Death and Revenge: how closely does one resemble the other?

Death is a key concept in revenge, and the two can sometimes seem inextricably connected.
It is difficult to decipher the answer to this question because death is a common theme
amongst revenge tragedy. In order to sort through this, it is important to discover the
purpose of revenge, the possible outcomes, and the desires of the revenger. There are many
texts which cover this topic, and delving between a few provides a sense of the universal
revenge and the personal. We shall see that whilst death is a common result, it is not always
the true purpose or satisfaction, but instead comes into the equation punishment and
retribution, plot structure, honor or moral justice and character-type. In the interrogation of
the texts there arise interesting questions about whether revenge can exist at all without
knowledge of it, and as to the importance of the result or the journey of revenge
First let us look at death as the only form of revenge.

In Memento, Leonard Shelby appears solely focused on trying to “find …and kill”1 the man
who “raped and murdered [his] wife”. He has devoted his body, his mind, his entire life to
this purpose. However he claims he is “not a killer”. The truth of this is seen at the end of
the film, as he holds a gun to Teddy’s head, but cannot kill him. When he does, it is because
Teddy’s role has changed: he has become the object of revenge. For Shelby, revenge is the
only justification for killing, and thus death for him is revenge.

There are many revengers apparently in the same predicament. In Oldboy, Oh Dae-su wants
to rip his captor’s “body limb from limb”2. In Kill Bill, death is the only revenge the Bride ever
contemplates. Hicks says about Hamlet that it “deals so centrally with death”3, implying that
this is the key component to Hamlet’s revenge and everything in the play revolves around
this. The use of a skull in both Hamlet and The Revenger’s Tragedy shows the past being
avenged, but also the future desire of the revenger for the skull of their injurer, supplied
only in death, where "blood may wash away all treason"4. Hamlet contemplates the “purging
of [Claudius’] soul”5 but ultimately shows no desire for “salvation”, only to send the King to
Hell. All of these revengers appear linked by their mutual desire. In their grief, their first
instinct, the one remaining emotional outlet, is to take life. So it appears that death is the
ultimate revenge.

However, whilst death often seems to be a desired result, it cannot be assumed that this is
the object of the revenge, nor that it is the only desire. In these examples the original sin is
known or thought to be murder: in Hamlet, of his father; in The Revenger’s Tragedy and
Memento, their wives; in Kill Bill, her baby. The most basal desire of revenge is to take back
what was taken, like for like, and thus the revengers in these texts seek the death not as the
only revenge, but as their only equivalent revenge. In Oldboy, Oh Dae-su was not directly
responsible for Soo-ah’s death. This is considered by Woo-jin, and his vengeance for
"talk[ing] too much”6 never requires death. Instead the punishment is living with the
knowledge of his incest, as did the tortured Soo-ah. Dae-su in some ways seems to
sympathize with Woo-jin, for he calls himself a “beast” sees that he has done “too much
wrongdoing”. In this sense Woo-jin as taught him a lesson in the error of his ways and,
although disturbed, uses a justifiably equivalent revenge. Thus death is not imperative to
revenge, for it need only be equivalent.

1
Memento (tattooed across Leonard’s torso)
2
Oldboy
3
Greg Hicks, ‘The Ghost, the Player, and the Grave Digger’, in Michael Dobson, ed., Performing Shakespeare’s
Tragedies Today: The Actors Perspective, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), p17
4
(Tourneur - attributed here to) Thomas Middleton, The.... p136 5.3:137
5
Hamlet, p695, 3.3:84
6
Oldboy

4
 Death is also used as a vessel for punishment. The Revenger’s Tragedy – using the Duke's
own adulterous lust to deliver the poison, and then revealing the Duchess’ incestuous affair
– resonates far deeper than killing alone. Firstly, it offers the Duke redemption if only he
could amend his corrupted ways and overcome his lust. Secondly, whilst the poison destroys
his body, exacting eye-for-an-eye justice for Vindice’s “poisoned love”7, the forced exhibition
is to “tortur[e] his soul”8 and “make [his] spirit grievous sore”9, a punishment beyond death
in retaliation for the ruined existence of Vindice himself. Furthermore, it is says: “whoe’er
knew, murder unpaid”10 and Gloriana’s skull is then used for the revenge, making it personal
vendetta of them both. Hamlet also partakes in this, when he considers killing the King
whilst he prays, but decides that to only kill him would not make him “revenged”11. Instead
he wishes to send Claudius to be “as damn’d and black as hell”. Justice and recompense,
exacted in equal terms to the original sins, are the true purposes of this revenge, whilst
death is merely a result.

