Next Article in Journal
A Treatise in Disguise: Eschatological Themes in Aquinas’s Commentary on the Parables of Matthew’s Gospel
Previous Article in Journal
Reviewing the Complexity of Ecumenism and the Missio-Cultural Factors Promoting Church Cooperation in Mberengwa, Zimbabwe, and Beyond
Previous Article in Special Issue
Semantic Restoration of Snake-Slaying in Chan Buddhist Koan
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Worship of Tian, Transgressive Rites, and Judged Ghosts: The Religious Transformation of Hamlet in Peking Opera

School of Foreign Languages, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 102488, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Religions 2025, 16(8), 1022; https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16081022
Submission received: 10 June 2025 / Revised: 3 August 2025 / Accepted: 4 August 2025 / Published: 7 August 2025

Abstract

Peking opera The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan reinterprets Shakespeare’s Hamlet by integrating supernatural elements and traditional rituals from Chinese folk religion. The religious transformation is revealed through the reworking of lines, incorporation of ritual traditions, and portrayal of supernatural figures. The divine entity that is invoked in Hamlet’s prayers (2.2.169, 5.2.316) and Claudius’s repentance (3.3.36–72) is translated as tian 天 (Heaven) in Revenge, thus introducing the concepts of the worship of tian and tianming 天命 (Mandate of Heaven). Revenge also adapts Claudius’s command of “give me some light” (3.2.261) by associating it with ancient exorcisms, thereby dramatizing his attempts to conceal the guilt for regicide. Ophelia’s “maimed rites” (5.1.208) are depicted as a deviation from Confucian funeral rites in Revenge, reflected in the simplified funeral banners and Hamlet’s transgressive mourning. The “sulphurous and tormenting flames” (1.5.3) and the morning cock’s crow (1.2.217) are reinterpreted through the introduction of the judicial system of the underworld. These changes are not merely transitions in performing conventions but reflect the deep connection between folk religion and traditional Chinese theater through these prayers, rituals, and supernatural elements, thus creating a specific theatrical “field” in which Chinese folk religion interacts with Western classics.

1. Introduction

The supernatural elements of religion, such as ghosts and retribution, often serve as indispensable themes for theatre. The gestures, symbolic actions, and symbols in religious rituals provide inspiration for theatrical performances. In Ancient Art and Ritual, Jane Ellen Harrison (1913) demonstrated the connections between sacrificial rites and performative arts through her research on Greek drama, offering influential perspectives that stimulated later research on the relationship between theatre and religion. As for the connection between traditional Chinese theatre and folk religion, Paul Kuritz suggested that Chinese theatre “seems to have begun in the exorcist rites of the wu priests during the early feudal age of the Zhow Dynasty” (Kuritz 1988, p. 84). In The History of the Chinese Theater (Zhongguo Xiju Shi 中國戲劇史), Tanaka Issei (たなかいっせい) (Tanaka 2011) traced the origins of Chinese theatre to rural ritual practices, particularly examining the interplay between shamanic performances and secular ceremonial traditions. In Traditional Chinese Theatre and Chinese Religions (Zhongguo Xiqu yu Zhongguo Zongjiao 中國戲曲與中國宗教), Yude Zhou (1990) demonstrated that traditional Chinese theatre adapts certain religious rituals from Confucianism, Buddhism, and Daoism into performing conventions. While there are sufficient studies on the interconnections between traditional Chinese theatre and folk religion, relevant studies on how Chinese folk religion influences intercultural adaptations, particularly when reinterpreting source texts that are imbued with religious elements, remain limited.
As Joe Lee Davis observed, Hamlet abounds with religious motifs, such as “a divinity that shapes our ends”, “a special providence in the fall of a sparrow”, and “an honest ghost” versus “a damned ghost” (Davis 1943, p. 426). James S. Baumlin (2012) also argued that several symbols in Hamlet reflect a contemplation of the loss of the Catholic Last Rites in the Protestant world. In Hamlet in Purgatory, Stephen Greenblatt (2013) explained that the Ghost’s statement, “Doomed for a certain term to walk the night/And for the day confined to fast in fires” (1.5.10–11), reflects the Catholic concept of purgatory. As for intercultural adaptations of Hamlet, these religious motifs need to be reconsidered and reinterpreted within the framework of indigenous religions. There are numerous examples of this, such as the allegorical use of the hinadan (a traditional Japanese doll tier) in Ninagawa Yukio’s 1998 production of Hamlet (Brokering 2007, p. 378) and the shamanistic Ophelia in Kim Jung-ok’s 1993 Korean adaptation of Hamlet (Lee 2011, p. 108). By incorporating indigenous religious elements and rituals, these adaptations not only make Hamlet accessible to their target audience but also enrich their thematic reinterpretations. The Peking opera adaptation of Hamlet, The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan1 王子復仇記 (henceforth “Revenge”), also incorporates many indigenous supernatural elements and religious rituals, such as the exorcism and the Chinese underworld. However, previous research has primarily focused on restaging the play through the conventions of chang 唱 (singing), nian 念 (speaking), zuo 做 (acting), and da 打 (combat). For example, Weimin Li (2008) examined how Revenge’s intertextuality manifests through transforming from blank verse to qupai 曲牌 (tune patterns) and establishing connections between Western tragedy and Chinese kuqing xi 苦情戲 (bitter situation drama); Malcolm Moore (2011) observed that while Revenge’s warbling falsettos and sudden acrobatics might seem strange, it facilitates the Western audience’s understanding of Chinese theatrical performance; and Lyn Gardner (2011) suggested that Revenge defies all Western theatrical traditions and turns into a combination of exotic and familiar, ancient and strangely modern; Baorong Gong (2012) analyzed how the intercultural translation and Peking opera’s performing conventions influence Revenge’s reinterpretation of Hamlet; F. Liu (2019) argued that Revenge retains Hamlet’s delay through Peking opera’s performing conventions and traditional Chinese stage design. While scholars have predominantly concentrated on the stage representation of Revenge, they have often overlooked the influence of Chinese folk religion on the supernatural elements and traditional rituals of the performance, which reinterpret the religious motifs in Hamlet. Therefore, this study examines how and why indigenous religious elements and rituals are used in Revenge to reinterpret Hamlet.
This study particularly focuses on how Chinese folk religion influences Revenge’s reinterpretations of these religious motifs in Hamlet, such as the appearance of the Ghost (1.1.58–62, 1.4.39–57), Hamlet’s prayers (2.2.169, 5.2.316), and Claudius’s repentance (3.3.36–72), highlighting the unique role of folk religion in traditional Chinese theater.

2. The Multiple Manifestations of the Worship of Tian

The influence of Chinese folk religion is reflected in the alteration of lines in Revenge, in which the object of worship is different from that in Hamlet. For instance, prayers to “God” and “Heaven” are replaced with invocations to tian2 (Heaven), signaling a transition to the concept of worship of tian3. This change not only reflects a shift in the object of prayer but also highlights the role of tianming 天命 (Mandate of Heaven), an essential concept in the worship of tian, shifting the focus of Revenge toward the legitimacy of Yong Shu’s usurpation.

