The croaking raven doth bellow for revenge!
What about Hamlet’s strange outburst during the play-within-the-play? He yells, “Get on with it, murderer. The croaking raven doth bellow for revenge!” It is an odd line and seems out of place. But what has actually happened is that Shakespeare has played a number of jokes simultaneously with this very pregnant line:
- He is making fun of the stilted poetry that the players are speaking. (Full thirty times Phoebus cart… etc.)
- He gives Hamlet a chance to echo his own intentions
- He makes fun of another revenge tragedy being produced at the same time called The True Tragedy of Richard III (first produced in 1591) in which a speech appears and calls for “revenge” 15 times in only 16 lines! The speech is below. Take a look and compare its psychological and emotional impact compared to Hamlet’s lines…
Meethinkes their ghoasts comes gaping for revenge,
Whom I have slaine in reaching for a Crowne.
Clarence complaines, and crieth for revenge.
My Nephues bloods, Revenge, revenge, doth crie,
The headlesse Peeres comes preasing for revenge,
And every one cries, let the tyrant die.
The Sunne, by day shines hotely for revenge.
The Moone by night eclipseth for revenge.
The stars are turnd to Comets for revenge,
The Planets change their coursies for revenge.
The birds sign not, but sorrow for revenge.
The silly lambs sit bleating for revenge.
The screeking Raven sits croking for revenge.
Whole heads of beasts come bellowing for revenge.
And all, yea all the world I thinke,
Cries for revenge, and nothing but revenge.
But to conclude, I have deserved revenge.
Consider how refined Hamlet’s conceptions of right and wrong are, how nuanced are the images in Shakespeare’s lines, and how the lines above work much like a jack-hammer: pounding remorselessly into one’s ears a simplistic dudgeon.
Now for Hamlet’s lines right before he visits his mother. She is very angry with him. But he has proof that the Ghost’s story is true and he must move forward with his plans for revenge. Notice the violent anger that is in Hamlet’s words, but there is also a gentleness and an awareness in his being, too. He is conscious of his feelings, his plans, and his aims–and how appearances may achieve more than actions. Also notice the subtlety of the imagery and the historical references (Nero planned elaborate murders of his mother that failed, finally being forced to send an assassin to simply dispatch with no pretense at it being an accident).
Hamlet: ‘Tis now the very witching time of night,
When churchyards yawn, and hell itself breathes out
Contagion to this world: now could I drink hot blood,
And do such bitter business as the day
Would quake to look on. Soft! Now to my mother.
O, heart, lose not thy nature; let not ever
The soul of Nero enter this firm bosom:
Let me be cruel, not unnatural:
I will speak daggers to her, but use none;
My tongue and soul in this be hypocrites;
How in my words soever she be shent,
To give them seals never, my soul, consent!
Filed under: Uncategorized and
Act 3 Scene 4
__________________________
Gertrude-
O, speak to me no more!
These words like daggers enter in my ears.
No more, sweet Hamlet.
___________________________
Exactly what Hamlet wanted. To get revenge on his mother through violent words, but not violent actions.
Is Hamlet mad (both angry and crazy) with the need for revenge?
[Reply to comment]
i would say, @Stejones, that Hamlet seems to be on a quest to save his mother–he seems so connected to her. He wins her over, but at the cost of crushing her spirit. But, then, Hamlet is not much for feel good lines, he’s for what’s right–and that is always a downer.
There’s a lot of evidence that Hamlet is younger than 30–why else would he be so astonished that an older woman would have lustful feelings…? He won’t leave his mother alone (a very teenage hang-up), even though the Ghost tells him to leave her to heaven. The Ghost must even show up to 3.4 to get Hamlet’s mind back on track; Hamlet gets stuck on the incestuous bed kick for too long.
[Reply to comment]
@Mr. E:
Good point(s). What about Laertes?
He was so set for revenge that it blinded him.
And that his excursion to France left him ill-informed to the on-goings in Elsinore and easy to manipulate by Claudius. And also the recent death of his father effect him emotionally.
Would this be parallel to Hamlet in the fact that he was emotionally distraught (by the recent events from the beginning of the play) made him the ideal puppet for the (angelic/demonic) ghost of his father?
[Reply to comment]
And then there is irony in 5.1, when Laertes and Hamlet both jump into Ophelia’s grave. Their parallel situations collide where they both grieve Ophelia, but Laertes is consumed by his thirst for revenge and attacks Hamlet. But then after the fight is broken, Laertes doesn’t speak for the rest of the scene. Does that foreshadow Laertes letting go of his lust for revenge by the end of the play?
And then going back to our ring analysis we have done in class,
Couldn’t we order the three revenge situations into three rings:
Hamlet’s at the center, Laertes’ in the middle, and Fortinbras in the outer. Then the above mentioned citation would be a combination of the two inner rings of Hamlet’s and Laertes’ revenge connected by Ophelia’s death.
[Reply to comment]
Last one, I promise… (but I doubt I can keep to it)
In the last scene, 5.2, don’t the above rings of three revenges collide, as all are fulfilled and/or forgiven?
Its is an epic way to end the play, with three rings (like the great chain of being) becoming one.
The only justifiable death was Claudius who was the connection of all three rings. All the other deaths were unfortunate and regrettable.
Okay, one more thing:
Is 4.7 supposed to be some kind of tribute to Polonius’ idiocy/incompetence? Laertes displays Polonius’ pride, while Claudius is long winded and scheming, not to mention paranoid too.
And when Laertes falls into his own death trap, he even repeats his father’s ideas from earlier:
“Why, as a woodcock to mine own springe, Osric. I am justly killed with mine own treachery.”
Would this failure of Laertes plan be some sort of destiny to prove that his reasons for revenge were unjustified and capricious?
Okay, I am done thinking for the night.
[Reply to comment]