Abstract

The paper aims at highlighting what the author considers to be the most significant philosophical articulations of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, whose power of attraction is largely conditioned by his own obscure nature. Starting from the reading of some famous interpreters such as Bonnefoy, Cavell, Girard, Schmitt and Vygotsky, through the themes of revenge, silence, and the collapse of values, it is emphasized how, in the drama, the acceptance of death becomes a sign of the indifference of the world and therefore of the insufficiency of meaning. In particular Hamlet’s statement “I don’t know it seems”, is explained by the fact that his world is completely different from that of others. This expression should be seen, then, as a kind of preliminary description of his general way of perceiving things. Starting from the famous scene of “theatre in theatre”, and in a constant confrontation with Adorno’s aesthetics, the article aims at pointing out the different ideas of theatre that face each other in the drama. The idea of theatre supported by Hamlet, however, based on the size of the logos, is not at all the one adopted by Shakespeare, since his style is based on the immoderation, the excess and the irruption of the pathos. Hamlet is not even the place for that extreme act of faith that emerges at the end of King Lear: here hopes are shattered over a world totally abandoned to nonsense. For this reason, the only possibility of redemption is offered by “being ready” rather than by “being mature” as professed by Edgar.