Hamlet's "Let be": More Jesus to John Baptist than Virgin Mary to Gabriel?
IN OUR LAST EPISODE
I recently shared a blog post around the time of the Epiphany, reflecting on how Shakespeare's play, Twelfth Night, is named after the last of the twelve days of Christmas, and how Twelfth Night is the night before the feast of the Epiphany.
Epiphany Sunday usually falls one week before the feast of the Baptism of the Lord, which was last Sunday.
THIS WEEK: SOMETHING MISSING?
A year and two months ago, I shared a blog post about Hamlet's repeated line, "Let be." While Hamlet's "Let be" is similar to what the Virgin Mary says to Angel Gabriel at the Annunciation, telling her she will bear a son conceived by the Holy Spirit, it's not exactly the same. Also, there's a different "let be" in the gospels that offers a closer or exact match: This occurs when Jesus goes to be baptized by John the Baptist.
Two years ago, I thought it may have been mostly an allusion to Mary's words, but with a nod toward John the Baptist because of other allusions to the Baptist in Hamlet, such as "Baptista" (the player queen) and certain similarities to the tale of Herod's step-daughter, Salome, asking for the head of John the Baptist. Herod Antipas had married the divorced wife of his brother, and John the Baptist condemned the marriage, just as Hamlet has strong negative feelings about his mother's scandalous marriage to her first husband's brother.
Yet because it was the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord, I was again reminded of the "let be" which Jesus speaks to John. It seemed maybe I was missing something about Hamlet only nearly speaking the worlds of Mary to the angel, but exactly quoting some existing English translations of Jesus to John. What was I missing?
[Image: "Bautismo de Cristo" (The Baptism of Christ) Ca. 1567 by NAVARRETE "EL MUDO", JUAN FERNÁNDEZ, MUSEO DEL PRADO. Source: Wikipedia.]
PASSING A TORCH?
It now occurs to me that the story of Jesus' baptism is the story of the passing of a torch, between John who preaches repentance, and Jesus who preaches the "good news." John will be the first to die, but Jesus will eventually be crucified.
In Hamlet, the prince tells Horatio, "Let be" shortly before his death (but the use and placement of the line varies from the second quarto to the first folio). So there is an echo: One dies, and the other will try to tell his story aright.
WHY DO SCHOLARS PREFER TO THINK IT'S PRIMARILY AN ALLUSION TO MARY (or the Beatles)?
Perhaps because the feast of the annunciation was more familiar and central to Protestants and Catholics, and more prominently in mind, with Mary's Magnificat a key optional text in Evening Prayer liturgy in the Book of Common Prayer, unlike the gospel reading from the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord, which came up only once a year on the feast.
More thoughts:
OUT OF JOINT:
In some ways, the allusion is out-of-joint, because the play hints through other allusions that Hamlet is a kind of Christ-figure: Like Jesus who, according to tradition, has his face wiped with a cloth by Veronica, Hamlet has his mother offer to wipe his face in the last scene during the sword-play between Hamlet and Laertes. Hamlet is also a John the Baptist figure with a prophetic soul who opposes an incestuous marriage, so in that sense, as in the gospel chronology, he will die firat as John the Baptist dies before Jesus. But the allusions overlap, and there's no suggestion that Horatio will become a Jesus figure, as Hamlet was like John.
PROPAGANDA:
Modern biblical scholars often recognize that when Jesus was put to death and a movement blossomed in his name, there were still many who believed John the Baptist may have been the promised messiah, and who sought to be faithful to John's teachings rather than to those of Jesus. For the gospel writers to tell a tale of Jesus being baptized by John, but John admitting the superiority of Jesus, this seems to be a fiction designed to reduce anything resembling buyer's remorse among those who had previously been followers of John, but switched over to support for the Jesus movement. It may also have been an olive branch extended to the followers of John, claiming that there was more in harmony between the teachings of John and Jesus, and thereby meant to help convert followers of John to Jesus' cause.
In what way might Shakespeare's play, Hamlet, also function as a kind of propaganda to convert old faithful to a new cause?
Back in August of 2017, I shared a blog post about how scholars were considering a re-dating of Hamlet to 1603, after James of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I after her death. It makes sense to consider Fortinbras, the prince from the north whose father was killed by the now-dead king, as pointing toward James, whose mother was executed under Elizabeth I, the now-dead-queen.
In that way, Shakespeare's Hmalet might be seen by some as royal propaganda, serving to help citizens of London to imagine the son of a former enemy taking the throne of England after the house of Tudor had come to its end.
FORMS OF BE: "To Be or Not to Be," /"Let Be" / "I Am Who Am"
The words of Jesus to John invite John to accept the will of God: John had protested that it is he who should be baptized by Jesus, not the other way around. But Jesus tells him, "Let be." Here's how the 1599 Geneva translation puts it in Matthew 3:13-15 (emphasis mine):
13 Then came Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John to be baptized of him.
14 But John earnestly put him back, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 Then Jesus answering, said to him, Let be now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. So he suffered him.
One could say that the words of Jesus here, as well as the words of Mary in Luke 1:38 ("be it unto me according to thy word") are both pointing toward the "I AM" of surrender to the mystery of the nameless God, as described in Exodus 3:14 (emphasis mine):
14 And God answered Moses, I AM THAT I AM. Also he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Mary surrendered to the will of God; Jesus invites John to surrender, to "Let be now." And Hamlet invites Horatio in 5.2 to surrender, to "let be."
So in that sense, perhaps it's not so much a question of "To be or not to be," or an existential/philosophical moment, so much as it is a surrender to the unfolding will of Providence who used the mercy of pirates to save Hamlet at sea?
And Hamlet passes the torch to Horatio, to tell his story aright, and his dying voice to Fortinbras in the election of the next king. "Let be." And welcome James as the new king?
Perhaps in that way, the play's ending is not so much a Marian acceptance of the angel's word regarding the birth of a new king (as they'd hoped for Elizabeth to marry and bear an heir), as it is the new followers of James speaking to those still dedicated to the House of Tudor, Let be now: The torch has been passed to a new leader - as Christians in Shakespeare's day viewed John passing a torch to Jesus?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading!
My current project is a book tentatively titled “Hamlet’s Bible,” about biblical allusions and plot echoes in Hamlet.
Below is a link to a list of some of my top posts (“greatest hits”), including a description of my book project (last item on the list):
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/12/top-20-hamlet-bible-posts.html
I post every week, so please visit as often as you like and consider subscribing.
I recently shared a blog post around the time of the Epiphany, reflecting on how Shakespeare's play, Twelfth Night, is named after the last of the twelve days of Christmas, and how Twelfth Night is the night before the feast of the Epiphany.
Epiphany Sunday usually falls one week before the feast of the Baptism of the Lord, which was last Sunday.
THIS WEEK: SOMETHING MISSING?
A year and two months ago, I shared a blog post about Hamlet's repeated line, "Let be." While Hamlet's "Let be" is similar to what the Virgin Mary says to Angel Gabriel at the Annunciation, telling her she will bear a son conceived by the Holy Spirit, it's not exactly the same. Also, there's a different "let be" in the gospels that offers a closer or exact match: This occurs when Jesus goes to be baptized by John the Baptist.
Two years ago, I thought it may have been mostly an allusion to Mary's words, but with a nod toward John the Baptist because of other allusions to the Baptist in Hamlet, such as "Baptista" (the player queen) and certain similarities to the tale of Herod's step-daughter, Salome, asking for the head of John the Baptist. Herod Antipas had married the divorced wife of his brother, and John the Baptist condemned the marriage, just as Hamlet has strong negative feelings about his mother's scandalous marriage to her first husband's brother.
Yet because it was the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord, I was again reminded of the "let be" which Jesus speaks to John. It seemed maybe I was missing something about Hamlet only nearly speaking the worlds of Mary to the angel, but exactly quoting some existing English translations of Jesus to John. What was I missing?
[Image: "Bautismo de Cristo" (The Baptism of Christ) Ca. 1567 by NAVARRETE "EL MUDO", JUAN FERNÁNDEZ, MUSEO DEL PRADO. Source: Wikipedia.]
PASSING A TORCH?
It now occurs to me that the story of Jesus' baptism is the story of the passing of a torch, between John who preaches repentance, and Jesus who preaches the "good news." John will be the first to die, but Jesus will eventually be crucified.
In Hamlet, the prince tells Horatio, "Let be" shortly before his death (but the use and placement of the line varies from the second quarto to the first folio). So there is an echo: One dies, and the other will try to tell his story aright.
