PLEASE talk some more about hampolo changing their status to stalemate/uneasy truce/mutually assured destruction because you're absolutely correct about this
I would LOVE to give a thorough answer to this ask, but Hampolo's non-relationship (as I like to call it) is something sufficiently complex that it's a viable dissertation topic and I definitely cannot dissect it as much as I want to in a Tumblr post
that being said. I'll list some observations (~1k) anyway:
-Polonius cares about Hamlet in the absence of true external demand. His fatherhood demands him monitor his children. His position as advisor demands him to present a good image to claudgert. But he has absolutely no true need to monitor Hamlet as closely as he does, especially since Claudius has already dismissed his claims regarding Hamlet's madness by early Act III: "love? his affections do not that way tend". So why did he follow Hamlet into Gertrude's chambers? Why does he make the little quip to Hamlet about having played Caesar in college? It's because he's worried for Hamlet and wants to cheer the boy up and support him however he can, even in his failing age and failing wits.
-Hamlet is always receptive to Polonius in a way that he is not receptive to anyone else. Obviously the bulk of Acts II and III, and by extension Hamlet's early characterization, are just hampolo bantering, but there's even more to it than that. They always entertain and are responsive to each other's little quips and insults and banters! You can't get this from two people who aren't theatre kids bonding and trying their best to relate to each other. And Hamlet always allows Polonius to cheer him up a little whenever Polonius plays into his old wordy fool persona (e.g. pastoral, scene individable...)
-It's very clear to me that (a) Hamlet is in agony, (b) Hamlet is afraid of confronting his mission and would much rather seek some distraction from his troubles, (c) Polonius understands that Hamlet is suffering and would be stabilized by a distraction, (d) Polonius plays into his role to amuse Hamlet and provide Hamlet with the distraction Hamlet needs, (e) Hamlet is aware that Polonius is trying to appease him but allows Polonius to make him feel better anyway, (f) Polonius keeps doing this because he knows Hamlet cares about what he has to say. They have what I call a baseline level of understanding and entertaining each other that is NEVER broken no matter how much the narrative tries to place them in antagonistic roles
-See, claudgert (and even HamSr!) capitalize upon their parental relationships to Hamlet to demand Hamlet behave in a certain way. Rosguil, similarly, capitalize upon their "friend" status to Hamlet for other ends. But Polonius never does that. Polonius doesn't order Hamlet to be less mad or grieving or annoying or prickly or what-have-you. He meets Hamlet at where Hamlet's at and allows Hamlet to leave uncomfortable situations. He doesn't refer to himself as Hamlet's friend or superior; he doesn't assert authority over Hamlet; he most certainly doesn't frame himself to Hamlet as his ex's father demanding explanations. And Hamlet acknowledges the leeway that Polonius is giving him and expresses his gratitude by (1) not offing himself and (2) allowing Polonius to touch his heart cheer him up a little. [Digression: If only Polonius treated his children with the same amount of agency he grants Hamlet...]
-Also note that no matter how much I (or you, Will) may ship poloclaud, it does happen in canon that Claud is dissatisfied with Polonius, perhaps even irritated or annoyed. The most significant moment being "love? his affections do not that way tend". Gertrude is more regularly disapproving of Polonius, of course. The thing is...who's the other character that claudgert consistently are dissatisfied with? Hamlet. Exactly. Poloham find in each other what they cannot find in the same other people who like to proclaim their care about them but actually aren't all that attentive as to how they are feeling!
-After all of those broad narrative/thematic strokes above this is where I'd start delving into some of their details as foils if this were my thesis: Hamlet & Polonius are more similar than different in a lot of ways. They're both theatre kids; they have similar methods and tendencies of espionage/duplicitous speech/hiding pain/wanting someone's approval/ speech patterns. And of course they do remark upon all of their similarities from time to time though it is always in an easy-to-miss manner. They both make asides about each other's vulnerabilities to the audience in their extended banter sessions, blah blah blah.
OKAY. To finally answer the question a little:
-Poloham start out as a stalemate because Hamlet has not exactly decided how much he shall allow Polo to comfort him and Polo has not exactly decided how much he should be worrying for Hamlet's well-being. They're both probing at this point and neither goes very far
-The turning point I'd say is when Hamlet actively threatens suicide in front of Polonius - i.e. "walk out of the air", "nothing I'd rather you take from me except my life". This is also when Polonius remarks on the "method in his madness". From now on, they are in an uneasy truce: While they are still in narratively antagonistic roles, Polonius is actively worrying about Hamlet and trying to comfort him, even if he doesn't truly understand why Hamlet is suffering; and Hamlet allows Polonius to be the distraction he needs from the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, and accepts that Polonius cares about him in a way independent of ulterior motives, even as he is guarded around Polonius.
-Mutually assured destruction, I would say, develops hand-in-hand with their uneasy truce. If Hamlet harmed himself or harmed someone else and spiralled as a result, Polonius would never forgive himself for not being the anchor Hamlet needed, which is why he enters Gertrude's chambers to monitor Hamlet and why he cries 'Help!' when Hamlet has a moment of crisis (he's not as worried about Hamlet harming Gertrude; rather, he's worried about Hamlet spiralling due to having hurt his own mother, or about Hamlet just outright self-harming). Of course, conversely, it is canonical that Polonius's death is what causes Hamlet to completely unravel - acting more 'mad' than ever and even developing enough cruelty to kill off RosGuil because he cannot accept that someone who cared for him, understood him, and entertained him that much died at his own hands. It was at that moment Hamlet knew he could never redeem himself, and he crashes out. So, they both feel responsible for the other and destroy themselves if the other is destroyed.
Something that really fascinates me about Claudius in Act one, scene two of Hamlet, is his reaction/what he says to comfort Hamlet. Because, right off the back, not only is it NOT comforting at all, it isn't even a response to what Hamlet is feeling in this moment.
"But you must know your father lost a father That father lost, lost his; - and the survivor bound In filial obligation for some term"
He continues to say -
"Why should we in our peevish opposition Take it to heart? - "
His comments don't read as an uncle now father comforting his nephew about the loss of his father, but instead, it reads as Claudius explaining why death has to happen. It's as if Hamlet, devastated and alone, asked Claudius, "why did my father have to die," and Claudius is trying to convince him that it wasn't his fault. Which is totally interesting because it's almost like he's projecting! Hamlet never even asked Claudius why his father had to die, not that we know, his behaviour is just that of a scared boy who lost his dad. Claudius, carrying a burden, whether it be guilt or fear (or both) rushes to explain that Hamlet's father had to die, and it was simply natural.
Hamlet doesn’t believe his fate is ordained. He doesn’t know what to believe. He wants to matter, he wants to believe he has a fundamentally just purpose and his sins can be absolved. What bliss, then – to fall towards an inescapable destiny full of power and divinity. He has been a victim of things outside his control – his father’s death, his mother’s remarriage, his uncle’s election – and all along his pain had meaning. It was not for nothing. There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will. He’s terrified that his pain was fundamentally useless. What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? A beast, no more. Sure, that he who made us with such large discourse, looking before and after, gave us not that capability and god-like reason to fust in us unused. He longs to know that his violence and his desires for revenge and his dream of meaning something more than a prince who couldn’t sleep is part of a grand destiny.
And yet he doubts himself – at the core of his being he wants to matter, not to die. To die, to sleep - To sleep, perchance to dream - ay, there's the rub, For in this sleep of death what dreams may come. He’s so desperately afraid, and relentlessly shames himself for it. He expected death to be peace and yet it is not; he is afraid that he will never find it. There’s a dread of a new unknown; a hatred of the known presence. In my heart there was a kind of fighting that would not let me sleep. What if it was all meaningless, and he was in agony from his own thoughts, in his own mind, for no purpose or reason? He so desperately clings to a destiny he convinces himself to believe in. And he’s still so afraid.
I bought a copy of hamlet from a used bookstore and it’s full of annotations and my plan is to reread it and add my own, but in my preliminary skim I found this?
It’s a list of reasons Ophelia went mad:
“1. death of father
2. love for Hamlet
3. Hiding her guilt for carrying Ham’s baby”
WHAT????
like. where did they get that???
I would Love to talk to this person I wish I could find them
two (2) scenes in hamlet that will give me heart palpitations if staged correctly
1: okay this is technically multiple scenes but establishing consistency of who can see the ghost of hamlet sr is so fantastic. he obviously appears on the ramparts of the castle in I.i and I.iv/I.v, and everyone present can see him (bernardo, marcellus, horatio, and hamlet). none of them have any reason not to see him, and hamlet in particular is actively looking for signs that his father is still present, since claudius & gertrude are hellbent on ignoring his very existence. the ghost appears to hamlet again when gertrude is in distress over arguing with her son, in direct violation of the instructions that the ghost gave to hamlet. again, the son sees his father, and the mother/wife does not. she has blocked hamlet sr from her mind and persists in her ignorance. HOWEVER. i was recently part of a production where the ghost also appears during the play-within-a play scene, right after the player king is poisoned. this is what precipitates the king shutting down the entertainment and abandoning the court, and it makes SO much sense!! he’s just seen his horrific crime reenacted before his eyes and then his victim appears before his eyes as a result! GOD i just love it so much
2: ophelia’s madness scene. i know a lot of words have been written and said about the nuances of this poor girl but so much can be said about her and the other characters and the entire play by who she gives the flowers to & what they mean.
“there’s rosemary, that’s for remembrance. pray you, love, remember.” present to gertrude, the woman who has forgotten the worst thing to ever happen in her privileged life by forcing it out of her own head.
“and there’s pansies, that’s for thoughts.” present to horatio, who does nothing for this entire play but think and think and share his thoughts with no one except hamlet.
“there’s fennel for you, and columbines.” present to laertes, symbolic of false flattery and ingratitude, who left her alone in that big house with a meddling father and a mad lover and no one in the wide world to help her.