2.1. From “God-a-Mercy” to Merciful “Tian”

In traditional Chinese culture, the term tian plays a central role in mythology, philosophy, and religion. It represents the supreme ruling power that governs the natural laws, human destiny, and the cosmic order. As Yang noted, “The core of classical religion was the worship of Heaven and its pantheon of subordinate deities, and the worship of ancestors” (Yang 1961, p. 23). In Revenge, the concepts of “God” and “Heaven” in Hamlet are transposed into the notion of tian. For instance, in Hamlet, when Polonius asks, “How does my good lord Hamlet?” (2.2.168)4, Hamlet replies, “Well, God-a-mercy” (2.2.169), while in Revenge, the invocation of tian in Zi Dan’s response reflects the belief in the worship of tian. Upon his entrance, Zi Dan holds a book and says, “Tian has mercy to all living beings” 上天垂憫眾生5 (Shi 2008). When Yin Fu bows and attempts to speak with him, Zi Dan repeats the line. This prayer for tian to care for all beings suggests an ancient Chinese belief that “Heaven was the supreme anthropomorphic power of the universe directing the operation of the spiritual world” (Yang 1961, p. 23).
Furthermore, as the supreme power of the spiritual world, tian’s authority on Earth is embodied through the tianzi 天子 (the Son of Heaven), who functions as its direct representative. “Throughout the history of dynastic rule, rulers seek the favor of tian through rituals to ensure harmony between their reign and nature. They also proclaimed themselves as the tianzi to establish a divine image among the common people, thereby legitimizing and sanctifying their family’s rule” (W. Chen 2017, p. 51). In Revenge, when Zi Dan learns the truth about Yong Shu’s murder of Yong Bo from the Ghost, his prayers are not only asking for the mercy of tian but also implicitly expecting that Yong Shu, as the usurped tianzi, will fulfill his duties and care for the people.
The prayer to tian is further reflected in the change in the dialogue between Hamlet and Laertes, where “Heaven” in Hamlet is substituted by “tian” in Revenge. On his deathbed, Laertes seeks Hamlet’s forgiveness:
Exchange forgiveness with me, noble Hamlet,
Mine and my father’s death come not upon thee,
Nor thine on me.
(5.2.313–315)
McGee elaborated on the religious implications of Laertes’ plea: “Only Christ could forgive sins, and without sincere repentance damnation inevitably followed. Laertes’ gesture, therefore, in Elizabethan eyes, does nothing to avert his fate—like Gertrude, Hell is his destination” (McGee 1987, p. 171). While Laertes’ gesture cannot avert his fate, Hamlet’s response functions as a symbol of personal forgiveness and reconciliation. His words, “Heaven make thee free of it. I follow thee” (5.2.316), not only acknowledge Laertes’ grief but also place himself “in the role of father confessor loosening Laertes’ sins through a deathbed absolution” (Stegner 2007, p. 121). Moreover, Hamlet’s response reflects an understanding that ultimate absolution lies beyond human authority, entrusted instead to Heaven. In Revenge, the concept of tian introduces a similar religious belief in forgiveness. When Yin Ze seeks Zi Dan’s forgiveness on his deathbed, he pleads, “Your Highness, let us forgive each other” 殿下, 讓我們彼此寬恕吧 (Shi 2008). Zi Dan responds, “May tian forgive your sins” 但願上天饒恕你的罪行 (Shi 2008). This response not only acknowledges Yin Ze’s transgressions but also emphasizes that ultimate forgiveness is beyond Zi Dan’s personal power, resting instead with the divine power of tian. As Yang observed, “in the religious life of the common people the predominant idea of heaven and the underworld was the moral note of reward for good by the higher deities in heaven and punishment for evil by the fearful authorities of the underworld” (Yang 1961, pp. 12–13). Zi Dan’s response thus reflects the traditional belief in the connection between human virtue and divine justice, epitomized in the idea that “Tian blesses the virtuous and punishes the wicked” 天道福善禍淫 (Ruan 1980, p. 162). Zi Dan’s response also functions as a personal plea to tian and expresses his hope that Yin Ze will be able to receive forgiveness from tian. In short, Revenge transforms Hamlet’s act of forgiveness into a traditional Chinese expression of prayer before tian, while still preserving the emotional and moral tension between Zi Dan and Yin Ze.

2.2. From “I Cannot Repent” to “Please Be Merciful”

Disasters and anomalies were often seen as manifestations of tianyi 天意 (the will of Heaven), reflecting the immoral conduct of rulers and signaling the instability of their rule. In such periods, rulers would engage in the act of repenting to tian; as Liu and Zhang noted, “when the imperial authority faced crises, the country suffered natural disasters, or the regime was in danger, many emperors had to introspect their own faults and issue a Zui Ji Zhao 罪己詔6 to acknowledge their mistakes” (Liu and Zhang 2015, p. 111). Within this cultural framework, Revenge reinterprets Claudius’s repentance in Hamlet as a ritual of self-reproach that Yong Shu is compelled to perform in response to the crisis of his rule.
In Hamlet, Claudius’s repentance (3.3.36–72) reflects his inner struggle, especially when he considers the following:
My fault is past. But O, what form of prayer
Can serve my turn: ‘Forgive me my foul murder’?
That cannot be, since I am still possessed
Of those effects for which I did the murder,
My crown, mine own ambition and my Queen.
(3.3.51–55)
This moment reveals that Claudius cannot obtain genuine forgiveness from Heaven because he is unwilling to give up his throne. Moreover, Claudius acknowledges his failure to repent, lamenting that:
Try what repentance can—what can it not?—
Yet what can it, when one cannot repent?
O wretched state, O bosom black as death,
O limed soul that struggling to be free
Art more engaged. Help, angels, make assay.
(3.3.65–69)
According to Hopkins and Steggle, this phrase, “can repent”, indicates “the Calvinist position that it may be impossible to repent because God may have chosen to withhold from the individual the grace that would enable him or her to do so. Claudius in Hamlet also finds that he cannot repent, even though he wants to” (Hopkins and Steggle 2007, p. 17). Claudius realizes that his confession is disconnected from genuine remorse, and this inability to confess is evident in his later words: “My words fly up, my thoughts remain below./Words without thoughts never to heaven go” (3.3.97–98). However, Revenge reinterprets Claudius’s repentance by depicting Yong Shu, who, unlike Claudius, is motivated to perform a ritual of repentance more out of fear of divine punishment from tian than true confession.
In Revenge, after the play-within-a-play re-enacts Yong Shu’s regicide, Yong Shu kneels and confesses to tian:
Shangtian, can you still forgive me?
I repent.
With utmost reverence and fear, I come to confess.
Shangtian,
May you show mercy and forgive my sins.
上天, 你還能寬恕我麼?/我悔/誠惶誠恐來悔懺/上天哪/但願你慈悲為懷恕罪衍
Yong Shu’s plea to tian, especially the phrase “forgive my sins”, emphasizes his belief that his regicide and usurpation of the throne are already known to tian. Thus, his plea is not only a confession but also reflects his fear of divine punishment. For Yong Shu, the play-within-a-play that shows his regicide at this point becomes a sign of the impending punishment from tian. As stated in Luxuriant Dew of the Spring and Autumn Annals with Commentary (Chun Qiu Fan Lu Yizheng 春秋繁露義證), “Rulers must analyze natural disasters and anomalies to understand tianyi. Tian has its approvals and disapprovals. When confronted with these signs, rulers should engage in introspection to correct their faults, while also observing their tangible effects on the state. Those who understand tianyi accept these signs with reverence rather than resentment, and regard these disasters and anomalies as divine warnings meant to reveal their mistakes and guide them to reform” 謹案災異以見天意 天意有欲也, 有不欲也 所欲所不欲者, 人內以自省, 宜有懲於心; 外以觀其事, 宜有驗于國 故見天意者之於災異也, 畏之而不惡也, 以為天欲振吾過, 救吾失, 故以此報我也 (Dong 2019, p. 229). This framework offers an insight into the cause of Yong Shu’s confession, positioning it as an act that is driven by fear of impending punishment rather than genuine repentance. For Yong Shu, the regicide is not only an act of treason or a manifestation of personal ambition but an affront to tian itself, directly challenging the very order that governs the world. His confession thus turns into a performative act of reverence less than an expression of repentance, a calculated act of obedience that is designed to reassert his submission to tianyi. His repeated plea of “Forgive me” 寬恕我吧 (Shi 2008) further reveals his internal struggle with the belief that “Heaven according to the new outlook was to give expression to its approval of good and punishment for evil by causing a variety of extraordinary phenomena to appear in the skies and on earth” (Yang 1961, p. 108). Therefore, Yong Shu’s repentance in Revenge is not really a prayer for forgiveness in remorse for his regicide but rather a desperate appeal to be able to avoid the divine punishment that he fears.

