Hi folks. Some weird stuff in this scene... Skulls?? Jokes?? Disturbing puns?? Fist-fights inside a grave?? Alexander the Great stopping up a beer barrel?? More allusions to Hercules?? Whaaa?
The Royal Shakespeare Company does a great job bringing the scene to life-- especially that saucy grave digger. I recommend reading the scene first and annotating, then watching the video. After that: post a discussion question/comment with a quote. Only one required this time, so make 'em good. :)
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLO5IdAl-q8
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVHu5BTylbM
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOkay so I guess I'll lead the discussion off. I have to say, this may be my favorite seen in the whole play. I love the madness of this scene; from the grave diggers joking about their job, to Hamlet and Laertes going nuts over Ophelia. Anyways, I thought the fist fight between Hamlet and Laertes was quite comical. I know, I am a bad person, but the thing I thought was funny was their battle to one up each others' love for Ophelia. Hamlet says, "'Swounds, show me what thoult do. Woo't weep? Woo't fight? Woo't fast? Woo't tear thyself? Woo't drink up eisel? Eat a crocodile? To outface me with leaping in her grave" (Act V. Scene 1. 277-287. 131). Hamlet continues, but basically he is trying to render his love for Ophelia greater than Laertes. I am not so sure weather leaping into your dead lovers grave displays love or madness. I just thought I would comment on this, but my question is this; Do you think this scene shows a sane Hamlet or an insane Hamlet?
ReplyDeleteI think this shows an insane Hamlet, but not the "insane" Hamlet that may or may not have been present throughout the play. This "madness" was caused by Hamlet just finding out that Ophelia, the woman who he apparently DID love, has died while he was away. He is a smart guy, so he can connect the dots and figure out that her death has something to do with the murder of Polonius. He is immediately overcome with guilt, sadness, and rage, and all these emotions descend on him before he can wrap his brain around it.
DeleteNow, moving on, as I was reading scene 2, I noticed a most likely fatal mistake on Hamlet's part. The lord explained the duel to Hamlet, and told Hamlet that Laertes will be at an extreme disadvantage. Because Hamlet is so cunning and thinks everything through, I found it odd that he never thought that this could obviously be a set up. Even Horatio provided some foreshadowing by saying, "You will lose this wager, my lord,' (V, ii, 193). Hamlet had just murdered Laertes's father, and is the direct cause of his sister's suicide, and Hamlet is supposed to believe that Laertes is not planning on exacting revenge with royal issued weapons in a duel with Hamlet? It is way too convenient for Laertes to not take advantage of the situation. Another thing Hamlet could have thought of was "Why is Claudius giving me such an advantage if he knows that I know what he did?" It all seems way too fishy, but surprisingly, Hamlet doesn't seem to pick up on that. What do you guys think? Will this lead to Hamlet's downfall, or will he realize he is being set up just in time? Or, I guess as a better question, will this mistake cost Hamlet his life? If so, will he be able to exact revenge on Claudius first?
It’s interesting that you mention his seeming lunacy, Eric, but I think both you and I know from the play/book Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead that he isn’t, in fact, insane. To me, at least, it appears that Hamlet is putting up a witty guise. When it is simply him and Horatio, who is a close companion with him, he does ramble on a bit in the clouds, but that doesn’t seem all that farfetched from guys nowadays. I mean, one second we’ll be talking about how hot Megan Fox is, and that will turn into some random conversation about why the Seahawks are better than the 49ers. I don’t know about girls, but guys do this ALL the time. We can change the course of the conversation with one fleeting flurry of a comment. This appears to be what Hamlet does with Horatio on a constant basis, as he talks about the “poor Yorick” whose “lips that [he had] kissed” more times than he can count. (V,i, l. 144-148) Immediately following this sad reminiscing of his lost friend, he flashes an irrelevant remark to Horatio, asking if he “think[s] Alexander looked o’ this fashion i’ th’ earth?” (V,i,l. 197-198). He even goes so far as to entertain the possibility that Alexander the Great could have “stop[ed] a bunghole”. (V,i,l. 204) This instantaneous manipulation of the present topic shows that Hamlet is just one of the bros. Sometimes he feels like delving deep into his emotional core, and other times he simply wants to ramble on about something as trivial as where an ancient rulers remains may have been unfortunately scattered.
