상징계의 주체, 햄릿: 대타자와 무의식과 욕망의 역학관계를 중심으로

황순향 경남대학교 인문과학연구소 2023 人文論叢 Vol.62 No.-

This study examines Hamlet’s subjectivity from a very different viewpoint compared to the Freud and Lacan’s perspectives on Hamlet’s desire by applying the psychoanalytic theories of Freud and Lacan to Hamlet’s subjectivity from the perspective of rigorous analysis based on various criteria of their theories. Freud insists that Hamlet has incestuous Oedipal desire for his mother, and because of that reason, Hamlet delays his revenge for his father ghost. And Lacan argues that Hamlet remains in ‘the Imaginary’ stage forming the narcissistic identification with his mother’s desire, and his mother’s desire dominates Hamlet’s own desire and makes him delay his revenge. But this study argues that Hamlet is a subject whose Unconscious and desire is completely determined by ‘the Symbolic’ order in close relation to the desire of ‘the Other’ by intensively analyzing the dynamics between the society and the characters in Hamlet. And so this study reveals that the Christian ideology as ‘the Other’, in the society of Denmark where Hamlet lives, suppresses and bans Hamlet’s impulse, and Hamlet follows the desire of ‘the Other’ in the Symbolic order functioning as a strict superego, that is to say, the law of a society. Through this paper’s approach to Hamlet’s subjectivity, it is verified that Hamlet is a subject of ‘the Symbolic’ showing that his Unconscious and desire are completely governed by the desire of ‘the Other’, the Christian ideology which also hinders him from fulfilling his revenge for his father ghost.

Hamlet에 나타난 유령과 극중극의 극적 효과에 대하여

류승희 대불대학교 2001 論文集 Vol.7 No.1

This paper is designed to examine the dramatic effect of the Ghost and the play-within-the play in Hamlet. At first, the roles of the ghosts in Seneca's revenge tragedies, the Elizabethan and some Shakespearean plays were surveyed briefly in order to inquire out the definite differences between the king Hamlet's Ghost and them. The appearance of the King Hamlet's Ghost in Act I as a prologue-ghost is similar to them, but the Ghost plays and important role as a character in Hamlet while they are just a secondary element in their plays. The Ghost is not a piece of perfunctory stage machinery, but and essential character who sheds at once a supernatural grandeur in this play, and exposes a secret of foul and unnatural murder by Claudius. It seems evident that there have been attempts to clarify whether the Ghost is a Catholic ghost, a paganeque one, or a devil. The ghost in Hamlet is and ambiguous being. This ambiguity arises because Shakespeare used it for its artistic purpose rather than theological one. He leaves the Ghost ambiguous to heighten the dramatic tension of Hamlet. The Ghost, from the beginning, provides the dramatic mood and situation for the work. the doubtful message of the ghost is the most important element in this paper. It takes not only the role of revealing murder and commanding revenge, but the role of suggesting the way to and ultimate recognition. The play-within-the play is the climax of Hamlet. It is designed by Hamlet to clarify the identity of the Ghost and to convict Claudius of murder. It is to put the Ghost's information on a test, along with his substance and to give light to the change in Hamlet and its result. In conclusion, the Ghost and the play-within-the play designed and presented by Hamlet play very important roles to heighten the dramatic effect of Hamlet.

