in his rebellion. However, in the face of a powerful dark reality, he adopted the means of pretending to be crazy. On the one hand, this shows the loneliness of the humanist, and on the other hand, it is also the manifestation of the ingenuity of the characters. Pretending to be crazy can not only paralyze the enemy, but also facilitate the prying eyes on the other party's reality, on the contrary, so that the enemy does not know the truth and falsity of the other side. So he was confusing the enemy and, through madness, issued a curse on the dark society. However, Hamlet did not have specific steps in action, and he dared to be angry and hateful without being able to act in time. This delay, on the one hand, is a manifestation of his thoughtfulness and pushing for the best means of revenge, and on the other hand, it is also a manifestation of the weakness of his character. To think that Hamlet's tragedy is only the tragedy of the times, the result of a huge dark force that harms him and devours him, is only half right. Indeed, Hamlet embodies the inevitable demands of history and the tragic conflict in which it is practically impossible. But among the humanists were heroic warriors who were in close contact with the masses of the people, such as Mintzer, and there were also people who were in contradictions and lacked the support of the people, such as Huden. Hamlet is not the kind of figure described by historians in the whirlpool of struggle, but the image portrayed by the artist. Although the understanding of this character as a coward or heroic warrior varies from one generation to another, Shakespeare's portrayal of Hamlet is not a simple trumpet of a single personality tendency. Hamlet is not only a tragic figure caused by the times, but his internal shortcomings are also the reasons for this tragedy. Even Hamlet himself understands his weaknesses, and he feels that he is "a confused guy, dejected... It will only complain empty words." Hamlet is apprehensive, bitter, indecisive, hesitant, ambitious but lacking practical and effective action. Marx and Engels said: "Not only does there be no mesmerism of the Danish prince, but also no prince himself", which shows the understanding of the revolutionary teachers of this aspect of Hamlet's character. Prince and melancholy are closely linked. The prince's melancholy is the embodiment of Hamlet's grief and weakness. This characteristic of grief and weakness encapsulates a typical characteristic of the individual rebel. "Hamlet character" refers to this aspect of the characteristic, it has become a common term. It could also be said that Hamlet is a special type of "superfluous person". At least, this is how Turgenev's article Hamlet in Higre County is understood. Although he only values Hamlet's weak side and has one-sidedness, he says that he has some characteristics of the character's personality.

Hamlet is not the embodiment of the concept of "hesitation" or an expression of this universal humanity. His characteristics are the content of his character, an aspect of the complexity of his character. The complexity of Hamlet's personality lies not only in its inherent contradictions, but also in the fact that it is in the process of development and change. Hamlet doesn't stop at melancholy. Reality is educating him, and the beautiful and ugly are educating him. His good friend Rosenklands betrayed his friendship, his lover Ghorfia became a prisoner and tool of backward forces, and he was shocked that good artists were ostracized and wandered. Injustice was everywhere, and officials were running rampant, which made him resentful. In the end, he increased his sense of responsibility for eliminating evil and correcting the times, and gradually became stronger. At this time, a thrilling struggle surrounded him. He was sent to England, but he fell into the trap set by others. How could he not pick himself up when he discovered the conspiracy halfway through, eliminated the accomplices of the traitorous king, and returned to Denmark? The act of The Norwegian prince Fordingbras in revenge for his father had long affected him. Isn't Hamlet uplifted by drawing strength from the Norwegian prince who led his army to invade Poland, and by the heroism of others and deeply ashamed of his own incompetence? Reality was forcing him to fight. Especially in the end, when he was wounded and had no hope of survival, Hamlet became a "giant" who fought not only with his tongue, but also with his sword, and in a fierce struggle he destroyed the reactionary king who concentrated on representing sin, and even he died, which was the road of struggle and destruction that life had given him, and it was not a momentary impulse or blind action. Hamlet is confronted with a vast and boundless dark reality, and he cannot but hesitate and eventually fight the enemy to the death. We cannot harshly condemn him for the weakness of his character, determined by the anti-feudal masses and his aristocratic origins, but for the typical image of the humanists who rebelled against the old forces and explored the way to realize their beautiful ideals in life.

There have always been various understandings of hamlet's image and his character. Of course, some of the following understandings, far from Shakespeare, are not enough to teach.

The 18th-century Russian tragic writer Sumarokov, according to his understanding, adapted Hamlet with solemn classical verses, with the theme of the conflict between love and filial reason. In such a tragedy, the one who really killed Hamlet's father was Polonius. Hamlet's filial piety to avenge his father clashes with his love for Gaffelia. Conversely, Gopheria is in conflict with her filial piety to her father Polonius and her love for Hamlet. The play ends with Polonius committing suicide and Hamlet marrying Gopheria. This play is a poor imitation of Corneille's Cid.

