Explore Shakespeare’s presentation of the Ghost in Hamlet
As attested by James Hansford, ‘questions lie at the heart of Hamlet, and
no shape is more ‘questionable’ than the ghost of Hamlet’s father.’
Shakespeare harnesses the dubious nature of the ghost to present it as an
embodiment of uncertainty, allowing him to embed a feeling of political
anxiety into Denmark akin to that characterising Elizabethan England at
the turn of the seventeenth century. In the doubling of the Ghost with
Hamlet, this uncertainty is similarly inherited by Hamlet himself,
presenting the Ghost as the reason for his inability to embrace his role as
a typical revenge hero. Shakespeare also presents the Ghost as a
manifestation of the conflict of old and new rule in its opposition to
Claudius, both in terms of religion and traditional values of chivalry and
honour, allowing Shakespeare to reflect on the superior past of Catholic
England.
In Hamlet, Shakespeare presents the character of the Ghost as an
embodiment of uncertainty, using it to build anxiety to in turn reflect the
political anxiety consuming both the ‘rotten’ state of Denmark, and
England at the turn of the seventeenth century. Shakespeare creates an
overwhelming sense of anxiety through the Ghost, which begins even
before he first appears to the audience with Marcellus’s asking, ‘What, has
this thing appeared again tonight?’ The ambiguity of ‘this thing’ is
furthered by its later description as an ‘apparition’ and ‘LIKE the King’ to
build tension regarding its questionable form, and its looming threat is
established by the use of ‘again’, which Emma Smith proposes “tells us
the ghost is doubly reiterative, symbolising the recurrent past” in her This
is Shakespeare. This emphasises the fact that this ‘apparition’ could
appear at any given point, as Marcellus alludes to in his questioning of
whether it has ‘again’ appeared, which Smith identifies in her description
of the Ghost’s recurrency, thus building tension as the audience nervously
wait for this unbeknownst yet imminent threat to make an appearance as
expected. This building of anxiety continues through the Ghost’s conduct
upon eventually appearing to Horatio and the guards. Shakespeare draws
attention to the Ghost’s continued refusal to speak despite Horatio’s
repeated cries of ‘Speak, speak, I charge thee speak!’ throughout the
scene. On two occasions, the Ghost exits despite Horatio’s desperate
pleas, leaving his questions unanswered. This refusal to speak leaves both
the characters and audience on edge as the purpose of the Ghost remains
unspecified. The anxiety the Ghost brings from the onset of Hamlet,
through its unspecified form and intentions, as well as the questions it
garners yet leaves answered, is significant in mirroring the political
anxiety rife in Hamlet’s Denmark with the international threat of young
Fortinbras perusing its outskirts. Historian John Guy relates Shakespeare’s
As attested by James Hansford, ‘questions lie at the heart of Hamlet, and
no shape is more ‘questionable’ than the ghost of Hamlet’s father.’
Shakespeare harnesses the dubious nature of the ghost to present it as an
embodiment of uncertainty, allowing him to embed a feeling of political
anxiety into Denmark akin to that characterising Elizabethan England at
the turn of the seventeenth century. In the doubling of the Ghost with
Hamlet, this uncertainty is similarly inherited by Hamlet himself,
presenting the Ghost as the reason for his inability to embrace his role as
a typical revenge hero. Shakespeare also presents the Ghost as a
manifestation of the conflict of old and new rule in its opposition to
Claudius, both in terms of religion and traditional values of chivalry and
honour, allowing Shakespeare to reflect on the superior past of Catholic
England.
In Hamlet, Shakespeare presents the character of the Ghost as an
embodiment of uncertainty, using it to build anxiety to in turn reflect the
political anxiety consuming both the ‘rotten’ state of Denmark, and
England at the turn of the seventeenth century. Shakespeare creates an
overwhelming sense of anxiety through the Ghost, which begins even
before he first appears to the audience with Marcellus’s asking, ‘What, has
this thing appeared again tonight?’ The ambiguity of ‘this thing’ is
furthered by its later description as an ‘apparition’ and ‘LIKE the King’ to
build tension regarding its questionable form, and its looming threat is
established by the use of ‘again’, which Emma Smith proposes “tells us
the ghost is doubly reiterative, symbolising the recurrent past” in her This
is Shakespeare. This emphasises the fact that this ‘apparition’ could
appear at any given point, as Marcellus alludes to in his questioning of
whether it has ‘again’ appeared, which Smith identifies in her description
of the Ghost’s recurrency, thus building tension as the audience nervously
wait for this unbeknownst yet imminent threat to make an appearance as
expected. This building of anxiety continues through the Ghost’s conduct
upon eventually appearing to Horatio and the guards. Shakespeare draws
attention to the Ghost’s continued refusal to speak despite Horatio’s
repeated cries of ‘Speak, speak, I charge thee speak!’ throughout the
scene. On two occasions, the Ghost exits despite Horatio’s desperate
pleas, leaving his questions unanswered. This refusal to speak leaves both
the characters and audience on edge as the purpose of the Ghost remains
unspecified. The anxiety the Ghost brings from the onset of Hamlet,
through its unspecified form and intentions, as well as the questions it
garners yet leaves answered, is significant in mirroring the political
anxiety rife in Hamlet’s Denmark with the international threat of young
Fortinbras perusing its outskirts. Historian John Guy relates Shakespeare’s