『햄릿』과 정신분석: 프로이트, 랑크, 존스

양석원 한국비교문학회 2009 比較文學 Vol.0 No.47

This essay aims at a close examination of the psychoanalytic interpretations of Hamlet, initiated by Sigmund Freud and developed by Otto Rank and Ernest Jones. Psychoanalysis is often indicted of monotonously reducing literary works within a narrow psychoanalytic model, omitting those elements which do not fit the model, and thus distorting the literature. The charge of monotonous reductionism, however, can equally be brought against the critical tendency that lumps all psychoanalytic readings into one category and thereby elides the differences and permutations within them. The history of psychoanalytic criticism of Hamlet from Freud through Rank to Jones shows important changes and developments that ultimately anticipates Jacques Lacan’s innovative reading. Freud ascribes Hamlet’s hesitation over his revenge to his unconscious self-reproach that he is fundamentally not different from Claudius who fulfilled his infantile Oedipal wish to kill his father and sleep with his mother. Freud also sees the Danish prince as a hysteric who expresses repulsion for sexuality in his relationship with Ophelia. Freud later mentions Hamlet as a typical melancholic who severely debases himself after the loss of a love object. Freud’s account of melancholy yields an interpretation that after losing his mother as a love object, Hamlet identifies with her and incorporates her into his ego, mounts a harsh attack upon her, and then finally commits suicidal self-destruction. Highlighting Hamlet’s incestuous impulse, Otto Rank zeroes in on the sexual aspects of his Oedipus complex. A mother figure, like a father figure, is divided into a sensual fornicator (Gertrude) and a chaste virgin (Ophelia), and this division demonstrates the conflict between Hamlet’s incestuous desire and his defense against it. What distinguishes Shakespeare’s tragedy from earlier myths and legends is the introduction of the theme of incest and sexuality. Hamlet’s death, which occurs only after Gertrude’s death, is also explained as caused by his wish to be united with her in death. Assessing Shakespeare as the first modern man who delved into inner conflicts instead of external struggles, Ernest Jones further elaborates on the themes of parricide and incest. Hamlet unconsciously sees his other self in his murderous and incestuous uncle and thus is able to kill the villain only by killing himself. Reconstructing hypothetically Hamlet’s infantile years, Jones sees little Hamlet, excessively loved by his mother and then disappointed by his mother’s sexual betrayal, grow into a misogynist who displaces his repugnance against his mother onto Ophelia. Jones’s study culminates in his argument that frustrated by his mother’s betrayal and defending against his incestuous desire, he harbors a matricidal impulse against his mother and this impulse may be a solution to his Oedipus complex. Rank’s and Jones’s studies develop three important points from Freud’s original view. First, focusing on the theme of incest and sexuality, they shift the critical attention from father to mother. Secondly, they attempt to explain the completion of Hamlet’s revenge and his consequent death in addition to his hesitation. Finally, in so doing, they shed light on the dissolution of his Oedipus complex as well as Oedipal feelings. These are the points critically developed later by another successor of Freud, Jacques Lacan. This essay aims at a close examination of the psychoanalytic interpretations of Hamlet, initiated by Sigmund Freud and developed by Otto Rank and Ernest Jones. Psychoanalysis is often indicted of monotonously reducing literary works within a narrow psychoanalytic model, omitting those elements which do not fit the model, and thus distorting the literature. The charge of monotonous reductionism, however, can equally be brought against the critical tendency that lumps all psychoanalytic readings into one category and thereby elides the differences and permutations within them. The history of psychoanalytic criticism of Hamlet from Freud through Rank to Jones shows important changes and developments that ultimately anticipates Jacques Lacan’s innovative reading. Freud ascribes Hamlet’s hesitation over his revenge to his unconscious self-reproach that he is fundamentally not different from Claudius who fulfilled his infantile Oedipal wish to kill his father and sleep with his mother. Freud also sees the Danish prince as a hysteric who expresses repulsion for sexuality in his relationship with Ophelia. Freud later mentions Hamlet as a typical melancholic who severely debases himself after the loss of a love object. Freud’s account of melancholy yields an interpretation that after losing his mother as a love object, Hamlet identifies with her and incorporates her into his ego, mounts a harsh attack upon her, and then finally commits suicidal self-destruction. Highlighting Hamlet’s incestuous impulse, Otto Rank zeroes in on the sexual aspects of his Oedipus complex. A mother figure, like a father figure, is divided into a sensual fornicator (Gertrude) and a chaste virgin (Ophelia), and this division demonstrates the conflict between Hamlet’s incestuous desire and his defense against it. What distinguishes Shakespeare’s tragedy from earlier myths and legends is the introduction of the theme of incest and sexuality. Hamlet’s death, which occurs only after Gertrude’s death, is also explained as caused by his wish to be united with her in death. Assessing Shakespeare as the first modern man who delved into inner conflicts instead of external struggles, Ernest Jones further elaborates on the themes of parricide and incest. Hamlet unconsciously sees his other self in his murderous and incestuous uncle and thus is able to kill the villain only by killing himself. Reconstructing hypothetically Hamlet’s infantile years, Jones sees little Hamlet, excessively loved by his mother and then disappointed by his mother’s sexual betrayal, grow into a misogynist who displaces his repugnance against his mother onto Ophelia. Jones’s study culminates in his argument that frustrated by his mother’s betrayal and defending against his incestuous desire, he harbors a matricidal impulse against his mother and this impulse may be a solution to his Oedipus complex. Rank’s and Jones’s studies develop three important points from Freud’s original view. First, focusing on the theme of incest and sexuality, they shift the critical attention from father to mother. Secondly, they attempt to explain the completion of Hamlet’s revenge and his consequent death in addition to his hesitation. Finally, in so doing, they shed light on the dissolution of his Oedipus complex as well as Oedipal feelings. These are the points critically developed later by another successor of Freud, Jacques Lacan.

