Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2001 :: March ::
Re: Weed Noted
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0650  Tuesday, 20 March 2001

[1]     From:   Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 16 Mar 2001 08:23:57 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0636 Re: Weed Noted

[2]     From:   Edmund Taft <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Friday, 16 Mar 2001 12:14:07 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0636 Re: Weed Noted

[3]     From:   Stephanie Hughes <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Sunday, 18 Mar 2001 14:31:20 -0800
        Subj:   Re: SHK 12.0636 Re: Weed No


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Sean Lawrence <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Friday, 16 Mar 2001 08:23:57 -0800
Subject: 12.0636 Re: Weed Noted
Comment:        Re: SHK 12.0636 Re: Weed Noted

Clifford writes that

>Similarly, paranoiacs
>live in a world in which everybody is in on the secret conspiracy of
>which they are the focus, and yet they must be struck by the absolute
>silence all these conspirators (and some may be perceived by the
>paranoiac as allies) manage to maintain, as if they have sworn some sort
>of oath.  Having imposed the oath, Hamlet's (or the audience's)
>delusions are not disturbed by the fact that Horatio does not reveal his
>knowledge to other potential allies.

There's a further question:  just because he's paranoid, does that mean
that they aren't all out to get him?  As in the film Conspiracy Theory,
we're not sure how much of the paranoia is actually right or, further,
whether the fact that some of the paranoid notions turn out to be right
justifies the logic of paranoid thought.  Could Hamlet be right (that
the king is out to get him) and wrong (that there's a vast conspiracy in
operation) at the same time?

In other words, can be arrogate to ourselves the ability to know
Hamlet's psychology (to play upon him, he might say) more than we know
the ghost's ontology?  Is 'knowing' the right sort of stance to should
assume towards characters?

Cheers,
Se

 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.