Hamlet's journey

Did literature's most famous character have a near-death experience? Literally, no. But figuratively or symbolically, maybe yes.

I'm talking about Hamlet, the title character in William Shakespeare's greatest tragedy. About halfway through the play, Hamlet is shipped off to England by the perfidious King Claudius. Unknown to the prince, but revealed to the reader or spectator of the play, Claudius has enclosed letters of instruction with Hamlet that will result in the young man's execution when he touches English soil.

After this unsettling development, Hamlet disappears from the play for the second half of Act Four. He does not die, of course -- not yet. But his extended absence from the stage, coupled with a recurring motif of close shaves with death, powerfully suggest that he has symbolically died and been reborn. In fact, he may be said to "die" three times.

His first death -- or near-death -- involves the aforementioned letters. They are meant to seal his doom, but by a lucky accident (or stroke of fate) he discovers their contents and deftly substitutes new letters which ensure the death of his companions, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. That's his first escape.

Next, his ship is set upon by a pirate vessel, and in the fighting he -- and he alone -- is taken prisoner. Most prisoners of marauding pirates would be executed without delay, but these pirates recognize that Hamlet is of noble birth, and not wishing to get themselves in trouble with the Danish crown, they deposit Hamlet unharmed on the shore of Denmark.

Ere we were two days old at sea, a pirate of very warlike appointment gave us chase. Finding ourselves too slow of sail, we put on a compelled valour, and in the grapple I boarded them: on the instant they got clear of our ship; so I alone became their prisoner. They have dealt with me like thieves of mercy: but they knew what they did; I am to do a good turn for them.

That's his second escape.*

Having cheated death twice, Hamlet is reunited with his friend Horatio in time to see the funeral of his beloved Ophelia. During the burial, he impulsively leaps into Ophelia's grave and struggles with her brother, Laertes. The fight is broken up, and Hamlet emerges from the grave saying dejectedly,

I loved Ophelia: forty thousand brothers
Could not, with all their quantity of love,
Make up my sum.

It appears to be the first time he has realized that he truly loved her.

Many readers have wondered why Hamlet engages in this rather melodramatic action. "He is mad," Claudius says, but is he? Perhaps the main reason for this bit of business is that it serves as a visual dramatization of the idea of death and rebirth. He enters a grave, then leaves it.

In short, three times we are confronted with the same idea: Hamlet is effectively dead yet somehow still alive. His time off stage seems to involve more than a simple respite for the fatigued actor, though doubtless it serves this purpose as well. It is as if, by hiding Hamlet from us for a while, Shakespeare wishes to convey the idea of his temporary departure from this earth and then his reappearance.

If this were all there was to it, the motif of close shaves with death -- or near-death experiences, as I would prefer to call them -- would be only a meaningless gimmick. But there is something more. In Act Five, Hamlet is a markedly different man than he was when we last saw him. He seems considerably older, even though in "real-time" only a few weeks have passed. More important, he seems wiser, more philosophical, more fatalistic, and less prone to the self-doubt that hampered him throughout the first three and a half acts.

It is in Act Five that Hamlet delivers his famous lines about destiny:

There's a divinity that shapes our ends,
Rough-hew them how we will.

He considers the briefness of life:

It will be short: the interim is mine;
And a man's life's no more than to say 'One.'

But instead of being discouraged by this fact, he takes it in stride:

Not a whit, we defy augury: there's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all: since no man has aught of what he leaves, what is't to leave betimes?

He has come to a calm acceptance of his own mortality, a subject that tortured him in previous scenes, most notably in the famous "to be or not to be" soliloquy. He also has a new perspective on the meaninglessness of worldly affairs -- whether they are the conquests of Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar or the pretenses of courtiers like the fawning Osric.

Imperious Caesar, dead and turn'd to clay,
Might stop a hole to keep the wind away:
O, that that earth, which kept the world in awe,
Should patch a wall to expel the winter flaw! ...

He [Osric] hath much land, and fertile: let a
beast be lord of beasts, and his crib shall stand at
the king's mess: 'tis a chough; but, as I say,
spacious in the possession of dirt.

Kings and conquerors are, in the end, only "clay," and the estate of an ambitious courtier is but "dirt." Here is the rejection of all material striving.

Finally, just before his climactic duel with Laertes, Hamlet apologizes with obvious sincerity for having wronged him.

