Further to yesterday's post, I'll continue with my defense of Shakespeare's use of puns by having a look at a scene from Hamlet which shows how they are often used in argument. In this case (1.3), Polonius is questioning Ophelia about the nature of her relationship with the prince, and receives the reply: "He hath, my lord, of late made many tenders/ Of his affection to me". Both the answer and the word "tenders" infuriate him, and he becomes fixated on it and attempts to use it as a way into Ophelia's way of thinking. Thus we get the following, in which he puns on the word three times, while showing that he's aware of the device (almost apologizing for it), and repeating another word of Ophelia's ("think") which he also attempts to twist to his advantage:

LORD POLONIUS

Do you believe his tenders, as you call them?

OPHELIA

I do not know, my lord, what I should think.

LORD POLONIUS

Marry, I'll teach you: think yourself a baby;

That you have ta'en these tenders for true pay,

Which are not sterling. Tender yourself more dearly;

Or--not to crack the wind of the poor phrase,

Running it thus--you'll tender me a fool.

I'd argue that it's a mistake to think of punning as no more than a stylistic choice. Rather, it's an integral part of conversation and argument, and happens all the time.

I've mentioned the long, intricate second scene of act two from Hamlet in a couple of posts, and today I'd like to look at it again, but this time from the interactionist perspective that has been of considerable recent interest in my thinking about Shakespeare's characters. I've always thought of the scene as a sort-of "day in the life of Hamlet", as we watch his interactions with Polonius, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and the players. (After all of this, it ends with the second great soliloquy that begins with "Now I am alone./ O what a rogue and peasant slave am I!") It's also occurred to me that it alone could be the basis of an interesting production, maybe a film version that employs a long single shot - similar perhaps to the one that opens A Touch of Evil, directed by Orson Welles, who was also an important interpreter of Shakespeare. Or perhaps this idea isn't original - I think Branagh's splendid version may have used this technique. Never mind.

Anyway, the main point that I'd like to make about its content is this: Hamlet's behaviours with the other characters cover a broad spectrum, and they are partially influenced by the reactions of those he is dealing with; but when he's left alone, he is as surprised by his own thoughts as he was by the interjections of the others.