George Washington University

A Thing of Nothing: The Catastrophic Body in Hamlet

Author(s): John Hunt
Source: Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 1 (Spring, 1988), pp. 27-44
Published by: Folger Shakespeare Library in association with George Washington University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2870585 .
Accessed: 21/02/2011 08:56

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=folger. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Folger Shakespeare Library and George Washington University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Shakespeare Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
 A Thingof Nothing:The Catastrophic
Body in Hamlet
JOHN HUNT

IF HAMLET ACTUALLY WRITES DOWN MORAL LESSONS on his tablets as he

studieshis revenge,manyof themsurelyhave to do withhow life is lived,
and lost, in bodies. Far moreeven thanin Macbethor Coriolanus,thehuman
bodyinHamletformshumanexperience,beingthemediumthrough whichmen
suffer and act. Butthebodyalso deformshumanbeingsand threatens ultimately
to reducethemto nothing.The nonbeinglurkingat thematerialcenterof being
announces itselfeverywherein the play's corporealimagery,and occupies
Hamlet's mindas he triesto findhis way fromthe regal death thatinitiates
theactionto theregaldeaththatconcludesit. This essay examinestheproblem
in two parts, using an analysis of the imageryas an approachto the great
mystery of theplay, Hamlet'squandaryabouthow to act. It suggeststhatHam-
let cannotadequatelyrespondto theGhost'scommandsuntilhe learnsto accept
physicality,withall its dissoluteinconstancy,as the image of mentality.Not
untilhe findshis way out of a despairingcontemptforthebodycan he achieve
the wish of his firstsoliloquy and quietlycease to be.

At the end of Hamlet, all theremainingmembersof the two greatfamilies

of Denmarklie crumpledabout the stage. Meta-theatrically doublingthistab-
leau, Horatioasks Fortinbrasto "give orderthatthesebodies /Highon a stage
be placed to theview" (V.ii.379-80)-an orderthatis carriedout as theplay
ends.1 Polonius's "guts" have alreadybeen hauled offthe stage less cere-
moniously;Ophelia's body has been broughton withtruncatedceremonyand
loweredintothepit beneaththe stage, fromwhichskullshave come flyingup
to make room forit; and all the carnagehas been set in motionby the pale,
glaring"dead corse" of King Hamlet.The eyes of themind,if theyare open,
beholdin theplay's languagea spectacleof ruinedbodies fullyas grimas what
theirphysicalcounterparts behold on stage. Beforehearingof and seeing the
body's demise in thechurchyard,we imaginean unorthodox autopsywhenone
gravedigger tellstheothertheresultsoftheinquiryintoOphelia's suicide: "The
crownerhathsate on her, and findsit Christianburial" (V.i.4-5). Grotesque
visions arise when he respondsto the suggestionof his companionthatthe
originalspade-wielder,Adam,was a gentleman,"the first thateverborearms."
"Why, he had none," the clown objects, only to be refutedin a mannerthat
makes his statementmonstrous."What, art a heathen?How doest thou un-
derstandtheScripture?The Scripturesays Adam digged. Could he dig without
1 All
quotationsare fromtheSignettexteditedbyEdwardHubler(1963; rpt.New York:Harcourt
Brace, 1972).
 28 SHAKESPEARE
QUARTERLY

arms?" (V.i.30 ff.). Amputeegardeners,corpses used as sofas (perhapstwo

of thethousandnaturalshocksthatfleshis heirto), and manykindredfigures
drivethe play's physicalviolence deep intothe mindsof the audience.
The bodythusrepresented is no merevehicleor Platonicinstrumentforthe
soul; it incarnatesspirit,as Christ,His Church,and the Host incarnateGod.
Shakespeare'smetaphorical figures go to eerylengthsto showmandeeplyrooted
in a materialsubstrate.Thus Hamlettakesthe sayingof Genesis and Matthew
thatman and wife become one fleshas authority forhis mockingvalediction
to Claudius:

Ham. Farewell,dear Mother.

King. Thy lovingfather,Hamlet.
Ham. My mother-fatherand motheris manand wife,
man and wife is one flesh,and so, my mother.
(IV.iii.50-53)
Claudius himselfimpartsa corporealfacticityto theold figureof horsemanas
Centaur,tellingLaertesof a Normanriderwho "grewuntohis seat" and seemed
to have been "incorpsedand deminatured /Withthebravebeast" (IV.vii.85-
88). And Laertes warns his sisternot to love theprincebecause his ambitious
mindgrows along withhis youngbody and, as lord of the kingdom,he will
be "circumscribed/ Untothe voice and yieldingof thatbody/ Whereofhe is
the head" (I.iii.22-24).
The bodypoliticis morethana metaphorforsocial organizationin thisplay;
it describesa tightlyintegratedworld whererealitystemspalpablyfromthe
centersof politicaland religiousauthority. FrancisBarker,describingthepub-
lic, spectacularqualityofHamletand otherJacobeantragedies,has arguedthat
the abundantcorporealimages used in textsof thisperiodwere notthe "dead
metaphors"thattheyare now, but "indices of a social orderin whichthebody
has a centraland irreducibleplace." "With a claritynow hardto recapture,"
he says, "the social plenumis the body of the king,and membership of this
anatomy is the deep structural form of all being in the secular realm."2 The
extravagantidea, examinedby ErnstKantorowiczthreedecades ago, thatthe
kingin facthas two bodies-his own plus a superbodyequivalentto the cor-
poratelifeof his nation-always threatened to revertto a mysticalabstraction,
and eventuallydisappearedfrompoliticaltheory.Discussingitsrole in Richard
II, Kantorowiczobservedthatif the conceit "still has a veryreal and human
meaningtoday,thisis largelydue to Shakespeare.It is he who has eternalized
thatmetaphor."3Thereis nothingin RichardII to matchthereallyastonishing
concretenessthatthe metaphoracquires in one passage of Hamlet,whenRo-
sencrantzand Guildenstern accede to Claudius's plan to "dispatch" Hamletto
England:
We willourselves
provide.
Mostholyandreligiousfearit is
To keepthosemanymanybodiessafe
ThatliveandfeeduponyourMajesty.
(III.iii.7-10)

2 FrancisBarker,The TremulousPrivate
Body: Essays on Subjection(London and New York:
Methuen,1984), pp. 23, 31.
3 ErnstKantorowicz,The
King's Two Bodies: A Studyin Mediaeval Political Theology(Prince-
ton: PrincetonUniv. Press, 1957), p. 26.
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 29

Callingup picturesof a bloatedinsectqueen coveredbyhersuckingattendants,

or a convocationof politicwormsfeastingon a corpse,or a communionmore
literallycannibalisticthanmost,thisviolentlyarresting imagelocates theking
at the dark centerof a worlddense withmaterialsignificance.His universal
Body, symbolizingreligiousauthority over a commonality, does nothoverin
some libraryof legal abstractions,but pulsateswithgrislyvitality.
The imagerythatShakespeareinventsto establishman's corporeality startles
most when isolated partsof the body functionas metonymicor synechdocal
equivalentsforactions and statesof being. Everyaudience remembers"The
harlot'scheek,beautiedwithplast'ringart"; Hecuba's "lank and all o'er-teemed
loins"; Fortinbrassharkingup men "For food and diet to some enterprise /
That hatha stomachin't"; Osric complyingwithhis dug beforehe sucks it;
Hamletbeatinghis brains;and countlesssimilarfigures.This usage pervades
so muchof theplay thatone can hardlyread or heartwentyconsecutivelines
withoutencountering it. To maintainthe motif'simpactin the midstof such
copious use, Shakespeareoccasionallyresortsto violentlypressuredand im-
probableimages. "Let thecandiedtonguelick absurdpomp," says Hamletto
Horatio in an indictmentof the flatterer so suggestivelylewd thateven the
compleatcourtiermightblush to hear it, "And crook the pregnanthingesof
theknee /Wherethrift mayfollowfawning"(III.ii.60-62). Shortlyafterwards
he asks Horatioto watchClaudius carefully,"For I mineeyes will rivetto his
face" (1. 85). Afterthisanatomicaloutragehas beenperformed uponhim,Clau-
dius decides thatwithHamletin Denmarkhe is notsafe fromthe "Hazard so
near's as dothhourlygrow/ Out of his brows" (III.iii.6-7). In such images,
strangely transformed partsof thebody-the flatterer's glazed tongueand preg-
nantknees,Hamlet's boltedeyeballsand malignantly hypertrophicforehead-
figureforthmorbidstatesof mindtypifiedin the pursuitof some compelling
action. One thinksof certainpunishments in the lowerreachesof Dante's In-
ferno: Mohammad's riven trunk fulfillinghis schismaticmischief,Ugolino
gnawinghis enemy's malevolentskull. Indeed, the Ghost hintsthat,were it
not for the intolerableeffectsthatsuch a tale would have on the living, he
could tell of such a treatment of the body's partsin his purgatory:"But this
eternalblazon mustnot be / To ears of fleshand blood" (I.v.21-22).
It has, I believe, never been observedthatthese images of body partsin
Hamlet add up to a virtualanatomicalcatalogue (or, to use the Ghost's grim
littlejoke about dismemberment, "blazon") of thehumanform."Considered
as
curiously," curiously as Hamlet considersthe dust of Alexander,the play
looks like a dissectingroom,stockedwithall of man's limbs,organs,tissues,
and fluids.Certainpartsare mentionedincessantly:eyes, ears, heads, hearts,
hands,faces, tongues,brains.These majormelodiesin thecarnalconcertoare
accompaniedby numerouslesser themes.We hear (in varyingdegreesof fre-
quency)ofmouths,noses,lips,cheeks,jaws, teeth,eyelids,foreheads ("brows"),
thecrownof thehead ("pate"), theskin,hairin general,beards,necks,limbs
in general,arms,legs, knees, feet,heels, toes, fingers,the thumb,thepalm,
the wrist,the shoulder,the back, the loins, the waist, the breastin general
("bosom"), the mammaryorgan (Osric's "dug"), genitalsin general("pri-
vates"), male genitals("cock" and the "long purple" flowerswhose common
namehas beeneuphemizedto "dead men's fingers"),femalegenitals("country
matters"),and the anus ("bunghole").4 Of internalorgans,thereis mention
4 The OED identifies
theanus as a contemporary sense of "bung-hole,"citingan entry
figurative
in Cotgrave'sDictionarieof theFrenchand EnglishTongues(1611) forthe cul de cheval or sea
30 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

not only of the heartand brain,but also the throat,lungs, stomach,spleen,

liver,guts,bones, marrow,nerves,sinews,spinalcord ("pith"), and arteries.
Of the fluidproductsof thebody, we hearof blood and tearsincessantly,and
also of sweat, milk, fat, and gall. The play also refersto variouscorrupting
growthsin the body-moles, cankers,warts,ulcers, abcesses, sores, scabs,
and "contagious blastments."Finally, it alludes to such bodily functionsas
speech, hearing,sight,touch,taste, smell, eating,drinking,chewing,diges-
tion,vomiting,evacuation,sleep, dreaming,hallucination,yawning,weeping,
laughing,breathing,copulation,pregnancy, suckling,pulse,disease,fever,death,
and decomposition.
More thansimplypaintinga bloodybackdropforhis tragedyof revenge,in
the mannerof Webster,Shakespeareseems to be methodicallydeconstructing
thebody. His universalcataloguingof particularsdoes to thehumanbodywhat
HamlettellsOsric it wouldbe hardto do to Laertes:"divide himinventorially"
(V.ii.114). Like Montaigne,who soughtto examinethe unknowntotalityof
humanexperiencethroughits genesisin manyparticular,irreduciblephenom-
ena experiencedby the organism,Shakespeareseeks to reducelife to its cor-
porealelements.His charactersin thisplaythinkofeverypsychologicalquality,
everyrationaldeliberationor spiritualchoice, in termsof the physicalequip-
mentthatlocates themin a worldof action. Claudius's unsuccessfulattempt
to prayis a good example, demonstrating as it does the limitationof human
possibilityimpliedby this procedure.He thinksthroughout his soliloquy in
corporealimages: the smell of his offense, the blood on his hand, the face of
a reprobateand a penitent,"stubbornknees" thatwill notbow down,a "bosom
blackas death"hidinga "heartwithstrings of steel," and so forth(III.iii.36 ff.).
Claudius's "limed soul" reflectsconditionsof corporeallimitationthatMon-
taigne suggests,at the end of "Raymond Sebond," man can overcomeonly
throughthe extensionof divine grace:
Forto makethehandful biggerthanthehand,thearmfulbiggerthanthearm,and
morethanthereachof ourlegs,is impossible
to hopeto straddle andunnatural.
Norcan manraisehimself abovehimselfandhumanity; forhe can see onlywith
hisowneyes,andseizeonlywithhisowngrasp.
He willrise,ifGod byexceptionlendshima hand.5

None of the angels whomClaudius begs to "Make assay" offershim an in-

corporealhand;caughtwithintheparalyticcompoundofhis heart,hands,brain,
face, voice, he looks in vain fora way out of the dwellingthathe has made
a prison. Nor do any of the othercharactersin Hamlet find"exceptional"
release fromtheirnaturalcondition.In theirvariouslyless desperateways, all
struggleagainsttheweb of matterthatlifehas wovenroundthemand in which
theyimplicatethemselvesfurther everytimetheyact.
Montaigne'schallenge, after skepticallyweighingthe particularsof human
experience, was to put them back togetherin a livingtotality.Shakespeare's
intentionappearsto be verydifferent. Far fromeven attempting to presentthe
life of thebodyas an organicallyfunctioning entity,he portraysit morein the
mannerof Donne's Devotions, as a collectionof pieces whose morbidityin-
anemone:"a small and ouglie fish,or excrescenceof the Sea, resemblinga mansbung-hole,and
called the red Nettle."
5 Donald Frame, trans.,The CompleteWorksof Montaigne(Stanford:StanfordUniv. Press,
1957), p. 457.
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 31

timatestheirultimateviolentdissolution.The play's countlesspartsand func-

tions, linkedwithvariousextremeand unhealthystatesof mind,engendera
disturbing sense of ontologicaldislocation.Thingsfallapartin Hamlet-or are
tornapart.Shakespearedoes notuse thecurrently popularmetaphorof anatomy
here (as he does, forinstance,forJaques's laceratingintelligencein As You
Like It), butthroughout theplay we are made to thinkof thefragmented state
of a bodythathas been cut open, probed,dissected.When,in thefirstline of
theplay, Barnardoinappropriately demandstheidentityof Francisco,thesen-
tinelhe is replacing,Franciscoresponds,"Nay, answerme. Standand unfold
yourself."In the claustrophobicheartof Elsinore,thepoliticianstryto make
Hamletstandstillso thattheycan unfoldhimand findwhatlies within.Seeing
Hamlet's disturbedbehavior,Claudius resolves to discover (surgically,as it
were) "Whetheraughtto us unknownafflicts himthus,/Thatopenedlies within
our remedy"(II.ii. 17-18). Polonius, supposingthathe has foundtheanswer,
points(accordingto thecommonesteditorialreading)to his head and shoulders
and says:

Takethisfromthis,if thisbe otherwise.

lead me,I willfind
If circumstances
Wheretruth is hid,thoughit werehidindeed
Within thecenter.
(II.ii. 156-59)

Rosencrantzand Guildenstern, Fortune'sprivates,who makelove to theirem-

ployment,who would play on Hamlet's stops as on a pipe, reachingforthe
heartof his mystery, are themselves groundup in theirobsceneprobings,doomed
"by their own insinuation" (V.ii.59). The king keeps them,as Hamlet tells
Rosencrantz,"like an ape, in the cornerof his jaw, firstmouthed,to be last
swallowed" (IV.ii.19-20). Finallytheybecome inertmatterin Hamlet's own
perversionof Claudius's plans.
Otherinsinuations of partition
or dismemberment come in referenceto "parts"
or "pieces," as in the fragmented lines thatopen the play. When two more
figuresenter,Barnardoasks, "What, is Horatiothere?"and Horatioanswers-
perhapsin numbnessat the frigidweather,perhapsin disdain forthe spooky
proceedings,butcertainlystrangely-"A piece of him" (I.i. 19). Laertes,"the
continentof whatpart a gentlemanwould see" (V.ii.112-13), suffersoften
fromsuch usages, severalof themin the scene in whichClaudius reduceshim
to a tool of his murderousintentions(IV.vii.57 ff.). Laertes agrees to obey
Claudius on the conditionthat "you will not o'errule me to a peace," and
Claudius replies"To thineown peace." Laertesis content,butwishesit could
be arranged"That I mightbe theorgan" of Hamlet'spunishment; and Claudius
agrees that, of Laertes's courtly"sum of parts," he will use one "part," his
fencing,to enticeHamletto his doom. The ideas of incisionand partitionare
combinedin the closet scene, whereHamlet's promisenot to let Gertrudego
untilhe has made hersee her "inmostpart" makesherfearthatshe is literally
to be carvedup (III.iv.20 ff.).Afterherhastyexclamationhas caused thatfate
to befall the vigilantPolonius instead,and afterHamlethas thrusthis merely
verbaldaggersin herears, thequeen lamentsthatherhearthas been "cleftin
twain" and is told, "0, throwaway theworserpartof it, / And live thepurer
withtheotherhalf" (III.iv. 157-59). Hamletteemswithsuchfiguresof a body
thathas been dislocated,brokeninto its parts. "The timeis out of joint" in
 32 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

Denmark,and the youngprincehas been called upon to planthis footin the

socketand violently"set it right"-an actionthatinvolveshimin causingstill
moreviolationand dislocation.
All thisimagerypertainingto theunmakingof thebodybears some resem-
blance to the imageryof theHenryIV plays, whichNeil Rhodes discusses in
the courseof his studyof theElizabethantraditionof isolatingand distorting
partsof the body forcomic and admonitory effects.6Food metaphorsin par-
ticularattachthemselvesto the personof Falstaff,alternately evokingjoyous
physicalityand miserablecorporealdegeneration.A similaremphasison what
Rhodes calls "the meremateriality . . . of existence"inheresin thesomewhat
differentcorporealmetaphors of Hamlet, whichderiveultimately fromtheGhost
who hoversbehindthescenesand impelstheaction.Despitehis relativelybrief
timeon stage, the Ghost fillsthe linguisticfabricof his play withimages of
brokenbodies, muchas thefatknightgeneratesimagesof sensorygratification
and discomfort."Somethingis rottenin the stateof Denmark,"and he sym-
bolizes it. Since WolfgangClemen's book on Shakespeare's imagery,it has
becomea commonplacein Hamletcriticismthatthemotifof ulcerousinfection
and corruptionthatrunsthroughout the play centerson the speech in which
Hamletis told how poison was pouredintohis father'sears, coursedthrough
his blood, and ate away his bodyfromwithin,coveringit withsores.7It could
be added to Clemen's important observationthatthe figureof the dead king
also organizes corporealimageryimplyingdislocationand dissolution.The
physicalundoingof King Hamlet accountsultimately-in termsof both the
structuresof imageryand thoseofplot-for thephysical,psychological,moral,
and politicalundoingsuffered by the play's livingcharacters.
As thekingwas "cut off" (I.v.76) fromall thathe loved, so Ophelia finds
herself,in Claudius's words, "Divided fromherselfand her fairjudgment,/
Withoutthewhichwe are picturesor merebeasts" (IV.v.86-87). Deprivedof
the coherentformof reason, but still obscurelyintelligible,"Her speech is
nothing,/ Yet the unshapeduse of it doth move / The hearersto collection;
theyyawnat it, / And botchthewordsup fitto theirown thoughts"(IV.v.7-
10). Claudius correctlysays of thispsychicmutilation,"0, thisis thepoison
of deep grief;it springs/ All fromher father'sdeath" (IV.v.76-77)-just as
he discernedearlierthatsomeruinous"matter"in Hamlet'sheartwas distorting
his appearanceandbehavior(III.i. 165 ff,).Claudiuscan see thatthesamepsychic
recapitulation of King Hamlet'spoisoneddisfiguration is takingplace in Laertes,
who "wantsnotbuzzersto infecthis ear /Withpestilentspeechesofhisfather's
death,/Whereinnecessity,of matterbeggared,/Will nothingstickourperson
to arraign/ In ear and ear" (IV.v.91-95). Notingall these changes,and the
politicaltroublethattheyare bringing-Hamlethas just been sentto England,
"For like the hecticin my blood he rages," and Laertes is about to burstin
upon the innersanctumof thepalace "in a riotoushead"-Claudius too suc-
cumbs to a feelingof violentpsychologicaldisruption.The swellingdisaster
in his kingdom,he tellsGertrude,"Like to a murd'ring piece, in manyplaces /
Gives me superfluousdeath" (11.96-97).
In thecloset scene, Hamletanalyzesin termsof corporealdisfigurement the
moraldepravitythatreaches out fromClaudius to all those who come under
his sway. Gertrude'svice appears in her havingabandonedthe physicalar-
6 Neil Rhodes,ElizabethanGrotesque(London: Routledgeand Kegan Paul, 1980).
7
WolfgangH. Clemen,TheDevelopmentofShakespeare'sImagery(Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard
Univ. Press, 1951).
 A THINGOF NOTHING:THE CATASTROPHIC
BODY IN HAMLET 33

