Shakespeare's Hamlet Act 4 Sara manouchehri

Immediately after Hamlet exits, dragging Polonius’ body, we see Claudius asking Gertrude to explain what has happened. She tells him of Hamlet’s accidental killing of Polonius and Claudius realizes that he could have just as easily been slain.Claudius asks where Hamlet has gone and Gertrude says that he has taken the body away. the king orders Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to find Hamlet and discover where he has taken Polonius’ corpse. They question Hamlet about Polonius’ whereabouts. Hamlet evades their questions playfully, accusing his former friends of sycophancy to the king and leading them on a wild goose chase.

 The authority/Power of IS  Attachment  Differance  Aporia  Supplementarity

Deconstruction is against the authority of is. When some body says “I AM THE BEST”, it means there is no possibility of superior power either in the past or future, while superior power can come in the future even if not exist in the past. According to deconstruction we must respect to any being and notice that the power of IS, is not linear but circular.

In some parts of this act we can see this power in Hamlet’s dialogues, like his conversation with Rosencrantz: Hamlet: Do not believe it. Rosencrantz: Believe what? Hamlet: that I can keep your counsel and not mine own. Besides, to be demanded of a sponge, what replication should be made by the son of the king? Hamlet believes in his power and considers answering of Rosencrantz’s question as a trivial thing and also calls him a sponge and himself the son of the king. It is obvious that there is some sense of superiority in Hamlet’s mind.

also in another conversation between Hamlet and Guildenstern, he called Claudius : a thing of nothing, he believes in his and his father’s power and the real kings and considers his uncle just as a kinglet. Hamlet: … the king is a thing __ Guildenstern: A thing, my lord? Hamlet: of nothing. bring me to him. hide fox, all after! So Hamlet wants to show his authority of being by the words he choses to his speech.

When we are attach to some thing,our actions/ reactions/decisions get influenced by it. In scene1/act4 we see the king, Claudius claims that because he and Queen love Hamlet so much, they ignore Hamlet’s wrong actions and did not take the right step in order to punish him. King:..but so much was our love, we would not understand what was most fit. Attachment can bee seen in another dialogue as in below Claudius is attach to his name and seat, that he does not want to reveal the murder for the sake of his profit. King: … whose whisper o’er the world’s diameter. As level as the cannon to his blank, transports his poisoned shot, may miss our name and hit the woundless air.

Aporia is a deadlock of a relationship, decision, interpretation, which one reaches after exchanged the logical reasoning and justification, but all in vain. in deed the concluding logic is the declaration of the death of the relationship or a decision. We may witness various aporetic decisions in our every day life, like divorce, drug addiction, the split of business partners (Hooti, 2013 ).we see an aporetic decision which is made by the king, Claudius, King: the sun no sooner shall the mountains touch, but we will ship him… Claudius and Queen reaches to this conclusion that hamlet must leave the castle and there is no more logic to keep him in castle.

According to deconstruction, without spatial and temporal separation, there could be no difference because every thing exists in relation to its spatial and temporal separation from other things. while reading the story We can feel that there is some sense of jealousy in Claudius, he is looking for a chance to get rid of hamlet as a prince of Denmark and this Differance happened when Polonius was killed by Hamlet, this was a proper time for the king to remove him that is sensible in this dialogue: King: oh, Gertrude, come away! The sun no sooner shall the mountains touch, but we will ship him…

Difference shows that we have to give a chance to any decision to have a new interpretation in all the unborn episodes of life. Claudius gives this chance to hamlet that cause his desirable decision, because it seems he always wants to remove Hamlet.

Derrida takes this term from Rousseau, who saw a supplement as “an inessential added to something complete In itself”. Rousseau describes writing as a “supplement” to speech in that it represents speech. Derrida argues that what is complete in itself can not be added to and so a supplement can only occur when there is an originary lack. In any binary set of terms, the second can be argued to exist In order to fill in an originary lack in the first. We can see this element In the Queen’s statement:

Queen: to draw apart the body he hath killed, o’er whom his very madness, like some ore among a mineral of metals base, show itself pure:’ a weep for what is done. Ore and mineral of metals base have some relation with each other. As the structuralists’ point of view the most appropriate way of analysis, is through binary oppositions. They believe through the contrastive exposure of two individuals, which is highlighting their differences; one can have a right analysis of their values.

While deconstruction does not believe in comparing and contrasting two individuals in order to declare one winner and the other one loser. Deconstruction believes that each individual should be dealt with independently. It assumes that through independent analysis of the values, one may reach the differences. A supplement is some thing that, allegedly secondarily, comes to serves as an aid to some thing ‘original’ or ‘natural’ : So ore is original and complete in itself / metals base are supplemented because there is an originary lack in them that permits them to be supplemented.