Hamlet - Play within a play

[Alphathree33]

I have to do a short presentation on the significance of the play within a play in Hamlet (i.e. The Murder of Gonzago)

I have some good quotes relating to Hamlet's use of the play to determine the King's guilt, the superiority of Hamlet as a director (although no good quotes for this...), the king's reaction, etc.

What other significance of this part of the play is there? I have overheard people talking about Shakepeare writing through Hamlet, as though for that time Hamlet is shakespeare, or something like that. Can anyone who knows what they are talking about build on this idea for me?

 

[minendo]

Isnt this the play that Danny DeVito teaches to the Army kids in Renaissance Man?

 

[Jzero]

<< What other significance of this part of the play is there? >>

The play is done entirely in pantomime, so it's often referred to in scripts as a "dumb show."
You can draw your own conclusions as to the significance.
Actually I couldn't resist the opportunity to make that crack--I love Hamlet.

 

[Balt]

The play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king.

Unfortunately, I can't really help you with your question. I've only studied this on the high-school level (although I am now in college) and we didn't really get that in-depth. Seeing as how this is the first interesting topic I've seen here in a while, however, and since I am now curious myself...

Bump!

Edit: Found a link (which may or may not be very reliable/academic):

Scroll to #2.

 

[Rarr]

I have not come across anything that mentions Hamlet as Shakespeare during the period he is revising the play.

The reaction of the Claudius to the play is the key point of significance- this is the first actual representation of his guilt in the play. Before we had just seen indications of guilt, and now we are sure that the Ghost was correct. Hamlet's doubt is resolved.

A good source to find out questions/answers, essay topics and hints is www.sparknotes.com Just click on the Literature section and go to Hamlet.

Hamlet can be rather ambiguous at times-but good luck!

 

[Alphathree33]

Where do the players come from and how does Hamlet end up talking to them? Do they work for pollonius?

 

[Alphathree33]

<<

<< What other significance of this part of the play is there? >>

The play is done entirely in pantomime, so it's often referred to in scripts as a "dumb show."
You can draw your own conclusions as to the significance.
Actually I couldn't resist the opportunity to make that crack--I love Hamlet. >>



Uh, it is? There are some very long speeches by the actor king and queen...

 

[pyonir]

<< Where do the players come from and how does Hamlet end up talking to them? Do they work for pollonius? >>



i always thought the players were common players in a play house (or theater). Hamlet seems to know the players personally and so arranges with them his plan. i can't be certain of my thoughts though. you might want to check out Hamlet.org for more info and a synopsis. good luck.

 

[Jzero]

<<

<<

<< What other significance of this part of the play is there? >>

The play is done entirely in pantomime, so it's often referred to in scripts as a "dumb show."
You can draw your own conclusions as to the significance.
Actually I couldn't resist the opportunity to make that crack--I love Hamlet. >>



Uh, it is? There are some very long speeches by the actor king and queen... >>



I could be thinking of a different Shakespeare play....hehe

 

[Alphathree33]

The fact that the play is named mouse trap is significant because it pertains to Claudius, yes?

 

[Balt]

I'm not certain if the official name of the play was mouse trap or if that's just what Hamlet was referring to it as.

As far as where the players come from, I got the impression (which could be totally incorrect) that they travelled around and did plays whereever they could be hired. Kind of roaming actors, I guess. Not sure who actually hired them, and I'm not sure if they play really tells that either.

 

[alee25]

the book: rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead, greatly extrapolate of the significane of the actors. You can check up some stuff on the msg boards on sparknotes.com but basically rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead is a piece of existentialist novel (bascially they quesiton what is the point to their life), they say that the actors since they feign death every night (in acting), how is that different from really dying (if they are suppose to truely be their character) and mabye it is that they all are alreday dead. You can probably relate this idea to hamlet's to be or not to be speech, as they both question what is the value of life, hamlet says that the reason people dont embrace death (as they should due to the burdens of life), is because they fear death. in Ros.guild are dead, they say bascially the same thing.

 

[Antoneo]

Hey there... have you tried using Spark Notes or Pink Monkey? They provide great outlines and explain key parts of stories. Hamlet included .
The play within a play is Hamlet's scheme to find out whether or not Claudius is indeed guilty of the horrible deed the ghost was talking about. Claudius tells the actors not to drag out too much feeling so the play feels as "real" as possible. The play is very similar to the plot mentioned by the ghost of Hamlet Senior in that poison is poured into the ear of Gonzago. Claudius rises up from his chair at this point and we can assume either of the following: 1) the most obvious being that he is reminded himself of the horrible deed 2) He is appalled that the play would contain such treachery or 3) Claudius has indigestion. The third one can be found in the text somewhere.