The Marxist Hamlet
In his article "'Funeral Bak'd Meats:' Carnival and the Carnivalesque in Hamlet," Michael D. Bristol mingles Marxism and Bakhtin's notion of double discoursed textuality into an unique reading of Shakespeare's drama as a struggle between opposing economic classes. Bristol opens with a two paragraph preface on Marxism, highlighting Marx's own abnegation of Marxism: "Marx is famous for the paradoxical claim that he was not a Marxist" (Bristol 348). While he acknowledges some of the flaws inherent in Marxist criticism, Bristol uses the introductory paragraphs to assert the "enormous importance" of "the theory of class consciousness and class struggle" which Marxist theory includes (349). Having prepared readers for a discourse whose foundation lies upon "the most fundamental idea in Marxism," Bristol recasts Hamlet as a class struggle.
A strange, mutli-faceted mingling pervades Bristol's argument, and, according to his thesis the drama of Hamlet as well. According to Bristol, two contrasting texts, two opposing social worlds, flow past one another in the drama, forming a strange suspension "of grief and of festive laughter" (350). This odd juxtaposition of opposites becomes the basis for Bristol's introduction of the carnivalesque. The echoes of Carnival within Hamlet, according to Bristol, ceaselessly evolve throughout the play until they reach their most perfect representation in the grave-diggers' scene of the fifth act. Bristol assigns Carnival a function that immensely strengthens his thesis: "Carnival opens up alternative possibilities for action and helps to facilitate creativity in the social sphere" (351). Bristol's discussion of Carnival expands in order to include the theories ...
... middle of paper ...
...istol concludes his article by explaining the ultimate end of the Carnivalesque, "the dissolution, and finally the extinction of identity, the annihilation of the individual in the historical continuum" (365). The bodies of the festival-makers, the court of Hamlet, lie on the stage like "slaughtered 'meat'" (364). Bristol concludes that the second culture, or the second language, of Carnival within the drama of Hamlet, supplies an alternate reading for the drama by "uncrowning the shifting rationales used to explicate political intrigue," by transforming the play into a struggle between social classes as expressed by the carnivalesque (365). The doubleness of Hamlet, the mingling of tragedy and the comic, sheds new light on the drama as an ambivalent and grotesque Carnival which diametrically contrasts the power and propriety typically associated with the play.
In his article "'Funeral Bak'd Meats:' Carnival and the Carnivalesque in Hamlet," Michael D. Bristol compares both Marxism and Bakhtin's notion of “double discoursed textuality” into an exclusive reading of Shakespeare's drama as a struggle between opposing economic classes. Bristol begins his argument immediately discussing Marxism. He begins by shining light on the fact that Marx “claims that he was not a Marxist, and in a sense that is a perfectly accurate description” (pg. 348. Bristol understood that Mar5x theories has several errors simple because he did not have the proper evidence during his time. While he acknowledges some of the flaws inherent in Marxist criticism, Bristol uses the introductory paragraphs to assert the "enormous importance" of "the theory of class consciousness and class struggle" which Marxist theory includes (349). Bristol recasts Hamlet as a class struggle.
Hamlet is a masterpiece not because it conforms to a set of conventions but because it takes those conventions and transmutes them into the pure gold of vital, relevant meaning. Hamlet’s feigned madness, for instance, becomes the touchstone for an illumination of the mysterious nature of sanity itself (44-45).
When looking at the play Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, through a Marxist critical lens, there are many Marxist themes that would apply. In Hamlet there is a big difference between the monarchy and the peasants. Even in Hamlet’s time, the high class is treated in a better way than the low class. The royalty members’ poor decisions are easily overlooked or covered up like with Claudius covering up the murder of his brother. Hamlet is the only character that directly hates the monarchy and goes against it, making him more sympathetic to the lower classes. There are characters within the play that are lower class, but they appear to have some privileges associated with the ruling class, and then there are characters where class makes no difference
In conclusion, Hamlet is undeniably the crown of indulgence into contemporary behaviors and insight into human complexities. Shakespeare’s exquisite use of theme, entertainment and characterization not only develops the intricate plot and body of the play, but also invites the audience into a realm of knowledge and understanding. Ultimately, the pursuit of knowledge is the greatest asset known to humankind. Its infinite possibilities excite the imagination and for that reason, one should value contemporary literary works. But it is important to respect and study the foundation of these pieces, for they base their content off of the classics.
