عاشقِ آن خضوع و خشوعی هستم که بعد از خواندن و تمام کردنِ یک شاهکار به آدم دست می‌دهد. یک جور آرام‌گرفتن و رام‌شدن است.

پ.ن. : بعد از خواندنش، نمایشِ "هملت" با کارگردانی لیندزی ترنر را هم دیدم. تجربه فوق‌العاده‌ای بود :))

«Γιατί η γη κι ο ουρανός, Οράτιε, βρίθει από πράγματα που δεν μπορεί ούτε να ονειρευτεί η φιλοσοφία μας».

Δεν περιμένετε εμένα ασφαλώς για να σας πω τι είναι αυτό το έργο κι αν πρέπει να το διαβάσει κανείς, ίσως γιατί το πρέπει δεν αρμόζει σε αυτή την τέχνη και δεν αρμόζει στις απολαύσεις γενικώς. Ούτε φυσικά μία ανάγνωση, ή και μια δεύτερη, μπορεί να αποκαλύψει όλους τους χυμούς αυτού του κειμένου, τον απίθανα μοντέρνο χαρακτήρα του, που εγκαινιάζει μια νέα εποχή στοχασμού και ένα νέο πνεύμα για να ζεις και να πορεύεσαι. Όχι. Ο Άμλετ είναι ένα κείμενο αργής επαναφοράς, που το μεταβολίζεις για πάντα, που επιστρέφεις σ' αυτό στις διάφορες φάσεις της ζωής, κοιτώντας το με ίδια μάτια αλλά διαφορετικά μυαλά.

Θα ήθελα να αντιγράφω τα αποσπάσματα του Άμλετ σ' ένα τετράδιο μέχρι να τα αποστηθίσω, αλλά αυτό έχει ήδη κάπως συμβεί.

Κι ο άνθρωπος τι είναι, τι αξίζει,
εάν το χρόνο του πάνω στη γη
τον έχει για να τρώει και να κοιμάται;
Τίποτα, ένα κτήνος. Τόσο μόνο.
Κι εκείνος που μας έπλασε με νου
τόσο πλατύ που να μπορεί να βλέπει
και προς το παρελθόν και προς το μέλλον.
σίγουρα δεν μας έδωσε αυτή
τη θεϊκή ικανότητα του λόγου
για να σαπίζει μέσα μας αργή.
Τι φταίει λοιπόν; Η λησμονιά του ζώου
ή κάποιος άνανδρος ενδοιασμός
μιας σκέψης τόσο πια προσεκτικής,
τόσο λεπτής που αν την τεμαχίσεις
το ένα τέταρτό της θα' ναι σύνεση
και τ' άλλα τρία τέταρτα δειλία;
Ό,τι κι αν είναι, δεν καταλαβαίνω
γιατί να ζω ακόμα για να λέω
«αυτό πρέπει να γίνει», όταν έχω
λόγο, θέληση, δύναμη και μέσα
για το κάνω;
[...]
Μεγαλοσύνη σίγουρα δεν είναι
να πολεμάς μονάχα όταν έχεις
έναν μεγάλο λόγο. Αλλά να βρίσκεις
έναν μεγάλο λόγο για να πολεμήσεις
και σ' ένα τίποτα, και σ΄έναν ίσκιο,
όταν το τίμημα είναι η τιμή σου.

Τη μετάφραση του Διονύση Καψάλη την επέλεξα συνειδητά, συγκρίνοντας αποσπάσματα του κειμένου με επίσης πάρα πολύ καλές απόπειρες άλλων μεταφραστών. Αυτή εδώ όμως με κέρδισε τελικά.

"To be or not to be...," that is not my favorite line. My favorite is: "Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio; a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy; he hath borne me on his back a thousand times."

It's that recollection of innocent days that gets me every time, because you know Hamlet is being swept up in a vortex of innocence lost.

STUPID ADULTS! They screw up everything!

I grew up in a truly idyllic setting. As childhoods go, mine was a joy. But then you grow up and you wake up to reality.

My introduction to Hamlet came during high school in my early teen years. Its murderous plot of family deceit and infidelity struck home, my family being likewise stricken with such maladies. The parallels were all too similar and I love/hated the play for driving it all home.

Mel Gibson's movie version came out at this time, and its over-simplification and emotional heightening was a perfect fit for a simple-minded, emotionally-blinded teen. Less than stellar, the movie nonetheless had its effect upon me, furthering the torment.

Luckily my family drama was not as murdery as Hamlet's, although if the personalities of some of the principle players were slightly more volatile, there could easily have been a bloodbath of Hamlet-esque proportions. In my reality, we all got over it, sorted it out, and moved on with our lives wherever they led. The beauty of fiction is to see the deepest of fantasies played out. It gives us - I hesitate to use the melodramatic "victims" here, but that is essentially what we amount to - it gives us release from the pent up anger when we see the wrong-doers get their comeuppance.

For that reason, I doubt I'll ever be able to view this work through a truly unbiased, critical lens. Just because it's a "classic" doesn't mean you have to adorn it with a 5-star laurel wreath, but - for what it means to me - I do.

Here's the thing about Hamlet: if you see it and you hate it, you saw a terrible Hamlet. I don't care if it's given critical acclaim - fuck off, Kenneth Branagh - Hamlet is supposed to be compelling, and if you didn't find the character compelling, that actor didn't do their job. You need a Hamlet who knows the character, not a Hamlet who wants to do grace to the character or some shit.

Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changed when the fire nation attacked when I saw Santa Cruz Shakespeare's 2016 production of Hamlet, starring actress Kate Eastwood Norris as Hamlet.


(CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)

I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once.


// HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN

➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel.

➽ Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.

Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.

➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!

On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.

➽ Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's.

In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play.

VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually.

Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube

“Madness in great ones must not unwatch’d go.”

I don’t know what to say about Hamlet. I could go on about how it is a story of madness and revenge. I could talk about the bonds of family loyalty, the sacrifices of love, the breaches of trust and their deleterious effects on the psyche. But this is old news—Hamlet has been around for over four hundred years. What could I possibly say that hasn’t already been said?

When my wife saw I was reading Shakespeare, her snippy comment went something like, “What are you reading that for? Don’t you you have enough drama in your life?” Which, thanks Cristina, and yes I suppose I do, but what of it? Drama can be so much freaking fun. There is a reason it sells, a reason there are countless dramatic television shows on the air, countless box office films released each year rehashing the same old dramatic plotlines (some to great effect; others, not so much). And there is a reason people are still reading Shakespeare centuries upon centuries after his death: they are fun, they are witty, they are ever so dramatic.

Hamlet is no exception. With plot elements involving fratricide, lethal potions, mistaken identity, forgery of correspondence, espionage and treachery, along with a solid dose of hanging out with the ghosts of dead relatives, one could imagine I’m reviewing an episode of General Hospital. But what is Hamlet if not a soap opera for the Elizabethans? It is an epically tragic train wreck crammed into five tiny acts.

What makes this piece of drama so timeless, though, is that its action is served in such perfect complement by its depiction of character. We all know what Prince Hamlet is going to do before he does it. Hamlet himself, even while doubting his abilities and struggling with his resolve, knows how it’s going to all play out. Why else would he be so cruel to Ophelia? And yet it is this internal turmoil that fuels our interest in the action. It might seem like an ordinary train wreck at its surface, but upon deeper inspection it is a train wreck in whose conductors and engineers we have a vested interest.

So, witty discourse meets fast-paced drama meets penetrating character introspection? It almost makes me wonder what would have become of Luke and Laura had William Shakespeare been in charge of the script.

This play made me wish that I had drowned in a river instead of Ophelia.

n  
مشکل هملت این نیست که بیش از حد فکر می‌کنه، مشکل اینجاست که بیش از حد خوب فکر می‌کنه و با فکر کردن خودش رو به حقیقت می‌رسونه و تنها کاری که در مورد حقیقت میشه انجام داد اینه که ازش مرد
فریدریش نیچه
n

فکر نکنم هیچوقت بتونم تجربه‌ی خواندن هملت رو فراموش کنم. من تا جایی که بتونم سعی می‌کنم از ادبیات لذت ببرم اما غرقش نشم. اما هملت من رو با خودش به گرداب عجیبی کشید. هارولد بلوم میگه که هملت آینه‌ایه که همه می‌تونن بخشی از خودشون رو درش ببین، اما در آخر هملت شبیه هیچکس نیست. من خودم رو در هملت ِ آگاه از مرگ دیدم. هملتی که دائم با سوال و مفهوم مرگ دست و پنجه نرم می‌کنه. هملتی که جملات سیاهش مثل زهریه که عموش در گوش پدرش ریخت. و من هم وقتی به خودم آمدم مسموم شده بودم. این ریویو نتیجه‌ی جمع‌بندی مطالبیه که در مورد این نمایشنامه خوندم

هملت درباره‌ی چیه؟
قرن‌هاست که این سوال وجود داره که این نمایشنامه دقیقاً در مورد چیه؟ نمایش، مثل شخصیت اصلیش، از تعریف شدن گریزانه. شخصیت اصلی کیه؟ یک پرنس؟ پسر؟ برادرزاده؟ عاشق؟ شاعر؟ شمشیرزن؟ دانشجوی فلسفه؟ منتقد تئاتر؟ فردی در لبه‌ی پرتگاه خودکشیه؟ همش و هیچکدوم

هملت حتی با سنش هم تعریف نمیشه. زمانیکه نمایش شروع میشه، هملت از دانشگاه برگشته و سن تحصیلات دانشگاهی در آن زمان حدود نوزده سال بوده. اما در اکت آخر وقتی هملت بالای قبر ایستاده، سن خودش رو سی عنوان می‌کنه. یعنی در داستانی که حداکثر در شش هفته اتفاق افتاده، او حدود یازده سال بزرگ شده. این بازی شکسپیر با سن، عمدی و برای نشان دادن بلوغ هملته. اما باعث میشه هملت حتی در قالب تصورات سن و سال هم نگنجه

مشکل هملت چه بود؟ آیا اونطور که گوته میگه بیش از حد حساس بود؟ یا به جای انجام دادن فکر می‌کرد؟ یا از مرگ پدرش و ازدواج مادرش بیش از حد شکه بود؟ یا به گفته‌ی فروید هملت نتونست انتقام خودش رو از عموش بگیره چون او فانتزی ادیپ هملت رو عملی کرده بود؟ چیزی که می‌دونیم اینه که مشکل هملت، مشکل جوانیه. درگیری با مشکلاتی که فرد باعث ایجادش نبوده و از سمت محیط بهش تحمیل شده. برخلاف مکبث و کینگ لیر که با مشکلات میان‌سالی و پیری مواجهند

شکسپیر و هملت
هملت، طولانی‌ترین نمایشنامه‌ی شکسپیر، با زندگی شخصی خودش گره‌ خورده. پسر شکسپیر، همنت، سه سال قبل از این نمایشنامه در یازده سالگی مرد. در زمان شکسپیر هنوز نگارش انگلیسی استانداردسازی نشده بود و این دو اسم عملاً یکی بودند. هر چند که ایده‌ی اصلی هملت بسیار قدیمی‌تر از نسخه‌ی ۱۶۰۰ شکسپیره. قدمت اولین متن این داستان به سال ۱۲۰۰ برمی‌گرده و در دهه‌ی ۱۵۸۰ نسخه‌ای ازش که از دست رفته روی استیج اجرا می‌شده. اما هملتِ شکسپیر نسخه‌ی پخته‌ی این داستان قدیمیه که بسیاری از متفکران معتقدند از مرگ پسر و پدرش (در سال بازبینی متن نمایشنامه) تاثیر گرفته

:کاراکترهای دیگر
۱. روح کینگ هملت
در جامعه‌‌ی پروتستانی که شکسپیر در اون زندگی می‌کرده، مسئله‌ی بازگشت روح پدر هملت از پایه مشکل‌سازه‌. از دیدگاه مسیحیت کاتولیک در قرن ۱۶، روح‌ها از برزخ بازمی‌گشتند تا از زندگان تقاضاهایی داشته باشند‌‌. اما مکتب پروتستان معتقد بود که روح‌ها شیاطینی بودند که قصد داشتند افراد رو با خودشون به تباهی ببرند. روح پدر هملت خودش رو به شیوه‌ی کاتولیکی معرفی می‌کنه و هملت به شیوه‌ی پروتستانی احتمال شیطانی بودنش رو در نظر می‌گیره. در این نمایشنامه که پر از کنایه‌هاست، آیا شکسپیر اینجا هم داره با استفاده از هر دو طرز فکر بازی می‌کنه؟

جدای از این، روح کینگ هملت باز به جهان مادی برمی‌گرده تا هملت رو کنترل کنه و بهش دستور بده. چنگال نسل قبل بر نسل آینده در جای‌جای این نمایشنامه محکمه

۲. زنان نمایشنامه
زنان نمایشنامه‌ی هملت در سکوت عجیبی سر می‌کنند. جملات گرترود کوتاه و در مورد دیگرانه. اوفیلیا تازه پس از دیوانگی به حرف میاد. این دو زن انقدر در طول نمایشنامه کم درون‌نگری می‌کنند که ما حتی نمی‌دونیم نسبت به شرایطشون چه احساسی دارند؟ اصلا گرترود حرف هملت رو در مورد کشته شدن شاه سابق باور کرد؟ حس اوفیلیا وقتی از صحبت با هملت منع شد چه بود؟

گرترود در ظاهر زن پوچی به نظر میاد اما در واقع تک‌تک جملاتش عاقلانه و حساب‌ شده‌ست. او از همان ابتدا مشکل هملت و دلیل ناآرامیش رو درک می‌کنه، خودش رو به ندانستن نمی‌زنه و حتی سعی می‌کنه که به پسرش کمک کنه‌. تنها فردی هم که در طول زندگی اوفیلیا بهش محبت و توجه نشان میده گرتروده

یکی از بزرگترین درگیری‌های ذهنی هملت ازدواج سریع مادرش با عموش هست که در عمل زنا محسوب میشه. هملت نمی‌تونه جلوی افکارش رو بگیره و مادرش رو دائم در بستر با عموش تصور می‌کنه. زنی که انگار نباید و نمی‌تونه از امیال جنسی برخوردار باشه و برای همین هم در معادلات ذهنی هملت نمی‌گنجه. در تحلیل این وسواس فکری اگر از عقده‌ی ادیپ بگذریم، یک تئوری اینه که هملت نمی‌دونه این رابطه از چه زمانی شروع شده و شاید خودش هم فرزند همین رابطه باشه؟

اوفیلیا اما نمونه‌ی زنی گیر افتاده در سیستم مردسالارانه‌ست. تمام مدت حضورش در صحنه تا قبل از دیوانگیش به کنترل و تحقیر شدن می‌گذره. در ابتدا پدرش بهش دستور میده که ارتباطش با هملت رو قطع کنه و بعد در صحنه‌ی صومعه (یا فاحشه‌خانه) هملت تحقیرش می‌کنه و تمام افکار خرابش در مورد زنان رو بهش نسبت میده. اوفیلیا فقط زمانی حرفش رو اون هم با جملات شدیداً پیچیده و رمزی میگه که دیوانه شده. دید دیگران به دیوانگیش هم چیزی جز ترحم و تحقیر نیست. این در حالیه که هملت دیوانه هر چیزی که می‌خواد رو به وضوح میگه و به دیوانگیش هم با ترس و اضطراب نگاه میشه. حتی در مرگ هم اوفیلیا دست به عمل نمی‌زنه و مرگ انتخابش می‌کنه، اما هملت خودش مرگ رو انتخاب می‌کنه

جمع‌بندی
اما هملت برای من تراژدی پذیرش مرگه‌. پذیرش اضطراب از بین رفتن و نابودی. پذیرفتن کرمی که از درون وجود انسان رو می‌خوره. هملت برای من اون لحظه‌ایه که جمجمه‌ی یورک رو بالا می‌گیره و از مرگ میگه. جایی که بالاخره هملت مرگ رو می‌بینه و به عنوان یک انسان، یک خدای میرا، بهش سر تعظیم فرود میاره

متن اصلی نمایشنامه، نسخه‌ی راحت‌ترش و نسخه‌های صوتیش رو می‌تونید از اینجا دانلود کنید
Maede's Books
تمام منابع دیگر رو هم به مرور در کانال آپلود می‌کنم

۱۴۰۳/۸/۱۷

Revenge and madness is what takes the theme throughout. Hamlet is eager to take revenge from his uncle, who killed his father - King of Denmark and mother who married his uncle later on.

Yet in his revenge he himself dies along with many others. Madness in great ones must not go unwatched or else it leads to turmoil and failure.

Blog | YouTube  | Instagram | Facebook | LinkedIn

if you don't ship Hamratio did you even read the play???

The reason why Hamlet is still discussed today is that it still eludes and confounds us. This intriguing aspect of the play has kept it alive for centuries. Hamlet's doubts, questions, and inability to act strengthen him in our eyes; everything that he struggles with is deeply familiar, and it reverberates, to varying degrees and in different contexts, with us even today. For instance, these six words 'to be or not to be' haunt Hamlet throughout the play, and this dilemma is no stranger to us, we face it all the time. No living person is immune to it.

The plot of Hamlet is simple; his father, the king, is killed by Hamlet's uncle who then marries the widowed queen – Hamlet's mother. The exact nature of king's death is revealed to Hamlet by his father's ghost More than his father's death, and it is the intrigue behind his death that pushes him into a vortex of doubts and shakes his very existence.

Now what happens to Hamlet in the play is not unusual. Even worse incidents happen in life, but not all young men or women respond to death, crime in ways he does. His very being is invaded. He is consumed by what he now knows, and this 'knowing' forces him to act, which means, he has to expose and punish his father's murderer.

When the young Hamlet gets to know of his uncle's heinous deed, he is internally damaged. He has no control over his life. His lover, Ophelia, could not calm him or divert him, nor does he seem capable of responding to her pleadings; strangely enough he is more eaten away by the thoughts of his uncle and mother's sinful union. However, he is not angry with his mother because his father's ghost has nothing against her 'she is blessedly unaware of the darker sides of the world.'

To dissect Hamlet psychologically takes us nowhere, he is a problematic character that defies 'fixing.' T. S Eliot, in his critique of Hamlet, coined the term 'objective correlative' and claimed that Hamlet's emotions are in excess of the situation he encounters. This seems a valid observation. For instance, one wonders why does the queen never for a second reflect or doubt the abrupt death of the king. How could she be so naive? Not only this, soon after the king's death, she agrees to marry her brother. Hamlet, on the contrary, stops living his life, stops loving his beloved Ophelia. He is only left with one motto; his entire life reduced to one thing – that is to avenge his father's murder.

One can unceasingly go on analyzing Hamlet and yet not able to know him. Like truth, like life, Hamlet is eternal, elusive, only partly penetrable. Therefore, we are so obsessed with Him.

YouTube kanalımda Shakespeare'in hayatı, mutlaka okunması gereken kitapları ve kronolojik okuma sırası hakkında bilgi edinebilirsiniz: https://youtu.be/rGxh2RVjmNU

KİŞİLER
Oğuz - Yaşıyor.
Oğuz'un ölü hali - Yaşanacak olan.
Anneannem - O artık bir ölü.
Dedem - O artık bir ölü.
Hamlet - Eski kralın oğlu.
Yaşama sevinci - Hepimizin istediği.
Ölüm - Hepimizin yaklaştığı.
Kader - Hepimizin bağlı olduğu.
Amaç - Hepimizin boşluğu.
Baba spermi - Hepimizin geldiği.
Anne karnı - Hepimizin doğduğu.

PERDE I
SAHNE I
(Hamlet ve Oğuz sahneye girer.)

Hamlet: Kim var orada?
Oğuz: Önce sen konuş, kimsin söyle.
Hamlet: Benim ben. "Olmak ya da olmamak işte bütün mesele bu." cümlesiyle tanınan. Monologlarıyla yürüyen. Ölümle savaşan. Babasının ölümünü aklından atamayan.
Oğuz: Tamam, tanıdım seni. Ne işin var burada? Ne arıyorsun benim kitaplığımda?
Hamlet: Bu soruyu sana sormak lazım Oğuz. O kadar Shakespeare kitabı okudun sonuçta. Mantıken Shakespeare'in tarihi oyunlarında iktidarlar arasındaki iç savaş ile benim ruhum ve bedenim arasındaki iç savaşın ne kadar benzer olduğunu fark etmiş olman gerekirdi.
Oğuz: Haklısın Hamlet. Sen de ölümle savaşıyorsun benim gibi. Ölümle savaşıyor olma ihtimalini seviyorsun. Ölüm senin için bir kaçış değil, tam tersine zamanı gelince yaşanması gereken bir deneyim. Laertes adlı karakterin isyan edip seni alt etmeyi istemesi gibi senin de yazarının tarihi oyunlarında anlattığı şey iktidarların iç mekanizmalarındaki isyanların, insanların içlerindeki isyanlara ve beyin adı verilen kontrol mekanizması tarafından bastırılmasına benziyor olmasıydı. Ama bu da nedir?

(Oğuz'un ölü hali girer.)

Oğuz'un ölü hali: Sen bana dönüşeceksin Oğuz. Bundan hiçbir kaçarın yok. Öleceksin. İntikamımı alacağım senden bütün o güzel günlerin. Donuk ve gözlerin kapalı bir şekilde yatıracağım seni bir mezara, oradan geliyorum zaten. Benden kaçamazsın Oğuz, ben zaten senim ve geleceğindeki şimdiki zamanım.
Oğuz: Aman Allahım! Bu da neyin nesi Hamlet?
Hamlet: Ona iyi bak, o senin geleceğin. Hepimizin kaçamayacak olanı. Benim de babam bana böyle görünmüştü. Sonrasında ölümden intikam almam gerektiğini anlamıştım. Ölüm hakkında ne düşünürsün Oğuz?
Oğuz: Ölüm, öldürmek istediğimdir Hamlet.
Hamlet: Peki, ölümü öldürseydin ortada yine bir ölüm olmaz mıydı Oğuz?

SAHNE II
(Hayat adlı bir savaş alanında yaşama sevinci ve ölüm kıyasıya çarpışıyordur.)

Yaşama sevinci: Hayat ne güzel! Hiçbir derdim yok. Karnım o kadar tok ki göbeğim ve enerjimle istediğim her şeyi yapabilecek bir durumdayım. Yaşamı seviyorum!
Ölüm: Hayat ne kadar soğuk. Berzahtayım, beni iki dünyaya da bağlayan şey yine kendimim. İnsanların gözlerini kapatırım. Ruhlarını çekip alırım.
Yaşama sevinci: Herkes beni görmek istiyor!
Ölüm: Hiç kimse beni görmek istemiyor.
Yaşama sevinci: Yarınlar için umut kaynağıyım!
Ölüm: Her geçen gün yaklaşanım.
Yaşama sevinci: Hayatı yaşanılır kılan benim!
Ölüm: Sen olmasaydın olmazdı hiçbir albenim!
Kader: Hop, hop, hop... Durun bakalım, nedir böyle alıp veremediğiniz şey? İkinizi de ben belirliyorum, nedir arzuladığınız?
Ölüm: İlk o başlattı.
Kader: İkiniz de zıttınızla anlamlısınız. Ben yaşama sevincine derim sevindir şu insanı, sevinir, yaşama tutunur o insan. Ben ölüme derim öldür şu insanı, ölür o insan. Hatırlasanıza... Hamlet'in monologlarında da siz yok muydunuz? Babasının ölümü üzerine intikam almak istememiş miydiniz? İnsanın kimliği de bir arkeoloji değil midir ve sizler de o kimliğin arkeologları değil misiniz?

SAHNE III
(Oğuz, Hamlet ile sohbetinden sonra yaşama sevinci ve ölümle birlikte yaşamayı öğrenir.)

Oğuz: Gelin bakalım, gelin. İkinize de yer var burada. İkiniz de çektiniz kolumdan bugüne kadar. Biriniz dedi, hayat ne güzel, hiçbir dert yok. Diğeriniz dedi, hayat ne kadar soğuk, her yer berzah. Nereden geliyorum ve ben kimim? Neden sizlerle birlikte dünyaya geldim? Neden atıldım buraya seçimim sorulmadan? Nedir bu her insanın başarı isteği hiç yorulmadan? Hamlet'i hala okumayan insanlar görüyorum. Fakat Hamlet okumadan önce Shakespeare'in tarihi oyunlarının ve Bir Yaz Gecesi Rüyası gibi büyülü gerçekçi ögeler içeren kitaplarının da okunması gerektiğini söylüyorum. Nedir bana Shakespeare'i okutan? Nedir bu kader tanrıçalarının ipliğini bana dokutan?

(Anneannem ve dedem sahneye girer.)

Anneannem: Biziz.
Dedem: Biziz.
Oğuz: Ben sizi hiç görmedim bugüne kadar. Ben doğduğumda siz yoktunuz. Yoksa doğum düşmanı mıdır ölümün? Peki ölüm hangi safhasındadır bu hayat bölümünün?
Anneannem: Eğer biz olmasaydık annen ve baban da olmazdı değerli torunum. Biziz senin varlığının nedeni. Fakat bizden de yüksekte bir Allah vardır seni baştan sona var edeni. Bak, istersen konuş geldiğin yerle. İnsanın gittiği yeri öğrenebilmesi için geldiği yeri bilmesi gerekir derler...

(Anne karnı ve baba spermi sahneye girer.)

Anne karnı: İşte! Biziz varlığının sebebi.
Baba spermi: İşte! Biziz varlığının sebebi.
Oğuz: Nedir bu hengame? Nedir bu bana sorulmayan her şey? Hamlet, nedir bu seçemediklerimizin karşımıza sonradan bir seçim olarak çıkması? Ey ölüm, eşitsizliklerimizi eşit hale getiren, sen söyle madem. Nedir elimdeki seçenekler? Hiç doğmamış olmayı istemek, sen söyle, sırf "Keşke doğmasaydım" cümlesine karşı bir "İyi ki doğmuşum" cümlesini söyleyebilmek için mi Şahane Hayat filmini izledim? Verin bir balta, keseyim bu spermin yolunu ve her şey uçsun havaya! Gösterin bir yol, anlaşayım kader denen tefeciyle ve biriktireyim hiç olmayacak borçlarımı. Olmak ya da olmamak işte bütün mesele bu deyip de yaşam çelişkisini çözebilmek mümkün mü Hamlet? Peki seni yaratanın oğlunun adı Hamnet olduğu için ve onun ölümünün acısından dolayı mı senin adın Hamlet?
(Oğuz'un ölü hali girer.)

Oğuz'un ölü hali: Bırak şimdi Hamlet'i, Hamlet'ten sana ne! Sen bensin, ben de senim. Mezardayken yanında Hamlet olmayacak. Sadece ben olacağım. Bak anneannene, o artık benle. Bak dedene, o artık benle. Herkes bir gün burada olacak. Bak ölüme! Nasıl da kıkırdıyor arkandan, nasıl iç çeviriyor sen yaşama sevinci ile doluyken. Bak Hamlet'e, nasıl okutuyor sana kendini içindeki bütün kelimelerle. Odur sana bir hayaletle barışık olmayı öğreten. Odur senin içindeki iç savaşları sana tanıtan. Hamlet'in kendisi gelsin, o söylesin sana bütün bunların niye olduğunu...

Hamlet: Ben değilim beni esas ben yapan. İntikamımdır benim tek isteğim. İntikam alınınca kimliğim de tamamlanır ve çıkarım hayat denen bu sahneden. Hayat bir sahnedir ve kadınlar da erkekler de onun oyuncuları demiştir Jaques, Nasıl Hoşunuza Giderse'de. Neresidir bu sahnenin bulunduğu bina? Neden ve niçin intikam alıyorum ben?

SAHNE IV

(Amaç sahneye girer.)

Amaç: Heheyyt, çekilin hepiniz önümden! Hepinizin sebebi benim. Benim ölümü anlamlı kılan. Benim yaşama sevincini sevindiren. Benim Oğuz'u anneannesiyle ve dedesiyle konuşabilme bilincine eriştiren. Benim ona Shakespeare'i okuması gerektiğini söyleyip Hamlet'i ona ulaştıran. Izdırari ve ihtiyari kader dostlarımla birlikte çalışırım bu yolda. Ölümü öldürmek istedi Oğuz, oyunun başında. Fakat ölümü öldürmek de bir ölümdür Hamlet'in dediği gibi.

Ey insanlar, benim hepinizin boşluğu ve doldurulması gereken! Benim bu hayat denilen oyunun tek perde oluşunun sebebi! Dostoyevski, içinde ben ve ben isteği olmadan kimse yaşayamaz dedi, haklıydı! Montaigne, bana bağlanmayan ruh, yolunu kaybeder, her yerde olmak, hiçbir yerde olmamaktır dedi, haklıydı! Hamlet de onlarla birlikte işte şimdi. Her yerde olmayı isteyip hiçbir yerde olan, benimle birlikte intikam alan ve Oğuz'a da bunları yazdıran.

(Herkes çıkar, sadece Oğuz kalır.)

What’s the question?

“To be, or not to be: that is the question”

Shakespeare’s most famous play? Maybe. And that quote may be his most recognizable, certainly one of the most memorable. The tragedy of the Danish prince, his revenge, the introspection and self doubt that shaped his actions, and the tragic events described in some of Shakespeare’s most provocative language is mesmerizing.

“This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.”

Borrowing from ancient legends, Shakespeare’s tragedy draws on complicated human emotions. Themes of death, loss, justice and destiny abound in a play that may be characterized by its somber, dark subject.

“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”

Perhaps his most psychologically compelling drama, analysis of Hamlet has fueled debates, challenged students and inspired countless writings since. “The character of Hamlet played a critical role in Freud's explanation of the Oedipus complex and thus influenced modern psychology” – Wikipedia.

“When down her weedy trophies and herself
Fell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide;
And, mermaid-like, awhile they bore her up:
Which time she chanted snatches of old tunes;
As one incapable of her own distress,
Or like a creature native and indued
Unto that element: but long it could not be
Till that her garments, heavy with their drink,
Pull’d the poor wretch from her melodious lay
To muddy death.”

Interestingly, for such a depressingly emotional action, Ophelia’s character and her role in the narrative do much to anchor the mood and sets a tone from which the play never rises.

“Now cracks a noble heart. Good-night, sweet prince;
And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest. ”