“there’s rue for you, and here’s some for me. o, you must wear your rue with a difference.” present to claudius and to herself, the two who have done the most to destroy hamlet, symbolic of sorrow and repentance, although neither of them know quite why they are sorrowful or what they repent for.
“there’s a daisy.” leave limply hanging against her dress or from her crown, strew the petals across the stage just as her innocence has been torn from her by the men in that room.
“i would give you some violets, but they withered all when my father died.” enough said, i think.
how do you feel about interpretations where hamlet abuses alcohol
It wouldn’t be my choice, but it certainly is a way that some people deal with very stressful situations, so it’s definitely not beyond the scope of imagination. It does change the interpretation of Claudius planning to poison him with wine– that he sees that as an easy way to get at Hamlet in his point of weakness.
Hamlet as written has an interesting relationship to alcohol. I think it’s worth noting that CLAUDIUS is said to drink and party a lot, which Hamlet looks on with disdain. It is very possible, though, that Hamlet could begin to take on the trait he dislikes so much about Claudius *after* witnessing the ghost– the play does draw many parallels and forced comparisons between Hamlet and Claudius, and this could be one of them.
At the very beginning of the play, Hamlet greets Horatio with “What is your affair in Elsinore? We’ll teach you to drink deep ere you depart!” which is either a playful ‘we’re gonna party hard’ invitation OR a criticism of the new customs of Claudius’ reign- this is immediately followed with discussion of how the wedding party closely followed the funeral.
He says before witnessing the ghost that Claudius ‘drains his draughts of Rhenish down’ at a loud and raucous late-night party, something that he describes as typical but never was the ‘custom’ until Claudius became king. He even says that foreign nations criticize Danes as being drunkards and that it takes away from their international reputation because of this.
After the play, when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern confront him with telling him that the king is “marvellous distempered,” Hamlet sarcastically replies, “With drink, sir?” as though this is the most typical way for Claudius to be distempered.
When listing times he might kill Claudius, he suggests, “When he is drunk asleep” first, suggesting that this does happen at times.
And he expresses his physical disgust with the ‘bloat king,’ who certainly seems to be a physical manifestation of sin and greed. So if anything, Claudius most likely abuses alcohol (though he could just occasionally drink but still offends Hamlet by the contrast to his own father). That doesn’t necessarily mean that Hamlet doesn’t, though. Hamlet is always doing things that disgust him and an addiction out of his control could be in-character.
When I played Hamlet, my Horatio and I agreed that when Claudius offered Hamlet wine during the duel, I would play it like, “Dude, why would I want wine while fencing? What a horrible idea?” Like OF COURSE my lush stepdad is offering around alcohol. But that’s mainly because this is a modern-day setting where it would be incredibly weird to drink alcohol to quench thirst during a sports match. Of course back then it was a lot more common. But yeah, my version of Hamlet develops a strong aversion to drink the same way he does the other pleasures of the body, such as sex, all of which he relates to Claudius.
Claudius is always related to the physical and bodily throughout the play, grossly so. By contrast, his brother, King Hamlet, by virtue of being dead, is all spirit. (In fact, when he describes his death by poison, it’s incredibly grotesque and graphic verse.) Just as Claudius’ words cannot fly up to heaven, so too is Claudius firmly grounded in the earthly and physical. Hamlet stands somewhere in the middle. He is disgusted with his own too, too sullied/solid flesh and his own baser inclinations, but he is fascinated with thoughts of the spirit and the soul. So yes, I could see alcohol use fitting into this interpretation, though I took the opposite approach in my own portrayal!
Hi! I saw in one of your memes you ask why Hamlet acts mad in the first place. In 1.5, Hamlet makes Horatio and Marcellus swear not to tell anyone, especially not Gertrude or Claudius, about the king’s ghost. Hamlet puts on the “antic disposition,” by my understanding, in order to hide his tell from Claudius, because he wouldn’t be able to hide the fact that he knows that Claudius killed Hamlet’s father, and so acts mad to disguise any odd behavior. (1/2)
(2/2) There’s argument that this doesn’t work, from the “to be or not to be,” the bad quarto leaves Ophelia visible onstage during the “soliloquy,” which also contains a lie (“the undiscover’d country from whose bourbon i traveller returns” but Hamlet has MET a ghost) & Claudius isn’t convinced (“was not like madness”). My prof argues that Hamlet DOES go mad from the Nero mention at the end of 3.2 and through the closet scene, but is back to his weird self after he returns from England.
Thank you for taking the time to clarify that for me! Though your professor raises an interesting point, I feel like the only time Hamlet was genuinely mad was during the closet scene. After that he seems to trust his own thoughts a little less starting to share more of his thoughts with Horatio. I think the only scene he has before England where he interacts with anyone is when he’s talking to Claudius about the whereabouts of Polonius’ corpse. It would make sense for him to act crazy in that circumstance because it partially covers his actions and annoys Claudius. That being said, I definitely feel Hamlet clears his head a bit by going out to sea but I think he’s more sad and angry at his situation than insane
