![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.gfdesign.co.uk\/culture\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/d8dc8af7d28fc3c74346960c38f79466.jpg\" "\\"Delacroix,")
\nJenny Farrell discusses the prophetic politics of the Gravedigger scene in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, in which class-based justice\u00a0and fundamental human equality are discussed by those whose task it will be to ‘set right the time’ by revolutionary upheaval. The scene is the first appearance of working people on the world stage.<\/em><\/p>\n There is hardly a country or a language in the world that is not familiar at least with Shakespeare\u2019s name. His poetry has had an impact on the English language like no other. How can this enduring and all-encompassing popularity be explained? Has Shakespeare anything to say about the times we live in?<\/p>\n Hamlet<\/em> is one of the most famous, if not the most famous, of Shakespeare\u2019s plays. Yet one scene in it is hardly ever fully played out, and when it is, it is considered a piece of comic relief: the gravedigger scene at the beginning of the tragedy\u2019s final act. A closer look at this scene reveals much of what Shakespeare is about and what he has to offer a 21st-century audience.<\/p>\n Act 5 opens with the first appearance of working people as independently acting persons on the world stage. They are two gravediggers discussing corruption in society, their own worth, and the equality of all humankind. The significance of this can hardly be overestimated.<\/p>\n The scene begins with the gravediggers, entirely on their own and completely self-sufficient, chatting and commenting on social injustice. Suicide victims were not normally buried in a churchyard in those days. The gravediggers comment how this rule does not apply to the nobility and how lawyers ensure this: \u201cCrowner\u2019s quest [coroner\u2019s inquest] law.\u201d They laugh at their own logic that therefore the wealthy have more reason to kill themselves than their ordinary fellow-Christians: \u201cGreat folk should have countenance in this world to drown or hang themselves more than their even Christian\u201d<\/em> (their equals).<\/p>\n This train of thought quickly moves on to an astonishing expression of self-respect: \u201cThere is no ancient gentleman but gardeners, ditchers, and grave-makers. They hold up Adam\u2019s profession.\u201d A connection is being made by the gravedigger to the Peasant Revolt of 1381, in which one of the leaders, John Ball, asked in a sermon:<\/p>\n When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then the gentleman?<\/em><\/p>\n These words, spoken at the time of the peasant rising in a sermon at Blackheath, near London, became legendary. The next sentence is: \u201cFrom the beginning all men by nature were created equal.\u201d John Ball deduced the equality of humankind from their common descent from Adam. He\u00a0advocated social equality for all, and the gravedigger develops this idea. A gentleman\u2019s coat of arms is swiftly reinterpreted to mean physical arms as the only arms worth having. They enable people to work and to build. This in turn leads to banter about a gravedigger building the most permanent of houses: \u201cThe houses that he makes last till doomsday.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The working people in this scene are given more space than the actors in a previous scene. They are more clearly drawn as individuals; they have a direct and unromanticised relationship with their job, which Hamlet and Horatio comment on. They are superbly confident. The humour they bring onto the stage acts as a comic relief to the mounting tension of the main plot, but it is far more than that: it is a manifestation of the absolute integrity of the gravediggers.<\/p>\n The gravediggers are even more radical in their understanding of death than Hamlet. Hamlet had displayed a profoundly materialist concept of death (i.e. physical without reference to a soul) at the time of Polonius\u2019s death, yet he is taken aback at first by the unceremonious treatment of human bones by the singing gravedigger.<\/p>\n The gravedigger\u2019s throwing about of skulls, irrespective of whose they might be, parallels Hamlet\u2019s earlier statements about the levelling role of death, suggesting the natural equality of all humankind. This is an instance of doubling,<\/em> or restating of an idea. In addition, Shakespeare is making the point that the working gravediggers have reached the same insights as the university-educated Hamlet through their work, their lives, and independent thinking.<\/p>\n Hamlet vents his disgust at double standards with Horatio (more doubling, as the gravediggers just discussed the same) before he addresses the gravedigger. But he\u00a0is in for a surprise when he begins talking to the gravedigger. This man is his equal in the important matters of punning speech, honesty, and absoluteness.<\/p>\n The theme of a fundamental common humankind-ness, a kind of emotional communism, is underlined as Hamlet joins the gravedigger, along with Horatio. They all occupy the same space and have a scientific discussion about the process of decomposition, linking it with Hamlet\u2019s comments about death at the time of Polonius\u2019s demise.<\/p>\n At this time, in the graveyard, we see representatives of the working people together with the humanist prince and the humanist middle-class scholar. They understand each other fully and without hierarchy. At the level of language they are equals: no-one can outwit the gravediggers. Basic human equality is emphasised, and social criticism made, as they toss around the skulls.<\/p>\n When Hamlet is given the skull of Yorick, the court jester of his childhood, he vividly recalls him and alludes once more to the perfectibility of humankind as well as the material nature of death. Hamlet, Horatio and the gravediggers are natural allies. There are only a few occasions in the play when Hamlet feels relaxed and with his own kind of person – a person of integrity and honesty. This scene is one of those moments; another is when he interacts with the actors.<\/p>\n When asking ourselves why Hamlet finds it difficult to \u201cset right\u201d his time, we must consider what allies are available to him. They are all gathered in the churchyard. It becomes clear that his undertaking is all but impossible, and that a solution lies in the future. It would be another forty years or so before similar characters would be a strong enough force in English society to challenge and execute their king, or form movements whose objectives included a more just and equal society, in the English Revolution of 1640\u20131660.<\/p>\n In this context the function of the scene within the tragedy becomes extraordinarily clear. It expands our understanding of Hamlet\u2019s alternatives, which are historical and linked to class forces as well as personal, even if their time has not yet come. It is clear that in this episode social inequality and human equality are being discussed by those whose task it will be to ‘set right the time’ – by revolutionary upheaval. In this centenary year of the Russian Revolution, which was the first successful take-over of state power by representatives of workers and peasants (including gravediggers), the episode is more relevant than ever.<\/p>\n Jenny Farrell\u2019s book Fear Not Shakespeare\u2019s Tragedies: A Comprehensive Introduction (2016), published by Nuasc\u00e9alta, is available online.<\/em><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n