ACT II, 2: A METHOD TO THE MADNESS
In the next part of the scene (beginning in line 172), Polonius proceeds to gather further proof of his belief regarding Hamlet’s madness by having a direct conversation with him. The reader will note that Shakespeare’s language changes at this point. Before the language was poetic; now it is in prose. Often, Shakespeare uses poetry to indicate the higher elevated speech of aristocrats and prose to indicate the language of the commoner. Reports and letters are also usually done in prose. Here the prose is used to indicate the language of madness or feigned madness. Prose will also be used to express untruthful statements and dialogue. On stage the flow of the language, as it shifts from poetry to prose, has a subtle affect on the audience. The audience may not consciously be aware of the shift, but they will sense a difference.
Hamlet’s mad language is complex, for it conveys a subtle or hidden truth. Hamlet begins by greeting Polonius and calling him a “fishmonger” (a seller of fish – line 175). A fishmonger holds a low position in society, even in the society of commoners. For an aristocrat to be referred to as a lowly commoner, then, is an insult. Polonius is insulted, but he believes that Hamlet is mad. So, Polonius does not take the insult seriously. Hamlet then responds that he wishes Polonius were as “honest” as a fishmonger (177). Here again is a subtle social criticism. Although many aristocrats believed that honesty was a quality to be found in the higher classes, Hamlet is suggesting the opposite. He is suggesting that a quality like honesty can be found only in the lowly commoner. By extension, then, he is also suggesting that aristocrats are dishonest and corrupt. Hamlet emphasizes his point by stating that only one man “out of ten thousand” is honest (17980). Thus, the world is a corrupt place full of dishonesty.
When Polonius says that he agrees with
Hamlet, the prince then begins to make a statement that sounds quite mad: “for if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion …” (18283). Hamlet then stops and changes the subject. Polonius does not understand Hamlet’s comment at all. Polonius probably does know the old superstition declaring that maggots were created in dead animals that were exposed to sunlight. But he would have no idea how that relates to the beginning of the conversation. Hamlet, though, is speaking metaphorically. The word maggots could signify dishonest men, and the dead dog would thus signify the world. The imagery is extremely fitting since Hamlet views the world as essentially corrupt and in a state of decay.
Hamlet’s mad language also employs the use of puns. He tells Polonius that he should not allow Ophelia to “walk i’ th’ sun” (185). The line picks up on the idea of the sunlight breeding maggots. Hamlet is telling Polonius to keep Ophelia free from corruption. But the pun is that the word sun also sounds like son. Thus, Hamlet also appears to be warning Polonius to keep Ophelia away from the son of the king, namely, Hamlet himself.
The pun on sun is followed by another pun: “conception is a blessing, but not as your daughter may conceive” (185-86). The word conception means both (1) to have a thought or idea and (2) to have a child (to conceive an idea or to conceive a child). Hamlet is thus stating that having thoughts or ideas are blessings, but having children is not a blessing. In a world full of corruption and dishonesty, more children means more dishonest men and more corruption.
The dialogue continues with additional puns, and Hamlet also manages to include a negative description of Polonius as well (lines 196-202). Among other things, Hamlet criticizes Polonius for having a “plentiful lack of wit” (199). But not being very witty, Polonius does not realize that he is the target of Hamlet’s humor. After Polonius exits, Hamlet refers to him as a “tedious old fool” (215). Shakespeare thus contributes to his negative depiction of the king’s advisor once again to indicate the corruption in the court.
ACT II, 2: THE SHADOWS OF BEGGARS
Hamlet then has a conversation with
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern after Polonius exits (beginning in line 217). The use of mad language and puns continues, and Hamlet also manages to criticize Fortune (or Fate) as well (lines 230-31). The reader should also note the reference to doomsday (line 234) and the use of prison imagery (lines 23740) in the dialogue. The depressed Hamlet asserts not only that he feels trapped, but also that the entire world is a prison. To Hamlet the world is a terrible and corrupt place without freedom. There is no place to go to escape that corruption. And such a terrible state suggests that the end of the world is near (according to certain Christian beliefs).
Social criticism also appears in this dialogue. Hamlet’s companions suggest that Hamlet’s ambition makes him feel like he is trapped (line 246). The conversation then suggests that ambitions are dreams and that dreams are like shadows: airy and insubstantial. Hamlet then concludes with the following:
Then are our beggars bodies, and our monarchs and outstretched heroes the beggars’ shadows. (256-57)
Here Hamlet is playing with rhetoric, with language, in creating this complex metaphor. Beggars do not have any ambition, but kings and heroes do. Thus, the kings and heroes are merely shadows; and the beggars are the solid bodies that cast those shadows. Hamlet is criticizing kings and heroes. He is stating that they are like shadows. They are nothing. They are insubstantial. They are meaningless. To be a king or a hero in the world means nothing. The life of a beggar has more meaning and importance than the life of a king.
Hamlet realizes that Rosencrantz and
Guildenstern were called by Claudius and Gertrude to spy on him (lines 273-74). Hamlet then asks them to reveal the truth because of their friendship or fellowship (276-80). Yet, Hamlet is also aware that, in the corrupt court of Denmark, such friendship is also corrupt.
ACT II, 2: THE PIECE OF WORK SPEECH
During his dialogue with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet admits that he has changed and become depressed (beginning in line 287). His description and explanation form a prose speech that expresses his feelings and, at the same time, contradicts a prevailing Renaissance philosophy.
