Captain Jack Sparrow and Prince Hamlet, two pirates of note 
Not a whit, we defy augury; there's a special providence in 
the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be 
not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: 
the readiness is all. Since no man knows aught of what he leaves, 
what is't to leave betimes? Let be. 
Of all the people on the ship bound for England, only Hamlet is taken prisoner by the pirates. 
He promises to do a good turn for the pirates in return for them sending some letters from him to 
King Claudius. They deliver the letters via Horatio and one, the one to the King, is read aloud. It 
is a threatening letter (“you shall know I am set naked on your kingdom”) with a mocking tone 
and addressed sarcastically to “high and mighty” King Claudius: 
Messenger. Letters, my lord, from Hamlet: 
This to your Majesty; this to the Queen. 
Claudius. From Hamlet? Who brought them? 
Messenger. Sailors, my lord, they say; I saw them not. 
They were given me by Claudio; he receiv'd them 
Of him that brought them. 
Claudius. Laertes, you shall hear them. 
Leave us. 
[Exit Messenger.] 
[Reads]'High and Mighty,-You shall know I am set naked on your 
kingdom. To-morrow shall I beg leave to see your kingly eyes; 
when I shall (first asking your pardon thereunto) recount the 
occasion of my sudden and more strange return. 'HAMLET.' 
What should this mean? Are all the rest come back? 
Or is it some abuse, and no such thing? 
Laertes: Know you the hand?
Claudius: 'Tis Hamlet's character. 'Naked!' 
And in a postscript here, he says 'alone.' 
Can you advise me? 
Laertes: I am lost in it, my lord. But let him come! 
It warms the very sickness in my heart 
That I shall live and tell him to his teeth, 
'Thus didest thou.' (IV.vii.37-57) 
The king is naturally dismayed by this letter and very soon devises a plot to kill Hamlet. 
Moreover, Hamlet’s intentions with his letter, the open announcement of hostilities after long, 
careful and studied hiding of his real feelings, may be compared to the way that pirates, using the 
ruse de guerre, often only hoisted their true colors, the pirate flag, after approaching the prey 
with false colors hoisted1 
How has Hamlet now achieved the bravery and courage to announce his intentions to attack 
his enemy? One motivation may clearly be, of course, that he has recently learned that King 
Claudius had secretly ordered his execution through letters sent with Rosencrantz and 
Guildenstern, who were accompanying him. But a second motivation may be that he has been 
inspired by his recent association with real pirates. For the very day after he learned of Claudius’ 
plan to kill him, the ship Hamlet was traveling on was attacked by pirates. The audience does not 
see the action directly but learns of it in a letter from Hamlet to Horatio: 
[reads the letter] 'Horatio, when thou shalt have overlook'd 
this, give these fellows some means to the King. They have 
letters for him. Ere we were two days old at sea, a pirate of 
very warlike appointment gave us chase. Finding ourselves too 
slow of sail, we put on a compelled valour, and in the grapple I 
boarded them. On the instant they got clear of our ship; so I 
alone became their prisoner. They have dealt with me like thieves 
1 Sometimes, pirates used the ruse de guerre to trick victims into allowing the pirate 
ship to come so close to the prey that she could not successfully defend herself once the 
pirates revealed their true colors. They hoisted the same nation’s flag, or that of an ally, 
as the prey. Le Sieur du Chastelet des Boys, a traveler aboard a Dutch ship in the 1600s, 
found himself in the midst of an attack by Barbary corsairs. When he sighted six Dutch 
ships coming to the rescue, his relief was immeasurable until “the Dutch flags 
disappeared and the masts and poop were simultaneously shaded by flags of taffeta of 
all colors, enriched and embroidered with stars, crescents, suns, crossed swords and 
other devices.” (Pirates, 87) Konstam, Angus. Pirates 1660-1730. Oxford: Osprey, 1998. 
http://www.cindyvallar.com/tactics.html (accessed November 23, 2014).
of mercy; but they knew what they did: I am to do a good turn for 
them. Let the King have the letters I have sent, and repair thou 
to me with as much speed as thou wouldst fly death. I have words 
to speak in thine ear will make thee dumb; yet are they much too 
light for the bore of the matter. These good fellows will bring 
thee where I am. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern hold their course 
for England. Of them I have much to tell thee. Farewell. 
'He that thou knowest thine, HAMLET.' 
Come, I will give you way for these your letters, 
And do't the speedier that you may direct me 
To him from whom you brought them. Exeunt. (IV.vi.13-30) 
“T’is Hamlet’s character”, says Claudius, and though he may be referring to handwriting 
(“know you the hand?” asks Laertes), there is another meaning too: this is the real Hamlet and 
moreover, this is the real Shakespeare, whose secret artistic life as a fighter against fossil fuels 
and the damage they would do, the damage they were already doing to England in the 1600s, 
was chronicled in this autobiographical play.2 
The romantic and swashbuckling story is strange indeed, but it needs to be told, and it starts 
with the sequence in Romeo and Juliet, where Romeo and Juliet, when they are together, 
illustrate, in their solitary scenes isolated from interaction with other characters, the history of 
mankind’s interaction with the sun as an energy source and more than that, with the sun as a 
religious or sacred object. It is all part of Shakespeare’s desire to be closer, in his art, to nature, 
as close as he could be, to approach the Divine Truth as Giordano Bruno, his hero, described 
Actaeon approaching the naked Diana bathing in the forest stream in Gli Eroici Furori. Coal and 
mankind were and are simply part of nature, and they concerned Shakespeare from a social and 
environmental point of view. 
