Spectres of Shakespeare:Ong Keng Sen’s Search: Hamlet and the Intercultural Myth

Arguably, the myth of Shakespeare is a myth of universality. Much has been written about the dramatic, thematic and ‘humanistic’ transference of Shakespeare’s works: their permeability, transcendence of cultures and histories, geographies and temporalities. Located within this debate is a belief that this universality, among other dominating factors, is founded upon the power and poeticism of Shakespeare’s language. Subsequently, if we acknowledge Frank Kermode’s assertion that “the life of the plays is the language” and “the secret (of Shakespeare’s works) is in the detail,” what then becomes of this myth of universality, and how is Shakespeare’s language ‘transferred’ across cultures? In Asian intercultural adaptations, language becomes the primary site of confrontation as issues of semantic accuracy and poetic affiliation abound. Often, the language of the text is replaced with a cultural equivalent or reconceived with other languages of the stage – song and dance, movement and music; metaphor and imagery consequently find new voices. Yet if myth is, as Roland Barthes propounds, a second-order semiotic system that is predicated upon the already constituted sign, here being language, and myth is parasitical on language, what happens to the myth of Shakespeare in these cultural re-articulations? Wherein lies the ‘universality’? Or is ‘universality’ all that it is – an insubstantial (mythical) pageant? Using Ong Keng Sen’s Search Hamlet (2002), this paper would examine the transference of myth and / as language in intercultural Shakespeares. If, as Barthes argues, myths are to be understood as metalanguages that adumbrate social hegemonies, intercultural imaginings of Shakespeare can be said to expose the hollow myth of universality yet in a paradoxical double-bind reify and reinstate this self-same myth.