Hamlet Group

Question:

jjggii99
jjggii99
Student
High School - 12th Grade

Why is the line "At home, my lord" so important, and why might it make Hamlet angry?

Rate question:

Posted by jjggii99 on Tuesday February 10, 2009 at 10:17 PM and tagged with act 3, angry, at home, hamlet, my lord, ophelia, quote, scene 1, shakespeare.

Answers:


  1. adrigon Teacher
    High School - 12th Grade

    eNotes Editor

    If one is reading the play as though Hamlet is sane and merely manipulating his surroundings, then "At home, my lord" becomes Hamlet's confirmation that Ophelia is supporting her conniving father and not Hamlet, because he knows she is lying to him, and that Polonius is still in the castle, and possibly even knows that he is listening.

    Rate answer:

    Posted by adrigon on Tuesday February 10, 2009 at 11:16 PM


  2. robertwilliam

    eNotes Editor

    The line itself isn't immediately important or significant. It's not like it's a key theme of the play, really, but it's a significant moment in the scene.

    Hamlet and Ophelia have been having a conversation about something else entirely, when suddenly Hamlet changes the topic:

    HAMLET:
    Where's your father?

    OPHELIA:
    At home, my lord.

    Claudius and Polonius are hiding in the same room. Has Hamlet suddenly realised that Polonius is watching him? Has Ophelia just somehow given the game away? That varies from production to production. But Ophelia's answer makes Hamlet change topic again, and suddenly start verbaly attacking her. Why? Because, perhaps, it is a lie - a direct lie - and Ophelia knows it. Because, perhaps, the way she says it tells Hamlet that Polonius is watching.

    But it opens a little window into the deception is going on in the scene - and perhaps Hamlet does recognise that.  

    Sources:
    http://www.enotes.com/hamlet-text/act-iii-scene-i

    Rate answer:

    Posted by robertwilliam on Wednesday February 11, 2009 at 5:14 AM


  3. jagtig

    I believe it's what is known as a "transparent lie."

    The question of whether the character of Hamlet would be more consistent with his role and speeches should he be taken as a manipulator, rather than a madman, is a subject of much debate.

    He believes himself mad, and others see him as mad. It's one of those "I'd have to smell his laundry" (live with him) deals, and since he is a fictitious character, that's not possible. The story of Amleth, upon which Hamlet was said to have been based, has the namesake main character acting mad. However, Shakespeare owed no debt to that story, save the Anglicized name taken for his title and the protagonist, and the fact that the King was also trying to kill the hero-prince.

    The intent of telling his mother to "ravel out" that he is mad only in craft, or acting mad to gain his ends, is clearly made to catch his uncle, who he says will test the theory, whereupon he will be toppled from the roof. How? By Hamlet's madness? By other means? It's not clear. One thing is for certain, it's not a confession of sanity.

     

    Rate answer:

    Posted by jagtig on Wednesday February 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM