Page:The Journal of English and Germanic Philology Volume 18.djvu/13

Rh

The scene in which the play is performed before the assembled court is of far greater tensity than any which have preceded, save the nocturnal revelations of the Ghost upon the battlements. Its effects have been carefully prepared, and it is itself most artfully constructed, so as to increase in interest steadily up to the very moment when the King stops the play. To this climax each stage in the action contributes its due and well-adjusted share. Our present purpose is to examine the dramatic development up to this climax, and to endeavor to gain a clearer understanding of the details, and thereby of the whole scene.

A bit of explanation seems desirable at the outset, in order to make clear the method to be followed here. When we ask the reason why Hamlet delayed the consummation of his revenge upon his uncle, there are really two answers. The first is that without this delay there would be no play. But, in the second place, it is the duty of the dramatist to provide a plausible reason within the play for this postponement of revenge. This Shakspere does by making Hamlet temperamentally inclined to meditate, to procrastinate, to think too precisely "on the event." Similarly, when we try to explain why the King did not betray himself at the dumb-show, which afforded a lively representation of his guilt, the first reason is that this would have spoiled the whole scene. The climax does not belong at the beginning. But the further question arises: how has Shakspere made the presentation of the dumb-show and the King's composure plausible? It is this second type of question which will engage our attention here—how Shakspere has motivated the actions of his characters. Only rarely has he allowed dramatic effectiveness to outweigh the strict logic of a situation, and made his characters act otherwise than in the most natural and obvious way. Close study shows that the motivation of this scene has been very carefully arranged, and that it is consistent with other parts of the play, and with the play as a whole.

The significance of the dumb-show which opens the drama of the strolling players has not hitherto, I believe, been generally realized. Certainly one searches the critics in vain for a satisfactory explanation. To us this pantomime seems rather artificial and perhaps superfluous, on first thought. But it should be remembered