Initially, when I was preparing for one of my presentations this semester, I intentionally chose The Hamletmachine by Heiner Müller, because it seemed the most intriguing and engaging that can be strong enough to even conjure physical and embodied reactions from my audience. This proved useful in the representation of the abject by Julia Kristeva and also provided a display for the constitution of the subject. Moreover, for me the most interesting part is the introduction of the machine into this equation that can take various positions, such as an abject or as a part of the subject, not just being an object.
My research topic that is rooted in the relationship between the human and the machine and also in the postmodern is tied to The Hamletmachine in multiple ways. First of all, Müller’s work is foundational in light of the identity crisis that is the result of the postmodern paradigm shift. This transitionary period sees the deconstruction of traditions and categories, which results in both shaking the performative aspects of society and its building blocks. Second, the play also signals a change in the narrative sphere as it focuses plainly on the subject and the micro- and macrodynamics that constitutes it. Third, by embracing the self-conflicting Hamlet as the titular character and the protagonist, the drama also elevates Shakespeare into the cavalcade of utopias and dystopias as characters conceived by the early modern err in the cyberpunk space where the man is fused with the machine. In this chaotic representation Hamlet and Shakespeare become the symbols that are like magnets for the fragments of the human as it is shattered into million pieces in order to be rebuilt in a novel manner.
Mostly, my interest at first was piqued by the vivid scenes that are full of power, agency and crisis. Hamlet and Ophelia are recategorized and they are also turned inside out, similarly as Shakespeare also tried to reveal what is under the flesh. However, in the postmodern, more focus is put on the mind and the unravelling of its mysteries. Almost as if, the early modern started to peel the layers of the human only to arrive to the layers of the mind, which we are trying to peel off at the moment to what is under and what makes it.
Additionally, these vivid scenes are also violent and bloody. This is an important notion, because the play is not just an allegory or a representation of the abject, but it can also be viewed as Žižek’s notion of violent awakening from ideology. This in the end constitutes a desire for escape and running for the subject, where the almost unavoidable coping mechanism switched and rather naturally led to the unity of man and machine. Which in this manner can also be interpreted in a positive light as ideology can give you a protection from the unknown but all the more sorrowful beyond.
Moreover, it can be viewed upon the basis of the theatre of cruelty, a notion that explores the cruel nature and effects of the wakening. The theatre of cruelty aims to shed light on the process that separates us from the real by making us feel and experience without filter. This of course is cruel and similarly terrifying and violent as in Žižek’s case. However, the focus in this theory is on the raw and unfiltered experience that brings us closer to the real that is independent of ideology. Cruelty in this manner is the feeling that outside of the subject position and behind the shielding nature of ideology there are immense and vivid feelings of existence that are also chaotic. This can only be felt if the subject position is pushed to its limits before it disappears. For these purposes the staging of the play or even the narrative of the play has to operate with violent scenes, gore and has to provide an interaction with the abject. And The Hamletmachine also does this in order to get the audience react instinctively and in an embodied manner with something that precedes the subject and the filter of ideology.
Therefore, Müller’s work becomes one of the most challenging plays to stage. While reading and now rereading the drama, I was constantly playing with the idea of how to stage this play. The themes and topics are very absurd and are less rooted in a graspable believable ordinary setting, than other contemporary ones. While, I do not write this to discredit any plays, because anything can have depth and can be open for interpretation, of course; however, the more a play is firmly rooted in a conventional setting the easier it is stage to make it accessible for mass audiences. For The Hamletmachine to work, the actors, the director and the audience all have to work together in order to bring this play alive. The staging can include different levels of gore and disgust, but can also work with the light or the division of space. I wonder how sound could also add to the manipulation of focus here; for instance, something unrhythmic or dyssynchronous could add to the enhancement of embodied responses.
Furthermore, by involving the audience in this manner, the play becomes a laboratory for the mind of the individuals that sit in among the audiences. As I introduced above, awakening or simply just the revelation of the processes of ideology are violent in nature, because the subject is fighting to keep these intact, because these aspects also constitute the socially positioned subject and without ideology there is no subject. The question is then what is outside of ideology? Similarly to the theory of the theatre of cruelty, the play also finds its foundation in gore, violence and in an interaction with the abject. As a result, this makes the audience react in a somatic manner – instinctively – as they are tempted with the undressing of their mind from its shackles to feel and experience the real without filters. However, these filters are ideology on the one hand and the constituted and interpellated subject itself on the other.
This nearly impossible endeavour still manages to succeed on other levels, because while the play also deals with the issues of identity, sexuality, gender and rebirth, it also moves on from them. In an age where the machine is no longer mastered by the human and control is slowly slipping out from our hands, the machine also becomes part of the constitution process. It is now an integral part as it also occupying our innermost and even repressed fears as it also starts to dwell among the taboos. This also introduces the problematization of what is the human in the shadow of technology?
The Hamletmachine in this manner envisions the unity of man and machine to create a new subject that can co-exist with the machine or even use it to find solace. Hamlet suffers from the postmodern condition and the merge becomes a solution as he can only run from the real that is too raw for him. This merge becomes the attempt of formulating a new category amidst the storm of deconstruction that sees the dissolution of past foundations, but fails to provide new ones.
All in all, I picked The Hamletmachine by Müller, because it introduces new horizons in relation to the micro- and macrodynamics and also very actively and vividly engages the audience in its own experiment with the psyche and the subject. It manages to put agency on the test and reverse the roles, while also proposing the ability for rebirth from the human side. This can be triggered by language and classification (or categorization). As a result, the laboratory that the play creates out of the theatre becomes a place that challenges the already constituted subject to interact with the ideological building blocks that make the audience consume endlessly as their agency slips out of their hands to trade free will for unending and unlimited pleasure. Thus, a violent reaction awakens in the body and the mind as they resist to keep the constructed reality intact.