Read Hamlet by William Shakespeare Online


Many consider the tragedy of "Hamlet" to be Shakespeare's masterpiece and one of the greatest plays of all time. It has entertained audiences for centuries and the role of Hamlet is one of the most sought after by actors. It is the story of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark who learns of the death of his father at the hands of his uncle, Claudius. Claudius murders Hamlet's fatMany consider the tragedy of "Hamlet" to be Shakespeare's masterpiece and one of the greatest plays of all time. It has entertained audiences for centuries and the role of Hamlet is one of the most sought after by actors. It is the story of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark who learns of the death of his father at the hands of his uncle, Claudius. Claudius murders Hamlet's father, his own brother, to take the throne of Denmark and to marry Hamlet's widowed mother. Hamlet is sunk into a state of great despair as a result of discovering the murder of his father and the infidelity of his mother. Hamlet is torn between his great sadness and his desire for the revenge of his father's murder. "Hamlet" is a work of great complexity and as such has drawn many different critical interpretations. Hamlet has been seen as a victim of circumstance, as an impractical idealist, as the sufferer of an Oedipus complex, as an opportunist wishing to kill his Uncle not for revenge but to ascend to the throne, as the sufferer of a great melancholy, and as a man blinded by his desire for revenge. The true motivations of Hamlet are complex and enigmatic and have been debated for centuries. Read this classic tragedy and decide for yourself where Hamlet's true motivations lie and how they influence his ultimate demise....

Title : Hamlet
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9781605015996
Format Type : ebook
Number of Pages : 0 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Hamlet Reviews

  • Madeline
    2019-06-11 07:28

    Hamlet, abridged:GHOST/DAD: Hamlet, your uncle killed me and married your mom. I want vengeance, so best get to murdering, plzthnx. HAMLET: EEK! OPHELIA: Hamlet, are you okay?HAMLET: Get away from me, skankwhore! OPHELIA: WTF? *goes from zero to crazy like that*GERTRUDE: Kid, you need therapy.HAMLET: And you need to be less of AN ADULTEROUS WHORE! POLONIUS: OMG so rude!HAMLET: Eavesdropping? I KEEL YOU!*play goes on hold while Hamlet talks to skeletons*LAERTES: You killed my dad and drove my sister to suicide, you jerk! I challenge you to a duel!HAMLET: I KEEL YOU!CLAUDIUS: MWAHAHAHA! I put poison in your goblet, Hamlet!GERTRUDE: Yum, poisoned wine. *dies*CLAUDIUS: Whoops, my bad.HAMLET: I KEEL YOU! GHOST/DAD: Wow, nice job son. Except for the part where you're bleeding all over my castle.HAMLET: Ah, dammit. *dies*And then the even more abridged version:ROCKS FALL, EVERYONE DIES. The end.Really, what's not to love?Read for: 12th grade AP EnglishBONUS (courtesy of Married to the Sea, a webcomic you should probably read on a regular basis): BONUS: Speaking of Ophelia...

  • BillKerwin
    2019-06-10 09:35

    I don't have any original insights to share from this most recent of god-knows-how-many readings, but this time through I was really struck by: 1) what a damn fine piece of stagecraft this is, from the suspenseful, moody opening on the castle battlements to the solemn dead march carrying the prince offstage, and 2) how Shakespeare seems to want Hamlet's personality--particularly the wellspring of his actions (and lack of action)--to remain an enigma, and that he achieves this by infusing the character with so much of himself--so much wit and poetry, so much despondency and savagery--that the result is that the audience simply bows before the great mystery of human personality, and that this reverence for the unknown lurking in the heart of an extraordinary man intensifies the sense of pity, horror and waste that fills us at the end of the play.

  • Nayra.Hassan
    2019-06-18 09:21

    متردد في قراءة هاملت..ستندم اذن!!اكلنا نكره الاختيارات. .و نجاهد احيانا لنلقي بها على غيرنا ..نختار هذا اللون ..ام ذاك..ننام ام نعمل..تقرأ هاملت و لا نؤجلها؟ننتقم ام نسامح ؟و الاهم☀ نسلك هذا الطريق المضيء ...ام ذاك الطريق المعتم؟نكون او لا نكون؟ا"غاية ما دافعت به عن اب و ملك عزيز نكب أشد النكبات..هو ان اهذي هذيان الحالم...مع ان شاغل الانتقام ملأ نفسي..جبان انا "؟؟حسنا و من منا لم تطن في أذنه هذه الكلمات ..لمرات و مرات و نحن نلوم أنفسنا على تخاذلنا..عن أخذ حقوقنا. ..او حقوق من نحبللاسف سيظل هاملت هو انا و انت و كل من يمتلك بذرة الخير و العدل في نفسه..و بحلول سن الثلاثين سيختار كل منا ..هل سيكون ؟ و هؤلاء محظوظون .. او لا يكون ؟..و ساعتها سيضع نفسه على وضع الطيار الآلى الشهير "عايش و مش عايش "..حتى يقضي الله في أمره..و حينها لن يلح عليه سؤال هاملت ...و لن يكون مطالبا باتخاذ اي قرارا"سيظل فني خالدا ..ما دامت هناك عيون ترى و اذان تسمع " صدقت شكسبير بالفعل..قد تخيفنا اللغة الثقيلة. ..قد تصدنا مبادىء قديمة..و لكنه سيجذبنا هو شاب نبيل ؛قلبه كبير قست عليه الحياة فثار عليها. .تشكك في الفضيلة..يأس من الناسلكنه ظل مطالبا بالثار ممن قتل والده..احقاقا للعدل الذي ظل يؤمن به ..و الفضيلة التي يطمح إليها و لو رغما عنه👀و لكنه التردد..التردد ..لعنة هاملت"ان التفكير الكثير في احتمالات الموقف ..يؤدي إلى شلل في التصرف "و هكذا لخص لنا هاملت مأساته في سطر واحد..أليست ماساتنا جميعا ؟💬و من فينا اليوم لا يشعر بحيرة هاملت و تشاؤمه؟ ..قلقه و كابتهمن؟ لذا من المؤكد انك ستجد نفسك تقراها او تشاهدها كاملة ذات يوم ..من الايام

  • Paul Bryant
    2019-06-15 13:18

    The Skinhead Hamlet - Shakespeare's play translated into modern English. By Richard Curtis. Yes, that Richard Curtis!Note : those offended by the F word - LOOK AWAY NOW! And Georgia, if you've stumbled on this review by your funny old dad - this is ANOTHER Paul Bryant. Not me! *********ACT ISCENE IThe Battlements of Elsinore Castle.[Enter HAMLET, followed by GHOST:] GHOST: Oi! Mush! HAMLET: Yer? GHOST: I was fucked! [Exit GHOST:] HAMLET: O Fuck. [Exit HAMLET:] SCENE IIThe Throneroom.[Enter KING CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, HAMLET and COURT:] CLAUDIUS: Oi! You, Hamlet, give over! HAMLET: Fuck off, won't you? [Exit CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, COURT:] HAMLET: (Alone) They could have fucking waited. [Enter HORATIO:] HORATIO: Oi! Watcha cock! HAMLET: Weeeeey! [Exeunt:] SCENE IIIOphelia's Bedroom.[Enter OPHELIA and LAERTES:] LAERTES: I'm fucking off now. Watch Hamlet doesn't slip you one while I'm gone. OPHELIA: I'll be fucked if he does. [Exeunt:] SCENE IVThe Battlements.[Enter HORATIO, HAMLET and GHOST.:] GHOST: Oi! Mush, get on with it! HAMLET: Who did it then? GHOST: That wanker Claudius. He poured fucking poison in my fucking ear! HAMLET: Fuck me! [Exeunt.:] ACT IISCENE IA corridor in the castle.[Enter HAMLET reading. Enter POLONIUS.:] POLONIUS: Oi! You! HAMLET: Fuck off, grandad! [Exit POLONIUS. Enter ROSENCRANZ and GUILDENSTERN.:] ROS & GUILD: Oi! Oi! Mucca! HAMLET: Fuck off, the pair of you! [Exit ROS & GUILD.:] HAMLET: (Alone) To fuck or be fucked. [Enter OPHELIA.:] OPHELIA: My Lord! HAMLET: Fuck off to a nunnery! [They exit in different directions.:] ACT IIISCENE IThe Throne Room.[Enter PLAYERS and all COURT.:] FIRST PLAYER: Full thirty times hath Phoebus cart... CLAUDIUS: I'll be fucked if I watch any more of this crap. [Exeunt.:] SCENE IIGertrude's Bedchamber.[Enter GERTRUDE and POLONIUS, who hides behind an arras.:] [Enter HAMLET.:] HAMLET: Oi! Slag! GERTRUDE: Watch your fucking mouth, kid! POLONIUS: (From behind the curtain) Too right. HAMLET: Who the fuck was that? [He stabs POLONIUS through the arras.:] POLONIUS: Fuck! [POLONIUS dies.:] HAMLET: Fuck! I thought it was that other wanker. [Exeunt.:] ACT IVSCENE IA Court Room.[Enter HAMLET, CLAUDIUS.:] CLAUDIUS: Fuck off to England then! HAMLET: Delighted, mush. SCENE IIThe Throne Room.[Enter OPHELIA, GERTRUDE and CLAUDIUS.:] OPHELIA: Here, cop a whack of this. [She hands GERTRUDE some rosemary and exits.:] CLAUDIUS: She's fucking round the twist, isn't she? GERTRUDE: (Looking out the window.) There is a willow grows aslant the brook. CLAUDIUS: Get on with it, slag. GERTRUDE: Ophelia's gone and fucking drowned! CLAUDIUS: Fuck! Laertes isn't half going to be browned off. [Exeunt.:] SCENE IIIA Corridor.[Enter LAERTES.:] LAERTES: (Alone) I'm going to fucking do this lot. [Enter CLAUDIUS.:] CLAUDIUS: I didn't fucking do it, mate. It was that wanker Hamlet. LAERTES: Well, fuck him. [Exeunt.:] ACT VSCENE IHamlet's Bedchamber.[Enter HAMLET and HORATIO.:] HAMLET: I got this feeling I'm going to cop it, Horatio, and you know, I couldn't give a flying fuck. [Exeunt.:] SCENE IILarge Hall.[Enter HAMLET, LAERTES, COURT, GERTRUDE, CLAUDIUS.:] LAERTES: Oi, wanker: let's get on with it. HAMLET: Delighted, fuckface. [They fight and both are poisoned by the poisoned sword.:] LAERTES: Fuck! HAMLET: Fuck! [The QUEEN drinks.:] GERTRUDE: Fucking odd wine! CLAUDIUS: You drunk the wrong fucking cup, you stupid cow! [GERTRUDE dies.:] HAMLET: (Pouring the poison down CLAUDIUS'S throat) Well, fuck you! CLAUDIUS: I'm fair and squarely fucked. [CLAUDIUS dies.:] LAERTES: Oi, mush: no hard feelings, eh? HAMLET: Yer. [LAERTES dies.:] HAMLET: Oi! Horatio! HORATIO: Yer? HAMLET: I'm fucked. The rest is fucking silence. [HAMLET dies.:] HORATIO: Fuck: that was no ordinary wanker, you know. [Enter FORTINBRAS.:] FORTINBRAS: What the fuck's going on here? HORATIO: A fucking mess, that's for sure. FORTINBRAS: No kidding. I see Hamlet's fucked. HORATIO: Yer. FORTINBRAS: Fucking shame: fucking good bloke. HORATIO: Too fucking right. FORTINBRAS: Fuck this for a lark then. Let's piss off. [Exeunt with alarums.:]