Claudius, as the coal economy, is the “kingdom” that Hamlet----or Shakespeare---- 
visualizes himself setting himself upon, using, of course, his writing as his tactical weapon. Here, 
let me pause and comment, personally, (it is unorthodox for literary critics to comment 
personally, but nearly everything about my critical endeavors is unorthodox so I have little to 
lose), ‘poor Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’. It really isn’t fair for Hamlet, so much above them in 
brains and cleverness, to do what he does to them, just as it isn’t really fair (in my opinion) for 
2 Please see my article “‘Stand and Unfold Yourself ’: Prince Hamlet Unmasked” 
published in Tsukuba Area Studies Journal March 2014 and my talk “Who is Prince 
Hamlet” presented at Shakespeare 450, sponsored by Shakespeare Societé Français, in 
April, 2014, for more information on the allegory in the play.
Shakespeare to do to some of the remunerated critics and scholars who have just been doing their 
jobs for centuries, that is, trying to explain what Hamlet was all about, what he does to them, 
which is to sort of send their ideas off, as Captain Jack Sparrow might tip his hat sarcastically to 
his enemies, to oblivion3. Hillary Gatti gets to the root of the situation when she refers to 
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as “paid spies”4 who, unlike Horatio, have not kept themselves 
“financially independent of the prevailing power-complex”5. That is to say, it is market forces 
which determine whether a market exists for the products of someone’s labor and when an 
economic market ceases to exist, for material reasons such as fossil fuel depletion, then some 
products of that discontinued market would also go out of date.6 
The allegory makes it very clear. Hamlet uses his writing very deviously and tricks not only 
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, but also the English king, who puts these two men to death. He 
starts his narrative, explaining all to Horatio, and it will be noted that Hamlet uses seaman’s 
terminology (“mutines” and “bilboes”), matching the theme of the sea and the episode of the 
pirates that occurs the day after he writes the devious commission, and as I will show later, this is 
because, in his heart, Shakespeare seems to have been a sort of “pirate of a playwright”, sailing 
under false colors until the very end, when his true colors were hoisted and revealed. (I cannot 
resist citing the passage from an actual pirate attack of the 1600s, a Dutch ship was the prey of 
Barbary pirates, where the ruse de guerre was employed since the visual description of the colors 
uncannily and serendipitously captures what Shakespeare may have had in mind as an artist 
devoted to heliocentrism): 
The Dutch flags disappeared and the masts and poop were simultaneously shaded by 
flags of taffeta of all colors, enriched and embroidered with stars, crescents, suns, 
crossed swords and other devices.7 
He actually admits---and even explains--- how devious he has been in his writing (“Folded 
the writ up in the form of th' other, Subscrib'd it, gave't th' impression, plac'd it safely, The 
changeling never known”). It is good to read the whole account of that night, as he explains it to 
3 Obviously not soon…. 
4 Hillary Gatti, The Renaissance Drama of Knowledge. Page 155 
5 Same as above. 
6 Michael Bristol, Big-time Shakespeare: “In my view, Shakespeare’s authority is linked 
to the capacity of his works to represent the complexity of social time and value in the 
successor cultures of early modern England. One of the crucial features of these 
successor cultures is the way individuals and institutions must constantly adapt to the 
exigencies of a market economy. Our extended historical dialogue with Shakespeare’s 
works has been one of the important ways to articulate values more durable than those 
which circulate in current markets.” (Big-time Shakespeare, page xii.) 
7 Pirates, please see footnote 1. (Pirates, 87) Konstam, Angus. Pirates 1660-1730. 
Oxford: Osprey, 1998.
Horatio, from the start: 
Hamlet: Sir, in my heart there was a kind of fighting 
That would not let me sleep. (Methought) I lay 
Worse than the mutines in the bilboes, Rashly--- 
And praised by rashness for it---let us know 
Our indiscretion sometimes serves us well 
When our deep plots do pall, and that should learn us 
There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, 
Rough-hew them how we will. 
Horatio: That is most certain. 
Hamlet: Up from my cabin, 
My sea-gown scarf'd about me, in the dark 
Grop'd I to find out them; had my desire, 
Finger'd their packet, and in fine withdrew 
To mine own room again; making so bold 
(My fears forgetting manners) to unseal 
Their grand commission; where I found, Horatio 
(O royal knavery!), an exact command, 
Larded with many several sorts of reasons, 
Importing Denmark's health, and England's too, 
With, hoo! such bugs and goblins in my life- 
That, on the supervise, no leisure bated, 
No, not to stay the finding of the axe, 
My head should be struck off. 
Horatio: Is't possible? 
Hamlet: Here's the commission; read it at more leisure. 
But wilt thou bear me how I did proceed? 
Horatio: I beseech you.
Hamlet: Being thus benetted round with villanies, 
Or I could make a prologue to my brains, 
They had begun the play. I sat me down; 
Devis'd a new commission; wrote it fair. 
I once did hold it, as our statists do, 
A baseness to write fair, and labour'd much 
How to forget that learning; but, sir, now 
It did me yeoman's service. Wilt thou know 
Th' effect of what I wrote? 
Horatio: Ay, good my lord. 
Hamlet: An earnest conjuration from the King, 
As England was his faithful tributary, 
As love between them like the palm might flourish, 
As peace should still her wheaten garland wear 
And stand a comma 'tween their amities, 
And many such-like as's of great charge, 
That, on the view and knowing of these contents, 
Without debatement further, more or less, 
He should the bearers put to sudden death, 
Not shriving time allow'd. 
Horatio: How was this seal'd? 
Hamlet: Why, even in that was heaven ordinant. 
