The Ghost

[Hamleto]

Why couldn't Gertrude, the queen, see the ghost? The guards, Horatio and Hamlet saw it. This is puzzling me.

[byquist]

This is a good question. We get to see the Ghost too. The obvious is that Shakespeare decided so; but why? Or, why not? What if Gertrude saw the Ghost? What then? Maybe he'd have to have more scenes about her character in an already long play.

Also, the fact that H. sees the ghost and she doesn't allows her to insinuate and accuse that he is mad, which leads to his counter-response which follows -- in effect, "Hey, this scene is not about my madness, but your indiscretion. And let me give you advice. I'm telling you the score; you're not telling me I'm off-base."

[aeroport]

I actually developed a theory (not a very well-tested one, really) that maybe Horatio, Bernardo, and Francisco were all people of Hamlet's imagination. I cannot remember an instance in which any of these characters speak to any others (but I haven't actually looked through the text since I thought of this; it is possible that the final scene could invalidate this). Thus, Hamlet is perhaps convinced that something is "rotten in the state of Denmark", and his imaginary companions' accounts justify this for him, so he goes and busts a cap or two. Were this the case, Gertrude obviously would not see the ghost. I really kind of doubt all this, but it could be something similar.

[mir]

perhaps the ghost only showed itself to those it wanted to. if it could appear and disappear at will, i don't think that's so amazing.

[subgenre]

I agree with Mir. The ghost had possible ability to allow itself to be shown only to those it wanted to see him. Or maybe the ghost is merely a figment of Hamlet's imagination and that in some twisted sense Horation, Bernardo and Francisco got sucked into the weird play of his psychosis.

[Virgil]

I think the nature of the ghost is an unresolved complication in the play. I think the only thing I can conclude is that who sees the ghost is based on what Shakespeare's needs are. The story of the ghost is a way to begin the play, and so several characters see it. But if Gertrude sees it, the whole plot would be screwed up; she would tell the King and who knows where it would go. I hope I make sense.

Jamesian: Interesting theory, but Horatio is a character that runs throughout the play.

[aeroport]

Jamesian: Interesting theory, but Horatio is a character that runs throughout the play.

But does he talk to anyone but Hamlet and the two guards? I cannot remember. Probably so. I guess he does give the "flights of angels sing thee to thy rest" bit after Hamlet dies, so he's probably a real fella. Who knows? Probably just poor writing.

[Thorwench]

I think the Ghost haunts Hamlet and not the Queen since Hamlet is the one who has to make a decision. The Queen has already made hers, the consequences are well known. Hamlet is, not only in terms of the ghost, the haunted one. Greenblatt suggested that Hamlet's underlying problem is covert catholicism i.e. a soul that couldn't receive the last rites has to spend a hell of a longer time in purgatory where the ghost would be coming from to remind his son of his duties as a son. Covert catholicism or not: The evil has to be atoned for him to find peace. What should be the King's reason to appeal to Gertrude who is partly responsible for his dire situation? Even if the Queen had seen the ghost, she probably would still have called Hamlet mad because, I think, Hamlet's madness does not lie in seeing the ghost but in his manner to deal with the problem i.e. he is going to feign madness, is going to "put on an antic disposition".

[aeroport]

Thorwench: Does this apply to the other characters who see the ghost?

[Regit]

Why couldn't Gertrude, the queen, see the ghost? The guards, Horatio and Hamlet saw it. This is puzzling me.

This is because the ghost can choose who does see it and who does not, (during the night when it is doom'd to walk, that is). All of its appearances are purposeful. It is crucial not only to see its speeches, but also to mark the circumstances of its appearances in order to determine these purposes.



- In the first scene, the ghost's appearance becomes progressively real. As the guards, we want to understand what it is, and why it is. The most significant in this scene is its reappearance when Horatio, to some extent, accurately divines the reasons for its previous appearances:

"And even the like precurse of fierce events,
As harbingers preceding still the fates
And prologue to the omen coming on,
Have heaven and earth together demonstrated
Unto our climatures and countrymen."

This indicates to us (the audience) and himself that there might be some wisdom in Horatio's reasoning.
Therefore and moreover, the ghost's appearance was to alarm the guards in hope to meet Hamlet, who is certain to hear of it through them, and rightly, as Horatio promptly says:

"Let us impart what we have seen to-night
Unto young Hamlet. For upon my life,
This spirit dumb to us will speak to him"

Notice that, though the guards can also see the ghost, it only ever talks to Hamlet in the entire play. The ghost is not seen again (or at least does not feature again) after Hamlet has talked to it (until Act III), thus, perhaps, indicates that it no longer needs the guards to see it and that its initial appearances are deliberate.




- The reason why Gertrude cannot see the ghost is, again, because it does not wish her to. The purpose of this appearance is to scold at Hamlet for forgetting his given tasks: "This visitation is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose." One scold is, as Hamlet rightly says, it comes to its "tardy son to chide, that laps'd in time and passion, lets go by th' important acting of [its] dread command". The other scold, much more significant to your question, is because Hamlet was disobeying the ghost's command to leave his mother to the punishments of heaven by telling her the truth and asking her to repent.
In the first conversation with Hamlet, the ghost makes clear its disgust at the act of the "seeming-virtuous Queen":

"But virtue, as it never will be moved,
Though lewdness court it in a shape of Heaven,
So lust, though to a radiant angel link'd,
Will sate itself in a celestial bed,
And prey on garbage."

And, though her offence may not amount to the urgent punishment that the ghost asks Hamlet to give to Claudius, the anguished spirit of the King does not want to forgive her. If she was not confronted and advised of the terrible truth, she will not have the chance to repent and, thus, will have to face the consequences enforced by heaven (which she does deserve for her unknowing act of lust alone)(A similar reasoning is used when Hamlet decides not to kill Claudius whilst he is confessing.):

"Taint not thy mind; nor let thy soul contrive
Against thy mother aught; leave her to heaven,
And to those thorns that in her bosom lodge,
To prick and sting her."

So when Hamlet was very close to making Gertrude realise the unvirtuous nature of her new marriage and, even to persuading her that her new husband is a murderer, the ghost interferes simply to stop this from happening. If it lets Gertrude see it, the pale spirit of her murdered King, this would only further convince her that Hamlet is telling her the truth, and further amount to her remorse and penitence, which would be completely against its cause. But by not letting Gertrude see it, yet conversing with Hamlet at the same time, it, perhaps wittingly, aids Hamlet on his task of faking insanity. Therefore, this invisibility is purposeful. And, therefore, who does see the ghost and who does not is intentional on the part of the ghost.

Perhaps the ghost must be cunning in this, for, though Hamlet appears to grief and obey his father's wishes whole-heartedly, his just and extraordinary sense of morality understands the immorals of these wishes and contemplates them with even more devotion.

[aeroport]

Regit: That was my next guess.

[ash_of_lee]

Your theorys not bad mine is that they are sub consious voices talking to conscious voices that being FRANCISCO and sub being BERNARDO and once they fall asleep FRANCISCO goes and enters MERCELLUS and thats when they dream

[Thorwench]

I agree with Regit. If Gertrude would have seen the ghost Hamlets feigned madness would not work. There is also an indication that there was an earlier version of Hamlet by Kyd (now lost) which included a ghost for theatrical reasons (horror, stunned audience etc.) whereas the medieval telling of Hamlet (then called Amleth) includes the feigned madness but not the ghost. So it could well be that Shakespeare merged the two versions (he often picked up on earlier works or stories) but changed the logic towards an inner conflict (i.e. Hamlet's). Greenblatt's interpretation goes back to those two versions and to the catholocism problem because he argues that SH. could have been a crypto.catholic for whom the prohibition of last rites and masses after death may have been a considerable problem. What I didn't know but found in Greenblatt's book was that SH.'s only son, called Hamlet (SIC) died, the play was written after his death. So, it is not unlikely that such religious issues which have a very personal meaning for the people concerned may have played their part in the shifting of the above mentioned focus. Perhaps the roles of Gueldenstern and Rosenkranz can be seen in the same light. SH's Hamlet studied at the first protestant founded university in Europe (i.e. Wittenberg) but has no the best relationship to his fellow students.

[Virgil]

. And, therefore, who does see the ghost and who does not is intentional on the part of the ghost.

Perhaps the ghost must be cunning in this, for, though Hamlet appears to grief and obey his father's wishes whole-heartedly, his just and extraordinary sense of morality understands the immorals of these wishes and contemplates them with even more devotion.

Very good analysis Regit. However, is a coincident that who sees the ghost also serves Shakespeare's purposes as dramatist? Under your analysis why would the ghost show himself to the guards? He could have appeared in Hamlet's bedroom to Hamlet alone, not on that Danish field.

[Regit]

What I didn't know but found in Greenblatt's book was that SH.'s only son, called Hamlet (SIC) died, the play was written after his death.

William Shakespeare's son, who died in infancy, was Hamnet Shakespeare, not Hamlet.