2008 年 2008 巻 28 号 p. 1-18,84
The purpose of this study is to examine the ambiguity of Hamlet from the psychoanalytic point of view.
In the first place, we focus our attention on the speech of Ghost and Hamlet' s soliloquy, and examine their words with many different meanings. Because of the indefinite existence of Ghost, Hamlet cannot believe the speech of it, and loses confidence in his own role as an avenger. Similarly, because of the inconsistency between Hamlet's sayings and doings, he comes to feel a credibility gap in his own statement, and moreover, he comes to doubt the consistency in the language itself and the unity between a show and its' substance, “signi fier” and “signified”. The ambiguity of their words leads to the uncer tainty of the language itself in this play.
In the second place, we consider expressions with “mirror” in this play. They are used directly in some lines and implied by symmetrical relationships between characters in this play. Each of the characters in Hamlet is connected and is contrasted with another character in it as a mirror image of himself or herself But, in the complex symmetry, Horatio is the unique character, who only stands the outside of the complicated relationships and serves as the only observer of this story. In the last scene of this play, he also functions as a narrator of all of the occurrences in it. Such distinctive position of him takes the essential part for Hamlet, which assures us of the objectivity of this story and connects us to Horatio in the role of the interpreter. In other words, when each of us, as an interpreter of Hamlet, is contrasted with Horatio as the interpreter of this story, we ourselves are thrown into the intricate symmetrical world of Hamlet in which various mirror images are reflected.
Then, to discuss further on their relationships between characters in this play and between We and the text of Hamlet, we quote Jacques Lacan's theory of “The Mirror Stage” and his “schema L”, and survey them. Here, adopting his theory and the figure, we examine more closely the text of Hamlet and the symmetrical relationships between its characters, and analyze the process of our interpretations of this play from the psychoanalytic point of view.
In conclusion, we reveal how “the Subject” of Hamlet or ourselves is mistaken in the process, and then I would like to point out the important role which psychoanalytical criticism can play in it.