Hamlet and David Ball’s Backward and Forward Essay

Shakespeare’s Hamlet is the archetypal reversal of the natural order in canonical theatre. The master bard’s work weaves intricate plot lines wielding theatrical and literary techniques that were famously before their time. Prince Hamlet of Denmark is tortured by the violent death of his father, the betrayal of his mother, and the king’s vengeful, accusing ghost. Caught in the tragic web are Hamlet’s friends and followers: the mistreated Ophelia and ever-loyal Hamlet. In the closing scene Hamlet pleads with Horatio to survive him for the sole purpose of passing on the truth: “If thou didst ever hold me in they heart/ Absent thee from felicity a while,/ And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain/ To tell my story” (333-336). This is the essence of Hamlet and what makes the sentiment so true to our time—the inherent pain of life, a cosmic sense of injustice, and the karmic balance of natural order.

In Backwards and Forwards David Ball uses Hamlet and other classic theatrical texts to examine the plot techniques that help our analysis as readers. Perhaps the most logical of all his techniques, in the case of Hamlet, is in his chapter entitled “Families”. Here Ball states that we must “bring to a play what you know from your own experience with fathers, sons, mothers, daughters…” (Ball 85). This passage not only explains our aforementioned social and emotional connection to Prince Hamlet but alliterates insights into the movement of the play that we can already sense as readers. For example, the reaction Hamlet has to his mother’s apparent sexual betrayal with the brother of her late husband is what moves the plot forward. But Hamlet says, “oh, that this too, too sullied flesh would melt/ Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew,/ Or that the Everlasting had not fixed/ His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter” (129-133). His grief is so strong that he is disgusted with life, desperate even for death. How, as readers and an audience, do we rationalize the King’s death and deeds of Claudius and the Queen as the driving force behind Hamlet’s devastating madness?

Certainly, exposure to society has made us familiar with the ravaging effects of a broken home. However common it continues to become, the dissolution of a family in any manifestation is damaging to the psyche of all involved. We understand on an innate level that the effect of perceived and real betrayal can be confusing and debilitating for children, and Hamlet deals with this on a royal level. We can use Ball’s advice and what we know about the nature of families here too, by relating the pressure of the crown and loyalty to his father that Hamlet faced with our own lives. We also can use our knowledge of religion and the context of the play to understand his struggle with contemplating suicide. Hamlet feels too much for this world, wants to die, and is further disturbed by the fact that he knows it is a sin. “… the instinct for survival acquires a political dimension at a number of moments, and that these moments reverse the ideological polarity of, say, Hamlet’s princely contempt for his own desire for life in the direction of a populist, survivalist ethos” (Not Drowning, Waiving 11). This contributes to Hamlet’s inner struggle, in which even his mind seems to be against him.

Another of Ball’s techniques that help illuminate the script is his description in “Beginnings and Endings” in which he explains that “The ending of every play could be the beginning of a new play…Similarly, the beginning of every play could be the end of another” (Ball 93). In the case of Hamlet, I believe the script can be seen as both preceding and proceeding itself. It begins where it starts and starts where it ends. In the beginning, Marcellus, Horatio, and the sentinels discuss the appearance of a ghost resembling the dead King Hamlet. The presence of this quasi-character denotes the end, which all comes down to the emotional legacy the King left. In turn, with the plea to Horatio to tell his story after he is gone, Prince Hamlet ends his story with the same resignation and anger with which it began.

David Ball’s ideas truly contribute to our understanding of Hamlet’s text in that we learn to approach the script critically, deconstructing so we can discover meaning. Shakespeare was so ahead of his time that Hamlet gives shows the author’s understanding of psychology before experts in the field understood it. “Hamlet unquestionably raises the issue of being in an irrational state as a mitigating factor in a crime (Hamlet claims that he was mad when he killed Polonius, and that Laertes should take this into account in how he thinks about Hamlet’s relation to Polonius’s death)” (Not Drowning, Waiving 65). It is important when approaching such ancient, celebrated works, that we consider the effect our assumptions bring to the story. How is our perception refined (or short-changed) by our exposure to other literature, experiences, history, and culture when we search for the meaning that the author seeks to express?

Works Cited

Ball, David. Backwards and Forwards: A Technical Manual for Reading Plays (1983). Southern Illinois University Press. Pages 96.

Not Drowning, Waiving: Responsibility to Others in the Court of Shakespeare :Statement of Facts. (2008). Law, Culture and the Humanities, 4(1), 20-69.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet (1602).