I had my father's signet in my purse, 
Which was the model of that Danish seal; 
Folded the writ up in the form of th' other, 
Subscrib'd it, gave't th' impression, plac'd it safely,
The changeling never known. Now, the next day 
Was our sea-fight; and what to this was sequent 
Thou know'st already. 
Horatio: So Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to't. 
Hamlet: Why, man, they did make love to this employment! 
They are not near my conscience; their defeat 
Does by their own insinuation grow. 
'Tis dangerous when the baser nature comes 
Between the pass and fell incensed points 
Of mighty opposites. 
Horatio: Why, what a king is this! 
Hamlet: Does it not, thinks't thee, stand me now upon- 
He that hath kill'd my king, and whor'd my mother; 
Popp'd in between th' election and my hopes; 
Thrown out his angle for my proper life, 
And with such coz'nage- is't not perfect conscience 
To quit him with this arm? And is't not to be damn'd 
To let this canker of our nature come 
In further evil? (V.ii.4-70) 
To perform his ruse, he takes on a disguise or costume, (“my sea-gown scarfed about me”); 
it is an absolutely necessary step for a performer, as all performers know. And later, narrating the 
incident, it will be noted that Hamlet has a sardonic and insubordinate streak and he is not afraid 
to mock authority. His dismissive and contemptuous summary of standard elite and 
ruling-class/royal language or rhetoric (“As love between them like the palm might flourish, As 
peace should still her wheaten garland wear/ And stand a comma 'tween their amities, And many 
such-like as's of great charge”), which he can easily write very well and convincingly when he
feels like it, is, when read as a part of the allegory of Shakespeare’s artistic life, a warning about 
where his true loyalties in society always lay: not necessarily with the elites. He was excellent at 
producing elite rhetorical flourishes and “high and mighty” language, but his purposes were not 
to extol elite power. 
There has been a great deal of critical angst spent on dwelling on Hamlet’s “antic 
disposition”---‘is Hamlet really mad or just pretending?’ and so forth----- but it is very clear that 
he drops his antic disposition when he is out of earshot of the elites (except for Horatio), that is 
to say, the court. Hamlet talks comfortably and naturally to gravediggers and players, rough 
people from the lower social strata. Around them, he loses the “antic disposition”, the icy manner, 
the insolence and his impudence that he naturally assumes when he talks to any of the members 
of the court. Besides gravediggers and players, one more set of rough low-class people he meets 
and seems to befriend (though, living outside the law they are arguably even more rough and low 
than the grave-diggers and players), are the pirates he is captured by on his way to England. 
Hamlet calls them “thieves of mercy” and also refers to them as “good fellows”. 
But, after all, can pirates really be “good fellows”? Could Prince Hamlet possibly be 
correct when he says that some pirates, not all, perhaps, but some, are “good fellows”? Not 
knowing any pirates personally, I turned to popular culture in the form of the Disney franchise 
Pirates of the Caribbean, to see if it could be so. More to the point, I turned to this extremely 
popular, highly-grossing depiction of pirates in the movies to see if popular culture, by definition 
not aimed at the elites, could give us a hint at what Shakespeare, a man who seems to have 
secretly scorned the elite powers of his day, meant by his characterization of pirates as “good 
fellows”. My gambit worked, actually, since I found the Pirates of the Caribbean movies have 
much in common with Hamlet. 
The most fertile area to examine is the similarities between the central character Captain 
Jack Sparrow and Prince Hamlet. I have already mentioned the rather cruel-tip-of-the-hat-to-the 
–enemies motif. It underlines the most important similarity between both of the fictional 
characters: their lack of respect for authority figures. At the same time, neither of these heroes is
rebellious or stupid in a way to bring danger onto himself until it is time to really fight. For 
example, in the fourth installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean series, On Stranger Tides, 
when a member of King George’s court asks “You are Jack Sparrow, aren’t you?”, Jack Sparrow 
responds, with perfect timing, “There is a ‘Captain’ in there somewhere.” It is in the same vein 
that Hamlet answers Claudius’ question, “How is it that the clouds still hang on you?” (I.ii.66) 
with the retort, “Not so, my lord, I am too much in the sun.” (I.ii.67) These clever and tricky 
responses walk a fine line by subversively revealing the respondent as not at all cowed or awed 
by power, yet substantively the answers are unobjectionable and can be seen as merely harmless 
quibbles. 
Moreover, Hamlet and Captain Jack Sparrow, as ‘trickster’ figures or ‘fool’ figures or 
‘court jester figures’ perpetually retain the verbal power to leap outside the frame of the current 
discourse, change the subject radically and craftily throw open new windows to new ontological 
structures when it is suitable for them to do so. Here are Jack Sparrow and Angelica in On 
Stranger Tides: 
Angelica: Not for me, for my father. I am truly the daughter of Blackbeard. 
Sparrow: You’ve fallen for your own con, love. 
Angelica: No, he is my father. The lies I told you were really the truth. 
Sparrow: You lied to me by telling me the truth? 
Angelica: Yes. 
Sparrow: That’s very good. May I use that? 
Angelica: I’m sure you will anyway.
Angelica, as a matched pair with Sparrow, is a sort of female version of him, in on the game, 
and she does not fall victim to his rhetorical skill but deftly counters with her own gambit (“I’m 
sure you will anyway”). However, in Hamlet, Polonius, a true pedant, is not so lucky: 
Polonius: How does my good Lord Hamlet? 
Hamlet: Well, God-a-mercy. 
Polonius: Do you know me, my lord? 
Hamlet: Excellent well, you are a fishmonger. 
Polonius: Not I, my lord. 
Hamlet: Then I would you were so honest a man. 
Polonius: Honest, my lord? 
Hamlet: Ay sir, to be honest, as this world goes, is to be one man pick’d out of ten thousand. 
Polonius: That’s very true, my lord. 
Hamlet: For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion----have 
you a daughter? (II.ii.171-182) 
The respective stories make it clear that both Jack Sparrow and Hamlet are dispossessed. 
Jack Sparrow has lost his ship the Black Pearl, while Hamlet has lost his father and his claim to 
the throne. Describing Prince Hamlet, Hillary Gatti could just as well be describing Jack Sparrow, 
“Hamlet remains without anything that he can call his own, dispossessed, just like the court 
Fools. Only his wit and his intelligence and his wit remain for him to use as weapons to protect 
himself in a world he perceives as profoundly corrupt and false.”8 The Pirates of the Caribbean 
8 Hillary Gatti, Essays on Giordano Bruno, “Bruno and Shakespeare: Hamlet”, page 
148.
movies have totally corrupt and hateful antagonists: from Beckett in World’s End who admits 
that he will go back on his word in order to win, and who keeps showing his materialistic and 
base side with his favorite tag line “it’s just good business”, to Blackbeard in On Stranger Tides, 
who would sacrifice his daughter’s life for his own gain. 
On the topic of wit and intelligence as the only weapons available to someone who has 
nothing left, it is necessary to bring in the theme of the court jester and expand upon it a bit. 
Hillary Gatti points to an underlying Jupiter/Momus dynamic in Hamlet. This dynamic, with 
respect to Jack Sparrow (and to some extent Captain Barbossa, Elizabeth Swann, William Turner 
and other pirates who are also ‘good fellows’) vis a vis authority figures, is also present in 
Pirates of the Caribbean. The dynamic is the interesting thing; the court jester, though of a low 
social position and materially not wealthy or powerful (i.e. dispossessed, an outsider, etc.) has a 
real and useful social role to play: 
Hamlet’s role within the new court of Elsinore can be usefully compared 
with that of Momus in the court of Jove in Bruno’s Lo Spaccio della bestia 
trionfante (The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast), written and published in 
London in 1584. This is the fourth of the Italian dialogues written by Bruno in 
London, and it narrates the story of a macroscopic, universal reform undertaken 
through the transformation of signs of the zodiac from bestial vices into 
reformed virtues; the entire operation being carried out by a Jove who considers 
himself an absolute prince, both in a political and a religious sense. Bruno, 
however, reminds his readers that even Jove, like all things that are a part of the 
material world, remains subject to the laws of vicissitude, suggesting that he is 
far from infallible, as he wishes to be considered. In order to underline this point, 
Bruno sees him as being accompanied through his long and meticulously 
organized reform by the suggestions of an ironic and satirical Momus, who gets 
dangerously close to appearing as the real hero of the story. Momus, in the 
classical world, was known as the god of satire, and was expelled from Olympus 
because of his witty and caustic tongue….In the Spaccio, Bruno claims that
Momus’s role in Jupiter’s celestial Court to that of a fool in a court of his time: a 
voice which “often presents more of factual truth to the ear of the prince than all 
the rest of the Court together, and for which generally, not daring to speak, they 
speak in the form of a game and in that way to change the course of events.”9 
The dynamic here at this time in our history is basically at heart a material one, not just 
becoming visible through people, their stories, or performers but existing as one notable example 
of Brunian material vicissitudes: the enormous stored but finite reserves of fossil fuel energy in 
contrast with the steady sun. I have covered elsewhere, in my talk at Shakespeare 450 sponsored 
by the Societé Français Shakespeare, for example, how Hamlet is about Shakespeare’s 
visualization of his role, through many centuries, as a subversive solar-energy loving artist 
within a long fossil fuel-based power regime. Now I will spring on you another shock: Pirates of 
the Caribbean: At World’s End also seeks, subtly and in a coded, careful way, to engage with its 
audience on this same topic. A “heathen” nature goddess named Calypso (the goddess of the sea) 
is bound up in the form of a human woman. Captain Barbossa, instead of Jack Sparrow, explains 
to the Nine Pirate Lords: 
There be a third course. We must free Calypso. In another age, at this very 
spot, the Brethren Council captured the sea goddess and bound her in her bones. 
That was a mistake. Oh, we tamed the sea for ourselves, aye, but opened the 
door for Beckett and his ilk. Better were the days when mastery of the seas 
came not from bargains struck with eldritch creatures but from the sweat of a 
man’s brow and the strength of his back alone. You all know this to be true. We 
must free Calypso. 
The British colonial regime in their red coats and gold buttons, with their tea cups and 
powdered wigs, their elegant furniture, material wealth, haughty and formal manners, 
hierarchical power structure, and symbolized by the lethal and treacherous Beckett, is here made 
to stand in for the whole Western colonial/industrial project, one that was founded on coal and 
9 Gatti Essays on Giordano Bruno, pages 148-9.
oil10, two resources which were in extreme abundance in England (and later the United States, 
the main successor culture to the British Colonial Empire). The writers of the screenplay seem to 
be basically familiar with the issue, but they carefully hide the rather frightening beast behind a 
curtain and describe it in an indirect way, with “the sweat of a man’s brow and the strength of his 
back alone” standing in for the past world where the internal combustion engine was not in 
evidence. 
But it would be utter folly to claim that Shakespeare or the Disney Corporation, who owns 
the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, are Marxist revolutionaries. It was indeed Karl Marx who 
pointed out the fact of the metabolic rift, which later scholars have described accurately, in my 
opinion, as the (temporary, since the rift will close one day) material basis for economic activity 
based mainly on fossil fuels. However, the purpose of popular cultural products such as Hamlet 
or Pirates of the Caribbean is not to rouse people to planet-saving action; these cultural products 
are more like spies, agents, the subtle forward movements of information-gatherers in a cosmos 
where humans need all the information they can get. As Hamlet promises Horatio: “I am to do a 
good turn for them (the pirates). Let the King have the letters I have sent.” And we are indeed, 
the pirates. 
10 Barbara Freese, Coal a Human History. “Clearly, though, the industrial revolution 
could never have taken the shape it took without coal.” .(page 69)

Jack Sparrow & Prince Hamlet, Two Pirates of Note

  • 1.
    Captain Jack Sparrowand Prince Hamlet, two pirates of note Not a whit, we defy augury; there's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all. Since no man knows aught of what he leaves, what is't to leave betimes? Let be. Of all the people on the ship bound for England, only Hamlet is taken prisoner by the pirates. He promises to do a good turn for the pirates in return for them sending some letters from him to King Claudius. They deliver the letters via Horatio and one, the one to the King, is read aloud. It is a threatening letter (“you shall know I am set naked on your kingdom”) with a mocking tone and addressed sarcastically to “high and mighty” King Claudius: Messenger. Letters, my lord, from Hamlet: This to your Majesty; this to the Queen. Claudius. From Hamlet? Who brought them? Messenger. Sailors, my lord, they say; I saw them not. They were given me by Claudio; he receiv'd them Of him that brought them. Claudius. Laertes, you shall hear them. Leave us. [Exit Messenger.] [Reads]'High and Mighty,-You shall know I am set naked on your kingdom. To-morrow shall I beg leave to see your kingly eyes; when I shall (first asking your pardon thereunto) recount the occasion of my sudden and more strange return. 'HAMLET.' What should this mean? Are all the rest come back? Or is it some abuse, and no such thing? Laertes: Know you the hand?
  • 2.
    Claudius: 'Tis Hamlet'scharacter. 'Naked!' And in a postscript here, he says 'alone.' Can you advise me? Laertes: I am lost in it, my lord. But let him come! It warms the very sickness in my heart That I shall live and tell him to his teeth, 'Thus didest thou.' (IV.vii.37-57) The king is naturally dismayed by this letter and very soon devises a plot to kill Hamlet. Moreover, Hamlet’s intentions with his letter, the open announcement of hostilities after long, careful and studied hiding of his real feelings, may be compared to the way that pirates, using the ruse de guerre, often only hoisted their true colors, the pirate flag, after approaching the prey with false colors hoisted1 How has Hamlet now achieved the bravery and courage to announce his intentions to attack his enemy? One motivation may clearly be, of course, that he has recently learned that King Claudius had secretly ordered his execution through letters sent with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who were accompanying him. But a second motivation may be that he has been inspired by his recent association with real pirates. For the very day after he learned of Claudius’ plan to kill him, the ship Hamlet was traveling on was attacked by pirates. The audience does not see the action directly but learns of it in a letter from Hamlet to Horatio: [reads the letter] 'Horatio, when thou shalt have overlook'd this, give these fellows some means to the King. They have letters for him. Ere we were two days old at sea, a pirate of very warlike appointment gave us chase. Finding ourselves too slow of sail, we put on a compelled valour, and in the grapple I boarded them. On the instant they got clear of our ship; so I alone became their prisoner. They have dealt with me like thieves 1 Sometimes, pirates used the ruse de guerre to trick victims into allowing the pirate ship to come so close to the prey that she could not successfully defend herself once the pirates revealed their true colors. They hoisted the same nation’s flag, or that of an ally, as the prey. Le Sieur du Chastelet des Boys, a traveler aboard a Dutch ship in the 1600s, found himself in the midst of an attack by Barbary corsairs. When he sighted six Dutch ships coming to the rescue, his relief was immeasurable until “the Dutch flags disappeared and the masts and poop were simultaneously shaded by flags of taffeta of all colors, enriched and embroidered with stars, crescents, suns, crossed swords and other devices.” (Pirates, 87) Konstam, Angus. Pirates 1660-1730. Oxford: Osprey, 1998. http://www.cindyvallar.com/tactics.html (accessed November 23, 2014).
  • 3.
    of mercy; butthey knew what they did: I am to do a good turn for them. Let the King have the letters I have sent, and repair thou to me with as much speed as thou wouldst fly death. I have words to speak in thine ear will make thee dumb; yet are they much too light for the bore of the matter. These good fellows will bring thee where I am. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern hold their course for England. Of them I have much to tell thee. Farewell. 'He that thou knowest thine, HAMLET.' Come, I will give you way for these your letters, And do't the speedier that you may direct me To him from whom you brought them. Exeunt. (IV.vi.13-30) “T’is Hamlet’s character”, says Claudius, and though he may be referring to handwriting (“know you the hand?” asks Laertes), there is another meaning too: this is the real Hamlet and moreover, this is the real Shakespeare, whose secret artistic life as a fighter against fossil fuels and the damage they would do, the damage they were already doing to England in the 1600s, was chronicled in this autobiographical play.2 The romantic and swashbuckling story is strange indeed, but it needs to be told, and it starts with the sequence in Romeo and Juliet, where Romeo and Juliet, when they are together, illustrate, in their solitary scenes isolated from interaction with other characters, the history of mankind’s interaction with the sun as an energy source and more than that, with the sun as a religious or sacred object. It is all part of Shakespeare’s desire to be closer, in his art, to nature, as close as he could be, to approach the Divine Truth as Giordano Bruno, his hero, described Actaeon approaching the naked Diana bathing in the forest stream in Gli Eroici Furori. Coal and mankind were and are simply part of nature, and they concerned Shakespeare from a social and environmental point of view. Claudius, as the coal economy, is the “kingdom” that Hamlet----or Shakespeare---- visualizes himself setting himself upon, using, of course, his writing as his tactical weapon. Here, let me pause and comment, personally, (it is unorthodox for literary critics to comment personally, but nearly everything about my critical endeavors is unorthodox so I have little to lose), ‘poor Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’. It really isn’t fair for Hamlet, so much above them in brains and cleverness, to do what he does to them, just as it isn’t really fair (in my opinion) for 2 Please see my article “‘Stand and Unfold Yourself ’: Prince Hamlet Unmasked” published in Tsukuba Area Studies Journal March 2014 and my talk “Who is Prince Hamlet” presented at Shakespeare 450, sponsored by Shakespeare Societé Français, in April, 2014, for more information on the allegory in the play.
  • 4.
    Shakespeare to doto some of the remunerated critics and scholars who have just been doing their jobs for centuries, that is, trying to explain what Hamlet was all about, what he does to them, which is to sort of send their ideas off, as Captain Jack Sparrow might tip his hat sarcastically to his enemies, to oblivion3. Hillary Gatti gets to the root of the situation when she refers to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as “paid spies”4 who, unlike Horatio, have not kept themselves “financially independent of the prevailing power-complex”5. That is to say, it is market forces which determine whether a market exists for the products of someone’s labor and when an economic market ceases to exist, for material reasons such as fossil fuel depletion, then some products of that discontinued market would also go out of date.6 The allegory makes it very clear. Hamlet uses his writing very deviously and tricks not only Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, but also the English king, who puts these two men to death. He starts his narrative, explaining all to Horatio, and it will be noted that Hamlet uses seaman’s terminology (“mutines” and “bilboes”), matching the theme of the sea and the episode of the pirates that occurs the day after he writes the devious commission, and as I will show later, this is because, in his heart, Shakespeare seems to have been a sort of “pirate of a playwright”, sailing under false colors until the very end, when his true colors were hoisted and revealed. (I cannot resist citing the passage from an actual pirate attack of the 1600s, a Dutch ship was the prey of Barbary pirates, where the ruse de guerre was employed since the visual description of the colors uncannily and serendipitously captures what Shakespeare may have had in mind as an artist devoted to heliocentrism): The Dutch flags disappeared and the masts and poop were simultaneously shaded by flags of taffeta of all colors, enriched and embroidered with stars, crescents, suns, crossed swords and other devices.7 He actually admits---and even explains--- how devious he has been in his writing (“Folded the writ up in the form of th' other, Subscrib'd it, gave't th' impression, plac'd it safely, The changeling never known”). It is good to read the whole account of that night, as he explains it to 3 Obviously not soon…. 4 Hillary Gatti, The Renaissance Drama of Knowledge. Page 155 5 Same as above. 6 Michael Bristol, Big-time Shakespeare: “In my view, Shakespeare’s authority is linked to the capacity of his works to represent the complexity of social time and value in the successor cultures of early modern England. One of the crucial features of these successor cultures is the way individuals and institutions must constantly adapt to the exigencies of a market economy. Our extended historical dialogue with Shakespeare’s works has been one of the important ways to articulate values more durable than those which circulate in current markets.” (Big-time Shakespeare, page xii.) 7 Pirates, please see footnote 1. (Pirates, 87) Konstam, Angus. Pirates 1660-1730. Oxford: Osprey, 1998.
  • 5.
    Horatio, from thestart: Hamlet: Sir, in my heart there was a kind of fighting That would not let me sleep. (Methought) I lay Worse than the mutines in the bilboes, Rashly--- And praised by rashness for it---let us know Our indiscretion sometimes serves us well When our deep plots do pall, and that should learn us There’s a divinity that shapes our ends, Rough-hew them how we will. Horatio: That is most certain. Hamlet: Up from my cabin, My sea-gown scarf'd about me, in the dark Grop'd I to find out them; had my desire, Finger'd their packet, and in fine withdrew To mine own room again; making so bold (My fears forgetting manners) to unseal Their grand commission; where I found, Horatio (O royal knavery!), an exact command, Larded with many several sorts of reasons, Importing Denmark's health, and England's too, With, hoo! such bugs and goblins in my life- That, on the supervise, no leisure bated, No, not to stay the finding of the axe, My head should be struck off. Horatio: Is't possible? Hamlet: Here's the commission; read it at more leisure. But wilt thou bear me how I did proceed? Horatio: I beseech you.
  • 6.
    Hamlet: Being thusbenetted round with villanies, Or I could make a prologue to my brains, They had begun the play. I sat me down; Devis'd a new commission; wrote it fair. I once did hold it, as our statists do, A baseness to write fair, and labour'd much How to forget that learning; but, sir, now It did me yeoman's service. Wilt thou know Th' effect of what I wrote? Horatio: Ay, good my lord. Hamlet: An earnest conjuration from the King, As England was his faithful tributary, As love between them like the palm might flourish, As peace should still her wheaten garland wear And stand a comma 'tween their amities, And many such-like as's of great charge, That, on the view and knowing of these contents, Without debatement further, more or less, He should the bearers put to sudden death, Not shriving time allow'd. Horatio: How was this seal'd? Hamlet: Why, even in that was heaven ordinant. I had my father's signet in my purse, Which was the model of that Danish seal; Folded the writ up in the form of th' other, Subscrib'd it, gave't th' impression, plac'd it safely,
  • 7.