Honorable punishment seems to play a large part in Vindice’s revenge. Smith describes “the
play‘s depiction of moral corruption… against which Vindice tries to assert himself”12. His
actions after killing the Duke corroborate this assertion, purging the court of its corrupt
Dukes. When he asks “why does heaven not turn black, or with a frown undo the world”13,
he shows a belief that he is doing what is “deeply moral”14. Similarly Leonard says “I’m just
someone who wanted to make things right”15. These revengers are not out for ‘death and
glory’; there is something far greater which resides beneath their determination

Despite Shelby’s notion that he can only kill for revenge, his conscious choice to make
Teddy “my John G”16, knowing his innocence, is an indirect assertion that he is a killer.
Coupled with his past as a ruthless claims-investigator, the picture of a wronged man
suffering from grief and a condition dissolves.In Oldboy, when Woo-jin unveils his plan, the
incestuous act of revenge has already occurred. However its significance and purpose is
unknown until the film reaches its climax in the revelation scene. This implies that revenge
is worthless until the knowledge of what has happened and why is imparted, and Oh Dae-
su’s attempt to erase it from memory confirms his belief that he and Mi-do could have
continued their relationship in ignorance. The ambiguous ending leaves it open to viewers
whether he did remember, and questions does it matter? It seems that it does in Memento,
where Shelby cannot remember he has killed at least three ‘John-Gs’. This suggests the
memory of revenge is more important than the death itself, as the latter for Shelby is
repeatable, yet the memory would perhaps offer him some solace. On the other hand he
chooses not to remember, and to kill the one person who knows the truth.

This is indicative of Leonard’s character, and it is important to understand the type of person
who exacts revenge and would kill someone. Vindice displays avidity and relish for revenge
which, calling it the “violence of my joy”17. This suggests that perhaps he has is sadistic,
looks to take life, whether in revenge or not. Smith corroborates this, writing that the play
7
Middleton, p45
8
Middleton, p93
9
Middleton, p98 3.5:173-4
10
Middleton, p46
11
Hamlet, p695, 3.3:84
12
Smith, 12:11
13
Middleton, p74, 2.1:254-6
14
Gâmini Salgâdo, ‘Introduction’, Three Jacobean Tragedies,
15
Memento
16
Memento
17
Middleton, p93

4
 includes “Tarrantino-type attention to the perverse pleasure of violence”18. Certainly this is
how he is seen by Antonio who says “you that would murder him would murder me”19. So it
seems unfair to connect all revenge to death because a killer who seeks revenge kills his
victims.

Aldus says “the very essence of great tragedy is that it seeks to spy out and show
something destructive and terrifying which in any final sense cannot be grasped or said
rationally, something which can be represented only”20. In representing revenge, The
Revenger’s Tragedy uses death as a hyperbole of revenge. Written with the “sensibility…of
‘Camp’”21, it contains elements usually attributed to comedy, disguised as tragedy. For
example, the mistaken identity of Junior for Lussurioso (“a trick wrought by my brothers”22),
the dissemblance of Vindice as Piato, and describing to a condemned man Gloriana’s
disguised skull as having “a grave look”23. Sontag comments that “the essence of camp is its
love of the unnatural: of artifice and exaggeration”, and further inquiry illuminates these
areas which “cannot be taken altogether seriously because [they are] ‘too much’”24. We see
gaps appear in the flesh of Vindice: firstly he has no occupation beyond revenge; secondly
his name resembles his mission (“Vindice…a Revenger”25). Has he been on this path since
birth? When he finally removes his disguise to the Duke and says “’tis I, ‘tis Vindice, ‘tis I!”26,
he also reveals himself to the audience and it becomes clear: hidden under the guise of a
man is Vindice: the Vengeful Vindicator. More than a man, he is a device – whether of the
gods, the story, or the stage – an encapsulation, of all vengeance and all revengers. By this
token he extenuates the excessive bloodshed and unrelenting vengeance as the hyperbole
of a “walking abstraction”27, of the accumulated vengeance throughout the Dukedom. When
we consider the play in these terms, we see Middleton embellishes revenge for dramatic
effect, bleeding the bad to make “the tragedy good”28, to please the audience. The death of
the “nest of Dukes”29 is thus without the theatre, unnecessary for revenge.

Revenge is proved more than a culmination in death because of its fundamental purpose in
life. When we look at Hamlet and Woo-jin they both meet death after exacting their revenge.
It is uncertain whether Hamlet, after he contemplates “to be or not to be”30, then chooses to
accept Laertes “challenge to what he must know was a duel”31 for revenge, indirectly killing
himself, or stumbles blindly upon it, but Woo-jin definitively commits suicide in quite the
opposite display of gore. He asks: “now, what will I live for”32? It seems that whilst death is
not the only possible revenge, for the revenger, whose life it swallows, perhaps death is the
only way to stop enacting the revenge cycle.

18
E Smith, ‘The Revenger's Tragedy: Thomas Middleton’, Not Shakespeare: Elizabethan and Jacobean Popular
Theatre, (Oxford University, 2009) [online lecture series accessed via iTunes U]
19
Middleton, p136, 5.3:113
20
P.J. Aldus, Mousetrap: Structure and meaning in Hamlet, (Toronto: 1908), p83
21
Susan Sontag: Notes on ‘Camp’ < http://interglacial.com/~sburke/pub/prose/Susan_Sontag_-
_Notes_on_Camp.html >
22
Middleton, p91, 3.4:39
23
Middleton, p97, 3.5:137
24
Sontag, Notes on ‘Camp’
25
Middleton, p114, 4.2:175-6
26
Middleton, p98, 3.5:167
27
Smith, 21:14
28
Middleton, p99, 3.5:200
29
Middleton, p67, 2.1:48
30
Wiliam Shakespeare, ‘Hamlet’, The Complete Works of William Shakespeare, (Oxford: Wordsworth, 1966), p688
3.1:56
31
Ernest Jones, Hamlet and Oedipus, (Anchor: 1954), p37
32
Oldboy

4
 Where the revengers have suffered loss, this cycle could be seen as the manifestation of
grief. In Oldboy, when Woo-jin sees himself holding onto his sister at the end and she says
“just let go of me”, this is symbolic of him holding onto his grief and revenge. It feels like his
entire revenge plot has built up to this moment and it has all been so he might finally be
able to let her death pass. In The Revenger’s Tragedy, he also holds on to his wife, talking to
her skull, describing it with a face (“a cheek keeps her colour”33), and treating “her” as if it
were still alive. Shelby displays grief also, as he complains he “can’t feel time” and so “how
can [he] heal”34? When he burns her possessions he is trying to burn his grief, but he “can’t
remember to forget [her]”. Revengers do not only use their vendetta for death but to bury
grief and to remember those lost, centering what little life they have, around them; and thus
begins the vengeance-cycle. If we look at it from another angle, had the Duke survived he
would still have been as adulterous, lustful and corrupt for those are his basal
characteristics. In Middleton’s play it is Vindice who survives and his basal characteristic –
condensed by nine years of grief-denial into pure vengeance – is sustained. He fails to
acknowledge or celebrate the completion of nine years brooding hate, and instead resolves:
“as fast as they peep up, let’s cut [the Dukes] down”, his symbolic transition into Revenge
itself is complete, for now continues to take the vengeance against the corrupt Dukedom.
Vindice only exists in revenge, like Shelby whose inability to make new memories also traps
his emotions and mind in a repetitive moment, and the only way to escape it is to use his
knowledge of the moment to drive his present forward. Antonio is right in arresting Vindice
for he sees that his vengeance has consumed his life until it is all that is left and must be
perpetuated in order to perpetuate himself.

