Ivan Fuller
SETC Symposium
March 25, 2003
“Playing ‘What
If?’ with Hamlet”
When staging Shakespeare’s plays I have been drawn to finding ways of creating a new experience for my audience. Granted, every new production is a new experience of that play; however, I believe that more popular titles like Hamlet bring with them a greater degree of expectation for how the show will be presented. Audiences think they know the show and often attend in order to have their expectations fulfilled. While I do not like to disappoint people by failing to live up to their expectations, I have no interest in giving an audience something that has already played out in their mind’s eye nor do I wish to recreate their favorite film version.
This need for creating a fresh production often leads me down the path of reexamining my own view of the script. I often throw out the ideas that I have always taken for granted and begin playing the “what if” game. However, this is not a quest of novelty for novelty’s sake. All decisions are solely based on what the text might be saying, as well as trying to find a way to connect the world of the play with the world of the audience.
In order to “win” the “what if” game, you need to throw out not only all that you have previously believed to be true about the play, but you must also accept the fact that people often say things that they do not mean; usually done so to deceive the listener. I also found that it helped if I kept myself open to inspiration coming from unexpected sources. With these guides working for me, I used four major “what if’s” for my six-actor production of Hamlet. Credit needs to be given to some fellow directors attending the 1995 NEH Summer Institute for three of these ideas.
The first “what if” was the result of inspiration arising out of the unexpected. I had originally intended to have my wife, Vickie, play Ophelia. However, on December 23 she made the surprise announcement that she was pregnant, which would make her eight months pregnant when we opened Hamlet in July. After considering and then dismissing the idea of a pregnant Ophelia (and being told by Vickie that I could replace her), I had my “crazy” idea. What if Gertrude was pregnant? Her first husband has been dead for two months, but she is clearly further along in her pregnancy than that. Everyone would naturally assume that the child was King Hamlet’s. But is it? Not to Hamlet who sees Claudius fawning on Gertrude. The ghost confirms Hamlet’s suspicion of infidelity when he tells Hamlet to “leave her to heaven/And to those thorns that in her bosom lodge/To prick and sting her.” (1.5.93-95) Suddenly “thorns,” “bosom,” “prick” and “sting” take on new meaning.
But does the text really support this idea? Are there lines spoken that deny the possibility of a pregnant Gertrude? The text is certainly full of references to pregnancy and conception. While I could find nothing to deny the idea, I did find several lines that could actually be interpreted to support it. Consider the following lines, coupled with appropriate gestures on the part of the actor:
· ’Tis an unweeded garden/That grows to seed. Things rank and gross in nature/Possess it merely. (1.2.139 – 141) Hamlet gives a “rounded belly” gesture with one hand while the other points toward where Gertrude exited.
· Hamlet: Sir, I lack advancement.
Rosencrantz: How
can that be, when you have the voice of the King himself for your succession in
Hamlet: Ay, sir, but “While the grass grows…” The proverb is something musty. (3.2.368 – 373) Hamlet again gives the “rounded belly” gesture while saying “grass grows.”
· Queen: What have I done, that thou dar’st wag thy tongue/In noise so rude against me?
Hamlet: Such an
act/That blurs the grace and blush of modesty,/Calls virtue hypocrite, takes
off the rose/From the fair forehead of an innocent love/And sets a blister
there, makes marriage vows/As false as dicers’ oaths – O, such a
deed!” (3.4.47 – 54) Hamlet gestures to the
While one could certainly argue that Shakespeare did not intend to communicate that Gertrude was pregnant, it is also apparent that the possibility can be supported when key lines are read with this condition in mind. Later I will refer back to her pregnancy and the effect it will have on her actions.
The second “what if” came out of dissatisfaction with the Hamlet/Ophelia relationship. Ophelia has traditionally been a weak character – a target for Hamlet’s insanity and a tool to be used toward his goal of revenge. I was much more interested in an Ophelia who would relate better to the world of my audience. This would require a stronger female character – someone who is an active participant, not someone who is simply acted upon. What if Hamlet confided in Ophelia about the ghost and the mission to seek revenge? Here is where the reading of lines spoken as untruths comes into play. There is no denying that Ophelia says things that make her seem a victim, rather than a conspirator. However, if we accept that she is saying these things in order to deceive, then an interesting new possibility arises. The examples that follow take into account the notion that Shakespeare did not specify every stage direction in his writing. It also takes into account only what the characters say. How and why they say them is where the “what if” factor comes into play.
Ophelia seems to be a character given to speaking in lengthy poetic speeches that read a tad bit phony in comparison to the dialogue surrounding those speeches. Two key examples are the Act 2, Scene 1 speech about Hamlet’s “doublet” being “all unbraced.” The second example is her “O, what a noble mind” speech in Act 3, Scene 1. I interpreted the somewhat excessive nature of those two speeches as signals that she was performing.
In the first example, I had Ophelia and Hamlet entering together , unseen by Polonius who is instructing Reynaldo. We see Hamlet whispering something to Ophelia. He then slips out of sight as Ophelia rushes to her father to tell him how scared she is at Hamlet’s strange behavior – a direct contrast to what we have just witnessed. Her dramatic “recollection” of Hamlet’s visit to her closet provided dramatic irony for the audience who knows that it is all an act, designed to establish the idea that Hamlet is acting oddly.
