Polonius

Alison Gordon
5 December 2015
Shakespearean Literature
ENG 245
Polonius: Two Character Analyses

In Shakespeares seminal work Hamlet, all of the minor characters seem to take a
backseat to the self-absorbed and indulgent title character of Hamlet, whose descent into false
madness and internal battles with elaborate revenge plots and half-baked suicidal ideation
dominate the narrative aspects of the play. One such minor character, Polonius, the father of
Laertes and Ophelia, delivers some of the plays most memorable lines, but he is widely
dismissed in critical readings as a foolish old man with little other consequence to the timeline
and thematic content of the play than the powerful lines he happens to deliver. Author Myron
Taylor, in his analysis Tragic Justice and the House of Polonius ascertains that [m]ost critics
since the 18th century have been content to see [Polonius] as a fool and a bore; some few have
read deeper significance into his actions. However, there are few other authors who have sought
to examine Polonius further as a character with more texture and merit to the overall thematic
quality of the play.
It is important to note in any thorough analysis of Polonius that though he is an
indisputably unintelligent and seemingly vacuous character, it does not mean that he is not just as
morally and ethically reprehensible as a more shrewd or purposefully manipulative villain from
other Shakespearean works, such as the notoriously evil King Richard from the Shakespearean
play Richard III. With a less dismissive and more analytical view of Polonius comes a new
perspective on the significance of his role in the play, and the significance of his accidental and
untimely death at Hamlets hand. When Polonius is seen as a force of true evil, his death is
painted as less of a rash accident on the part of the now somewhat mad Hamlet and more of a
symbolic killing of a wicked force in the context of the underlying thematic clash of good and
evil in the play, according to Taylors analysis.
As is often the case with oft-repeated lines, Poloniuss most famous statement over the
course of the play This above all: to thine own self be true/And it must follow, as the night the
day/Thou canst not be false to any man is often taken out of context and misunderstood, and is
thus seen as an inspirational and substantial piece of wisdom. However, Taylor, in making the
case that Polonius is a brute force of Machiavellian evil, frames these seemingly motivating and
innocent lines as a call from Polonius for his advisees to rely on an almost satanically-influenced
selfishness. Taylor goes so far as to say that, though it is of course true that the night follows the
day, it could also be true to state that the day follows the night. It is rhetorically significant,
argues Taylor, that Polonius chooses to phrase the line this way, for selfishness and darkness are
often seen as analogous, and he is choosing to begin with light and happiness and then descend
into darkness and evil.
Author Walter Gierasch notes, in his response to Poloniuss death that Hamlet simply
condemns Polonius as a selfish, foolish windbag in his subsequent dialogue following his death,
in a matter inconsistent with the nuanced and sensitive manner in which Shakespeare usually
portrays his characters responding in the immediate face of death. However, Gierasch cautions
the reader against accepting Hamlets unqualified perspective on Polonius as an interfering
fool as being identical with Shakespeares own ideas about the nature of the character Polonius.
Though it is impossible to assert that Polonius is intended to be wholly representative of
goodness or altruism, Gierasch argues that Polonius is meant to be seen as simply a fallible
human, a man who is sometimes wrong, but has feelings, fears, emotions and sometimes the
humility to accept all of this in full.
At first view, the perspectives of Gierasch and Taylor seem irreconcilable. However, to
say that Polonius cannot be both human and representative of perfect evil is a false dichotomy: as
a character, Polonius has nuance and subtlety expressed by several of his more genuine and less
pretentious pieces of dialogue over the course of the play. However, as a plot device, Polonius
fulfills the position of the Jungian shadow archetype, embodying the darker themes of
manipulation, deception, clandestine surveillance and lost morals in the face of opportunity.
Though he appears harmless and unintelligent, [h]e is obviously no new-made adviser to
the kind, brought into power by the new ruler. For many years [Polonius] has served the state and
in a brief two months, has already won with Claudius, the reputation for a certain astuteness,
notes Gierasch. Our knowledge of Poloniuss level of intelligence lies in direct contrast with
level of respect he seems to receive from his advisees, Claudius, and the king before him,
Hamlets father. It is ironic, of course, that a man who is so clearly unwise makes his living
giving advice and guidance to people in positions of great influence and power. This discrepancy
makes it clear that Polonius cannot just be written off as just a fool, because he has enough
shrewdness and acumen to work his way into a valuable position of power and regard which is
not suited to his actual level of intelligence, insight and wisdom.
Thus, it is fitting that a man who made his living through deception and shrouding his
true character met his death because of confusion and unclearness. While Hamlet is in his
mother, Gertrudes chambers, he enters into a violent argument with her. Polonius is hidden
behind a tapestry, eavesdropping, as he hopes to hear some explanation for Hamlets recent
irrational and erratic behavior. When Polonius cries out after Hamlet accosts his mother, Hamlet
suspects that the man behind the curtain is Claudius and stabs him through the arras, taking his
life. A classic interpretation of this wrongful death is that is indicative of how rash and
uncoordinated Hamlet has become at this point in the play: Polonius is a character most see as
relatively innocent, and in the madness of mourning his father, Hamlet has unintentionally killed
another father.
The dueling perspectives of Polonius as an Machiavellian evil force of proportions that
verge on becoming a caricature, and the perspective of viewing him as a fallible and relatable
human and father are both put forth respectively by the authors Taylor and Gierasch in their
character analyses. However, a thorough reading of the play Hamlet necessitates that the reader
is able to allow these views to coexist simultaneously. By being able to critically perceive both of
these seemingly irreconcilably academic views of the character Polonius in terms of the play, the
reader is able to gain a more holistic perspective on the significance of Poloniuss actions and his
eventual death.
Works Cited
Giersach, Walter. "Hamlet's Polonius, and Shakespeare's." College English 2.7 (1941): 699702.JSTOR. National Council of Teachers of English. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. <jstor.org>.
Taylor, Myron. "Tragic Justice and the House of Polonius." Studies in English Literature, 150019008.2 (1968): 273-81. JSTOR. Web. 12 Jan. 2014. <jstor.org>.

Polonius

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Polonius

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Polonius

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Alison Gordon

Polonius: Two Character Analyses

You might also like