Hamlet written by William Shakespeare has one of the greatest and widely recognized lines in literature, “to be or not to be”. Many have pondered over what this one line actually meant, but because it’s open to interpretation there are many perspectives. Many at times, it is assumed that this phrase contemplates suicide. The point where the protagonist uttered this line was a truly tragic moment, and he felt his life to be full of burdens and sorrows. Therefore, it is understandable if he wanted to commit suicide. Many also claim that Hamlet was pretending to be mad, so he could cover up his actual intentions for murdering his uncle Claudius, so as to take revenge for his father’s death. Therefore, he spoke meaningless and dubious phrases to keep those around him from discovering his actual intentions.
Upon close scrutiny it is realized that “to be or not to be” is far from being nonsensical and meaningless. This sentence has limitless depth attached to it and makes one wonder about the nature of existence. Some scholars have interpreted that this statement is representative of Hamlet’s consideration of committing suicide, only because he found his current life too hard and was scared about the consequences of murder. The portion of the phrase “to be” mentions the wonders of life and living, whereas “not to be” ponders over death and ending life. Equal importance is given to both, and that highlights confusion. Moreover, this line is never spoken in first person by Hamlet, which has confused many and some have suggested that he never meant it to himself, but was giving a profound lesson that was universally applicable. Here the idea is that Hamlet, or rather Shakespeare was toying with the idea of the nature of existence primarily based on philosophical terms. The foundation here lies in Shakespeare’s influence by Plutarch whose work was philosophical and discussed the concepts of existence and life in its true manifestation. According to Plutarch, “there is an existence of badness in the world, because residual irrationality abides in the world soul even when it becomes rational, which is accounted for by the fact that the world soul is originally non-rational in the sense that its movement is such, i.e. disorderly, and reason is an element external to it” . This idea denotes dualism on the basis that the human soul is differentiated from the world soul, and that the soul’s concern with the body is purely evil. When it comes to intellect Plutarch says that the co-operation between the soul and intellect promotes kindness and positivity. Therefore, Shakespeare’s statement through Hamlet, “to be or not to be” is existentialist and ponders over whether the protagonist should submit to his bodily desires, which will lead him to committing the evil act of murder based on revenge i.e. “to be”. It even covers the aspect of a combination of the soul and intellect rationale, which promotes kindness and forgiveness. With reference to Hamlet, this thought of “not to be” encourages him to forgive the mistakes of his enemies and be benevolent. The winning of the body rationale in the story incorporates the concept of a tragedy and Shakespeare’s pessimistic view that evil does achieve dominance. When observed from the angle of universal applicability Plutarch’s works inform other of this divide of the soul and how people are inclined towards revenge and other trivial issues rather than forgiveness. Essentially, Shakespeare’s portrayal of Plutrach’s philosophical idea gives the concept a realistic outlook that is understandable in lay man terms.
In the book named Hamlet’s Soliloquies: Emphasis on “to be or not to be” there is special dedication to deciphering this quote. The author says: “Soliloquy is defined as an instance of talking to or conversing with oneself, or uttering one’s thoughts aloud without addressing any person. There is only one character on stage. Consequently, the purpose of the character’s speech is not communication, but reflection upon its thoughts and feelings The soliloquy is impersonal because the speaker is not addressing anyone directly and personal pronouns are substituted with reflected pronouns, reinforcing the distance between the speaker and the hearer.” . With reference to this mention it can obviously be concluded that Hamlet’s statement was not only a literally reference to his own situation, but is also applicable to other realistic situation and has far more depth that can be uncovered by the eye. To understand this idea it’s dire to go behind the concept of Shakespeare’s other literally influences, especially psychological because it was reflective of Hamlet’s inner feelings and conflicts.
Shakespeare’s came about as a writer during the end of the Renaissance period and was therefore, one of the first literary artists to bring this concept to the forefront. In more ways that one his writing style was revolutionary, especially in Hamlet. His main focus was forming “human” characters that were psychologically complex and needed intense interpretation to understand the motive behind their actions, and the perfect example of this is Hamlet. Psychologically the humanity of every character excluding the stereotypes was taken under consideration by Shakespeare in most of his plays. Other than humanity, social position was incorporated not on an absolute, but on a rather defining basis. Hamlet’s quote “to be or not to be” emphasizes on the psychological influence he was under due to seeing the ghost of his father and wanting to avenge for his murder. In essence this image of his father in a wider context represents the unstableness of the mind of people who are bothered by the loss of lives of their dear ones. His father’s ghost is regarded by many as a manifestation of his sub-consciousness urging him to take revenge as pondered over in “to be or not to be”. The general stereotypes formed regarding kings and those subordinated to control when they in fact should be in control is hence, restructured and Shakespeare presents a rather typical image. Therefore, the dubious idea of whether in essence acting out typically by taking revenge on others, or by rising above menial matters and being the bigger person in everyday matters is given importance. The applicability of this quote is regardless of social positions as is equally defining when internal matters related to a lowly subordinate or high position king or monarch is concerned.
Moreover, many literary works and analysis of Shakespeare’s frame of mind have been conducted. On such book says: “He (Hamlet) has been depicted as a libertine and as a saint. Yet every writer reveals himself to some extent in the recorded product of his mind. If it is sometimes difficult to catch a glimpse of the personality behind the page, it is a reasonable assumption that the work, studied in an appropriate way, will lead to a dearer conception of the mentality of the man; and although personality is more than mentality yet some under- standing of a man's psychological processes is an essential step towards an adequate appraisal of his personality. As the writing of plays was Shakespeare's chosen way of expressing himself, we may assume that any enlightenment we may gain as to how they were conceived will increase our insight into the aspects of the poet's genius which are of interest to the Shakespearean student and at the same time extend our knowledge of the remarkable capacities which contributed to the poet's pre-eminence.” . These relevant statements obviously attach fundamental psychological meanings to Hamlet’s quote, on the basis that not only it is reflective of the protagonist’s character and his tragic internal conflicts, but also of the personality of the writer mainly on psychological foundations. It can be said that this quote in extension shows that Shakespeare was internally troubled and facing a dilemma of sorts, thus the paradox of opposing ideas in “to be or not to be”.
A popular opinion very adequately states: “To paste a convenient abnormal label over Hamlet is to explain nothing, it is to beg the question which we are seeking to answer. If one of the chief attractions of the this play is the quality of Hamlet’s intelligence, which comes through in many of his soliloquies and in his verbal dexterity and so on, then simply writing him off as a bit of a mental freak is inherently unsatisfactory. If we are tempted to see, as many are, that there is something strange or significant about Hamlet’s emotional state, then we need to explore that further, rather than just writing him off as crazy. The task is to find some emotional coherence in his thoughts and actions, some illuminating insight into his behavior.” . Therefore, to just take this quote lightly is not appropriate and to regard Hamlet as crazy when he says this is also foolish, because the writing obviously attaches some significance, which not only contributes to the character, but also to analyzing dubious situations in real life and the conflicts that people might face.
In conclusion, the explanation of this line simply can’t stop at Hamlet and his character because it’s not written in “I” terms, and the actual explanation can be applied to almost anyone. Even the writer or it seems like Shakespeare is passing on message explaining people in psychological and philosophical terms. Therefore, “to be or not to be” is intelligent to say the least and is rather definitive in nature because it divides the interpretation into positive and negative actions or even consequences that people might adhere to in their lives.
Works Cited
Armstrong, Edward A. Shakespeare's Imagination: A Study of the Psychology of Association and Inspiration. 1946.
Jahn, Dana. Hamlet's Siloloquies: Emphasis on "to be or not to be". n.d.
Johnston, Ian. Introductory Lecture on Hamlet. 2001.
Sandbach, F. H. Plutarch's Moralia. 1969.
