Hamlet and Oedipus

by Ernest Jones

“The Freud-Jones view of Hamlet is very widely known and probably this century’s most distinctive contribution to Shakespearean criticism.” ―Norman N. Holland, Director, Center for the Psychological Study of the Arts, State University of New York at Buffalo, in Psychoanalysis and Shakespeare A classic study in the psychoanalysis of literature, Hamlet and Oedipus investigates Hamlet’s mind as it relates to the general psychological conditions foreshadowed in the Oedipus legend. Dr. Jones gives a comprehensive view of the Hamlet literature and shows how the explanation of Hamlet’s mysterious inhibitions lies in his unconscious conflicts. The Hamlet theme is itself an old one, and there is a full discussion of the place of the saga in the complex mythological group to which it belongs.

Genres: Psychology, Literary Criticism, Nonfiction, Psychoanalysis, Criticism, Theory, Literature

172 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1949

About the author

Alfred Ernest Jones was a neurologist and psychoanalyst, and Sigmund Freud’s official biographer. Jones was the first English-speaking practitioner of psychoanalysis and became its leading exponent in the English-speaking world where, as President of both the British Psycho-Analytical Society and the International Psychoanalytic Association in the 1920s and 1930s, he exercised a formative influence in the establishment of its organisations, institutions and publications.

Reviews

[Samantha · Rating 4 out of 5]

did he lie 🤷‍♀️

[Jonathan Widell · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent, though flowery, psychoanalytical study of Hamlet, which goes on for 70 pages trying to convince the reader of the legitimacy of psychoanalyzing a literary character before going about its business of providing the actual analysis. Beyond the academic fluff, the key insight is that Hamlet is Shakespeare's alter ego, who suffered from an unresolved Oedipus complex. Hamlet's famous vacillation and hesitation is due the seemingly opposite movements of repression and regression. Here Jones reads Hamlet as mythology. First, repression results in complications that are meant to obfuscate the "simple" triangular Oedipal formula of son-mother-father. As for the component that in the Oedipus complex manifests itself in the relationship between the son and the father, the role of the tyrannical father is instead assumed by the mother's father (who is caught in a father-daughter complex) and/or, as in Hamlet, by the father's brother (Claudius). The relationship between the son and the mother, on the other hand, disguises itself in what Jones calls brother-sister-complex. He calls these complexes secondary themes which mask the original underlying Oedipus complex. Second, those strategies are counteracted by Shakespeare's own regression, which prevented Hamlet (ergo, Shakespeare) from avenging the death of his father in a decisive manner, thus bringing to surface the psychological insights that Shakespeare was already coming up with. Interestingly, that fairly straightforward scheme is further complicated by two other forms of repression that may take place beside the subsidiary complexes, namely decomposition and doubling.

Jones' analysis is neat. He combines Freudian insights with the Jungian way of seeing basic psychoanalytical mechanisms in the greater scheme of things in myths and, as in his analysis of Hamlet, in works of fiction. Jones is acutely aware of the radical nature of his undertaking. Bottomline: Jones convinced me. I recommend the book. Besides, it is a quick read.

[Dominick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ground-breaking and influential study of Hamlet in that it mainstreamed the Freudian reading of the play--Hamlet's problem is an Oedipus complex. Inventive, if dubious, attempts to rationalize the play in light of events in Shakespeare's life that brought his own father issues and sexual disgust to the fore (written shortly after Shakespeare's mistress betrayed him with the young man praised in the sonnet sequence), rather more convincing links to myth and attempts to explain changes from the source material in light of Sghakespeare's playing up of the Oedipal stuff (though Jones goes from acknowledging that we can't be sure which plot innovations were Shakespeare's and which carried over from the ur-Hamlet to assuming that said plot innovations reflect Shakespeare's own modifications and reflect his own concerns. Ultimately not in my opinion a convincing case, as with pretty much any reading that attempts to expain everything in light of one overarching concern.

[Phillip · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this study, Ernest Jones expands on Freud's passing remark that the guiding principle of Hamlet is the Oedipus complex. Basically, Jones took this thing the Freud just causally dropped and made a whole book of it.

Jones begins by showing why previous explanations for Hamlet not immediately shanking Claudius after the Ghost tells him to don't really add up. Either they require ignoring relevant evidence from the play (For instance, the argument that Hamlet is paralyzed by indecision about the ethics of violence don't account for the fact that he casually kills a number of people without hesitation), or supposing evidence that the play itself doesn't support. Jones argues that these types of problems mean the explanations cannot be seen as legitimate interpretations of Hamlet's fundamental problem. Instead, he is caught in the Oedipal trap where his mother remarrying triggers his own repressed desire for her, which he can now only experience with disgust, but it is also disgust turned toward her (and, vicariously toward Ophelia, both as a woman who isn't his mother and as a woman who reminds him of his mother), which is why Hamlet is consistently more vicious toward Gertrude than he is toward Claudius. Simultaneously, Hamlet unconsciously recognizes that Claudius has in fact fulfilled the desire that he himself had repressed (i.e., to kill old Hamlet and sleep with Gertrude), so Hamlet is caught between his unconscious desire to vicariously live out the incestuous fantasy through Claudius and the searing hatred of Claudius for doing what Hamlet unconsciously wished to do but was unable to.

[Madeline · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really interesting proposal that simplified the Hamlet problem down to a repressed Oedipus Complex. I’m not convinced myself, but I did enjoy the attempt! Jones is clearly a well educated, passionate man, on both the subjects of psychoanalysis and Shakespeare’s Hamlet, and reading his ideas about the combination of the two was a really fun experience!

Four stars instead of five, because for the first fifty pages or so, Jones spoke mostly in contradicting theories and quotes, introducing popular theories and speaking on them briefly, before completely breaking them down with an opposing view. Interesting at first, but became tiresome as it went on back to back for several pages at a time. It stopped as soon as the essay hit its stride, and I admit it was a great way to get across a bulk of the historical conversation on the Hamlet problem without slowing it down as much as the points would have had they been individually introduced.

[Advika Ramesh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Wow I never read any more - my form of reading has turned into reading the subtitles of whatever foreign language movie I’ve decided to consume, and when i tried to justify this as reading i was rightfully judged heavily . Sucks that i have lost the literary form after i promised myself that when finals were over I would engage with books more . Promises are in their nature created to be broken i suppose. Anyways this book is fine but makes me look pretty annoying as a human for reading it which i love

[I Will Elaborate And That's a Threat✨ · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't want to rate it; the 3 stars are just because it's the average.

Read (more like skimmed) only because it's included in the course, but I fully intend to disagree in the discussion as well as the paper because I think interpretations are fun and all, but you kind of need more than random assumptions to really make it believable. It's fun if you're into this, but it didn't sound like essential reading to me.

[S · Rating 2 out of 5]

Freud, Freud, Freud...

[Andrew Cockcroft-Charles · Rating 5 out of 5]

Comprehensive take on the psychoanalytic approach to the Hamlet myth.

[Gill · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Don't read all the preface and commentaries and don't listen to the lectures. Just read the plays. It is remarkable how easy they are to understand at the naive level. Then go and read the analysis and see what you didn't think of.

This is THE book to read about the Oedipal interpretation of Hamlet. However one of the strengths is the review of non-Oedipal solutions to Hamlet.

I also recommend these podcasts from Stamford U. by Marsh McCall and Martin Evans.



Literature of Crisis podcasts from Stanford
http://tinyurl.com/554f5s

[Cecilia · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 ⭐️