Tuesday, November 5, 2013

from Inna

This week, I've been reading a very interesting essay that I wanted to share with you all: "The Oedipus-Complex as an Explanation of Hamlet's Mystery: A study in motive" written by Dr. Ernest Jones in 1910. As the title suggests, Jones analyzes several hypotheses that could explain Hamlet's inability to revenge his father, using psychoanalysis as well as textual evidence to support his claims. Here, I have taken excerpts from the paper to outline the general argument. You will see the three main hypotheses, proposed by scholars, Jones’ response to them and his main argument.

Question: Why does Hamlet not act?

1. “the difficulty in the performance of the task in Hamlet's temperament, which is not suited to effective action of any kind” – overly intelligent, analytical, pensive etc.
            -Jones: “there is every reason to believe that,
 apart from the task in question, Hamlet is a man capable of
 very decisive action.  This could be not only impulsive, as in
the killing of Polonius, but deliberate, as in the arranging for
the death of Guildenstern and Rosencrantz.  His biting scorn
and mockery towards his enemies, and even towards Ophelia,
his cutting denunciation of his mother, his lack of remorse
after the death of Polonius, are not signs of a gentle, yielding
or weak nature”
2. “the nature of the task, which is such as to be almost impossible of performance by any one”, “a complicated
bringing to judgment” – needed to murder and provide hard evidence for that murder
            -Jones: “This distortion of the meaning of the revenge is purely
gratuitous and has no warrant in any passage of the play, or
elsewhere where the word is used in Shakspere. Hamlet
 never doubted that he was the legitimately appointed instru
ment of punishment, and when at the end of the play he secures his revenge, the dramatic situation is correctly resolved,
 although the nation is not even informed, let alone convinced,
of the murder that is being avenged….On which side the people would have been
 in any conflict is clearly enough perceived by Claudius, who
 dare not even punish Hamlet for killing Polonius”.
3. “some special feature in the nature of the task which renders it peculiarly difficult or repugnant to Hamlet” – ethically opposed to revenge
            -Jones: “why did Hamlet in his mono
logues give us no indication of the nature of the conflict in his
mind?...Throughout the play we see his
 mind irrevocably made up as to the necessity of a given course
of action, which he fully accepts as being his bounden duty;
indeed, he would have resented the mere insinuation of doubt
 on this point as an untrue slur on his filial piety.”

Jones’ argument:
“Hamlet's hesitancy may have been
 due to an internal conflict between the need to fulfill his task
 on the one hand, and some special cause of repugnance to it
 on the other;
"One moment he pretends he is too
cowardly to perform the deed or that his reason is paralysed
by "bestial oblivion," at another he questions the truthfulness
of the ghost, in another, when the opportunity presents itself
 in its naked form, he thinks the time is unsuited….When a man gives at different times a dif
ferent reason for his conduct it is safe to infer that, whether
 purposely or not, he is concealing the true reason." 
"As a child Hamlet had experienced the warmest affection for his mother, and this, as is always the case, had contained elements of a more or less dimly defined erotic quality…Now comes the father's death and the mother's second marriage. The long 'repressed' desire to take his father's place in his mother's affection is stimulated to unconscious activity by the sight of some one usurping this place exactly as he himself had once longed to do."
“He is therefore in a dilemma between on the one hand allowing his
natural detestation of his uncle to have free play, a consummation which would make him aware of his own horrible
wishes, and on the other ignoring the imperative call for vengeance that his obvious duty demands...The call of duty to slay his uncle
 cannot be obeyed because it links itself with the call of his
nature to slay his mother's husband, whether this is the first
or the second; the latter call is strongly "repressed," and
 therefore necessarily the former also”

This was only an outline – Jones speaks in length about ethics, religion, murder, revenge, sexual repression, the relationships between father and son, father and daughter, mother and son etc. Some very interesting points made (on both sides). Hope this is helpful!


from Inna

The following essay, "On Hamlet as an aesthetic document", written by A. Clutton-Brock is an analysis of Hamlet, with a special consideration given to Aristotle's Poetics. How does the play stack up with the philosopher's famous analysis? How does Hamlet compare to other works? "The law of art is all case-law and Hamlet is a case that has been decided in the court of experience". 
Here is the link:


Friday, November 1, 2013

EXTRA post from Desiree

After Simon Russell Beale was mentioned in class I decided to look him up.  I was intrigued to see what he looks like.  I decided to go on youtube and I found a video of him in Much Ado About Nothing playing Benedick.  He does a lot of explaining but there are clips of him acting.  Also, I was looking up some stuff about Hamlet online and I found this youtube link of a composition by Sergei Sergeyevich Prokofiev and Dmitry Yablonsky.  It is the Russian State Symphony Orchestra performing music to Shakespeare's Hamlet entitled Ghost of Hamlet's Father.  I found it to be very bizarre but fascinating.  It is very thematic!

