TPPM (9): Hamlet and Sloth

[Tim Strzechowski]

You make some good points here, Kris.  And while the opening of the play would indeed suggest that Hamlet has been suffering what Demascene would define as "sloth," it is important to remember that the time element in the play would not support this having occurred for any significant length of time.  In fact, since Gertrude and Claudius married so soon after the King's death, it's safe to assume that Hamlet's sloth hasn't been going on all *too* long.  Time is out of joint, after all.

Also, "The Mousetrap" is a very elaborate reaction to his vow of vengeance (and here I might add that I don't find the character of Hamlet "proactive" at all . . . in fact, he is mostly a *reactive* character, don't you think?), but he's hardly done "nothing" for the first two and a half acts.  By the conclusion of Act I he has vowed vengeance against his uncle, sworn to put on "an antic disposition" that will set into motion the rest of the play's events, and made Horatio et al swear to not let on about any of this to anyone.  Yes, he mopes for a good portion of the first act, but he "acts" by the conclusion of it.

And that was pretty much my point in my original post:  wanting to do nothing (sloth) is not to be confused with Hamlet's *strong desire* to do something, but not knowing what the hell to do and dwelling too much on what why he doesn't know what the hell to do.

I still find Hamlet technically a poor example of "sloth" on Pynchon's part, for what it's worth.

Tim


  While I agree that it might be an oversimplification, I don't think that Pynchon's description of Hamlet is erroneous.  At the begining of the play we find out that Hamlet has been doing nuthin' since the old man died. Claudius (Act I, Scene II, 90-95): 
  "But you must know, your father lost a father, 

  That father lost, lost his, and the survivor bound 

  In filial obligation for some term 

  To do obsequious sorrow; but to persever 

  In obstinate condolement is a course 

  Of impious stubbornness; 'tis unmanly grief, 

  It shows a will most incorrect to heaven."

  I don't think that the inaction resulting from sorrow has to be absolute for it to be considered accidia.  Hamlet only acts proactively a couple of times in the play, "The Mousetrap" being the first, and that comes in the third act.  So mabye Hamlet gets it together halfway through the play?  I agree that Hamlet can be read as not "necessarily" slothful, and that Pynch dropped Hamlet's name lightly, but I hear 'unmanly grief is incorrect to heaven' as being analogous to what you posted under 'Dante and Sloth':

  >Sloth, according to Damascene (De Fide Orth. ii, 14) is an oppressive sorrow, which, to wit, so weighs upon man's mind, that he wants to do nothing;
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20041201/7aeeb4f7/attachment.html>