To be, or not to be

1 Interpretations
2 Influences
3 Other Sources
4 References in later works of fiction and music
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References

The phrase "to be, or not to be" comes from William Shakespeare's Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (written about 1600), act three, scene one. It is one of the most famous quotations in world literature and the best-known of this particular play. The soliloquy, spoken in the play by the eponymous character, follows in its entirety:

“

To be or not to be, that is the question;
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing, end them. To die, to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to — 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause. There's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life,
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch^[1] and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.^[2]

”

In the popular imagination the speaking of this soliloquy is often conflated with the action of Hamlet thoughtfully holding a skull (Yorick's), although the two actions occur at different moments of the play. Also, Hamlet is not alone on the stage (which is the standard for a soliloquy): Ophelia, Polonius, and the King are onstage (editors and various productions disagree about whether Hamlet sees her or the King and Polonius).

Interpretations

The German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said:

“

The essential purport of the world-famous monologue in Hamlet is, in condensed form, that our state is so wretched that complete non-existence would be decidedly preferable to it. Now if suicide actually offered us this, so that the alternative "TO BE OR NOT TO BE" lay before us in the full sense of the words, it could be chosen unconditionally as a highly desirable termination ("a consummation devoutly to be wish'd" [Act III, Sc. I.]). There is something in us, however, which tells us that this is not so, that this is not the end of things, that death is not an absolute annihilation.^[3]

”

Thus, the lines "whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer/the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" is the to be option, and "to take arms against a sea of troubles/and by opposing end them" is the not to be option. The possibly paradoxical concept of equating taking arms with not being is usually explained by that taking arms against an irresistible sea of troubles is suicidal — our troubles, resisted rather than borne, will destroy us.^[4] Another take on these lines is that the only way to take arms against an ungovernable tide is by the "constructive act of suicide".^[5] But both of these contemporary views of that passage recognize that one's own death is the result of taking arms.

Although the "conscience" that "does make cowards of us all" is often linked to the excerpt that follows and interpreted as an odd use of the word to mean "consciousness of the possibly bad unknown that awaits", it can be also understood as the sense of right and wrong. Indeed, E. Prosser said that "This soliloquy is a meditation on the central theme of the duties and temptations of a noble mind in an evil world". By that interpretation, it's the moral injunction against suicide that would be ultimately decisive, rather than the "dread of something after death", which only symbolizes the usual fires of Hell.^[6]^[7]

However, the next five lines (starting with "and thus the native hue of resolution...") do not refer any longer to moral judgements, but are saying that in a similar way anything (not just suicide) can become problematical from too much thinking about it.

This (along with Hamlet's indecisiveness and uncertainty of knowledge being major themes throughout the play) inspired many commentators to read the choice between the life of action ("to be") and life of silent acceptance ("not to be") as a primary focus of Hamlet's dilemma. According to that interpretation, "whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer/the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" would get associated with not to be alternative, while "to take arms against a sea of troubles/and by opposing end them" with the to be.

In this take, the Prince's further pondering the nature of death can be seen in yet a different light (in addition to the aforementioned two proposals, i.e. the inevitable failure to win the fight against the "sea of troubles" or the only way to actually defeat it). Namely, death could be considered as a third option - the route which allows to avoid choosing between to be and not to be altogether.

Regardless of whether the focus is placed on "life vs. death" or "action vs. no action," the themes tackled by the soliloquy (and by Shakespeare's play in general) led to the character of Danish Prince often getting compared to existentialists after the term was introduced in the twentieth century.

Influences

It is often thought that Shakespeare was influenced by his contemporary, albeit late, fellow playwright Christopher Marlowe when he wrote this soliloquy; even partly paraphrasing a line from Marlowe's final play, Edward II:

“

Base Fortune, now I see, that in thy wheel
There is a point, to which when men aspire,
They tumble headlong down. That point I touched,
And, seeing there was no place to mount up higher,
Why should I grieve at my declining fall?
Farewell, fair Queen, weep not for Mortimer,
That scorns the world and, as a traveller,
Goes to discover countries yet unknown.

”

Other Sources

In Shakespeare's First quarto, Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" speech appears as:

To be, or not to be, I there's the point,
To Die, to sleepe, is that all? I all:
No, to sleepe, to dreame, I mary there it goes,
For in that dreame of death, when wee awake,
And borne before an euerlasting Iudge,
From whence no passenger euer retur'nd,
The vndiscouered country, at whose sight
The happy smile, and the accursed damn'd.
But for this, the ioyfull hope of this,
Whol'd beare the scornes and flattery of the world,
Scorned by the right rich, the rich curssed of the poore?
The widow being oppressed, the orphan wrong'd,
The taste of hunger, or a tirants raigne,
And thousand more calamities besides,
To grunt and sweate vnder this weary life,
When that he may his full Quietus make,
With a bare bodkin, who would this indure,
But for a hope something after death?
Which pusles the braine, and doth confound the sence,
Which makes vs rather beare those euilles we haue,
Than flie to others that we know not of.
I that, O this conscience makes cowardes of vs all,
Lady in thy orizons, be all my sinnes remembred.

References in later works of fiction and music

See also: References to Hamlet

There have been several films entitled To Be or Not to Be. Other films and television series taking their titles from this speech include Outrageous Fortune (film), Outrageous Fortune (TV series), What Dreams May Come and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country which has a number of references to the works of Shakespeare. Additionally, the original title for the classic sci-fi/horror film Invasion of the Body Snatchers was "Sleep No More."

In the Reduced Shakespeare Company's production The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (abridged), the speech is omitted from the Hamlet portion of the production, not for time constraints, or because the speech is so well known, but because the group states that they dislike the speech for momentum and motivation reasons. Instead, the actor playing Hamlet begins the speech, but cracks under the pressure, delves into nonsense rambling about making "Guacamole for twelve" and is unable to complete the speech. The What a piece of work is a man speech is delivered in its stead.

"In one of the Bard's best-thought-of tragedies, our insistent hero, Hamlet, queries on two fronts about how life turns rotten" is a relevant anagram of the first three lines, discovered in 1996 by Cory Calhoun^[8].

In the 6th stanza of Wislawa Szymborska's poem, "Children of Our Age," an allusion is made to the first line of the soliloquy.

Canadian television series Slings and Arrows derives its name from the soliloquy.

Notes

↑ So the 2nd Quarto; the Folio has 'pith', which is a possible reading (Edwards, p. 159, note to line 86)
↑ Edwards, 3.1.56-88
↑ Schopenhauer, p.324
↑ Jenkins (1982), p. 490
↑ Edwards, 2003, p. 48
↑ Edwards, p.48
↑ Lewis(2002) says that here it means 'nothing more or less than "fear of death"', p. 207
↑ The Write Stuff. BBC. Radio 4. 2008-04-14.

References

Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Philip Edwards, ed., updated edition 2003. (New Cambridge Shakespeare)
Hamlet. Harold Jenkins, ed., 1982. (The Arden Shakespeare)
Lewis, C.S., Studies in Words. Cambridge UP, 1960 (reprinted 2002).
Schopenhauer, Arthur, The World as Will and Representation, Volume I. E.F.J. Payne, tr. Falcon Wing's Press, 1958. Reprinted by Dover, 1969.

"Something Rotten". Jasper Fforde 2004