2.3. The Mandate of Revenge: Tianming’s Command

Tian is endowed with religious and moral attributes, and the concepts of tianli 天理 (the principle of Heaven) and tianming are foundational in interpreting the ancient Chinese religious philosophical system (Zhang et al. 2025). In Revenge, the influence of the worship of tian is not only reflected in Zi Dan’s prayers and Yong Shu’s repentance but also in the decision-making and ritualized actions of both Zi Dan and Yong Shu. In Hamlet, Claudius recognizes Hamlet as “the most immediate to our throne” (1.2.109). In Revenge, Yong Shu fails to designate Zi Dan as his heir and instead seeks to eliminate him in order to consolidate his rule. By violating the primogeniture principle, which “prioritize the eldest son of the primary wife” in the succession system (Liu and Zhang 2015, p. 65), Yong Shu’s murder of Yong Bo and usurpation of the throne are the cause of his anxiety about the legitimacy of tianming, a fear that is rooted in his violation of the traditional royal succession system.
Yong Shu’s anxiety about tianming explains why he perceives Zi Dan as a direct threat to his rule. In Revenge, after observing the interaction between Zi Dan, Yin Fu, and Yin Li, Yong Shu remains unconvinced of Zi Dan’s madness, saying that “Though his speech was incoherent/It bore no mark of madness” 他說話雖然顛倒/卻不像瘋狂 (Shi 2008). He then makes a decision:
Let me draft letters to neighboring kings.
By the bonds of our longstanding friendship,
That they might rid me of Zi Dan—this calamity within my bosom.
待我修書各國君主/看在我等多年交好的份上/替我殺了子丹這個心腹之患
Yong Shu’s decision reflects his fear of Zi Dan as a legitimate threat, whose rightful position under tianming could undermine his own power. This desperate decision stems from his awareness that his rule lacks the divine legitimacy mandated by tian, and from his fear that Zi Dan’s survival could expose him for acting against the orthodox rule of succession. This fear drives Yong Shu to take extreme actions, including having Yin Ze duel with Zi Dan and poisoning his wine, all with the goal of eliminating the most immediate threat to his rule. The concept of tianming in Revenge not only deepens Yong Shu’s internal struggle but also enriches the reinterpretation of Hamlet’s themes. It introduces a powerful motive in Revenge: even though Zi Dan has not learned the truth about Yong Shu’s murder, Yong Shu still feels compelled to eliminate him in order to consolidate his illegitimate rule.
In Revenge, Yong Shu’s actions are shaped by his anxiety about tianming, and Zi Dan is similarly influenced by this notion, particularly in how he attributes certain crimes to Yong Shu. In Hamlet, before Claudius’s death, Hamlet condemns him in the following way:
Here, thou incestuous, damned Dane!
Drink of this potion. Is the union here?
Follow my mother.
(5.2.309–311)
As Bradley described, Claudius is “no tragic character” but rather possesses “a small nature”—“physically weak” and “morally small” (Bradley 2013, p. 138). In Revenge, this moment of Hamlet’s denouncement transforms into a formal indictment of Yong Shu’s crimes, especially when Zi Dan lists his three major crimes before killing him. The personal accusation thus changes into a ritualized act of judgment that reinforces the legitimacy of revenge. These charges include “the murder of the ruler” 弑君, “the usurpation of the throne” 竊國, and “the violation of the ancestral order” 亂宗廟 (Shi 2008). The first two directly demonstrate Yong Shu’s betrayal of the king and violation of the succession system. The third charge, “the violation of the ancestral order”, implies not only Yong Shu’s incestuous marriage to Queen Jiang Rong but also that he violates the royal ancestral hierarchy. Ancestor worship, particularly male ancestor worship, is closely tied to tianming, as the ruler is viewed as the embodiment of the authority of the family and state.
Moreover, loyalty to the ruler is maintained through two primary mechanisms: “First, through ancestor worship, where the ruler is equated with the father, transforming filial piety into loyalty; and second, through the worship of tian, in which the ruler’s authority is mandated by tian and people have to respect tian and obey the ruler” (Liu and Zhang 2015, p. 173). Ancestor worship is not merely a spiritual or religious practice, but for the ruler, it is also a system that reinforces the hierarchical order of society. It ensures that common people view their relationship with the ruler as one that is rooted in filial piety and reverence, thus securing their loyalty to the ruler on both the moral and spiritual levels. This worship, for the royal family, highlights the fact that the throne is both a genealogical mandate and a ritual imperative, as “only the legitimate son may preside over royal ancestral rites” (Liu and Zhang 2015, p. 65), thereby legitimizing his authority by receiving affirmation from the royal ancestors. Based on this logic, in Revenge, this authority is transferred directly to Zi Dan after Yong Bo’s death. By violating this royal succession system, Yong Shu not only destabilizes the dynastic succession but may also have aroused the resentment of the royal ancestors and dishonored the paternal authority that is embodied in the throne. Therefore, Zi Dan’s revenge transcends personal grievance and evolves into a struggle to restore the justice and harmony of the inherent order of tianming.

3. The Collapse of Order: The Exorcism, “Maimed” Funeral Rites, and Divine Punishment

In Revenge, the collapse of order is reflected in Yong Shu’s exorcism and Yin Li’s funeral. Yong Shu’s exorcism not only presents the tradition of exorcism in Chinese folk religion, but also reveals Yong Shu’s effort to erase the haunting reminders of his sins instead of confronting them. At Yin Li’s funeral, the simplified funeral banners and Zi Dan’s kneeling and kowtowing reflect the disruption of Confucian funeral rites. Moreover, the pervasive yin 陰 energy and the pingfeng 屏風7 with the collage long 龍 (dragon) image serve as significant symbols of the impending divine punishment for Yong Shu, signaling the intervention of “Tian of moral principle, the supreme cosmic order” (Fung 2010, p. 27) in restoring the collapsed order caused by Yong Shu.

3.1. The Exorcism: The Disguise of Yong Shu’s Personal Moral Disorder

The motif of ghosts seeking retribution for past injustices is common in Chinese ghost stories. As Poo observed, “For the male ghosts, and some female ghosts as well, revenge for the wrongs they had suffered when alive seems to be one of their deeds most often related in the stories” (Poo 2022, p. 96), reflecting the Chinese belief in supernatural justice, where unresolved grievances in life are settled through supernatural retribution8. In Revenge, this supernatural justice is introduced by adapting Claudius’s plea for “some light” (3.2.261) into Yong Shu’s request for an exorcism. In Hamlet, when Lucianus poisons Gonzago in The Mousetrap, Claudius interrupts with “Give me some light, away” (3.2.261). As Lawrence argued, Claudius is saved by Hamlet’s uncontrolled madness and the insulting remarks about his second marriage in The Mousetrap, which “gives Claudius ample excuse to call for lights and end a disgraceful situation by withdrawing” (Lawrence 1939, p. 734). The light serves as an instrument of dissimulation that enables Claudius to conceal his guilt while disrupting the depiction of his crimes on stage. However, Revenge transforms this light into torches that are used in the exorcism.
In Revenge, after confessing to tian, Yong Shu changes his attitude, blaming Zi Dan for using the play-within-a-play to test him:
Tonight’s affair,
Clearly, it was Zi Dan who intended to test me.
Why should I be afraid?
今晚之事/分明是子丹有意試探於我/我怎麼害怕起來了
Then, he strengthens his resolve to eliminate Zi Dan, declaring that “I must not show mercy” 萬不可心慈手軟哪 (Shi 2008). However, just as Yong Shu makes up his mind, a sudden thought makes him panic. He mutters anxiously,
Hold! Wait!
My murder of Yong Bo was unknown neither to gods nor ghosts.
How could he recount it
As if he witnessed it?
哎呀且住/我謀害兄王之事神鬼不知/怎麼他演示得/如同親眼得見地一般
After a brief pause, Yong Shu seems to think of something, his expression hardens, and he declares the following with growing fear:
Could vengeful ghosts truly exist in this world?
Exorcise the Ghost, exorcise it, come quickly.
Fill this Forbidden City with torches
And light up the darkness for me
莫非世上真有冤魂復仇之事麼/打鬼, 打鬼, 來呀/禁城之內與我遍插松明火把/替寡人照亮這夜幕黑天
The cry of “exorcise the Ghost” marks Yong Shu’s psychological collapse. Once able to redirect his attention towards Zi Dan to control his fear of tian’s punishment, he now finds himself overwhelmed by the terror of supernatural retribution from ghosts. For Yong Shu, after poisoning Yong Bo, it is very likely that the Ghost will take revenge on him for the wrongs that Yong Bo suffered during his life. This terror is rooted in the belief that the ghosts’ malicious behavior “originated from their desire of revenge for the wrongs that they suffered” (Poo 2022, p. 168). Yong Shu’s command to light torches thus becomes a direct reflection of his fear of revenge from the Ghost. His order to “Fill this Forbidden City with torches/And light up the darkness for me” enacts ancient palace exorcisms, in which fire was believed to be “auspicious and efficacious in expelling evil spirits” (Poo 2022, p. 77). Yong Shu’s command to light torches in the Forbidden City can be traced back to the nuo-ritual9 儺儀 during the Zhou Dynasty.
As Rites of Zhou (Zhou Li 周禮) documented, “Fangxiangshi is covered with bear skin, with four golden eyes, and dressed in a black upper robe and red lower garment. Wielding a spear and raising a shield, he leads a hundred participants and performs the seasonal nuo-ritual, to search the palace and expel diseases” 方相氏掌蒙熊皮, 黃金四目, 玄衣朱裳, 執戈揚盾, 帥百隸而時難, 以索室驅疫 (Ruan 1980, p. 851). The role of fire in this ritual is further highlighted in Dong Jing Fu 東京賦, which describes “Blazing fires race like shooting stars, expelling diseases from every corner” 煌火馳而星流, 逐赤疫於四裔 (Xiao 2011, p. 123). In this ritual, fire functions as an instrument of purification, expelling evil spirits from the palace. Therefore, for Yong Shu, who is haunted by the idea that the Ghost will seek revenge on him, performing the nuo-ritual is the most effective way for him to get rid of this fear. However, this exorcism is not merely an attempt to expel evil spirits but also a reflection of Yong Shu’s anxiety about his illegitimate rule. When Yong Shu sees the re-enactment of his murder of Yong Bo in the play-within-a-play, the exorcism that he later demands reveals his attempts to suppress his own inner moral judgment and create the illusion that he bears no guilt for the usurpation. This exorcism thus becomes Yong Shu’s performative act, which aims at diverting attention from the portrayal of his crimes and transforming his moral conflict into an illusory battle between himself and the Ghost, thereby avoiding direct confrontation with his own sins.

3.2. “Such Maimed Rites”: The Disruption of Confucian Funeral Rites

Funerals were not only rites for guiding the dead into the underworld in traditional Chinese society but also embodiments of Confucian ethics and social hierarchy. As Yang noted, “According to the Confucian tradition, which upheld the cult of ancestor worship, the most basic reason for practicing the mortuary and sacrificial rites was to ‘express gratitude toward the originators and recall the beginnings’” (Yang 1961, p. 44). In Revenge, the Confucian tradition is not fully integrated into the depiction of Yin Li’s funeral, echoing the “maimed rites” (5.1.208) of Ophelia’s funeral in Hamlet. Ophelia’s funeral rites are notably incomplete in Hamlet, as Hamlet comments the following:
But soft, but soft awhile, here comes the King,
The Queen, the courtiers. Who is this they follow?
And with such maimed rites? This doth betoken
The corpse they follow did with desperate hand
Fordo it own life. ‘Twas of some estate.
(5.1.206–210)
As Holleran argued, “Ophelia’s ‘maimed’ graveside rites (particular ceremonies) are actually only a part of her larger maimed funeral ritual (a set form of rites)” (Holleran 1989, p. 67). The “maimed” funeral rites are further emphasized by the Priest’s response to Laertes:
Her obsequies have been as far enlarged
As we have warranty. Her death was doubtful;
And but that great command o’ersways the order
She should in ground unsanctified been lodged
Till the last trumpet: for charitable prayers,
Flints and pebbles should be thrown on her.
(5.1.215–220)
The Priest’s statement, particularly his remark that “Her death was doubtful”, serves as the key reason for denying Ophelia’s full church rites. As Greenblatt argued, “what is at stake is not only the communal social judgment upon Ophelia, suspected of suicide, but also the communal ritual assistance given to the dead by the living” (Greenblatt 2013, p. 246). However, in Revenge, there is no such debate or commentary on Yin Li’s funeral, yet certain paraphernalia and rites still deviate from the Confucian tradition.
In Revenge, the coffin-carrying ceremony and the four white banners are the main symbols of Yin Li’s funeral rites on stage. The tradition of using funeral banners in funerals can be traced back to the early periods of Chinese history. As Zhao noted, “Shi 施, Ming 銘, Mingjing 銘旌, Mingjing 明旌, and Liushi 旒施 all refer to funeral banners. Since banners were already documented in Confucius’ funeral rites, this demonstrates that funeral banners had been employed in burial ceremonies by at least the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods” (Zhao 2024, p. 110). For the deceased, these funeral banners provide spiritual guidance, helping to ensure a safe passage to the afterlife; for the family, they function as a public symbol of social status, demonstrating their wealth and influence (Yang 1961, pp. 37–38). As documented in Book of Rites (Li Ji 禮記), “since the dead cannot be personally present, they are instead identified by their funeral banners” 以死者為不可別已, 故以其旗識之 (Ruan 1980, p. 1301). Yet in Revenge, these four blank funeral banners lack the relevant decorative elements and inscriptions to fulfill their ritual purpose of identifying the deceased. “Since the pre-Qin era, Confucian interpretations of funeral practices gradually transformed them from purely religious rituals into expressions of social ethics. Through standardized practices for mourning rites—including protocols for mourning periods, coffin specifications, and burial timelines—all designed to reinforce social hierarchies and filial piety” (B. Liu 2013, p. 114). Therefore, the blank funeral banners at Yin Li’s funeral not only reveal the incompleteness of Confucian funeral rites but also indirectly symbolize the collapse of social hierarchies and ritual norms under Yong Shu’s illegitimate rule. This collapse is further reflected in Zi Dan’s kowtowing at Yin Li’s funeral.
In Revenge, when Zi Dan realizes that the funeral he is witnessing is Yin Li’s funeral, he declares that “I shall kneel and kowtow with each step/To escort Yin Li to her burial” 我要一步一跪, 一跪一叩首/替殷縭小姐送葬 (Shi 2008). As Yang noted, “Looking at a person’s mourning garments and gestures in a funeral procession, one could tell the general type of kinship relation each had with the dead” (Yang 1961, p. 36). However, given his royal status, Zi Dan’s kowtowing subverts the hierarchical order that is traditionally upheld by such rites. The notion of hierarchical order is rooted in the belief that “Tian is superior and Earth is inferior, thus qiankun is settled. The low and the high are arrayed, and the ranks of the noble and the humble are established. This illustrates that the relationship between ruler and minister is as unalterable as that between tian and Earth” 天尊地卑, 乾坤定矣 卑高以陳, 貴賤位矣 言君臣之位猶天地之不可易也 (Si 2013, p. 2). As the prince of the Red City 赤城國, Zi Dan’s kowtowing represents a violation of social hierarchy and ritual order by offering undue respect from a superior to an inferior. Furthermore, through his transgressive mourning, Zi Dan not only mourns the loss of Yin Li but also indirectly reflects the subversive act of Yong Shu’s murder of Yong Bo and usurpation of the throne, condemning the collapse of the sociopolitical and hierarchical order caused by him.

3.3. The Divine Punishment: Yin Energy and the Collage Long Image

In addition to the collapse of order that is shown through the portrayal of Yong Shu’s exorcism, the use of simplified banners, and Zi Dan’s kowtowing at Yin Li’s funeral, the pervasive yin energy and symbolic props not only reinforce this thematic concern, but also highlight the idea that “Tian of moral principle, the supreme cosmic order” (Fung 2010, p. 27) is watching over the disorder caused by Yong Shu.
In the opening scene of Revenge, Zi Dan’s monologue sets the tone and vividly describes the atmosphere:
Dark clouds veil the waning moon. The air is cold with frost and fog.
Softly we tread, winding through palace paths.
A nighthawk’s mournful cry pierces the darkness
Echoing like the wails of wandering ghosts.
The night is heavy, the cold presses,
And the howling wind cuts to the bone
墨雲滾遮殘月霜寒霧冷/步悄然繞宮闕穿小徑/又聽得夜鷹悲啼/恰似那孤魂野鬼哀鳴聲聲/夜色沉沉寒氣緊/罡風獵獵刺骨疼
The imagery of “frost biting”, “nighthawk’s cry”, and “howling wind” establishes a chilling and suffocating atmosphere that emphasizes the dominance of yin energy in Revenge. As documented in the Book of Han (Han Shu漢書), “Yang represents virtue, while yin stands for punishment. Tian ordains that yang resides in summer, nurturing and fostering life; yin is confined to winter, accumulating in empty and unused places. This illustrates that tian favors virtue over punishment” 陽為德, 陰為刑 天使陽常居大夏而以生育養長為事, 陰常居大冬而積於空虛不用之處, 以此見天之任德不任刑也 (Ban 1964, p. 1031). This principle indirectly explains why Yong Shu seeks forgiveness from tian after witnessing his regicide being re-enacted in the play-within-a-play. His repentant actions do not arise from guilt but from his fear of being the potential target of tian’s punishment for his murder and usurpation of the throne.
Furthermore, the divine punishment is confirmed by the environmental descriptions in Revenge. After Yong Shu’s confession, the atmosphere is described as follows: “The night is deep, yin energy converges from all directions/As if hell spews poisonous mist” 夜深沉陰氣四合, 地獄噴吐著毒霧 (Shi 2008). In terms of narrative structure, this description directly follows Yong Shu’s command to light the torches, creating a contrast between the oppressive yin energy and the yang energy that is summoned by his exorcism. This contrast not only highlights the tension between yin and yang but also symbolizes Yong Shu’s helpless struggle in the face of divine punishment. Revenge further deepens the theme of divine punishment by linking Yong Shu’s death to the symbolic props.
In the final scene, a pingfeng 屏風 adorned with a long 龍 (dragon) image serves as the stage backdrop, placing the scene in the jiaochang 校場 (military drill ground): “The Prince is set to engage in a duel with General Yin Ze. Let the war drums thunder from the jiaochang to support the Prince” 殿下與殷澤將軍比試武藝, 校場內架起戰鼓替殿下助威 (Shi 2008). The long image on the pingfeng is of great symbolic importance to the rulers. As Wang noted, “Rulers elevated the long’s cultural image and symbolic power to embody supremacy over the state and transformed it into an imperial emblem of their rule” (Z. Wang 1992, p. 52). The collage long image thus resonates with the theme of the collapse of order driven by regicide and usurpation in Revenge. The long image is shattered through the collage design, suggesting the illegitimate, unorthodox, and fractured nature of imperial power under Yong Shu’s usurpation. In addition, the combination of this collage long image and the pervasive yin energy in the final scene serves as an ominous sign from tian, symbolizing that the divine punishment that Yong Shu fears has finally manifested itself, condemning his usurpation as disrupting not only the succession order but also the harmony between tian and Earth. As documented in Luxuriant Dew of the Spring and Autumn Annals with Commentary (Chun Qiu Fan Lu Yizheng 春秋繁露義證), “All disasters and anomalies originate from failings in governance. When such failings first arise, tian sends calamities as warnings. If these warnings are ignored, strange phenomena emerge to terrify the people. Should terror still fail to awaken reverence, true catastrophe will inevitably follow” 凡災異之本, 盡生於國家之失 國家之失乃始萌芽, 而天出災害以譴告之; 譴告之而不知變, 乃見怪異以驚駭之; 驚駭之尚不知畏恐, 其殃咎乃至 (Dong 2019, p. 229).
Therefore, the play-within-a-play becomes the divine warning from tian that Yong Shu ignores, and together with the pervasive yin energy signals, it represents the inevitable divine punishment for Yong Shu. The collage long image in the final scene serves as a visual indictment of the consequences of Yong Shu’s actions. When Zi Dan kills Yong Shu in front of this pingfeng, the collage long image is transformed into a direct representation of tian’s divine punishment for Yong Shu’s usurpation of the throne and disruption of the harmony between tian and Earth.