DeleteWow, that's actually such a good point, and I never even considered that. You're absolutely right, and as much as I'd like to say Shakespeare made a mistake in plot continuity, I think Hamlet's poor decision to accept Laertes's challenge does reflect a new madness. This madness is genuine, the same madness that drove Ophelia to her death after Hamlet murders Polonius. And while I don't want to ruin the end, both Ophelia's and Hamlet's honest psychological illnesses seem to reflect the consequences of the acts that Horatio relays to Prince Fortinbras after the "happy group hug" part. It's interesting, though, that Hamlet loses his marbles after Ophelia dies but not his father, both of whom suffer rather tragic deaths. Perhaps Shakespeare conceals some facet of the father and son relationship which impedes Hamlet from going crazy. Regardless, the outcome is always madness!
DeleteWe keep seeing consequences catch up to the players. Claudius sees each of these tragedies as spurring from the murder of King Hamlet. Hamlet sees the death of Ophelia and Polonius as a direct result of his feigning of madness. Finally, Laertes untempered anger leads to.... well you'll have to read the end to find out, but ultimately no one's anger or greed is repaid how they'd like, and very often, the consequence is madness. Why does Shakespeare choose the punishments to be death and madness and perhaps not "everyone who does something bad has to lose a foot." There's purpose in his decision to drive all his characters to the loony house and then to the grave.
"There's another. Why may not that be the skull of a lawyer? Where be his quiddities now, his quillities, his cases his tenures, and his tricks? Why does he suffer this mad knave now to knock him about the sconce with a dirty shovel, and will not tell him of his action of battery?" (Act 5, scene 1, v.98-103). In this scene, Shakespeare demonstrates that a dead man's title means nothing after death (on earth at least). He says even Alexander the Great will be turned to clay. Alexander is famous for his astonishing feats in such a short lifetime, yet what did that earn him once dead? Well, death, just like everyone else. SO WHAT MATTERS? Ultimately, I think that's made clearly seen by examining who's not in the death count by the end of the play. We end up seeing the loyal one, the non-judgemental one, the ever-loving one survive all of the dangers and misdeeds throughout the plot. I might therefore summarize by saying Shakespeare wants his audience to know that those who cultivate honest relationships are rewarded.
Okay, that was quite a bit to process. I know this scene is known for its macabre preoccupation with death mixed in with the puns and wit that make somewhat light an otherwise solemn scene, but it really just made me sad. Here, Hamlet felt more real to me than anywhere else in the text. One could argue that the "To be, or not to be" suicide contemplation provides the greatest insight into his deeper psyche, however, what I loved here was how vulnerable Hamlet made himself. While his famous soliloquy is devoid of any personal pronouns, here we get intimate with Hamlet's past as he relives a part of his childhood. As he holds Yorik's skull, Hamlet declares "I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath bore me on his back a thousand times... Here hung those lips that I have kissed I know not how oft. Where be your gibes now?" (V.i.184-189). Delivered in prose, there is nothing disguised in formalities and extravagant language. Hamlet is raw and exposed, completely overwhelmed about how this life that once lived is simply no more, forgotten in death. I think it's beautiful.
ReplyDeleteThen, what really got me was when he follows that up with "Now get you to my lady's chamber and tell her, let her paint an inch thick, this this favor she must come. Make her laugh at that" (V.i.192-194). I can only assume that Hamlet is meaning Ophelia here. He so casually refers to her, and after everything that has happened he still considers her to be his beloved. I think it's sweet that he still thinks about something that will make her laugh, even if it is a little sinister and dark. The dramatic irony in his ignorance and our knowledge of her death is almost too much for me to bear. So sad! The realization of her death overwhelms him so.. As the saying goes, you never know what you have until it's gone.
In the end, it seems to me that Hamlet's love for Ophelia was very real. What do you think of his response, though? Does he do Ophelia's memory justice as he fights with Laertes over who loved her most? Did you expect this at all? After the all the indifference and perverted teasing of past scenes, I know I didn't see this coming!
