The action of the playlet took place behind the scenes of a provincial playhouse during the rehearsals of Hamlet. Hence the title Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Act One began with the actors gathering to rehearse. The first to appear were two actors, one of whom, Tigrov (Chekhov came up with the name), who played Hamlet’s father’s ghost, told stories about his many years of troup-ing in backwoods provincial towns. His generally very funny account had one purely Chekhovian detaiclass="underline"
“You arrive and put up at the ‘Grand Hotel’ — every dump in the sticks has its ‘Hotel Europa’ or ‘Grand Hotel’ . . .”
The first act was to end with a scandal and general bedlam.
The second act was supposed to show a scene from Hamlet.
After thinking about the first act, I sketched out a few combinations and a plan for the first act to the end. My inexperience in writing for the stage was expressed in the fact that, instead of a scandal and general bedlam, the first act was filled with lots of dialogue, although comic and sufficiently lively. Having kept a copy for myself, I sent the original Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, along with my rough drafts, to Chekhov and began to await the results of a letter.
Chekhov replied with a short postcard; admitting that my efforts to work out and finish the first act were not entirely hopeless, he promised after the production of Ivanov to send me a more detailed letter with notes on my supposed mistakes.
On November 27 I received that letter.
Chekhov to Lazarev-Gruzinsky, November 15, 1887:
The fact is that when I gave the actors a brief account of the plot of Hamlet, Prince ofDenmark, they expressed a burning desire to play it no later than January, i.e., as soon as possible. Strike while the iron is hot. Have you written anything? Is it coming out as needed? Can you manage the plot and the stage conventions? Be that as it may, hurry and write me in detail what you have thought up, written down and have planned out. At the same time send me my manuscript (rolled into a scroll), keeping a copy for yourself. I will combine mine with yours, I will think up and immediately inform you of my intentions and projects. Conditions: 1) utter confusion, 2) each mug must be characteristic and speak its own language, 3) no dull spots, 4) uninterrupted action, 5) roles must be written for Gradov, Svetlov, Schmidthof, Kiselevsky, Solovtsov, Vyazovsky, Valentinov, Kosheva, Krasovskaya and Borozdina, 6) criticism of theatrical practices, without criticism our vaudeville would be meaningless.
While awaiting the speediest answer I recommend you, dear sir, to lie in bed, take your brains in hand and start cogitating; after long cogitation you will sit at your desk and sketch out your plan.
Lazarov-Gruzinsky to Chekhov, November 21, 1887:
I admit that your “Conditions” for a vaudeville are very clear, very correct and very necessary; what’s needed are 1. complete mayhem, 2. absence of dull spots, 3. characteristics, 4. criticism, 5. action. As to the casting of roles, I am not familiar with the lines of business of Svetlov, Solovtsov, Vyazovsky, Valentinov and Kosheva.6 Didn’t Svetlov play Khlestakov, or am I wrong? Vyazovsky is a comic old man . . . Kes ke say Valentinov? Maybe this can all be worked out?
[. . .] I keep thinking about Act 2. True, it isn’t suitable to present a scene from Hamlet (i.e., the early scenes). It would be better to set the second act of the vaudeville “backstage.” Let Hamlet be going on, but our action unfolds behind the scenes: then the mixup with the wreathes is possible and anything you want, and even the general donnybrook. . . . In a best-case scenario the general fate of the vaudeville will be this: you will get Act 1 and the synopsis of Act 2 by November 29; you’ll take a few days to read and consider it; meanwhile I will be busy with Act 2; on the 21st I’ll come to Moscow (in the evening), on the 22 (Tuesday morning) I’ll pay you a call, and 22–23–24 the vaudeville will receive its final form. [. . .] P.S. On second thought I’m changing the plan: first, you asked that I send you back your manuscript, I’m sending it; second, I’ll hold on to the synopsis I have and planned (the ending), and wait for your answer, instructions, changes etc.
After your lines: Tigrov’s speech; the impresario runs in and wants to carry off Tigrov by force, Tigrov is undaunted, the impresario disappears in horror; second attack on Borshchov; Borshchov lays into Tigrov and says that, as long as he lives, he will not yield; appearance of Tigrov’s wife, incited by the impresario; she persuades Tigrov to leave the stage, entreats him, loses her temper, but when Tigrov reminds her of the impresario’s insult, the old woman sides with her husband; Borshchov is exhausted; Tigrov sends his wife to help him; the reporter appears (on stage; how are we to put him in the orchestra?), approving of the unmasking of Tigrov and praising his exposure; but when Tigrov refers to the press — the reporter gets embarrassed etc. Tigrov shifts to the immorality of actr[esses]. The impresario for the second times wants to take him off by force and for the second time suffers defeat. Tigrov talks. Wishing to worm his way into the impresario’s good graces, the prompter crawls out of his box, grabs the gaping Tigrov by the legs, stagehands run on and carry off Tigrov. The impresario is in transports of delight. But in a minute Tigrov appears again, devoid of fur coat and coattails (“Treachery may triumph for but a moment! . . .”). Unmasking of Ophelia, the engineer’s procession, Hamlet’s rage. Unmasking of Gertrude—Svireleva. Gertrude demands that the impresario shut Tigrov up; dialogue of Gertrude and the impresario; Gertrude faints. The impresario horrified agrees to do anything so long as Tigrov shuts up; Tigrov forces him to take an oath before the audience (“Swear” from Hamlet) and leaves the stage. Hamlet runs on stage, followed by Ophelia, who is trying in vain to convince him. Hamlet addresses himself to the now exultant (over his conclusion of the business with Tigrov) impresario and refuses to act. The impresario is dumb struck. Curtain.
In the second act I think there ought to be (as you already said) a fight between Babelmandebsky and the impresario and Tigrov, adding a different sort of confusion.
Chekhov to Lazarev-Gruzinsky, November 26, 1887:
Now about Hamlet
1) Your Hamlet consists entirely of dialogues, which have no organic connections. The dialogues are impossible. With each scene the number of characters has to increase progressively:
By accumulating episodes and characters and connecting them, you will succeed in keeping the stage filled and noisy over the course of the whole act.
You forget that the Tigrovs and Co. feel the eyes of the audience on them at all times. Consequently, Hamlet’s cross-examination of Ophelia as you’ve set it up is impossible. There’s far too much outburst and noise at that point. Hamlet is upset, but at the same time he masks his unhappiness.
3) The press agent can speak only from the orchestra pit. What the hell’s the point of dragging him on stage? He speaks curtly and firmly, Belyankin type.7
4) In Act II a scene from Hamlet has got to be played. In Act I the stage is set up in relation to the audience like this
But in Act II you want to set it up like this: