Bryant 1

Dakota Bryant

Jeff Hendry

PA Seminar

3 December 2013

To Be, or Not To Be Any Questions?

(An Examination of the Multiple Realms of Interpretation of Shakespeares Hamlet)

To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the

slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by

opposing end them? To die: to sleep; No more; and by a sleep to say we end To die, to

sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream The Tragedy of Hamlet William Shakespeare

The Tragedy of Prince Hamlet is single handedly William Shakespeares longest play

and possibly the most performed play done by the Bard of Avon. With a plot that twists and

turns leaving the audience with a stage full of dead royals and a heart full of sorrows, Hamlet

has been enamoring its viewers since its conception in the 1600s and even today with the

recent Royal Shakespeare Companys production of Hamlet (a show that has graced the

RSCs stage since 1879) starring Patrick Stewart and David Tennant. It is true that our play

has been transformed and re-imagined over the years, there is even a Quarto version of the

play that suggests a pirate theme: (Pictured Below)

 Bryant 2

But is the story still Hamlet? Or is it an obstruction and abstraction of the words of the Sweet

Swan of Avon. It is going to be my goal throughout this paper to examine and uncover the

true elements of what make Shakespeares Hamlet the staple it is in the playwrights work. By

analyzing the text, the John Gielgud and Richard Burton production, the RSCs Recent Film,

and Disneys The Lion King. Through this work I hope to find what it takes To Be, or Not

To Be Hamlet.

First off I would like to start by discussing the elements (text, stage, film, and

animated feature) separately. By starting with the text we can begin to dive into the true

nature of the beast of Denmark. Shakespeare was not the first to write about a grief stricken

Dane that would seek to avenge his fathers ghost and slay everyone in-between. The tale

actually gets its origins from the Scandinavian myth of Amleth. The account that follows

was written about 1185 but is based on older oral tradition. It describes the same players and

events that were immortalized by William Shakespeare in his The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince

of Denmark, written about 1600 says D. L Ashliman from the University of Pittsburg. The
 Bryant 3

story of Amleth parallels the Shakespeare Hamlet quiet a lot. For there is an unhappy Dane

(Amleth) who is visited by his dead King and Father (Horwendil) who says that his uncle

(Feng) has usurped the throne and taken Horwendil wife / Amleths mother (Gurutha) as a

prize. Along the way a fair unnamed maiden drowns herself for Amleths love and an

unnamed eavesdropper who is stabbed in Guruthas chamber by Amleth. The story then

changes from our Elizabethan tragedy because Amleth survives the attack and has more

adventures including a trip to England and his own Trials of Hercules (Ashliman).

Basically, this story is not a pure stroke of genius by our Bard but has its place among the

oral traditions and legends that crept through England during its foundation. Shakespeare

merely took the story and manipulated it to get his philosophical views out. Other theorists

have speculated a variety of reasonings and hidden motifs in the text from a dedication to

Shakespeares dead son Hamnet to the rise of the Scottish Succession of Elizabeth the Firsts

throne by King James the First. To truly understand Hamlet we must examine the basics of

the story and plot. Hamlet (much like Amleth) is a young Danish Prince whose father, King

Hamlet, has recently died and his Uncle Claudius has taken the throne and Gertrude

(Hamlets Mother and Former Queen to King Hamlet). The play revolves around the young

Dane taking a vow to avenge his father and the manipulation of the various royal and noble

bodies (on both sides aka by Hamlet and Claudius) to destroy the other party. Hamlet fakes

the element of madness to help keep him safe from being found out or destroyed by his

Uncle but the play employs the soliloquy in a way that is special to the show.
 Bryant 4

Hamlet (based on Quarto 2) has in a sense seven soliloquies, all which range from

philosophical views to plot filled twists. In Fact, It is within these soliloquies that we as the

audience are allowed to view the inner workings and mentality of Hamlet and the truly

inspirational and destructive nature of the human mind. Some of the soliloquies, in fact, hold

some of the most quoted lines of Shakespeare: O, that this too too sullied flesh would melt,

thaw, and resolve itself into a Dew (Act 1, Scene 2), O villain, villain, smiling, damned

villain (Act 1, Scene 5), O, what a rogue and peasant slave am I (Act 2, Scene 2), To Be,

or Not To Be (Act 3, Scene 1), O heart, lose not thy nature Let me be cruel but not

unnatural (Act 3, Scene 2), And so am I revenged (Act 3, Scene 3), and How all

occasions do inform against me (Act 4, Scene 4). Some experts say that it is within these

soliloquies that we see Hamlets true madness and it is within these sequences the audience

actually can attach itself with a certain character. This style is similar to the soliloquy style of

Richard in Richard the III also by William Shakespeare. Shakespeare utilizes the soliloquy as

a means of communicating with the audience directly, an early breaking of the fourth wall if

you will, by doing so the audience can be manipulated to side with Hamlet and develop an

emotional connection with the character as he spills his thoughts, plans, and philosophies to

them. To me this style is where the true harnessing of the plays power must be made

apparent. It is within these sections that Hamlet must convince us that he is right and not

truly crazy but intellectually deceiving those around him to keep himself safe (since he is

now plotting against the current king). The stance and importance of the soliloquies are the
 Bryant 5

essence of Hamlets brilliance and it will be within these sequences we will discover what

makes Hamlet. Hamlet.

Madness in great ones must not unwatched go.

William Shakespeare, Hamlet

Starting now with the productions of Hamlet, I am comparing three different styles of

production. I will examine the interpretations of Richard Burtons Hamlet, David Tennants

Hamlet, and Simba as Hamlet. The goal is to see what interpretations can shift and still make

the text and vehicle successful without changing the essence of the piece. I would like to take

the Hamlet productions first starting with Richard Burtons Hamlet which is in reference to

the 1964 Broadway production that took place at the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre. The production

was sparked (supposedly) by a lighthearted challenge among Richard Burton and Peter

OToole while filming Becket. The challenge was to mount a successful production of

Hamlet with a coin toss determining the odds. OToole won and launched a production in

London with Laurence Olivier as Director and Burton was given John Gielgud and New

York. The National Theatre production or OToole Hamlet opened October 22, 1963 at the

Old Vic. The set featured a weighty design and a massive immovable staircase. The

production received conflicting views with many more leaning towards the idea that OToole

was miscast, also there was dissention among the ranks as Derek Jacobi (Laertes) became

frightful of the final fight with OTooles Dane because OToole had taken to drinking

before and during shows. But in New York a different set of ideas were brewing, Burton

(with the guidance and help of Alexander Cohen and John Gielgud) launched a production
 Bryant 6

without period clothing (due to his our disgust with the style) instead the production took on

a more abstracted theme Rehearsal. Gielgud envisioned the production in the rehearsal like

visual with actors in street clothes and the sets incomplete. The set had a sense of blankness

as if the players were simply stuck in a state of purgatory. To be constantly preparing for

something that never truly happens. Burton was of course dressed in all black while other

characters seemingly look as though they have walked in off the streets. A very specific

stylized choice that Gielgud made was in the decision of the Ghost being a projected shadow

on the back wall with a voice over (provided by Gielgud). The Hamlet that Burton gives us is

one of a robust pathos injected Danish prince bursting at the seams with flippancy, anger,

suspicion, and isolation. Burton seems to rely on the physical and verbal pulses and cues

given by the other actor and in a sense seems to slip into the realm of Hamlet. In honesty, I

found the acting to be very standard, nothing truly outstanding was given from the ensemble

but with a lead like Richard Burton who can expect to look as good (I would like to say that

Hume Cronyn was wonderful as Polonius and his hilarity and spontaneity in confusion

allowed of an interesting spin of the seemingly senile advisor to the King).

What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! How infinite in

faculties! In form and moving, how express and admirable! In action how like an

angel! In apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world! The paragon of

animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? William Shakespeare,

Hamlet

Moving now to the Royal Shakespeare Companys film Hamlet starring David

Tennant as Hamlet and Sir Patrick Stewart as Claudius and the Ghost of King Hamlet.
 Bryant 7

Needless to say this is a modern adaptation of the play (not quite as off quilter as the Gielgud

Dress Rehearsal setting) set in what is seemingly a dark and dreary royal palace in a

cutting edge style (not quite as cutting edge as the Ethan Hawke Hamlet where in the

duration of the show we are in a glass business office with lots of windows and security

cameras but more on that later). This production swaps the dated royalty look and musters up

some divine yet simple costumes. Elsinore castle seems to have this scrubbed feel as the

obsidian-like floor gives a reflective and introspective character to the actors. The film leans

towards a more realistic (though highly comic on Tennants part) portrayal of the madness of

Prince Hamlet. Tennant lends himself to the language so easily that we simply follow along

as if he were speaking regular modern speech and Stewart as Claudius and the Ghost serves

as a dastardly villain and reverent yet menacing ghost (which is interesting that he played

both roles. It tends to give the text an eerie feeling). Royal Shakespeare Company Director

Gregory Doran wanted the theme of observation to be relevant within the production and the

design team returned with the black glossy floors, tall full-length mirrors, and heavy

illuminated chandeliers. This theme has continued in the film version as the floors,

chandeliers, and mirrors make reappearance plus the utilization of security cameras and

filming of the players scene by Hamlet himself. Tennant makes sure not to appear only as

frivolous; BBC Doctor Who actor also finds the crucial pain and pathos that we as the

audience crave to see. At one point we find Tennant performing the too too sullied flesh
 Bryant 8

soliloquy and is almost in a state of convulsions on the glossy floor surrounded by mirrors to

give us the all-encompassing torment of Hamlet.

Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all William Shakespeare, Hamlet

The final film I want to examine is the Walt Disney film The Lion King, which is a

loosely adapted version of various biblical stories (mainly of Joseph and Noah) but also of

William Shakespeares Hamlet. What we do know is there are specific parallels and

characters that could be references to Shakespeare original thoughts behind the characters for

example: Simba is Hamlet, Scar is Claudius, Gertrude is seen as Sarabi, Nala as Ophelia, and

Mufasa as the ghost of King Hamlet. Also some of the characters seem to split character

traits so that they dont embody the characters wholly. The best example I can think of is

Timon and Pumba, critics seem to believe that the light-hearted duo are representations of

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern but seem to forget that in the text Rosencrantz and

Guildenstern were sent for by the King to investigate and later kill Prince Hamlet but seeing

as the meerkat and warthog were supposed to be the likeable best friends of our bereft lion

prince we see the evil side of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern represented by the three hyenas

that start off as Scars lackeys. Another example would be the Polonius character represented

by Zazuu (as lord Chamberlin to both Mufasa and Scar) and Rafiki (who seems to be the

wise fool who steers Simba to reclaiming Pride Rock). Another interesting parallel is the

relationship and friendship of Nala and Simba twining in a bit of the Horatio character to
 Bryant 9

Ophelia to provide our Hamlet figure with a love interest and best friend. Being a Disney

feature film some major editing had to be done to avoid the over looming tragic story-line:

E. X. Only two figures actually die (Mufasa and Scar) and instead of madness Simba escapes

and tries to forget who he is and what hes convinced hes done. The Lion King has always

been one of my favorite films from the Disney Renaissance or Golden Age of Disney before

Pixar and I think it is because it translates an extant text and reworks it to fit within a style

that is both entertaining and exciting to all ages. The real question begins here, how much of

the story can change before the work is no longer considered the same piece? Well as Ive

watched The Lion King again I notice more and more the parallels of the Shakespearean

tragedy. I mean point blank we have an Uncle who kills the current king and takes over the

kingdom, banishes the son of the late king to protect the truth, where upon the prince returns

to claim what is his and avenge his father. But is this Hamlet? Well considering we also have

a ghost scene that delivers power of revenge or in lighter terms (for Disney) retribution. But

again I ask is this Hamlet? Honestly I believe that it is just a valid to claim Disneys The Lion

King as an adaptation of Hamlet but it lacks the concrete foundation to actually be Hamlet (a

step I do not believe that the director or producers were actually hoping for). But this point

brings up another question to me, what happens if you do the text as written but the idea

behind it causes the production to crumple and the work to look like a joke? A theory that

can readily be seen in Ethan Hawkes Hamlet (which takes place in the metropolitan business

area) which depicts Hamlet as a half-crazed suit who talks to himself or the security
 Bryant 10

cameras. Either it was the delivery or the direction or both that caused this message to be

understood and not scoffed at by the masses but what it does serve is that adaptation and

creativity are better than ill construction and poor direction (or acting).

You come most carefully upon your hour. William Shakespeare, Hamlet

Now the thought behind this next section is to take a few of Hamlets Soliloquies and

compare them in the realms of the films and performances watched beforehand but I have to

disprove some of the performances that I feel were improper representations of Hamlet. I

was given the DVD of Hamlet the Opera by French Composer Amboise Thomas from the

Toulouse Opera House. I will say this it certainly was three hours of depressed Danes singing

in French. I was absolutely appalled they took the sequences out of order and completely

rearranged the soliloquies to fit the operatic dramatic style. I was not amused. Then I found

Rock-a-bye Hamlet, a rock-and-roll style musical where in the text of Shakespeare is cut and

sliced to fit into guitar screeches and musical rockabilly satires to help influence the

message of the play. Again I was not amused. I couldnt find a full recording of the Hamlet

Ballet (and thank god there wasnt a full recording of the travesty of Rock-a-bye Hamlet) so I

have decided to examine the acting / directorial choices of Burtons Hamlet from New York

and Tennants Hamlet from London.

 Bryant 11

My father's spirit in arms! all is not well; I doubt some foul play: would the night

were come! Till then sit still, my soul: foul deeds will rise, Though all the earth

o'erwhelm them, to men's eyes. William Shakespeare, Hamlet

One of the quintessential scenes in the earliest part of the show would be the

infamous ghost scene. In this scene, we have Horatio bringing Hamlet to the wall to see an

apparition of the late King Hamlet. The ghost of the deceased King appears to Hamlet and

leads him off to speak with him. In the exchange we learn of the seedy path of the current

King Claudius: Slaying his own brother and taking his sister-in-law as Queen. The Ghost

demands vengeance and Hamlet swears to it (It is Adieu, adieu! Remember me. I have

sworn t). What proceeds the swear of vengeance is Hamlets second soliloquy. Within the

soliloquy Hamlet becomes filled with hate and anger for his Uncle and Mothers wrong-

doings and it is one of the crowning moments of Hamlets nature and possible madness. In

the 1964 Burton Hamlet, The castle motif is left behind instead we have Hamlet on a

platform center stage between two curtains that have a steel door motif. Projected onto

Burton is the shadow of a figure (the ghost) projected from the chest up. This choice kind of

leaves the interpretation of Hamlets lunacy to become more realistic. Because we as the

audience dont see the ghost in full form (that is to say see the actor physically) we have the

traveling thought that maybe the figure doesnt exist in reality but in the mind of our tragic

hero. As the soliloquy progresses Burton uses a highly animated and physical Hamlet that

seems to harbor more anxiety and brashness than out right anger. This seems to show a more
 Bryant 12

intellectually affected Hamlet who is crushed by the news rather than consumed with anger,

in a sense a more sensitive Hamlet. In the Tennant Hamlet, The ghost is physically show and

with great detail. No computer generated graphics or special effects but an actual person (Sir

Patrick Stewart, in fact). The Ghost of the King is dressed in a fairly modern style militant

armor that also hints at a more medieval style battle armor. The ghost being in person give

the scene a more menacing effect because the threat seems more real and Stewart plays to an

angrier vengeful ghost. Tennant seems to be playing a more senseless Hamlet, upon the

ghosts disappearance Tennants Hamlet comically lets loose of the anxiety that he built up in

the presence of his dead father but when the pieces finally come together at most pernicious

women the cogs have started turning and Tennant turns dark with the soliloquy. He seems

to have hate seething from inside by the way he elongates the consonants and the look in his

eyes as he develops the start to his plan of vengeance. Oddly enough both interpretations

lend themselves as possibilities because of the way that the text is written within the scenes.

Hamlet has been called one of the most interpreted works of Shakespeare to date. Also in

Walt Disneys The Lion King the ghost scene is replicated and placed much later in the

process of the story (but serves the same function). Mufasa appears to Simba in the

Pridelands from the sky, at first Simba doesnt know how to react but eventually is persuaded

by the ghost of his father to seek his true place as king and in a sense avenge his fathers

murder.
 Bryant 13

For in that sleep of death what dreams may come When we have shuffled off this

mortal coil, Must give us pause: there's the respect That makes calamity of so long

life William Shakespeares Hamlet

The next sequence is probably the most reverential soliloquy from Shakespeares

Hamlet, the To Be or Not To Be sequence. I use the word sequence because the soliloquies

of Hamlet serve multiple purposes: to drive the plot, to relate Hamlets thoughts to the

audience, and to find the method in the madness. I have placed the majority of the soliloquy

at the top of page one but essentially the soliloquy is asking why live only to end with

because death could be worse. It is the ultimate debate over legitimate suicide in a world

that one feels there can be no more to life but then ends the idea with conscience does make

cowards of us all (meaning that fear of after death leads to our sensitivities to protecting

life). These scenes are both handled very differently in both versions of our show. In the

Tennant version we have a seemingly subtle angry Hamlet that can press on no further. In a

sense almost longing for death. The director made a specific choice to have a close up on

Tennants face for exact delivery (in fact the entire soliloquy is almost one single frame).