In the 1930s, the Soviet artist Agimov understood Hamlet in a counter-traditional way, changing the elegant and melancholy "Velvet Prince" into a heroic, energetic optimist and power struggler for the Danish throne. The ghost in the play is a deception committed by Hamlet and Horasch in order to pull Marcellus and Bernardo to their own side. Horasui imitated the ghost's voice and shouted, "Swear! Whenever he overdoed and was in danger of being recognized by Marcellus, Hamlet kicked him and said unhappily, "Rest in peace, crucified souls!" This kind of revolutionary live newspaper drama that deletes ghost superstitions is a happy joke. Hamlet became a far-leftist.

In addition to the above categories, modern scholars and writers have made specific analysis and generalizations of the image of Hamlet, and put forward enlightening insights, which will help later scholars to further study this typical image. However, due to the limitations of the times and classes, some opinions are inevitably deficient in one way or another. Some of these insights are representative:

William Huslett, a 19th-century English Critic of Romanticism, said in Shakespeare's Theatrical Figures (1817): "Hamlet is just a name, and his speech is nothing more than a casual forgery of the poet's brain." So what, isn't it true? These words are as true as our own thoughts. And the truth of these words is in the reader's mind. We are Hamlet. The play has a prophetic truth, which is high above the truth of history. Whoever becomes more thoughtful and melancholy because of his own or the misfortunes of others, who thinks with a contemplative frown that he has 'been too much of the sun'; whoever has ever seen the golden-red lamp of the day obscured by the melancholy fog rising in his chest, and thus sees only an emptiness in the world before him, in which there is nothing worthy of attention; whoever has suffered the 'pain of lost love, the tyranny of the gate,' The great talent who has worked hard is kicked away by the little man who is a blessing in disguise'; who feels that his mind is depressed, whose sorrow haunts his heart like a disease, whose hopes are destroyed, whose youth is hesitating by the ghosts of strange things; whoever sees sin swirling around like a ghost and cannot be quieted; whose ability to act is eroded by thought, who thinks that the universe is infinite, and he is nothing; whoever is reckless because of the hatred and pain of the heart, who pushes the drama away as if it were a pushaway, The best way to remove all the sins of life, to use the play as a way to mock the evil as a manifestation of sin—whoever is the real Hamlet. This subjective evaluation replaces the objective comment on the character with the feelings and resonance of the reader or the audience. This is tantamount to saying that Hamlet's melancholy, melancholy, depression, and hesitation are manifestations of universal human nature.

In his novel The Age of Study of Wilhelm Meister (1795), the great German poet Goethe wrote that the protagonist joined the troupe and prepared to stage "Hamlet", analyzing the character of Hamlet, in fact, the author Goethe's evaluation of this character: "Now he really feels depressed, now he really feels lonely, and there is no happiness in the world that can compensate for his loss." His nature is not sad, not contemplative, so sorrow and contemplation become a heavy burden on him. ...... What kind of person do we see in front of us? Is it a young hero who is desperate to avenge snow hate? Or is he a born prince who is happy to duel his uncle who usurped his crown? Neither! Consternation and melancholy strike this lonely man; ...'The whole age is out of touch; ah, it's so bad, born to want me to put it back together!'" I thought that this sentence was the key to Hamlet's whole action, and I felt that it was obvious that Shakespeare was going to describe: a great cause was entrusted to a person who was incompetent. ...... A beautiful, pure, noble and morally noble man, who has no strong perseverance to make him a hero, but who is destroyed under a burden which he can neither lift nor let go; every responsibility is sacred to him, but this responsibility is too heavy. He was asked to do the impossible, not impossible in itself, but impossible for him. How he wandered, tossed, feared, and was in a dilemma, always touching the scene, always reminiscing about the past, and finally almost losing the goal in front of him, but he could no longer become happy. (4) Goethe's view is typical of the "Hamlet weakness" theory. This is obviously only one aspect of Hamlet's personality, and more about Hamlet's performance in the first few scenes. The actual situation in which it and Hamlet later fought was remarkable.

