The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 14.1103 Thursday, 5 June 2003
Date: Wednesday, 4 Jun 2003 09:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: 14.1076 Re: Hamlet and Grebanier
Comment: Re: SHK 14.1076 Re: Hamlet and Grebanier
Terence Hawkes writes, "What Bill Arnold fails to grasp is that however
strong our resolve to 'stick with the text, and deal with it
contextually' (whatever that means), there is absolutely no chance that
we will be able, as a result, to come into contact with 'the play Will
Shakespeare wrote'. The past, and its art, are just not available to us
in those simple terms."
Excuse me? What are we on SHAKSPER doing then? You mean to tell me we
are not reading it, analyzing it, and writing exegeses about parts of
it? And seeing it, no matter how well or poorly staged? Isn't the play
which purports to be that by Will Shakespeare called Hamlet as Grebanier
calls it "The Play Shakespeare Wrote"?
My only complaint is that the BIG PICTURE of Hamlet the character in the
play Hamlet is overlooked, and each scholar or student of Shakespeare is
stuck in a narrow mindset without disclosing his or her mindset. Well,
was Hamlet insane or not? If someone is insane, how can he also be
sane? It is either one or the other, is it not? So, which is it?
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.