What do you think?
Rate this book
Hamlet
En una gélida noche, tan funesta que el viento se vuelve mensajero de terribles presagios, Hamlet, Horacio y tres soldados se reúnen con el propósito de desentrañar el misterio en torno al espectro que ha aparecido en las últimas noches cerca del castillo. Solo hablará con Hamlet, pues esa criatura castigada a vagar por las tierras de Elsinor fue su padre, el último rey de Dinamarca. Su hermano Claudio le traicionó arrebatándole la vida, el trono y su reina. Un horrible crimen que reclama justicia.
Frente al magnífico texto original presentamos la versión de Tomás Segovia, una de las más apreciadas en español. Asimismo, cuenta con una introducción a cargo de Alan Sinfield, catedrático emérito de literatura inglesa de la Universidad de Sussex.
Frente al magnífico texto original presentamos la versión de Tomás Segovia, una de las más apreciadas en español. Asimismo, cuenta con una introducción a cargo de Alan Sinfield, catedrático emérito de literatura inglesa de la Universidad de Sussex.
309 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1601
About the author
William Shakespeare
21.1k books44.8k followersWilliam Shakespeare was an English playwright, poet, and actor. He is widely regarded as the greatest writer in the English language and the world's pre-eminent dramatist. He is often called England's national poet and the "Bard of Avon" (or simply "the Bard"). His extant works, including collaborations, consist of some 39 plays, 154 sonnets, three long narrative poems, and a few other verses, some of uncertain authorship. His plays have been translated into every major living language and are performed more often than those of any other playwright. Shakespeare remains arguably the most influential writer in the English language, and his works continue to be studied and reinterpreted.
Shakespeare was born and raised in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire. At the age of 18, he married Anne Hathaway, with whom he had three children: Susanna, and twins Hamnet and Judith. Sometime between 1585 and 1592, he began a successful career in London as an actor, writer, and part-owner ("sharer") of a playing company called the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later known as the King's Men after the ascension of King James VI and I of Scotland to the English throne. At age 49 (around 1613), he appears to have retired to Stratford, where he died three years later. Few records of Shakespeare's private life survive; this has stimulated considerable speculation about such matters as his physical appearance, his sexuality, his religious beliefs, and even certain fringe theories as to whether the works attributed to him were written by others.
Shakespeare produced most of his known works between 1589 and 1613. His early plays were primarily comedies and histories and are regarded as some of the best works produced in these genres. He then wrote mainly tragedies until 1608, among them Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth, all considered to be among the finest works in the English language. In the last phase of his life, he wrote tragicomedies (also known as romances) and collaborated with other playwrights.
Many of Shakespeare's plays were published in editions of varying quality and accuracy during his lifetime. However, in 1623, John Heminge and Henry Condell, two fellow actors and friends of Shakespeare's, published a more definitive text known as the First Folio, a posthumous collected edition of Shakespeare's dramatic works that includes 36 of his plays. Its Preface was a prescient poem by Ben Jonson, a former rival of Shakespeare, that hailed Shakespeare with the now famous epithet: "not of an age, but for all time".
Shakespeare was born and raised in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire. At the age of 18, he married Anne Hathaway, with whom he had three children: Susanna, and twins Hamnet and Judith. Sometime between 1585 and 1592, he began a successful career in London as an actor, writer, and part-owner ("sharer") of a playing company called the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later known as the King's Men after the ascension of King James VI and I of Scotland to the English throne. At age 49 (around 1613), he appears to have retired to Stratford, where he died three years later. Few records of Shakespeare's private life survive; this has stimulated considerable speculation about such matters as his physical appearance, his sexuality, his religious beliefs, and even certain fringe theories as to whether the works attributed to him were written by others.
Shakespeare produced most of his known works between 1589 and 1613. His early plays were primarily comedies and histories and are regarded as some of the best works produced in these genres. He then wrote mainly tragedies until 1608, among them Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, Othello, King Lear, and Macbeth, all considered to be among the finest works in the English language. In the last phase of his life, he wrote tragicomedies (also known as romances) and collaborated with other playwrights.
Many of Shakespeare's plays were published in editions of varying quality and accuracy during his lifetime. However, in 1623, John Heminge and Henry Condell, two fellow actors and friends of Shakespeare's, published a more definitive text known as the First Folio, a posthumous collected edition of Shakespeare's dramatic works that includes 36 of his plays. Its Preface was a prescient poem by Ben Jonson, a former rival of Shakespeare, that hailed Shakespeare with the now famous epithet: "not of an age, but for all time".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 24,614 reviews
October 16, 2020
if you don't ship Hamratio did you even read the play???
July 6, 2020
I don't have any earth-shattering insights to share from this most recent of god-knows-how-many readings, but this time through I was struck by:
1) what a damn fine piece of stagecraft this is, from the suspenseful, moody opening on the castle battlements to the solemn dead march carrying the prince offstage, and
2) how Shakespeare seems to want Hamlet's personality--particularly the wellspring of his actions (and lack of action)--to remain an enigma, and that he achieves this by infusing the character with so much of himself--so much wit and poetry, so much despondency and savagery--that the result is that the audience simply bows before the great mystery of human personality, and that this reverence for the unknown lurking in the heart of an extraordinary man intensifies the sense of pity, horror and waste that fills us at the end of the play.
May 23, 2022
متردد في قراءة هاملت..ستندم اذن!ا
كلنا نكره الاختيارات..و نجاهد احيانا لنلقي بها على غيرنا
نختار هذا اللون..ام ذاك؛ننام ام نعمل ..نقرأ هاملت و لا نؤجلها؟
ننتقم ام نسامح ؟
و الاهم☀ نسلك هذا الطريق المضيء..ام ذاك الطريق المعتم؟
نكون او لا نكون؟
ا"غاية ما دافعت به عن اب و ملك عزيز نكب أشد النكبات..هو ان اهذي هذيان الحالم. .مع ان شاغل الانتقام ملأ نفسي
..جبان انا"؟؟
حسنا و من منا لم تطن في أذنه هذه الكلمات..لمرات و مرات و نحن نلوم أنفسنا على تخاذلنا
عن أخذ حقوقنا..او حقوق من نحب
للاسف سيظل هاملت هو انا و انت و كل من يمتلك بذرة الخير و العدل في نفسه
و بحلول سن الثلاثين سيختار كل منا
هل سيكون؟و هؤلاء محظوظون
او لا يكون ؟..
و ساعتها سيضع نفسه على وضع الطيار الآلى الشهير "عايش و مش عايش "..حتى يقضي الله في أمره..و حينها لن يلح عليه سؤال هاملت ...و لن يكون مطالبا باتخاذ اي قرار
ا"سيظل فني خالدا ..ما دامت هناك عيون ترى و اذان تسمع "صدقت شكسبير بالفعل..قد تخيفنا اللغة الثقيلة. ..قد تصدنا مبادىء قديمة..و لكنه سيجذبنا هو
شاب نبيل ؛قلبه كبير قست عليه الحياة فثار عليها. .تشكك في الفضيلة..يأس من الناس
لكنه ظل مطالبا بالثار ممن قتل والده..احقاقا للعدل الذي ظل يؤمن به..و الفضيلة التي يطمح إليها و لو رغما عنه👀
و لكنه التردد..التردد ..لعنة هاملت"ان التفكير الكثير في احتمالات الموقف..يؤدي إلى شلل في التصرف "و هكذا لخص لنا هاملت مأساته في سطر واحد
أليست ماساتنا جميعا ؟💬
و من فينا اليوم لا يشعر بحيرة هاملت و تشاؤمه؟
..قلقه و كابته
من؟ لذا من المؤكد انك ستجد نفسك تقراها او تشاهدها كاملة ذات يوم ..من الايام
Link for an english review
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
كلنا نكره الاختيارات..و نجاهد احيانا لنلقي بها على غيرنا
نختار هذا اللون..ام ذاك؛ننام ام نعمل ..نقرأ هاملت و لا نؤجلها؟
ننتقم ام نسامح ؟
و الاهم☀ نسلك هذا الطريق المضيء..ام ذاك الطريق المعتم؟
نكون او لا نكون؟
ا"غاية ما دافعت به عن اب و ملك عزيز نكب أشد النكبات..هو ان اهذي هذيان الحالم. .مع ان شاغل الانتقام ملأ نفسي
..جبان انا"؟؟
حسنا و من منا لم تطن في أذنه هذه الكلمات..لمرات و مرات و نحن نلوم أنفسنا على تخاذلنا
عن أخذ حقوقنا..او حقوق من نحب
للاسف سيظل هاملت هو انا و انت و كل من يمتلك بذرة الخير و العدل في نفسه
و بحلول سن الثلاثين سيختار كل منا
هل سيكون؟و هؤلاء محظوظون
او لا يكون ؟..