4. Ritualizing the Unseen: The Judged Ghost and the “Discovered” Underworld

Through Peking opera’s performing aesthetics that visualize the Chinese belief in underworld judgment, “The undiscovered world from whose bourn/No traveller returns” (3.1.78–79) in Hamlet is transformed into the “discovered” underworld with a clear function of moral judgment in Revenge. From the visual symbols on stage that distinguish the Ghost’s identity and signal the procedures of the underworld judgment to Zi Dan’s interactions with the Ghost, Panguan 判官 (the Underworld Judge), and Heibai Wuchang 黑白無常 (the Black and White Impermanence Ghosts), Revenge demonstrates how the belief in underworld judgment reinterprets the Ghost and “the undiscovered country” (3.1.78) in Hamlet, thus presenting a Chinese interpretation of the conceptions of death and the afterlife.

4.1. From Doubt to Certainty: Identifying the Ghost Through Visual Reconstruction

The Ghost in Hamlet plays a crucial role in advancing the plot, as well as embodying certain religious beliefs. As Thiselton-Dyer noted, “The important part which Shakespeare has assigned to the ghost in Hamlet, has a special value, inasmuch as it illustrates many of the old beliefs current in his day respecting their history and habits” (Thiselton-Dyer 1966, pp. 41–42). As for the portrayal of ghosts, it was a common belief in the Elizabethan period that “ghosts are generally supposed to assume the exact appearance by which they were usually known when in the material state; even to the smallest detail of their dress” (Thiselton-Dyer 1966, p. 42). This notion is vividly illustrated in Hamlet by Horatio’s description. When Marcellus asks “Is it not like the King?” (1.1.57), Horatio responds as follows:
As thou art to thyself.
Such was the very armour he had on
When he the ambitious Norway combated.
So frowned he once, when in an angry parle
He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.
(1.1.58–62)
Horatio affirms the Ghost’s resemblance to the late King Hamlet, noting not only his identical appearance but also the specific armor he wore during his lifetime and the familiar expression he has when angry. Furthermore, when the Ghost reappears, Hamlet addresses it as follows:
Be thou a spirit of health or goblin damned,
Bring with thee airs from heaven or blasts from hell,
Be thy intents wicked or charitable,
Thou com’st in such a questionable shape
That I will speak to thee. I’ll call thee Hamlet,
King, father, royal Dane.
(1.4.40–45)
However, after his encounter with the Ghost, Hamlet begins to doubt its true identity:
The spirit that I have seen
May be a de’il, and the de’il hath power
T’assume a pleasing shape. Yea, and perhaps
Out of my weakness and my melancholy,
As he is very potent with such spirits,
Abuses me to damn me!
(2.2.533–538)
For Hamlet, the Ghost resembling his late father may be a devil in disguise. But in Revenge, the Ghost that Zi Dan encounters is directly portrayed as a traditional xiongsi gui 凶死鬼 (the ghost of a violent death) through the facial make-up and the costume pattern of Peking opera’s performing conventions.
In Revenge, when the Ghost reappears on stage, it is portrayed as “clad in golden armor, wearing a black cloak with two guisuizi 鬼穗子 (tassels, a type of theatrical ornament) hanging from its ears, shaped like two braided strings of mingqian 冥錢 (spirit money), and the black robes and white hangings further highlighting its identity as a ghost” (Ying Zhang 2015, p. 87). In addition to the Ghost’s golden armor symbolizing its royal status in life, the guisuizi decoration also clarifies the cause of its death. According to the traditional Chinese conception of xiongsi gui, the appearance of such ghosts “not only retains the basic features of human beings, but is often related to the circumstances of their death” (Lai 1993, p. 21). The guisuizi thus transcends the traditional function of portraying a typical ghost in Peking opera and instead reflects the cause of Yong Bo’s death: “A usurper sneaked into the imperial garden/And gently poured poison into my ears” 御苑內潛入了篡位之人/傾毒液由耳道輕輕灌進 (Shi 2008). The portrayal and connotation of the xiongsi gui in Revenge removes the alternative in Hamlet’s mind that “he saw a devil assuming his father’s likeness—a form which the Evil One knew would most incite Hamlet to intercourse” (Spalding 1880, p. 58). Moreover, this alternative is further precluded by the performing conventions and the introduction of Panguan and Heibai Wuchang in Revenge. The Ghost’s role type is jing淨, which typically refers to respected elderly figures of a high status. As Zhang explained, “The dominant color of the Ghost’s facial make-up is pink. According to the traditional color symbolism of Peking opera, this implies that Yong Bo was a righteous old man when he was alive. This characterization aligns with the audiences’ impression of the late King as a wise ruler” (Ying Zhang 2015, p. 87). Furthermore, Panguan and Heibai Wuchang, who appear alongside the Ghost, confirm that the Ghost that Zi Dan encounters is indeed that of his late father. This confirmation is supported by the belief that the underworld is a spiritual realm in which justice is served, and that Panguan possesses “the power to help fulfill human wishes” and “the all-seeing and omnipotent investigative authority” (Y. Xu 2005, p. 86). In Revenge, the Ghost is portrayed as one being escorted and judged, and Panguan’s declaration of its cause of death and the punishment that it will face in the yin kan 陰勘 (the judgment ritual of the underworld) ritual further eliminate the possibility that the Ghost “may be a de’il” (2.2.534).