The eminent Russian literary critic of the 19th century, Belinsky, objected to Goethe's "theory of weakness", pointing out: "Weakness of the will is not a basic concept, but only the expression of another, more universal, deeper concept, which is the concept of division." Belinsky's essay on Mochalov's role as Hamlet, Shakespeare's Play< Hamlet's > (1838), begins with Hegel's idealistic dialectic of "positive and negative" and explores Hamlet's contradictions and divisions: "It is true that Hamlet showed spiritual weakness; but it is necessary to know what this weakness means." It is a split, a transition from childish, unconscious spiritual harmony and self-pleasure to disharmony and struggle, which in turn is necessary for the transition to majestic, conscious spiritual harmony and self-pleasure. ...... This is Hamlet's concept: weakness of will, but it is only the result of division, not of his nature. By nature, Hamlet was a powerful man, his angry sarcasm, his momentary emotional outbursts, his passionate and violent arguments in conversation with his mother, his arrogant contempt for his uncle and his unconcealed hatred—all of which proved that he was energetic and had a great soul. (5) Belinsky saw weakness only as a transition from the first to the second of Hamlet's three stages of character development. From the perspective of the ending, Hamlet is moving towards a majestic and tragic realm of brilliance; from the perspective of nature, Hamlet is essentially a heroic warrior. Belinsky's "Mochalov created a tenacious, rebellious Hamlet." The role became, in his acting, a voice of inner majesty, a cry of rebellion against the injustices seen everywhere and calls for freedom. The audience, especially the young, repeatedly interrupted his lines with stormy applause." (6) Almost a hundred years later, in 1942, during the war, arminian actor Wagelshan performed "Hamlet is very optimistic." He plays Hamlet as a brave warrior with a bright sword in his hand. 'Take up arms against boundless suffering'. Even in the scene when he picked up Yorick's skeleton and held it in his hand, he... There is no fear that everyone will die. ...... He recalled his happy childhood (Yorick had carried hamlet from his childhood) and smiled calmly and happily. (7) The understanding of Hamlet as an optimistic and courageous warrior of a strong nature simplifies the complex character.

As for Turgenev, he said that Hamlet was "self-analysis and egoism, and thus lacked faith." He's all about living for himself, he's an egoist,...... He was a skeptic and always busy with himself" ;(8) Tolstoy said that "this main character has no character,...... Shakespeare could not and did not want to endow Hamlet with any character" (9), which is clearly biased.

And Freud said from the perspective of sexual perversion psychology that Hamlet had an Oedipus complex, so he killed his love enemy Claudius, and was an adulterous maniac, which is even more worth mentioning, and its absurdity is known at a glance.

Han Yu's poem reads: "Li Du's article is here, and the flames are long. In the same way, Shakespeare's grandiose portrayal of Hamlet, or glorifying it or destroying it, does not glorify it or damage half a hair. Is Hamlet a coward, a warrior, or something else? Or is it nothing? It can still be debated. As long as we do not start from the preconceptions but from the actual script, and do not start from the whole play from individual words or scenes, the discussion will always gradually coincide with the image of Hamlet itself.

[Note]

The Collected Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. 3, pp. 445-446.

Marx and Engels on Art, translation, vol. 2, p. 155.

ƒ See Translation Series of Classical Literary and Art Theory, No. 9, Published by the People's Literature Publishing House in 1964.

(4) See The Third Issue of the Translation Series of Classical Literary and Art Theories, published by the People's Literature Publishing House in 1962.

(5) See The First Volume of the Belinsky Anthology, People's Literature Publishing House, 1958, pp. 431-432.

(6) Morozov: Shakespeare in the Soviet Union, Pingming Publishing House, 1953, p. 10.

(7) Ibid

(8) "Hamlet and Don Quixote" written by Turgenev in 1860, in Literary theory Translation Series, No. 3, 1958.

(9) See The Compilation of Shakespeare's Commentaries, vol. 1, China Social Sciences Press, 1979, p. 515.

(Journal of Xi'an Institute of Education, No. 4, 1997)

(Note: The author of this article has authorized this headline)

(Ma Jiajun, a native of Qingyuan, Hebei, born on October 5, 1929, is currently a professor at the College of Literature of Shaanxi Normal University, a member of the Chinese Writers Association, a member of the Chinese Dramatists Association, a member of the Chinese Filmmakers Association, an honorary president (former president) of the Shaanxi Foreign Literature Society, a principle of the Chinese Foreign Literature Society, a principle of the Chinese Russian Literature Research Society, a former president of the Shaanxi Provincial Higher Education Drama Research Society, a former consultant of the Shaanxi Poetry Society, and a former executive director of the Shaanxi Provincial Federation of Social Science Societies. Shaanxi Province to build socialist spiritual civilization advanced individuals, Shaanxi Province to teach and educate advanced teachers, etc., enjoy special allowances from the State Council.

He is the author of 12 kinds of "Nineteenth Century Russian Literature", "The New Stage of Aesthetic History", "Poetry Exploration", "Exploration of World Literature", etc.; 4 kinds of "The Essence of World Literature" and "History of Western Drama" co-authored with his daughter Ma Xiaoyi; 9 kinds of "History of World Literature" (3 volumes) and "Research on Gorky's Creation"; edited 4 kinds of "30 Lectures on European and American Modernist Literature"; co-edited and co-authored "100 Topics of Marxism-Leninism", "Cultural Research Methods", "50 Lectures on Oriental Literature", "Western Literature in the Twentieth Century", etc. and more than 40 kinds.

It has been listed in more than 40 kinds, such as the Dictionary of Chinese Writers, the Dictionary of Chinese Poets, the Dictionary of Chinese Social Science Scholars, the Cambridge Dictionary of International Biographies (27th Edition in English), the Directory of Experts in Russian Studies Abroad (Russian Edition) of the Institute of World Literature of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the Classics of Shaanxi Century of Literature and Art. ）