This chapter maps Hamlet’s “dramaturgy of delay” as a scenography of trauma, providing a reading of the play as driven by the Ghost’s violent intromission. It elaborates a Laplanchean, “Copernican” reading which decenters the action of the Oedipus complex, locating it not, as Freud famously argued, in the protagonist’s own spontaneous oedipal impulses, but rather in their provocation by the active agency of the daimonic or spectral figures of the other who haunt both Oedipus Tyrannus and Hamlet. Their relation to the tragic protagonist is not reducible to being allegorized as an externalization or projection of the protagonist’s oedipal guilt. Instead, Hamlet is possessed by the Ghost’s traumatizing transmission of the “primal scene” of his murder, through the ear, like so much else in the play. We witness a traumatic series of scenes of violent possession by the other, and repetitions of the scene of the original crime as Hamlet is caught up in the theatrical fictions he stages in acts 2 and 3. The appropriate psychological mechanism to understand Hamlet’s relation to his father’s ghost, then, is not Hamlet’s projection onto his father, but rather the father’s invasive possession of his son, as illuminated by Laplanche’s concept of intromission.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Hamlet, Freud, Laplanche: A Copernican Reading

  • John Fletcher

摘要

This chapter maps Hamlet’s “dramaturgy of delay” as a scenography of trauma, providing a reading of the play as driven by the Ghost’s violent intromission. It elaborates a Laplanchean, “Copernican” reading which decenters the action of the Oedipus complex, locating it not, as Freud famously argued, in the protagonist’s own spontaneous oedipal impulses, but rather in their provocation by the active agency of the daimonic or spectral figures of the other who haunt both Oedipus Tyrannus and Hamlet. Their relation to the tragic protagonist is not reducible to being allegorized as an externalization or projection of the protagonist’s oedipal guilt. Instead, Hamlet is possessed by the Ghost’s traumatizing transmission of the “primal scene” of his murder, through the ear, like so much else in the play. We witness a traumatic series of scenes of violent possession by the other, and repetitions of the scene of the original crime as Hamlet is caught up in the theatrical fictions he stages in acts 2 and 3. The appropriate psychological mechanism to understand Hamlet’s relation to his father’s ghost, then, is not Hamlet’s projection onto his father, but rather the father’s invasive possession of his son, as illuminated by Laplanche’s concept of intromission.