Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack)'s Reviews > Hamlet

Hamlet by William Shakespeare
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
52545435
Here's the thing about Hamlet: if you see it and you hate it, you saw a terrible Hamlet. I don't care if it's given critical acclaim - fuck off, Kenneth Branagh - Hamlet is supposed to be compelling, and if you didn't find the character compelling, that actor didn't do their job. You need a Hamlet who knows the character, not a Hamlet who wants to do grace to the character or some shit.

Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changed when the fire nation attacked when I saw Santa Cruz Shakespeare's 2016 production of Hamlet, starring actress Kate Eastwood Norris as Hamlet.

description
(CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)

I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once.


// HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN

➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel.

Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.

Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.

➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!

On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.

Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's.

In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play.

VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually.

Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube
161 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Hamlet.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

September 10, 2017 – Started Reading
September 15, 2017 – Shelved as: to-read
September 15, 2017 – Shelved
September 17, 2017 – Shelved as: z-read2017
September 17, 2017 – Shelved as: 5-star
September 17, 2017 – Shelved as: literary-fiction
September 17, 2017 – Shelved as: favorite-characters
September 17, 2017 – Shelved as: z-favs2017
September 26, 2017 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-17 of 17 (17 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Mary (new)

Mary Pagones My favorite work of literature. I think the best Hamlet I ever saw was Simon Russell Beale.


Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack) @Mary I don't think I've heard of him!! maybe I'll check his adaptation out


message 3: by Mary (new)

Mary Pagones @Elise--unfortunately, I just saw it on stage and I'm not sure if there is a recording! He is a wonderful Shakespearean actor. I think the Derek Jacobi version is available on YouTube. He's another favorite of mine.


message 4: by Arie (new)

Arie I almost wonder if it counts to have "read" a play without seeing it performed at least once... Especially Shakespeare!


Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack) Arielle wrote: "I almost wonder if it counts to have "read" a play without seeing it performed at least once... Especially Shakespeare!"

oh my god, I totally agree. Shakespeare is so much better once you've seen it first - you have a sense for the characters and visuals to a degree you don't when you're only reading. I have so many blocking ideas :)


message 6: by Mary (new)

Mary Pagones Yes, Shakespeare is an author who needs to be both seen and read. Seen to get a sense of the play first, then read because every production is only one "take" on a very complex play, then seen again. Then read again! Shakespeare is an author whose works I can say changed me as a person (for the better); without him I would be a completely different person (maybe we all would be, given his influence on world literature)!


Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack) @Mary completely agree :)


Chelsea Hamlet will never be my favourite Shakespeare play, but I agree that if he's not a compelling character it's a bad production. I usually like Branagh but his Hamlet was awful!!! I did like Tennant though. Actually the first season of Slings and Arrows, a Canadian satire/dramedy about a Shakespeare Festival (it's totally based on the Stratford Shakespeare Festival in Ontario) deals with Hamlet and the clips where they actually put on the production make me wish they'd done the whole play! Rachel McAdams is Ophelia.


Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack) Chelsea wrote: "Hamlet will never be my favourite Shakespeare play, but I agree that if he's not a compelling character it's a bad production. I usually like Branagh but his Hamlet was awful!!! I did like Tennant ..."

agree about Tennant and Branagh! And I'll check that out, thank you.


message 10: by Sabrina (last edited Oct 14, 2017 09:19PM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Sabrina OKAY HI sorry I just saw this review as well I'm getting excited over you reading all this Shakespeare I actually have a lot of thoughts regarding her identity. I think that it's not that Ophelia lacks agency, it's that it's obscured (as is the actual framework) because the only times we ever see Ophelia is framed through other men's eyes (mostly Hamlet, but also Laertes, Polonius, etc) - there's constant conflating imagery of her as both a whore and a virgin depending on the speaker - and on Hamlet.

There is no real direct connection between Ophelia and her desires and the audience - it's layered over Hamlet's view, and then the other men's view, and then the audience's pre-conceptions again, so while her agency is present it's never made known in a significant way because she's constantly subjected by the framework of the play to be unknown, ironically, in all the ways it counts.

I don't know if I'm making my point well enough, like, she's a distorted mirror of herself held up to reflect men, I guess, if you want to get poetic about it. She's very much there, but the audience never gets to know her because her identity is lost not just over the course of the play but also almost purposely concealed from the audience - her identity is all these different selves that start to splinter, and we only get glimpses of each of them and only through the male gaze.

Anyways, I understand what you were getting at as well, I don't know how much you'll agree with me, I just have a lotttt of thoughts about Hamlet and especially our homegirl Ophelia I'm always up for discussion ahahaha

(ALSO THIS WAS SO LONG I'M SO SORRY I DIDN'T REALISE)


message 11: by Elle (new) - rated it 5 stars

Elle (ellexamines on TT & Substack) Sabrina wrote: "OKAY HI sorry I just saw this review as well I'm getting excited over you reading all this Shakespeare I actually have a lot of thoughts regarding her identity. I think that it's not that Ophelia l..."

no I get what you're saying! I guess I just feel the play doesn't work very well when her character isn't given extra agency - her character always ends up unmemorable unless the narrative is aware of how her agency is being stolen, if that makes sense?

and I'm sure Shakespeare wasn't aware of this, it's just what I like, I guess.

AND YES I LOVE SHAKESPEARE SO MUCH. the only other one I've reviewed I think is Julius Caesar, maybe also Macbeth and Much Ado?


message 12: by soleil (new)

soleil Ooh you’ve convinced me to try again!


The Smol Moth I love your review! You've got me all fired up about this play and I haven't even read it yet! But I totally agree about Ophelia, it's the WORST when people take agency away from a female character when they don't even have to. It's one thing if the character is written in such a way where she isn't given much agency in the original story and it'd be hard to give it back without changing the script. But if it's at all possible to portray the girl with agency, why wouldn't you?


message 14: by Balu (new) - rated it 5 stars

Balu What is wrong with Branagh's interpretation?? It is the best there is.


Lidia I only saw the BBC one with David Tennant, because I needed to refresh the play for a test and I like him, and I think he got his vibe right. Even though he was probably close to his 40s, he felt like a teenager and he grasped how he swinged from brooding to mad to heartbroken


message 16: by Sunflower21 (new)

Sunflower21 im reading this at skool and im sorry but itss not hitting me within


message 17: by orna (new) - rated it 4 stars

orna i thought there was a reference that hamlet is 30/near 30 within the book.


back to top