I read that part the same too, Madison. When he said "make her laugh at that". I totally thought he as saying it about Ophelia. I really like that you pointed that out because I saw that as a very relevant speech right before they come out to bury Ophelia. It gives us a little sneak preview to how Hamlet feels about Ophelia. Through out the entire play I always wanted to believe that Hamlet really did love Ophelia, and here, I'm glad to say, I believe he did.
DeleteWhen Hamlet and Laertes are fighting, we have to remember that Laertes was just going insane a scene ago. The boy was kill crazy. Also, Hamlet had just found out that the girl he had just talked about a few lines before, committed suicide and he would never see her again. I think that she and Hamlet shared a close relationship. He knew of all the struggles and hardships that her family brought her, and he was there for her. I really see this when he starts listing out all the things that he could do for her instead of him. "'Swounds, show me what thoult do. Woo't weep? Woo't fight? Woo't fast? Woo't tear thyself? Woo't drink up eisel? Eat a crocodile?" (Act V. Scene 1. 277-287. ). I really loved the "eat a crocodile" part. He's just like "bro, please, I would eat something that would eat me, and all you got is your lil' sword." I really enjoyed this part. And again to reference his random act of passion, the man had just found out that Ophelia had died, therefore I give him a little credit in the matter.
I totally agree with you guys. I feel as if Hamlet is always joking or never really direct about anything he says, but here I think we finally got some insight into who he really was by revealing some of his past and his reaction to Ophelia's death. I sort of saw the entire situation as maybe no a theme, but a motif of sort? Is that what they call it? I feel like Shakespeare is trying to put an emphasis on the finality of death; more importantly suicide. The fact that the main character, Hamlet, is given a rather lengthy soliloquy in which he debates it, and then his reaction to Ophelia's suicide are how I'd support this issue.
DeleteWhen Hamlet says, "What is he whose grief/ Bears such an emphasis, whose phrase of sorrow/ Conjures the wandering stars, and makes them stand/ Like-wonder-wounded hearers? This is I, Hamlet the Dane" (V.i.231-234) we see his anguish at his realization that the beautiful Ophelia is gone. He then proceeds to fight Laertes and when they're asked to stop, he says, "I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers/ Could not with all their quanitity of love/ Make up my sum. What wilt thou do for her?" (V.i.247-249). In addition to putting an emphasis on suicide itself, Shakespeare also portrays what happens after, which I think many people fail to think about, and that is the effect that a person's suicide has on others. Nothing about suicide is positive; it's a permanent solution for a temporary problem.
I felt exactly the same way while reading this as well! I wondered through the whole play whether or not Hamlet actually had feelings for Ophelia, or if he just sort of wanted someone to give him the attention and the affection that he seemed to lack throughout the play. This scene made Hamlet feel incredibly open and totally real. Which, to me, makes it seem more obvious that he had created a facade in which he hid behind.
DeleteI was definitely 'aww-ing' when Hamlet thought of Ophelia and wanted to "make her laugh" (V.I.194) because it just made me feel really sad for Hamlet and also like you said Madi, it is just really sweet that even though Ophelia is dead, he still thinks of her first when he finds something funny, and wishes to tell her and aw poor Hamlet.
By far the best scene!
Alrighty then. My turn. This most definitely is my favorite scene so far. I actually quite enjoyed the grave-digger's comments and jokes, for though they were of black humor, they brought levity to the scene. I had to look up the word rustic (as the footnotes defined the word "clown") to be sure I understood the placement of this character. What I found called the man a "country bumpkin, a character meant for comic relief", which was portrayed very well in the video as well as in the written work.
ReplyDeleteIn the part where Hamlet sits and talks to the skull of the deceased jester, I wondered what Horatio thought of all this. Does his friend disgust him with the handling of a human skull? I thought I picked up on this idea, what with his one word answers. Not to mention the fact that Hamlet speaks to the skull, reminiscing about his times with the jester. Is Horatio used to the way Hamlet acts, as if this is normal, or is this still an unnatural thing for him?
I quite enjoyed the tumbling between Laertes and Hamlet, not only for my infatuation with violence, but because some information came to light here as well. Hamlet shouts "I loved Ophelia...What wilt thou do for her?" (V.i.272-274) as a comeback to Laertes. This love that we as readers have been doubting for most of the play has been outrightly proclaimed by the bearer. On this basis, I really do believe that Hamlet loved Ophelia.