4.2. The Judged Ghost and the Judicialized Afterlife

The Chinese concepts of ghosts and the afterlife have been influenced by the belief in an organized underworld. As Poo asserted, the concept of the underworld not only “had a profound influence on the development of the concept of ghosts” but also “became a lasting model for the religious imagination of the Chinese” (Poo 2022, p. 17). This concept of the underworld directly influences Revenge’s interpretations of the Ghost scenes in Hamlet, such as the addition of the Ghost being judged. In Hamlet, the Ghost appears as the sole supernatural figure, who intends to communicate with Hamlet alone. As Horatio observes, “It beckons you to go away with it/As if it some impartment did desire/To you alone” (1.4.58–60). However, Revenge changes the pattern of the Ghost’s encounter with Hamlet, with the Ghost appearing under the escort of Panguan and Heibai Wuchang.
In Revenge, when Zi Dan meets the Ghost, Panguan stands at the center of the stage, with Heibai Wuchang standing on either side, creating a theatrical representation of the judicial process in a traditional Chinese yamen 衙門 (government office). The re-enactment of this yamen scene reflects the belief that “the offices of the underworld are a counterpart to those in the living world” (Wei 2007, p. 18). As Yang noted, the spiritual world follows a strict dichotomy: “At the top was the grand pantheon of gods (shen), each of whom was assigned definite functions in the governing of both men and spirits. Below the gods were the multitudes of spirits or ghosts (kuei), who constituted the common subjects of the spiritual world” (Yang 1961, pp. 23–24). This hierarchical division not only clarifies the structured phenomena of the two realms but also highlights the gods as embodiments of order and authority, responsible for overseeing both the living and the dead. Therefore, in Revenge, Zi Dan’s encounter with the Ghost is supervised by gods, transforming Hamlet’s personal communication with the Ghost into an official underworld interrogation that is controlled by Panguan and Heibai Wuchang. Their presence not only legitimates Zi Dan’s encounter with the Ghost but also ensures that the Ghost’s demands, such as its call for revenge, are conveyed through the judicial process of the underworld. Moreover, Panguan and Heibai Wuchang in Revenge are portrayed as authoritative enforcers of the underworld’s judicial power, particularly in their responsibility for pronouncing the Ghost’s crimes and enforcing the corresponding punishments.
In Hamlet, the Ghost’s description of its torment in “sulphurous and tormenting flames” (1.5.3) evokes a vivid image of purgatorial suffering. As Greenblatt observed, this tormenting fire functions as “a convenient image, drawn from ordinary life, of the suffering that a redeemed soul would experience after the death of the body, during the cleansing period in which it was deprived of the vision of God” (Greenblatt 2013, p. 69). In Revenge, the Ghost’s punishment is incorporated into the underworld judicial process and is officially pronounced by Panguan. On stage, “Heibai Wuchang carry the zhao hun fan 招魂幡 (soul-calling banners), while Panguan is in the traditional zha pan 紮判 (a costume with exaggerated shoulder armor) costume and performs the wu pan 舞判 (Panguan’s judgment dance) ritual” (Ying Zhang 2015, p. 88). In this wu pan ritual, Panguan demonstrates the Ghost’s punishment:
I am Panguan of the underworld.
Yong Bo, the ruler of the Red City, was secretly murdered.
Because of unresolved sins in his life,
I hereby condemn him to be burned by the flames of the underworld in the daytime
And to wander in the world of the living at night.
Ghost soldiers,
Escort the soul of Yong Bo to the court.
吾乃幽冥判官是也/今有赤城國君雍伯被人暗害/只因他生前孽緣未盡, 為此判他/白日身受地獄烈焰焚燒/夜晚在人間遊蕩/鬼卒們/將雍伯的靈魂押了上來
Panguan’s pronouncement not only clarifies the Ghost’s punishment but also highlights that the punishment is determined by the judicial system of the underworld based on the Ghost’s actions in life. This phenomenon resonates with the belief that “human souls must undergo judgment in the underworld, a place where all the dead are accounted for what they have done” (Wei 2007, p. 19). This belief in the underworld judgment in Revenge is reflected not only in the judgment of the Ghost but also in the transformation of “the undiscovered country” (3.1.78) in Hamlet from a vague and unknown realm into a judicial space that is governed by the underworld order.

4.3. From “Undiscovered Country” to Zi Dan’s Dilemma: Dream or Nightmare After Death

The conceptions of ghosts and the underworld are shaped by different social and cultural backgrounds. As Poo argued, “The fact that each cultural system produces its own version of the netherworld, and its own kind of ghosts, suggests that although the need to produce certain explanations regarding death and afterlife might be similar among all societies, the actual result may differ according to specific cultural/local conditions” (Poo 2022, p. 7). Revenge exemplifies this difference by adapting the location and events of Hamlet’s encounter with the Ghost. In Hamlet, the meeting between Hamlet and the Ghost takes place on the platform, whereas in Revenge, this scene is changed to the underworld yamen. This transformation is further highlighted by the contrasting portrayal of the living world and the underworld, created through stage lighting and props.
In Revenge, the living world is illuminated by bright light, while the underworld is dominated by cold and dim light. This visual contrast is further reinforced by the dry ice fog that lingers in the background of the underworld scenes, amplifying the eerie atmosphere. The contrast between light and dark not only distinguishes the different stages but also establishes a metaphorical opposition between the realms of the living and the dead. When the Ghost, Panguan, and Heibai Wuchang appear on stage, the lighting design always adopts a dim light. This arrangement establishes a stable aesthetic paradigm for the underworld scenes, making dark light a visual symbol of the underworld and enabling the audience to recognize these scenes through the lighting patterns. Moreover, the cold and dim light becomes a visual representation of the surveillance that the underworld is always under. In Revenge, this surveillance is reflected not only in the role of Panguan as an observer and regulator of Zi Dan’s encounter with the Ghost, but also in Zi Dan’s subsequent interactions with Panguan and Heibai Wuchang, particularly his attempts to catch up with the Ghost when it is forced to leave at daybreak.
In Hamlet, the cock’s crow serves as a symbolic trigger for the Ghost’s retreat. As Horatio recounts,
But even then the morning cock crew loud
And at the sound it shrunk in haste away
And vanished from our sight.
(1.2.217–219)
Wilson explains that the crow functions as a divine signal, driving “the dead back to their graves to wait the coming Messiah” and echoing “the treble shriek that Christ predicts signals Peter’s betrayal” (Wilson 2007, p. 14). In Revenge, the cock’s crow is replaced by a direct command from Panguan: “Ghost soldiers, the dawn is breaking, escort it away” 鬼卒們, 天色將明, 押著走 (Shi 2008). This transforms the Ghost’s retreat into an order within the judicial system of the underworld. As a result, Zi Dan’s pursuit and intervention of the departing Ghost turn into a challenge to Panguan’s authority and the underworld’s judicial system. Panguan then stops Zi Dan by using supernatural powers to strike him down, demonstrating its inexorable authority. This intervention highlights the absolute authority of Panguan and also exemplifies the difference between the two conceptions of the afterlife in Hamlet and Revenge. This difference is also reflected in Revenge’s reinterpretation of Hamlet’s contemplation of “the undiscovered country” (3.1.78).
In Revenge, the involvement of the underworld’s judicial system transforms Hamlet’s personal encounter with the Ghost into an official and regulated act of Zi Dan being surveilled by Panguan and Heibai Wuchang. Zi Dan not only witnesses the operating mechanisms of the underworld’s judicial system but also personally experiences the consequences of breaking its rules. This experience reinterprets Hamlet’s exploration of death and the afterlife in his soliloquy (3.1.55–89). For instance, Hamlet compares death to sleep:
Devoutly to be wished—to die: to sleep—
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there’s the rub,
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil
Must give us pause: there’s the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
(3.1.63–68)
As Bloom argued, “Hamlet’s undiscovered country, his embassy of annihilation, voids the limits that ought to confine his drama to stage dimensions” and demonstrates his contemplation of the essence of death (Bloom 2003, p. 133). However, Revenge seems to reintroduce such limitations back to the stage through the introduction of Panguan and Heibai Wuchang, the yin kan ritual, and Panguan’s use of supernatural powers against Zi Dan. These elements transform “the undiscovered country” (3.1.78) from an abstract concept into the Chinese imagination of the world after death. As a result, Zi Dan’s contemplation of the afterlife in Revenge becomes more grounded in the potential judgment after death in the underworld:
Once asleep, one begins to dream.
But what kind of dream will it be?
A sweet dream or a nightmare? It is hard to know.
It is this fear of dreams beyond death that makes us hesitate.
睡著了就會做夢/做的是什麼夢呢?/是美夢還是噩夢令人難以猜透/世人畏懼這死後的夢境而躊躇顧慮
In Zi Dan’s soliloquy, the “dream” functions as a metaphoric expression of the judicial system of the underworld, transforming Hamlet’s confusion about the unknown after death into the process of judgment in the underworld. The question of whether it is a “beautiful dream or a nightmare” demonstrates Zi Dan’s reflections on the possibility of facing a different judgment after death.