  • Ana
    2019-06-08 13:28

    Here be spoilers. This could all have been avoided if Hamlet and his posse had sought the counsel of Sassy Gay Friend.Although Hamlet is one of the most important pieces of literature on the planet, many find it hard to understand. Basically this is what happens.Hamlet is depressed and feeling emo af. He's got 99 problems and his dysfunctional family is the biggest one. The prince of Denmark is not a happy camper. He wants to kill his uncle aka the king to avenge his father. Not a good idea.I mean, I get it. Claudius is a big douche. He needs to die. Like a lot. But murder is murder. Come on Hamlet, you're better than that.Hamlet is starting to lose his mind. He's just walking around, saying,'To be, or not to be: that is the question.'He has zero chill. As usual Gertrude and her stupidity are of no help here.The person I feel most sorry for is Ophelia. I like her but what was she thinking?!Poor Ophelia. It's gotta suck when your bf tells you to go to a nunnery and you just gotta sit there and accept it.I wanted to shake her and tell her to find a man who will treat her right.Oh Hamlet you poor foolish boy. You're an idiot but you're a lovable idiot. Hamlet is very likely the best thing Shakespeare has ever written. It's a great read, as long as you know what to expect. To borrow a quote from Game of Thrones- if you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention.The rest is silence. *tear*

  • Jason
    2019-05-31 10:35

    “Madness in great ones must not unwatch’d go.”I don’t know what to say about Hamlet. I could go on about how it is a story of madness and revenge. I could talk about the bonds of family loyalty, the sacrifices of love, the breaches of trust and their deleterious effects on the psyche. But this is old news—Hamlet has been around for over four hundred years. What could I possibly say that hasn’t already been said?When my wife saw I was reading Shakespeare, her snippy comment went something like, “What are you reading that for? Don’t you you have enough drama in your life?” Which, thanks Cristina, and yes I suppose I do, but what of it? Drama can be so much freaking fun. There is a reason it sells, a reason there are countless dramatic television shows on the air, countless box office films released each year rehashing the same old dramatic plotlines (some to great effect; others, not so much). And there is a reason people are still reading Shakespeare centuries upon centuries after his death: they are fun, they are witty, they are ever so dramatic.Hamlet is no exception. With plot elements involving fratricide, lethal potions, mistaken identity, forgery of correspondence, espionage and treachery, along with a solid dose of hanging out with the ghosts of dead relatives, one could imagine I’m reviewing an episode of General Hospital. But what is Hamlet if not a soap opera for the Elizabethans? It is an epically tragic train wreck crammed into five tiny acts.What makes this piece of drama so timeless, though, is that its action is served in such perfect complement by its depiction of character. We all know what Prince Hamlet is going to do before he does it. Hamlet himself, even while doubting his abilities and struggling with his resolve, knows how it’s going to all play out. Why else would he be so cruel to Ophelia? And yet it is this internal turmoil that fuels our interest in the action. It might seem like an ordinary train wreck at its surface, but upon deeper inspection it is a train wreck in whose conductors and engineers we have a vested interest.So, witty discourse meets fast-paced drama meets penetrating character introspection? It almost makes me wonder what would have become of Luke and Laura had William Shakespeare been in charge of the script.

  • J.G. Keely
    2019-06-01 07:37

    Shakespeare is an adept poet and master of the language. He layers on jokes, puns, and references everywhere. He has a massive output of work, and a number of different plots. When we compare him to other authors, it is difficult to find anyone who stacks up--but then, we're often comparing him to the wrong people.Shakespeare didn't write books or pamphlets or epics, he wrote plays: short pieces of drama that were meant to be fast-paced and exciting. That they are mainly experienced today as bound books and not theatrical productions does not change their origins. If one wants to look at the achievements of Shakespeare, he should be compared to someone of a similar bent.He should be compared with prolific writers known for catchy jokes and phrases. Writers who reuse old plots, making fun of their traditions. Writers of work meant to be performed. Writers who aim for the lowest common denominator, while still including the occasional high-minded political commentary. He should be compared to the writers of South Park; or the Simpsons; or MAD Magazine.Shakespeare was meant to be lowbrow and political, but now it only reads that way to those who are well-educated enough to understand his language, reference, and the political scene of the time. If you do know the period lingo, then his plays are just as filthy as any episode of South Park.For example, the word 'wit' refers to a fellow's manhood (this one comes up a lot), here's an example from Much Ado About Nothing:Don Pedro: I said that thou hadst a great wit. Yay, said she, a great gross one. Nay, say I, a fine wit. Yay, said she, a fine little one. Nay, said I, a good wit. Just, said she, it hurts nobody.Plus there's the title of that play, which references the fact that 'nothing' was slang for a woman's maidenhead, which occurs also in Hamlet:Hamlet: That's a fair thought to lie between a maid's legs.Ophelia: What is, my lord?Hamlet: Nothing.He was also not one to pass up a good cunt joke.Shakespeare often refers to mythology because that was the standard pool of reference for authors at the time. Family Guy references 1980's pop culture. Is that any less esoteric? How esoteric will Mr. T be after 400 years (assuming he doesn't find his way into the latest testament of the bible anytime soon)?Additionally, all of Shakespeare's magnificent plots were lifted, sometimes whole cloth, from other books and histories, just like how sit coms reuse 'episode types' or borrow plots from popular movies. Shakespeare was not quite as visionary or deep as he is often given credit for. Rather, he was always so indistinct with the motives and thoughts of his characters that two critics could assign two completely different and conflicting motives, but find both equally well-supported. Is Shylock evil because he's a Jew, evil despite the fact, or evil because of the effects of racism on him? You can make a case for all three. Marlowe (the more practised and precise writer) never left interpretation to chance, and where has it gotten him?Shakespeare was an inspired and prolific author, and his effect on writing and talent for aphorism cannot be overstated. I think he probably wrote the King James version because it is so pretty. However, he is not the be-all and end-all of writing.His popularity and central position in the canon comes mainly from the fact that you can write anything you like about his plays. Critics and professors don't have to scramble, or even leave their comfort zone. Shakespeare's work is opaque enough that it rejects no particular interpretation. No matter your opinions, you can find them reflected in Shakespeare; or at least, not outright refuted.His is a grey world, and his lack of agenda leaves us pondering what he could possibly have been like as a person. His indirect approach makes his writing the perfect representation of an unsure, unjust world. No one is really right or wrong, and even if they were, there would be no way to prove it.I don't know whether this makes him the most or least poignant of writers. Is the author's absence from the stories the most rarefied example of the craft, or is it just lighthearted pandering? Either way, he's still a clever, amusing, insightful, and helplessly dirty fellow.

  • Jibran
    2019-06-09 09:37

    It is only when I read and compare across languages that I realise what a hard and thankless job translation is, especially older texts and more so when there's a significant cultural distance between languages. Shakespeare's diction is so profoundly poetic and idiomatic that it might be thought untranslatable, even when it is rendered into modern English idiom, it loses its antique beauty when tampered with, like those monuments reconstructed from history that look like originals but actually are not.And so reading Shakespeare in Urdu was always going to be a fascinating experience. I commend Firaq Gorakhpuri's consummate skill in recreating Hamlet in an idiom that recalls the dying days of the classical dialect mixed in with sufficient modernist invention to keep it coherent, but without employing too many calques and direct borrowings which would have grated on my nerves. I also like that the translator did not depart from the prose-poetry form of the original. All in all, this translation of Hamlet may go down as one of the finest examples of how to translate classical English literature, and not just Shakespeare, in a language that is fast losing translations from other cultures.December '16

  • Ahmad Sharabiani
    2019-06-10 13:10

    The tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, William Shakespeareعنوانها: هملت؛ سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک؛ تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک؛ هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: ماه مارس سال 1972 میلادیعنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مسعود فرزاد؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، 1337، در 290 ص؛ چاپ دوم 1346؛عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: داریوش شاهین؛ تهران، جاویدان، 1344، در 278 ص، مصور؛ عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: محمود اعتمادزاده (م.ا. به آذین)؛ تهران، اندیشه، 1344، در 288 ص؛ چاپ دوم فروردین 1351؛عنوان: سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ ویراستار: هارولد جنکینز؛ مترجم: میرشمس الدین ادیب سلطانی؛ تهران، نگاه، 1385، در 395 ص، فارسی انگلیسی، شابک: 9643513297؛ عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: آرش خیرآبادی؛ مشهد، پاژ، 1387، در 232 ص؛ شابک: 9789648904536؛عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ برگردان: رضا دادویی؛ تهران، آدورا، 1391، در 275 ص، شابک: 9786009307135؛ عنوان: تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: بهزاد جزایری؛ تهران، انتشارات پلک، 1393، در 412 ص، شابک: 9789642353187؛ عنوان: هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: شیدا فروغی؛ قزوین، سایه گستر، 1393، در 48 ص، شابک: 9786003740082؛ عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مهرداد پورعلم؛ تهران، انتشارات ایران، 1394، در 191 ص؛ شابک: 9786005347593؛نمایش‌نامه‌ ای تراژیک اثر ویلیام شکسپیر است که در سال 1602 میلادی نوشته شده، و یکی از مشهورترین نمایش‌نامه‌ های تاریخ ادبیات جهان به شمار است. نمایش نامه از آنجا آغاز می‌شود که هملت شاهزاده دانمارک، از سفر آلمان به قصر خود در هلسینبورگ دانمارک بازمی‌گردد، تا در مراسم خاکسپاری پدرش شرکت جوید. پدرش به گونه ای مرموز به قتل رسیده‌، کس از چند و چون قتل شاه آگاه نیست. هملت درمی‌یابد، که مادر و عمویش باهم پیمان زناشویی بسته، و هم بستر شده‌ اند. وسوسه‌ ها و تردیدهای هملت هنگامی آغاز می‌شود، که روح شاه مقتول بر او نمایان می‌شود. روح به هملت میگوید که چگونه به دست برادر خویش به قتل رسیده‌ است، و از هملت می‌خواهد انتقام باز ستاند. هملت در گیروداری اشتباهاً پدر معشوقه‌ اش اوفلیا را به قتل می‌رساند، پدر اوفلیا در پشت پرده، مشغول جاسوسی بوده، و هملت اشتباهاً او را کلادیوس پنداشته بود. اوفلیا از مرگ پدر آشفته می‌شود، و خود را در رودخانه‌ ای غرق می‌کند. سرانجام پس از درگیری با لایریتس، برادر اوفلیا، که به خونخواهی خواهر و پدر برخاسته بود، هملت انتقام پدر خویش را از عموی خویش نیز می‌گیرد؛ و در پایان نمایش هر دوی آنها، به همراه گرترود و برادر اوفلیا کشته می‌شوندشخصیتهای نمایش عبارتند از: کلادیوس: پادشاه دانمارک و عموی هملت؛ هملت: پسر شاه سابق، و برادرزاده ی پادشاه کنونی؛ گرترود: ملکه ی دانمارک و مادر هملت؛ پولونیوس: لرد چمبرلین؛ اوفلیا: دختر پولونیوس و معشوقه ی هملت؛ هوراشیو: دوست هملت؛ لایریتس: پسر پولونیوس؛ کورنلیوس، روزنکرانس، گیلدسترن: دوستان هملت؛ مارسلوس: افسر؛ برناردو: افسر؛ فرانسیسکو: سرباز؛ رینالدو: خادم پولونیوس؛ شبح: پدر هملت؛ فورتینبراس: شاهزاده نروژ؛ گروه بازیگران دوره گرد؛ا. شربیانی

