The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0033 Thursday, 17 January 2008
[1] From: Larry Weiss <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jan 2008 13:39:18 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
[2] From: Scott Shepherd <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jan 2008 13:51:30 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Weiss <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jan 2008 13:39:18 -0500
Subject: 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
Tony Burton is surely correct when he says that the text offers "a menu
of performable juicy choices," but to distinguish that from "ambiguity
and confusion" invites the question of whether there is a difference
between those two formulations beyond the obvious rhetorical one --
"juicy choices," good; "ambiguity and confusion," bad.
Putting the semantic quibble to the side, Tony has offered one possible
choice, depending on Hamlet's unexpressed deduction from all the
circumstances that he is being overheard. Scott Shepherd offers another
alternative, down to the manner in which the returned gifts are wrapped.
Both, I suppose, can be presented on stage with varying degrees of
cogency; but as I think that Tony, at least, will acknowledge, neither
is compelled by the text.
In fairness, I do not claim that my interpretation is absolutely
compulsory either or, indeed, that it is the only plausible answer. My
more modest claim is that it is the best answer that has yet been
advanced. It has the advantage of being supported by two short
consecutive speeches ("For to the noble mind ..." and "Ha ha! Are you
honest?") which the actors can easily perform in a fashion which
instantaneously suggests that Ophelia was coached and Hamlet recognizes
that. Tony's interpretation, on the other hand, requires the audience to
recall a galaxy of details and reach the conclusion that Hamlet also has
reached the same deduction without the benefit of a speech saying so.
Scott's interpretation is even worse in that it requires the director to
employ stage business and props that are nowhere hinted at in the text.
The director may choose to do that; but that is his choice, not
Shakespeare's.
Don Bloom is also on to something when he suggests that interpretations
may be informed by the background and cultural biases of the critic, and
he cites Merchant of Venice as the obvious example. In this case,
however, diligent self analysis has failed to identify anything in my
background which can be said to have influenced my solution, except a
native tendency towards logic and reason, and professional experience in
construing words and drawing conclusions from the statements and actions
of others.
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Scott Shepherd <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Wednesday, 16 Jan 2008 13:51:30 -0500
Subject: 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0028 Soliloquies - Truth or Lie...or Overheard
I sympathize with Don Bloom's impatience, even if it is expressed rather
ad hominem. But I do think the topic is interesting and textually
arguable, and worth a bit of a fight because the standard interpolation
has become so entrenched and so radically alters the meanings of the scene.
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
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.
|
