Something's Rotten In Denmark Meaning

It is highly problematic to use the word ‘tragedy’ when referring to Shakespeare’s works. ‘Hamlet’ has long been considered the best example of what one would call a tragedy out of all Shakespeare’s plays, yet this generalisation, as it proves to be, is the most troublesome of all. Perhaps the reason for this lies in the unknown extent of Shakespeare’s familiarity with what one would call traditional tragedy, whose routes lie in the principles set down by the Greeks and Aristotle.

Aristotle, in setting down the so-called rules of tragedy in his ‘Poetics’ talks of an essential element; ‘Hamartia’, fundamental in the downfall of the prominent (usually this prominence is reflected in a high up hierarchical figure, perhaps of the nobility)’tragic hero’ and which, furthermore the character must recognise. This fall from grace marks a reversal of the character’s fortune, placing great emphasis on an element of fate; the ‘strumpet fortune’ that Hamlet so frequently refers to.

Aristotle, echoing the Greek view that tragedy is didactic also talks of a fundamental element, Catharsis, at the tragic hero’s downfall where the audience’s emotions are purged and purified. Taking this into account, the links between Shakespeare’s dramatic works and Greek tragedy are nevertheless unproved and tenuous. It is likely, however, that elements of ‘tragedy’ would have filtered through somehow, perhaps through Latin literature, in the form of works such as Horace’s ‘Ars Poetica’.

In an attempt to best balance such uncertainties, it seems that one must reject Aristotle as the only guide and furthermore, in attempting to incorporate ‘Shakespearean tragedy’, all one can do is make comparisons to his other plays, which are considered to be ‘tragedies’.

Get quality help now

Marrie pro writer

Verified

Proficient in: Culture

5 (204)

“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

‘Hamlet’ can be separated from other tragedies because of the further idea, which percolates through the play, of the revenge tradition.

This provides the play, at least in terms of plot with a sense of additional inevitability that Hamlet, the ‘revenger’, will get his revenge. It also places Hamlet in a situation where, because Shakespeare essentially sticks to a fundamental ‘revenge tragedy’ structure regardless of his flexible and perhaps dismissive attitude towards conventions, he must nevertheless follow an unavoidable course, which is in some ways contradictory to the tragic elements of the play.

Shakespeare himself alerts us to the dangers of over-classification through the words of Polonius, who ironically hits the mark in an uncanny way, contrary perhaps to both his intentions and his character, when announcing the arrival of the actors;”The best actors in the world, either for tragedy, comedy, history, pastoral, pastoral-comical, historical-pastoral, tragical-historical, tragical-comical-historical-pastoral, scene individable, or poem unlimited.

Seneca cannot be too heavy, nor Plautus too light… ” Given all of these problems of definition I will explore what drives Hamlet in the play to see if this can be linked with anything else which is tragic. Hamlet, it seems, is a character caught between an old order and a new one. He finds himself adrift and unable to rely on the old certainties in a world where the stability of feudal chivalry is being replaced by one marked by trouble and uncertainty.

The world Shakespeare creates is one which perhaps reflects some aspects of that which the author himself lived in and one can parallel the transformation of Hamlet’s surroundings with the historical movement from what many view to be the Elizabethan ‘Golden Age’, a time of order and stability, to one of rapid change. J. Donne reflects upon this phenomenon in ‘The First Anniversary’, writing; “And new philosophy calls all in doubt the element of fire is quite put out…. ’tis all in pieces, all coherence gone: all just supply and relation: Prince, subject, father, son, are things forgot”

Shakespeare depicts Denmark as unstable, with a new king coming to the throne and an external threat from Norway in the shape of young Fortinbras avenging his father’s loss of land. The same sense of uncertainty is noticeable within the court with the long-established hierarchical divisions threatened by the ordinary people that Claudius refers to as the “distracted multitude”. Hamlet himself states, “Something is rotten in Denmark. Alongside this background Hamlet’s personal world has been greatly affected.