The Legality of Hamlet’s Modern Revenge
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper tackles the long-standing enigma regarding Hamlet’s “delay” and concludes that Hamlet hesitates to act because he fears he might leave behind “a wounded name” for killing the King to avenge his father, which may be morally righteous but is legally a homicide and a treason. Deviating from the previous studies of the play which see Hamlet’s hesitance to murder the King as a product of a repressed Oedipal urge or conflicted morals, this paper argues that Hamlet’s “delay” is a subconsciously constructed strategy to carry out a modern revenge that favors legal persecution with viable witnesses over the violence of a private blood-revenge. Hence, this paper points to Hamlet’s securing of the King’s letter to the English king—an irrefutable, physical evidence that may be used against the King—as a significant turning point in his revenge journey. Having safely entrusted the letter to Horatio, Hamlet ignores his sense of foreboding and proceeds to a fencing match with Laertes at which he not only kills the King at last but also meets his own tragic death. A Danish prince who is also a university student at Wittenberg, the birthplace of Protestant Reformation, Hamlet straddles the borders between the royal customs, traditions, and responsibilities, and the Renaissance ideals of the thinking individual as encapsulated in the philosophy of Descartes. His concern with how the act of revenge would affect his own reputation, coupled with his dying request to Horatio to live and tell his story, reflects the Renaissance man’s desperate attempt to reconcile the morality of a personal revenge with the legality of a public one.
Abstract
This paper tackles the long-standing enigma regarding Hamlet’s “delay” and concludes that Hamlet hesitates to act because he fears he might leave behind “a wounded name” for killing the King to avenge his father, which may be morally righteous but is legally a homicide and a treason. Deviating from the previous studies of the play which see Hamlet’s hesitance to murder the King as a product of a repressed Oedipal urge or conflicted morals, this paper argues that Hamlet’s “delay” is a subconsciously constructed strategy to carry out a modern revenge that favors legal persecution with viable witnesses over the violence of a private blood-revenge. Hence, this paper points to Hamlet’s securing of the King’s letter to the English king—an irrefutable, physical evidence that may be used against the King—as a significant turning point in his revenge journey. Having safely entrusted the letter to Horatio, Hamlet ignores his sense of foreboding and proceeds to a fencing match with Laertes at which he not only kills the King at last but also meets his own tragic death. A Danish prince who is also a university student at Wittenberg, the birthplace of Protestant Reformation, Hamlet straddles the borders between the royal customs, traditions, and responsibilities, and the Renaissance ideals of the thinking individual as encapsulated in the philosophy of Descartes. His concern with how the act of revenge would affect his own reputation, coupled with his dying request to Horatio to live and tell his story, reflects the Renaissance man’s desperate attempt to reconcile the morality of a personal revenge with the legality of a public one.
참고문헌 (18)
- Birch, John Henry Stopford, "Denmark in History" (1938), Butler & Tanner, Ltd
- Bowers, Fredson, "Hamlet as Minister and Scourge", PMLA, 70(4), pp.740~749 (1955)
- Boyd, Richard, "‘The Play’s the Thing", Wherein I’ll Catch the Conscience’: The Legal Community Reads Hamlet, 2009, pp.5(3), 425~451
- Curtis, Mark H, "Oxford and Cambridge in Transition, 1558-1642" (1959), Oxford UP
- "History"[URL]
- Dollerup, Cay, "Denmark, Hamlet, and Shakespeare: A Study of Englishmen’s Knowledge of Denmark Towards the End of the Sixteenth Century with Special Reference to Hamlet" (1975), Institut fur Englishe Sprache und Literatur, Universitat Salzburg
- Edwards, Philip, "Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William Shakespeare", pp.1~82 (2003), Cambridge UP
- Evans, Williams, "The Fiction of Law in Shakespeare and Spenser", pp.2021
- Hanson, Elizabeth, "Fellow Students: Hamlet, Horatio, and the Early Modern University", Shakespeare Quarterly, 62(2), pp.205~229 (2011)
- Hui, Andrew, "Horatio’s Philosophy in Hamlet", Renaissance Drama, 41(1-2), pp.151~171 (2013)
- Jones, Ernest, "Hamlet and Oedipus" (1976), W. W. Norton & Company
- Lee, Kyung-Won, "Shakespeare, the Canon of Empire" (2021), Hangilsa
- Mehta, Prakash, "An Essay on Hamlet: Emblems of Truth in Law and Literature", Georgetown Law Review, 83, pp.165~ (1994)
- Prosser, Eleanor, "Hamlet and Revenge" (1971), Stanford UP
- Regnier, Thomas, "Shakespeare as Lawyer, Hamlet: Death, Property, and the Pursuit of Justice", The IATC journal, 2018, pp.18, ~
- Shakespeare, William, "The New Cambridge Shakespeare" (2003), Cambridge UP
- Shakespeare, William, "The Arden Shakespeare Third Series" (1998), Bloomsbury Publishing
- Watkin, Thomas Glyn, "Hamlet and the Law of Homicide", Law Quarterly Review, 100, pp.282~310 (1984)