Critical Essay on T. S. Eliot’s Hamlet
and His Problems
Introduction
T. S. Eliot’s essay “Hamlet
and His Problems,” published in The Sacred Wood (1920), is
one of his most provocative and influential critical works. In this essay,
Eliot challenges traditional interpretations of Shakespeare’s Hamlet,
proposing that the play is an artistic failure. His analysis introduces the
concept of the “objective correlative,” a critical tool that has become a cornerstone
of modern literary theory. This essay examines Eliot’s arguments, his use of
the objective correlative, and the broader implications of his critique.
The Objective Correlative
One of the most
significant contributions of Eliot’s essay is his articulation of the objective
correlative, which he defines as “a set of objects, a situation, a chain of
events which shall be the formula of that particular emotion.” According to
Eliot, successful art requires a precise relationship between emotion and its
external expression. In this framework, an artist’s task is to create a set of
images, actions, or symbols that evoke the intended emotion in the audience.
Eliot criticizes Hamlet
for failing to achieve this balance. He argues that the play’s central
emotional force—Hamlet’s anguish—lacks a corresponding objective correlative,
making it difficult for audiences to fully comprehend or empathize with his
inner turmoil. For Eliot, this failure undermines the coherence and artistic
integrity of the play.
Hamlet’s Emotional Excess
Eliot’s critique of Hamlet
extends to the characterization of its protagonist. He contends that Hamlet’s
emotions are disproportionate to the situations he faces, creating a sense of
excess and inconsistency. Unlike Shakespeare’s more successful tragedies, such
as Macbeth and Othello, where the
protagonists’ emotions are grounded in clear and compelling circumstances, Hamlet
presents a protagonist whose feelings seem to exceed the bounds of the play’s
dramatic framework.
Eliot attributes this
problem to Shakespeare’s source material. He suggests that Shakespeare
inherited an intractable narrative from earlier versions of the Hamlet
story, particularly the Ur-Hamlet, and was unable to resolve
its inherent contradictions. As a result, the play’s emotional core remains
diffuse and unconvincing.
Critique of Romantic Interpretations
Eliot’s essay is
also a critique of Romantic readings of Hamlet, which often
emphasize the play’s psychological depth and the complexity of Hamlet’s
character. Romantic critics, such as Samuel Taylor Coleridge, celebrated Hamlet
as a figure of profound introspection and intellectual sensitivity. Eliot,
however, dismisses such interpretations as overly sentimental and reductive.
For Eliot, the
tendency to focus on Hamlet’s psychological complexity obscures the play’s
structural and artistic shortcomings. He argues that the critical obsession
with Hamlet’s character has led to a neglect of broader questions about the
play’s coherence and effectiveness as a work of art. This shift in focus
reflects Eliot’s broader modernist agenda, which prioritizes form and technique
over subjective interpretation.
Eliot’s Modernist Perspective
Eliot’s critique of Hamlet
is deeply rooted in his modernist aesthetics, which emphasize precision,
detachment, and formal rigor. His insistence on the objective correlative
reflects a broader modernist concern with the relationship between emotion and
representation, highlighting the importance of craft and technique in achieving
artistic success.
At the same time,
Eliot’s essay reveals his ambivalence about Shakespeare’s status as a cultural
icon. While he acknowledges Shakespeare’s genius, he also challenges the
uncritical veneration of his works, suggesting that even the greatest artists
are not immune to failure. This iconoclastic stance is characteristic of
modernist criticism, which seeks to redefine the literary canon and challenge
conventional hierarchies of value.
Legacy and Influence
“Hamlet and
His Problems” has had a profound
impact on literary criticism and theory. Eliot’s concept of the objective
correlative has been widely adopted and debated, influencing subsequent
generations of critics and writers. His essay also exemplifies the modernist
emphasis on form and technique, shaping the critical discourse of the 20th
century.
However, Eliot’s
arguments have not been without controversy. Some critics have challenged his
dismissal of Hamlet as an artistic failure, arguing that
the play’s emotional complexity and thematic ambiguity are central to its
enduring appeal. Others have questioned the applicability of the objective
correlative to Shakespeare’s works, suggesting that Eliot’s modernist framework
imposes anachronistic standards on Renaissance drama.
Conclusion
T. S. Eliot’s “Hamlet
and His Problems” is a provocative and influential essay that continues
to shape the study of Shakespeare and literary criticism more broadly. By
introducing the concept of the objective correlative and challenging Romantic
interpretations of Hamlet, Eliot offers a fresh and
rigorous perspective on one of Shakespeare’s most celebrated plays. While his
critique remains a subject of debate, its emphasis on form, technique, and the
relationship between emotion and representation has left a lasting legacy,
affirming Eliot’s place as one of the foremost critics of the modernist era.
******
