Other essays and articles in the Literature Archives related to this topic include : The Power of Words in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Othello   •  Shakespeare’s Hamlet as a Tragic Hero   •    Full Character Analysis of Hamlet   •   Analysis of the “To Be or Not to Be” Soliloquy in Hamlet by William Shakespeare

Like his companions, Hamlet also seems to waver in his ideas about the presence of the ghost, particularly at first. Unlike them, however, he is unable to resist the allure of the strange presence and although he calls upon God to protect him, saying, “Angels and ministers of grace defend us!” (1.4.22) the fear for his immortal soul is not powerful enough to deter him from talking to the apparition. He openly questions the spirit and its intentions, and tells the ghost aloud, “Be thy intents wicked or charitable, / Thou com’st in such a questionable shape / That I will speak to thee” (1.4.24-26).

At this juncture in the plot of Hamlet, the main character Hamlet, by stating that it is the “questionable shape” that draws him in, is also revealing that he cannot resist temptation and must know the truth, or at least be offered some strange version of it. As we see throughout the rest of the play, this is some inherent part of Hamlet’s character (full character analysis of Hamlet here)  as he is constantly questioning and seeking answers, even to the most obscure inquiries.

Despite his reasons for going, it is nonetheless clear that at this early juncture, he is not at all convinced that this spirit is actually that of his father. For instance, like Horatio and Marcellus, refers to the ghost as an “it” rather than a “he” when he says, “It will not speak then I will follow it” (1.4.45). He is naturally curious and this aspect of his character as well as the ghost’s shocking admission that revenge must be sought makes him susceptible to the ghost’s influence. Even though the reader may wish Hamlet to run away from it, he is entranced as the ghost tells its story and even discusses a few arcane details about its experiences in hell and its doomed state. As the ghost is leaving though, despite any impact its revelations have had on Hamlet, the prince is jocular, flippant, and even mocking of the ghost’s presence and taunts it by calling it an “old mole” (1.5.164) because of its uncanny ability to move under the stage and follow his movements. At this point the reader, like Hamlet, is still completely torn between the two ways of perceiving the ghost and we are left to struggle with the temptation of believing his powerful words in the play or treating him as an object of scorn and mockery as Hamlet does upon the ghost’s retreat. We find, however, that despite his flippancy in Act I Scene V, Hamlet struggles deeply with the words versus the potential threat of the ghost and can only resolve this matter with firm proof of the need for revenge, proof which is given at the close of his successful play-trap.

        In terms of the questions about the nature and function of the ghost within the play, it seems as though it becomes a moot point by the end. At the tragic conclusion, revenge exists for entirely different reasons and really seems to have little to do with the ghost and his revelations. In many ways, it seems as though the ghost and its looming presence simply disappears, both in the mind of Hamlet and the reader, especially since Hamlet never even mentions the ghost in Act 5 after his trip away from home. It seems that the very question of the ghost is resolved (or at least garners less attention) after a few simple but crucial lines spoken by Hamlet before the play-within-a-play begins. At this point he states in one of the important quotes from Hamlet, The spirit I have seen may be the devil and the devil hath power / t’assume a pleasing shape; yeah, and perhaps / out of my weakness and melancholy / as he is very potent with such spirits— / abuses me to damn me. I’ll have grounds / more relative than this. The play’s the thing / wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king (2.2.600-607).

In essence, Hamlet is suggesting that this spirit has indeed had a great deal of power over him because it was able to appeal to his strongest emotions of “weakness and melancholy.” He also recognizes that by giving into these emotions (which were enhanced by the spirit’s rousing speeches) he was opening himself up to damnation. If he had been weaker, he might have given into this completely and enacted his revenge immediately (as Shakespeare’s audiences probably expected he would do) but instead, he centers in on the doubt and conducts his own “test” of guilt.

When he says that he will have “grounds / more relative than this” he is stating that the grounds are going to be more believable and substantial because he will be able to directly witness the results and the supernatural will not be involved. At this point, the ghost has been rendered almost useless in the play because his (or “its”) power has little to do with the final outcome of the play. In other words, even though both Hamlet and the reader (both Shakespearian and contemporary) have been prompted to put a great deal of thought into the nature, function, and intentions of the apparition, the conclusion subverts our expectations and relies on more “earthly” proof of guilt to justify revenge. While our questions are not entirely pointless, at this important moment in the play detailed above, they are no longer crucial or central to the outcome. Hamlet has allowed himself to leave doubt and speculation about the supernatural alone and like us, has preferred to rely on more substantial “grounds.” After this point, the ghost is no longer mentioned and its only importance in the overall ending of the play is that it provided the necessary “tip-off” for Hamlet to begin to suspect that indeed, something was rotten in Denmark.

Although our speculation about the ghost was of primary importance for the first half of the play, the fact that it was reduced to a more insignificant matter in the second does not make it unworthy of questioning. If for any reason, it is still an important question not just in the context of the play itself, but in terms of audience. For that strange first half the reader has become like Hamlet’s character and thus has acquired the role of detective. We are required to think about perceptions of ghostly phenomena both in Shakespearian and modern contexts and are left to wonder about what such a ghostly character could mean in this play. If anything, it seems that Shakespeare used the ghost and its appeal for revenge to later twist our expectations since would be easy (and even predictable) to think that Hamlet might have simply listened to the ghost and believed it completely. The fact that Hamlet constantly questions things leads the reader to do the same and thus we feel a kinship with him as a character which we might not have existed had he followed the prescribed “revenge drama” course that seemed so clearly laid. In sum, the reader is a vital and ever-changing part of this text as interpretations about the supernatural mingle with our expectations about revenge and its place in drama.

Other essays and articles in the Literature Archives related to this topic include : The Power of Words in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Othello   •  Shakespeare’s Hamlet as a Tragic Hero   •    Full Character Analysis of Hamlet   •   Analysis of the “To Be or Not to Be” Soliloquy in Hamlet by William Shakespeare

Source

Shakespeare, William (Eds. Stanley Wells, Gary Taylor). William Shakespeare: The Complete Works. Oxford, Oxford University Press; 1988.