SHAKSPER 2005: CLOSED: Gertrude-Ophelia

From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@shaksper.net)
Date: 12/09/05 

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.2043  Friday, 9 December 2005

[1] 	From: 	Larry Weiss <larry@lweiss.net>
	Date: 	Thursday, 08 Dec 2005 13:59:33 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate

[2] 	From: 	John Reed <finarphin@comcast.net>
	Date: 	Friday, 09 Dec 2005 04:07:00 +0000
	Subj: 	Re: Gertrude-Ophelia

[3] 	From: 	John Reed <finarphin@comcast.net>
	Date: 	Friday, 09 Dec 2005 04:43:47 +0000
	Subj: 	Re: Gertrude-Ophelia

[4] 	From: 	S. L Kasten <kostensl@012.net.il>
	Date: 	Friday, 09 Dec 2005 17:04:41 +0200
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Larry Weiss <larry@lweiss.net>
Date: 		Thursday, 08 Dec 2005 13:59:33 -0500
Subject: 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate

 >DW shows lost passages in the Q2, nowhere is there mention of the
 >loss of an entire *scene*

I suspect that "lost passages" is intended to refer to Dover Wilson's 
contention that Hamlet was present in II.ii and overheard Claudius and 
Polonius plan to loose Ophelia upon him, even though the stage 
directions show no hint of that, thus explaining Hamlet's treatment of 
Ophelia in the Nunnery Scene.  To my mind, this working backwards to 
answer the question is nearly as great a sin as hypothesizing lost 
passages to clarify Gertrude's murder of Ophelia.  In fact, the text we 
have shows how Hamlet came to understand that Ophelia was spying on him. 
  Dowden came closest to this "Ha ha!" moment, but no one else seems to 
have noticed.  But this is a subject for another thread.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		John Reed <finarphin@comcast.net>
Date: 		Friday, 09 Dec 2005 04:07:00 +0000
Subject: 	Re: Gertrude-Ophelia

Philip Tomposki:

 >The staging of the director and the performance of the actors
 >ultimately determine the interpretation.  But acknowledging that does
 >mean that you have license to construe the play in a way not supported
 >by the text.

Perhaps, but they (directors and actors) do that anyway, even more: they 
offer up versions that do not represent the text in rather gross 
fashion, by cutting out large chunks of it (that's *changing* the text, 
not just not supporting it), especially in Hamlet, as Eleanor Prosser 
has observed.  I could go on and on about this, but I won't (whew).

To Todd Lidh, your observations are apt, but I was just kidding, silly. 
  No one on this thread has been rude, unless it was myself, certainly 
not the divine Sara.  I apologize for giving the wrong impression, and 
for any other misconception in this area.  The tone of the discussion 
has been much less heated than I expected, and I want to thank Hardy, 
everyone who responded (as well as those who lurked) for their 
forbearance and patience with my heretical ideas.  I'm also sorry I 
couldn't respond to everyone on every point, due to lack of time and 
skill on my part.

One other minor matter.  It was reported that I wrote, "But to defile 
someone with temptation, that's the funniest thing there is."  I 
actually wrote, "But to defile someone with temptation, that's the 
funniest thing there is."  They both work, almost like some of the Q/F 
variants in Othello.  But I meant funniest, meaning "most fun."

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		John Reed <finarphin@comcast.net>
Date: 		Friday, 09 Dec 2005 04:43:47 +0000
Subject: 	Re: Gertrude-Ophelia

Oh, wait; when I said I was only kidding I meant in relation to 
identifying the forum as a den of vipers and Sara being rude.  The rest 
of it -- Gertrude killing Ophelia -- I meant that.

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		S. L Kasten <kostensl@012.net.il>
Date: 		Friday, 09 Dec 2005 17:04:41 +0200
Subject: 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate
Comment: 	Re: SHK 16.2028 Gertrude-Ophelia Penultimate

It is clear that there is not enough here for an indictment, let alone 
conviction.

But I still have a problem with "I will not speak with her": six 
stressed monosyllables, the emphatic "will not".  It could have been for 
example a more lyric, iambic "I do not wish to speak with her."

I see here no psychotophobia as suggested by one correspondent.  I see 
here no "sweets to the sweet" or "I hop'd thou shouldst have been my 
Hamlet's wife...".  I  see here no appropriate pity, as noted by the 
Gentleman  or whoever.

Had this line been in the performance on which Q1 was based it surely 
would not have been forgotten by the anonymous stenographer.  It is too 
strong.

Is it bardolatry to suggest that Shakespeare chose and ordered his words 
sparingly and meticulously.

What was S.'s intention if not to describe Gertrude's state of mind? 
Please don't insult him by saying it was a chance throw-away line with 
no purpose.

Best wishes,
Syd Kasten

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, editor@shaksper.net
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.


about SHAKSPER | current postings | submitted papers | browse SHAKSPER | search SHAKSPER
  
Copyright © 2004, Hardy M. Cook, design by Eric Luhrs. All rights reserved.