  • Dolors
    2019-05-23 08:35

    “All that is amiable and excellent in nature is combined in Hamlet, with the exception of one quality. He is a man living in meditation, called upon to act by every motive human and divine, but the great object of his life is defeated by continually resolving to do, yet doing nothing but resolve.”Lecture XII, STC.As much as I admire Coleridge and with the boldness of having read Hamlet only once and therefore being aware I haven’t even managed to scratch the surface of the Paragon of Tragedies, I dare to antagonize the poet and proclaim that I resist the idea of linking Hamlet’s moral idealism to reprehensible inaction.The Prince of Denmark’s obsession is to think, not to act, and in spite of having been dethroned by his duplicitous uncle, he seems to count with the favor of the common people. But Hamlet can’t help being haunted by the sickness of life and he retreats into the abyss of his inwardness. He is plagued by endless questions that paralyze him in meditation: “What a piece of work is a man!... And yet to me what is this quintessence of dust?”. In the opening scene of Act I, a melancholic dejection has already taken hold of The Prince and, whether in self-preservation or in fear of foul reality, he engages in deluded gibberish easily attributable to a man whose reason has abandoned him.And yet his inquisitive soliloquies are infused with the elucidating sharpness of a genius, someone with great intellectual capacity who taunts with puns and riddles that contain receding depths and layers and layers of meaning in them. “The widow being oppressed, the orphan wronged,The taste of hunger, or a tyrant’s reign,And thousand more calamities besides,To grunt and sweat under this weary life,When that he may his full quietus make, With a bare bodkin, who would this endure,But for a hope of something after death?”Spontaneous philosopher or irredeemably insane? The world of Hamlet is phantasmagorical, in constant disruption with the burdens of the past, the betrayals of the present and the falsehood of the future. Everybody around him seems to have hidden agendas. He observes, he ponders, he pretends not to see the King’s debasing lust and murderous greed, Polonius’ machiavellian maneuvers, the Queen’s disgusting shallowness, Ophelia’s gullible innocence. Yet his keen eyes discern it all…but at what cost?“Great wit to madness nearly is allied"The afflictions of life require greatness of spirit and Hamlet meets his fate fully aware that logic, reason and justice are not enough to disentangle the quandaries of existence. In the course of the action though, a transformation has taken place in him, the doubtful Prince has grown in wisdom and is ready to submit to providence without repudiating the world. The welfare of the Kingdom, the sense of honor, the corroding lust or ambition, all dissolve in the spectacle of beholding the spirit of man blossoming and most triumphant… in defeat.

  • Justin
    2019-05-25 13:38

    Updated review February 2017:This is my third time reading Hamlet and, like a fine wine... you know the rest. I read the same copy I've had lying around for years with one page of notes on the left and the play on the right. This time I was able to read most of the play without notes which was pretty awesome. Just had to glance over to figure out what some of the words meant l, but I actually got the story this time. It's taken me three tries with a book that helps me cheat, but boy oh boy I finally got this down. It's beautiful! I loved it! It really hits a variety of genres and kept me turning the pages. It was weird... I read it pretty slowly to breathe in the language and take my time with it, even reading it out loud at times until my wife made me shut up. I tried to get her to play the female parts, but she wasn't feeling it. I guess she really just had the Queen of Ophelia so her options were limited. But yeah, I read it slowly but it also seemed to fly by at the same time. Hamlet is a very complex guy who goes through a range or emotions as the story unfolds. His monologues are just really great poetry that I wish I could memorize and just belt out randomly on a street corner or while I'm in the grocery store contemplating another unhealthy snack. To be or not to be... I loved the monologues. I loved when things just went nuts at times. The ending was just crazy and awesome. It's just a daggum fantastic story, and you should give it a shot if you haven't already. Find a copy that helps you and breaks down the language and all that. It's good. I've got Macbeth on the shelf, too. Might be time to revisit it and then tackle more Shakespeare. I've gotta be in the right mindset though. Can't just be reading all this nonsense all the time. I have real books waiting to be read, too. Books with real words and stuff. Previous review:I once asked a friend of mine if he liked Shakespeare to which he responded, "I don't dislike Shakespeare". That's exactly how I feel about him, too.In high school I was forced to read Romeo and Juliet and Julius Caesar. My thoughts on Shakespeare haven't really changed much in the past 15 years. His stories are great, but they were written so long ago that it's not always fun to read. I appreciate the hell out of the guy, but he will never be my first choice (or second or third) when I'm looking for something new to read.That being said, this was my favorite play to read through. Maybe I'm older now and find it easier and more enjoyable to read this stuff for pleasure rather than because I may have a pop quiz over the third act. I thought the story was fantastic and was surprised by how many lines I recognized from just being a human and dabbling in a little bit of culture every now and then. Would I have ever read this if it wasn't being read in a group to prepare for Infinite Jest? Nope. But, I did and I'm glad I took the time to do it.

  • Manny
    2019-06-11 08:19

    Jesus Christ what a year no way could this get worse now they're hacking away at each other with their swords and I'm supposed to look interested oh well done Hamlet despite everything he's still my son that was a lovely feint pretty worried about Laertes though he looks so crazy first his dad and then his sister wish I could do something to help oh come on who am I kidding it's Hamlet I'm worried about of course God what am I going to do that poor kid is totally fucked and he thinks it's all my fault I told Claudius it wasn't smart to hush up what happened to Kingy they'd only believe he'd done it was I right or was I right of course with the two of us carrying on it did look suspicious don't blame people for jumping to conclusions I wish he hadn't broken up with Ophelia she seemed like such a nice girl everything just got worse after that he was so mean to her takes after his father that way know how she felt there were moments I could have jumped in the river myself and then lecturing me on my sex life I couldn't believe it honestly teenagers all think they've invented sex they can't imagine anyone over twenty still does it I'm only thirty-six for crying out loud I'm in my sexual prime not that I was getting much before Claudius noticed me poor old Kingy completely hopeless in bed have to hand it to Claudius even if he is a bastard he's the first man who's ever given me an orgasm can't imagine what Hamlet would say if I told him that bad enough as it is oh for Christ's sake Laertes what do you think you're doing that's not a real sword you know sweet Mary mother of God I need a drink but if Claudius sees me he'll start going on again about my alcohol consumption I'll wait until his back is turned and grab a quick one before he notices right here's my chance one glass won't k---

  • Foad
    2019-06-04 09:21

    یه اعتراف می خوام بکنم:من قبلاً از بین کارهای شکسپیر، هملت رو اصلاً دوست نداشتم. عاشق اتللو و مکبث بودم، ولی از هملت خوشم نمی اومد اصلاً و نمی دونستم چرا معروف ترین اثر شکسپیره.همه ى اين ها، تا وقتى شنيدم "بنديكت كمبربچ" نقش هملت رو بازى كرده. قبلاً اجراى سينمايى "مل گيبسون" رو ديده بودم، و راستش چندان كمكى نكرد كه هملت رو بيشتر دوست داشته باشم. اما بنديكت كمبربچ ماجراى ديگه ايه. با سختى اين اجرا رو پيدا كردم، و: موسيقى بى نظير، طراحى لباس بى نظير، طراحى صحنه ى بى نظير، نور پردازى بى نظير... اما همه ى اين ها فقط زيورهايى عارضى بودن گرد جوهر اصلى: بازى بى نظير.عادت شكسپير اينه كه تقريباً هيچ كدوم از حالات شخصيت ها و لحن ديالوگ ها رو نمى نويسه و همه رو واگذار كرده به كارگردان و بازيگر. كلماتش همه خشك و بى جان هستن، و يك كارگردان و بازيگر خوب نيازه تا روح درستى به اين كلمات بدمه. يكى مثل بنديكت كمبربچ كه با دم مسيحايى ش به تك تك كلمات، شخصيت متمايزى بده، روح مستقلى بده، و حالات چهره اى به نمايشنامه اضافه كنه كه مثل شارح يك كتاب قديمى، جمله به جمله شرح بده كه چطور بايد هر جمله رو فهميد.اوايل فيلم خیلی از دیالوگ ها رو متوجه نمی شدم به خاطر نثر قديمى شكسپير، و زيرنويس هم موجود نبود. به خاطر همین رفتم ترجمه ی "م.ا به آذين" (كه اتفاقاً از مترجم هاييه كه دوست دارم نثرشون رو) از نمایشنامه رو دانلود کردم. نمايشنامه رو باز گذاشتم کنار فیلم و همزمان فیلم رو می ديدم و ترجمه رو می خوندم، و به اين ترتيب بنديكت كمبربچ دست به دست م.ا به آذين، باعث شدن هملت با دوازده پله از قعر جدولِ نمايشنامه هاى محبوب من، به جايگاه صدرنشينى صعود كنه.آنك من: شيفته و دوستدار هملت!لینک فایل تورنت فیلم

  • Councillor
    2019-05-28 14:08

    Isn't it always a delight to delve into one of Shakespeare's world-famous plays?Like many others, I had been forced to read Shakespeare in school (Romeo & Juliet, as in my case), and unfamiliar with all the important literary classics as I was back then, I had a lot of troubles with the rather outmoded language. After finally finishing that play, not only was I relieved to have conquered it successfully, no, it had also raised my interest for other Shakespearian plays. Macbeth, Julius Caesar, A Midsummer Night's Dream - all of them are fantastic plays and an intriguing choice to spend some hours with. But none of them left me as enthralled, shocked and intrigued as Hamlet did.Everyone is probably familiar with the basic storyline of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, and his story of revenge. You may call into question Hamlet's intelligence in the performance of his revenge, but this does not erase the way Shakespeare has so beautifully written one of his most well-known plays to engage readers of the original text as well as viewers of the stage performances alike. The play has been discussed and analyzed so many times already that it probably does not need yet another review, especially since I don't consider myself to be in the position to elaborately judge or even criticize the sophisticated language or the engaging storyline.I'd recommend this tale to everyone, even (or especially) if you don't know Shakespeare yet or don't want to read anything else by him due to negative experiences with his other plays. Hamlet may be called a classic thriller in its essence, but it is also an exploration on themes like humanity or the worth of whether revenge as a reaction to certain deeds is truly appropriate. Read and judge it for yourself, but read it. Until now, I have been reading Shakespeare's plays mostly because I thought everyone has to at some point, but Hamlet turned out to be a compelling reading journey, even if you are already familiar with the basic concept of the story.

