WHY SHAKESPEARE IS HILARIOUS

why shakespeare is hilarious


Hamlet: Denmark's a prison.
Rosencrantz: Then is the world one.
Hamlet: A goodly one; in which there are many confines, wards & dungeons – Denmark being one o' the worst.
Rosencrantz: We think not so, my lord.
Hamlet: Why then 'tis none to you – for there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so; to me it is a prison!
Rosencrantz: Why then your ambition makes it one; 'tis too narrow for your mind.
Hamlet: O God! I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space -- were it not that I have bad dreams...

-Wm. Shakespeare, Hamlet, Act II Scene II



What's the joke?

Hamlet is depressed. Rosencrantz (and Guildenstern) are trying are trying to cheer him up. Their strategy is to affirm that his melancholy is the natural result of his life circumstances being too small for his vast intellect. This is such a crude and superficial attempt at manipulation that Hamlet is prompted to mock them – announcing that his intellect is so tiny, so insignificant that it would fit neatly in a nutshell with enormous spaciousness left over.

Hilarious.


Rosencrantz is the conventional self-serving idiot. He cannot understand the depth of the philosopher's considerations. And by 'philosopher' we always also mean Shakespeare himself -- whomever he might really turn out to have been. Rosencrantz imagines that Hamlet's trouble must be local, based on simple events, and readily corrected by easy flattery. This is the same idea as when the buffoonish seducer allows his lust to persuade him that a young woman's reluctance to embrace him is evidence of her own lack of self-esteem. Of course he resolves to help her overcome this problem!

He thinks he is a “good man” in two senses – he is doing a benevolent deed and he is also trying to accomplish a personal goal. These are not inherently bad motives, but they are quite crude and too often veil selfishness & insensitivity. Rosencrantz is the altruistic friend or family member who tries to “correct” Hamlet's ambiguity and world-weariness. He is the salesman who superficially believes his own logic -- that rephrasing into positive terms is already to have solved the problem. Thus he maintains the problem pertually by his own attempt to easily escape. A very American scheme of “winning friends and influencing customers.”

It is obvious to the philosopher Hamlet that his “helpful” friend is simplistically selfish -- trying to keep his own heart apart from any deep encounter with the ambiguous universe. Insult, deception, idealism, success, failure, contempt, irony, playfulness and and exaggerated metaphor all at once. Comedy.

This is the kind of multi-layered, trans-ironic humour found in sitcoms like “The Office” or “Arrested Development.” It plays off the valid rhythms of speech and follows their logic until it invalidates itself. The momenum of its reasoning is perptually spilling over the edges of the word-containers, overflowing with a surplus of harmless meanings. Pathos mixes with mockery to illuminates the insipid quality of whomever wishes to “succeed” at the expense of intelligently responding to other people and circumstances. We are confrontes by the limits of our social logic through a half-serious juxtaposition one reasoning against another. High intellect and ridiculous motivation are blended together into one delicious stew.

But if it's so damned funny & cutting edge -- why aren't people falling in the aisles at Shakespeare's plays?

Or do they just not laugh at the 'tragedies'?

That is unlikely. We must doubt that an author so instinctively comfortable with the rhythms of parody and comedic dance would be able to thoroughly keep jokes out of his long "dramatic" plays. And does Hamlet's interaction with Rosencrantz not show that the gags have crept in? Perhaps the distinction between farce and drama has always been mostly in the incomprehending emotional response of audiences.

So why don't people laugh more at Shakespeare?


There two likely answers:

1. People simply do not put the necessary effort into following the linguistic rollercoaster of the dialogue. Since they are not tracking the logic they miss the unexpected logical revsersals. Without noting the set-up a punchline will go undetected.

2. People have become semi-professional "Shakespeare-advocates" and “theater-goers.” They miss what would have entertained the unruly author because they are otherwise occupied about the business of dressing up & congratulating themselves for appreciating high culture.

Probably both.

,

,