Simon Russell Beale:

Russian State Symphony Orchestra:

from Desiree

After talking about Olympic fencing this week in class I decided to look it up.  A friend of a friend was actually going to the olympics to fence in 2012 but had to have surgery.  I tried to find some videos of her fencing and when I didn't have success I decided upon this video.  It is the video of Szilagyi a Hungarian fencer winning the fencing sabre gold at the 2012 olympics.  I really like this video because from the beginning you can see his attacks.  I have watched some fencing but I have never seen how advanced the technology in their suits has become.  It's actually pretty awesome!  This video is worth watching to the end.  It is just over 13 minutes but it is very fast paced!  This gave me better insight into the way a match like this would be paced.  Now how would that work for our production of Hamlet


from Jacqueline

On Thursday October 24th I went to see Actors’ Shakespeare Project’s Romeo and Juliet and then on Saturday October 26th I went to see Sleeping Weazel’s The Madness Of Small Worlds.
I never thought I’d see the day where I would be able to understand every single word in a Shakespeare play. But this production of Romeo and Juliet succeeded in doing this! I was amazed at the actors’ knowledge of what they were saying and their capacity to transmit it to an audience. This made me think I had it all figured out, that the key to enabling an audience to understand and listen was the actor’s knowledge of what they are saying.
However, after seeing The Madness Of Small Worlds, I realized I didn’t have it figured out at all. The actors in it had complete knowledge of what they were saying, that was very clear, and yet, I didn’t understand a single thing! It was in a post-modern style, which I had never seen before. The actor’s presence on stage was so strong, and yet no matter how hard I tried to follow what was being said I couldn’t understand. Nevertheless, there were numerous people in the audience that seemed to understand everything and kept laughing and laughing. This seriously baffled me as I tried to figure out why, despite the actor’s brilliancy, I couldn’t seem to grasp what was going on.

I still don’t have an answer to how it was possible that I understood every single word of a play written by Shakespeare’s daunting language, but not a single one of commonly spoken English.

from Zahan

As per Matt's suggestion, here's a video of some fencing stuff. It's just a little accident that, along with the commentary, is quite funny.


from Francesca



I saw the Actors’ Shakespeare Project’s production of Romeo and Juliet last night at the Strand Theatre. It was by far the best Shakespeare show I have ever seen. For the first time, I really understood every single line that was spoken, making the story extremely powerful and understandable. Every single actor had a strong grasp of exactly what he or she was saying, allowing him or her to deliver the lines with complete clarity. There was a modern twist put on the show, mostly in terms of set, costume, and lighting, so many times when they delivered the lines, they did it with that modern twist incorporated. It proved that Shakespeare knew exactly what he was creating and saying when he wrote these plays, and many of the lines are still relatable today. Witnessing how well they knew the meaning of each and every line they spoke made me very appreciative of all the table work we have been doing for both Twelfth Night and Hamlet. Although it has taken a long time, it will be well worth it in the end. I wish we had more time to study the Hamlet script, but seeing Romeo and Juliet made me extremely excited to continue to discover the words and figure out exactly what Shakespeare was intending to say. 

from Desiree


So this week I decided to explore Shakespeare's writing style in Hamlet.  While doing some research I found an article about the different periods of Shakespeare's plays.  The article talks about the four periods in which his plays are classified. They are: the early period, the balanced period, the overflowing period, and the final period.  They are classified based on clarity and maturity of the writing as well as characterization. However, this is not without some debate.  There are some plays which scholars do not believe belong in a particular period.  Two of these plays are Hamlet and The Merchant Of Venice.  This article no only lists the plays in each period, but also the style in general, characterization, and dialogue with examples. I think that this may be helpful in our text research! 



from Danny



The essay above is In Defense of Hamlet's King Claudius, a breakdown of the allegations made by Hamlet against his uncle and a critical perspective on the amount of credence that can be given to them in the context of the play. The cumulative point of the writing is that the grand majority of Hamlet's grievances against Claudius are either totally unsupported by the rest of the text or rendered irrelevant by the politics / customs of the time. The only acts he committed that were truly wrong were fratricide and the attempted assassination of prince Hamlet, the motives behind the latter being even more tangled than those behind the former -- if Claudius had had his way, Hamlet would have been an opportunity for redemption rather than an opportunity for further malevolence. I felt this essay was valuable because it gave an objective perspective on Claudius as a full character, rather than a flat villain, and also illuminated the motives behind many of Claudius' actions; the expedited marriage to Gertrude was in the interest of maintaining the political stability of Denmark more so than indulgent sexuality, and after the murder of King Hamlet he does nothing untoward with his new position of power -- even the stalking of prince Hamlet is a far more benevolent act than that of most any other one of Shakespeare's true villains.

from Maria


How catholic are Shakespeare's plays?

Valid question. As stated in the article, Will was very comfortable
around Catholics, the sacred nature of their actions had not slipped
from his life in the least. As we have read, Shakespeare's language
gives vivid depth to the minds and actions of his characters, but was
his dramatic depth strengthen by his understanding of Catholicism, or
as the article states, his ''opportunity to see god in all creation,
in all pleasure, in human love and even in sickness.''
The argument in this article that especially interests me is that real
catholic priest during this time were criminal, and treated as such,
Shakespeare provides a public space to show the depths of Catholics as
well as protestants. I believe this speaks more to his understanding
of all human nature and equality and less with his knowledge of

Catholicism, but what do you all think?

from Inna

This week I wanted to explore something that was briefly mentioned in class - Ophelia's suicide and burial. I found a great article written by Rocellus Guernsey in 1885 called "Ecclesiastical Law in Hamlet: The Burial of Ophelia". He discusses types of suicide burials, canon law, text in Hamlet, religious scripture etc. which help illuminate the time in which Shakespeare was living. Guernsey devotes a large portion of the paper to the explanation and illustration of the actual ritual of the funeral procession and burial. Fascinating read - hope this is helpful!