rangementof partsthatwas King Hamlet-"a combinationand a form"that

proclaimedmanliness-for a demonstrablyinferiorform(III.iv.56 ff.). "Have
you eyes?" Hamletasks, suggestingthatonly some physicalmutilationcould
accountforsuch blindness.To choose Claudius indicatesnot merelysensual
weakness,but sensoryderangement:
Sensesureyouhave,
Else couldyounothavemotion,
butsurethatsense
Is apoplexed ...
Eyes withoutfeeling,feelingwithoutsight,
Ears withouthandsor eyes, smellingsans all,
Or buta sicklypartof one truesense
Couldnotso mope.
(11.72-74, 79-82)
Hamlet continueshis indictmentof Claudius with a comparisonto the dis-
memberedbodyof thedead king.The new rulerof Denmark'sgovernment and
Gertrude'saffectionsis, he tells the queen, a sum of partsthatdo not make
up a whole, a livingbody thathas alreadybeen reducedto fragments: he is
"a kingof shredsandpatches," "not twentieth partthetithe/Of yourprecedent
lord" (11. 103, 98-99).
The physicalimitation of King Hamlet'sundoingthatculminatesin theplay's
finalscene withfourdeathsby poisoning-five ifHoratiocould have his way-
beginswiththedeathof Polonius,whosecorpseis madean emblemof physical
decay. AfterHamlet has renderedthe old courtier"most grave" and lugged
his gutsoffstage,Claudius asks whereHamlethas gone and Gertrudereplies,
withechoesofdismemberment: "To drawapartthebodyhe hathkilled"(IV.i.24).
Claudius sends Rosencrantzand Guildensternto "bring the body/ Into the
chapel" (11.36-37), but theirpersistentinquiriesare parriedby Hamlet,who
makes the absentcorpse a kindof absentpropfordramatizingthe mystery of
undoingrevealedby his father'sghost:
Rosen. Whathaveyoudone,mylord,withthe
deadbody?
Ham. Compounded it withdust,whereto
'tis
kin.
Rosen. My lord,youmusttellus wherethebody
is, andgo withus to theKing.
Ham. The bodyis withtheKing,buttheKing
is not withthe body. The King is a
thing-
Guilden. A thing,my lord?
Ham. Of nothing.Bringme to him.
(IV.ii.5-6, 26-31)

The deathof kingsis thebeginningand theend of Hamlet's studyin thisplay.

Polonius offershiman imaginativelinkbetweenthelive kingwho attachesso
muchimportance to bodies and thedead kingwhoknowshow littletheyamount
to. BroughtbeforeClaudius and asked once more "where the dead body is
bestowed," Hamletwaxes philosophicalabout kings,beggars,and the worms
thatconsumethemboth.Consideringthateven a king,whosemystically double
Body representsthe corporatebeing of all his subjects, "may go a progress
34 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

throughthe guts of a beggar," he recitesthe lesson of the play's corporeal

images. The body personaland politicis a provisionalstructure, botha form
thatsustainshumanbeing and a shadowthroughwhichnonbeingbeckons. As
a compositionof partsthatwill inevitablyfall apartand decompose, human
lifeis paradoxically"a thing. . . of nothing,"an existenceconstructed
around
the void.

II

In his famoussubtilizationof theRomanticidea thatHamletis unnecessarily

and morbidlyreflective,T. S. Eliot arguedthatShakespearehimselffailedin
Hamletto establishanyclear correspondence betweenthoughtand action,idea
and image. The play is "full of some stuffthatthe writercould not drag to
light,contemplate,or manipulateintoart," Eliot suggested;and since nothing
in the fictionaloccasion is sufficient
to accountfortheprotagonist'sgreatap-
prehensionand disgust,his thoughtsand feelingscannotbe expressedby "a
skilfulaccumulationof imaginedsensoryimpressions."8The morbidcorpo-
realityof theimaginedsensoryimpressionsdescribedin thefirstsectionof this
essay mayprovidean answerto Eliot's charge,in thattheyconstitute something
like an "objective correlative"for Hamlet's obsessive withdrawalfromthe
worldof action. The attitudetowardcorporealexistenceinherentin theplay's
imageryfiguresprominently in theprotagonist'sthinkingas well; it contributes
to his inabilityto "act" by challengingwhathe regardsas theintegrity of his
being.
Insofaras Hamlet suffersfroma psychologicalProblemdistinctfromthe
formidablemoraland practicaldifficulties presentedby his situation,it consists
in questioninghis own being;and thisin turnhas muchto do withhis inability
to identify himselfwiththatwhichdecays, "passing through natureto eternity"
(I.ii.73). A small eternityof dramatictimemustpass beforeHamletcan think
of himselfas a creatureof fleshwithoutexperiencingparoxysmsof anguish
and disgust.His observationthata kingmaypass throughthegutsof a beggar
is intendedas a thinlyveiled threatagainstClaudius's life, but it attacksalso
his sense of himselfas a dignified,purposeful,heroicbeing. Fearingthatphys-
ical actions may neveradequatelyembodyvirtuousintentions,he makes the
doubt self-fulfilling by shieldinghis high sense of himselfwithinan over-
whelmingcontempt thebody-a contemptthatsabotagesmeaningful
for action.
MarkRose has observedhow Hamletis "bound" to certaincoursesof action
by his birth,by his uncle's calculatingrefusalto let him leave the corrupt
"prison" of Denmark,and by his loyaltyto theGhost("I am boundto hear";
"So artthouto revenge,whenthoushalthear"); he rebels againstthesecon-
strictions, Rose argues,by becoming"obsessed withtheidea of freedom,with
the dignitythatresides in being masterof oneself."9 But Hamletis bound as
well to his body, and obsessed withhis contemptfor it. Even beforehe is
called upon to "set right"the unnaturalmurderand the incestuousmarriage,
he lamentshis connectionto theroyalcouple's physicality.His mother'slas-
civious "appetite" promptshimto wish fora way out of thehatefulbody that

8 T. S. Eliot, Selected Essays: 1917-1932 (London: Faber and Faber, 1932),

pp. 144-45.
9 Mark Rose, "Hamlet and the Shape of Revenge," EnglishLiteraryRenaissance, 1 (1971),
132-43, esp. pp. 132-34.
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 35

can lead people to forgetso quicklythespiritualgoods thathave sustainedthem

fora lifetime:

O thatthistootoosulliedfleshwouldmelt,
Thaw,andresolveitselfintoa dew,
Or thattheEverlastinghadnotfixed
His canon'gainstself-slaughter.
(I.ii.129-32)
Claudius's rowdybehaviorwiththe boys becomes the occasion for another
meditationon corporealsubversionof virtue.Denmark's "heavy-headedre-
vel," he tells Horatio,has taken"fromour achievements. . . / The pithand
marrowof our attribute"(I.iv.17-22)-hollowing out the bones, enervating
thespineof a nationalreputation builtup fromtheachievements of nobleDanes.
If an irruption of physicalimpulsecan so damage the reputationof an entire
nation,it is not surprisingthatsome "vicious mole of nature"or "the o'er-
growthof some complexion"can underminethereputation of individualmen,
to sucha degreethattheirvirtues"Shall in thegeneralcensuretakecorruption /
Fromthatparticularfault" (11.23-36).
The Ghostcalls Hamletdeep intothisworldof disruption.Its invitationto
decapitatethebodypoliticseems a horrific charge("O cursedspite"), and by
theend of theplay it will manifestlybe so: Ophelia will have been emotionally
brutalizedand lost to lunaticdistraction;the king and queen will have been
piercedwithhatefulinsight,theirattempts to reconstitutea harmonious political
entityshattered;thepopulace will have been raisedto thebrinkof revolt;Pol-
onius,Rosencrantz,Guildenstern, Ophelia,Gertrude, Laertes,andHamlethim-
self will have fallenas moreor less innocentvictimsbeforeClaudius finally
does; and Denmarkitselfwillbe putin thehandsoftherecklessyoungmarauder
whose hostileapproachthe sentriesanticipatedat the beginningof the play.
In settingrighttwo injustices,Hamletwill cause physical,psychological, moral,
and politicaldislocationson a universalscale.
Nothingabouttheapparitiongives Hamletanyconfidencethatthepurposeful
determination needed to perseverethroughthe play's violence is groundedin
substantial,lastingvirtuetranscending Oresteianfutility.On thecontrary, the
Ghostis simultaneously and a horrifying
insubstantial mementoof all thatrots,
seemingto embodytheveryforcesof corporealruinthatHamletfearsmaybe
inimicalto virtue.It recalls in appearanceand dignitythe majesticking who
won honordestroyingthe Poles and conqueringambitiousNorway. But the
Ghostis a weak and ephemeralsubstitute fortheking,referred to by Horatio
and theguardsas his "image," "this thing," "illusion," "this portentous fig-
ure," a "horribleform,""a figurelikeyourfather,"something "like theKing."
Hamlet's astonishedprostration beforeit in thecloset scene contrastswiththe
queen's equallygreat astonishmentthatherson is gazingwildlyinto"vacancy"
and holdingdiscoursewith"th'incorporal air" (III.iv.118-19). The Ghostseems
verymuch"a thingof nothing"whenHamlet'sappeals forGertrudeto confirm
its existenceelicit only fearsthather son is a victimof schizophrenichallu-
cination:

Queen.To whomdo youspeakthis?

