Shakespeare’s presentation of Claudius
Shakespeare’s presentation of Claudius is one which varies depending on the way his character is received. Though presented as a mere villain, Shakespeare crafts him in some moments, namely, the confession scene, to have some redemptive traits. Yet, this construction of Claudius fluctuates; Shakespeare shows that there is no fall from grace to hubris for him; rather, Claudius is trapped in his “distracted globe” as a mere consequence of his ambition. The presentation of Claudius can, therefore, be understood in three lights: the knock-on effect his actions bring to the state of Denmark, the effects his actions have on Hamlet and lastly, the variations in his character.
From the very start of the play, the audience is in the middle of an unsettling mood – one which is confirmed as “something rotten in the state of Denmark”. Shakespeare crafts the commencing scenes of the play to heighten this tension-filled mood, once again drawing to an Elizabethan audience that “all is not well”. Nevertheless, these moments suggest a corruption and a decay attached to the state of Denmark. The corruption that originated from Claudius, feeds itself into Denmark; a form of necessity to eliminate this something “rotten”. When we take the term “rotten” metaphorically, it can allude to the disruption within the chain of being – one which would further appeal to a 17th century audience, especially at a time of nationwide fear. Taking Alderman’s idea of Hamlet “saving his mother”, it can be argued that her Freudian reading of the matter is one which is too extremist – rather from the corruption Claudius extends on to the state and his inner circle which Hamlet fears for; thus saving his mother from this decay. Despite this, Claudius’ character as the play’s Machiavellian antagonist is one which amplifies his corruption – the idea that this can emanate from man too, as opposed to the general view that all women are inherently sinful.
Shakespeare utilises the flexibility of not adhering to Aristotelian conventions, notably by not following the unity of time. In doing so, Shakespeare structurally reveals different personas of Claudius; the most memorable being the shift from Act1 to Act 2. Claudius in Act 2 scene 1 appears outwardly like a king. His diction is elusive and his speech is full of figurative language, namely metaphors. Claudius’ ability to construct an outer appearance of a position which he unlawfully received further adds to his complexity as he appears as more than a stock character. The oxymoron “mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage” Claudius uses is one which Shakespeare skillfully crafts to match the elusiveness of Claudius. Here, the audience is given the opportunity choose which emotions that they hold in this particular moment. This rapport Claudius begins to establish with the courts and Denmark is one which Brannagh (1971) portrays to be successful; as the audience in front of him appear seemingly in admiration of Claudius. The effect Claudius has on other characters is most disturbing within the character of Hamlet. In agreement with Hazzlitt, Hamlet’s position as the “prime of philosophical spectators” is one which allows him to be unlike Claudius’ sycophants; rather this gives him the position to contemplate and arguably “procrastinate” the act of revenge. Yet, Hamlet, as Kerringon puts forth in his thesis, never promises to revenge, only it is to remember. He successfully does this, as through remembrance Shakespeare gives Hamlet the opportunity to be the director of the play within a play. This use if metatheatre is one which evokes feelings of fear and pity; especially once we look at this from within Claudius’ perspective. Shakespeare shows that there is no doubt Claudius is guilty of murder of Old Hamlet – a relief for skeptics like Horatio and modern audiences which are unable to trust the testimony of a supernatural figure. Nevertheless, the idea that from this moment onwards ; the play truly begins has been agreed upon , as it is after this scene that Claudius attempts to conceal his deceit backfires.
This is most explicit in the confession scene which in terms of tragedy, can be likened to be Claudius’ anagnorisis; his moment of reconciliation. Shakespeare crafts this scene to illuminate on the religious implications of Claudius’ actions. He cannot, in this scene, repent successfully as “my crown, mine own ambition, and my queen” are three factors hindering his possibility. Yet, this use of triple also gives the effect of Claudius’ speed in which he is confessing. This alludes to the “vaulting ambition” Shakespeare also portrays in Macbeth, once again highlighting the masculine need for power and dominance in what is often deemed to be a patriarchal society. In this confession scene, Shakespeare draws on similar vulnerability which earlier was portrayed in Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” soliloquy. This state of conflict Shakespeare shows Claudius to be in one which is universally relatable. The concluding couplet “my words which fly up my thoughts remain below/words without never to heaven go” written in eye rhymes reveal some form of deception – though the words “below”/”go” do not seem at first like rhymes, once read aloud their rhyme is particularly clear. Perhaps Shakespeare here is alluding to the idea of things not always being as they seem. Furthermore, the use of these eye rhymes hint a more realistic notion – Claudius, both literally and figuratively is trapped in the predicaments which he has created for himself. Despite this opportunity he is given to repent, thus in accordance to Elizabethan protestant teachings, be forgiven for his “foul and most unnatural murder” Claudius remains determined to be king. The core message of this scene can thus be likened to the conclusion of Hamlet’s concluding lines of “To be or not to be” soliloquy. In the lines; “the native hue of resolution” and “the pale cast of thought”, Shakespeare’s use of imagistic and syntactic parallelism emphasises the idea that our fears ultimately dissuade us from enterprises of “great pitch and moment”. The “great … moment” in this case for Claudius is indeed, repenting and offering repentance for his actions.
To conclude, Shakespeare’s presentation of Claudius is one which though fluctuates, remains to be as a villain. He is given numerous counts to turn his wrongdoings into right, but ultimately, is swayed by his ambition and desire for power.
No comments:
Post a Comment