Hamlet in art. Hamlet" in Russian literature and on the Russian stage of the twentieth century. Throughout the 19th century. judgments about Hamlet concerned, first of all, elucidation of his own character

Why is the image of Hamlet an eternal image? There are many reasons, and at the same time, each individually or all together, in a harmonious and harmonious unity, they cannot give an exhaustive answer. Why? Because no matter how hard we try, no matter what research we conduct, we are not subject to “this great secret” - the secret of Shakespeare’s genius, the secret of the creative act, when one work, one image becomes eternal, and another disappears, dissolves into oblivion, so and without touching our soul. And yet, the image of Hamlet beckons and haunts...

W. Shakespeare, “Hamlet”: history of creation

Before we set off on an exciting journey deep into Hamlet’s soul, let’s remember the summary and history of writing the great tragedy. The plot of the work is based on real events described by Saxo Grammaticus in the book “The History of the Danes.” A certain Horvendil, a wealthy ruler of Jutland, was married to Geruta, had a son Amleth and a brother Fengo. The latter was jealous of his wealth, courage and fame, and one day, in front of all the courtiers, he brutally dealt with his brother, and subsequently married his widow. Amlet did not submit to the new ruler and, in spite of everything, decided to take revenge on him. He pretended to be crazy and killed him. After some time, Amlet himself was killed by his other uncle... Look - the similarity is obvious!

The time of action, the place, the action itself and all the participants in the unfolding events - there are many parallels, however, the problematic of William Shakespeare’s tragedy does not fit into the concept of “revenge tragedy” and goes far beyond its limits. Why? The thing is that the main characters of Shakespeare's drama, led by Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, are ambiguous in character and differ significantly from the solid heroes of the Middle Ages. In those days, it was not customary to think much, reason, and even more so, doubt accepted laws and ancient traditions. For example, it was considered not evil, but a form of restoration of justice. But in the image of Hamlet we see a different interpretation of the motive of revenge. This is the main distinguishing feature of the play, the starting point of everything unique and amazing that is in the tragedy, and that has haunted us for several centuries.

Elsinore - majestic of kings. Every night the night guard observes the appearance of the Ghost, which is reported to Horatio, Hamlet’s friend. This is the ghost of the Danish prince's late father. In the “dead hour of the night” he confides to Hamlet his main secret - he did not die a natural death, but was treacherously killed by his brother Claudius, who took his place - the throne and married the widow - Queen Gertrude.

The inconsolable soul of the murdered man demands revenge from his son, but Hamlet, confused and stunned by everything he heard, is in no hurry to act: what if the ghost is not the father at all, but a messenger of hell? He needs time to be convinced of the truth of the secret told to him, and he pretends to be crazy. The death of the king, who in the eyes of Hamlet was not only a father, but also an ideal man, then the hasty, despite the mourning, wedding of his mother and uncle, the story of the Ghost - these are the first lightnings of the emerging imperfection of the world, this is the beginning of the tragedy. After it, the plot develops rapidly, and with it the main character himself changes radically. In two months he turns from an enthusiastic young man into an indifferent, melancholic “old man.” This concludes the topic “V. Shakespeare, Hamlet, the image of Hamlet does not end there.

Deceit and betrayal

Claudius is suspicious of Hamlet's illness. To check whether his nephew has actually suddenly lost his mind, he conspires with Polonius, a loyal courtier of the newly-crowned king. They decide to use the unsuspecting Ophelia, Hamlet's beloved. For the same purpose, the prince’s old devoted friends, Rosencrantz and Guildensten, are also called to the castle, but they turn out to be not so loyal and readily agree to help Claudius.

Mousetrap

A theater troupe arrives in Elsinore. Hamlet persuades them to perform a performance in front of the king and queen, the plot of which exactly conveys the story of the Ghost. During the performance, he sees fear and confusion on Claudius's face, and is convinced of his guilt. Well, the crime has been solved - it's time to act. But Hamlet is again in no hurry. “Denmark is a prison”, “time is dislocated”, evil and betrayal reveal themselves not only in the murder of the king by his own brother, they are everywhere, from now on this is the normal state of the world. The era of ideal people is long gone. Against this background, blood feud loses its original meaning and ceases to be a form of “rehabilitation” of justice, because, in essence, it does not change anything.

Path of Evil

Hamlet finds himself at a crossroads: “To be or not to be? - that is the question". What is the use of revenge, it is empty and meaningless. But even without quick retribution for the evil committed, it is impossible to live further. This is a duty of honor. Hamlet's internal conflict leads not only to his own suffering, to his endless discussions about the futility of life, to thoughts of suicide, but, like boiling water in a sealed vessel, it boils and results in a whole series of deaths. The prince is directly or indirectly guilty of these murders. He kills Polonius, who overhears his conversation with his mother, mistaking him for Claudius. On the way to England, where Hamlet was to be executed, he replaced a letter discrediting him on board the ship, and his friends Rosencrantz and Guildenster were executed instead. In Elsinore, Ophelia, who has gone mad from grief, dies. Laertes, Ophelia's brother, decides to avenge his father and sister and challenges Hamlet to a court duel. The tip of his sword is poisoned by Claudius. During the duel, Gertrude dies after tasting poisoned wine from a cup that was actually intended for Hamlet. As a result, Laertes and Claudius are killed, and Hamlet himself dies... From now on, the Danish kingdom is under the rule of the Norwegian king Fortinbras.

The image of Hamlet in the tragedy

The image of Hamlet appears just as the Renaissance is approaching its end. At the same time, other, no less vivid, “eternal images” appear - Faust, Don Quixote, Don Juan. So what is the secret to their durability? First of all, they are ambiguous and multifaceted. In each of them lie great passions, which, under the influence of certain events, sharpen one or another character trait to the extreme. For example, the extreme of Don Quixote lies in his idealism. The image of Hamlet brought to life, one might say, the last, extreme degree of introspection, soul-searching, which does not push him to quickly make a decision, to decisive action, does not force him to change his life, but on the contrary - paralyzes him. On the one hand, events dizzyingly replace each other, and Hamlet is a direct participant in them, the main character. But this is on the one hand, this is what lies on the surface. And on the other? - He is not the “director”, he is not the main manager of the whole action, he is just a “puppet”. He kills Polonius, Laertes, Claudius, becomes responsible for the deaths of Ophelia, Gertrude, Rosencrantz and Guildensten, but all this happens by the will of fate, by tragic accident, by mistake.

Exodus of the Renaissance

However, again, not everything is so simple and unambiguous. Yes, the reader gets the impression that the image of Hamlet in Shakespeare’s tragedy is filled with indecision, inactivity and weakness. Again, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Under the impenetrable thickness of water, something else is hidden - a sharp mind, an amazing ability to look at the world and oneself from the outside, the desire to get to the very essence, and, in the end, to see the truth, no matter what. Hamlet is a real hero of the Renaissance, great and strong, putting spiritual and moral self-improvement first, glorifying beauty and boundless freedom. However, it is not his fault that the ideology of the Renaissance, at its later stage, is experiencing a crisis, against the background of which he is forced to live and act. He comes to the conclusion that everything he believed in and lived by is just an illusion. The work of revising and revaluing humanistic values ​​turns into disappointment, and as a result ends in tragedy.

Different approaches

We continue the topic of what Hamlet’s characteristics are. So what is the root of the tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark? In different eras, the image of Hamlet was perceived and interpreted differently. For example, Johann Wilhelm Goethe, a passionate admirer of William Shakespeare’s talent, considered Hamlet to be a beautiful, noble and highly moral being, and his death stems from the burden placed on him by fate, which he could neither bear nor throw off.

The famous S. T. Coldridge draws our attention to the complete lack of will of the prince. All the events occurring in the tragedy, without a doubt, should have caused an unprecedented surge of emotions, and subsequently an increase in activity and decisiveness in action. It couldn't be any other way. But what do we see? Thirsting for revenge? Instant execution of your plans? Nothing of the kind, on the contrary - endless doubts and meaningless and unjustified philosophical reflections. And this is not a matter of lack of courage. It's just the only thing he can do.

Weakness of will was attributed to Hamlet and But, according to the outstanding literary critic, it is not his natural quality, but rather a conditional one, determined by the situation. It comes from a mental split, when life and circumstances dictate one thing, but internal beliefs, values ​​and spiritual abilities and possibilities dictate something else, absolutely the opposite.

W. Shakespeare, “Hamlet”, the image of Hamlet: conclusion

As you can see, how many people - so many opinions. The eternal image of Hamlet is surprisingly multifaceted. One might say, a whole picture gallery of mutually exclusive portraits of Hamlet: a mystic, an egoist, a victim of an Oedipus complex, a brave hero, an outstanding philosopher, a misogynist, the highest embodiment of the ideals of humanism, a melancholic person, not suited for anything... Is there an end to this? More likely no than yes. Just as the expansion of the Universe will continue endlessly, so the image of Hamlet in Shakespeare’s tragedy will excite people forever. He long ago broke away from the text itself, left the narrow framework of the play for it, and became that “absolute”, “supertype”, which has the right to exist outside of time.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

• Introduction
• 3. Katarina's image
• 4. Tragedy "Hamlet"
• Conclusion
• Literature

Introduction

The wonderful creations of the masters of the past are available to everyone. But it is not enough to read them for the artistic merits to reveal themselves. Every art has its own techniques and means. Anyone who thinks that the impression made by Hamlet and other similar works is something natural and self-evident is mistaken. The impact of the tragedy is due to the art of its creator.

What we have before us is not a literary work in general, but a certain kind of it - drama. But drama is different from drama. "Hamlet" is a special kind of it - it is a tragedy, and, moreover, a poetic tragedy. The study of this play cannot be connected with issues of dramaturgy.

In an effort to comprehend the ideal meaning, spiritual significance and artistic power of Hamlet, one cannot separate the plot of the tragedy from its idea, isolate the characters and consider them in isolation from each other.

It would be especially wrong to single out the hero and talk about him in no connection with the action of the tragedy. "Hamlet" is not a monodrama, but a complex dramatic picture of life, in which different characters are shown in interaction. But it is indisputable that the action of the tragedy is built around the personality of the hero.

Shakespeare's tragedy "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark", the most famous of the plays of the English playwright. According to many highly respected art connoisseurs, this is one of the most profound creations of human genius, a great philosophical tragedy. It is not without reason that at different stages of the development of human thought, people turned to Hamlet, looking for confirmation in it of their views on life and world order.

However, Hamlet attracts not only those who are inclined to think about the meaning of life in general. Shakespeare's works pose acute moral problems that are by no means abstract in nature.

1. Brief description of Shakespeare's work

Biographical information about Shakespeare is scanty and often unreliable. Researchers believe that he began performing as a playwright in the late 80s of the 16th century. Shakespeare's name first appeared in print in 1593 in the dedication of the poem "Venus and Adonis" to the Earl of Southampton. Meanwhile, by that time at least six plays by the playwright had already been staged.

Early plays are imbued with a life-affirming principle: the comedies "The Taming of the Shrew" (1593), "A Midsummer Night's Dream" (1596), "Much Ado About Nothing" (1598), the tragedy "Romeo and Juliet" (1595 .). The historical chronicles "Richard III" (1593), "Henry IV" (1597-98) depict the crisis of the feudal system. The deepening of social contradictions led to Shakespeare's transition to the genre of tragedy - "Hamlet" (1601), "Othello" (1604), "King Lear" (1605), "Macbeth" (1606). Socio-political issues are typical for the so-called “Roman” tragedies: “Julius Caesar” (1599), “Antony and Cleopatra” (1607), “Coriolanus” (1607). The search for an optimistic solution to social tragedies led to the creation of romantic dramas "Cymbeline" (1610), "The Winter's Tale" (1611), "The Tempest" (1612), which have the tinge of a kind of instructive parable. Shakespeare's canon (his undisputed plays) includes 37 dramas written primarily in blank verse. Subtle insight into the psychology of the characters, vivid imagery, public interpretation of personal experiences, and deep lyricism distinguish these truly great works that have survived centuries, becoming an invaluable asset and an integral part of world culture.

2. Imagery and thematic analysis of the “Sonnets” cycle

Shakespeare owns a cycle of 154 sonnets, published (without the knowledge or consent of the author) in 1609, but written, apparently, back in the 1590s (in any case, already in 1598 a message about his " sweet sonnets known to close friends") and was one of the most brilliant examples of Western European lyric poetry of the Renaissance. Under the pen of Shakespeare, the form, which had become popular among English poets, sparkled with new facets, containing a wide range of feelings and thoughts - from intimate experiences to deep philosophical thoughts and generalizations. Researchers have long drawn attention to the close connection between sonnets and Shakespeare's dramaturgy. This connection is manifested not only in the organic fusion of the lyrical element with the tragic, but also in the fact that the ideas of passion that inspire Shakespeare’s tragedies also live in his sonnets. Just as in his tragedies, Shakespeare touches on in his sonnets the fundamental problems of existence that have troubled mankind for centuries; he speaks about happiness and the meaning of life, about the relationship between time and eternity, about the frailty of human beauty and its greatness, about art that can overcome the inexorable passage of time. , about the high mission of the poet.

The eternal inexhaustible theme of love, one of the central ones in the sonnets, is closely intertwined with the theme of friendship. In love and friendship, the poet finds a true source of creative inspiration, regardless of whether they bring him joy and bliss or the pangs of jealousy, sadness, and mental anguish.

Thematically, the entire cycle is usually divided into two groups: it is believed that the first

(1 - 126) is addressed to the poet’s friend, the second (127 - 154) is addressed to his beloved - the “dark lady”. The poem that distinguishes these two groups (perhaps precisely because of its special role in the general series) is not, strictly speaking, a sonnet: it has only 12 lines and an adjacent arrangement of rhymes.

The leitmotif of grief about the frailty of everything earthly, passing through the entire cycle, the imperfection of the world clearly realized by the poet does not violate the harmony of his worldview. The illusion of afterlife bliss is alien to him - he sees human immortality in glory and offspring, advising his friend to see his youth revived in children.

In the literature of the Renaissance, the theme of friendship, especially male friendship, occupies an important place: it is considered as the highest manifestation of humanity. In such friendship, the dictates of reason are harmoniously combined with spiritual inclination, free from the sensual principle.

No less significant are the sonnets dedicated to the beloved. Her image is emphatically unconventional. If the sonnets of Petrarch and his English followers (Petrarchists) usually glorified a golden-haired, angelic beauty, proud and inaccessible, then Shakespeare, on the contrary, devotes jealous reproaches to a dark brunette - inconsistent, obeying only the voice of passion.

Shakespeare wrote his sonnets in the first period of his creativity, when he still retained faith in the triumph of humanistic ideals. Even despair in the famous 66th sonnet finds an optimistic way out in the “sonnet key”. Love and friendship still act, as in Romeo and Juliet, as a force that affirms the harmony of opposites. Hamlet's break with Ophelia is still to come, as is the fragmentation of consciousness embodied in the Danish prince. Several years will pass - and the victory of the humanistic ideal will move into the distant future for Shakespeare.

The most remarkable thing in Shakespeare's sonnets is the constant feeling of the internal inconsistency of human feeling: what is the source of the highest bliss inevitably gives rise to suffering and pain, and, conversely, happiness is born in severe torment.

This confrontation of feelings in the most natural way, no matter how complex Shakespeare’s metaphorical system may be, fits into theOa form in which dialecticism is inherent “by nature.”

3. Katarina's image

Catharina is the heroine of W. Shakespeare’s comedy “The Taming of the Shrew” (1592-1594). K. is one of Shakespeare's most charming female characters. This is a proud and capricious girl, whose pride is severely offended by the fact that her father is trying with all his might to get her married. She is deeply disgusted by the characterless and mannered young men who pursue their sister. Bianca's suitors, in turn, revile her for her absurd character and call her nothing more than a “devil.” K. gives some grounds for such an assessment: he beats up his quiet sister, breaks a lute over the head of one of the suitors, and greets Petruchio, who has wooed her, with a slap on the wrist. But in the person of the latter, for the first time she finds an equal opponent; to her amazement, this man takes a mockingly loving tone towards her and plays out the comedy of chivalrous defense of a beautiful lady. The usual rudeness of “sweet Kat” does not have any effect on him: having played a quick wedding, he quickly achieves his goal - at the end of the play, K. not only turns out to be the most obedient wife, but also makes a speech in praise of female humility. This transformation of K. was perceived differently both by Shakespeare’s contemporaries and by researchers of his work: some reproached the playwright for a purely medieval disdain for women, but others found in the play a life-affirming ideal of Renaissance love - a marriage union of two “healthy” natures promises complete fulfillment in the future. mutual understanding and happiness. On the Russian stage, the role of K. is one of the most beloved. Over the years, it was performed by such actresses as G.N. Fedotova (1865), M.G. Savina (1887), L.I. Dobzhanskaya (1938), V.P. Maretskaya (1938), L.I. Kasatkina (1956). In the film by F. Zeffirelli (1967), K. played E. Taylor. An opera by V.L. was written based on the plot of the comedy. Shebalina (of the same name); among the performers of the party K. - G.P. Vishnevskaya (1957).

4. Tragedy "Hamlet"

Among William Shakespeare's plays, Hamlet is one of the most famous. The hero of this drama inspired poets and composers, philosophers and politicians.

A huge range of philosophical and ethical issues are intertwined in the tragedy with social and political issues that characterize the unique facet of the 16th and 17th centuries.

Shakespeare's hero became a fiery exponent of those new views that the Renaissance brought with it, when the progressive minds of mankind sought to restore not only the understanding of the art of the ancient world, lost over the millennium of the Middle Ages, but also man's trust in his own strengths without relying on the mercy and help of heaven.

Social thought, literature, and art of the Renaissance decisively rejected medieval dogmas about the need for hourly humility of spirit and flesh, detachment from everything real, submissive anticipation of the hour when a person passes into the “other world,” and turned to man with his thoughts, feelings and passions , to his earthly life with its joys and sufferings.

The tragedy “Hamlet” is a “mirror”, “the chronicle of the century”. It bears the imprint of a time in which not only individuals, but entire nations found themselves, as it were, between a rock and a hard place: behind, and even in the present, are feudal relations, already in the present and ahead are bourgeois relations; there - superstition, fanaticism, here - freethinking, but also the omnipotence of gold. Society has become much richer, but there has also been more poverty; the individual is much freer, but there is also more freedom for arbitrariness.

The state in which the Prince of Denmark lives, languishing from its ulcers and vices, is a fictional Denmark. Shakespeare wrote about contemporary England. Everything in his play - heroes, thoughts, problems, characters - belongs to the society in which Shakespeare lived.

“Hamlet” is filled with such deep philosophical content, the tragedy gives such a broad picture of Shakespeare’s contemporary life, it creates such grandiose human characters that the writer’s thoughts and feelings contained in this masterpiece of Shakespearean drama became close and consonant not only with his contemporaries, but and people of other historical eras. Thanks to some “distracting” episodes, Hamlet’s image deepens, his humanity becomes less severe than in those scenes where he struggles. The warmth of the soul, the inspiration of an artist counting on mutual understanding - these are the new touches that appear in the portrait when Shakespeare shows Hamlet talking with the actors.

Shakespeare's determination is evidenced by one important detail in the construction of the image of Hamlet. The Danish prince, after the death of his father, has the right to the throne; he has reached adulthood (though it is not entirely clear how old he is). No plea of ​​immaturity could justify Claudius' usurpation of the throne. But Hamlet never once declares his rights, he does not seek to sit on the throne. If Shakespeare had included this motive in the tragedy, it would have lost a lot; first of all, the social essence of Hamlet’s struggle would not have been revealed so clearly. When Horatio says about the deceased monarch that he was “a true king”1, Hamlet clarifies: “He was a man, a man in everything.” This is the true measure of all things, the highest criterion for Hamlet. How many boundaries are there in this complex image?

He is irreconcilably hostile to Claudius. He is friendly towards the actors. He is rude in his interactions with Ophelia. He is courteous to Horatio. He doubts himself. He acts decisively and quickly. He's witty. He skillfully wields a sword. He is afraid of God's punishment. He is blasphemous. He denounces his mother and loves her. He is indifferent to succession to the throne. He remembers his father the king with pride. He thinks a lot. He cannot and does not want to contain his hatred. This entire rich range of changing colors reproduces the greatness of the human personality and is subordinated to the revelation of the tragedy of man.

The tragedy of Hamlet is unanimously considered mysterious. It seems to everyone that it differs from the other tragedies of Shakespeare himself and other authors primarily in that it certainly causes some misunderstanding and surprise in the viewer.

Tragedy can have incredible effects on our feelings, it causes them to constantly turn into the opposite, to be deceived in their expectations, to encounter contradictions, to split into two; and when we experience “Hamlet”, it seems to us that we have experienced thousands of human lives in one evening, and for sure - we have managed to feel more than in entire years of our ordinary life. And when we, together with the hero, begin to feel that he no longer belongs to himself, that he is not doing what he should be doing, then tragedy comes into its own. Hamlet expresses this remarkably when, in a letter to Ophelia, he swears his eternal love for her as long as “this car” belongs to him. Russian translators usually render the word “machine” with the word “body,” not understanding that this word contains the very essence of the tragedy (in B. Pasternak’s translation: “Yours forever, most precious, as long as this machine is intact.”

The most terrible thing in the consciousness of the era was that the object of its deepest faith - Man - was being reborn. Along with this consciousness came a fear of action, of action, for with each step a person moved further into the depths of an imperfect world, becoming involved in its imperfections: “So thought turns us all into cowards...”