Ham. Do yousee nothing
there?
at all, yetall thatis I see.
Queen.Nothing
 36 SHAKESPEARE
QUARTERLY

Ham. Nordidyounothing hear?

Queen. No, nothing butourselves.
Ham. Why,lookyouthere,lookhowit stealsaway!
in hishabitas he lived!
My father,
Look wherehe goes,evennow,outat theportal!
Exit Ghost.
Queen.Thisis theverycoinageof yourbrain.
Thisbodilesscreation
ecstasy
Is verycunningin.
(III.iv.132-40)

Hamlet answershis mother'schargeof "ecstasy" convincingly.We cannot

believe thattheGhostis a figment of his imagination:Horatiohas raisedpre-
cisely thisissue in the firstscene of theplay, and has been quicklyconvinced
that the apparitionis "somethingmore than fantasy" (I.i.54). But Shake-
speare's stagecraft makes us feel poignantlyhow littleHamletis able to rely
on theGhostas his justification fora murderouscourseof action. Cast on the
defensive,forcedto justifytherightof a lunaticto catechizea sinner,Hamlet
is in no way aided by theencoreappearancethattheGhostmakesto whethis
"almost bluntedpurpose."
In additionto being "incorporal," insubstantial,the Ghost dwells on the
terrifyingprocessesby whichcorporealcreaturesare reducedto fragments of
themselves.Its firstwordsseemcalculatedto plungeHamletdeep intothoughts
of undoing."My houris almostcome, / When I to sulf'rousand tormenting
flames/ Must renderup myself,"it begins, evokingvisions of humanflesh
"rendered"to its elementslike animalfat(I.v.2-4). The Ghostmaybe Ham-
let's "father'sspirit," but it is a spiritbound by "foul crimes," doomed to
wear away by fastingand firethe impuritiesthatit acquiredin nature(11.9-
13). The punishments of its "prisonhouse" are notless intensethanwhatflesh
is heirto; in fact,theyare so muchmoreintensethathearingof them
Wouldharrow up thysoul,freezethyyoungblood,
Makethytwoeyeslikestarsstartfromtheirspheres,
Thyknotted andcombined locksto part,
Andeachparticular hairto standan end
Likequillsuponthefearful porpentine.
Butthiseternalblazonmustnotbe
To earsof fleshandblood.
(11.16-22)
The GhostsparesHamletthe sympathetic undoingthatwould befallhimif he
heard this tale of the Almighty'spurgingfires,but it treatshim to the next
worstthing,an accountof the effectsof Claudius's poison. When he is told
themannerof his father'sdeath-cut offinstantly fromlife, wife,and crown,
withvenomcoursingthroughhis body,his blood congealingand skincrusting,
and unrepented sinsweighinguponhis head-Hamlet hardlyrequirestheGhost's
accompanyinginjunction:"0, horrible!Most horrible!/ If thouhastnaturein
thee,bear it not" (11.80-81). Reelingas beneatha physicalblow, he feelsthat
his own bodymayno longercohere,no longersupporthis consciousness:"Hold,
hold, my heart,/ And you, my sinews, grow not instantold, / But bear me
up" (11.93-95).
stiffly
Earlier,the sightof the Ghosthas leftMarcellusand Barnardo"distilled/
Almostto jelly withtheact of fear" (I.ii.204-5). The tale of how his father's
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 37

body sank fromadmirablebeautyto horrifying monstrosity in an instant,and

how in the same instantinvisiblesins overwhelmedhis father'ssoul, plunges
Hamletintoa horroras muchontologicalas physical,intoa worldwhereman
the effectualethicalagentseems distilledto utterinconsequence.Is ambition
a shadow,as RosencrantzandGuildenstern suggestin a feebleattempt to broach
the topic of Hamlet's politicalintentions?"Then are our beggarsbodies, and
our monarchsand outstretched heroesthe beggars' shadows" (II.ii.267-69).
Justas a king's body mightbe imaginedgoing a passage throughthe gutsof
a beggar,his ambitious,"outstretched"spiritmaybe nothingmorelastingthan
a ghostlyshadow. In this world,thoughtsmay be no more capable of tran-
scendingruinthanare bodies. The earthnow seems "sterile" to Hamlet,the
firmament a morbidexhalationof infectious"vapors," and godlikemana hand-
ful of dustwaitingto returnto its disorganizedstate(II.ii). The best thingsin
himself-his fidelityto his father,and the love of Ophelia-are seen now as
compromised bytheold corrupt"stock" of mankindthatvirtuecan "inoculate"
but never supplant(III.i). Linkinghimselfwithmen such as Claudius-and
Ophelia withwomensuch as Gertrude-by the corruptiblematerialin which
theyare commonlyrooted,Hamletsees virtuouspurposeand rationalsignifi-
cance threatened everywhereby corporealcorruption.
This perceptionof bodilyexperienceas corruptand corrupting drivesHamlet
into disdainful,alienatedcontempt:contemptforhis own flesh,contemptfor
those partsof his experiencethatseem taintedby corporeality,contemptfor
people who threatento harmor to compromisehimby insinuatingthemselves
intohis thoughts.WhenHoratiowarnshimof thepossibledangersof following
the Ghost, he welcomes the destruction of his body: "Why, what should be
the fear?/ I do not set my life at a pin's fee, / And formy soul, whatcan it
do to that,/ Being a thingimmortalas itself?" (I.iv.64-67). Horatio's rea-
sonable reminderthatthe soul is no moreimmutableor invulnerablethanthe
body,butmayitselfbe wreckedin madnessas it hoversovertheabyss, drives
Hamletintowhatseems to Horatioa "desperate" violence: "Unhandme, gen-
tlemen./ By heaven,I'll makea ghostof himthatlets me!" (11.84-85). This
violentwithdrawal fromhisbodyand fromhiscompanionsis augmentedshortly
by withdrawal from his own worldlyself. Hamlet imaginesthat,in orderto
honorthe Ghost's partingcommand,he mustobliteratefrommemoryall the
experienceand learningstoredin his brain,uprootingpast impressionsuntil
onlythoseoftheavengingspiritlivethere,"Unmix'dwithbasermatter"(I.v. 104).
Forsakingforthe momenttheprudentialconsiderations thathis yearsof "ob-
servation" would suggestto him, and also his trustin his companions,he
contentshimselfwith"wild and whirlingwords," like a falcontoweringhigh
above the earth.
Hamlet's transcendent contemptis dramatizedmostpowerfullyin his treat-
mentof Ophelia, theone creaturewho ties himinextricably, physically,to the
corruptworld of Elsinore. His alienationfromher begins soon afterthe en-
counterwiththe Ghost. At theend of II.i, she tells Poloniushow Hamlethas
withdrawn himselfin ghostlysilence fromher society.The anticperformance
thatPolonius takes for "the veryecstasyof love" is indeed ecstatic,though
hardlyamatory.Hamlet,in Ophelia's description,resemblestheliteraryfigure
of the distractedand dishevelledlover, but he more stronglyevokes the cor-
poreal ruin suggestedby the figureof the Ghost. He has enteredher room,
Ophelia says, in a mannerominousenoughto striketerrorintoherheart,very
pale (as the Ghostwas said to be), "And witha look so piteousin purport,/
 38 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

