Ghost enters, Hamlet speaks of other matters: he mentions the coldness of the night, and observes that he has not heard the clock strike, adding, in reference to the custom of drinking, that it is "More honour'd in the breach than the observance." Act I., Scene 4. Owing to the tranquil state of his mind, he indulges in some moral reflections. Afterwards, the Ghost suddenly enters. "Hor. Look, my lord! it comes. Ham. Angels and ministers of grace defend us!" The same thing occurs in "Macbeth" in the daggerscene, the moment before the hero sees it, he has his mind applied to some indifferent matters; "Go, tell thy mistress," &c. Thus, in both cases, the preternatural appearance has all the effect of abruptness, and the reader is totally divested of the notion, that the figure is a vision of a highly wrought imagination. Here Shakspere adapts himself so admirably to the situation-in other words, so puts himself into it—that though poetry, his language is the very language of nature. No terms, associated with such feelings, can occur to us so proper as those which he has employed, especially on the highest, the most august, and the most awful subjects that can interest a human being in this sentient world. That this is no mere fancy, I can undertake to establish from hundreds, I might say thousands, of passages. No character he has drawn, in the whole list of his plays, could so well and fitly express himself, as in the language Shakspere has put into his mouth. There is no indecision about Hamlet, as far as his own sense of duty is concerned; he knows well what he ought to do, and over and over again he makes up his mind to do The moment the players, and the two spies set upon it. him, have withdrawn, of whom he takes leave with a line so expressive of his contempt, "Ay so; good bye you.1-Now I am alone," he breaks out into a delirium of rage against himself for neglecting to perform the solemn duty he had undertaken, and contrasts the factitious and artificial display of feeling by the player with his own apparent indifference; "What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba, That he should weep for her?" Yet the player did weep for her, and was in an agony of grief at her sufferings, while Hamlet is unable to rouse himself to action, in order that he may perform the command of his father, who had come from the grave to incite him to revenge :: "This is most brave! That I, the son of a dear father murder'd, A scullion." Act II., Scene 2. It is the same feeling, the same conviction of what is his duty, that makes Hamlet exclaim in a subsequent part of the tragedy: "How all occasions do inform against me, Why yet I live to say- this thing's to do,' Act IV., Scene 4. Yet with all this strong conviction of duty, and with all this resolution arising out of strong conviction, nothing is 1 1st Fol., "God buy' ye"; Globe Shak. " God be wi' ye." M done. This admirable and consistent character, deeply acquainted with his own feelings, painting them with such wonderful power and accuracy, and firmly persuaded that a moment ought not to be lost in executing the solemn charge committed to him, still yields to the same retiring from reality, which is the result of having, what we express by the terms, a world within himself. Such a mind as Hamlet's is near akin to madness. Dryden has somewhere said,1 "Great wit to madness nearly is allied," greatness and he was right; for he means by "wit that of genius, which led Hamlet to a perfect knowledge of his own character, which, with all strength of motive, was so weak as to be unable to carry into act his own most obvious duty. With all this he has a sense of imperfectness, which becomes apparent when he is moralizing on the skull in the churchyard. Something is wanting to his completeness-something is deficient which remains to be supplied, and he is therefore described as attached to Ophelia. His madness is assumed, when he finds that witnesses have been placed behind the arras to listen to what passes, and when the heroine has been thrown in his way as a decoy. Another objection has been taken by Dr. Johnson, and Shakspere has been taxed very severely. I refer to the scene where Hamlet enters and finds his uncle praying, and refuses to take his life, excepting when he is in the height of his iniquity. To assail him at such a moment of confession and repentance, Hamlet declares, 1 "Why, this is hire and salary, not revenge." Act III., Scene 3. "Great wits are sure to madness near allied, 2 Read "O." He therefore forbears, and postpones his uncle's death, until he can catch him in some act "That has no relish of salvation in't." This conduct, and this sentiment, Dr. Johnson has pronounced to be so atrocious and horrible, as to be unfit to be put into the mouth of a human being.1 The fact, however, is that Dr. Johnson did not understand the character of Hamlet, and censured accordingly: the determination to allow the guilty King to escape at such a moment is only part of the indecision and irresoluteness of the hero. Hamlet seizes hold of a pretext for not acting, when he might have acted so instantly and effectually: therefore, he again defers the revenge he was bound to seek, and declares his determination to accomplish it at some time, "When he is drunk, asleep, or in his rage, Or in th' incestuous pleasures of his bed." This, allow me to impress upon you most emphatically, was merely the excuse Hamlet made to himself for not taking advantage of this particular and favourable moment for doing justice upon his guilty uncle, at the urgent instance of the spirit of his father. Dr. Johnson farther states, that in the voyage to England, Shakspere merely follows the novel as he found it, as if the poet had no other reason for adhering to his original; but Shakspere never followed a novel, because he found such and such an incident in it, but because he saw that the story, as he read it, contributed to enforce, or to explain some great truth inherent in human nature. He never could lack invention to alter or improve a popular narrative; but he did not wantonly vary from it, when he knew that, as it was related, it would so well apply to his 'See Malone's Shakspere by Boswell, vii. 382, for Johnson's note upon this part of the scene.-J. P. C. own great purpose. He saw at once how consistent it was with the character of Hamlet, that after still resolving, and still deferring, still determining to execute, and still postponing execution, he should finally, in the infirmity of his disposition, give himself up to his destiny, and hopelessly place himself in the power, and at the mercy of his enemies. Even after the scene with Osrick, we see Hamlet still indulging in reflection, and hardly thinking of the task he has just undertaken: he is all despatch and resolution, as far as words and present intentions are concerned, but all hesitation and irresolution, when called upon to carry his words and intentions into effect; so that, resolving to do everything, he does nothing. He is full of purpose, but void of that quality of mind which accomplishes purpose. Anything finer than this conception, and working out of a great character, is merely impossible. Shakspere wished to impress upon us the truth, that action is the chief end of existence that no faculties of intellect, however brilliant, can be considered valuable, or indeed otherwise than as misfortunes, if they withdraw us from, or render us repugnant to action, and lead us to think and think of doing, until the time has elapsed when we can do anything effectually. In enforcing this moral truth, Shakspere has shown the fulness and force of his powers: all that is amiable and excellent in nature is combined in Hamlet, with the exception of one quality. He is a man living in meditation, called upon to act by every motive human and divine, but the great object of his life is defeated by continually resolving to do, yet doing nothing but resolve. Note on the Subjects of the Remaining Lectures. The Twelfth Lecture, as advertised in the Times, was to be on "Shakspere and Milton; but Milton does not appear |