Give me your pardon, sir: I've done you wrong;
But pardon't, as you are a gentleman.
This presence knows,
And you must needs have heard, how I am punish'd
With sore distraction. What I have done,
That might your nature, honour and exception
Roughly awake, I here proclaim was madness....
Sir, in this audience,
Let my disclaiming from a purposed evil
Free me so far in your most generous thoughts,
That I have shot mine arrow o'er the house,
And hurt my brother.

Now, if we think about it, Hamlet's new vantage point on matters of life and death, destiny and fate, ambition and revenge, is surprisingly similar to the change of heart often reported by near-death experiencers.

People who have undergone a near-death experience will frequently say that they no longer fear death, that they believe in a higher purpose for their lives and for the universe, that they are less concerned with material things, and that they seek to atone for their earlier wrongdoing. They are often described as exhibiting newfound serenity and philosophical detachment combined with sincere compassion and uncharacteristic outpourings of love. And they seem to be older and wiser than their years.

Just like Hamlet.

What are we to make of this? Is it only a coincidence? Maybe. Or maybe the author of Hamlet had a close brush with death himself -- even an actual NDE -- and emerged from the experience altered in the same way that modern near-death experiencers are altered.

Most scholars agree that Hamlet is Shakespeare's most autobiographical play and that the protagonist is, in some sense, a stand-in for the author himself. If so, and if the author had a life-changing experience like an NDE, then this is the play in which we would expect to see some evidence of it.

And I think that possibly -- just possibly -- we do.

-----------

*For those who, like me, are partial to the theory that the true author of Shakespeare's works was the Earl of Oxford, Edward De Vere, it is worth noting that, upon his return from Europe, De Vere himself was captured by pirates. Like Hamlet, he was faced with the prospect of immediate execution until his noble status was discerned. At that point, the pirates made the prudent decision to land him on English soil. This is only one of many remarkable parallels between incidents in Shakespearean plays and in the life of Edward De Vere. See Mark Anderson's superb biography of the Earl of Oxford for further details.

Comments

[Michael H]

This is interesting speculation, Michael.

R.M. Bucke, who compiled the volume Cosmic Consciousness which I’ve mentioned in previous posts, was convinced that whoever wrote the Shakespeare material had experienced a transcendent form of consciousness of some sort. Bucke spends about fifteen pages discussing Shakespeare’s Sonnets, arguing that these were addressed to the Cosmic sense itself, and made little sense otherwise.

Bucke championed Francis Bacon as the author of the Shakespeare works, but regardless of authorship, perhaps the best indicator that these were written by a transcendent soul is their continued relevance today, some 400 years later.

[Eteponge]

I've heard it suggested that Charles Dickens may have had an NDE, or may have heard such accounts, as his story "A Christmas Carol" has more than apparent NDE Elements within it. Viewing the past in a life review, viewing the present veridically (OBE) while unseen, witnessing future events, coming back from the experience a changed man, having met spirits that guided him through the process, etc. Ebenezer Scrooge went through all of the elements of a classic NDE.

[Arthur]

It's amazing to me how many verses in the New Testament have a NDE/holographic flavor about them. Makes me think that perhaps Jesus was a near death experiencer. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, judge not that ye be not judged, whatever you so that also shall ye reap, God is One, God is Light, God is Love, etc. Jesus prayed that we all be one in the Garden of Gethsemanee, and there are many more parallels to NDE's. Many eastern religions also have NDE parallels. - Art

[william]

arthur suggesting that jesus had a NDE will go over well with your christian friends as jesus has not only been thought of as a son of god but god itself.

my favorite passage in the new testament is that the meek shall inherit the earth. never heard a preacher get that one right in their sermons.

and of course he stated this at the time that rome controlled the known world with all of their power.

the book cosmic consciousness suggests that jesus was at the right age to awaken to cosmic consciousness.

[Chris K]

I've read that Lord Burghley possibly hired the pirates to kill de Vere, his son in law. This from a book by Paul Streitz that purports de Vere to be the son of Queen Elizabeth, through the rape of an uncle when she was 15 years old.

In line with this thinking, de Vere would be heir to Elizabeth's throne, which is why Burghley married into the de Vere family. His daughter, the granddaughter of a merchant, would be queen.

While de Vere was traveling in Europe, Anne, his wife, gave birth to their first child, a daughter. For years, de Vere did not believe he was the father (this theme can be found throughout the Shakespeare canon, as can the theme of changeling babies, hence the notion that de Vere was the changeling of a young Elizabeth). De Vere was estranged from his wife for 5 years because he believed to have been cuckolded.

With and unpredictable son-in-law and future king, and the ticket for Burghley to attain the ultimate heights of power -- a daughter who is Queen, it's not too far fetched to imagine the powerful Machiavellian statesman orchestrating the assassination of Edward de Vere via the pirates.

De Vere had been and would always be a thorn in the side of Burghley and Burghley has been accused of and associated with much worse crimes than the contract murder of a rogue courtier.

Nevertheless, Michael, I like the way you lay out your case. It shows that you are an intelligent writer. I wonder if you have plans to explore the Shakespeare authorship question in literary form -- and please forgive me if you already have.

[Michael H]

“Makes me think that perhaps Jesus was a near death experiencer.”

Art, I’d suggest that you might have this backwards. It strikes me that NDE testimony largely confirms the teachings of all of the major religions, but the experience of higher consciousness encountered in an NDE is achieved only upon temporary expiration of the physical body.

The testimony of the founders of the various religions, coupled with the testimony of those of all faiths who have had direct realizations of a deeper reality that we refer to as “mystics”, leads me to believe that the realization of the divine nature of existence is always available, though rare, and can be achieved while one is right here on earth, fully “alive”, though they all seem to recognize that part of the experience is the realization they were previously “dead” on some level before the event.

It seems to me that what the religions together are telling us is that this level of existence we’re currently in is entirely spiritual as well – the moral teachings of all of the faiths are the consequence of the realization of a deeper reality while right here on earth, but are not necessarily the path one must travel to achieve that realization (though it certainly can’t hurt).

The reality described by those who have achieved enlightenment appear to describe a state of mind; a psychological event if you will. It also seems that when that state of mind manifests in an individual, they find themselves in the position of the man in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, trying to describe sunlight to those of us who have known nothing but shadows.

[william]

"they find themselves in the position of the man in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, trying to describe sunlight to those of us who have known nothing but shadows."

Very well stated. I spent some time posting on another blog where several people posting on that blog thought they knew that "sunlight" but when someone offered a different view (me) of what the sunlight may be, they attacked with such a fervor that gave them away and showed clearly they were indeed still in the shadows.

Hey, Arthur! Back on our toyboy Josh:an: Have you heard his song "To Where You Are"? Love song to a dear departed. So schmaltzy and so beautiful. Sniff, honnnnnnnnnnk... :-)

[Ginny]

Sorry, didn't sign. That Josh Groban fawn-fest above was me, Ginny.

[Art]

Hey, Arthur! Back on our toyboy Josh:an: Have you heard his song "To Where You Are"? - ginny
-------------------------------------------
Yes, it's on one of my CD's. My favorite Josh Groban song is "you're still you." I think it says something profound about life after death and it brings tears to my eyes. Like I said, I think Josh must be an Angel. No human that I know of has a voice like that. - Art

To Where You Are - Josh Groban
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-_itEo3y6WI
You're still you - Josh Groban
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-dK_TOg1KRM

[Richard Smiley, webmaster]

I will put a link to your website on the website of the Shakespeare-Oxford Society in the News and Events page. Nice article!

[Ginny]

Hey, Art,you may be right. He does have that sweet innocent face, and those curly locks. Hmmmm..... :-) Thanks for the links! I'll go swoon some now.

[Art]

Hey, Art,you may be right. He does have that sweet innocent face, and those curly locks. Hmmmm..... :-) Thanks for the links! I'll go swoon some now. - ginny
--------------------------------------------

I wonder what his parents think of his talent. How proud they must be. It can only be considered a gift from God. It's not like you can teach a kid to sing like that. All the voice lessons in the world couldn't do it. Can you imagine raising a kid like that? I wonder how old was he when they figured it out? Middle School? Where was he? Choir? Did he just open his mouth one day and that voice came out? Every time I listen to "your still you" it brings tears to my eyes. My mom died when I was fifteen years old and I often wonder if I'll recognize her in Heaven? What will our relationship be like? That's why that song means to much to me. I'm soon to turn 55 years old and I still miss her. It's been 40 years since she died but hardly a day goes by where I don't think about her. For some reason Josh Groban's singing makes me think about heaven and spiritual thoughts. I wonder if he knows he has that effect on people? - Art