Megan Kuhle
Prof. Schenone
ENGWR 301
6 March 2009
1266 words
Shakespeare’s Use of Miscommunication in Hamlet
In his renowned play Hamlet, Shakespeare uses miscommunication to introduce and complicate various circumstances. Because effective communication is crucial for avoiding conflicts and misunderstandings, the miscommunication that is woven into the plot of Hamlet allows for dramatic build-ups and intense situations. Shakespeare successfully demonstrates how a prominent and continuous lack of timely discussions between two characters can ultimately destroy relationships. Within the play, several characters’ failures to appropriately and maturely communicate with one another lead to situations of disarray, deceit, and in some cases, death.
After his father’s death, Hamlet experiences an unfamiliar range of emotions that he finds difficult to express in a clear and proper manner, one of them being a strong sense of hatred towards his mother. Hamlet believes his mother’s hasty marriage to Claudius, her deceased husband’s brother, to be one of utmost incest, and he quickly forms an obsession with her sexual life. This fixation of Hamlet’s continues throughout the remainder of the play, due to his lack of initial confrontation with his mother regarding her dishonorable deeds. Sadly, Hamlet feels as though it would be impossible to voice his true opinions on the matter, causing him to continue to live with unresolved strife. In Act 1, scene ii, after a conversation with his uncle and mother, Hamlet says to himself,
O God, a beast that wants discourse of reason
Would have mourned longer!- married with my uncle,
My father’s brother, …
…O most wicked speed, to post
With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!
It is not nor it cannot come to good,
But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue.
(1.2.154-164)
This quote reveals Hamlet’s internal shame and disconcert brought on by his mother’s action. Instead of expressing his thoughts directly, he resorts to the use of insulting puns and figurations throughout the first two and a half acts to ambiguously demean his mother. As Act III is coming to a close and the play builds to its climax, Hamlet finally confronts his mother directly. Because he had internalized his feelings for so long, however, he comes across in a way that is so vindictive and unexpected that it hardly represents a successful and virtuous approach to resolution. Instead, it leaves Hamlet’s mother in shock and despair, as demonstrated by her lines in Act 3,
O Hamlet, speak no more!
Thou turn’st mine eyes into my very soul,
And there I see such black and grained spots
As will not leave their tinct.
(3.4.99-102)
Had Hamlet approached this matter at an earlier time and with deference, he may have been able to persuade his mother of her wrongdoings and inspire a change of her heart. Unfortunately, his inopportune delivery of his feelings of disgust does nothing more than upset his mother and confirm her suspicions of his lunacy.
Another character that suspects prince Hamlet’s lunacy but neglects enacting a suitable conversation is Polonius, the father of Ophelia, Hamlet’s lover. Polonius, a loyal councilor to King Claudius, believes that Hamlet has gone mad out of his unrequited love for Ophelia. With this thought entertaining his one-track mind, Polonius elects to forgo initiating mature, adult conversations with both Hamlet and Ophelia about their love for one another. This lack of communication by Polonius creates additional and unnecessary tension within the royal family, and is mirrored by his son in later scenes. Due to his lack of expertise in handling open and honest discourse, he treats Ophelia like a child, and compares Hamlet to a broker who swaps between various sexual intrigues. In a conversation with his daughter regarding Hamlet’s recent preoccupation with her, Polonius mocks her hopeful spirit:
…You speak like a green girl
Unsifted in such perilous circumstance.
Do you believe his “tenders,” as you call them?...
…Marry, I will teach you. Think yourself a baby
That you have ta’en these tenders for tru pay,
Which are not sterling. Tender yourself more dearly,
Or (not to crack the wind of the poor phrase,
Running it thus) you’ll tender me a fool.
(1.3.110-118)
Polonius’ doubt and ridicule of his daughter’s feelings set the stage for his devious plot to prove to the king and queen what he believes to be the cause of Hamlet’s madness. Ophelia and Hamlet’s interest in one another becomes a manipulative game to Polonius, meant to prove what he has already so rashly concluded in an effort to improve his social rank. Instead of being happy for his daughter and embracing the prince’s love for her, Polonius convinces the king and queen to allow him to continue in his silent trickery and carry out his deceitful scheme that accomplishes one thing: increasing Hamlet’s anger and suspicions of the dishonesty in all the people around him.
Laertes, Polonius’ son, mirrors his father’s deceptive approach to communication by resorting to silence when his friendship with Hamlet becomes tense. He returns from France to avenge Polonius’ death thinking King Claudius is to blame, only to find out that his father’s murderer is none other but his good friend Hamlet. He is filled with rage, initially promising to face Hamlet immediately and with courage, as he states in act 4, lines 61-63: “It warms the very sickness in my heart/ That I (shall) live and tell him to his teeth/ ‘Thus didst thou’.” (4.7.61-63) As the scene unfolds, however, the king persuades Laertes to hide his true feelings from Hamlet and instead take part in his vengeful plan involving a fatal fencing match. This dastardly change of mind represents Laertes’ fear and decided refusal to poignantly confront Hamlet in a straightforward and honest manner about the disposition of sorrow that they now share. Laertes allows the cowardly king to bait him into a fearful and unjust mindset, one in which secrecy and improbity become key features of his plan to murder Hamlet. Regarding Hamlet’s planned death in the match, Laertes tells the king,
I will do ‘t.
And for that purpose I’ll anoint my sword
I bought an unction of a mountebank
So mortal that, but dip a knife in it,
Where it draws blood no cataplasm so rare…
…I’ll touch my point
With this contagion, that if I gall him slightly
It may be death.
(4.7.159-168)
Having heard this idea of Laertes’, the king proposes they keep quiet about their outlined ordeal, should anyone else overhear their conversations. As the above quote and subsequent conversation with Claudius reveal, Laertes plans on concealing both his urge and intent to kill Hamlet until he is safely poised behind a sword with a poisonous tip. With considerable influence from the king and his own apprehension, Laertes opts to take the recreant route of his father, evading all communication with Hamlet. The result of his silence is a disgraceful murder that fails to accomplish his original goal of honorable vengeance.
As we have seen in the cases of Hamlet, Polonius, and Laertes, failing to exercise the use of proper and timely communication leads to the unraveling of already complicated situations. Their predispositions to allow resentment and deceitfulness to silently foster within them to a point of desperation create a barrier between themselves and other characters that are (or were) important in their lives. As evident in the play, once these barriers have been formed, it is difficult if not impossible to break them down and open the doors to appropriate communication. As these characters unfortunately fail to discover, it is only when these miscommunication obstacles have been overcome that true, honest and fulfilling discourse can be employed.