The second example, during the “nunnery” scene, has Ophelia giving Hamlet a note. (“Remembrances of yours.”) When Hamlet reads the note he says, “Ha, ha, are you honest?” (3.1.113) In my production, Hamlet looked to the tapestry hiding Claudius and Polonius as he said this line in a hushed voice. In essence, he was asking, “Are you serious?” Ophelia responds with a cautioning, “My lord?” Hamlet realizes he must play the encounter for those in hiding as he begins to slowly work his dialogue into a semblance of madness, climaxing with the “nunnery” attacks. It was apparent to the audience that Ophelia was playing along with Hamlet (and having a fine time of it, too). The bond between these two young people is strong. The tragedy will be all the greater, therefore, when they begin to lose control of the situation. When Hamlet leaves the scene (after giving Ophelia a quick, yet tender, kiss of gratitude), Ophelia launches into a speech designed to make her father and king believe that she is devastated by Hamlet’s words. She is a good actress, but the audience knows that it is, indeed, an act.
Ophelia makes an unexpected appearance in Act 4, Scene 3 when Hamlet is telling Claudius where to find Polonius’ body. She is clearly in shock from the news for she can say nothing. When Hamlet sees her, the full impact of his actions come crashing home so that when Claudius tells him that he will be sent to England, Hamlet responds, “Good,” for Ophelia’s sake, trying to apologize as he accepts the punishment. When the king agrees that Hamlet would believe it “good” if he “knew’st our purpose,” Hamlet looks at Ophelia and says, “I see a cherub that sees them.”
One final example
of how we strengthened the relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia occurred as
the result of cutting all references to Fortinbras from the production. I felt that Hamlet’s scene of
departure from
How all occasions do inform against me
And spur my dull revenge…I do not know
Why yet I live to say “This thing’s to do,”
Sith I have cause, and will, and strength, and means
To do ‘t…How stand I, then,
That have a father killed, a mother stained,
Excitements of my reason and my blood,
And let all sleep?…[N]O, from this time forth
My thoughts be bloody or be nothing worth! (4.4.34 – 69)
At the mention of the “father killed” the death of both fathers resonates clearly. As Hamlet leaves, Ophelia is convinced that she will never see him again. The combined loss of father and lover make her fall toward insanity even more believable.
A pregnant Gertrude becomes a tiger fighting to protect her unborn child against any threats. This notion set the stage for the final two “what if’s.” In an attempt to pump up the dramatic power of the scene between Hamlet and his mother in her “closet,” we wondered what would happen if Gertrude saw and heard the ghost of her dead husband. Again, we were faced with a situation where the words spoken contradicted the truth. We had to play Gertrude’s attempt to deny what she had seen. Whether it appeared to be her guilty conscious or fear of admitting the reality of the ghost, her refusal to admit seeing anything came across clearly as the act of a woman on the very edge of holding things together. Additional rationale for the “what if” comes from the old argument about why everyone can see the ghost in Act One, but only Hamlet can see him in Act Three. Sensible answers have been given for the reason why Gertrude doesn’t see the ghost, but when we allowed her to see and hear him, the dramatic impact was huge for both the actress playing the role and the audience caught up in her dilemma. And it made sense to the audience that she could see the ghost, given his visibility to others in prior scenes.
When Gertrude is left to cope with a late-term pregnancy, guilt over the factors that brought about the pregnancy, a son who has just murdered someone, and the ghost of her former husband, the stage is ripe for a woman on the brink of disaster. Traditional stagings of Hamlet have often kept Gertrude as the fairly innocent victim of Hamlet and Claudius, but our production showed that if she was a victim, she paid the price much earlier than the final scene. We showed a woman unraveling from all that she has experienced and then being verbally assaulted by Ophelia in her “madness” scene (Act 4, Scene 5). It was obvious from Ophelia’s rather pointed comments, and her song, that she knew about Gertrude, Claudius and their infidelity. Rather than singing about Hamlet, as is often the case, Ophelia directs these lyrics to the king and queen: “Young men will do ‘t, if they come to ‘t;/By Cock, they are to blame./Quote she ‘Before you tumbled me,’/You promised me to wed.” (4.5.65 – 68) When Ophelia returns with the flowers, she gives the rue to Gertrude (for sorrow and remembrance). As Ophelia instructs Gertrude to “wear [her] rue with a difference,” she smacks the flowers on Gertrude’s stomach. The implication is clear. Ophelia knows and is just crazy enough to spread the truth to others. Gertrude is both outraged and scared.
When Gertrude returns to the stage she reveals that Ophelia is dead. This became our fourth “what if.” As Gertrude delivers this long, poetic speech about the death of Ophelia, it tends to ring a bit false – especially given the relationship between the two women the last time we saw them together. Why aren’t Gertrude’s clothes wet or dirty? Did she make no attempt to help Ophelia? Apparently not. Could she have had something to do with Ophelia’s death? While we did not hit the audience over the head with an answer to that question, the possibility was certainly in the air. At Ophelia’s burial, Gertrude says that she had hoped Ophelia would have been Hamlet’s wife. This could still be very true – a moment of real regret for the course events had taken – or it could have been a cover-up. Only Gertrude knows and she doesn’t say anything further about it.
The final impact of the pregnant Gertrude “what if” shows up in the final scene. As Gertrude is dying from the poisoned cup, she has a moment of epiphany while clasping her stomach – the infidelity that created the child in her womb has led to the death of both her children.
All four of these “what if” scenarios were designed to heighten the dramatic impact of the production while maintaining textual integrity. That they succeeded in moving the audience and raising the dramatic stakes was evident from their comments and critical reactions. In the case of this production, a desire for novelty, coupled with respect for the spoken text, led to some fascinating discoveries resulting in a fresh, new Hamlet that defied audiences’ expectations.