Vindice says “nine years’ vengeance crowd into a minute”35. His wording here is paramount
for it must be noted that he does not say ‘nine years awaiting vengeance’ suggesting he is
constantly enwrapped in it. The structure of the play argues this further to say the Duke's
death does not end the cycle of Vindice’s revenge, for it floats outside the climatic finish
causing the audience to focus away from the death.
Whilst Shakespeare uses a more commonplace structure, it has a similar effect. When we
look to the ending, the series of deaths starting with the Queen and ending with Hamlet,
quickly succeed one and other, not only detracting from the gravity of each, but giving a
sense that Shakespeare crammed them into this final scene in a hurry to clear the stage.
This device, common in Shakespeare's plays, alerts us to the fact that it is not this scene
which is important; instead it is how we arrived here which matters. Wilson is quoted saying
“the play scene is the central point of Hamlet…the climax and crisis”36. In light of this,
Hamlet’s revenge becomes less erratic and less about death, for its focal point is the
rationality of his own personal ‘trial’ of Claudius, given over to considerably more pages than
the four major deaths which all occur palimpsestically on the final page; in short, the
decision or contemplation to kill is given more significance than the final death. So death is
not the only revenge, for the path to revenge is more important and could exist without the
culmination in a violent end.

This draws parallel with Leonard – meaning lion, a “betoken [of] courage” and “valian[ce]”37
– for he is also trapped in an eternal revenge cycle, a perpetual motion which cannot be
attributed solely to his “condition”38. When Shelby learns the truth about himself, he asks:
“do I lie to myself to be happy”39. In this question, he is contemplating whether to continue
on the path of revenge or remember it is already completed, disclosing both his true
purpose of seeking happiness over death, and his acknowledgement of deriving this
33
Middleton, p94 3.5:60
34
Memento
35
Middleton, p96
36
J.D.Wilson, qtd. in P.J. Aldus, Mousetrap: Structure and meaning in Hamlet, (Toronto: 1908), p148
37
Middleton, p114, 4.2:177
38
Memento
39
Memento 1:43:56

4
 satisfaction from the journey to, not the completion of revenge. Expanding on this idea, in
that the main death occurs at the beginning of the film. Once again we feel it unimportant to
the revenge, and so look elsewhere for Shelby’s purpose. It becomes clear that, as the film
traces backwards, it is foregrounding the significant aspect of his revenge: once again the
journey. Leonard’s decision to perpetuate his revenge shows that nothing will satisfy it, not
even the death of two John G’s prior. He realizes that the “habit and routine [which] make
[his] life possible”40 are the thirst and search for vengeance, a cathartic vendetta in which he
can hide from the truth. Leonard has become like Vindice: they both now live only through
revenge and seeks to perpetuate the act to perpetuate themselves. So for them, death is a
mere by-product of revenge. It has become meaningless to their quest for now the true
worth of vengeance comes from the path traversed to reach it.

IGNORE
We can see that perhaps death is actually the worst type of revenge: the suffering is
relatively short-lived, as is the victim’s knowledge that they have been revenged against.
There is a great play between the known and the unknown in all the texts. Dae-su questions:
“If they had told me then that it would be fifteen years, would it have been easier to
endure”41? The Bride says “I want him to know what I know… I want them all to know…
they’ll all soon be dead.”
The path of revenge is far more fulfilling for the revenger, becoming for Vindice and Shelby a
way of life which can even continue after the object of vengeance is killed. To live with the
result of vengeance far worse for victims like Oh Dae-su,
Death is not the only revenge, but there is a link which ties all of our revengers together.
does revenge exists at all? Revenge is just grief – which cannot be quelled by killing
In Memento, vengeance is insatiable

40
Memento
41
Oldboy

4
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

ALDUS, P.J. Mousetrap: Structure and Meaning in Hamlet. Toronto: 1908.

JONES, Ernest. Hamlet and Oedipus. Anchor, 1954.

Kill Bill. Quentin Tarrantino. 2003

Memento. Christopher Nolan dir. 2000.

Oldboy. Chan-wook Park dir. 2003.

SHAKESPEARE, William. ‘Hamlet’, The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. Oxford:

Wordsworth, 1966.

SMITH, Emma. ‘The Revenger's Tragedy: Thomas Middleton’. Not Shakespeare: Elizabethan and
Jacobean Popular Theatre. Oxford University: 2009. [online lecture series accessed via
iTunes U]

SONTAG, Susan. Notes on ‘Camp’. < http://interglacial.com/~sburke/pub/prose/Susan_Sontag_-

_Notes_on_Camp.html >

TOURNEUR, Cyril. att. MIDDLETON, Thomas. ‘The Revenger’s Tragedy’, ed. Gâmini Salgâdo. Three
Jacobean Tragedies. Penguin: 1977.