5. Conclusions

Peking opera The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan reinterprets the religious motifs in Hamlet by incorporating concepts and rituals from Chinese folk religion. The substitution of “God” and “Heaven” with “tian” not only foregrounds the paradigm of the worship of tian throughout Revenge but also provides new interpretations of Zi Dan’s revenge and Yong Shu’s repentance under the influence of tianming. Claudius’s plea for “some light” (3.2.261) in Hamlet is transformed into Yong Shu’s call to “exorcise the Ghost” in Revenge, which serves to present the exorcism tradition of Chinese folk religion. The blank funeral banners and Zi Dan’s act of kowtowing at Yin Li’s funeral not only echo the description of Ophelia’s “maimed rites” (5.1.208) in Hamlet, but also symbolize the collapse of Confucian funeral rites and hierarchical order under Yong Shu’s illegitimate rule. The restoration of order in Revenge is achieved not only through Zi Dan’s revenge but also through the belief in divine retribution from tian, which is symbolically manifested through the pervasive yin energy that runs throughout the entire play. Moreover, the portrayal of the Ghost through the jing role type establishes a clear supernatural identity, and its judgment from Panguan dispels the ambiguity that the Ghost may be perceived as a devil that “assume a pleasing shape” (2.2.535) in Hamlet. The introduction of Panguan and Heibai Wuchang, along with their interactions with Zi Dan, not only represents the supernatural elements of Chinese folk religion but also influences how Revenge reinterprets Hamlet’s contemplation of death and the afterlife in his soliloquy (3.1.55–89). It transforms Hamlet’s meditations on “the undiscovered country” (3.1.78) into a more straightforward contemplation of whether it is “a sweet dream or a nightmare” (Shi 2008). Through these shifts, the audience can reinterpret Hamlet’s central conflicts in Revenge from the perspective of Chinese folk religion. The reinterpretation of these conflicts not only initiates a dialogue between Chinese and Western cultures on religious differences but also epitomizes how contemporary Chinese intercultural theatre constructs its cultural identity through adaptation, reflecting the relationship between the pursuit of Chinese modernity and traditional Chinese culture.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.X.; writing—original draft preparation, J.X. and H.Q.; writing—review and editing, J.X. and H.Q.; funding acquisition, J.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Beijing Institute of Technology Scientific and Technological Innovation Plan, grant number 2024CX01022.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Notes

1
The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan 王子復仇記, performed by Shanghai Jingju Theatre Company 上海京劇院 in Shanghai in 2005, was released on DVD by Beauty Media Inc. 俏佳人文化傳播有限公司 in Guangzhou in 2008. This play takes Zhu Shenghao’s 朱生豪 Chinese translation of Hamlet as its foundational text, with additional creative adaptations by script writer Feng Gang 馮鋼. It was directed by Shi Yu-kun 石玉昆, and the principal cast includes Fu Xi-ru 傅希如 as Zi Dan (Hamlet), Guo Rui-yue 郭睿玥 as Jiang Rong (Gertrude), Zhao Huan 趙歡 as Yin Li (Ophelia), Chen Yu 陳宇 as Yong Shu (Claudius), Yan Qing-gu 嚴慶穀 as Yin Fu (Polonius), and Liu Da-ke 劉大可 as Yin Ze (Laertes).
2
See Fung Yu-Lan’s History of Chinese Philosophy (Zhongguo Zhexue Shi 中國哲學史), in which he divides tian into five distinct but interrelated dimensions: “Tian of matter” 物质之天, “Tian of sovereignty” 主宰之天, “Tian of fate” 运命之天, “Tian of nature” 自然之天, and “Tian of moral principle” 义理之天.
3
In this article, we use “worship of tian” instead of “worship of Heaven” to avoid confusion and ambiguity in terminology when analyzing the replacement of “tian” in Revenge with “Heaven” and “God” in Hamlet. It should be noted that the concepts of “Tian” and “God” discussed in this article are not equivalent. In traditional Chinese culture, “Tian” is not necessarily conceived as an anthropomorphic deity, a characteristic that distinguishes it from the concept of “God”. For further exploration of the differences surrounding these concepts, see Zhu (2023, pp. 28–36) and Yingying Zhang (2020, pp. 124–31).
4
All quotations from Hamlet in this article are taken from the Arden Shakespeare Third Series edition (Shakespeare 2016).
5
All Chinese quotations from Revenge and other texts appearing in this article were translated into English by the authors.
6
Zui Ji Zhao 罪己詔 (edict of self-reproach) refers to a ritual document through which rulers publicly acknowledged their failures in governance, often issued in response to natural disasters or political crises, aiming to legitimize their rule by aligning with tianyi 天意.
7
A traditional Chinese folding screen, typically made of wood or other materials, with decorative panels often featuring intricate designs, paintings, or calligraphy. It was historically used not only as a room divider but also for privacy, decoration, and to shield against drafts or cold.
8
For research on the differences among retribution, karma, and chengfu 承負 (inherited burden), see Y. Wang (1998, pp. 60–67); X. Chen (2004, pp. 67–69); M. Xu (2008, pp. 10–14); Qu and Chen (2016, pp. 75–81).
9
The term nuo 儺 refers to a ritual for exorcising evil spirits.

