Page images
PDF
EPUB

HAMLET'S MOUSE-TRAP

The usual interpretation of the third act of "Hamlet" renders some of the protagonist's subsequent actions difficult if not impossible to explain. If Hamlet, as is generally supposed, was completely successful in the plot by which he put his uncle's integrity to the test, it is hard to understand why he made no immediate use of it, or why he gave himself up so easily to the diversion caused by the projected journey to England. He could not have set out in ignorance of his companions' characters, for Hamlet acknowledges to the queen that he would trust them as adders fanged, an assertion indicative of his complete distrust of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He had set out upon a course of revenge, and he had held back from its accomplishment for certain reasons that the Mouse-trap was intended to remove; if they were removed by the complete success of the plot, why did he not continue as he had begun? He does not, however; but gently, without opposition consents to his own removal from the scene of action at the moment which most demands his presence, in company with men set over him by the king, men whom he suspects equal to foul play of the foulest kind. The suggestion that Shakespeare glanced at this apparent inconsistency in the character of Hamlet for the purpose of ridding the plot of him at the time of the re-appearance of Laertes is hardly worth consideration in a play that shows elsewhere the most careful construction even to the minutest details. In order to show that Hamlet's action is due to the utter failure and collapse of his plan to compromise the king by the Mouse-trap, it is necessary to go back for a moment to the beginning of the play.

The Elizabethans as a class were implicit believers in the ghost-lore of the time, and Shakespeare, in relying upon a supernatural revelation, is appealing to one of the strongest sympathies of his audience. To them no thought of weakness was introduced by the idea that a man of Hamlet's character was swayed in his actions by the promptings of a shadowy apparition. It was also a part of the contemporary ghost-lore that a spirit had the power of becoming invisible to whom it pleased, to

one or more of many; hence there is no necessity of providing an explanation that assumes a difference between the ghost seen by all who are present upon the platform at the beginning of the play and the ghost seen later by Hamlet and not by the queen.

There was, however, another bit of tradition equally believed at the time that introduced an element of uncertainty as to the identity of the ghost: namely that the devil (for the Elizabethans believed in a personal devil) had the power of appearing in the likeness of a departed friend for the purpose of tempting one into a crime for which he would suffer eternal punishment. It should be borne in mind that this idea is not introduced subsequently by Hamlet as an excuse for inaction; on the other hand, it not only occurs first to Horatio but also occurs to him immediately upon the suggestion that Hamlet follow the ghost into a different place. Never till the Mouse-trap is over does Hamlet lose hold of the idea of the danger to his soul if he revenges a crime that was never actually committed. It is in order to discover by the king's behaviour whether the ghost of the elder Hamlet has appeared with a true tale upon its lips, or whether the devil in a pleasing shape has appeared with a tale of falsehood, that Hamlet plans the Mouse-trap.

Note the plan in all its details. Hamlet believes that no man who had committed the crime attributed to Claudius could sit through the visible reproduction of that crime without displaying unusual emotion. Such an exhibition on the part of the king will at once settle the question of the ghost's identity and determine Hamlet's future action. Hamlet, however, with the full intention of doing complete justice, fears that his own bias may influence him to a wrong judgment, so he imparts his plan to Horatio who is also to note what happens, and they are to compare notes on the king's behaviour after the play is over. Note that it is Hamlet's full intention to sit idly by till the play is finished before he arrives at a final conclusion.

In this clever scheme Hamlet has forgotten one important detail. He has forgotten to think what may be the effect of this scene upon himself. In the sequel it turns out that Hamlet is far more deeply moved than is his uncle, and at last completely collapses under the strain. The play proceeds. Both Hamlet

and Horatio watch the king like a pair of hawks. Hamlet, however, is the first to give evidence that he is himself suffering extreme emotion at sight of what is to be the reproduction of his father's murder. This seems to be the motive of the exclamation "Wormwood, wormwood" which is not marked as an aside in the early editions. Doubtless the king is struck with the similarity of the lovemaking of the actors, for he turns to Hamlet to ask whether he has seen the play, whether there is in it any of fense. Whatever Claudius may have shown of emotion up to this point, it has not taken shape in words. This anxiety to know what is coming tells Hamlet beyond peradventure that he is on the road to the coveted proof. He is madly joyous over this fact and impetuously makes the fatal blunder of the play. In his reply to the king he, as it were, shows his hand completely.