Well I just got home from my game! But I am just starting to read act 5 scene 1 and I am guessing that the "First and Second Clown's" are discussing Ophelia's death. I find that interesting that right away, when the audience find's out about Ophelia's death and hear one thing, then the next they are hearing a completely different view on her death than of the Queen's. What do you guys think? The Clowns said that "It must be se offendendo" [V.i.6-7] which means that it was a justifiable homicide? Was it a homicide or a mistake?!
ReplyDeleteAnother thing, what is with all of these biblical references? In line 31 of act 5, scene 1, the First Clown says "They hold up Adam's profession" after talking about Christian's. Coincidence, I think not!
Lastly, to the skull and I will be done for tonight, he says to Horatio "That skull had a tongue in it and could sing once" [V.i.75-76]. To me this shows that he is thinking about things, maybe not in his sanity, but he is going into depth with them, which might be him thinking about his plan for Claudius or is it him being weird. Last thing I found ironic is he swears and then talks about God in the same sentence! Isn't that "using God's name in vain?" or what is the exact definition of using God's name in vain?
Okay I am done! Goodnight my wonderful classmates! :)
I'm really glad you touched on this Mo! this scene really captivates how brilliant Shakespeare was in keeping his audiences guessing throughout this work especially! The fact that the audience is never given a hint as to whether or not Ophelia committed suicide or if her death was accidental. It is completely left open to interpretation. I love it! So what do you guys think about her death? Was it purposeful or no? And how do you feel not knowing how Shakespeare intended it?
DeleteI think that the most interesting part of this scene is the part with the priest. The part that is specifically intriguing is when he says, "She should in ground unsanctified been lodged / Till the last trumpet. For charitable prayers, / Shards, flints, and pebbles should be thrown on her. / Yet here she is allowed her virgin crants..." (V.i.229-232). I think it is very odd that since her death was questionable that she can't be buried as a person of the faith, but that she can still be buried as a virgin. It seems as though they have many different types of burials. Also, I don't understand why the priest doesn't just bury her as a person of the faith because even if she did kill herself, God wouldn't pin anything on the priest for not knowing. Ophelia could also not be a virgin, and yet they are going to bury her like a virgin.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I don't think Ophelia killed herself on purpose. I think Ophelia became so lost in her own mind that she was mentally incapable of coming up with a plan to kill herself. I say that because she kept singing and everything she said was so childlike. I think that Ophelia should have been buried as a person of the faith.
This scene was very entertaining to read. Although sad, it let us look into the life of Hamlet just a little closer and some things were revealed to us. We find out that Hamlet really did love Ophelia with all his heart (or at least he wants everyone to think so, but I do believe it was genuine). His fight with Laertes just proves his emotional despair when he heard it was her body to be buried there. I thought the Royal Shakespeare Company did an incredible job portraying that scene effectively and what seems to be true to the text.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that caught my eye was the very beginning of the act, Shakespeare once again contemplates the uncertainty of the afterlife concerning suicide. The first "clown" says "Is she to be buried in Christian burial, when she willfully seeks her own salvation?". To which the second replies, "I tell thee she is; therefore make her grave straight. The crowner hath sat on her, and finds it a Christian burial" (V. I. 1-5). For the second time, Shakespeare brings this to the audience's mind, showing how controversial this issue is by having the grave diggers, who should be experts in this area, discuss the outcome of her situation. Another observation I had about these two are that they speak in prose. Does that mean they are unintelligent? And if so, what more can we learn from that? Can we trust their knowledge, then?
And finally, the last observation I want to bring to your attention are all the historical references Hamlet makes in the middle of scene one. Through all of his allusions to historical figures like Alexander the Great and Ceasar Augustus, he pretty much states the fact that, no matter how great or successful they were in life, all men will return to the same state, buried in the ground to waste away for years and years. I think here he is doubting the goodness of eternity (Heaven), or humanizing the great figures in history and pretty much saying "they were just like one of us". I just thought this was very interesting. Did you guys read this another way? What did you think was the significance of Hamlet referring to these figures?