Why does Hamlet hesitate? A sacramental question, which has already been partly answered. Therefore, let’s ask another: “How do we know that he is hesitating?” First of all, from Hamlet, executing, urging himself to action.

Completing the second act, Hamlet finally utters the right word and, as if in the right tone, in a monologue after the scene with the actors who agreed to play a play exposing him before the usurper king. To complete the similarity of events, Hamlet will add a few lines to the murder of his father, and the “mousetrap” will be ready. Having agreed on its performance, Hamlet is left alone, remembers the actor who read the monologue to him, and is delighted with the passion he played, although it would seem “what is he to Hecuba? What is Hecuba to him? But this is a worthy example to follow for him, Hamlet, who has a real reason to shake heaven and earth. He is silent when he should exclaim: “O vengeance! ”

Hamlet finally snatched this word from himself, only to immediately come to his senses and correct himself: “What an ass I am, there’s nothing to say.”

Hamlet openly breaks with the role of a tragic hero, unable and, as it turns out, unwilling to act as the avenging hero familiar to the public.

Moreover, there is someone to play this role. The actor participating in the “mousetrap” will be able to show it performed, and Laertes, Fortinbras will be able to directly embody it... Hamlet is ready to admire their determination, their sense of honor, but he cannot help but feel the meaninglessness of their actions: “Two thousand souls, tens of thousands of money / Not It’s a pity for some clump of hay!” This is how Hamlet responds to Fortinbras’ campaign in Poland.

Against this heroic background, Hamlet’s own inactivity emerges more clearly, the diagnosis of which has been made for two centuries: weak, indecisive, depressed by circumstances, and finally, ill.

In other words, this is divine justice, embodied by the world law of existence, which can be undermined: if evil is done to someone, it means that evil has been done to everyone, evil has penetrated the world. In the act of vengeance, harmony is restored. He who refuses revenge becomes an accomplice in its destruction.

This is the law from which Hamlet dares to deviate. Shakespeare and the audiences of his era certainly understood what he was retreating from in his slowness. And Hamlet himself is well aware of the role of the avenger, which he will never accept.

Hamlet knows what he was born for, but will he find the strength to fulfill his destiny? And this question does not relate to his human qualities: is he strong or weak, sluggish or decisive. The whole tragedy implies the question not of what Hamlet is, but of what his place in the world is. This is a subject of difficult thought, of his vague guesses.

Hamlet chose thought, becoming “the first to reflect,” and through this, the first hero of world literature who survived the tragedy of alienation and loneliness, immersed in himself and his thoughts.

Hamlet's alienation is catastrophic, growing as the action progresses. His break with previously close people, with his former self, with the whole world of ideas in which he lived, with his former faith is completed... The death of his father shocked him and gave rise to suspicions. His mother's hasty marriage marked the beginning of his disappointment in man and, especially in a woman, destroyed his own love.

Did Hamlet love Ophelia? Did she love him? This question constantly arises when reading the tragedy, but has no answer in its plot, in which the characters’ relationships are not built as love ones. They are expressed by other motives: Ophelia’s paternal prohibition to accept Hamlet’s heartfelt outpourings and her obedience to her parental will; Hamlet's love desperation, prompted by his role as a madman; the genuine madness of Ophelia, through which the words of songs break through memories of what happened, or what did not happen between them. If the love of Ophelia and Hamlet exists, then it is only a wonderful and unrealized possibility, outlined before the beginning of the plot and destroyed in it.

Ophelia does not break the circle of Hamlet’s tragic loneliness; on the contrary, she makes him feel this loneliness more acutely: she is turned into an obedient instrument of intrigue and made a dangerous bait with which they are trying to catch the prince. The fate of Ophelia is no less tragic than the fate of Hamlet, and even more touching, but each of them separately meets his fate and experiences his own tragedy.

Ophelia is not given the opportunity to understand that Hamlet is a man of philosophical thought, that in the suffering of thought, truthful, demanding, uncompromising, is Hamlet’s lot, that Hamlet’s “I accuse” conveys the unbearableness of his position in a concrete world, where all concepts, feelings, connections, where it seems to him that time has stopped and “it is so, so it will be” forever.

Alienated from family, from love, Hamlet loses faith in friendship, betrayed by Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He sends them to death, which was prepared for him with their, albeit involuntary, assistance. Constantly blaming himself for his inactivity, Hamlet manages to accomplish a lot in the tragedy.

They even talk about two Hamlets: the Hamlet of action and the Hamlet of monologues, which are very different from each other. Hesitating and reflective is the second; over the former, the inertia of the generally accepted, the inertia of life itself, still retains power. And even the inertia of one’s own character, as we can judge, is by no means weak in nature, decisive in everything until it comes to the main decision - to take revenge. Hamlet is a person enlightened in humanism, who, in order to clarify the truth, has to take a step back to the medieval concepts of “conscience” and “the country from which no one returned.” “Conscience,” like humanism, has become a modern word for us, having changed and expanded its original content. It is already very difficult for us to imagine how the same word was perceived by Shakespeare’s audience, denoting for them, first of all, the fear of afterlife punishment for their earthly actions, the very fear from which the new consciousness sought to free itself. Hamlet’s soul is drawn to the people of the people, and their souls are attracted to Hamlet, “a violent crowd is partial to him,” but this mutual attraction does not lead to their union. The tragedy of Hamlet is also the tragedy of the people.

Thinking about the meaning of human existence, Hamlet utters the most exciting and profound of his monologues, the first words of which have long become a catchphrase: “To be or not to be, that is the question.” This monologue contains a whole tangle of questions. There is the riddle of “an unknown land from where there is no return for earthly wanderers,” and much more. But the main thing is the choice of behavior in life. Perhaps they will “submit to the slings and arrows of furious fate?” - Hamlet asks himself. “Or, taking up arms on the sea of ​​turmoil, defeat them with confrontation?” This is a truly heroic solution. This is not why man was created “with a thought so vast, looking both forward and backward”, so that “the god-like mind... idly grows moldy”!

Hamlet is often drawn to philosophical thoughts, but if fate has given him a titanic mission to restore the moral health of the human race, to forever rid people of meanness and scoundrels, Hamlet does not refuse this mission. After this, it is not Hamlet’s weak character that must be explained by his throwing, hesitation, mental and emotional dead ends, but by historical conditions, when popular uprisings ended in defeat. Hamlet could not merge with the people - neither in their struggle, nor in their temporary submission.

Hamlet carries within himself a ray of great hope - a passionate interest in the future of humanity. His last wish is to preserve his “wounded name” in the memory of posterity, and when Horatio intends to drink the rest of the poison from the cup in order to die after his friend, Hamlet begs him not to do this. From now on, Horatio's duty is to tell people about what happened to Hamlet and why he suffered so much.

Is Hamlet tragic? After all, this is so often disputed. They ask, doesn’t Hamlet lose heart at the slightest failure, isn’t all his ardor wasted, and doesn’t his blows miss the mark? Yes, but this is because he wants more than he is able to fulfill, and therefore his courage is wasted. After all, the most terrible thing in Hamlet’s tragedy is not so much the crime of Claudius, but the fact that in a short time in Denmark they got used to despotism and slavery, brute force and stupid obedience, meanness and cowardice. The worst thing is that the crime that took place is now forgotten by those who know the circumstances of the king’s death. This is what Hamlet is terrified of.