  • Jason Koivu
    2019-05-21 10:18

    "To be or not to be...," that is not my favorite line. My favorite is: "Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio; a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy; he hath borne me on his back a thousand times." It's that recollection of innocent days that gets me every time, because you know Hamlet is being swept up in a vortex of innocence lost. STUPID ADULTS! They screw up everything!I grew up in a truly idyllic setting. As childhoods go, mine was a joy. But then you grow up and you wake up to reality.My introduction to Hamlet came during high school in my early teen years. Its murderous plot of family deceit and infidelity struck home, my family being likewise stricken with such maladies. The parallels were all too similar and I love/hated the play for driving it all home.Mel Gibson's movie version came out at this time, and its over-simplification and emotional heightening was a perfect fit for a simple-minded, emotionally-blinded teen. Less than stellar, the movie nonetheless had its effect upon me, furthering the torment.Luckily my family drama was not as murdery as Hamlet's, although if the personalities of some of the principle players were slightly more volatile, there could easily have been a bloodbath of Hamlet-esque proportions. In my reality, we all got over it, sorted it out, and moved on with our lives wherever they led. The beauty of fiction is to see the deepest of fantasies played out. It gives us - I hesitate to use the melodramatic "victims" here, but that is essentially what we amount to - it gives us release from the pent up anger when we see the wrong-doers get their comeuppance. For that reason, I doubt I'll ever be able to view this work through a truly unbiased, critical lens. Just because it's a "classic" doesn't mean you have to adorn it with a 5-star laurel wreath, but - for what it means to me - I do.

  • Bookdragon Sean
    2019-06-12 11:19

    Well, I’m an English literature student and I absolutely love Shakespeare’s plays. This is nothing unusual or exciting. Most English student’s live for Shakespeare. So far I’ve enjoyed reading, and studying, everything of his that’s popped up on the reading list until this came along. My reaction surprised me most of all, I never expected to find something of Shakespeare’s that I not only dislike, but also detest. This is also one of his most revered plays, and it’s also considered one of his greatest tragedies. So I’m somewhat dumfounded at my reaction. This play was frustrating, annoying and damn right revolting. Now, I know what you’re thinking: ‘who has the right to actually criticise this masterpiece?’ Well no one does. Objectively speaking it is, of course, a work of sheer brilliance. But, that doesn’t mean I have to like it or enjoy reading it. Today I sat through three hours of my lecturer praising this and calling it one of Shakespeare’s most important plays because it marked an important change within his career as dramatist and development as a writer. That’s all well and good, I can see that; and I appreciate that. However, Hamlet is one of the most idiotic and self-obsessed characters in creation. His inaction defines him as a tragic character, but to my mind that’s just silly. He caused his own death and the death of everyone in the play; yes, again, this makes his inaction tragic but it was also completely self-defeating; it boarded upon the absurd. The man needed a slap and a reality check, I just find him so unbearably frustrating. I’m not arguing against the play’s literary merit, so please don’t get defensive with me in the comments section. It is an iconic piece of literature; it can’t be denied. However, I am going to lay down three points of reasoning as to why I disliked it so. 1. A crap idea for revenge Hamlet’s revenge makes no sense; it is completely illogical. His uncle has killed his farther; he has personally murdered his own brother by pouring poison into his ear. This man, Claudius, has no empathy; he has no conscience. If a man can so callously kill his own brother, then, surely, logically speaking, trying to appeal to his sense of regret is almost pointless. He’s murdered his brother and has taken his place. He’s filled that role; he doesn’t care who he’s killed in the process. But, yet, somehow, this cold hearted man is deeply affected by his deed that is manifested in Hamlet's mock play. The idea for revenge shouldn’t have worked, but it did. Claudius admits his guild, in prayer, and sets Hamlet into a more crazed state. How is this revenge?2. Hamlet is a foolHamlet needed to step and truly consider his situation; yes, he does this in five soliloquies, but he never considered one angle; he never considers that his inaction could lead to a worse result that acting directly. He stages a play for the King to get revenge after much indecisiveness. The most direct action of revenge would have been to simply run the King through with a sword in the throne room or to poison him in kind. This would have made him a murderer, so it was off the table. He could have clenched his fists, and grinded his teeth, and just got on with the situation. But, to do so would be to ignore his father’s spirits’ request for revenge. So he could not really go down either route, but to do neither is worse than simply ignoring one. It leads to the bloodbath that is the final scene, which forced his hand. On a character level, I think of Hamlet as a coward who, ultimately, causes his own fate. This isn’t why I dislike him; he makes the play a tragedy, but it’s the illogical nature of his actions that condemns him in my estimation. He has two roads before him, and instead of taking either he forces a third road that is more detrimental than either.3. He is too self-obsessedHamlet barely considers anyone else. To his mind, his uncle marrying his mother is incest. In renaissance England this was as bad as full blown incest. Claudius and Gertrude were only in-laws: siblings by marriage. So by today’s standards it’s not that immoral. Regardless, though Hamlet doesn’t consider how his mother feels about this. He is repulsed by the notion, but she could be in love or she could be in the more likely eventuality of a forced marriage. Hamlet doesn’t consider her feelings; he is just repulsed by the idea of their marriage rather than the emotions and bond that may or may not be involved. This doesn’t make him a bad person, but, when considered with my other two points, I think it make him somewhat idiotic, selfish and frustrating. I simply dislike this play because I’m practically repulsed by its “tragic hero.” I recognise that this is an unpopular opinion, and I cannot help but think that I should have liked the play. But, Hamlet just infuriates me far too much for me to overlook my dissatisfaction with him and admire the play's formal features. I just cannot personally like it.

  • Carlos
    2019-06-14 08:38

    The first time I read this book I was in highschool. It was an 80-page book. The story was so short and simple, so I wondered "Why so many people say this is such a complex play/book?". A couple of years later, I bought a special edition of 592 pages: Too much? No! Why not? Because the play was written in Shakespearean English, and every single word that was not in standard English was explained at the bottom of the page, it explained the context, the uses you can have from that word.Ok, so I read that version and it was a pain in the ass. Not because it was a bad story at all, but now I truly understand people who say that Shakespeare was such a special writer, and I agree!Well, about the story... Fascinating! I loved how Shakespeare made of Hamlet such a special character. It was very difficult for Hamlet to take action, it was like "almost, almost!"I feel Shakespeare wanted to express himself on Hamlet. His multiple personalities during the play reminded me of Shakespeare's life a bit.On the other hand, I really LOVED how this play ends... What a bloody and violent ending, Terrific!Recommended? Absolutely, but a simple version, because the original might be too difficult and slow to read.

  • James
    2019-05-25 10:28

    Book Review4 out of 5 stars to Hamlet, a tragedy published in 1600 by William Shakespeare. Buckle your seat belts, as I have a 38 page review to share... Just Kidding! Well, I do have a lengthy review I could include from a previous course on Shakespeare, but I will not do so here... chance are you've already read the play or seen some film adaption, perhaps even a staged version. I've seen a bunch of them and read the place 4 times (once in high school, twice in college and once just for pleasure). Here's the thing about this play: There is WAY too much to absorb in just one or two reads. Each time you read the play, you pick up on new interpretations, new meanings and new thought patterns. Each time you watch a new performance, the actors and directors choose a different angle or approach. Hamlet is all of us. And we will always take from it something we want to believe... likely based on what's going on in our life at that time. If you are having relationship issues, you'll probably focus on that aspect of Hamlet's life. If you feel depressed, you'll questions "to be or not to be." If you are happy, you'll root for him to do the right things. I'm not sure if that's how Shakespeare intended it to happen, but he certainly left it open on purpose. Maybe not to allow us to have completely widespread views and interpretations, but enough to choose the key things we want to focus on. I think maybe I need to read it again this summer!About MeFor those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.

  • Elise (TheBookishActress)
    2019-06-12 09:21

    Here's the thing about Hamlet: if you see it and you hate it, you saw a terrible Hamlet. I don't care if it's given critical acclaim - fuck off, Kenneth Branagh - Hamlet is supposed to be compelling, and if you didn't find the character compelling, that actor didn't do their job. You need a Hamlet who knows the character, not a Hamlet who wants to do grace to the character or some shit. Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changed when the fire nation attacked when I saw Santa Cruz Shakespeare's 2016 production of Hamlet, starring actress Kate Eastwood Norris as Hamlet. (CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once. // HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel. ➽ Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.➽ Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's. In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play. VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually. Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube

  • Fernando
    2019-06-02 14:13

    "Un sueño no es en sí más que una sombra" Inmortal Hamlet...

  • Trevor
    2019-06-05 14:38

    I’ve always meant to talk to my mate George about Hamlet and I guess this is as good an opportunity to do so as any.There are different things I would say to different people about Hamlet – and as this is the near perfect play I guess there ought to be many and various things one could say about it. The oddest thing about Hamlet is that people always tend to say the same thing – they always say, “Oh yes, Hamlet, the man who hesitates”. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I don’t believe in capital punishment, but I do think that corporal punishment is much maligned and if one does not deserve a slap for saying Hamlet hesitates, it is hard to see what one should be slapped for at all.Aristotle was a top bloke, one of my favourites. In his poetics he says what he thinks makes a good tragedy. The first thing is that you needed a fall from grace. It is hardly a tragedy if the tragic figure is already at the bottom of the heap. There has got to be a fall or there really is no tragedy. So, tragedies are about kings and such – not (excuse my French, but I’ve just finished reading Simenon) ‘shit kickers’. Miller’s Death of a Salesman is famous as a modern tragedy, not least as it breaks this Aristotelian requirement for the tragic figure to be from the upper classes.Aristotle then thought that if the play was going to work as a tragedy the person about to undergo a tragic fall should have some flaw that was pretty ‘human’ and therefore something that would make sense to the audience. The feeling the writer of a tragic play wants to convey to his audience is pretty much, ‘there but for the grace of god go I’. The flaw needs to be fairly easy to identify – pride, for example, or lust – something easy to spot and it needs to be the reason for the downfall.Well, Hamlet is the Prince of Denmark, so he has a long way to fall. But just what is his tragic flaw? And this is where so many rush in and say, “He hesitates.” But I beg to differ.I think Hamlet is an enlightenment figure in an age only just (and even then, not quite) casting off the last remnants of the dark ages – and Shakespeare is an enlightenment figure doing much the same. It is important to remember that Shakespeare is writing at a time when King James is king. James was a very interesting King – not simply because he was homosexual and spent a lot of time chasing young men around the castle. But for me the most illuminating story of him – and he is mostly remembered for the Bible that bears his name – is to do with his new bride’s little trip over from Norway. On her way to England a storm blow up and made her crossing incredibly dangerous and frightening. James was not impressed. He decided that the storm was caused by the ill-will of local witches (as one does) – so a goodly number of old women were gathered together and killed for daring to cause such an irritation for his new bride. Like I said, the Enlightenment hasn’t quite taken hold, but we are getting there.In my view the people who say that Hamlet hesitates are dark age types. What happens in the story? Hamlet is called by his best friend to see his father’s ghost wandering around at night – his father’s ghost tells him that he has been killed by Hamlet’s uncle and that Hamlet should kill his uncle in revenge. In the dark ages this would have been enough.However, Hamlet decides to test what the ghost has told him by putting on a play in which the circumstances of the murder are acted out in front of his uncle to see if he gives himself away – he does and Hamlet almost immediately tries to kill him (deciding against it on religious grounds the first opportunity that arises – interestingly) and then mistakenly kills the Prime Minister about five minutes later.So, does he hesitate? Well, yes. But only in the sense that trying to confirm the advice presented by a ghost before killing your uncle is a bad idea. The fact that pausing is anything but reasonable after the enlightenment should give us pause to think (which is about all that Hamlet does – hardly a ‘tragic flaw’). I love this play – I think it is one of the greatest things ever written in our language. I love the way Shakespeare plays with Hamlet’s madness and compares and contrasts with Ophelia’s true (and horrific) madness. Imagine your lover killing your father – what a complete nightmare. I’ve never understood why there is no such thing as an Ophelia complex. Not least as it would seem to me that many women must feel that being with their husband / lover must feel like killing off their family.There is so much in this play to talk about – it is truly endless. That people go on and on about it being about hesitation really is saying just about the dullest thing about it. Hamlet is playing with forces greater than himself – he is trying to understand those forces, as he is a thoughtful, rational person, but sometimes we are too close to what is going on in our lives to really get to see – even if we are incredibly clever. Sometimes only those outside can see and understand. There are some interesting Oedipal themes going on here too.The only thing that bothers me about this play is that at the end everyone ends up dead – I mean, if it wasn’t for Hamlet, even Horatio would have snuffed it. I’m not sure that really is the most satisfying end to a play – where the only way things can go on is for everyone affected to be dead. Lear is much the same, but worse in so many ways. Death always seems the easy way out in these things – the real tragedy of human existence isn’t death, but being forced to live on. As Oedipus must go on, even after plucking his own eyes out. Ah, but you know what those bloody Greeks are like, George. ‘Unrelenting’ is the word I’m struggling for.

  • Foad
    2019-06-10 07:18

    «پس ادراك از ما يك مشت ترسو مى سازد.»این جمله ایست که هملت در پايان تك گويى معروفش "بودن يا نبودن" می گوید؛ وقتى به خودكشى فكر مى كند، و اين كه آگاهى از احتمال مجازات پس از مرگ مردم را در خودكشى به ترديد مى اندازد، او را به این نتیجه می کشاند که «عزم در سایۀ اندیشه بیمارگونه می نماید.» و همين جملات چه بسا كليدى باشد براى فهم تمام نمايش، و براى شناخت شخصيت هملت، مردى كه زياد مى داند، زياد فكر مى كند، زياد جوانب كار را در نظر مى گيرد، و به همين دليل مدام عمل را به تعويق مى اندازد تا جايى كه «حتی نام عمل را از دست مى دهد»، تا جايى كه انتقامش ديگر شبيه انتقام نيست و بيشتر به فاجعه اى خارج از كنترل شباهت دارد. شكسپير هر چند گذرا، اما به تكرار به ما نشان مى دهد كه هملت شخصيتى تحصيل كرده، اهل مطالعه، و متفكر است: به هنگام گفتگو با اوفيليا او را مى بينيم كه كتابى در دست دارد، به هنگام گفتگو با پولونيوس او را باز با كتابى در دست مى بينيم، پس از ملاقات با روح پدر مى گويد: «از لوح حافظه ام همۀ مضامین کتاب ها را... خواهم زدود و تنها کلمات تو در کتاب مغزم زنده خواهد ماند.» و در نهايت اين نكته كه هملت دانشجوى دانشگاه ويتنبرگ بوده (احتمالاً دانشجوى فلسفه، با توجه به اشارات متعددى كه به فلسفه مى كند) هر چند كمى پس از مرگ پدر به السينور آمده، و عمويش مانع بازگشت به او به دانشگاه مى شود. هملت، نمايندۀ ادراك و دانش است، همان ادراك و دانشى كه به گفتۀ خودش «از ما يك مشت ترسو مى سازد.» و اين "ترسو" بودن نيز، مشخصۀ اصلى اوست. او بارها خود را سرزنش مى كند كه قادر به انتقام از عموى خود نيست، پس از مشاهدۀ اجراى متأثركنندۀ يك بازيگر، خود را كبوتر صفتى مى خواند كه همچون كنيزان و روسپيان تنها بلد است ناسزا نثار زمين و آسمان كند، بدون آن كه جرئت اقدام داشته باشد. جاى ديگر خود را با سربازان نروژى فورتينبراس مقايسه مى كند كه به خاطر هيچ، به خاطر فتح قطعه زمينى بى ارزش، جان خود را بر كف دست گذاشته اند، اما او با بزرگ ترين انگيزه ها، حاضر به اقدام نيست. نه فقط به خاطر ترس، بلكه به خاطر بيش از حد فكر كردن، بيش از حد نقشه كشيدن. پیوسته در انتظار لحظۀ ایدئال است، و فرصت های مناسب را یکی یکی از دست می دهد.اين ها، همه به دليل آن است كه بر خلاف آن چه معروف است، ادراک و اراده، دانستن و توانستن، رابطه اى معكوس با هم دارند. در هر عمل چيزى از جنون هست، زيرا تا زمانی که فکر هست، عملی نیست و آن كس كه مى خواهد عمل كند، بايد قيد انديشه و يقين را بزند. همان طور كه هملت هم مى گويد: «پس ادراك از ما يك مشت ترسو مى سازد.»