WHY DO SCHOLARS PREFER TO THINK IT'S PRIMARILY AN ALLUSION TO MARY (or the Beatles)?
Perhaps because the feast of the annunciation was more familiar and central to Protestants and Catholics, and more prominently in mind, with Mary's Magnificat a key optional text in Evening Prayer liturgy in the Book of Common Prayer, unlike the gospel reading from the feast of the Baptism of Our Lord, which came up only once a year on the feast.
More thoughts:
OUT OF JOINT:
In some ways, the allusion is out-of-joint, because the play hints through other allusions that Hamlet is a kind of Christ-figure: Like Jesus who, according to tradition, has his face wiped with a cloth by Veronica, Hamlet has his mother offer to wipe his face in the last scene during the sword-play between Hamlet and Laertes. Hamlet is also a John the Baptist figure with a prophetic soul who opposes an incestuous marriage, so in that sense, as in the gospel chronology, he will die firat as John the Baptist dies before Jesus. But the allusions overlap, and there's no suggestion that Horatio will become a Jesus figure, as Hamlet was like John.
PROPAGANDA:
Modern biblical scholars often recognize that when Jesus was put to death and a movement blossomed in his name, there were still many who believed John the Baptist may have been the promised messiah, and who sought to be faithful to John's teachings rather than to those of Jesus. For the gospel writers to tell a tale of Jesus being baptized by John, but John admitting the superiority of Jesus, this seems to be a fiction designed to reduce anything resembling buyer's remorse among those who had previously been followers of John, but switched over to support for the Jesus movement. It may also have been an olive branch extended to the followers of John, claiming that there was more in harmony between the teachings of John and Jesus, and thereby meant to help convert followers of John to Jesus' cause.
In what way might Shakespeare's play, Hamlet, also function as a kind of propaganda to convert old faithful to a new cause?
Back in August of 2017, I shared a blog post about how scholars were considering a re-dating of Hamlet to 1603, after James of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I after her death. It makes sense to consider Fortinbras, the prince from the north whose father was killed by the now-dead king, as pointing toward James, whose mother was executed under Elizabeth I, the now-dead-queen.
In that way, Shakespeare's Hmalet might be seen by some as royal propaganda, serving to help citizens of London to imagine the son of a former enemy taking the throne of England after the house of Tudor had come to its end.
FORMS OF BE: "To Be or Not to Be," /"Let Be" / "I Am Who Am"
The words of Jesus to John invite John to accept the will of God: John had protested that it is he who should be baptized by Jesus, not the other way around. But Jesus tells him, "Let be." Here's how the 1599 Geneva translation puts it in Matthew 3:13-15 (emphasis mine):
13 Then came Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John to be baptized of him.
14 But John earnestly put him back, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 Then Jesus answering, said to him, Let be now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. So he suffered him.
One could say that the words of Jesus here, as well as the words of Mary in Luke 1:38 ("be it unto me according to thy word") are both pointing toward the "I AM" of surrender to the mystery of the nameless God, as described in Exodus 3:14 (emphasis mine):
14 And God answered Moses, I AM THAT I AM. Also he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Mary surrendered to the will of God; Jesus invites John to surrender, to "Let be now." And Hamlet invites Horatio in 5.2 to surrender, to "let be."
So in that sense, perhaps it's not so much a question of "To be or not to be," or an existential/philosophical moment, so much as it is a surrender to the unfolding will of Providence who used the mercy of pirates to save Hamlet at sea?
And Hamlet passes the torch to Horatio, to tell his story aright, and his dying voice to Fortinbras in the election of the next king. "Let be." And welcome James as the new king?
Perhaps in that way, the play's ending is not so much a Marian acceptance of the angel's word regarding the birth of a new king (as they'd hoped for Elizabeth to marry and bear an heir), as it is the new followers of James speaking to those still dedicated to the House of Tudor, Let be now: The torch has been passed to a new leader - as Christians in Shakespeare's day viewed John passing a torch to Jesus?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading!
My current project is a book tentatively titled “Hamlet’s Bible,” about biblical allusions and plot echoes in Hamlet.
Below is a link to a list of some of my top posts (“greatest hits”), including a description of my book project (last item on the list):
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/12/top-20-hamlet-bible-posts.html
I post every week, so please visit as often as you like and consider subscribing.
Comments
Post a Comment