Before committing an evil deed, a person waits until his “conscience” calms down, passes away, like illness. It will work for someone. Hamlet does not, and this is his tragedy. It is not, of course, that Hamlet does not want and cannot become unscrupulous in the concepts of our current morality. The tragedy is that he finds nothing else but seemingly once and for all rejected dependence on otherworldly, inhuman authority for support and action, in order to put in place the “dislocated joints” of the era. He has to judge one era by the standards of another, already bygone era, and this, according to Shakespeare, is unthinkable.

Hamlet had the opportunity to punish Claudius more than once throughout the song. Why, for example, does he not strike when Claudius is praying alone? Therefore, the researchers found that in this case, according to ancient beliefs, the soul of the murdered person would go straight to heaven, and Hamlet needs to send it to hell. If Laertes had been Hamlet, he would not have missed the opportunity. “Both lights are despicable to me,” he says. For Hamlet, they are not despicable, and this is the tragedy of his situation. The psychological duality of Hamlet's character is historical in nature: its cause is the dual state of a “contemporary”, in whose mind voices suddenly began to speak and the forces of other times began to act.

No matter how popular other plays may be, none can compete with Hamlet, in which the man of the modern era first recognized himself and his problems.

The number of interpretations of the entire tragedy and especially the character of its main character is enormous. The starting point for the ongoing controversy to this day was the judgment expressed by the heroes of Goethe’s novel “The Years of the Teaching of Wilhelm Meister,” where the idea was voiced that Shakespeare wanted to show “a great deed weighing on a soul that is sometimes beyond the power of such an act... here an oak tree is planted in a precious vessel, whose purpose was to cherish only delicate flowers in its bosom...” They agreed with Belinsky that Hamlet is an image that has universal significance: “... this is a person, this is you, this is me, this is each of us, more or less, in a lofty or funny, but always in a pitiful and sad sense...”. They began to argue with Goethe, and more and more persistently, with the end of the romantic period, proving that Hamlet was not weak, but was placed in conditions of historical hopelessness. In Russia, this kind of historical turn of thought was already proposed by V.G. Belinsky. As for Hamlet's weakness, while finding its adherents, this theory was increasingly met with refutation.

Throughout the 19th century. judgments about Hamlet concerned, first of all, elucidation of his own character.

Strong or weak; self-absorbed, representing, first of all, introspection, “egoism, and therefore lack of faith,” in contrast to the moral idealism of Don Quixote. This is how I. S. Turgenev saw him in the famous article “Hamlet and Don Quixote” (1859), ten years earlier he gave a modern embodiment of the eternal image in the story “Hamlet of the Shchigrovsky District”. In English Shakespearean studies, on the contrary, a tradition has been established to see in the case of Hamlet a tragedy experienced by a moral idealist who entered the world with faith and hope, but was painfully shocked by the death of his father and his mother’s betrayal. This is exactly the interpretation proposed in his classic work “Shakespearean Tragedy” by A.S. Bradley (1904). In a sense, the deepening and development of this concept was the Freudian interpretation of the image, outlined by Freud himself and developed in detail by his student E. Jones, who, in the spirit of psychoanalysis, presented the tragedy of Hamlet as a result of the Oedipus complex: unconscious hatred of the father and love for the mother.

However, in the 20th century, the warning with which T.S. began his famous essay about the tragedy began to be heard more and more often. Eliot, who said that “the play Hamlet is the primary problem, and Hamlet as a character is only a secondary one.” To understand Hamlet means to understand the laws of the artistic whole within which he arose. Eliot himself believed that Shakespeare in this image brilliantly guessed the birth of human problems, so deep and new that he could neither give them a rational explanation nor find an adequate form for them, so that from an artistic point of view “Hamlet” is a great failure.

Around this time, an analysis of the tragedy “Hamlet” from the point of view of genre structure, carried out by L. S. Vygotsky, began to take shape in Russia. Asking the question: “Why does Hamlet hesitate?” - a remarkable linguist and psychologist is looking for the answer in how, according to the laws of the construction and impact of tragedy, plot, plot and hero coexist in it, coming into inevitable contradiction. And in this sense, “Hamlet” is not a violation of the genre, but an ideal implementation of its law, which defines for the hero as an inevitable condition the existence of several planes, which he tries in vain to bring together and brings together only in the finale, where the act of revenge coincides with the act of his own death.

Hamlet is a hero of intellect and conscience, and this makes him stand out from the entire gallery of Shakespearean images. Only Hamlet united brilliant civilization and deep sensitivity, an educated mind and unshaken morality. He is closer, dearer to us than all the other heroes of Shakespeare, both in his strength and weakness. It is much easier to mentally make friends with him; through him, it is as if Shakespeare himself directly communicates with us. If Hamlet is so easy to love, it is because in him we feel to some extent ourselves; if it is sometimes so difficult to understand him, it is because we have not yet fully understood ourselves.

The legend of Hamlet was first recorded at the end of the 12th century by the Danish chronicler Saxo Grammaticus. His History of the Danes, written in Latin, was published in 1514.

In the ancient times of paganism - so says Saxo Grammaticus - the ruler of Jutland was killed during a feast by his brother Feng, who then married his widow. The son of the murdered man, young Hamlet decided to take revenge for the murder of his father. To gain time and appear safe, Hamlet decided to pretend to be mad. Feng's friend wanted to check this, but Hamlet beat him to it. After Feng's unsuccessful attempt to destroy the prince at the hands of the English king, Hamlet triumphed over his enemies.

More than half a century later, the French writer Belfore presented it in his own language in the book “Tragic Histories” (1674). An English translation of Belfort's narrative did not appear until 1608, seven years after Shakespeare's Hamlet was performed on stage. The author of the pre-Shakespearean Hamlet is unknown. It is believed that he was Thomas Kyd (1588-1594), famous as a master of revenge tragedy. Unfortunately, the play has not survived and one can only speculate about how Shakespeare revised it.

In both the legend, the short story, and the old play about Hamlet, the main theme was the ancestral revenge committed by the Danish prince. Shakespeare interpreted this image differently.

Hamlet began a new life in his drama. Having emerged from the depths of centuries, he became a contemporary of Shakespeare, a confidant of his thoughts and dreams. The author mentally lived through the entire life of his hero.

Together with the Danish prince, Shakespeare mentally leafed through dozens of old and new books in the library of the University of Wittenberg, the center of medieval learning, trying to penetrate the secrets of nature and the human soul.

His hero grew and imperceptibly left the boundaries of his Middle Ages and introduced people who read Thomas More, people who believed in the power of the human mind, in the beauty of human feelings, to the dreams and disputes.

The plot of the tragedy, borrowed from the medieval legend about Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, places on the hero concerns and responsibilities not related to the tragedy of humanism and rebirth. The prince is deceived, insulted, robbed, he must avenge the treacherous murder of his father and regain his crown. But no matter what personal problems Hamlet solves, no matter what torments he suffers, his character, his state of mind, and through them, his spiritual state, probably experienced by Shakespeare himself and many of his contemporaries, representatives of the younger generation, are reflected in everything: this is a state of the deepest shock.

