Whatever generational archetype you might think Hamlet is, it’s most likely that Fortinbras is the same as well. They are both referred to as “youth” and “prince,” (which suggests an upper bound on their age) and they both had to have been born before their fathers’ trial by combat (giving a lower bound). Despite what the gravedigger says in Act V, it’s likely that they are late teens/early twenties (youths, that is).
Lee Blessing’s play Fortinbras paints the new king as an undeserving head to bear the crown, one who gained it primarily because he walked in as the entire royal family died...er, that is, was victimized by a Polish spy who managed to pull off one of the most successful regicides in recorded history.
Actually, this Fortinbras, for all his lack of noble character, is a street-smart guy. What difference does it make about what “really” happened, especially since nobody is going to believe such a ridiculous story? The important thing is that the story connect the new king to his people, that the people recognize that all that came before was necessary for King Fortinbras to take his rightful place. He’s a perfect Reactive: Morally ambiguous, pragmatic, focused on the bottom line - the story is even redemptive, in that he starts to learn, by the end, why telling this truth is important.
And the guy playing Hamlet in this production was even reminiscent of Dante from Clerks. Considering the play was written in 1991, he was about the same age as a youthful Hamlet and Fortinbras really should be. It all fits...
(The playwright is not GenX, however: Lee Blessing, born 1949, is an early Boomer.)
No comments:
Post a Comment