The speech begins with a metaphor: “the earth seems to me a sterile promontory” (289-90). A promontory is a rock, and for Hamlet the world is nothing but a dry and barren piece of stone. There is nothing alive there. All is dead and useless to him. Hamlet then proceeds to describe the sky in positive terms: excellent, brave, majestic. Hamlet does this to express the positive attitude that others have about the world and the heavens that surround it. But to Hamlet, the air is filthy and diseased: “a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours” (293).
From the earth and sky, Hamlet then moves more specifically to the topic of mankind: “What a piece of work is a man!” (293-94). The line suggests that man is like a perfect machine, wellmade and finely crafted. Hamlet then lists man’s best features: his excellent reasoning ability, his unlimited intellect (“faculty”), his beautiful body (“form”), and his wonderful and precise physical agility. Hamlet then adds two similes to complete the description: his actions or movements are like an angel and his ability to understand or comprehend is like a god.
Hamlet then concludes this description by stating that man is the perfect creation, the perfect animal (“paragon of animals”). The description that Hamlet presents here is one that is consistent with the philosophy of Humanism. The Humanists did believe that man was capable of perfection and that with the power of his mind a man could accomplish just about anything. Students may be familiar with the expression “Renaissance Man.” A Renaissance Man suggests a man who studies everything and takes a lively and scholarly interest in everything. Perhaps the best example of a true Renaissance Man is the Italian Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519). Leonardo da Vinci was a musician, an artist, a sculptor, a painter, a scientist, an engineer, and an inventor. He was probably the most remarkable man who ever lived. He could do everything, and he was outstanding in everything he did. The Humanists believed that anyone could be like da Vinci if he applied his mind to it.
Hamlet (and, apparently, Shakespeare) however, does not agree with the Humanists. The turning point in the speech (like a turning point in a poem) is indicated by the word yet: “And yet to me what is this quintessence of dust?” (297-98). In one short breath, Hamlet has moved from describing man as an angel or a god to describing him as dust or dirt. Hamlet concludes that “Man delights not me” (298). Hamlet is expressing that he finds nothing wonderful or impressive about mankind. The line is actually a good example of understatement. Hamlet is actually implying an idea opposite to that of the Humanists. To Hamlet, man is the lowest of the low. He does not even rank with the lowest of living creatures, like an ant or a flea. Man is below that. He is dirt. He is dust. He deserves to be swept away.
At this point in the speech, Rosencrantz would smirk or smile. So, Hamlet adds, “no, nor woman either” (298-99). Shakespeare adds this line because he knew very well that Renaissance audiences were always on the alert for doubleentendres and sexual jokes. Hamlet’s comment to Rosencrantz is actually Shakespeare’s comment to the audience. The Renaissance audience might humorously view Hamlet’s line about finding no delight in man to be a declaration of his heterosexuality (that is, Hamlet is not attracted to men). So, Hamlet adds the comment about women to clarify his point: he finds nothing wonderful or impressive about mankind (men and women). The addition that Hamlet makes, though, also cleverly proves his point: man is usually quick to think in a base and lowly manner. Hamlet is talking about higher philosophy, but many members of the audience are thinking crudely about sex and dirty jokes.
ACT II, 2: METATHEATER AND
LONDON FADS
The term metatheater (and sometimes metadrama) refers to a drama within a drama as well as a drama about drama. In Hamlet there are both.
There is a shorter play, which is called The Mousetrap, within the larger play of Hamlet. But in several instances Prince Hamlet and other characters also comment about the art of acting and playwriting as well.
The first instance of metatheater occurs directly after Hamlet’s “Piece of Work” speech. Rosencrantz informs Hamlet that some famous actors (“tragedians”) from the city have traveled to the castle as traveling performers (lines 315-16). Although this play is set in Denmark, Shakespeare uses that background to symbolize England. Thus, “the city” is actually a reference to London. Hamlet is surprised that such good actors would leave the city and the playhouse (theater) where they usually perform because a good acting troupe would make more money staying at their own theater in London. Traveling performers were more often acting troupes that had no established theater for their performances. And traveling actors made far less money than the actors in the city.
Rosencrantz explains that there is an
“innovation” or fad currently popular in the city. He adds that lately audiences are mostly interested in seeing performances by all-boy acting troupes. Although the acting and performances are not as good as those by adults, the audiences find the allboy cast to be cute and charming. And, so, they attend these performances instead of the performances by the adult actors. And, so, the adult actors are forced to go on the road and perform in the small towns outside of the city.
Such a fad actually did occur in London during Shakespeare’s time, and Shakespeare uses the character of Hamlet to criticize the fad. Shakespeare knew that such a fad was bad for acting and the theater business in general. These lines, then, are also a form of social criticism. Shakespeare is criticizing the low tastes of a society that prefers bad boy actors to good professional adult actors.
ACT II, 2: POLONIUS
The negative depiction of Polonius continues as the actors (or “players”) arrive:
Jephthah in the Bible (line 385)
In the Old Testament (Judges, Chapter 11), Jephthah vowed that he would sacrifice the first person he saw on his return home if he was successful in battle. The first person he saw on his return was his own daughter (whom he was forced to sacrifice). Hamlet is suggesting that Polonius is not only a fool, but he also does not recognize the value of his own daughter (referred to as a “treasure”).
Shakespeare also uses Polonius to list the genres of drama that were performed during the Renaissance: “tragedy, comedy, history, pastoral, pastoral-comical, historical-pastoral,” and so forth and so on. The list gets too long and too ridiculous. Having the foolish Polonius recite the list emphasizes the ridiculous aspect of it. All of these genre classifications were too complicated and basically unnecessary. Every play could simply be listed as either comedy or tragedy, and Shakespeare would certainly not have felt that all of these classifications were necessary. This is another example of metatheater. It is a comment, a criticism, on playwriting classifications.