Shakespeare put into this tragedy all the painful questions of his age, and his Hamlet will step across the centuries and extend his hand to posterity.

Hamlet has become one of the most beloved characters in world literature. Moreover, he has ceased to be a character in an ancient tragedy and is perceived as a living person, well known to many people, almost everyone of whom has their own opinion about him.

Although the death of a person is tragic, yet the tragedy has its content not in death, but in the moral, ethical death of a person, what led him on a fatal path that ends in death.

In this case, Hamlet’s true tragedy lies in the fact that he, a man of the most beautiful spiritual qualities, broke down. When I saw the terrible sides of life - deceit, betrayal, murder of loved ones. He lost faith in people, love, life lost its value for him. Pretending to be insane, he is actually on the verge of madness from the realization of how monstrous people are - traitors, incestuous people, perjurers, murderers, flatterers and hypocrites. He gains courage to fight, but he can only look at life with sorrow.

What was the cause of Hamlet's spiritual tragedy? His honesty, intelligence, sensitivity, belief in ideals. If he were like Claudius, Laertes, Polonius, he could live like them, deceiving, pretending, adapting to the world of evil.

But he could not reconcile, and how to fight, and most importantly, how to defeat, destroy evil, he did not know. The cause of Hamlet's tragedy, therefore, is rooted in the nobility of his nature.

The tragedy of Hamlet is the tragedy of man's knowledge of evil. For the time being, the existence of the Danish prince was serene: he lived in a family illuminated by the mutual love of his parents, he himself fell in love and enjoyed the reciprocity of a lovely girl, had pleasant friends, was passionate about science, loved the theater, wrote poetry; A great future awaited him - to become a sovereign and rule an entire people.

But suddenly everything started to fall apart. At the dawn of time, my father died. Before Hamlet had time to survive the grief, a second blow befell him: his mother, who seemed to love his father so much, in less than two months married the brother of the deceased and shared the throne with him. And the third blow: Hamlet learned that his father was killed by his own brother in order to take possession of the crown and his wife.

Is it surprising that Hamlet experienced the deepest shock: after all, everything that made life valuable to him collapsed before his eyes. He had never been so naive as to think that there were no misfortunes in life. And yet his thoughts were largely fueled by illusory ideas. The shock experienced by Hamlet shook his faith in man and gave rise to a duality of his consciousness.

Hamlet sees two betrayals of people connected by family and blood ties: his mother and the king's brother. If people who should be closest to each other violate the laws of kinship, then what can you expect from others? This is the root of the dramatic change in Hamlet's attitude towards Ophelia. His mother's example leads him to a sad conclusion: women are too weak to withstand the harsh tests of life. Hamlet renounces Ophelia also because love can distract him from the task of revenge.

Hamlet is ready for action, but the situation turned out to be more difficult than one might imagine. The direct fight against evil becomes an impossible task for some time. The direct conflict with Claudius and other events unfolding in the play are inferior in their significance to the spiritual drama of Hamlet, which is highlighted. It is impossible to understand its meaning if we proceed only from Hamlet’s individual data or keep in mind his desire to take revenge for the murder of his father. Hamlet's internal drama consists of the fact that he repeatedly torments himself for inaction, understands that words cannot help the matter, but does nothing specifically.

Hamlet's reflection and hesitation, which became a hallmark of the character of this hero, was caused by an internal shock from the “sea of ​​disasters,” which entailed doubt in the moral and philosophical principles that seemed unshakable to him.

The case is waiting, but Hamlet hesitates; more than once throughout the play, Hamlet had the opportunity to punish Claudius. Why, for example, does he not strike when Claudius is praying alone? Therefore, the researchers found that in this case, according to ancient beliefs, the soul goes to heaven, and Hamlet needs to send it to hell. In fact of the matter! If Laertes had been Hamlet, he would not have missed the opportunity. “Both worlds are despicable for me,” he says, and this is the tragedy of his situation.

The psychological duality of Hamlet's consciousness is of a historical nature: its cause is the dual state of a contemporary, in whose consciousness voices suddenly began to speak and the forces of other times began to act.

“Hamlet” reveals the moral torment of a person called to action, thirsting for action, but acting impulsively, only under the pressure of circumstances; experiencing a discord between thought and will.

When Hamlet becomes convinced that the king will commit reprisals against him, he talks differently about the discord between will and action. Now he comes to the conclusion that “thinking too much about the outcome” is “bestial oblivion or a pathetic skill.”

Hamlet is certainly irreconcilable to evil, but he does not know how to fight it. Hamlet does not recognize his struggle as a political struggle. It has a predominantly moral meaning for him.

Hamlet is a lonely fighter for justice. He fights against his enemies with their own means. The contradiction in the hero’s behavior is that to achieve his goal he resorts to the same, if you like, immoral methods as his opponents. He pretends, cunning, seeks to find out the secret of his enemy, deceives and, paradoxically, for the sake of a noble goal, he finds himself guilty of the death of several people. Claudius is responsible for the death of only one former king. Hamlet kills (though unintentionally) Polonius, sends Rosencrantz and Gildenson to certain death, kills Laertes and, finally, the king; he is also indirectly responsible for Ophelia's death. But in the eyes of everyone, he remains morally pure, for he pursued noble goals and the evil that he committed was always a response to the machinations of his opponents.

Polonius dies at the hands of Hamlet. This means that Hamlet acts as an avenger for the very thing that he does to another.

Another theme emerges with greater force in the play - the frailty of all things. Death reigns in this tragedy from beginning to end. It begins with the appearance of the ghost of the murdered king, during the course of the action Polonius dies, then Ophelia drowns, Rosencrantz and Guildensten go to certain death, the poisoned queen dies, Laertes dies, Hamlet’s blade finally reaches Claudius. Hamlet himself dies, a victim of the treachery of Laertes and Claudius. This is the bloodiest of all Shakespeare's tragedies. But Shakespeare did not try to impress the viewer with the story of the murder; the death of each character has its own special meaning. The fate of Hamlet is the most tragic, since in his image true humanity, combined with the power of the mind, finds its most vivid embodiment. According to this assessment, his death is depicted as a feat in the name of freedom.

Hamlet often talks about death. Soon after his first appearance before the audience, he reveals a hidden thought: life has become so disgusting that he would commit suicide if it were not considered a sin. He reflects on death in the monologue “To be or not to be?” Here the hero is concerned about the mystery of death itself: what is it - or a continuation of the same torments that earthly life is full of? Fear of the unknown, of this country from which not a single traveler has returned, often makes people shy away from the fight for fear of falling into this unknown world.

Hamlet focuses on the thought of death when, attacked by stubborn facts and painful doubts, he cannot continue to strengthen the thought; everything around is moving in a fast current, and there is nothing to cling to, not even a saving straw is visible.

Hamlet is sure that people need the initial story about his life as a lesson, a warning and a call - his dying order to his friend Horatio is decisive: “Out of all events, reveal the reason.” With its fate, it testifies to the tragic contradictions of history, its difficult, but increasingly persistent work to humanize man.

Conclusion

So, using the example of Shakespeare’s “Sonnets”, which are an integral part and, in my opinion, a fairly striking example of his work, we can come to the following conclusions:

1). The changes developed and consolidated by Shakespeare in the national English version of the sonnet canon, called “Shakespearean,” not without reason allow us to consider his “Sonnets,” as part of his work, the pinnacle of the English Renaissance.

2). The traditions of pan-European Renaissance culture, defined as the revival of the ancient way of thinking and feeling and being the result of the development of medieval culture, created the conditions for the emergence of outstanding creative personalities, which, undoubtedly, is W. Shakespeare. The figurative and thematic system and the very form of his “Sonnets” reflect the anthropocentric thinking of this period, on the basis of new European dialectics, revealing the complex inner world of the great poet, brilliantly embodying his creative plan. Thus, the work of W. Shakespeare can be considered the highest synthesis of the traditions of pan-European Renaissance culture.

Despite the gloomy ending, there is no hopeless pessimism in Shakespeare's tragedy. The ideals of the tragic hero are indestructible, majestic, and his struggle with the vicious, unjust world should serve as an example for other people. This gives Shakespeare's tragedies the meaning of works that are relevant at all times.

Shakespeare's tragedy has two endings. One directly ends the outcome of the struggle and is expressed in the death of the hero. And the other is taken into the future, which will be the only one capable of perceiving and enriching unfulfilled ideals.

Revival and establish them on earth. Shakespeare's tragic heroes experience a special upsurge of spiritual strength, which increases the more dangerous their opponent is.

Thus, the destruction of social evil constitutes the greatest personal interest, the greatest passion of Shakespeare's heroes. That's why they are always modern.

Literature

1. Foreign literature Reader for grades 8-10 of secondary school, - M.: Education, 1977

2. A. Anikst Shakespeare. M., 1964

3. Z. Civil From Shakespeare to Shaw, - M.: Education, 1982

4. W. Shakespeare Complete. collection op. -- M., 1957-1960, vol. 1, vol. 8

5. S. Shenbaum Shakespeare Brief documentary biography, - M.: Progress, 1985

6. Belinsky V.G. Hamlet, Shakespeare's drama. Mochalov in the role of Hamlet - M., state publishing house of fiction, 1948;

7. Vertsman I.E. “Hamlet” by Shakespeare, - M., Fiction, 1964;

8. Dinamov S.S. Foreign literature, - L., Fiction, 1960;

9. Dubashinsky I.A. William Shakespeare, - M., Enlightenment, 1965;

10. Shaitanov I. O. Western European classics: from Shakespeare to Goethe, - M., Moscow University Publishing House, 2001;

11. Shakespeare V. Hamlet, - M., Children's literature, 1982;

12. Shakespeare V. To the four hundredth anniversary of his birth, - M., Nauka, 1964;

13. Shakespeare V. Comedies, chronicles, tragedies, collected. in 2 volumes, - M., Ripod classic, 2001;

14. Shakespeare V. Plays, sonnets, - M., Olympus, 2002.

Similar documents

The plot and history of the creation of William Shakespeare's tragedy "Hamlet". The tragedy "Hamlet" as assessed by critics. Interpretation of the tragedy in various cultural and historical eras. Translations into Russian. Tragedy on stage and in cinema, on foreign and Russian stages.

thesis, added 01/28/2009


Features of the work of W. Shakespeare - an English poet. An artistic analysis of his tragedy "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark." The ideological basis of the work, its composition and artistic features. Characteristics of the main character. Minor characters, their role.

abstract, added 01/18/2014


List of Shakespeare's works, his origin, training, marriage. Opening of the Globus Theater. Two cycles (tetralogy) of Shakespeare's chronicles. Features of early and late comedies. The mystery of Shakespeare's sonnets. Greatness and baseness in Shakespeare's tragedies.

abstract, added 09/19/2009


The theme of tragically interrupted love in tragedy. The plot of "Romeo and Juliet". The appearance of endless internecine strife as the main theme of Shakespeare's tragedy. "Romeo and Juliet" by W. Shakespeare as one of the most beautiful works of world literature.

essay, added 09.29.2010


Shakespeare's work is an expression of humanistic ideas in their highest form. A trace of Italian influence in Shakespeare's sonnets. Style and genres of Shakespeare's plays. The essence of tragedy in Shakespeare. "Othello" as a "tragedy of betrayed trust." The great power of Shakespeare.

abstract, added 12/14/2008


The question of periodization of the work of Shakespeare's mature period. The duration of Shakespeare's creative activity. Grouping of Shakespeare's plays by plot. Shakespeare's Early Plays. The first period of creativity. A period of idealistic belief in the best aspects of life.

abstract, added 11/23/2008


William Shakespeare is an English poet, one of the most famous playwrights in the world. Childhood and adolescence. Marriage, membership in the London acting troupe of Burbage. Shakespeare's most famous tragedies: "Romeo and Juliet", "The Merchant of Venice", "Hamlet".

presentation, added 12/20/2012


Shakespeare's work of all periods is characterized by a humanistic worldview: interest in man, his feelings, aspirations and passions. Shakespeare's genre originality using the example of plays: "Henry V", "The Taming of the Shrew", "Hamlet", "The Winter's Tale".

abstract, added 01/30/2008


Brief characteristics, descriptions and dates of productions of William Shakespeare's comedies: "Love's Labour's Lost", "The Tempest", "The Merchant of Venice", "The Merry Wives of Windsor", "Twelfth Night", "The Winter's Tale", "As You Like It", Comedy of Errors ", "Cymbeline".

presentation, added 11/11/2013


Studying the biography and work of W. Shakespeare. Linguistic and theoretical foundations for the study of sonnets in the writer’s work. Classification and features of sensory assessment of reality in works. Themes of time, love and creativity in the sonnets.

And the full text) is the most difficult to interpret due to the extreme complexity of its design. Not a single work of world literature has given rise to so many contradictory explanations.

Hamlet. Feature film 1964

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, learns that his father did not die a natural death, but was treacherously poisoned by his own brother Claudius, who married the widow of the deceased and inherited his throne. Hamlet vows to devote his whole life to the cause of revenge for his father - and instead, over the course of four acts, he reflects, reproaches himself and others, philosophizes, without taking anything decisive, until, at the end of Act V, he finally kills the villain purely impulsively, when he finds out that he poisoned him himself.

What is the reason for such passivity and apparent lack of will of Hamlet? Critics see it in the natural softness of Hamlet’s soul, in his excessive “intellectualism”, which supposedly kills his ability to act, in his Christian meekness and tendency to forgive everything.

All these explanations contradict the clearest instructions in the text of the tragedy. Hamlet, by nature, is not at all weak-willed and not passive: he boldly rushes after the spirit of his father, without hesitation, kills the traitor Polonius, hiding behind the carpet, and shows extreme resourcefulness and courage while sailing to England. The point is not so much in Hamlet's nature, but in the special situation in which he finds himself.

A student at the University of Wittenberg, completely immersed in science and reflection, staying away from court life, Hamlet suddenly reveals aspects of life that he “never dreamed of” before. It’s as if scales are falling from his eyes. Even before he was convinced of the villainous murder of his father, he discovered the horror of the inconstancy of his mother, who remarried, “not having had time to wear out the shoes” in which she followed the coffin of her first husband, the horror of the falsehood and depravity of the entire Danish court (Polonius, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Osric, etc.). Hamlet also reveals the moral weakness of his former lover, Polonius’s daughter Ophelia, who is unable to understand him and help him, since in everything she obeys the pathetic intriguer - her father.

All this is generalized by Hamlet into a picture of the depravity of the world, which seems to him “a garden overgrown with weeds.” He says: “The whole world is a prison, with many locks, dungeons and dungeons, and Denmark is one of the worst.” Hamlet understands that the point is not the fact of the murder of his father, but that this murder could have been carried out and remained unpunished only because of the indifference, connivance and servility of everyone around him. The entire court and all of Denmark turn out to be accomplices in this murder, and Hamlet would have to take up arms against the whole world to take revenge.

In the monologue “To be or not to be?” he lists the scourges that torment humanity:

The scourge and mockery of the century,
The oppression of the strong, the mockery of the proud,
The pain of despicable love, the slowness of judges,
The arrogance of the authorities and insults,
Done to uncomplaining merit.

If Hamlet had been an egoist pursuing purely personal goals, he would have quickly dealt with Claudius and regained the throne. But he is a thinker, concerned about the common good and feels responsible for everyone. Hamlet must fight the lies of the whole world. This is the meaning of his exclamation (at the end of Act I):

The century has become loose; and worst of all,
That I was born to restore it!

But such a task is beyond the power of even a mighty man, and therefore Hamlet goes into his thoughts for a long time, plunging into the depths of his despair. This is precisely where Hamlet’s spiritual tragedy lies (what nineteenth-century critics called “Hamletism”).

The hero of Shakespeare's tragedy himself mourns his state of mind and reproaches himself for his inaction. He sets himself as an example the young Fortinbras, who “because of a blade of grass, when honor is hurt,” leads twenty thousand people to a mortal battle, or an actor who, reading a monologue about Hecuba, was so imbued with “fictitious passion” that “he became pale all over.” “, while he, Hamlet, like a coward, “takes away his soul with words.” Hamlet's thought expanded so much that it made direct action impossible. This is the root of Hamlet's skepticism and his external pessimism.

But at the same time, this position of Hamlet unusually sharpens his thought, making him a vigilant and impartial judge of life. Looking into reality, into the essence of human relationships becomes, as it were, Hamlet’s life’s work. He tears off the masks from all the liars and hypocrites he meets, exposes all the old prejudices.

Often Hamlet’s statements are full of bitter sarcasm and, as it may seem, gloomy misanthropy, for example, when he says to Ophelia: “If you are virtuous and beautiful, your virtue should not allow conversations with your beauty... Go to a monastery: why should you produce sinners? » Or when he declares to Polonius: “If we take everyone according to his deserts, then who will escape the whip?” However, the very passion of his expressions testifies to the fervor of his heart, suffering and responsive.

Hamlet, as his attitude towards Horatio shows, is capable of deep and faithful friendship; he loves Ophelia dearly, and the impulse with which he rushes to her coffin is deeply sincere. He loves his mother, and in a night conversation, when he torments her with reproaches, notes of touching filial tenderness slip through his mind. He is truly considerate (before the fatal rapier competition) with Laertes, from whom he straightforwardly asks forgiveness for his recent harshness. His last words before his death are a greeting to Fortinbras, to whom he bequeaths the throne for the good of his homeland. It is especially characteristic that, caring for his good name, he instructs Horace to tell everyone the truth about him.

Expressing thoughts of exceptional depth, Hamlet is not a philosophical symbol, not a mouthpiece for the ideas of Shakespeare himself or his era, but a concrete person whose words, expressing his deep personal experiences, thereby acquire special persuasiveness.

One of the Russian composers who turned to Shakespeare was Alexander Egorovich Varlamov. The composer's highest achievement was the music for Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet (1837). Its production translated by N.A. Polevoy became an event in Russian theatrical life. The composer wrote the music at the personal request of the famous artist P.S. Mochalov to his benefit performance, which created “the image of the Russian Hamlet of the 30s,” as noted by theater historian B.V. Alpers (Acting art in Russia. M.; Leningrad, 1945. T. 1. P. 139).

I also cannot help but cite an excerpt from the article by Master of Art History V.B. Nikonova, “The Image of Hamlet in Modern Musical Culture,” which most fully reveals my vision on this topic.

“Having studied the scientific and journalistic thought about the Prince of Denmark, having analyzed a large number of literary and dramatic interpretations of the tragedy carried out in the works of I. Turgenev, A. Döblin, T. Stoppard, B. Akunin, F. Chechik and others, as well as musical interpretations, represented by the works of F. Liszt, P. Tchaikovsky, D. Shostakovich, R. Gabichvadze, N. Chervinsky, S. Slonimsky and others, we came to some of the following conclusions.

Firstly, in contrast to musical interpretations, the first of which dates back to 1858 (a symphonic poem by F. Liszt), literary interpretations, for certain reasons, began to appear in the 18th century. Thus, “Literary Hamlet” covers a historical period of almost three centuries. Along with dramatic productions, interpretations of Hamlet in literature develop not only in parallel with musical ones, influencing each other, but also historically precede the latter, creating in a sense semantic “landmarks” for them.

Secondly, in numerous musical works there is no doubt about the commonality of the thematic material used to create the image of Hamlet and its semantic content. In this regard, literary works are more diverse; here, in almost every work, a new Hamlet appears, different from the previous one. The degree of interest in the image of the Prince of Denmark varies; Hamlet often becomes, paradoxically, a secondary character (while for composers he invariably remains in the foreground!). At the same time, the semantic dominants in the interpretation of the image shift, the aesthetic subtext changes, until the appearance at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century of the comic Hamlet, which is diametrically opposed to Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

And here we come to the third, very important point. It was during this historical period in 1991, in the opera by composer S. Slonimsky, that the musical Hamlet became as diverse as the literary Hamlet. The difference is that “all Hamlets” - philosophizing, ironizing, decisive, half-mad - are united in one hero, we emphasize again, a musical work, as was the case only in Shakespeare. Whereas, say, in each of the works of writers and playwrights in the interpretation of the image of the Prince of Denmark, one facet prevails - either related to the question of Hamlet’s inaction as prone to reflection, or depicting the active medieval prince Amleth, or some completely original, a character trait of the hero identified only by a given author (and existing, often only in his imagination).

It is in Slonimsky that Hamlet appears as a cruel, maliciously ironic Hamlet, who not only laughs good-naturedly at Polonius, but also mercilessly deals with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Accordingly, along with the musical means used in the works of predecessor composers, new ones arise to embody such a multifaceted image as the Hero of Shakespeare's Tragedy is revived in this work.

So, it was Slonimsky at the end of the 20th century who came closest to Shakespeare’s interpretation of the Prince of Denmark, “in practice” proving the famous words of I. Annensky that “the true Hamlet can only be musical” (1). The synthetic, but still, first of all, the musical genre of the opera for the first time reveals in a different, non-traditionally dramatic way, a truly Shakespearean Hero of one of the most amazing and paradoxical tragedies in the entire history of dramaturgy!”

The concept of aesthetics Aesthetics is the science of non-utilitarian contemplative or
a person's creative attitude to reality,
studying the specific experience of its development, in the process and
as a result of which a person feels, senses,
experiences in states of spiritual-sensual euphoria,
delight, indescribable joy, bliss, catharsis,
ecstasy.

Main aesthetic categories

Tragic

Tragic on the example of Shakespeare's work “Hamlet”

Symbolism of tragedy in Hamlet