Granville-Barker, Harley. “Place and Time in Hamlet.” Readings on The Tragedies. Ed. Clarice Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1996. Reprint from Prefaces to Shakespeare. vol.1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University P., 1946.
Through Shakespeare’s play, Hamlet, if looked at carefully, one can see many aspects of Marxist thought in the story. When analysing Hamlet through a Marxist critical lens, you need to pay close attention to the interactions between characters in different classes. (add sentence)
Shakespeare’s play Hamlet is a complex and ambiguous public exploration of key human experiences surrounding the aspects of revenge, betrayal and corruption. The Elizabethan play is focused centrally on the ghost’s reoccurring appearance as a symbol of death and disruption to the chain of being in the state of Denmark. The imagery of death and uncertainty has a direct impact on Hamlet’s state of mind as he struggles to search for the truth on his quest for revenge as he switches between his two incompatible values of his Christian codes of honour and humanist beliefs which come into direct conflict. The deterioration of the diseased state is aligned with his detached relationship with all women as a result of Gertrude’s betrayal to King Hamlet which makes Hamlet question his very existence and the need to restore the natural order of kings. Hamlet has endured the test of time as it still identifies with a modern audience through the dramatized issues concerning every human’s critical self and is a representation of their own experience of the bewildering human condition, as Hamlet struggles to pursuit justice as a result of an unwise desire for revenge.
My analysis of Hamlet’s fascination and fear of death has led me to think that William Shakespeare created this play for the people of England. The play was used as a podium that allowed for the concerns of the common English people to be seen and heard. It is not a coincident that Hamlet was written after the Reformation. It is not a coincident that the fears that Hamlet had of death could have been eased with Catholic traditions. Finally it is not a coincident that they all die in the end of the play, because in the end the Catholic traditions died in
In conclusion these two poems by William Blake are both deep and have hidden meanings, they both use imagery, repetition, alliteration and ryming couplets as well as biblical references to create a vivid pictures in the readers head. But these poems do differ in many ways such as the structure, theme and way it is written. The Tyger appeals to me most as it has more hidden meanings than the Lamb and the Lamb is boring and as if written by a child (for effect). In this essay I have analysed, contrasted and compared the two poems The Tyger and The Lamb to the best of my ability detailing the poetic devices used and the underlying meanings.
not see any muscles on her at all. Yet as virtuous as this film is, I
Mack, Maynard. “The World of Hamlet.” Twentieth Century Interpretations of Hamlet. Ed. David Bevington. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968.
Blake is saying to the lamb, I'll tell you who made you, and it is
Poe, Edgar Allen. “The Pit and the Pendulum.” Poe, Edgar Allan. The Pit and the Pendulum. Mankato, Minn.: Creative Education, 1980. Print
Logan, Thad Jenkins. "Twelfth Night: The Limits of Festivity." Elizabethan and Jacobean Drama. N.p.: Rice University, 1982. 223-38. Vol. 22 of Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. Rpt. in Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Print.
Hamlet is one of the most often-performed and studied plays in the English language. The story might have been merely a melodramatic play about murder and revenge, butWilliam Shakespeare imbued his drama with a sensitivity and reflectivity that still fascinates audiences four hundred years after it was first performed. Hamlet is no ordinary young man, raging at the death of his father and the hasty marriage of his mother and his uncle. Hamlet is cursed with an introspective nature; he cannot decide whether to turn his anger outward or in on himself. The audience sees a young man who would be happiest back at his university, contemplating remote philosophical matters of life and death. Instead, Hamlet is forced to engage death on a visceral level, as an unwelcome and unfathomable figure in his life. He cannot ignore thoughts of death, nor can he grieve and get on with his life, as most people do. He is a melancholy man, and he can see only darkness in his future—if, indeed, he is to have a future at all. Throughout the play, and particularly in his two most famous soliloquies, Hamlet struggles with the competing compulsions to avenge his father’s death or to embrace his own. Hamlet is a man caught in a moral dilemma, and his inability to reach a resolution condemns himself and nearly everyone close to him.