As ifhe had beenloosed outofhell /To speakofhorrors"(II.i.82-84). Silently

scrutinizingthe amazed object of his visitation,as the Ghost silentlystood
beforehis interlocutors beforefinallyyieldingup speech to Hamlet,and three
timesimitating its actionof liftingits head up and down (describedby Horatio
at I.ii.216), he at last raises "a sigh so piteousand profound/ As it did seem
to shatterall his bulk/ And end his being" (II.i.94-96)-then driftsout of
the roomwithoutthe use of his eyes, theybeing constantlyfixedon Ophelia,
as the Ghost's were said to be on Horatio. In thusaffecting the shatteringof
bulk and endingof beingthattorehis fatherfromthequeen, Hamletdeclares
his intentionto tear himselffromhis eroticattachment to Ophelia.
A violentattemptto freehimselffromcorporeality, resultingparadoxically
in a deep immersionin it, characterizesall of Hamlet's dealingswithOphelia.
When he turnshis assumedmadnessupon the unfortunate girlwithfullforce
in Act III, he revilesheras a prettysnareforthespirit-one of thosecreatures
who substitute new faces fortheones God gave them,whojig and amble and
lisp, who excuse theirmoraldepravityby pleadingtheirrationalincapacity-
and urges her to take herselfout of sexual circulation.The next scene finds
himattackingherbody withribaldjokes aboutcountrymatters,lyingbetween
maids' legs, and games of show and tell. In thusbitterly doingviolenceto the
creaturewho mosthas access to his innerself, Hamletdoes not findfreedom
fromthe dangerof love, butonlyreduceshimselfand herto ruin.The defor-
mationof his formerselfthatOphelia thinksshe sees in his harangue-"That
unmatchedformand featureof blownyouth/Blastedwithecstasy" (III.i. 160-
61)-prefigures her own madnessin the nextAct. It foretellsalso Hamlet's
distractedexpressionsof anguishat her death: '

'Swounds,showmewhatthou'tdo.
Woo'tweep?Woo'tfight? Woo'tfast?Woo'ttearthyself?
Woo'tdrinkup eisel?Eat a crocodile?
I'll do't.
(V.i.274-77)

Hamletfindsexcessive and violentdegradationsof his own bodythe onlyad-

equate testimony to the falsenessof his earliercontempt.All of his effortsto
removehimselffromthecompromising infectionof corporeality
onlydrivehim
moredeeply into the understanding of his dependenceon the frailbody.
Hamlet's violent,and ultimatelyfutile,ambitionto transcendbodilyweak-
ness can be seen not only in his dealingswithOphelia, but also in all of his
attempts to respondadequatelyto thedeathof his father.In his firstspeech of
the play, while manifestly actingthe partof a mourner,he disdainsdramatic
action as being limitedby the opacityof the flesh.No physical"show," he
insists,can adequatelyconvey the immensity of his grief.His black clothes
and the expressivecorporealactions that accompanythemfall shortof the
indescribablestateof suffering thatresideswithinhim. Hamlet's separationof
"actions thata manmightplay" and theinvisibleanguishof his alienatedsoul
is an admissionof futility,suggestingthatno physicalacts-whetherdramatic
or heroic-can servethepurposesof thespirit.And his wordsringfalse when
comparedto the authenticalienationof Ophelia, whose mad meanderingsand
distractedgestures,while opaque to reason, neverthelessmove theiraudience
to anguishedcommiseration as coherentutterancenevercould-prompting Laertes
to exclaim, "This nothing'smorethanmatter"(IV.v. 174).
 A THINGOF NOTHING:THE CATASTROPHIC
BODY IN HAMLET 39

The Ghost's demandforvengeancerequiressome strongerresortto physi-

cality,and whenHamlet asks the Playerfor "a passionatespeech" he seems
brieflyto have founda model for "suiting" corporealactionto mentalstate.
He admiresthe Player's capacityto so translatea fictionalintentionintodra-
matic actionthatall of his corporeal"function"can be seen lending"forms
to his conceit" (II.ii.561-62). But it soon appears thatHamlet is not chiefly
interestedin theharmonioussuitingof body to soul. Rather,he has asked for
the speech in orderto excite himselfto a still moreviolentcontemptforthe
body. He imaginesthat,giventhemagnitudeof his wrong,he should "drown
thestagewithtears," "cleave thegeneralear withhorridspeech," "and amaze
indeed/The veryfacultiesof eyes and ears" (11.567-71). He fixesobsessively
on corporealexcitationas a standardfordramaticand ethicalaction,contem-
platingimaginaryinjuriesto his own body in orderto workhimselfup into
violence:
AmI a coward?
Whocalls me villain?Breaksmypateacross?
Plucksoffmybeardandblowsit in myface?
Tweaksmebythenose?Givesmethelie i' th'throat
As deepas to thelungs?Whodoes methis?
Ha, 'swounds,I shouldtakeit,forit cannotbe
ButI am pigeon-livered andlackgall
To makeoppression or erethis
bitter,
all theregionkites
I shouldha' fatted
Withthisslave'soffal.Bloody,bawdyvillain!
Remorseless, treacherous, kindlessvillain!
lecherous,
0, vengeance!
Why,whatan ass am I!
(11.577-89)
Hamlet'sbitterself-hatred in theselines stemsfromhis convictionthat,in order
to act the partof the revenger,he mustplungedeep into the bodilypassion
thathe so despises, and perhapsbecome a bloodyvillainhimself.He quickly
abandonsthe part,determining insteadto have otheractorsenact a play that
will determinethe king's guiltor innocence.
His instructions to the playerscorrecthis bittercontemptforthe body, as-
signingcorporeality itsdue place in dramaticimitation.Renouncinghis ecstatic
exaggeration physicalviolence,Hamletsays, "0, it offendsme to the soul
of
to heara robustiousperiwig-pated fellowteara passionto tatters,to veryrags,
to splittheears of thegroundlings"(III.ii.8-11). Use thebodyin youracting,
he tells theplayers,but "Suit the actionto the word,the wordto the action"
(11. 17-18). He no longerdisdains the capacityof bodily actionsto execute
ethicalintentions.The purposeof acting,he says, is to mirrorthe lineaments
of humanexperienceon stage-"to hold as 'twerethe mirrorup to nature;to
show virtueherown feature,scornherown image, and theveryage and body
of the timehis formand pressure" (11.21-24). Like a mirrorthatfaithfully
receivesthephysicalformsof things,dramaticarttakesthebodilyimpressof
menand womenand re-presents theirmoralnaturein itslivingoutlines.Hamlet
achieves in these prescriptions for art a conceptionof its ethicallyeffective
function,and he manages to implementthe conceptionwhen he uses other
artists'worksto probethepsychesof Claudius and Gertrude.The starklymi-
metictableauof courtlybodies playedbeforeClaudius literallyshowstheking
 40 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

the formof his actions,and achieves its intendedeffectof drivinghim from

cover. The portraitsof Gertrude'stwo husbandsengage her consciencewith
similarlystunningeffect,confronting her inescapablywiththe lineamentsof
her desires.
But artisticimitationsof bodilyactiondo nothelp Hamletto accomplishhis
most importantethical action. He uses the artisticfusionof body and soul,
formand intention, to do whatartcan do accordingto theRenaissanceaesthetic:
convey the intelligibleorderof experienceto an audienceand stirtheirmoral
responses.He cannot-or will not-use it to accomplishregicide.Indeed, he
letseven his "antic disposition"slip beforeand duringtheplay, withtheeffect
thatClaudius understands exactlywhythemousetraphas been sprungand de-
terminesto removehis enemyfromDenmark.
Hamlet's explicitconsiderationsof revenge,like his studiesof models of
dramaticaction, sufferconstantlyfromhis ambitionto transcendcorporeal
weakness. By associatingheroic action withan escape fromthe fleshin the
"To be or not to be" soliloquy, he initiatesa vain attemptto transcendthe
veryconditionsof action. He imaginesthat"takingup arms" will somehow
liberatehis soul fromtheindignitiesof thebody. But hearingthestoryof how
his fatherdied has made it impossibleforhimto imaginetheprocessof leaving
the body (so "noble in the mind") in any termsexcept those of corporeal
calamity.Eternalsleep suggestseternalnightmares.Castinghis mindup and
out of corporealmiseryonly leaves him "sicklied o'er withthe pale cast of
thought,"his face drainedof "the nativehue of resolution"by a consciousness
turnedpathologicallyinward.Corporealitydrags his heaven-seekingthoughts
to earth;like theprayingClaudius, he findsthemmiserablyincapableof tran-
scendingthe limitationsof bodilyexistence.
His effortto drawinspiration fromthesoldiershipof Fortinbras, like his very
similaradmirationforthePlayer,loses coherentethicalpurposeas it sinksinto
violentdisdainforbodilywell-being.The NorwegianadventureagainstPoland
seems to him a case of pathologicallymorbidviolence, an "imposthumeof
muchwealthand peace, / That inwardbreaks,and shows no cause without/
Whythemandies" (IV.iv.27-29). But he forceshimselfto admireit, because
of Fortinbras'seagernessto abandonbodilyconcernsforthesake of thespirit.
His own small sum of bloodshed,he decides, indicatesa beast's dull main-
tenanceof corporealfunctions,whileFortinbras'sadmirable"spirit," his "di-
vine ambition,"appear in his willingnessto expose the great"mass" of his
armyto indiscriminate slaughter.Fortinbras'ssacrificeof twentythousandmen
fora piece of land notlargeenoughto burythemoutpacesin barbarity Laertes's
willingness to cuthis enemy's throatin thechurch, and his motives-"a fantasy
and trickof fame"-are moreinsubstantial. Hamletrecognizesthemonstrosity
of the deed, and even the wordsthathe calls up to defendit betraytheiros-
tensiblepurposes: "Examples gross as earthexhortme" (can such examples
be exemplary?);"Rightlyto be great/ Is not to stirwithoutgreatargument"
(if he is affirming Fortinbras'saction, does he not need another"not"?). In
yearningto patternhis own revengeon thissenselesspromotion of catastrophe,
Hamlet abandons all realisticconsiderationof good and evil in an effortto
overcomehis dull animal maintenanceof corporeallife. Insteadof deploring
Fortinbras'sfailureto use thebody forsubstantialpurposes,he celebratesthe
way in whichhe contemptuously smashesit, and therebyentertainsthoughts
of moraldepravity.
In theprayerscene, we see Hamletcaughtonce morein thedivisionthathe
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 41

wouldmakebetweenbodyand spirit,and once morecultivating thepathological

corruptionthathe so fears. Seeing Claudius engaged, as he thinks,in "the
purgingof his soul," makinghimself"fit and seasoned for his passage"-
whereashis own fatherdied "grossly,fullof bread,/Withall his crimesbroad
blown"-Hamlet waits for a momentthatwill have "no relish of salvation
in't," andleavesClaudius's"physic"togivewaytomore"sicklydays" (III.iii.80-
96). An ill-intentioned consultingphysician,he judges the alimentarysystem
of thepatientsufficientlyfreeof obstructionto permitan unimpeded"passage"
of the soul to paradise,and prescribesa periodof waitingso thattheorganism.
may worsenand clog the hatefulsoul withinit beforeit is killed. His false
assumptionthatanyhumansoul, muchless one so corruptas Claudius's, could
free itselffromthe conditionsof corporealityleads him to seek a barbaric
revengeincompatiblewithChristianvirtue,and preventshimfromenactingthe
simplerrevengethatlies possiblebeforehim. The dramaticironythatClaudius
has not been able to transcendhis body and the thingsthatit stillloves urges
the insufficiency of Hamlet's attitudes.
Purposefulactioncannotcoexist withHamlet's effortto distinguishthe in-
vincible soul fromthe ruinousbody. Such an effortseeks to rescue the self
fromsomethingthatit depends upon forits being and doing. Consciousness
in Hamlet is, like thebody, an entitypoised betweensubstantialpresenceand
ephemeralabsence. The body growsand decays accordingto its own laws; by
the same inscrutablelaws, menfindachievementin themidstof loss, security
in themidstof fear,powerin weakness,significancein accident.Hamletdefies
theselaws so long as he attempts to removethespiritfromambiguityand lodge
it in simplicity.Insteadof cultivatingthe compoundof kindredelementsthat
is a spiritedbody, he tries to split it into a duality,and wastes his energy
contemninghalf of himself.
WhenHamletbreaksout of his dualismand moreconfidently treadsthestage
as a duellist,it is because he has finallyacknowledged,withoutdread or an-
guish, thatprinces,like theirswords,accomplishtheirends in "passing." A
clown's tricksdo notoutlivehis kicks:notonlyYorick's lips have disappeared
fromthe earth,but also his gibes, his gambols,his songs, his flashesof mer-
riment.Nor, by the same token,can Caesar, "thatearthwhichkepttheworld
in awe" (V.i.215), expectto remaina substantialand functional presence,save
perhapsas a patchon a windywall. The greatpersonageswho mayhave owned
the graveyard'sbones dance again in imaginationas creatureswho mistook
theirpower forsomethingmore substantialthanthe body, and the fragments
of theirbodies mock theirpretensionby outlivingthem.Gertrudemay have
forgotten herhusbandafteronlytwomonths,buta tanner'sfleshis stillkeeping
out wateraftereightyears. As Hamletpersists(despiteHoratio's objection)in
his courageouslyreductivemeditationson humanvanity,he approachesthe
brashhumilityof theGravedigger,who happilyshovelsaside pieces of bodies
as he singsa dittyof age having"shipped me intotheland, /As if I had never
been such" (V.i.71-74). The rustic's"absolute" use of theterms"man" and
"woman" comicallyrelievesthe anxietygeneratedsince the beginningof the
play by Hamlet's effortto distinguishmankindfromcorporeality:

Ham. Whatmandostthoudig it for?

Clown.Forno man,sir.
Ham. Forwhatwomanthen?
Clown.Fornoneneither.
42 QUARTERLY
SHAKESPEARE

Ham. Whois to be buriedin't?

Clown.One thatwas a woman,sir;but,resthersoul,
she's dead.
Ham. How absolutethe knave is!
(11.130-36)

Hamlet's takingsolace in theprovisional"absolute" thatmenand womenare

morethantheirbodies, but not different fromthem,suggeststhathe accepts
as well thefactthatman's strength consistsin accedingto corporealaccidents,
ratherthanin tryingto transcendthem.
While it is clear thatHamletadoptsa new kindof understanding in Act V,
and thathe undergoessome beneficialchange as a result,criticismhas long
been notoriously vague aboutpreciselywhatthissavingknowledgeconsistsin.
Hamletdoes notlearnsimplyto acceptdeath;indeed,he seems alwaysto have
desiredit. Nor are his wordsaboutthe "divinitythatshapesour ends" and the
"special providencein the fall of a sparrow" sufficient foundationon which
to base a religiousethic or cosmology.What seems to be on his mindmore
essentiallythaneitherdeath or God is a preoccupationwiththe possibilities
and conditionsof purposefulhumanaction. But even here the understanding
seems to be morenegativethanpositive.Hamletbeginsto embraceaccidental
occasions-seeing themunderthe aspect of ProvidenceratherthanFortune-
and to renouncehis earlierneed to understandand controleveryaspect of his
revenge.Discussing the importanceof chance occurrencein the finalaction,
WilliamWarnerhas recently observedhowreluctant thecriticsof variousschools
have been to accept limitationson Hamlet's importance,and how theyhave
beendrivento ingeniousorvaguearguments in attemptsto rescuehispurposeful
intentionality.10What Hamletlearns,Warnersuggests,is preciselythe insuf-
ficiencyof his own attempts to makefinaland coherentconstructions of reality:
he learns,in effect,by unlearningwhathe has thoughtearlierin the play.
One thingthatHamletunlearnsis his contemptforhis physicalnature,which
has persistently reducedthis spiritedand capable exemplarof active virtueto
actingnot at all, or in spurtsof blindrage. Hamlet's identitythroughout the
play has dependedupon his wish to exceed the conditions of vulnerabilityand
incompleteness thatinherein an animalbody. But realityhas repeatedlycon-
tradictedthis assumedidentity,insistingthatthe body mustbe centralto his
being, not somethinginessentialthatcan be thoughtinto irrelevanceand vi-
olentlydiscarded.All of Hamlet's efforts to transcendcorporealityhave only
implicatedhimamorallyin its ruinousviolence. Finallyhe abandonsthefruit-
less attempt.He sees in the graveyardnot simplythe bodily "nothingness"
thathas so distressedhimbefore,but an inescapableconnectionbetweenthat
nothingness and his own being. As JamesCalderwoodhas putit, "For Hamlet
fully'To Be,' it seems,he mustexperiencein thegraveyard,underthetutelage
of theGravemaker,whatit is 'Not To Be.' For his own identity to crystallize,
he mustcome to the place whereall identitiesdissolve."" The Hamlet who
killsthekingis a manwhohas acceptedradicallimitations on his being,leaving
the orchestration of his revengeto Claudius ("I am constantto mypurposes;

'1 William BeattyWarner,Chance and the Text of Experience:Freud, Nietzsche,and Shake-

speare's Hamlet (Ithaca: CornellUniv. Press, 1986), pp. 268-75.
" JamesL.
Calderwood,To Be and Not to Be: Negationand Metadramain Hamlet(New York:
Columbia Univ. Press, 1983), p. 103.
 A THING OF NOTHING: THE CATASTROPHIC BODY IN HAMLET 43

theyfollowtheKing's pleasure"),theunderstanding of his deathto God ("Since

no man of aughthe leaves knows,whatis't to leave betimes?"), thetellingof
his tale to Horatio("Horatio, I am dead; /Thou livest;reportme and mycause
aright"), and the continuationof his life to Fortinbras("He has my dying
voice"). In askingforgivenessof Laertesfortheimprudent violencethattook
Polonius's life,he detacheshimself-withdiplomaticmendacity,butalso with
evidentsincerity-fromthe arrogantand tormented self thathe has been:
If Hamletfromhimselfbe ta'enaway,
Andwhenhe's nothimself does wrongLaertes,
ThenHamletdoes it not,Hamletdeniesit.
Whodoes it then?His madness.
(V.ii.236-39)
Hamlethas notin factkilledPoloniusin a fitof "madness," butthewordmay
be takenas a tactfulway of referring to an assumedself thathas been all but
insane. Calderwoodcalls it a metaphor:"As a metaphorforHamlet's bond to
his father-forthatsense in whichHamletas revengeris 'possessed' by the
ghost of his father-Hamlet's madnessis trulyno partof himself,and is in
fact 'poor Hamlet's enemy.' "12
Secure in the less ambitiousand less anxiousself thatremainswhenhe has
cast out the demon of transcendent power, Hamletcomes into his own as an
actor on the nationalstage, easily and confidentlysubmitting himselfto the
"pass" of swordplay.He acceptsClaudius's invitationto let Laertes's poison-
ous hand pass into his own: "Come, Hamlet,come, and take thishand from
me" (V.ii.227). His body informshim withsick misgivingthatClaudius is
arranginghis exit fromthislife, but it assures him at the same momentthat
he has the physicalmeans to act as he purposes:
Hor. You willlose thiswager,mylord.
Ham. I do notthinkso. Sincehe wentintoFranceI havebeenin continual
practice.I shallwinat theodds.Butthouwouldstnotthinkhowill
all's hereaboutmyheart.Butit is no matter.
(V.ii.211-15)
Hamlet suggeststhat,in orderto act, humanbeings mustaccept the factthat
theirachievementsgo hand in handwithfailure,and findtheirintegrity in the
welcomingof fragmentation. Acceptingthathe will himselfsooneror laterbe
"no matter,"Hamletconsentsto make up one frangiblepartin a largerbody,
as an actorperformsone role in a play. In his finalwordsbeforethecushions
and courtiersand daggers and drinksappear-"Let be"-he overcomesthe
distinctionbetween spiritualfixityand corporealfluxthat has plagued him
throughout theplay. Thingswill be as theybecome,his deathwill come when
it arrives,and he can at last leave offhis effortto definehimselfin opposition
to whatMaynardMack has called his "imaginativeenvironment.""13
Most of Shakespeare'stragediestell the storyof an arrogantman who mis-
takes his grandioseconstructions of realityforrealityitself.FromRichardII
to Coriolanus,his heroesattemptforcefully to imposea deludedconceptionof
realityon the world,and realitybringsthemdown. Hamletdiffersfromthese
12Calderwood, 44.
p.
13
MaynardMack, "The Worldof Hamlet," The Yale Review,41 (1952), 502-23, esp. p. 502.
44 SHAKESPEARE QUARTERLY

vain and power-madmen in being adolescent,uncertain,victimized,self-hat-

ing. But he shareswiththemthe presumptuousness of believingthathe can
transcendthe laws by which othermen and women thinkand behave. The
of his attempting
futility to be something
otherthana bodyis comicallyasserted
by themadcapramblingsof theGravedigger;it assumestragicgrandeurin the
finalcatastrophe,as newlyruinedbodies litterthe stage, awaitingthe Grave-
digger'sservices.Havingfinallyconsentedto actthemodestpartoftheduellist,
a disciplinedcorporealagentwho confineshis thoughtsto theplay of physical
circumstances, Hamletsubmitswithgrace and dignityto thelimitationsof his
kind.