“By Indirections Find Directions Out”: Indirect Words as Political/Artistic Bullets in Hamlet

이희원 한국중세근세영문학회 2011 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.20 No.1

In a sense Hamlet dramatizes a story of crime and investigation. Claudius killed his brother to be a king; he succeeded in hiding his crime. But Hamlet suspects Claudius as a murderer and starts to investigate the murder suspect secretly. Hamlet also has to hide his inner mind to penetrate into the heart of the suspect. In this situation both Claudius the murder suspect and Hamlet the investigator fully employ the tendency of language to hide, to play, and to show. For both of them, language becomes an effective tool to find the truth about each other while they conceal the truth about themselves. Claudius plays the consummate Machiavellian who uses the language of persuasion, diplomacy, and deception to conceal his crime. He also uses agents or spies in his desperate attempt to penetrate into Hamlet’s real motives without arousing suspicion. Yet he does not dig Hamlet’s secret out before Hamlet himself reveals it. Like Claudius, Hamlet the investigator chooses, as his weapon, the indirect use of language and role-playing because only through guise and wit can he defend himself and strike out against the murder suspect. But Hamlet’s weapon is different from what Claudius uses in his defense. Hamlet’s instrument is, like Claudius’s, a political one to interrogate Claudius, but at the same time it is an artistic one. By using the various indirect forms of language—poetic, dramatic, obscure, bawdy, non-sense words,—Hamlet becomes a kind of artist who can succeed in finding that Claudius is a murderer. Hamlet’s word-play functions as a prelude to his grand symphony of the play-within-play. Just as Claudius manipulates his spies in an effort to ascertain Hamlet’s thoughts, so Hamlet is willing to employ the players for his detection of Claudius’ crime. As revised by Hamlet and presented by the players, “the Murder of Gonzago” becomes “the mouse-trap” to catch Claudius the mouse. For Hamlet the dramatic art is transformed into a pragmatic instrument to find a criminal.

