The Hamlet Project

Judges, he says. Judges plural. When judgment is called for – Osric delivers it but is he the judges? He is only one, not particularly judiciary, man. Is he rather the voice for the actual judges of this contest? Do the actual judges confer and decide the points? Deliver their verdicts like Olympic judges with cards or hand signals or gestures of some kind?

And what exactly is Claudius getting at in telling the judges to bear a wary eye? Is it because he’s about to pull some dirty tricks and the way to misdirect from your own dirty tricks is to tell people to be on the look out for some other people’s.

But what’s weird about suggesting the judges bear a wary eye is that he may be suggesting they keep an eye on Hamlet, whom he has just bet on and talked up. Laertes IS in fact about to do some dirty deeds – so telling the judges to watch HIM is selling his own conspirator down the river. Which, of course, he WOULD do – but maybe not before his conspirator put a sword in the guy he wants dead.

It is a weird thing to say before beginning this duel.

Of all the powers a monarch has, the ability to make people start things must be one of the greatest. A king can get this party started, okay.

A king can stop all this yammering and kick off the lecture.

A king can cut the preamble short and have them cut to the chase.

A king can start the fight, the game, the show.

Claudius is composing a little piece of music in this text.

Kettle drum begins.

Then the trumpet answers and continues.

From a distance, cannons answer the trumpet’s call.

This is all a pretty specific cue for a sound designer. I wonder how many follow the instruction.

First he wants the wine on the table. Now he wants to be given it.

Is this so he has a prop to refer to as he gives a speech about the pearl?  (Union. Onion.)

So first he needs them close but then he needs them delivered to his hands.

Is one of the pleasures of being a king ordering people to do tiny things that you definitely could have done yourself?

It’s that and/or an extra bit of ceremony. He’s certainly adding several layers of ceremony with those cannons and such. Perhaps there’s also something in how the cups are delivered to his hands – some kind of ritual or blessing or gesture.

The only reason I knew a union was a pearl was that every Claudius ever holds up a pearl at this point to demonstrate. But I just looked it up because I was wondering if union was somehow a metaphorical pearl or jewel. What I learned was that union is connected to onion. Its sense as a pearl is connected to its onion-ness. Etymology on-line defines it as a pearl or onion. As if the two were essentially the same. And now I’m very confused – because we do, in fact, have pearl onions – which are usually the ones that go into cocktails. There is circularity to this. Here is Claudius calling a pearl a union, which for a time was the same word as an onion. He puts it in a drink, like it’s a cocktail onion, not a precious jewel. I mean, who wants a pearl in their drink? Seems dangerously easy to swallow.

An onion though – adds flavor. Is Claudius putting an onion in the drink? No. It’s definitely a little ball of poison – either disguised as a pearl or glazed in the killer stuff. But wow. Union. Onion. It’s so obvious when you look at it – but before? I’d not have seen these words as connected in any way.

To drink to Hamlet’s better breath is to drink to something slightly ambigious. On one hand, it could suggest that Hamlet’s breath, his power, his life, his vigor is better than Laertes! However, it could also suggest that Hamlet’s breath needs to be better, that it could use improvement, that it needs support.

And underlying all of it is the knowledge that Claudius wants to STOP Hamlet’s breath, to end his life.

Is there breath in the after life? Do angel’s have breath? If so, it is probably better than earthly breath – so drinking to better breath might be drinking to a kind of a heavenly one.

These are some complicated rules. Hamlet’s gotta get a hit in quickly in order to score, sure, that makes sense. And if he does, Claudius is going to celebrate big time. I mean – cannons? That’s a rather big reaction to a small tap with a sword. The quitting in answer of the third exchange is a little harder to make sense of. So basically – if Hamlet doesn’t get the first or second point, he can make up for it in the third round.

But what I’m not entirely clear on is HOW he does that in round three.
Part of the problem is that it’s not entirely clear what the word “quit” is doing here. It’s definitely not being used the way we use it today. Claudius is not going to sound the cannons if Hamlet gives up in round three.

Quit here is likely much more connected to acquit – and most likely to the idea of acquitting oneself.

So, practically, if he’s caught up to Laertes by round three, the king will still sound the cannons.

Claudius really wants to shoot off those cannons. And by shooting off the cannons, I mean he wants to put that poison pearl in Hamlet’s wine and kill him. So…the game is rigged so that Hamlet will have to win it in some way or another so he can get killed.

But really – aren’t the cannons on the battlements a little bit extra, as the kids would say?