Sir Ian McKellen recently characterized the film “Hamnet” as “improbable,” suggesting that Shakespeare’s inspiration was not derived from family life. While McKellen’s critique stems from a lifetime of engagement with Shakespeare’s works, it raises a critical point about the distinction between historical accuracy and emotional truth, which is the essence of the narrative that “Hamnet” seeks to portray.
This film operates in the realm of poetic truth—a tradition that has existed long before Shakespeare. It does not claim historical precision but rather strives to evoke universal emotions. This perspective aligns with Aristotle’s distinction in “Poetics,” emphasizing that while history recounts factual events, poetry—which can encompass film—reflects what might resonate on a human level.
“Hamnet” explores the emotional repercussions of a child’s death on Shakespeare’s marriage, inviting viewers to contemplate the nature of grief within that family dynamic. It focuses on the possibilities of emotional experience rather than asserting historical events. To demand that the film adhere to strict historical standards overlooks the artistic license that allows for deeper emotional exploration.
A comparison can be made to the life of a plumber; he may not be motivated by a romantic notion of plumbing but rather by the desire to support his family. Although the job may not stem from direct familial inspiration, the emotional motivation behind his work is palpable. Similarly, while Shakespeare did not explicitly write “Hamlet” in response to his son’s death, the emotional landscape shaped by grief and love may resonate within his creative process.
Critics, including McKellen, question aspects of the film, such as Anne Hathaway’s perceived ignorance of the theatre, misinterpreting her response. In reality, her emotional turmoil arises from witnessing her husband’s grief being publicly laid bare—a rawness that illustrates human connection and vulnerability rather than historical accuracy.
“Hamnet” offers a poignant portrayal of Shakespeare not as a distant, marble statue but as a flawed human being who experienced love and loss. The film emphasizes that even great figures possess their complexities and emotions. Rather than sanitizing Shakespeare, it endeavors to humanize him, underscoring that legends were once real people with genuine feelings.
Criticism aimed at “Hamnet” often appears to reflect a disapproval of its very existence as a creative interpretation of Shakespeare’s life. Artistic expression does not require sanction; it flourishes through the recognition of shared human experiences. “Hamnet” captures the essence of emotional storytelling, reminding its audience that love and grief are authentic feelings that transcend historical documentation.
Ultimately, the film posits that creativity springs from the fabric of life itself, encompassing the full spectrum of human experience, including the trials of love and loss, which do not require academic validation to be acknowledged as real.