Applying the theory of the Oedipus complex to Hamlet

by Mutsuko Takahashi

The example of applying the Oedipus complex to Oedipus Rex is as follows:

Applying the theory of the Oedipus complex to Oedipus Rex - Mutsuko Takahashi BLOG

In this article, I would write the case of applying the Oedipus complex to Hamlet.

The main subject of Hamlet

One of the most notable elements that should be focused on is Hamlet's procrastination of revenge. Since the appearance of the ghost under the name of Hamlet's father, Hamlet has decided to revenge to his uncle. Nevertheless, he procrastinates revenge without providing us with specific reasons, and why?

Freud's interpretation for Hamlet

In his essay entitled, "The Interpretation of the Dream", Freud has approached two literary works: one is Oedipus Rex and the other is Hamlet. Freud also points out the issue of Hamlet's procrastination. He thinks that the reason for this procrastination is derived from Hamlet's Oedipal issues.

Freud states that the child's wishful phantasy of the Oedipal moment is usually manifested as is the case with a dream; however, such an Oedipal phantasy is repressed in Hamlet's case. He thinks that this repressed aspect is parallel to the case of neurosis. He points out that the text of Hamlet doesn't provide us with the reason for Hamlet's hesitation of revenge. He poses the question of why Hamlet procrastinates to take vengeance on his uncle even though he is able to do anything. According to Freud, the incident of which the uncle took father's place with his mother means the realization of the repressed wishes of his own childhood. Seeing that his repressed desire is manifested by his uncle, his uncle mirrors Hamlet's own self-reproaches. For this reason, Hamlet thinks that the one who should be punished is himself, not the uncle who merely realized a substitute of his childhood desire.

As is seen, the central theme to interpret Hamlet is his procrastination of revenge due to the mental agitation. According to Freud, the Oedipus complex is the reason for Hamlet's procrastination. Freud's perspective shows that Oedipus Complex of Hamlet, his incestuous desire, had already done by Claudius. Because he has identified the embodiment of his own desire accomplished in Claudius, he can't kill him.

Lacan's interpretation of Hamlet

I would suggest another viewpoint provided by Jacque Lacan. In his essay entitled "Desire and the Interpretation of Desire in Hamlet", Lacan states that the place where the Phallus located is too realistic to compare with the Oedipus complex which located in the unconscious domain. For this reason, Hamlet cannot strike the phallus even though the phallus is real but is still a ghost.

Same as Freud, Lacan indicates the central issue in Hamlet is Hamlet's desire which lost the destination based on the Oedipal issue. However, the Lacanian viewpoint emphasis on the process of recovery from the Oedipus Complex. According to Lacan, Hamlet wouldn’t be able to strike the phallus, because it's a ghost. Therefore, in his case, acceptance of the father's castration which is the recovery from Oedipus Complex hasn't done by regular process. The process of father's castration replaced into his "grief work" of his father's death, but the problem is that the "grief work" hasn't done enough, Lacan actually points out Hamlet's lack of mourning in his essay; as a result, "grief work" is not for his father's death, but for his narcissistic attachment to the phallus.

Freud's theory of "grief work" is officially called the "work of mourning". Freud wrote about his concept in his essay, "Mourning and Melancholia". This concept is very important for further understanding of the Freudian theory, so I will explain the detail in my future article.

For further interpretation

My focal point of Hamlet is directed on the issue of the nature of words in terms of the tension between concept and its meaning as a word. In Hamlet, the voice of the ghost under the name of Hamlet’s father hasn’t reached Hamlet properly. Although the voice clearly said the words, Hamlet suspects the uncertain nature of the word and says, “Words, words, words". People have been trying to understand the meaning of Hamlet's words, "To be, or not to be, that is the question", and the interpretations are varied.

I interpret the words as Hamlet's perception of the nature of the message delivered by the ghost under the name of Hamlet's father. What I want to emphasis on is that we should distinguish Hamlet's father from the ghost who has Hamlet's father's name. By doing so, Hamlet's lamentation for "Words, words, words" can be more understandable. For this reason, we can interpret Hamlet's words, "To be, or not to be" as his close inquiry into the nature of existence in terms of the Imaginary level of perception of the message and the Symbolic level of the message.