I wonder if the prominence of that speech of Hamlet's isn't because it's another way of pointing up the whole question of interpretation -- like, in your last post you talked about Ophelia's dishonor-by-association, and Hamlet himself goes on and on about how his black cloak isn't all there is to him, and then at the end of the play he charges Horatio with telling his story because he's concerned for his "wounded name." And that in turn gets into the play's interest in issues of surveillance/interiority and so forth (I would argue, too, that Hamlet is really hyperaware of his status as a subject for interpretation -- it underlies a lot of his interaction with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, for instance -- and that in turn has political implications...)
There is definitely something in that; for someone not, apparently, much interested in kingship, politics, or any other kind of grown up job natural to his position, he does think a lot of how he is known and perceived--on reputation, in other words.
So...Hamlet goes into this protracted monologue about interpretation, appearance, perception...and then there's a ghost. Any relationship there to make that monologue feel less pastede on yay? He begins to offer himself up as a spectacle for his friends, lays the foundation of his rumored madness to come? But they wouldn't have spoken of it. I DON'T KNOW.
Well, I guess that it ties into what infiniteviking says about the statewide implications of what Hamlet's saying here? Because then the ghost shows up and he's the signifier of what's wrong in Denmark -- because his own internal "rottenness" and its implications haven't been resolved? As Lacan would say, he's between two deaths: literally dead, but not symbolically, and so he can't stay in the ground -- and although one would think that what we learn about the succession process in the Denmark of Hamlet would demystify kingship, it doesn't, exactly, or at least it doesn't any more than in other Shakespeare plays, and that has consequences to Hamlet as someone in the line of succession (possibly, as Hamlet suggests late in the play, someone who ought to be king?)
That long Hamlet monologue basically strikes me as saying "a single, simple flaw can lead a man to his doom": either by means of the "o'ergrowth of some complexion" (attitude) .."breaking down the pales and forts of reason" (driving you nuts), or by "some habit that too much o'er-leavens the form of plausive manners" (allowing base habits to overwrite polite behavior) -- by which he both rails at his uncle and foreshadows his own doom even before the ghost appears. But that's probably the plainest interpretation.
"Desperate with imagination": I read that as reckless heedlessness or something. The ghost and its implications have become more real to him than his friends.
By all means, keep the Shakespeare in-house -- it's fabulous being reintroduced to him. XD
Re: Just want to point out...corbisthecaFebruary 26 2008, 02:51:22 UTC
It's Marcellus's line in my text too -- Arden Complete Works. Though apparently not in the Online Lit version. One of those printing discrepancies between editions that may be traceable to different early versions of the play in which characters were portrayed in slightly variant ways, perhaps? The words didn't go directly from W.S.'s head to Quarto to Folio, after all -- there were a few years of performances in there in between. If I were the sort of person who did textual research, I'd know how to find out more about this particular line attribution... unfortunately, I'm not, and the person I know who might know happens to be knee-deep in rehearsals for Much Ado.
I'm pretty much with infiniteviking on the temperance speech. This is "I hate Claudius" railing that gets out of hand and "incidentally" pulls out this idea of a mole of nature/stamp of one defect/dram of eale (which in my text is spelled "evil") that's there from the get-go but by their actions/habits/attitudes spreads and corrupts everything -- like a rotten spot in the center of a
( ... )
Re: Just want to point out...kerrypolkaFebruary 26 2008, 14:24:16 UTC
I believe it's Marcellus in the Folio, although I'm sure it's Horatio in at least one of the quartos because the Hamlet quartos are all over the place. Q1's probably given it to, like, Osric.
Worth noting that the Giant Monologue of Drunken Danes and WTF? is cut to about seven lines, which I think most textual folk ascribe to James I's being married to Anna of Denmark (and nobody wanting to go "so hey, our queen's countrymen sure are notoriously sloshed, eh?").
Why imagination? Hamlet hasn't seen anything Horatio hasn't seen so far, and given the circumstances I don't think his reaction is irrational.
i think he is referring to hamlet being a teeny bit crazed in this scene (as opposed to simply amazed/frightened/etc. as was his own and marcellus' reactions previously). i mean, horatio and marcellus are telling hamlet not to go off with the ghost by himself, because they are concerned for his life, his soul, and his reason -- and his reaction is to threaten to kill them. sounds slightly crazed to me.
I really loved your breakdown of the scene. It put things into perspective for me - unusual as that perspective might be . In much the same light, I was looking online the other day for some insights to various scenes and acts and Hamlet quotes (http://www.shmoop.com/hamlet/quotes.html) and I found this amazing site called Shmoop that you might enjoy as well. It’s got an excellent breakdown of the play act by act and is full of resource material and opinions on the characters and themes. Oh.. and its written in the most down to earth, easy to understand language possible with enough modern references to make anyone think Shakespeare is a doddle! Check it out.
Comments 13
Reply
So...Hamlet goes into this protracted monologue about interpretation, appearance, perception...and then there's a ghost. Any relationship there to make that monologue feel less pastede on yay? He begins to offer himself up as a spectacle for his friends, lays the foundation of his rumored madness to come? But they wouldn't have spoken of it. I DON'T KNOW.
Reply
Or something; I'm talking out of my hat here.
Reply
"Desperate with imagination": I read that as reckless heedlessness or something. The ghost and its implications have become more real to him than his friends.
By all means, keep the Shakespeare in-house -- it's fabulous being reintroduced to him. XD
Reply
The ghost and its implications have become more real to him than his friends.
Oooh, well put.
Reply
Reply
What hour now?
HORATIO
I think it lacks of twelve.
HAMLET
No, it is struck.
"No, it is struck" is Marcellus's line and not Hamlet's
Reply
Reply
I'm pretty much with infiniteviking on the temperance speech. This is "I hate Claudius" railing that gets out of hand and "incidentally" pulls out this idea of a mole of nature/stamp of one defect/dram of eale (which in my text is spelled "evil") that's there from the get-go but by their actions/habits/attitudes spreads and corrupts everything -- like a rotten spot in the center of a ( ... )
Reply
Worth noting that the Giant Monologue of Drunken Danes and WTF? is cut to about seven lines, which I think most textual folk ascribe to James I's being married to Anna of Denmark (and nobody wanting to go "so hey, our queen's countrymen sure are notoriously sloshed, eh?").
Reply
He waxes desperate with imagination.
Why imagination? Hamlet hasn't seen anything Horatio hasn't seen so far, and given the circumstances I don't think his reaction is irrational.
i think he is referring to hamlet being a teeny bit crazed in this scene (as opposed to simply amazed/frightened/etc. as was his own and marcellus' reactions previously). i mean, horatio and marcellus are telling hamlet not to go off with the ghost by himself, because they are concerned for his life, his soul, and his reason -- and his reaction is to threaten to kill them. sounds slightly crazed to me.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment