-
Essay / The Causes of Christian Cruelty: Violence in Shakespeare's Masterpiece
One of the important conflicts within Renaissance culture was how to rationalize the many instances of violence that took place in a society with such strong Christian values. While some preached from the New Testament the importance of love and the welfare of others, many drew on the many descriptions of murder and war found in the Old Testament to justify the violence that occurs daily . Both Hamlet and The Tempest depict the violence that follows a character's betrayal of his brother, a common episode in the Bible. However, while the many instances of violence in Hamlet are presented as extremely violent, The Tempest contains more threats of violence or psychological torture. While Shakespeare's graphic depiction of violence in Hamlet represents a reasonable desire to restore God's intended royal hierarchy, the lesser degree of violence in The Tempest means that force is not necessary because God will eventually restore political stability . Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Seventeenth-century Christianity was not entirely focused on the salvation of souls. Often religion served an ulterior purpose, acting to impose a sense of order on the public. The Bible was used to persuade people to follow God's rules. However, it was not only God's laws that were imposed. A central idea in Renaissance society was the idea of the divine right of kings, where the king was appointed by God and acted as a representative of God's will. Therefore, the laws of rulers were to be followed as if they came directly from God; to defy the king was to defy God. Sharpe writes: “The distinction between disobedience to royal and divine authority, between crime and sin, was less sharp than at present” (Sharpe 159). The perception that God appoints the ruler who would be best for the kingdom is extremely important in both Hamlet and The Tempest, and I believe it explains the biblical allusions and the way Shakespeare represents violence in both plays. From the first act of Hamlet, there are obvious similarities with biblical stories. As old Hamlet's ghost explains that he was murdered by his own brother Claudius, he tells Hamlet, "The serpent that bit thy father's life / now wears his crown" (1.5.39). The reference to the serpent is a biblical allusion. In the story of Adam and Eve, Satan disguises himself as a serpent and encourages Eve to disobey God and bite into the forbidden tree of knowledge. The description of Claude as a serpent implies that he too is the embodiment of evil. In Renaissance society, ambition and the pursuit of power were considered admirable qualities, and Shakespeare's description of Claudius in biblical terms reminds the reader that Claudius' actions should be considered reprehensible. The most obvious biblical reference in Hamlet is the story of Cain and Abel. At the beginning of the Old Testament, two brothers offer sacrifices to God. God accepts Abel's sheep sacrifice, but rejects Cain's offering. Cain then takes Abel to a field and murders him in what Foakes calls "an act of wanton violence for which no motive is given" (Foakes 25). This act of violence is repeated in Claudius' murder of his brother, and Shakespeare mentions it several times. Claudius himself acknowledges the similarity to humanity's first murder, saying: "O, my offenseis serious! She smells of heaven./She is struck by the oldest primal curse,/The murder of a brother” (3.3.36). Hamlet also alludes to the story when he describes Cain as "the one who committed the first murder!" » (5.1.72). The echoes of the story of Cain and Abel are not simply a coincidence, but rather serve as validation of the extreme measures of violence in Hamlet. Critics argue that Renaissance society was "one in which the use of violence was accepted as a necessary means of maintaining order in hierarchical relationships" (Fletcher 192). That is, violence was often necessary to restore the social and political order that God had arranged. Old Hamlet was the ruler whom God had appointed to govern Elsinore. However, when Claudius repeated the fundamental sin of murdering his own brother, he destroyed the natural political order, Cohen writes: “An unequal power structure. . . must produce turbulence as the axis of power shifts and is moved by desire and possibility” (Cohen 4). The violence that results from old Hamlet's murder is inevitable as Hamlet attempts to restore stability to the kingdom. Hamlet is considered one of Shakespeare's bloodiest plays; in the final scene, Laertes, Polonius, Ophelia, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Claudius, Gertrude and Hamlet are all dead. Although a count of eight may seem extreme, the many religious references throughout the play serve as a reminder that violence is real. being used in the name of God and is therefore justified. In relation to my argument, the most violent deaths are those of Claudius and Hamlet himself. The murder of Claudius is the focus of much of the play as Hamlet attempts to avenge the "murder most." fault" (1.4.27) of his father. However, Hamlet's revenge is tainted by his moments of indecision. When he is finally presented with the perfect opportunity to kill Claudius, he is consumed by the Christian notion of the afterlife. The common understanding was that if someone died while praying, they would automatically go to heaven. Hamlet explains that to guarantee Claudius a place in hell, he must kill Claudius in his most natural state, "when. he is drunk, asleep, or in his rage,/or in the incestuous pleasure of his bed,/at gambling, swearing, or about some act/which has no taste of salvation” (3.3.89). The fact that Claudius will also be subject to God's punishment excuses Hamlet's violent thoughts. The actual murder of Claudius is equally complex. In the process, Hamlet accidentally kills Polonius in what Foakes calls an act of primary violence, or "violence which has no motive, or which is insufficiently motivated, violence which may seem to arise spontaneously and be essentially meaningless, until meaning is assigned to after the event” (Foakes 16). However, after Hamlet kills Polonius, he says, "Heaven so willed it / To punish me with this, and that with me, / That I might be their scourge and their minister" (3.4.157). The Christian reading of this "reckless and bloody act" (3.4.26) implies that, although Polonius' death is regrettable, it is a necessary step in Hamlet's process of restoring God's order. The murder of Claudius is also graphic as Hamlet stabs him with a poisoned sword, but it is depicted as retribution for Claudius' disregard for the natural order of the rulers. Hamlet is not seen as committing a simple act of violent revenge, but rather as an agent of God and uses violence in order to punish the character who has destroyed the political stability of the kingdom. Hamlet's death at the end of the final scene comes as a shock to many readers, who have come tofeeling a kind of sympathy for this distressed and confused protagonist. However, Claudius' death would have made Hamlet the rightful heir to the throne. Although Hamlet was not evil or manipulative like Claudius was, he lacked the characteristics of a good king. His indecisive nature and his spontaneous outbursts of violence would have made him unfit to govern the kingdom. Hamlet's violent death is therefore just as necessary for the maintenance of political order. God instituted the murder of Hamlet to ensure that the best ruler would rule Elsinore. The final scene shows Fortinbras arriving to take the position of king, and his respect for the deceased prince Hamlet indicates that God has chosen a worthy ruler. There are also numerous biblical references found in Shakespeare's The Tempest, but these references are decidedly less violent in nature. Antonio betrays his brother Prospero to steal his title of Duke of Milan. However, this act of betrayal is much less bloody and closely resembles the biblical story of Joseph and his brothers. After Joseph's brothers determined that he was their father Israel's favorite, they conspired to kill Joseph. But at the last minute, the brothers decided they had nothing to gain by killing Joseph and sold him into slavery. Joseph was transported to Egypt, where he was blessed by God and eventually became responsible for the entire nation. Many years later, Joseph's brothers went to Egypt and Joseph did not punish them but forgave them their sins (Genesis 37-43). Likewise, Antonio was jealous of his brother's power, but rather than assassinate him, Antonio persuaded the King of Naples that he was a better ruler and should therefore be given the title of duke. Prospero was sent to the island where the play takes place, he learned the art of magic and became very powerful. When Antonio arrives on the island, Prospero uses his magic to psychologically torture him, but eventually forgives him. Just as with Joseph, many instances throughout the play suggest that God was watching over Prospero and Miranda. When Miranda asks if they arrived on the island through foul play, Prospero replies, "It was through foul play, as you say, that we were raised from there, / But fortunately stay here” (1.2.61). Later, Miranda asks again how they arrived on this island, and Prospero replies: "By divine providence" (1.2.160). While many critics have argued that Prospero is truly an evil figure, these references to heavenly intervention indicate the presence of God in the life of this displaced ruler. Although the audience does not actually see Antonio take control of Prospero's duchy, Prospero goes into detail when describing the events to Miranda. While the transfer of power is depicted as extremely violent in many of Shakespeare's plays, this usurpation was remarkably peaceful. Prospero explains that Antonio was already making all the political decisions for the state, while he spent the majority of his time in the library. Prospero describes: “The government I imposed on my brother,/And to my state became a stranger, being transported/And enraptured in secret studies” (1.2.75-77). Antonio grew accustomed to this authority and, after paying monetary tribute to the king of Naples, he convinced the king to "confer upon him fair Milan, with all honors" (1.2.126-127). The king's men captured Prospero and Miranda in the middle of the night and they were sent to the island. Although Antonio's methods are clearly underhanded, his actions are not physically violent. Non-violence in a situation generally presented as deadly takes on a particular meaning. In addition to the obvious resemblance to the biblical story of Joseph, the absence.