  • Jean
    2019-05-29 08:30

    "To be or not to be that is the question:"Is this the most famous line in Shakespeare? It is certainly a contender. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark is Shakespeare's longest and most ambitious play, taking over four hours to perform in its entirety. Written at some point between 1599 and 1602, it has such an extensive vocabulary and expressive range, that Shakespeare was emotionally drained afterwards, and was incapable of writing anything for two years. It was not only one of Shakespeare's most popular works during his lifetime, but it has been hugely influential, inspiring countless adaptations and retellings, and is still among his most-performed plays world-wide. People have joked that it is a series of quotations from end to end, and certainly maxims such as,"Give thy thoughts no tongue""Be thou familiar but by no means vulgar""Neither a borrower nor a lender be""To thine own self be true""I must be cruel only to be kind" "Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all" "... it is a customMore honoured in the breach than the observance"have entered the English language so successfully, that people sometimes mistakenly think they are from a holy book. Many of the characters in Hamlet are inclined to philosophise. Here is (view spoiler)[Claudius (hide spoiler)], racked with guilt,"My words fly up, my thoughts remain below. Words without thoughts never to heaven go."But none more so than the eponymous character of Hamlet. His remark to the courtier Rosencrantz,"For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"is subjectivist. It has its philosophical basis in the Greek Sophists, who argued that nothing is real except in the mind of the individual. Therefore there is no absolute truth, only relative truth. Hamlet's most famous soliloquy, the "To be or not to be" speech, is a clear example of existentialism. Hamlet is considering "being" - or continuing in his life and therefore acting on his knowledge, as against "not being" - where he would not live any more, and therefore not take any action. Yet as all true philosophers are, Hamlet is both open-minded and sceptical. On seeing the ghost, he reassures his friend,"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."In addition, Shakespeare has made this brilliant, perceptive young man, the most skilled of all the characters at rhetoric, frequently using metaphors, puns, and double meanings. Surprisingly, this style of language still works well in a modern theatre, and is also comparatively easy to understand in this play. Other phrases such as, "Frailty, thy name is woman!""Murder most foul""To sleep: perchance to dream""A little more than kin, a little less than kind""Sweets to the sweet""In my mind's eye" and many more, are present in our culture. They are common sayings, frequently "borrowed" by other authors to be the titles of their books and plays. Shakespeare's language can sometimes be difficult to understand for contemporary readers, as it uses highly elaborate and complex witty discourse. Yet such is the skill of our greatest playwright, that he has coined these timeless and memorable quips in this play. For, as wise Polonius says, "Brevity is the soul of wit."There are many long speeches and soliloquies, but often it is these shorter phrases which have the most resonance. Shakespeare created the title role of Hamlet (as the play is usually referred to) for the leading tragic actor of the time, Richard Burbage, and the tradition of "wanting to play Hamlet" has remained the pinnacle of many actors' careers for 400 years. In modern times, some female actors have also expressed a desire to play the role - and a few now have.Shakespeare rarely invented his stories, and the source material for this one was probably the legend of "Amleth", from the 13th century. This was later retold by François de Belleforest in the 16th century. There is also apparently an earlier Elizabethan play, known today as the "Ur-Hamlet", although it is no longer extant. The author of the "Ur-Hamlet" is not known, and may well have been Shakespeare himself.The play starts with a supernatural episode, guaranteed to grip the audience. It is approaching midnight, a cold winter's night outside Elsinore, the royal castle in Denmark, where the play is to be set. With the very first words,"Who's there?" a ghostly figure has appeared to the guards, while they are awaiting a relief patrol.As the guards and the audience begin to anticipate more appearances by the ghost, we learn of the political situation through the discussion between the soldiers. There has been a long-standing feud between Denmark and Norway, a neighbouring country. The Norwegian prince, Fortinbras is expected to lead an invasion. This also neatly leads to an introduction of his counterpart, the title character and protagonist, Prince Hamlet of Denmark, whom the soldiers admire. Hamlet's father (who was also called Hamlet) has recently died, and his widowed mother, Gertrude, has married the deceased king's brother, Claudius, who immediately succeeded him to the throne. This is obviously an interesting topic of discussion, both in terms of both the domestic and the international political situation.The action moves to within the castle, and a scene introducing the characters mentioned. We become instantly aware of the young Prince Hamlet's dislike of his uncle Claudius, "My father's brother, but no more like my fatherThan I to Hercules" Indeed, he later refers to him as,"that incestuous, that adulterate beast"Hamlet seems confused, and consequently distanced from his mother, whom he views as having made an over-hasty marriage, "Frailty, thy name is woman! -A little month, or ere those shoes were oldWith which she follow'd my poor father's body,Like Niobe, all tears:"... "within a month:Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tearsHad left the flushing in her galled eyes,She married. O, most wicked speed, to postWith such dexterity to incestuous sheets!" Much later, Gertrude has begun to recognise her behaviour in Hamlet's dramatic representation, and objects,"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"but at this point she seems unaware of his judgement of her.We are introduced to Hamlet's circle of friends, his good friend Horatio, his romantic interest, Ophelia, her wise father - and the Lord Chamberlain Polonius (source of many of the timeless quotations), and her brave brother Laertes. The soldiers have consulted Horatio about the apparition's strange resemblance to the old king, and the Prince Hamlet decides to investigate.From now on, the play becomes increasingly tense, with thrills, madness, mayhem, suicide and murder at every turn. One of the greatest bloodbaths in the whole of Shakespeare is in this play. The ghost tells Hamlet,(view spoiler)["the serpent that did sting thy father's life Now wears his crown""Thus was I, sleeping, by a brother's handOf life, of crown, of queen, at once dispatch'd:" (hide spoiler)]urging Hamlet to,"Revenge his foul and most unnatural murder...Murder most foul!""O, horrible! O, horrible!" most horrible!""Adieu, adieu, adieu! remember me."Hamlet is mentally tortured by the knowledge of what the ghost has told him. He is driven to question the worth of his very existence, dissembling to many of his loved ones by assuming an air of madness. A genuine insanity takes hold of Ophelia, mainly because of Hamlet's behaviour and actions, particularly one which resulted in the wrong victim. He uses his brain to outwit the one he now knows to be the murderer,"O villain, villain, smiling, damned villain!"(view spoiler)["... the play's the thingWherein I'll catch the conscience of the King." (hide spoiler)]and a remarkable piece of theatre, a play within a play, is the result. This is a favourite device of Shakespeare, a literary conceit in which one story is told during the action of another story. It is both enjoyable in its own terms, yet it also reveals traits of character in those watching - just as that in, for instance, "A Midsummer Night's Dream". The twist in this play, of course, is that such reactions are being searched for by one of the characters, who is watching the others like a hawk. This a nice self-referential touch. When Hamlet is banished, although he does not know the whole of the devilment in store for him, he turns circumstances to his advantage."Though this be madness, yet there is method in 't""with wings as swiftAs meditation or the thoughts of loveMay sweep to my revenge"Yet he feels persecuted, and the audience sense that he is doomed. This is a tragedy, after all. And Hamlet himself seems to feel the omens,"The time is out of joint - O cursed spite!That ever I was born to set it right!"There are twists and turns in the play which come as a shock to the audience, and critics have debated the interpretation of the events ever since. There is cold-blooded murder, desire, jealousy, ambition, and calculated revenge. There are complex ethical and philosophical issues which have had varying significance depending on the time the play is performed. In the early 17th century Jacobean drama, when themes of insanity and melancholy were fashionable, the play was very popular. By the middle of the 18th century, Gothic themes became popular, so audiences appreciated not only madness in the play, but also the mystical and ghostly elements of Hamlet. In the 19th century, Romanticism blossomed, and readers and audiences began to admire internal and individual conflicts, so the focus shifted to an interest in Hamlet's characters and internal mental struggles. This tradition has continued into the 20th century, and even today. A modern audience may have an even deeper psychological approach, and look at Hamlet's unconscious desires and motivations, which may not be merely the ones he expresses. Additionally, on each performance, or reading, a reader may understand different points about the play. Consider just a few paltry examples from the hundreds of questions the play raises; here are a few alternative interpretations to those which seem the more obvious ones: Was Gertrude actually "guilty" of anything? A respectable woman of this time would be classed either as a maid, a wife, or a widow. Whores were considered to be clearly unrespectable. Yet Hamlet perceived his mother as a whore because she did not remain faithful to his father, the king. But wasn't she a woman trapped by convention, in the tradition of marrying her brother-in-law, to protect the kingdom? Or were there baser desires, as Hamlet suspected? Or alternatively, was Hamlet disgusted by his mother's "incestuous" relationship with Claudius because he himself had Oedipal desires? What was the true relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia? Was she an innocent? Or could Ophelia's madness after her father's death also be given a Freudian interpretation. She clearly loved her father - but was this in all innocence as a daughter? Why was she apparently so completely overwhelmed by his death that this drove her insane? And why did Hamlet's disgust at his mother's behaviour lead him to lose faith in all women, so that he treated Ophelia as if she was being dishonest - and as if she too was a whore? Was Hamlet himself mad, suicidal, hormonal, confused, or psychotic? It is interesting that in a play which sees so much action, it is in the soliloquies that Shakespeare shows us Hamlet's motives and thoughts. Why did he seem so inconsistent? Is this to lead the audience astray? The play focuses on confusion and duality, in all things. Was he a true hero?As with all classic works, there are myriad interpretations. None of the situations are simple; none of the characters one-sided. It is a play which can, and should, be read and watched over and over again."O, that this too too solid flesh would meltThaw and resolve itself into a dew!Or that the Everlasting had not fix'dHis canon 'gainst self-slaughter! O God! God!How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable,Seem to me all the uses of this world!Fie on't! ah fie! 'tis an unweeded garden,That grows to seed; things rank and gross in naturePossess it merely. That it should come to this!...It is not nor it cannot come to good:But break, my heart; for I must hold my tongue."..."To be, or not to be: that is the question:Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to sufferThe slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;No more; and by a sleep to say we endThe heart-ache and the thousand natural shocksThat flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummationDevoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;For in that sleep of death what dreams may comeWhen we have shuffled off this mortal coil,Must give us pause: there's the respectThat makes calamity of so long life;For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,The insolence of office and the spurnsThat patient merit of the unworthy takes,When he himself might his quietus makeWith a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,To grunt and sweat under a weary life,But that the dread of something after death,The undiscover'd country from whose bournNo traveller returns, puzzles the will..."

  • Foad
    2019-05-23 06:17

    چه کسی پدر هملت را کشت؟یادداشتی بر نمایشنامۀ هملت بر اساس نظریۀ هنری فرویدفروید و هنرفرويد بر اساس نظريات روانكاوى خود، ديدگاه جالبى راجع به هنر و اسطوره دارد. از نظر فرويد هنر و اسطوره مختص افراد روان‌رنجور است که نتوانسته اند به طور کامل امیال دوران کودکی خود را سرکوب کنند، در نتیجه همچنان نفرت به پدر و میل جنسی به مادر در آن‌ها وجود دارد، اما از آن جا که نمی‌توانند این امیال را به طور مستقیم ابراز کنند، از ابزار هنر و اسطوره استفاده می‌کنند، تا با همذات‌پنداری با قهرمان، لذت كشتن پدر و جمع شدن با مادر را هر چند به صورتى خيالى و ناقص، بچشند. هنرمند شرايط داستان را طورى مى سازد كه قهرمان به دليلى موجه پدر هيولا صفت خود را بكشد و با مادرش جمع شود، هر چند نه فيزيكى. چرا كه هنرمند مى خواهد بدون بر هم زدن اخلاقيات مرسوم، با قهرمان خود همذات پندارى كند.فروید و هملتاما فرويد به شكل عجيبى در تحليل هملت از اين نظر خود عدول مى كند (بدون اين كه ادعا داشته باشد از نظرش برگشته) و "هملت" را انسانى روان رنجور مى داند، نه شكسپير را. او هملت را قهرمان روان رنجوری معرفی می کند كه نمى تواند عموى خود را بكشد، چرا كه با عمویش، كه آرزوى روان رنجورانۀ هملت را برآورده كرده -كشتن پدر، جمع شدن با مادر- همذات پندارى مى كند. تحلیلی جدید از هملتسه كليد در نظريۀ تحليل هنرى فرويد هست که ما را به تحلیل درست روانکاوانۀ هملت راهنمایی می کند:کلید اولاز نظر فرويد "هنرمند" روان رنجور است، نه قهرمان. قهرمان از لحاظ عقده هاى جنسى، به ظاهر سالم تصوير مى شود. هنرمند اصرار دارد كه قهرمان را سالم و موجّه و مطابق اخلاقيات مرسوم تصوير كند، تا به اين شکل ميل جنسى روان رنجورانۀ خود را بپوشاند.با در نظر گرفتن این کلید، اين "شكسپير" است كه روان رنجور است، نه هملت. هملت كاملاً سالم است: نه از پدر خود نفرت دارد، و نه هیچ میلی به مادر خود دارد. يا حداقل شكسپير اصرار دارد او را اين گونه بنمايد.کلید دوماز نظر فرويد اين "قهرمان" است كه پدر خود را مى كشد، و با مادر جمع مى شود. قهرمان اصلى اثر هنرى، پدركش است. نه ضدقهرمان يا شخصيت هاى فرعى. با در نظر گرفتن این کلید، اين "هملت" است كه پدركش است، نه عموى هملت يا هر كس ديگر. اما هملت كى و كجا پدر خود را مى كشد؟ اين ما را به كليد سوم مى رساند كه مهم ترين كليد نظريه فرويد است:کلید سوماز نظر فرويد هنرمند نمى خواهد و اگر هم بخواهد، به دليل روان رنجورى نمى تواند اخلاقيات مرسوم را زير پا بگذارد، در نتيجه از تصريح به "كشتن پدر" و "جمع شدن با مادر" – که آرزوی درونی خود او هستند – توسط قهرمان طفره می رود و آن را در لفافه مى گويد، یا به گونه اى موجّهش می کند كه اخلاقيات مرسوم را زير پا نگذاشته باشد. با در نظر گرفتن این کلید، باید دید شكسپير روان رنجور چطور هملت را به كشتن پدر و جمع شدن با مادر وا مى دارد، بدون آن كه اخلاقيات مرسوم را زير پا بگذارد؟ چطور از تصريح به "پدركشى" هملت طفره مى رود؟اول: به جاى پدر، مى گويد "عمو". عموى هملت، با خصوصيت شاه بودن، با گفتن اين عبارت كه "ما را پدر خود بدانيد" كسى نيست جز پدر هملت، كسى كه شكسپيرِ روان رنجور با كشتن او به دست هملت مى خواهد آرزوهاى روان رنجورانۀ خود را ارضا كند. اما از آن جا كه نمى تواند به صراحت بگويد "هملت پدرش را مى كشد"، به ظاهر مى گويد: هملت نمى خواهد پدر خود را بكشد، تا او را از "پدركشى" مبرا كند، بلكه حتى بيشتر، هملت را تقديس مى كند و مى گويد: هملت مى خواهد انتقام پدرش را بگيرد. يعنى نه تنها تلاش مى كند او را از اتهام نفرت به پدر مبرا كند، بلكه از او چهره اى پدر دوست مى سازد. اما اين عمو همچون پدر فرویدی در ديد هملت منفورترين شخصيت است، و چرا؟ چون با مادر او جمع شده، چون مرتكب "زناى با محارم" (اين واژۀ پر بسامد در سرتاسر نمايشنامه) شده. درست همان دليلى كه كودك را به نفرت از پدر مى كشاند: چون او مى تواند با مادر جمع شود، و من نمى توانم.و براى اين كه كسى از اتهامى (زناى با محارم) مبرا شود، چه راهى ساده تر از آن كه آن را به ديگران نسبت دهد، و به اين ترتيب خود را در صف مقدم منتقدان آن قرار دهد؟ فرويد اين نوع تطهير را، "فرافكنى" مى نامد. شکسپیر نیز برای تطهیر هملت، دست به فرافکنی می زند و عموی هملت را پی در پی زانی با محارم می خواند تا فراموش شود که این خود هملت است که آرزوی زنای با محارم در سر دارد.دوم: هملت به طور فيزيكى با مادر خود جمع نمى شود. اما نشانه هايى از "نزديكى" هملت و مادر در نمايشنامه هست. اولاً از بين پدر-عمو و مادر، مادر تنها كسى است كه هملت با او جدى و به دور از اهانت و مسخرگى سخن مى گويد و حرف دل خود را به او مى زند. ثانياً، اصلى ترين گفتگوى هملت و مادر جايى است كه هملت مادر را به خاطر "زناى با محارم" محكوم مى كند، و او را متقاعد مى كند كه ديگر با پدر-عمو به بستر نرود. مى توان حدس زد كه شكسپير روان رنجور تا چه اندازه از اين پيروزى قهرمانش لذتى ممنوعه و روان رنجورانه برده است: كودكى كه بالاخره بر پدر پيروز مى شود و نمى گذارد با مادر جمع شود. هر چند نبايد در اين راه افراط كرد، چون نشانه هاى كمى از جمع شدن هملت با مادر هست، و محور اصلى نمايشنامه، بر "پدر-عمو كشى" است، و نه جمع شدن با مادر.در انتها تذکر این نکته ضروری است که مطالب این نوشته، از جمله روان رنجوریِ شکسپیر، الزاماً مورد باور من نیست. من تنها از دیدگاه فرویدی به نمایشنامه نگاه کردم، و تحلیل فروید از هملت را که به نظر با دیدگاه خودش متناسب نبود را اصلاح کردم.

  • Lyn
    2019-05-27 08:19

    What’s the question?“To be, or not to be: that is the question”Shakespeare’s most famous play? Maybe. And that quote may be his most recognizable, certainly one of the most memorable. The tragedy of the Danish prince, his revenge, the introspection and self doubt that shaped his actions, and the tragic events described in some of Shakespeare’s most provocative language is mesmerizing.“This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man.”Borrowing from ancient legends, Shakespeare’s tragedy draws on complicated human emotions. Themes of death, loss, justice and destiny abound in a play that may be characterized by its somber, dark subject.“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”Perhaps his most psychologically compelling drama, analysis of Hamlet has fueled debates, challenged students and inspired countless writings since. “The character of Hamlet played a critical role in Freud's explanation of the Oedipus complex and thus influenced modern psychology” – Wikipedia.“When down her weedy trophies and herselfFell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide; And, mermaid-like, awhile they bore her up: Which time she chanted snatches of old tunes; As one incapable of her own distress, Or like a creature native and induedUnto that element: but long it could not beTill that her garments, heavy with their drink, Pull’d the poor wretch from her melodious layTo muddy death.”Interestingly, for such a depressingly emotional action, Ophelia’s character and her role in the narrative do much to anchor the mood and sets a tone from which the play never rises.“Now cracks a noble heart. Good-night, sweet prince;And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest. ”

  • Darwin8u
    2019-06-13 09:08

    “Madness in great ones must not unwatched go.” ― William Shakespeare, HamletStill one of my favorite Shakepeare plays. I've probably read it 3-5 times and probably watched just as many film productions: 1996 - Kenneth Branagh; 1990 - Mel Gibson; 1948 - Laurence Olivier; 2000 - Ethan Hawke; 1990 - Kevin Kline. I love it. Every read gives me a chance to channel something else. This is also my first exposure to the play since visiting Hamlet's castle in Denmark last summer (2016) on the 400th anniversary of the Bard's death. While we were walking through it, they were doing a "Hamlet Live" at Kronborg Castle and the Hamlet flirted with my daughter. It was definitely worth the time and the blustery weather. I saw cannons and tapestries, but alas no ghosts or floating virgins. Sad!I also learned THIS summer while I was in Malta, reading about Samuel Taylor Coleridge, that it was Coleridge who largely propelled Hamlet to the top of Shakepeare's heap. According to Jonathan Bate, "the Romantics' reinvention of Hamlet as a paralyzed Romantic was their single most influential critical act." It seemed popluar among Romantics, after Coleridge, to show a strong antic disposition for Shakespeare's psychologically complex, young Prince.❂"We love Hamlet even as we love ourselves." - Lord Byron ❂"Hamlet's heart was full of such Misery as mine is when he said to Ophelia 'Go to a Nunnery, go, go!' Indeed I should like to give up the matter at once -- I should like to die. I am sickened at the brute world which you are smiling with." - John Keats❂"I have a smack of Hamlet myself, if I may say so...." - Samuel Taylor ColeridgeFavorite Lines this read:“O God, I could be bound in a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space – were it not that I have bad dreams.” (Act 2, Scene 2)“Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words.” (Act 2, Scene 2)“Our wills and fates do so contrary run.” (Act 3, Scene 2) “For some must watch, while some must sleep So runs the world away” (Act 3, Scene 2)“If your mind dislike anything obey it” (Act 5, Scene 2)

  • Ian
    2019-06-09 11:29

    A Young Lawyer’s Guide to "Hamlet":Head NoteSomething is rotten in the state of Denmark – Young Hamlet still mourns his father’s death – doesn’t like King Claudius marrying his mother, Queen Gertrude, so soon Ophelia's brother, Laertes, warns her not to fall in love with Young Hamlet - her father Polonius fears she will be hurtRosencrantz and Guildenstern investigate Young Hamlet’s strange behavior – Polonius believes he loves OpheliaGhost of Hamlet tells Young Hamlet he was poisoned by King Claudius – wants Young Hamlet to avenge his death, but not to punish GertrudeHamlet wants to kill Claudius - Claudius realises his crime cannot escape divine justice - fears Hamlet Hamlet offends King Claudius with lines he adds to play – after performance, Gertrude promises Hamlet she will leave Claudius Hamlet unwittingly kills Polonius who is hiding behind a tapestry – hides body - Hamlet finally tells Claudius where body is – Claudius sends Hamlet to England, so Laertes can avenge his father's deathOphelia goes mad with grief and drowns – Hamlet believes he loved her more than Laertes did Claudius accidentally kills Gertrude with poison intended for HamletHamlet fights Laertes – Laertes stabs Hamlet with poisoned sword – before dying, Hamlet kills Laertes and Claudius with same sword – Horatio lives to tell Hamlet's story Ratio Decidendi:O, that this too too solid flesh would melt, thaw, and resolve itself into a dew.This above all — to thine own self be true.There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.The play's the thing, wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king.To be, or not to be — that is the question.To sleep, perchance to dream — ay, there's the rub.The lady doth protest too much, methinks.Alas! Poor Yorick. I knew him, Horatio; a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy.There's a divinity that shapes our ends, rough-hew them how we will.Now cracks a noble heart. Good-night, sweet prince; and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest.The rest is silence.Judgment:PrefaceIt is customary for this Court to preside over disputes between citizens of the realm or actions between the Crown and perpetrators of crime.This is impossible in this case, because all of the chief protagonists together constituted the Crown in one way or another and now they are dead, one and all.Any dispute between the parties has therefore died with them.While the people await the Coronation of a Successor, it falls upon this Court to conduct a Coronial Inquiry.The Court derives no gratification from this etymological curiosity.Counsel assisting the Inquiry cited a passage from a soliloquy apparently spoken by Young Hamlet: “To be, or not to be, that is the question:Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to sufferThe slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,Or to take arms against a sea of troublesAnd by opposing end them. We shall never know the answer to this question, for in taking arms against the sea of troubles, both Young Hamlet and his antagonist have perished in battle.Neither could nor would bear their ills.One wonders whether either one would reverse the actions dictated by their will, if given half a chance.They sleep no more, nor do they dream. What dreams would otherwise have come have paused.The protagonists have shuffled off this mortal coil, and find themselves, if that is possible, in an undiscovered country from which no traveller has returned.In their mortal absence, they have escaped the jurisdiction of this Court.The Court can ascertain the Truth, but it cannot dispense Justice.King ClaudiusWhile this Court finds that Claudius did slay our once mighty King Hamlet, it can do nothing but state its finding.Claudius must go unpunished in this world, except to the extent that Young Hamlet’s revenge might contain a sliver of Justice.The Court does not find it necessary to deal with the argument that the King’s actions were immune from prosecution pursuant to any doctrine of Royal Prerogative. Young Hamlet In his quest to avenge the death of his father, Young Hamlet has sucked the life out of Polonius and Laertes.In the former case, Counsel submitted that this unfortunate death was a result of mistaken identity.This argument does not sway the Court.It finds that Hamlet did not witness one person and mistake him for another.Instead, Hamlet must not have known the identity of the person ensconced behind the tapestry.While it is common ground that Hamlet believed the secreter was Claudius and wrongfully intended to murder the King in an unlawful and heinous act of regicide, this Court finds that he had no reasonable grounds to believe that the victim was any one particular person or identity.Therefore, it is logically impossible for his mistake to have been made in good faith.If you have no idea, you may not assert in your defence that your idea was wrong.By not discovering the truth, you must be responsible for your own error and its consequences.LaertesCounsel is on safer ground, although to no avail, in the case of the death of Laertes.Whether Hamlet acted in self-defence or under extreme provocation, the Court finds that Laertes intended to kill Hamlet (and, indeed, was successful in his enterprise).It must follow, in the opinion of the Court, that Hamlet’s response was not disproportionate to the fate he apprehended for himself.Again, Laertes acted in the belief that Hamlet had intended to kill his father and his sister.While it is perhaps true that both deaths were caused by actions of Hamlet, the Court has already found that Hamlet did not know the identity of Polonius.Thus, in the absence of any intention to murder Polonius qua Polonius, the Court finds that Hamlet had done no wrong to Laertes personally that would have justified or excused his killing.He was motivated by revenge, pure and simple, albeit accompanied by grief.As to the argument that Laertes was acting on the instructions of the then King Claudius, the Court finds that such instructions had no legal force and it was incumbent on Laertes to disobey them and avoid the iniquity.It matters not that King Claudius might have taken the life of Laertes.The Court finds that Ophelia’s death was the result of misadventure.Young Hamlet was not directly and proximately responsible for her death.Therefore, the Court finds that Laertes could not use her death as the basis for any excuse or justification for his actions.ConclusionCounsel assisting the Coronial Inquiry prefaced his remarks by stating that something is rotten in the State of Denmark.With all due respect, the Court finds that this is an understatement.The Court wishes to express its gratitude to Horatio for apprising it of as many of the facts with respect to this sorry tale as it is possible to glean from the circumstances.It is to be hoped that, while Justice remains constant, Law and Order will be restored by the Coronation of an appropriate Successor.However, in expressing this sincere wish, it is mindful of Horatio’s wise but cautious advice that not every Succession is a Success.Citations:Film AdaptationBaz Luhrmann is in pre-production on a modernised film version of the play that will follow the completion of "The Great Gatsby".In order to avoid confusion between the two Hamlets, the King's son will be known by the stage name, M.C. Hamster.Legal CitationsYoung Lawyers interested in copyright issues might wish to investigate the case of Estate of William Shakespeare v. Anthony Hicks and Agatha Christie.This case involved Miss Christie's play, "The Mousetrap", which was also the name of the play in "Hamlet".Mr Hicks suggested that Miss Christie's play bear the same name, prompting Mr Shakespeare's Estate to sue for breach of copyright.The defendants successfully argued that the play was in the Public Domain. Shakespeare's lawyers tried to argue that copyright subsisted, because the play had only ever been performed in the Private Sphere.The Times Law Reports mention that the Judge dismissed the Plaintiff's argument on the evidence, glibly remarking that the play had actually been performed all around the Globe. Apparently, a little titter ran through the court room, but the guards were unable to detain him.

  • Aubrey
    2019-06-05 09:13

    The singular and peculiar life is boundWith all the strength and armour of the mindTo keep itself from noyance; but much moreThat spirit upon whose weal depends and restsThe lives of many. The cease of majestyDies not alone, but like a gulf doth drawWhat's near it with it. It is a massy wheelFixed on the summit of the highest mount,To whose huge spokes ten thousand lesser thingsAre mortised and adjoined, which when it fallsEach small annexment, petty consequence,Attends the boist'rous ruin.There is a mounting vileness once the Queen is dead. The Basilikon Doron is released, the son whose mother's head was cut off to ensure the peace of the realm is on the throne, and what has been gained through inveterate evil of colonialism has kept on gaining, but instead of that much pronounced Elizabethan, we have Jacobean. Instead of the gold of novelty, surprise after surprise of peace through scything after scything of populace, we may have the scythe, but not the wielder. Hated, unnatural, the bane of existence to many a man and a biting prick in the spine to the entire gender, but there was no betrayal that cut off the head too soon, no insipid frivolity that forced the island to swallow its own tail, no language of the conqueror to wriggle out from beneath and painfully make its way to light. There was just Elizabeth. And now she's dead.With the need of a royal divorce came the gateway to a new, minimized, individualized religion. Poetry is the mediation a human requires to reconcile life and death, and over time the rhythms and rhymes have coalesced into many a ritual of speaking, singing, screaming, the random chance of natural selection resulting in such an example as the words spoken during the course of a Catholic laying to rest. What happens, then, in a particular corner of the world where Purgatory is no longer an incentive and prayers no longer a necessity and your beloved long departed may or may not be suffering ten-thousand years longer, an oversight in a change of scheme that names their transmutation nonsense. All of us are doomed to die, a universality garnering interest with a vengeance beyond twenty-five when the cell decay begins to outpace the cell renewal, but truth has nothing to do with individual experience. All you love are doomed to die, but each and every may only die once.What of Hamlet I know now will make the return to King Lear all the more dire, for freedom's a baleful deity only because responsibility is so much worse. Your wars are won, your peace is gripped, and all there is left to do is provoke the self into an action guided by loss, propelled by rage, confined by that mewling and puking concept that is honor, that will bring the whole host of dependent selves down. A head of state's a nasty piece of work when fratricide is on the résumé, but put on the stage tens of thousands of revenge plots and you'll never accurately frame through scene and line of dialogue that creature that is civil war. Lear comes close, which is why, hard as it is for me to believe, I may come out of this class with a rearranged hierarchy when it comes to Shakespeare. But perhaps not. Unlike Hamlet, I have not yet seen the storm in the flesh, and the divide between words on a page and souls on a stage when contemplation's broken free off the footnotes must be given pause. I'm a reader through and through, but if all the world's a stage, the bodies fell first.If thou didst ever hold me in they heart,Absent thee from felicity a while,And in this harsh world draw thy breath in painTo tell my story.Hamlet, Hamlet. I will never muse enough.Good my lord, will you see the players well bestowed? Do ye hear?–let them be well used, for they are the abstracts and brief chronicles of the time. After your death you were better have a bad epitaph than their ill report while you live.---1/2/2013I first encountered Hamlet in comic book form, alongside many other Shakespeare plays portrayed with fantastical characters in all shades, poses, and degrees of perverseness. The strongest memory from that time consists of the titular character, blonde head posing with an innocent expression between a hawk and a handsaw. Some time later I was intrigued to learn that Shakespeare himself had performed in productions as the infamous ghost. Nothing else of his acting career stayed in my brain, which may have been a foretelling of the special place this play would come to hold in my heart.The years rolled on, and with them came my favorite teacher of all time. Thanks to her, Hamlet, and a ten page essay discussing the symbolism of death, I began to see what all the fuss with Shakespeare was about.  As that year ended, so did my last English class, and it would be a long while until I rediscovered Hamlet, at my first live performance put on by the actors of Shakespeare's Globe Theatre.Now, it's true that I had loved the play in high school, but that had been through reading it at an extremely slow pace, constantly ferrying back and forth between text and explanation. Flash forward four years to the performance, years filled with equations, calculations, and engineering garble, leading up to a much quicker rendition of the work I had understood only through slow perusal and much hand-holding. What good would watching it do, if the scenes flew past my uncomprehending brain?But I did know what was going on. I could follow every amusing quip and every stunning soliloquy. More importantly, I loved it as much as I had all those years ago, my first journey through lines of archaic prose to the shining and glorious wit that had composed it. And a week later the title Infinite Jest caught my eye, and the rest is history.In short, Hamlet is special to me, for its beautiful prose and deceptively human themes as well as its constant presence throughout the years. It is a play whose value to me only increases as my life continues, with every new encounter inspiring increased understanding and appreciation of its existence. I could go on about the complexities seething in the mind of each and every character, the wickedly quick humor and scathing wordplay, the immense presence of death working its way throughout every aspect of Hamlet's world, the battle between ancient cultures raging through lines of debate. To be, or not to be. With so many beliefs, who can avoid the question? I could even drag out my aforementioned essay for public perusal. But I won't. A heartfelt recommendation, for now, is enough. The rest is for the future.

  • Foad
    2019-05-26 07:13

    در الگوى "سفر قهرمان" كه جوزف كمبل ادعا مى كند در تمام اسطوره ها تكرار مى شود، آخرين مرحله از سلوك جسمانى-روحانى قهرمان اسطوره تبديل شدن به "ارباب دو جهان" است، كه بر خلاف ظاهر اسمش، به معناى به دست آوردن همه چيز نيست، بلكه درست برعكس، به معناى دست شستن از همه چيز است: قهرمان به نوعى خلسه مى رسد كه ديگر هيچ چيز برايش مهم نيست، و خود را به دست تقدير مى سپرد تا هر چه مى خواهد با او بكند. با رها كردن همه چيز است كه قهرمان به مرحله نهايى سفر خود مى رسد، سفرى كه با قصد به دست آوردن همه چيز شروع شده بود. در عرفان ما، اين مرحله را "فنا" مى نامند. هملت، نماد اراده معطوف به انتقام، در طول نمايشنامه درگير است، با خود و با ديگران به يك اندازه، افكار مختلفى كه به سرش هجوم مى آورند و نمى گذارند دستش به خون برود. پيوسته با حرارت و شور عهد مى بندد كه ديگر كار عمويش را يكسره خواهد كرد، و پيوسته قدم سست مى كند و تعلل مى ورزد. انگار هنوز رشته اى ناپيدا او را به دنيايى پيوند زده كه نمى خواهد با قتل، از آن دنيا ببرد.اما درست پس از آن كه ناگاه مى فهمد معشوقش، اوفيليا خود را غرق كرده است، پس از آن كه در كمال حيرت در برابر چشمانش او را بدون اجراى مراسم مذهبى چون فردى ناپاك به خاك مى سپرند، انگار آن تنها رشته پاره مى شود. ناگهان رفتارش تغيير مى كند؛ ديگرى خبرى از خشم ها و مسخرگى ها شور و حرارت نيست، ديگر همه چيز برايش يكسان مى شود. وقتى او را وادار مى كنند در دوئلى شركت كند كه هم خود و هم دوستش هوراشيو مطمئنند به منظور كشتنش طراحى شده، با آرامش كسى كه دست از همه چيز شسته خود را به دست جريان مى سپرد و مى گويد: «حتى سقوط يك گنجشك هم در دفتر قضا ثبت است. اگر قرار باشد مرگ برسد، مى رسد، و اگر الان هم نرسد، بالاخره خواهد رسيد. وقتى كسى نمى داند چه چیز از خود به جا می گذارد، دیگر زود مردن معنایی ندارد. بگذار هر چه مى خواهد بشود.» و وقتى از همه چيز دست مى شويد، وقتى ديگر برايش اهميتى ندارد، به همه چيز دست مى يابد: عمويش را مى كشد و خود هم در سكوت مرگ كه اين همه خواهان آن است فرو مى رود.

  • Alienor ✘ French Frowner ✘
    2019-06-13 07:37

    Quick reread before The Steep and Thorny Way (retelling WOOT!) Question: Is it really as crazy I remember or am I delusional?Answer: Oh okay. Never mind.Ps. The 4th picture makes me laugh way too much for my own good. Oops.