The Limitations of Language

Having now read multiple plays by Shakespeare we are slowly beginning to generate more concrete ideas about his work. However, when beginning Hamlet I began by reading through a different lens. Shakespeare’s plays were originally intended to be performed and not read; therefore negating any value of Shakespeare’s specific writing style or the analysis of how his writing functions. His plays were watched and received in a different way. I recently saw Hamlet performed over this past summer and in doing so, created a completely different ambiance and interpretation of the play while reading it. I think it interesting that seeing the play before reading it can have such a dramatic effect on how the reader absorbs the text and the mental images which they create. In reading I noticed I struggled with understanding what was going on, due to the dense text and complicated language (something which has happened with many of the past plays). I started too concluded about the relationship between watching a performance of Hamlet and reading its text. Is one way more beneficial to understanding the value and plot of the story? I argue that yes there are many positive attributions to watching a play before reading it. Specifically I am thinking about Act I scene I where the ghost enters and begins wandering the castle grounds. While watching the play, there was fear and confusion amongst the actors. In the text you can only create as much emotion as the words allow. Actors create this emotion, they display the tension within a scene, allowing the plot to grow and thicken. There are barriers which actors must cross when producing a play, they take written language and create the emotions and feelings which the audience absorbs. These limitations of writing are felt as reading, one can only interpret so much emotion for writing.

Similarly, while reading one can easily get lost within the text as the dialogue goes from person to person. While in past readings this has been less bothersome, in this particular reading I noticed that having witnessed the play enacted I had more concrete images and understandings of the characters speaking. It was almost easier to interpret who was speaking and when and how the plot was unfolding. I think that there are many benefits to reading Shakespeare’s work, however I recognize that there are many benefits which arise that the text cannot incorporate or involve due to the limitations of language. For instance, Hamlet; in Act I scene II grapples over the recent marriage of his mother and uncle. He states, “yet within a month/ Let me not think on’t; frailty, thy name is woman/ A little moth, or ere those shoes were old/ With which she followed my poor father’s body” (1704). This expression of Hamlets discontent with his mother’s marriage, when she had only recently been mourning the death of her husband. When seen on stage, this scene takes another form, a distressed and soon to been crazed man struggles with this problem and the emotion and sadness pours from the language he uses. The text does not display such emotion and one can only take the face value of what he says. I think it interesting these stark differences between acting and reading and it would be interesting to look at the effect witnessing a play has on a reader’s interpretation more readily.