Hamlet Freud

I've come to notice throughout the past few weeks that psychology is one of the only subjects that can relate with almost any other subject. Even in literature.

In The interpretation of Dreams, Sigmund Freud analyzes one of the greatest creations of tragic poetry, Shakespeare's Hamlet. Using the powers of psychology, Freud tries to understand Hamlet's behavior, even by relating it to the Oedipus Complex. He says that "Hamlet represents the type of man whose power of direct action is paralysed by an excessive development of his intellect." Long story short, he tells us that Hamlet can't get much done because he over thinks too much. Ironically, he implies it's a bad thing to do even though it's exactly what he does to be able to analyze and interpret the mind of Hamlet. He creates a paradox just as Hamlet does. In a way, Freud and Hamlet share parallel traits. In fact, it sometimes feels like Freud is only just analyzing himself. But, it would make sense of course, since psychology is based on the study of the behavior of human beings as a whole rather than the study of each individual being.



But just like Hamlet, there is one thing that Freud didn't really understand. After close examination he did find a logical reasoning in explaining the unusual crazy behaviors of Hamlet. I mean, it's natural for humans to feel that way when they are in the same situation as Hamlet. As a matter of fact, the crazy, yet intelligent, character of Hamlet actually seems to be a reflection and representation of the mind and feelings of Shakepeare since it was written immediately after his father's death. Furthermore, his son who died at an early age was named Hamnet (which really closely resembles the name Hamlet). But, Freud, the all-so-intelligent philosopher that impacted the world, had one thing that he couldn't quite grasp that Hamlet (nor Shakespeare) couldn't either. Freud once said, "the great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is 'What does a woman want?'”


...Yes, not even the most intelligent people in the world could answer that after all these years of existing on Earth. One of Hamlet's source of insanity comes from the disappointing behavior and actions of his mom. After the king's death, Hamlet's mom goes off to marry her supposedly beloved dead husband's brother. Not even the great power of psychology can explain that.

Anyway, besides that, we can trust Freud on the understanding of Hamlet's mind. His analysis might even be the most accurate one compared to all the others. After all, Freud easily empathizes with Hamlet, unlike most people who tend to feel sympathy instead.

Sidenotes

I found some sites that may be irrelevant to many, but still decided to post them up for personal reasons. So, here they are. The first one is a scene-by-scene summary of the Hamlet and the basic analysis of its general themes. The second one is an explanation of all (or at least most of) the puns and paradoxes within the play. Enjoy.

http://www.pathguy.com/hamlet.htm

http://www.shakespeare-navigators.com/hamlet/Pap.html

Hamlet: Entire Play

http://shakespeare.mit.edu/hamlet/full.html

An Obscure Window to the Prince's Past

Have you ever heard of a tale about an unfortunate prince whose uncle takes his dead (murdered) father's throne and marries his mother? No, it's not Prince Charming. This one's a bit more tragic: eight people, including the main character, end up dying in the course of the story. Although the story plot may seem a bit harsh or boring at times, the author's dynamic usage of literary devices keeps the reader entertained and puzzles the minds of many. Yes, it's the one and only play that we all know of: Shakespeare's Hamlet.
What makes this play so interesting is the surplus amount of different aspects and personalities that the main character, Hamlet, has. In one of the scenes, Hamlet goes through six different states of minds in only one soliloquy. Hamlet's indecisive personality is exceedingly diverse that even Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe, a great actor who once took Hamlet's role while presenting the play, had problems fully analyzing him.

For the most part, I do agree with Goethe's analysis on Hamlet. But, the strategy he used seems to be a bit ambiguous and inaccurate. He first tried to characterize how Hamlet was before the king's death (before the beginning of the play) by using small hints scattered all around the whole book. He then stepped in the shoes of the made-up "past Hamlet" and tried to imagine what it would feel like to be in his situation. Then, he assumed that Hamlet would have probably felt the same way as he did. This strategy might seem ingenious, and I have to admit, it was a pretty clever idea, but the hints shown in the play about Hamlet's past personality is minimal. In fact, one can argue that his multiple-sided personality was exactly the same before his father's death. There are many scenes that show the reader that Hamlet doesn't actually feel much of anything, but is rather smart in getting what he wants Furthermore, Goethe, ironically, contradicts his own method of using Hamlet's past to develop his character. He stated, "his past condition he remembers as a vanished dream."
He just implied that Hamlet's past has nothing to do with his present condition and yet, he tries to use little insinuations about the past to determine the peculiar idiosyncrasies of the character.

Sounds like a hypocrite to me. But who knows, maybe Goethe is following Shakespeare's guidelines of literary devices and using irony himself to interpret Hamlet's feelings. He just doesn't know it.