preview

Diction In Hamlet

Good Essays

In any historic piece of writing, there are going to be discrepancies in how the text is interpreted, which leads to differences in how it’s portrayed to the audience. One of the most diversely interpreted pieces of writing is Hamlet, and through no fault of our own, more so Shakespeare who didn’t quite give the full disclosure in any of his writings. In order to isolate the differences of interpretations amongst the famous “To be or not to be” speech, we watched four different films about Hamlet, and isolated a single scene where Hamlet delivers this speech. Each director tries to send their own message in how they interpreted the text through character, setting, diction, and tone. Amongst the four versions, starting at Sir Lawrence Olivier …show more content…

When referring to diction, it’s more so how the information is delivered rather than the way it’s told. By this I mean instead of deciphering the meaning behind the words, it’s deciphering how they delivered the words to begin with. In Olivier’s rendition Hamlet feels lost, unsure of what to do or if he should do anything at all. His diction in this speech is one of self-pity, almost a personal mantra he has to say aloud in order for him to believe it. By giving the “to be or not to be” speech in the manner in which he did, it’s evident to see he could no longer ponder this decision inward, but rather by saying it aloud to the world it offers some sort of clarity, or what he hopes to be clarity; perhaps a higher power giving him the answer, a sign, or perhaps nothing. The delivery of the speech seems to have a different diction in Branagh’s interpretation, wherein Hamlet gives his speech on a personal note, but he also does it for those who could possibly be listening in. Shakespeare never reveals if there are listeners behind the scenes, but in Branagh’s rendition he believes there to be someone lurking and thusly delivers the speech for himself, and those listening to try and throw them off about who he truly is. His diction also takes a step further by not just delivering this speech to the world, but rather to himself, literally. By …show more content…

A speech cannot be effective if the tone of what is being said isn’t compatible with their surroundings, their actions, and the delivery. In Olivier’s portrayal, the tone seems to match the surroundings and delivery, but not to the extent it could go. With the black and white setting his tone is dark, completely inward concerns and confusion. His tone is what truly ties this scene together, as he gets more and more desperate for answers he slowly shrinks down on the cliff until he is laying down, adding to the effect his words have. Now in Branagh’s version his tone is not the focal point, which is understandable. In 1948 (Olivier) there wasn’t a choice, they didn’t have the cinematography to makeup in scenery what Hamlet lacked in passion, whereas in 1996 (Branagh) the cinematography spectrum had evolved substantially and did make up for the lack in passion in his words, compared to Olivier that

Get Access