Act One - Some Considerations

By the end of Act One, a great deal has been accomplished. In terms of narrative, both the main plot and the two sub-plots have been established. The main plot, initiated by the ghost’s story to Hamlet, is known as the Revenge Plot. A good portion of the play’s energy will henceforth revolve around Hamlet’s efforts to determine the veracity of the ghost’s story; despite the way Act One ends, Hamlet is by no means certain of the truth, as we shall see.

Also established in a preliminary way is the Norwegian or Fortinbras Subplot. While seeming to be of peripheral import compared to the ghost’s revelations, we will see that it becomes a very important part of the play’s architecture. For now, let us remember that this subplot revolves around a young prince with a dead father and an uncle as his king, working to fulfill a mission, on a quest for national honour.

As well, there is the Romantic Subplot involving the relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia and revolving around the house of Polonius which, of course, includes Laertes. The relationship of these three plots will become more apparent as the play progresses.

We have also been introduced to the key characters of the play. Sufficient commentary has been made throughout Act One as to what can be observed about them, but a few things bear repeating: Hamlet, our protagonist, is a young man of formidable intellect and conscience. His moral sense has provoked inner outrage over the marriage of his mother to her brother-in-law, whereas no one else is depicted as having any reservations about the propriety of such a union. Of course, the act showed that the Prince’s despondency over it is also fueled by his low opinion of Claudius, his very high opinion of his late father, and his grave disappointment over the fact that already, the Queen seems to have forgotten her first husband. His disaffection with life is so profound that he wishes for death.

Claudius, putting aside the ghost’s allegations for the moment, is depicted as a skilled politician, dealing effectively with both people and matters of state as evidenced by the fact that everyone seems to have freely gone along with the marriage, and the country has a very good chance of averting a major war with Norway by Claudius sending his emissaries with a letter to the Norwegian King informing him of what his young nephew, Fortinbras, has been up to. If what the ghost has said is true, he is also a deadly usurper of the throne, a man who can beguile quite effectively.

Whatever else might be said about the morally-blunted Queen, there is no question that Gertrude loves her son, evident in the concern she expresses over what she sees as his protracted mourning for his father. Her echoing Claudius’ request that he remain in Denmark instead of returning to Wittenberg is undoubtedly prompted by a desire to watch over her distressed son.

As mentioned earlier, one of the key themes of the play is the disparity between appearances and reality. First introduced by Hamlet’s bitter observations about Gertrude’s betrayal of her husband’s memory despite her torrent of tears as the grieving widow at his funeral, the theme takes on much darker dimensions with the ghost’s story. According to him, Gertrude is an adulteress who married the King’s murderer. And this brings us to another dimension of the theme – the ghost itself. Is it really the spirit of King Hamlet? Is the mission it has charged Hamlet with consistent with Christian teaching, and, of course, is the story true?

One of the exercises I used to give my students was to draw a line down a page, on one side listing all of the arguments against the ghost being who it claims to be, and on the other side all of the arguments supporting its claims. I won’t reveal at this point what the consensus tended to be, but keep in mind that this issue is of paramount concern to Hamlet, something that will become quite evident as the play progresses.

shakespeare