Tennant stares directly into the camera as if to communicate directly to the viewer. This is a

very strong choice as it reminds the viewer that they are a part of the dramatic action and

involves the audience by breaking the fourth wall. In the Burton version we have an anxious

and more rapid Hamlet. It lacks the emotional severity in the beginning that Tennant was

going for. Then Burton makes the choice to sit and talk almost directly to the audience. He
 Bryant 14

makes the soliloquy less of a monologue and more as a talkback. He seems to be trying to

evoke the audience and track them along with the plot of the story. Its as if he is longing for

someone the give him the answer but has to reach it for himself. Though again both actors

have found different ways of expressing the soliloquy they have found specific differences in

the presentation of the lines. The biggest example is the phrasing of the line: For in that

sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give

us Pause (Act III, Scene 1, Lines 67-69). Tennant has a very direct and angry almost

spitting phrasing but Burton allows the words to roll out and the physicalizations that lead to

his sitting are simply brilliant. And famously enough, Simba from The Lion King has a moral

conundrum and soul searching event that parallels the To Be or Not To Be sequence, it is

when his Ophelia / Horatio (Nala) arrives and tries to convince him to become who he is.

Simba then finds his way to Rafiki who turns him to the open savannah where he begins to

question life and who he is then he is visited by his fathers ghost. It isnt exactly the

sequence Shakespeare would have dreamed of but it still has that underlying theme of

questioning life, morality, and who one is.

The final sequence I want to look at is the duel and death of the Hero. Both of the

productions feature a lengthy swordplay but Tennants is more official Lancing tournament

style with masks and a white suite adorned by Laertes. Where as in the Burton version we

have a more informal style of swordplay with more aggression. Then everyone starts dying.

After Laertes slices Hamlet with the poisoned blade and receives a cut in return, Gertrude
 Bryant 15

hits the ground having drunk the poison meant for Hamlet. Then Laertes confesses to the

plot. Then Hamlet seeks his vengence on his Uncle. This is where the productions differ in

the Tennant version Hamlet holds the sword to Claudius throat and makes the tyrant drink

the poison but in the Burton production, Hamlet charges the so to be late king and forcibly

drowns Claudius with the poison in a fervent rage. These two interpretations allow for the

different responses and both valid in the approaches that these two gentlemen had.

Unfortunately there is no real sword fight in Lion King but the Protagonist (Simba) and

Antagonist (Scar) face off to prove who shall reign over Pride Rock a battle that involves a

lot of scratching and biting and eventually ends with our Claudius figure being devoured by

hyenas.

In conclusion it is my philosophy that to be considered an interpretation a dramatic

element whether it be a film, play, musical, opera, or animated film the story must stick true

to the beliefs and ideologies set down by the initial words of the piece. Harvesting from what

is already given will help to create a truer and honest copy of the piece but if we do not allow

for artistic interpretation we are ultimately limiting ourselves to teaching ourselves and

others about great literature and artistic integrity. In fact where would we be had Shakespeare

himself not adapted the stories around him and created the artistic poetry that are his

complete works (we wouldnt have the same Lion King as we have currently). Even if the

interpretation is not one that we favor like Ethan Hawke as Hamlet or the Rock-a-bye Hamlet

that made its brief appearance on Broadway and then was gone faster than the ghost when
 Bryant 16

the cock crew at dawn. Point blank artistic integrity is gained by creating true art and

walking away from something you put all your effort into. From the 1600s to 2013

Shakespeares Hamlet has been every adapting and being made relevant to the time and age

its revived in and maybe that is the key to keystone dramas adaptability.
 Bryant 17

Works Cited

Ashliman, D. L. "Amleth, Prince of Denmark." Amleth, Prince of Denmark. University of

Pittsburg, 19 Feb. 2011. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. <http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/ amleth.html>.

Gardner, Janet E., and William Shakespeare. "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark." 12 Plays: A

Portable Anthology. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2003. 91-212. Print. Edition is Mainly

Based on the 2nd Quarto with intercuttings of the First Folio.

Hamlet (2000). Dir. Michael Almereyda. Perf. Ethan Hawke and Bill Murray. Miramax

Lionsgate, 2000. DVD.

Hamlet (2008). Dir. Gregory Doran. Perf. David Tennant and Patrick Stewart. Royal

Shakespeare Company, 2009. DVD.

The Lion King. Prod. Disney. Dir. Rob Minkoff. Perf. Jeremy Irons, Matthew Broderick, James

Earl Jones. Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment, 1994. DVD.

"Richard Burton's Hamlet (1964) Hot." Richard Burton's Hamlet (1964). N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec.

2013. <http://www.playshakespeare.com/hamlet/244-dvd-reviews/1282-richard -burtons-

hamlet-1964>.

Richard Burton's Hamlet. Dir. John Gielgud. Perf. Richard Burton. Image Entertainment, 1964.

DVD.

RSC. "Hamlet (2008)." Hamlet 2008 Production - Archive. Royal Shakespeare Company, 2013.

Web. 1 Dec. 2013. <http://www.rsc.org.uk/explore/shakespeare/plays/hamlet

/2008.aspx>.