    The changeling neverknown. Now, the next day Was our sea-fight; and what to this was sequent Thou know'st already. Horatio: So Guildenstern and Rosencrantz go to't. Hamlet: Why, man, they did make love to this employment! They are not near my conscience; their defeat Does by their own insinuation grow. 'Tis dangerous when the baser nature comes Between the pass and fell incensed points Of mighty opposites. Horatio: Why, what a king is this! Hamlet: Does it not, thinks't thee, stand me now upon- He that hath kill'd my king, and whor'd my mother; Popp'd in between th' election and my hopes; Thrown out his angle for my proper life, And with such coz'nage- is't not perfect conscience To quit him with this arm? And is't not to be damn'd To let this canker of our nature come In further evil? (V.ii.4-70) To perform his ruse, he takes on a disguise or costume, (“my sea-gown scarfed about me”); it is an absolutely necessary step for a performer, as all performers know. And later, narrating the incident, it will be noted that Hamlet has a sardonic and insubordinate streak and he is not afraid to mock authority. His dismissive and contemptuous summary of standard elite and ruling-class/royal language or rhetoric (“As love between them like the palm might flourish, As peace should still her wheaten garland wear/ And stand a comma 'tween their amities, And many such-like as's of great charge”), which he can easily write very well and convincingly when he
  • 8.
    feels like it,is, when read as a part of the allegory of Shakespeare’s artistic life, a warning about where his true loyalties in society always lay: not necessarily with the elites. He was excellent at producing elite rhetorical flourishes and “high and mighty” language, but his purposes were not to extol elite power. There has been a great deal of critical angst spent on dwelling on Hamlet’s “antic disposition”---‘is Hamlet really mad or just pretending?’ and so forth----- but it is very clear that he drops his antic disposition when he is out of earshot of the elites (except for Horatio), that is to say, the court. Hamlet talks comfortably and naturally to gravediggers and players, rough people from the lower social strata. Around them, he loses the “antic disposition”, the icy manner, the insolence and his impudence that he naturally assumes when he talks to any of the members of the court. Besides gravediggers and players, one more set of rough low-class people he meets and seems to befriend (though, living outside the law they are arguably even more rough and low than the grave-diggers and players), are the pirates he is captured by on his way to England. Hamlet calls them “thieves of mercy” and also refers to them as “good fellows”. But, after all, can pirates really be “good fellows”? Could Prince Hamlet possibly be correct when he says that some pirates, not all, perhaps, but some, are “good fellows”? Not knowing any pirates personally, I turned to popular culture in the form of the Disney franchise Pirates of the Caribbean, to see if it could be so. More to the point, I turned to this extremely popular, highly-grossing depiction of pirates in the movies to see if popular culture, by definition not aimed at the elites, could give us a hint at what Shakespeare, a man who seems to have secretly scorned the elite powers of his day, meant by his characterization of pirates as “good fellows”. My gambit worked, actually, since I found the Pirates of the Caribbean movies have much in common with Hamlet. The most fertile area to examine is the similarities between the central character Captain Jack Sparrow and Prince Hamlet. I have already mentioned the rather cruel-tip-of-the-hat-to-the –enemies motif. It underlines the most important similarity between both of the fictional characters: their lack of respect for authority figures. At the same time, neither of these heroes is
  • 9.
    rebellious or stupidin a way to bring danger onto himself until it is time to really fight. For example, in the fourth installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean series, On Stranger Tides, when a member of King George’s court asks “You are Jack Sparrow, aren’t you?”, Jack Sparrow responds, with perfect timing, “There is a ‘Captain’ in there somewhere.” It is in the same vein that Hamlet answers Claudius’ question, “How is it that the clouds still hang on you?” (I.ii.66) with the retort, “Not so, my lord, I am too much in the sun.” (I.ii.67) These clever and tricky responses walk a fine line by subversively revealing the respondent as not at all cowed or awed by power, yet substantively the answers are unobjectionable and can be seen as merely harmless quibbles. Moreover, Hamlet and Captain Jack Sparrow, as ‘trickster’ figures or ‘fool’ figures or ‘court jester figures’ perpetually retain the verbal power to leap outside the frame of the current discourse, change the subject radically and craftily throw open new windows to new ontological structures when it is suitable for them to do so. Here are Jack Sparrow and Angelica in On Stranger Tides: Angelica: Not for me, for my father. I am truly the daughter of Blackbeard. Sparrow: You’ve fallen for your own con, love. Angelica: No, he is my father. The lies I told you were really the truth. Sparrow: You lied to me by telling me the truth? Angelica: Yes. Sparrow: That’s very good. May I use that? Angelica: I’m sure you will anyway.
  • 10.
    Angelica, as amatched pair with Sparrow, is a sort of female version of him, in on the game, and she does not fall victim to his rhetorical skill but deftly counters with her own gambit (“I’m sure you will anyway”). However, in Hamlet, Polonius, a true pedant, is not so lucky: Polonius: How does my good Lord Hamlet? Hamlet: Well, God-a-mercy. Polonius: Do you know me, my lord? Hamlet: Excellent well, you are a fishmonger. Polonius: Not I, my lord. Hamlet: Then I would you were so honest a man. Polonius: Honest, my lord? Hamlet: Ay sir, to be honest, as this world goes, is to be one man pick’d out of ten thousand. Polonius: That’s very true, my lord. Hamlet: For if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog, being a good kissing carrion----have you a daughter? (II.ii.171-182) The respective stories make it clear that both Jack Sparrow and Hamlet are dispossessed. Jack Sparrow has lost his ship the Black Pearl, while Hamlet has lost his father and his claim to the throne. Describing Prince Hamlet, Hillary Gatti could just as well be describing Jack Sparrow, “Hamlet remains without anything that he can call his own, dispossessed, just like the court Fools. Only his wit and his intelligence and his wit remain for him to use as weapons to protect himself in a world he perceives as profoundly corrupt and false.”8 The Pirates of the Caribbean 8 Hillary Gatti, Essays on Giordano Bruno, “Bruno and Shakespeare: Hamlet”, page 148.
  • 11.
    movies have totallycorrupt and hateful antagonists: from Beckett in World’s End who admits that he will go back on his word in order to win, and who keeps showing his materialistic and base side with his favorite tag line “it’s just good business”, to Blackbeard in On Stranger Tides, who would sacrifice his daughter’s life for his own gain. On the topic of wit and intelligence as the only weapons available to someone who has nothing left, it is necessary to bring in the theme of the court jester and expand upon it a bit. Hillary Gatti points to an underlying Jupiter/Momus dynamic in Hamlet. This dynamic, with respect to Jack Sparrow (and to some extent Captain Barbossa, Elizabeth Swann, William Turner and other pirates who are also ‘good fellows’) vis a vis authority figures, is also present in Pirates of the Caribbean. The dynamic is the interesting thing; the court jester, though of a low social position and materially not wealthy or powerful (i.e. dispossessed, an outsider, etc.) has a real and useful social role to play: Hamlet’s role within the new court of Elsinore can be usefully compared with that of Momus in the court of Jove in Bruno’s Lo Spaccio della bestia trionfante (The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast), written and published in London in 1584. This is the fourth of the Italian dialogues written by Bruno in London, and it narrates the story of a macroscopic, universal reform undertaken through the transformation of signs of the zodiac from bestial vices into reformed virtues; the entire operation being carried out by a Jove who considers himself an absolute prince, both in a political and a religious sense. Bruno, however, reminds his readers that even Jove, like all things that are a part of the material world, remains subject to the laws of vicissitude, suggesting that he is far from infallible, as he wishes to be considered. In order to underline this point, Bruno sees him as being accompanied through his long and meticulously organized reform by the suggestions of an ironic and satirical Momus, who gets dangerously close to appearing as the real hero of the story. Momus, in the classical world, was known as the god of satire, and was expelled from Olympus because of his witty and caustic tongue….In the Spaccio, Bruno claims that
  • 12.
    Momus’s role inJupiter’s celestial Court to that of a fool in a court of his time: a voice which “often presents more of factual truth to the ear of the prince than all the rest of the Court together, and for which generally, not daring to speak, they speak in the form of a game and in that way to change the course of events.”9 The dynamic here at this time in our history is basically at heart a material one, not just becoming visible through people, their stories, or performers but existing as one notable example of Brunian material vicissitudes: the enormous stored but finite reserves of fossil fuel energy in contrast with the steady sun. I have covered elsewhere, in my talk at Shakespeare 450 sponsored by the Societé Français Shakespeare, for example, how Hamlet is about Shakespeare’s visualization of his role, through many centuries, as a subversive solar-energy loving artist within a long fossil fuel-based power regime. Now I will spring on you another shock: Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End also seeks, subtly and in a coded, careful way, to engage with its audience on this same topic. A “heathen” nature goddess named Calypso (the goddess of the sea) is bound up in the form of a human woman. Captain Barbossa, instead of Jack Sparrow, explains to the Nine Pirate Lords: There be a third course. We must free Calypso. In another age, at this very spot, the Brethren Council captured the sea goddess and bound her in her bones. That was a mistake. Oh, we tamed the sea for ourselves, aye, but opened the door for Beckett and his ilk. Better were the days when mastery of the seas came not from bargains struck with eldritch creatures but from the sweat of a man’s brow and the strength of his back alone. You all know this to be true. We must free Calypso. The British colonial regime in their red coats and gold buttons, with their tea cups and powdered wigs, their elegant furniture, material wealth, haughty and formal manners, hierarchical power structure, and symbolized by the lethal and treacherous Beckett, is here made to stand in for the whole Western colonial/industrial project, one that was founded on coal and 9 Gatti Essays on Giordano Bruno, pages 148-9.
  • 13.
    oil10, two resourceswhich were in extreme abundance in England (and later the United States, the main successor culture to the British Colonial Empire). The writers of the screenplay seem to be basically familiar with the issue, but they carefully hide the rather frightening beast behind a curtain and describe it in an indirect way, with “the sweat of a man’s brow and the strength of his back alone” standing in for the past world where the internal combustion engine was not in evidence. But it would be utter folly to claim that Shakespeare or the Disney Corporation, who owns the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, are Marxist revolutionaries. It was indeed Karl Marx who pointed out the fact of the metabolic rift, which later scholars have described accurately, in my opinion, as the (temporary, since the rift will close one day) material basis for economic activity based mainly on fossil fuels. However, the purpose of popular cultural products such as Hamlet or Pirates of the Caribbean is not to rouse people to planet-saving action; these cultural products are more like spies, agents, the subtle forward movements of information-gatherers in a cosmos where humans need all the information they can get. As Hamlet promises Horatio: “I am to do a good turn for them (the pirates). Let the King have the letters I have sent.” And we are indeed, the pirates. 10 Barbara Freese, Coal a Human History. “Clearly, though, the industrial revolution could never have taken the shape it took without coal.” .(page 69)