Hamlet and Turnus Compared: Their Views of Death

박우수 한국중세근세영문학회 2017 고전·르네상스 영문학 Vol.26 No.1

It is generally acknowledged that we have two Hamlets in Hamlet: young Hamlet and old. It is Hamlet’s view of death that distinguishes between the two. After undergoing his sea suffering and sea change on his way to England, Hamlet accepts death as inevitable and tries to reconcile himself with it. Here Shakespeare alludes to Virgil’s Turnus as Hamlet’s precedent model. In Virgil’s national epic, Turnus insists on war despite Latinus’ misgivings of death and replies to Latinus that death is cheap at the price of glory (12.49). Turnus puts the soldier’s glory and honour before death, saying that “If I am to die, it is not in my power to / Postpone the hour of it” (neque enim Turno mora libera mortis, 12.74). This stoic acceptance of death characterizes both Turnus and Hamlet as soldier. Unlike the young Hamlet in the first half of the play who is fearful of death and the after-life, the physically rather old and mentally mature Hamlet manifests himself as a soldier and challenges death and accepts its necessity quite positively, not to renounce himself to the course of events. When Hamlet says to Horatio “Let be” (5.2.220), he means more than just a break off of the conversation or the futility of Horatio’s persuasive efforts. When we understand Hamlet as a stoic soldier standing in the shadow of Turnus, we can easily grasp the significance of Hamlet’s funeral as a soldier defying the apprehension of death and Hamlet’s apparent kinship with Fortinbras. Latinus is to Turnus what Horatio is to Hamlet. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is the play of remembrance haunted by and still haunting the Renaissance English education of Virgil.

셰익스피어의 『햄릿』과 테니슨의 『모드』의 비교연구: 생각의 문제

이경옥(Lee, Kyung Ook) 미래영어영문학회 2016 영어영문학 Vol.21 No.1

The current essay has attempted to make a comparative analysis on the problem of thinking between Shakespeare's Hamlet and Tennyson's Maud. For an understanding of the drama Hamlet, as it “makes the play what it is” (Zhang 292), it is important to examine Hamlet’s thinking. Around the time when Hamlet was written, some doubts over human thinking prevailed, although ‘the power of thinking’ is still considered as a core requirement for a man to be entitled as a human being. Such a complicated attribute of human being, i.e. thinking was reflected in Hamlet with a focus on skepticism on thinking. Hamlet himself expressed his doubt on his own thinking in his attempt to gain the validity of the Ghost's reference. Hamlet's questions and reconsiderations of his own thinking, the incomprehensibility of the ghost within human understanding, and Hamlet's wrong judgement and misinterpretation of other people's behavior seemed to indicate Shakespeare's skepticism on human thinking. The most skeptical side on human thinking in Hamlet was represented by Hamlet's solipsism with his own thinking. His thinking on his father's death and his mother's sudden marriage to his own uncle whom he considers inferior to his father cast him into melancholy, pessimistic view toward life, misogyny, and even to death wish. Overwhelmed with his solipsism he was almost driven to insaneness. Tennyson's Maud is a monodrama where a melancholic monomania akin to Hamlet suffered from solipsism with his own thinking. Maud has several things common to Hamlet in that the death of the speaker's father traumatized him and eventually caused him to be isolated from the society and to suffer in melancholia. To note, the strong skepticism of obsessive thinking was more highlighted in Maud than that in Hamlet. Maud's speaker can be considered as a Tennysonian type of Hamlet considering that Tennyson referred to Maud as “Little Hamlet”. To him, Hamlet was a character who suffered from inner pain raised by his obsessive way of thinking and he created a Hamlet-type character in Maud. Through the character, he seemed to raise the problem of solipsistic way of thinking which was more intense than Hamlet's.

호두 껍데기, 자궁, 그리고 햄릿의 감옥 ―『햄릿』과 매큐언의 『호두 껍데기』

지승아 ( Seung-a Ji ) 21세기영어영문학회 2021 영어영문학21 Vol.34 No.4

This article examines Hamlet’s dilemma that turns his ontological question into an ethical practice in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and its adaptation in McEwan’s Nutshell. As a prequel to Hamlet, Nutshell rethinks Hamlet’s dilemma from the perspective of a nine-month-old fetus Hamlet. Hamlet, who feels trapped in a nutshell, wants to die to end his weary life. On the contrary, the fetus Hamlet, who is enclosed tightly in a womb, has a strong will to live. While Hamlet hesitates to avenge his father’s death because he is skeptical about the ghost’s claims, the fetus Hamlet casts aside his thought of revenge even though he witnesses the murder of his father by his mother and uncle. The fetus Hamlet should acquiesce to the murder to be born safe and free outside the prison. Here is his ethical dilemma between his filial duty and desire to experience the world. Hamlet’s death remains in silence, while the fetus Hamlet’s life remains in chaos. The birth of the fetus Hamlet sets him free from the womb but will bring him ceaseless bad dreams. Although Nutshell can be read as McEwan’s answer to Hamlet’s silence, the fetus Hamlet’s chaos, however, like a Möbius strip, seems to curve back to the enigmatic silence. This claustrophobic loop symbolizes Hamlet’s dilemma from the womb and the prison to the castle Elsinore and the nutshell. The enigmatic silence in Hamlet still leaves us a very tough task to report Hamlet’s tragic narrative properly.

『햄릿』에 대한 19세기의 음악적 해석: 베를리오즈, 리스트, 차이코프스키의 < 햄릿 >을 중심으로

이재용 ( Jae Yong Lee ) (사)음악사연구회 2015 음악사연구 Vol.4 No.-

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (c.1599~1602), among the best of Shakepeare`s tragedies, presents realistic and round characters and portrays various conflicts and inner struggles in depth. Since it deals with a wide variety of human nature that can be encountered in all ages, Hamlet has remained most-reflecting and most-analyzed play to this day. Hamlet has proved a pervasive influenced in different art forms, particularly from the early nineteenth century. It was recreated into many artistic works of different genres, each of that adopted different kind of themes and meanings from Hamlet`s dramatic structure. Nineteenth-century composer also explored Hamlet in diverse views and perspectives, and eventually projected them in their musical works. Berlioz composed Tristia (1844) depicting the death of Hamlet and Ophelia, in which he showed the thought on the death as a liberation in Hamlet. Liszt suggested an unconventional interpretation of the character of Hamlet. In his Symphonic Poem Hamlet (1858), Hamlet stood out as a modern hero with rational reason, not as a passive and indecisive figure. Tchaikovsky, though, in his Overture-fantasia Hamlet (1888), presented a rather conventional Hamlet, and narrated his love with Ophelia as well as his internal struggle caused by the revenge of his father. Hamlets, recreated in musical forms, are very different to each other, according to the themes and meanings that each composer took. It is because composer`s musical interpretation put a new life on the literary work. A study on Berlioz` Tristia, Liszt`s Hamlet, and Tchaikovsky`s Hamlet is an interesting example, indicating the musical outcome can vary depending on the composer`s interpretation of the literary work.

『햄릿』의 각색과 영화적 변용

박민영(Park, Minyoung) 국제언어문학회 2017 國際言語文學 Vol.- No.36

이 논문은 셰익스피어의 『햄릿』을 원작으로 한 영화의 각색과 영화적 변용 양상을 ‘원작의 재현’ ‘원작의 번안’ ‘원작의 전복’으로 나누어 살펴봤다. 2장 ‘원작의 재현’에서는 올리비에, 제피렐리, 그리고 브래너의 햄릿 영화를 논했다. 올리비에 감독의 <햄릿>(1948)은 햄릿 영화의 원조로서, 고뇌하는 인간으로서의 햄릿의 성격을 강조했다. 올리비에는 햄릿의 고뇌가 오이디푸스 콤플렉스에 근거한다고 보았다. 제피렐리 감독의 <햄릿>(1990)은 오이디푸스 콤플렉스라는 올리비에의 영화적 시각을 계승했지만, 햄릿의 성격은 사색가에서 행동가로 새롭게 해석했다. 셰익스피어의 원작을 가장 충실하게 각색한 영화는 브래너 감독의 <햄릿>(1997)이다. 브래너의 <햄릿>에는 원작이 내포하고 있는 정치적 의미가 그대로 담겨있으며, 그에 따라 셰익스피어 작품에 대한 심층적인 감상을 유도한다. 3장 ‘원작의 번안’에서는 앨머레이더와 펑 샤오강의 영화를 분석했다. 앨머레이더 감독의 <햄릿 2000>(2000)은 원작을 2000년 미국의 뉴욕시를 배경으로 번안했다. 앨머레이더는 원작에 동시대 청년들의 상처를 투영함으로써 “연극은 자연을 비추는 거울”이라는 셰익스피어의 문학적 견해를 적극적으로 실천했다. 중국의 영화감독 평 샤오강의 <야연(夜宴)>(2006)은 원작을 중국을 배경으로 중국어로 번안했다. 이 영화는 햄릿이 아닌 거트루드가 이야기를 이끌어 간다. 영화 <야연>의 의의는 지금까지 부당하게 평가되었던 한 여성의 내면에 주목하여 그 목소리에 귀 기울였다는 점이다. 『햄릿』의 번안 영화들은 셰익스피어의 작품이 시간과 공간의 경계를 넘어 보편적인 공감을 이끌어낼 수 있다는 사실을 다시 한 번 확인해준다. 4장 ‘원작의 전복’에서는 카우리스마키와 스토파드의 영화를 살펴봤다. 카우리스마키 감독의 <햄릿 장사를 떠나다>(1987)는 원작을 비틀고 냉소하는 블랙코미디다. 그는 셰익스피어의 『햄릿』을 현대 자본주의적인 관점에서 해석하여, 최후의 승자는 노동자여야 한다고 역설한다. 스토파드 감독의 <로젠크란츠와 길덴스턴은 죽었다>는 원작의 이면이야기다. 이 영화는 원작과 연계됨과 동시에 그것을 해체하며, 『햄릿』이 담고 있는 삶과 죽음의 문제를 현대적으로 재해석했다. 카우리스마키와 스토파드의 영화는 셰익스피어 원작의 영화가 끊임없이 진화하고 있음을 보여준다. This study examines the aspects of film adaptations and dramatization of Hamlet in terms of ‘representation,’ ‘adaptation’ and ‘inversion’ of the original work. Chapter 2 addresses ‘Representation’ of Hamlet with the films such as Laurence Olivier’s, Franco Zeffirelli’s and Kenneth Branagh’s. Laurence Olivier’s Hamlet (1948) is the very first of the Hamlet films, stressing the character of Hamlet as a human in agony. He presumed that Hamlet’s agony is originated from Oedipus complex. Franco Zeffirelli’s Hamlet (1990) is in the same line with the predecessor’s in terms of Oedipus complex, but Hamlet’s character changed from a thinker to an activist. Branagh’s Hamlet (1997) is the most faithful to the original story with all the political implications kept alive, accordingly inducing in-depth appreciation of a Shakespeare’s work. Chapter 3 analyzes Almereyda"s and Feng Xiaogang’s film in terms of ‘adaptation.’ Almereyda"s Hamlet 2000 (2000) is an adaptation set in New York in the year of 2000. He genuinely put into practice Shakespeare’s literary view, ‘A play is a mirror that reflects nature’ by embracing the contemporary youths’ pain. Feng Xiaogang’s The Banquet (Ye Yan: 2006) is a Chinese adaptation set in China. The movie’s main character is not Hamlet, but Gertrude. The significance of this adaptation is that it focuses on a woman’s inner voice which has been largely underestimated or unfairly estimated. These adaptations show that Shakespeare’s works can go beyond temporal and spatial boundaries and create universal responses. Chapter 4 deals with Aki Kaurismaki’s and Tom Stoppard’s film inversion of Hamlet. Kaurismaki’s Hamlet Goes Business (1987) is a black comedy which distorts and sneers at its original work. He interprets Hamlet from the modern capitalist point of view and insists that the final winner should be laborers. Tom Sroppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead (1990) is a supplement to the original story; it is connected with the original, deconstructing as well as reinterpreting the question of life and death from the original story. Kaurismaki’s and Tom Stoppard’s movies show that films based on Shakespeare’s works are constantly evolving.

국립극단 <햄릿>에 나타난 배우의 과제들 - 배우 이봉련을 중심으로

이주영 한국공연문화학회 2022 공연문화연구 Vol.- No.44

In the study, I examined the scene of an actress, Lee Bong-ryeon, meeting Hamlet of the drama <Hamlet>, which helped Lee Bong-ryeon to win the Best Female Actress award. To understand the meeting process of the actress Lee Bong-ryeon and Hamlet, I have made an attempt to analyze a variety of tasks that the actress should contemplate and resolve to act. The acting spectrum and career of the actress, Lee Bong-ryeon, who have assimilated with diverse characters through many productions, are the key to unravel the link between Lee Bong-ryeon and Hamlet. This article have identified diversely varied scenes in <Hamlet> due to the adaptation by a writer, Jung Jin-se, along with Shakespeare’s original work. The result of the study shows that Hamlet in the drama <Hamlet> was her role to play in that the actress Lee Bong-ryeon have participated in a production that dramatized a historical problem linked to the same era as an individual and actress, who lives in the same era, playing Hamlet in the drama <Hamlet>, trying to access to here in modern times which is not an actual Hamlet of <Hamlet> released in Queen Elizabeth era. In addition, through the drama <Hamlet>, the actress Lee Bong-ryeon has presented the appearance of Hamlet like —being free from the distinction between women and men, expressing the emotion such as madness, hatred and anger confidently and smoothly, and having an excellent swordsmanship that people expect from Hamlet— with different abilities, which she can covey as an actress. Through the following production work, this article could pin-spot the discussion of her contemplation and tasks, which Lee Bong-ryeon had as the actress to play Hamlet, and, at the same time, her value as the actress who successfully carried out her tasks. 본 연구에서는 배우 이봉련이 백상예술대상 연극 부분 여자 최우수연기상을 안겨준 <햄릿>의 햄릿과 만나는 과정을 고찰하였다. 배우 이봉련이 햄릿과 만나는 과정을 이해하기 위해, <햄릿>에서 배우 이봉련이 연기적으로 고민하고 해결해야 하는 여러 과제들을 분석하였다. 그간 여러 작품을 통해 다양한 캐릭터를 소화해 온 배우 이봉련의 연기 스펙트럼과 경력은 ‘배우 이봉련‘-’햄릿’ 사이에 놓인 고리를 풀어주는 열쇠라 할 수 있다. 이를 위해 본고는 셰익스피어의 원작과 함께 정진새 작가의 각색으로 인해 <햄릿>에서 다양하게 변주된 상황들을 파악하였다. 연구 결과, 엘리자베스 시대에 발표된 <햄릿>의 햄릿이 아닌 지금/여기와 접속하고자 하는 <햄릿>의 햄릿을 연기하는 배우 이봉련은 동시대를 살아가는 한 개인이자 배우로서, 그리고 동시대와 연결되어 있는 역사적 문제를 극화한 작업에 함께했고 그 성과를 보여주었다는 점에서 <햄릿>의 햄릿은 그녀가 맡아야 할 배역이었다. 또한 배우 이봉련은 <햄릿>을 통해 여성과 남성의 구분에서 벗어난 인간으로서의 햄릿, 광증·증오·분노 등의 감정을 과감하고 매끄럽게 표출하는 햄릿, 햄릿에게 기대하는 뛰어난 검술 능력을 갖춘 햄릿 등 연기자로서 보여줄 수 있는 다양한 능력과 햄릿의 모습을 무대 위에서 선보였다. 본고는 해당 작업을 통해 ‘햄릿’을 연기하기 위해 배우 이봉련이 연기자로서 가졌을 고민이자 과제를 논의하는 것과 동시에 이를 성공적으로 수행한 배우 이봉련의 연기자로서의 가치를 조명할 수 있었다.