Ham. No, no, they do but jest, poison in jest; no offence i' the world. King. What do you call the play?

Ham. The Mouse-trap. Marry, how? Tropically. This play is the image of a murder done in Vienna: Gonzago is the duke's name; his wife, Baptista: you shall see anon; 't is a knavish piece of work: but what o' that? your majesty and we that have free souls, it touches us not: let the galled jade wince, our withers are unwrung.

The word tropically, and the last phrases, tell the king the whole situation. He realizes that Hamlet has either discovered or suspected the secret crime and is now trying to entrap its author. A less accomplished villain than the man who could say with so much dignity at such a dangerous moment

Let him go, Gertrude; do not fear our person:

There's such divinity doth hedge a king,

That treason can but peep to what it would,

Acts little of his will. Tell me, Laertes,

Why thou art thus incensed. Let him go, Gertrude.
Speak, man-

is indeed far too accomplished in self-control not to be able to meet the coming shock when he is so fully aware of what is expected of him.

Hamlet immediately discovers the mistake he has made when he sees that the only effect of his words is to steady the king. It is exasperation at his own failure that causes Hamlet to violate his original plan of waiting so the end in order to compare notes

with Horatio.

It is the exasperation due to a coming sense of failure, because the players cannot accomplish it, that prompts Hamlet's attempt to force the king into an outward display of unusual emotion, by himself springing up and taking the words out of the actors' mouths.

Yet, wherein lies the failure? Has not Hamlet convinced himself of the ghost's integrity? Remember Hamlet's desire of justice. To kill Claudius in a way that will appeal to the public as a murder without setting the story in its true light is far from Hamlet's plan. He desires to be an avenging judge, not an implicated murderer. And thus he is bound to appear if he acts upon the information derived from the Mouse-trap.

court.

Hamlet has already won the reputation for madness about the He has jumped up in the midst of a play before the king, interrupted the players at an important point of the narrative, talked fiercely to the king himself, in other words has done much to strengthen the belief in his madness. It would be easy for Claudius to turn this impression to his advantage, as he actually does shortly afterward. The unusual situation is first mentioned, however, by others. It is Ophelia who first speaks. It is Polonius who first suggests that the play be "given o' re." And the king, though, of course, greatly wrought, is able to get away, almost unnoticed, leaving Hamlet in undisputed possession of the courtiers' thoughts. Almost immediately Rosencrantz and Guildenstern return to tell Hamlet that his mother has been struck with his mad behaviour, struck "into amazement and admiration." And so his behaviour must appear to every one who has seen him at the play, except Horatio and the king.

Hamlet voices this idea in his utterance beginning "Now might I do it pat." Claudius would be sent to heaven, not because killed while upon his knees, but because he would be canonized in the popular mind through having lost his life at the hand of a disappointed, insane claimant to the throne. And this view of the situation is still in Hamlet's mind at the end of the play when he begs Horatio to preserve his life a little longer, saying,

O good Horatio, what a wounded name,

Things standing thus unknown, shall live behind me!

So Hamlet's Mouse-trap has not turned out as he expected it. He has made a mistake that has virtually convinced him of the truthfulness of the ghost and at the same time robbed him of the power of effectively acting upon the fact. A fit of despondency ensues. He feels that he has bungled the whole matter. He has once before lamented that he was chosen to set things right; now he feels as if his own weakness makes the attempt utterly useless. In this frame of mind he is willing to depart far from Denmark, even to England where in company with men whom he trusts as adders fanged, rather than to remain where duty cries him on while his futility cries impossible. But this mood is of short duration. He is soon spurred into his true self again. at sight of the soldiers. He seizes the first opportunity, comes back to Denmark, is trapped into a fencing match ignorantly and against his will, and kills the king only when the evidence of his own poisoned cup and Laertes' dying confession leaves a record that tells posterity the truth.

HENRY THEW STEPHENSON.

The University of Indiana, Bloomington.

« PreviousContinue »