From Fear & Power to Fools & Affection (Emmaus in Hamlet 5.1, Part 3)

In my previous two Emmaus-related posts, I considered the Emmaus echo in the graveyard scene, Hamlet 5.1, and what in Shakespeare’s time may have been blasphemous [1] or heretical [2] implications.

[Image: Detail/crop of "The Supper at Emmaus," 1648, by Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn (1606–1669). Collection: Louvre Museum. Public domain, via Wikipedia.]

Hamlet 5.1 differs from the Emmaus tale in its three strangers:
1. The gravedigger is a stranger to Hamlet.
2. The strange skull is at first unrecognized by Hamlet.
3. Hamlet is unrecognized by the gravedigger as his prince.

If we read the Emmaus tale as one of a risen Jesus wielding supernatural power, there is only one Christ figure in Luke 24:13-35, identical with the stranger and the crucified Jesus.

But if we read it not as a gloriously resuscitated and supernaturally powerful Jesus, but an actual stranger, then a gap opens up between the crucified Jesus, and the stranger who comforts and instructs the disciples as Jesus might have done, reminding them of Jesus.

When the stranger is finally recognized in breaking bread, to them it may have seemed an appearance of Jesus in the form of a stranger, but not a supernatural manipulation of everyday reality.

Notice how this reading of the tale is more humanistic than supernatural, moving us away from a deity defined mostly in terms of power (omnipotence) and toward a deity whose presence is more diffuse, making use of natural events. [3]

And just as the stranger in the Emmaus gospel tale may not have been a supernaturally-resuscitated and omnipotent Jesus,
the gravedigger-clown may embody something of the spirit of Hamlet’s beloved court fool, Yorick, but the gravedigger and Yorick are not identical. 

With the gravedigger’s help and a tale of poured wine, Hamlet recognizes the skull as Yorick’s, and the stranger as a kind of disciple or kindred spirit of Yorick.

So as in the gospel tale, if there is be a gap between the corpse of the crucified Jesus, and the stranger who reminds the disciples of him, there is also a gap between the skull of Hamlet’s beloved Yorick, and the gravedigger/clown. [4]

As noted previously [1], if Hamlet 5.1 strictly followed the Emmaus tale pattern, instead of Yorick's skull and a clown in the graveyard, we’d have had another appearance of the fear-evoking ghost: the powerful, war-ready King Hamlet.

Instead, we move away from transcendence defined by fear and power (the ghost of King Hamlet), and toward transcendence embodied in “infinite jest” and kind affection (Yorick).

This is important: It coincides not only with Hamlet’s move away from idolizing his father, and toward his memory of Yorick as a more affectionate and playful father figure, but also with his move away from revenge and bloody thoughts, toward mercy.

Finally, Hamlet may be an Emmaus figure to the gravedigger who does not recognize him as his prince. Not only does the stranger on the road to Emmaus embody, or remind the disciples of, Jesus;
the disciples can also embody Jesus for the stranger.

The graveyard scene in Hamlet 5.1 opens up many interesting possibilities for understanding the Emmaus tale, as well as for Hamlet.

[Image: "The Supper at Emmaus," 1648 (not cropped), by Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn (1606–1669). Collection: Louvre Museum. Public domain, via Wikipedia.]

~~~~~
NOTES:
[1] Blasphemy and Heresy in Hamlet 5.1 Emmaus figures: Part 1
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/blasphemy-and-heresy-in-hamlets-emmaus.html

[2] Heresy in Hamlet 5.1 Emmaus figures: Part 2
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/heresy-in-hamlet-51-emmaus-figures-part.html

[3] People in Shakespeare’s time distinguished between general providence, in the sense of God working through natural things and events, and special providence, exceptional or extraordinary interventions, as was assumed to be the case with miracles.

In Hamlet 5.2.233-4, Hamlet says, “There is a / special providence in the fall of a sparrow.” Some critics notice “special providence” and assume that perhaps Hamlet or Shakespeare are Calvinists. But in fact the fall of a sparrow seems more an example of general providence than special providence, so Shakespeare may be using the phrase ironically here.

In other words, in Shakespeare’s time (as today), many Christians and Christian authorities would have considered the Emmaus appearance of Jesus to the disciples to be an example of special providence. But another way of reading the story, which I am describing in this post, is to read it as an example of general providence.

As noted in my previous post (Part 2), to read the tale in this way may have been considered a denial of the miracle, and therefore heretical. For this reason, making the Emmaus echo more explicit may have been too dangerous for Shakespeare.

[4] This gap may be related to the Eucharistic controversy (something to consider in a future post).


~~~~~
OTHER POSTS IN THIS SERIES:

INTRODUCTION: “Emmaus in Hamlet,” 21 May, 2018:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2018/05/emmaus-in-hamlet-in-emmaus-story-1.html

"Emmaus in Merchant of Venice," 7 May, 2018:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/01/emmaus-in-merchant-of-venice-in.html

1. Blasphemy in Hamlet 5.1 Emmaus figures: Part 1
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/blasphemy-and-heresy-in-hamlets-emmaus.html

2. Heresy in Hamlet 5.1 Emmaus figures: Part 2
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/heresy-in-hamlet-51-emmaus-figures-part.html

3. From Fear & Power to Fools & Affection (Emmaus in Hamlet 5.1, Part 3)
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/from-fear-power-to-fools-affection.html

4. Why Rhenish, not Bread? Emmaus in Hamlet 5.1, Part 4
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/why-rhenish-not-bread-emmaus-in-hamlet.html

5. Hamlet, Emmaus, Eucharistic Controversy, and Semiotics: Part 5
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/hamlet-emmaus-eucharistic-controversy.html

6. Emmaus Key Change in Hamlet & Merchant of Venice (Emmaus in Hamlet, part 6)
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2022/05/emmaus-key-change-in-hamlet-merchant-of.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Disclaimer: If and when I quote or paraphrase bible passages or mention religion in many of my blog posts, I do not intend to promote any religion over another, nor am I attempting to promote religious belief in general; only to explore how the Bible and religion influenced Shakespeare, his plays, and his age.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.