References

  1. Ban, Gu 班固. 1964. Han Shu 漢書 [Book of Han]. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Book Company 中華書局. [Google Scholar]
  2. Baumlin, James S. 2012. Theologies of Language in English Renaissance Literature. Lanham: Lexington Books. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bloom, Harold. 2003. Hamlet: Poem Unlimited. New York: Riverhead Books. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bradley, Andrew C. 2013. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. New Delhi: Atlantic Publishers & Distributors (P) LTD. [Google Scholar]
  5. Brokering, Jon M. 2007. Ninagawa Yukio’s Intercultural Hamlet: Parsing Japanese Iconography. Asian Theatre Journal 24: 370–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, Wei 陳瑋. 2017. Xixia Tian Chongbai Yanjiu 西夏天崇拜研究 [A Study of the Worship of Heaven in the Xixia Dynasty]. Xixia Studies 1: 51–60. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, Xiaofang 陳筱芳. 2004. Zhongguo Chuantong Baoyingguan yu Fojiao Guobaoguan de Chayi ji Wenhua Genyuan 中國傳統報應觀與佛教果報觀的差異及文化根源 [The Differences Between Traditional Chinese Retribution Concepts and Buddhist Karmic Retribution Concepts and Their Cultural Roots]. Social Science Research 社會科學研究 3: 67–69. [Google Scholar]
  8. Davis, Joe Lee. 1943. Something of What Happens in Hamlet. University of Toronto Quarterly 12: 426–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dong, Zhongshu 董仲舒. 2019. Chun Qiu Fan Lu Yizheng 春秋繁露義證 [Luxuriant Dew of the Spring and Autumn Annals with Commentary]. Annotated by Su Yu 蘇輿. Edited by Zhong Zhe 鐘哲. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Book Company 中華書局. [Google Scholar]
  10. Fung, Yu-Lan 馮友蘭. 2010. Zhongguo Zhexue Shi 中國哲學史 [History of Chinese Philosophy]. Shanghai 上海: East China Normal University Press 華東師範大學出版社, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gardner, Lyn. 2011. The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan—Review. The Guardian. August 23. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2011/aug/23/revenge-prince-zi-dan-review (accessed on 2 April 2025).
  12. Gong, Baorong 宮寶榮. 2012. Cong Hamuleite dao Wangzi Fuchou Ji—Yize Kuawenhua Xiju Anli 從《哈姆雷特》到《王子復仇記》—一則跨文化戲劇的案例 [From Hamlet to The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan: A Case Study in Intercultural Theatre]. Theatre Arts 戲劇藝術 2: 71–75. [Google Scholar]
  13. Greenblatt, Stephen. 2013. Hamlet in Purgatory. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  14. Harrison, Jane Ellen. 1913. Ancient Art and Ritual. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Holleran, James V. 1989. Maimed Funeral Rites in Hamlet. English Literary Renaissance 19: 65–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hopkins, Lisa, and Matthew Steggle. 2007. Renaissance Literature and Culture. London and New York: Continuum. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kuritz, Paul. 1988. The Making of Theater History. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lai, Yasheng 賴亞生. 1993. Shenmi de Guihun Shijie 神秘的鬼魂世界 [The Mysterious World of Ghosts]. Beijing 北京: People’s China Press 人民中國出版社. [Google Scholar]
  19. Lawrence, William Witherle. 1939. Hamlet and The Mouse-Trap. PMLA 54: 709–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lee, Hyon-u. 2011. Shamanism in Korean Hamlets since 1990: Exorcising Han. Asian Theatre Journal 28: 104–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Li, Weimin 李偉民. 2008. Cong Shaju Hamuleite dao Jingju Wangzi Fuchou Ji de Xiandai Wenhua Zhuanxing 從莎劇《哈姆雷特》到京劇《王子復仇記》的現代文化轉型 [The Modern Cultural Transformation from Shakespeare’s Hamlet to the Peking Opera The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan]. Chinese Theatre Arts 戲曲藝術 3: 12–16. [Google Scholar]
  22. Liu, Bingxue 劉冰雪. 2013. Qingdai Falv Wenxian zhong de Xisu Guizhi—Yi Sangzang Xisu Weili 清代法律文獻中的習俗規制—以喪葬習俗為例 [Provisions Regulating Funeral Customs in the Legislatures of Qing Dynasty]. Journal of Hebei Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences) 河北師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版) 3: 114–118. [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu, Chengyou 劉成有, and Hongbin Zhang 張宏斌. 2015. Zongfaxing Chuantong Zongjiao 宗法性傳統宗教 [Traditional Patriarchal Religion]. Beijing 北京: China Democracy and Legal System Publishing House 中國民主法制出版社. [Google Scholar]
  24. Liu, Fang 劉昉. 2019. Jingdian Shaju de Zhongguo Xiqu Chanshi Yanjiu 經典莎劇的中國戲曲闡釋研究 [A Study of Traditional Chinese Theatre’s Interpretations of Shakespeare’s Classic Plays]. Hangzhou 杭州: Zhejiang University Press 浙江大學出版社. [Google Scholar]
  25. McGee, Arthur. 1987. The Elizabethan Hamlet. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
  26. Moore, Malcolm. 2011. Edinburgh Festival 2011: The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan—The Secret of Hamlet in Chinese. The Telegraph. August 15. Available online: www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/edinburgh-festival/8701649/Edinburgh-Festival-2011-The-Revenge-of-Prince-Zi-Dan-The-secret-of-Hamlet-in-Chinese.html (accessed on 2 April 2025).
  27. Poo, Mu-chou. 2022. Ghosts and Religious Life in Early China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  28. Qu, Ningning 曲寧寧, and Chenjie Chen 陳晨捷. 2016. Lun Xianqin Shan’e Baoying Lilun ji qi Yanbian 論先秦善惡報應理論及其衍變 [On the Retribution Theory and Its Evolution in Pre-Qin Times]. Studies of Zhouyi 周易研究 5: 75–81. [Google Scholar]
  29. Ruan, Yuan 阮元. 1980. Shisanjing Zhushu 十三經注疏 [Commentaries and Explanations to the Thirteen Classics]. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Book Company 中華書局. [Google Scholar]
  30. Shakespeare, William. 2016. Hamlet. Edited by Ann Thompson and Neil Taylor. The Arden Shakespeare Third Series; London: Bloomsbury. [Google Scholar]
  31. Shi, Yu-kun 石玉昆. 2008. Wangzi Fuchou Ji 王子復仇記 [The Revenge of Prince Zi Dan]. (DVD). Shanghai 上海 and Guangzhou 廣州: Beauty Media Inc. 俏佳人文化傳播有限公司. [Google Scholar]
  32. Si, Maguang 司馬光. 2013. Zizhi Tongjian 資治通鑒 [Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Government]. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Book Company 中華書局, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
  33. Spalding, Thomas Alfred. 1880. Elizabethan Demonology. London: Chatto and Windus. [Google Scholar]
  34. Stegner, Paul D. 2007. “Try what repentance can”: Hamlet, Confession, and the Extraction of Interiority. Shakespeare Studies 25: 105–29. [Google Scholar]
  35. Tanaka, Issei 田仲一成. 2011. Zhongguo Xiju Shi 中國戲劇史 [The History of the Chinese Theater]. Translated by Bu He 布和. Beijing 北京: Peking University Press 北京大學出版社. [Google Scholar]
  36. Thiselton-Dyer, Thomas F. 1966. Folk-Lore of Shakespeare. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  37. Wang, Yueqing 王月清. 1998. Zhongguo Fojiao Shan’e Baoyinglun Chutan 中國佛教善惡報應論初探 [A Study of the Buddhist Theory of Retribution for Good and Evil in China]. Journal of Nanjing University (Philosophy, Humanities and Social Sciences) 南京大學學報 (哲學,人文科學,社會科學版) 1: 60–67. [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, Zengbin 王增斌. 1992. Lun Zhongguo Long Wenhua de Yanhua he Fenhua論中國龍文化的演化和分化 [On the Evolution and Differentiation of Chinese Long Culture]. Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition) 陝西師範大學學報 (哲學社會科學版) 2: 50–58. [Google Scholar]
  39. Wei, Fengjuan 韋鳳娟. 2007. Cong “Difu” dao “Diyu”: Lun Weijin Nanbei Chao Guihua zhong Mingjie Guannian de Yanbian 從”地府”到”地獄”—論魏晉南北朝鬼話中冥界觀念的演變 [From “Difu” to “Diyu”—The Evolution of the Concept of the Underworld in the Ghost Stories of Wei, Jin, and North and South Dynasties]. Literary Heritage 文學遺產 1: 16–25. [Google Scholar]
  40. Wilson, Richard. 2007. When the Cock Crew: The Imminence of Hamlet. Shakespeare 3: 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Xiao, Tong 蕭統. 2011. Wen Xuan 文選 [Selections of Literature]. Shanghai 上海: Shanghai Classics Publishing House 上海古籍出版社, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
  42. Xu, Mingsheng 徐明生. 2008. “Chengfu” yu “Lunhui”—Daojiao yu Fojiao Liangzhong Guobao Lilun de Bijiao “承負”與”輪回”—道教與佛教兩種果報理論的比較 [“Assumption” and “Samsara”—Comparison of the Theory of Karma in Taoism and That in Buddhism]. Journal of Jiangsu University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition) 江蘇科技大學學報 (社會科學版) 2: 10–14. [Google Scholar]
  43. Xu, Yanlin 徐燕琳. 2005. Mudanting, Mingpan he Panguanxi 牡丹亭·冥判和判官戲 [The Peony Pavilion: Judgment in the Underworld and Panguan Drama]. National Arts 民族藝術 1: 82–90. [Google Scholar]
  44. Yang, Ching Kun. 1961. Religion in Chinese Society: A Study of Contemporary Social Functions of Religion and Some of Their Historical Factors. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
  45. Zhang, Xin, Liao Lei, and Xie Xubin. 2025. The Dual Ethical Dimensions of “Tian” in Xizi-Belief: Unveiling Tianming and Tianli Through a Hunan Case Study. Religions 16: 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Zhang, Ying 張瑛. 2015. Shaju Guihun zai Zhongguo Xiqu Gaibian zhong de Kuawenhua Wutai Biaoxian 莎劇鬼魂在中國戲曲改編中的跨文化舞臺表現 [The Intercultural Representation of Shakespeare’s Ghosts on Chinese Opera Stage]. Theatre Arts 戲劇藝術 5: 84–91. [Google Scholar]
  47. Zhang, Yingying 張迎迎. 2020. Shen yu Ren: “Renfu Tianshu” yu “Shangdi Xingxiang” Duikan 神與人: “人副天數”與“上帝形象”對勘 [God and Man: A Comparison between Man as Copy of God and the Image of God]. The World Religious Cultures 世界宗教文化 4: 124–31. [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhao, Yaci 趙雅辭. 2024. Fodao Jiaoshe Beijing xia de Yinlu Pusa Tuxiang Yanjiu—Yi Fan Wei Zhongxin佛道交涉背景下的引路菩薩圖像研究—以幡為中心 [Research on the Images of Guiding Bodhisattva in the Context of Interaction between Buddhism and Daoism—Centered on the Banners]. Religious Studies 宗教學研究 1: 109–117. [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhou, Yude 周育德. 1990. Zhongguo Xiqu yu Zhongguo Zongjiao 中國戲曲與中國宗教 [Traditional Chinese Theatre and Chinese Religions]. Beijing 北京: China Theatre Press 中國戲劇出版社. [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhu, Hanmin 朱漢民. 2023. “Tian”: Cong Shenling Chongbai dao Zhexue Jiangou “天”:從神靈崇拜到哲學建構 [Tian: From Spirit Worship to Philosophical Construction]. Journal of Social Sciences 社會科學 5: 28–36. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xu, J.; Qian, H. Worship of Tian, Transgressive Rites, and Judged Ghosts: The Religious Transformation of Hamlet in Peking Opera. Religions 2025, 16, 1022. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16081022

AMA Style

Xu J, Qian H. Worship of Tian, Transgressive Rites, and Judged Ghosts: The Religious Transformation of Hamlet in Peking Opera. Religions. 2025; 16(8):1022. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16081022

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xu, Jia, and Huping Qian. 2025. "Worship of Tian, Transgressive Rites, and Judged Ghosts: The Religious Transformation of Hamlet in Peking Opera" Religions 16, no. 8: 1022. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16081022

APA Style

Xu, J., & Qian, H. (2025). Worship of Tian, Transgressive Rites, and Judged Ghosts: The Religious Transformation of Hamlet in Peking Opera. Religions, 16(8), 1022. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel16081022

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop