Deciet and Acting in 'Hamlet' and 'The Revenger's Tragedy
Explore the significance of Shakespeare’s presentation of deceit and acting in ‘Hamlet’. Show how far your appreciation and understanding of this element of ‘Hamlet’ has been informed by your study of ‘The Revenger’s Tragedy’ and critical readings of both plays.
Acting and deceit prove to be key ingredients to Revenge Tragedy as a genre; the deception of characters in both Hamlet and The Revenger’s Tragedy (Revengers) subsequently accelerating the plays to their respective final catastrophes. The majority of characters in both texts arguably play a part in order to deceive others at some point, creating a dramatic irony that resonates with the audience and adding comedy to an otherwise somber plot, however the complex system of acting and deception creates “an elaborate network of roles and relationships” (Michael Hall) that ultimately generates uncertainty within both the contemporary audience and critics in the modern day. Acting and deceit in Hamlet proves to delay the inevitable, however characters in Revengers deceive others to act as a catalyst, progressing their ambitions and causing the tragic finale to approach at a quicker pace. To a contemporary audience, the latter statement suggests that Revengers would have been more typical of a Revenge Tragedy genre; Hamlet’s intelligent, philosophical character sets him apart from classic Revengers and evokes pathos, however the typically male attitude of Vindice suggests that Revengers would have been the preferred by an Elizabethan audience. Ultimately, the dramatic irony and comedic effect created through acting and deception in both plays serve to lighten the atmosphere of the theatre, “If the quality of humour is important to comedy, it is more so in tragedy, whether in life or theatre” (Sir Herbert Tree), and create uncertainty within the audience as to how far the deception reaches, evoking controversy even in modern viewings.
Acting and deceit are imperative to an Elizabethan Revenge tragedy, and
Acting and deceit prove to be key ingredients to Revenge Tragedy as a genre; the deception of characters in both Hamlet and The Revenger’s Tragedy (Revengers) subsequently accelerating the plays to their respective final catastrophes. The majority of characters in both texts arguably play a part in order to deceive others at some point, creating a dramatic irony that resonates with the audience and adding comedy to an otherwise somber plot, however the complex system of acting and deception creates “an elaborate network of roles and relationships” (Michael Hall) that ultimately generates uncertainty within both the contemporary audience and critics in the modern day. Acting and deceit in Hamlet proves to delay the inevitable, however characters in Revengers deceive others to act as a catalyst, progressing their ambitions and causing the tragic finale to approach at a quicker pace. To a contemporary audience, the latter statement suggests that Revengers would have been more typical of a Revenge Tragedy genre; Hamlet’s intelligent, philosophical character sets him apart from classic Revengers and evokes pathos, however the typically male attitude of Vindice suggests that Revengers would have been the preferred by an Elizabethan audience. Ultimately, the dramatic irony and comedic effect created through acting and deception in both plays serve to lighten the atmosphere of the theatre, “If the quality of humour is important to comedy, it is more so in tragedy, whether in life or theatre” (Sir Herbert Tree), and create uncertainty within the audience as to how far the deception reaches, evoking controversy even in modern viewings.
Acting and deceit are imperative to an Elizabethan Revenge tragedy, and