I appreciate the use of “should” rather than “does.” “Does” has a definitiveness that does not always accurately reflect what meaning is.
When I teach Shakespeare, students constantly ask, “What does this mean?”
I am not wont to tell them – in part, for pedagogical reasons, in part, because there are often multiple meanings to be found once one goes looking for meaning. Maybe even more than “should,” I might go with “could.” There’s enough space in “could” for multiple meanings.
Claudius
Hamlet
Hamlet doesn’t bother with a sign off. He doesn’t say “Yours truly” or “Sincerely” or “Til tomorrow” or “thine as thou usest him” or “Thine evermore, most dear lady, whilst this machine is to him” as he wrote to Ophelia or “He that thou knowest thine” as he wrote to Horatio. He’s just like, “Hamlet.” Not “Prince of Denmark” or “your nephew” or even “That guy you tried to have killed but failed to.”
When I shall, first asking your Pardon thereunto, recount the occasion of my sudden And more strange return.
I wonder what story Hamlet is planning on telling Claudius. Is it the pirate story? Or will he start with what he found in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s orders? Or will he start with, “So I know you killed my father…?”
In the end, he doesn’t really have time to recount all this stuff because their first re-encounter is over Ophelia’s dead body but I’m very curious about what Hamlet’s strategy would have been.
To-morrow shall I beg leave to see Your kingly eyes.
There’s a director I’ve worked with, who cannot stand sarcasm on stage.
If I ever made a sarcastic choice, it was instantly rejected. I get it. But…this line right here, is just bedecked in sarcasm. Of course it can’t be played that way because it’s Claudius, it’s not Hamlet. But Hamlet is surely being a total smart ass when he talks about Claudius’ kingly eyes and surely Claudius knows it, too.
It’s the kind of thing that won’t get you convicted of king-bashing but will make your feelings clear.
Also – smart-ass Hamlet is my favorite Hamlet.
You shall know I am set naked on your kingdom.
While it is super much fun to imagine a Hamlet running around the kingdom in his birthday suit, it’s likely that the nakedness is more a reflection of vulnerability than actual nudity.
An actual nude Hamlet would suggest the antic Hamlet, the Hamlet who is still playing the crazy card – but a metaphorically naked Hamlet is likely without his usual princely protections.
I suspect that this also suggests that he is alone and therefore without any of Claudius’ spies. If the ruse is that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were protecting him on his trip to England, to be returned naked is to suggest that he’s returned without anyone controlling him or reporting on him.
Nakedness can also suggest a brand new start – a rebirth – a beginning again.
High and Mighty
We use this phrase now, in exactly this word order. Is this line why? Is the natural connection of High and Mighty, only natural due to this play? Or were people calling each other High and Mighty before? Is this Hamlet being a little bit of a smart-ass even in addressing his letter?
Scholars: Weigh in!
Leave us.
This is probably a great relief to the messenger. After all the obfuscation of the message’s provenance, I expect there is some sense of danger in delivering it and to be dismissed means a bullet has been dodged. The messenger has avoided being killed.
I think I always thought that “Don’t kill the messenger” was a kind of joke – but it was surely one of the most serious liabilities of being a messenger. An angry recipient might easily take the bad news out on the person who brought it. Being told to leave a volatile message situation is likely a bit like surviving a car wreck.
Laertes, you shall hear them.
I return to my questions about these letters. We clearly have two letters here. One for Claudius and one for Gertrude. But both have been given to Claudius. Given his telling Laertes that he shall hear them, it suggests that Claudius is planning on reading both of these letters. The one for him, of course, but perhaps also the one for the Queen. He doesn’t end up doing that – he just reads his own letter. It tells him enough I suppose. But I wonder what that letter to Gertrude says. I expect that Hamlet fully expects Claudius to read that too or he would have delivered it via a more private channel.
Who brought them?
I suppose this question is why there are so many layers of distance between messengers. I imagine that if you are a professional messenger it is probably a good move insurance-wise to put some space between yourself and the original message. If the news is bad, the emotions will be hot and the closer you are to the source, the more dangerous a position you are in.
I imagine that messengers pass on messages this way as a matter of course –a kind of hot potato-ing of a message. Just for safety.
From Hamlet!
Most editors try to be sparing in their use of exclamation marks. I’m not sure what the quarto or the folio look like exclamation point wise but I know modern editors try not to get too crazy with the !!! The hope is that the words are dramatic enough.
It’s not entirely justified to put one everywhere. This one, this one is entirely appropriate if you want to suggest Claudius’ sense of surprise. The punctuation gives a sense of the astonishment that Claudius must be feeling. But while Claudius may be feeling astonishment, it’s not a forgone conclusion that he lets that astonishment slip. He is a guarded political fellow who (with the exception of watching plays) mostly keeps his cool.
He could probably get away with: From Hamlet.
Or even a disinterested.
From Hamlet?
The news is surprising to Claudius. Everyone in the audience likely has a sense of that. We might not need to see him astonished to know that he is so. It might actually be very interesting to watch him suppress his astonishment.
The Hamlet Project 