Here is my response to you Hanna. I do agree with what you were saying. I took the idea from earlier, but I drew the same conclusion. Hamlet is correct about death is is the great leveler. For he states, "may not that be the skull of a lawyer?/why does he suffer this rude knave now to knock him about the sconce with a dirty shovel/ Hum! This fellow might be in's time a great buyer of land" (Act V.i). This lawyer and land owner are like Alexander and Caesar Augustus. In their life they were great men, held in high esteem, but in death they are just skulls to be, "knocked about with a dirty shovel." As the old saying goes from dirt we arose, and back to dirt we fall. Dirt is dirt, it does not matter if a body of a great man was buried in it. For "he [Alexander] was converted, might they not stop a beer-barrel?" or that "Caesar, dead and turn'd to clay, Might stop a hole to keep the wind away" (Act V.i). Hamlet's obsession with death is bringing up valid points. Why honor a grave which inside just lay decaying flesh or dirt?
ReplyDeleteI think Hamlet was referring to two significant figures in order to make a point. He is going to the extremes get a point across. (I do not remember if there is a lit term for this). We have a man who conquered the know world at the time, and a Caesar who founded the greatest empire to date, being compared to dirt and plugs for mundane tasks. By doing this Shakespeare through Hamlet is bluntly showing his opinion about death.
Here are some questions.
Is Shakespeare showing his own personal opinions, or is he just adding to the character of Hamlet?
Follow up: If they are personal opinions, how would Shakespeare feel about all the postmortem formalities we have ie bury the body, visit the grave, honor the site the body rests, respect the dead etc?
This scene was very intriguing. Hamlet still seems to be switching back and forth between sane and mad, but with no indication of which is his actual state. He seemed very sane when he first realized that Ophelia was dead: "What is he whose grief/ Bears such an emphasis, whose phrase of sorrow/ Conjures the wandering stars and makes them stand/ Like wonder-wounded hearers? This is I,/ Hamlet the Dane" (V.i.254-V.i.258) and "I loved Ophelia. Forty thousand brothers/ Could not with all their quantity of love/ Make up my sum. What wilt thou do for her?" (V.i.272-V.i.274), but later seems driven mad with this new grief combined with everything else he had dealt with thus far in the play, especially when Laertes freaks out on Hamlet:
ReplyDelete"'Swounds, show me what thou'lt do.
Woo’t weep? Woo’t fight? Woo’t fast? Woo’t tear thyself?
Woo’t drink up eisel, eat a crocodile?
I’ll do ’t. Dost thou come here to whine,
To outface me with leaping in her grave?
Be buried quick with her?—and so will I.
And if thou prate of mountains let them throw
Millions of acres on us, till our ground,
Singeing his pate against the burning zone,
Make Ossa like a wart! Nay, an thou'lt mouth,
I’ll rant as well as thou" (V.i.277-V.i.287).
In the midst of his ranting against Laertes, Hamlet seems to truly start descending into madness, rather than the fake insanity he had been employing previously as part of his plot to achieve revenge against his uncle. Everything in Hamlet's life seems to be going wrong, specifically his relationships. His dad was murdered by his uncle, who then married his mother. He accidentally killed Polonius which inadvertently caused the death of Ophelia and the wrath of Laertes. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have betrayed him, and who knows what will happen to Horatio? Everything about Hamlet's life could be wiped out very quickly as shown in the rest of the play, and that would be enough to drive anyone to madness. It doesn't help that Hamlet had just been contemplating the ramifications of death, such as the fact that everyone ends up the same (a smelly skeleton that had been food for worms) and that the decomposed bodies of the famous could be used for quotidian tasks, because now that's how he's thinking of Ophelia, someone he truly seemed to love.
I also noticed quite a bit in this scene that the queen really liked Ophelia, more than I had previously noticed or expected. She apparently thought that Ophelia and Hamlet would be allowed to marry, despite the fact that he had royal duties, and she seems like she wanted to be Ophelia's mother-in-law and friend. The tone of her final words to Ophelia, "Sweets to the sweet! Farewell./ I hoped thou shouldst have been my Hamlet's wife./ I thought thy bride-bed to have decked, sweet maid,/ And not have strewed thy grave" (V.i.243-V.i.246) indicate that she valued Ophelia as a person fit for a prince and her son, a very high honor.
Overall, this scene forced me to reconsider some of my previous assumptions about several of the characters.