Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: May ::
Various Hamlet Responses
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.0906  Thursday, 27 May 1999.

[1]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 26 May 1999 10:06:51 +0000
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0897 Re: Ophelia and Hamlet

[2]     From:   Geralyn Horton <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 26 May 1999 11:36:52 -0400
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.0902 Various Hamlet and Ophelia

[3]     From:   Ronald Moyer <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 26 May 1999 09:44:26 -0500 (CDT)
        Subj:   Pron. of Fortinbras


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 26 May 1999 10:06:51 +0000
Subject: 10.0897 Re: Ophelia and Hamlet
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.0897 Re: Ophelia and Hamlet

Dear Lucia,

Thanks for your response to my criticisms.  It seems we have more in
common than it at first seemed.

>I was talking just about some common interpretations of Christ's words
>in determinate times and countries, not about Christian thought as a
>philosophical one  (though this too is not out of history).

But this is the crux of my argument:  are we to judge philosophies and
faiths by their historical ramifications?  Is the historical (which is
to say, material) world the measure of reality?  Or is philosophy (which
these days is usually to say, epistemology) prior to history?  Could
ethics and the claim of the other be prior to both, rather than serving
as so much obfuscation and ideology hiding our true material condition?

>Coming back to Hamlet, what I find wonderful in the chapel scene is its
>various irony.

I enjoyed your exposition of these ironies.  I'd suggest one more:
Claudius tries to gain forgiveness by force of will, and makes his
receipt of grace contingent upon his ability to pray, rather than
recognizing the gratuitousness of grace.  As long as forgiveness has to
follow from his own acts, even acts of prayer, it remains unearnable.

Cheers,
Se

 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.