Hamlet:  Two-thirds Great

By H. G. Kippax
Sidney Morning News 
12/79

      Those who have been waiting eagerly for The Old Vic Hamlet will not be disappointed, I think.   It is a deeply considered—absorbing—production, and Mr. Jacobi’s Prince is at least two-thirds of a great performance.
      But I do suggest that you leave your preconceptions at home  The production superficially is straightforward, played in Tudor costume against sombre, towering flats and drapes.  There are no perversities, no impositions in the name of originality.  The text, cut to three hours playing time with one interval, determines all.
      But the production has a very definite point of view, and its logic can be surprising.  You will not find a “noble” Prince in any conventional sense; indeed, hardly a Prince at all, for there is little sense, court, kingdom, politics.
      This is a domestic tragedy, a tale of two families fatally embroiled in crime and intrigue.  What is rotten is nothing so complex as the State of Denmark.  It is erring human beings—representatives of corrupt, muddled, agonized humanity itself.
      The note is struck in an opening dumb-show.  This is not imposition, as I feared at first; the interpretation validates it.  In murky light Hamlet, his father, his mother and his uncle confront each other, circle each other, eye each other.  We are shown a world of suspicion.
     The domestic note emerges in the first court scene.  The king is a bully; the queen grumpish, overdressed, insensitive.  Their business is the ordering of family affairs, notably the family’s problem child—a sulky Hamlet, fretting to escape to Wittenberg.  Frustrated, he gives us his first soliloquy—a mingling of grief, disgust, and spleen.  The key is low, the pressure light, Hamlet?  One begins to wonder!
      Plainly something is needed if the most popular play ever written is not to drizzle down the drain.  It comes soon enough.  The meeting of Hamlet and a towering, superbly sonorous Ghost is a slow lightning stroke.  I have never seen it better acted.  It galvanizes the whole play.  And it sets this Hamlet on a course headed for stark, bleak tragedy.
      The meeting devastates Hamlet.  From then on there broods over the whole play the question, Is this an “honest” Ghost?  Well, is it?  Here, I think not—though Mr. Robertson imposes no answer.  Certainly, from this scene onwards a miasma of suspicion, cruelty and creeping callousness envelops this enclosed and inescapable world.
      No, this Hamlet is not Wilson Knight’s “villain,” the play’s destructive element.  Mr. Jacobi is more complex than that.  His Hamlet works on three levels—the admirable man of reason and of greatness of heart; the man of assumed antic disposition, cruel, malicious, insensitive (see his almost psychopathic detachment from the dead Polonius); and, the heart of the mystery, the man steered off-course, out-of-joint, by the sheer shock of the Ghost and the weight of the duty laid upon him.
      This is not an odeipal Hamlet.   His motive and his cue for passion is the murder of his father.  It comes from the Ghost, not Gertrude.  Mr. Jacobi’s grief with the Ghost is overwhelming; and it pervades the rest of the play, as the interplay of sanity, assumed insanity and “nervous breakdown” unravels the knotted thought, the contradictions, the passions of the part.
      The passions, above all.  This Hamlet is passion’s slave.  It corrupts him in the end, it exhausts him.  Baffled, he goes to his death fatalistically, quiescently, almost acquiescently.  The play ends with a great evil purged, but without comfort.
      I have called the Hamlet two-thirds of a great performance.  That is because with the final descent  into fatalism, the acting loses tension and the play’s interest falls away.  Its heights are the great scenes of passion—above all, with Ophelia and Gertrude, both heartbreaking.
      In these we can bow, like Raskolnikov, to suffering humanity itself in the image of this tortured, torturing, lonely man.
      It is virtuoso acting that remains unflinchingly faithful, in perception and nuance, to the text—contradictions, ambiguities and all.  Mr. Jacobi is Gielgud’s successor, building from many parts a whole.  And he proclaims his succession with most miraculous organ—in tones trumpet-tongued, or in a whisper.
      I have no space for the others and that is unfair.  This is a strong company, beautifully spoken, and with a dazzling command of pace.  Let me single out one—Miss Bruce, finding as the character grows, dignity and pathos in frivolous, stupid, selfish Gertrude.  Brilliant.

  Back to Articles Index