و ساعتها سيضع نفسه على وضع الطيار الآلى الشهير "عايش و مش عايش "..حتى يقضي الله في أمره..و حينها لن يلح عليه سؤال هاملت ...و لن يكون مطالبا باتخاذ اي قرار
ا"سيظل فني خالدا ..ما دامت هناك عيون ترى و اذان تسمع "صدقت شكسبير بالفعل..قد تخيفنا اللغة الثقيلة. ..قد تصدنا مبادىء قديمة..و لكنه سيجذبنا هو
شاب نبيل ؛قلبه كبير قست عليه الحياة فثار عليها. .تشكك في الفضيلة..يأس من الناس
لكنه ظل مطالبا بالثار ممن قتل والده..احقاقا للعدل الذي ظل يؤمن به..و الفضيلة التي يطمح إليها و لو رغما عنه👀
و لكنه التردد..التردد ..لعنة هاملت"ان التفكير الكثير في احتمالات الموقف..يؤدي إلى شلل في التصرف "و هكذا لخص لنا هاملت مأساته في سطر واحد
أليست ماساتنا جميعا ؟💬
و من فينا اليوم لا يشعر بحيرة هاملت و تشاؤمه؟
..قلقه و كابته
من؟ لذا من المؤكد انك ستجد نفسك تقراها او تشاهدها كاملة ذات يوم ..من الايام
Link for an english review
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
October 28, 2019
shakespeare when pitching this play, probably: this is my OC hamlet. hes a prince. hes bisexual. hes moody, brooding, and is anywhere between the ages of 16 to 30 years old. and no, i am not taking constructive criticism.
well, let me tell you what. im sold! i love hamlet. i love his angsty monologues. i love his sassy remarks. i love that he cant seem to shut up. i love his relationship with horatio. i love everything about him avoiding osric and his hat. i love that hes OTT and i seriously cant get enough.
also, for those of you who have read this, watch this. its great.
↠ 4.5 stars
well, let me tell you what. im sold! i love hamlet. i love his angsty monologues. i love his sassy remarks. i love that he cant seem to shut up. i love his relationship with horatio. i love everything about him avoiding osric and his hat. i love that hes OTT and i seriously cant get enough.
also, for those of you who have read this, watch this. its great.
↠ 4.5 stars
February 9, 2016
The Skinhead Hamlet - Shakespeare's play translated into modern English. By Richard Curtis. Yes, that Richard Curtis!
Note : those offended by the F word - LOOK AWAY NOW! And Georgia, if you've stumbled on this review by your funny old dad - this is ANOTHER Paul Bryant. Not me!
*********
ACT I
SCENE I
The Battlements of Elsinore Castle.
[Enter HAMLET, followed by GHOST:]
GHOST: Oi! Mush!
HAMLET: Yer?
GHOST: I was fucked!
[Exit GHOST:]
HAMLET: O Fuck.
[Exit HAMLET:]
SCENE II
The Throneroom.
[Enter KING CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, HAMLET and COURT:]
CLAUDIUS: Oi! You, Hamlet, give over!
HAMLET: Fuck off, won't you?
[Exit CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, COURT:]
HAMLET: (Alone) They could have fucking waited.
[Enter HORATIO:]
HORATIO: Oi! Watcha cock!
HAMLET: Weeeeey!
[Exeunt:]
SCENE III
Ophelia's Bedroom.
[Enter OPHELIA and LAERTES:]
LAERTES: I'm fucking off now. Watch Hamlet doesn't slip you one while I'm gone.
OPHELIA: I'll be fucked if he does.
[Exeunt:]
SCENE IV
The Battlements.
[Enter HORATIO, HAMLET and GHOST.:]
GHOST: Oi! Mush, get on with it!
HAMLET: Who did it then?
GHOST: That wanker Claudius. He poured fucking poison in my fucking ear!
HAMLET: Fuck me!
[Exeunt.:]
ACT II
SCENE I
A corridor in the castle.
[Enter HAMLET reading. Enter POLONIUS.:]
POLONIUS: Oi! You!
HAMLET: Fuck off, grandad!
[Exit POLONIUS. Enter ROSENCRANZ and GUILDENSTERN.:]
ROS & GUILD: Oi! Oi! Mucca!
HAMLET: Fuck off, the pair of you!
[Exit ROS & GUILD.:]
HAMLET: (Alone) To fuck or be fucked.
[Enter OPHELIA.:]
OPHELIA: My Lord!
HAMLET: Fuck off to a nunnery!
[They exit in different directions.:]
ACT III
SCENE I
The Throne Room.
[Enter PLAYERS and all COURT.:]
FIRST PLAYER: Full thirty times hath Phoebus cart...
CLAUDIUS: I'll be fucked if I watch any more of this crap.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE II
Gertrude's Bedchamber.
[Enter GERTRUDE and POLONIUS, who hides behind an arras.:]
[Enter HAMLET.:]
HAMLET: Oi! Slag!
GERTRUDE: Watch your fucking mouth, kid!
POLONIUS: (From behind the curtain) Too right.
HAMLET: Who the fuck was that?
[He stabs POLONIUS through the arras.:]
POLONIUS: Fuck!
[POLONIUS dies.:]
HAMLET: Fuck! I thought it was that other wanker.
[Exeunt.:]
ACT IV
SCENE I
A Court Room.
[Enter HAMLET, CLAUDIUS.:]
CLAUDIUS: Fuck off to England then!
HAMLET: Delighted, mush.
SCENE II
The Throne Room.
[Enter OPHELIA, GERTRUDE and CLAUDIUS.:]
OPHELIA: Here, cop a whack of this.
[She hands GERTRUDE some rosemary and exits.:]
CLAUDIUS: She's fucking round the twist, isn't she?
GERTRUDE: (Looking out the window.) There is a willow grows aslant the brook.
CLAUDIUS: Get on with it, slag.
GERTRUDE: Ophelia's gone and fucking drowned!
CLAUDIUS: Fuck! Laertes isn't half going to be browned off.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE III
A Corridor.
[Enter LAERTES.:]
LAERTES: (Alone) I'm going to fucking do this lot.
[Enter CLAUDIUS.:]
CLAUDIUS: I didn't fucking do it, mate. It was that wanker Hamlet.
LAERTES: Well, fuck him.
[Exeunt.:]
ACT V
SCENE I
Hamlet's Bedchamber.
[Enter HAMLET and HORATIO.:]
HAMLET: I got this feeling I'm going to cop it, Horatio, and you know, I couldn't give a flying fuck.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE II
Large Hall.
[Enter HAMLET, LAERTES, COURT, GERTRUDE, CLAUDIUS.:]
LAERTES: Oi, wanker: let's get on with it.
HAMLET: Delighted, fuckface.
[They fight and both are poisoned by the poisoned sword.:]
LAERTES: Fuck!
HAMLET: Fuck!
[The QUEEN drinks.:]
GERTRUDE: Fucking odd wine!
CLAUDIUS: You drunk the wrong fucking cup, you stupid cow!
[GERTRUDE dies.:]
HAMLET: (Pouring the poison down CLAUDIUS'S throat) Well, fuck you!
CLAUDIUS: I'm fair and squarely fucked.
[CLAUDIUS dies.:]
LAERTES: Oi, mush: no hard feelings, eh?
HAMLET: Yer.
[LAERTES dies.:]
HAMLET: Oi! Horatio!
HORATIO: Yer?
HAMLET: I'm fucked. The rest is fucking silence.
[HAMLET dies.:]
HORATIO: Fuck: that was no ordinary wanker, you know.
[Enter FORTINBRAS.:]
FORTINBRAS: What the fuck's going on here?
HORATIO: A fucking mess, that's for sure.
FORTINBRAS: No kidding. I see Hamlet's fucked.
HORATIO: Yer.
FORTINBRAS: Fucking shame: fucking good bloke.
HORATIO: Too fucking right.
FORTINBRAS: Fuck this for a lark then. Let's piss off.
[Exeunt with alarums.:]
Note : those offended by the F word - LOOK AWAY NOW! And Georgia, if you've stumbled on this review by your funny old dad - this is ANOTHER Paul Bryant. Not me!
*********
ACT I
SCENE I
The Battlements of Elsinore Castle.
[Enter HAMLET, followed by GHOST:]
GHOST: Oi! Mush!
HAMLET: Yer?
GHOST: I was fucked!
[Exit GHOST:]
HAMLET: O Fuck.
[Exit HAMLET:]
SCENE II
The Throneroom.
[Enter KING CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, HAMLET and COURT:]
CLAUDIUS: Oi! You, Hamlet, give over!
HAMLET: Fuck off, won't you?
[Exit CLAUDIUS, GERTRUDE, COURT:]
HAMLET: (Alone) They could have fucking waited.
[Enter HORATIO:]
HORATIO: Oi! Watcha cock!
HAMLET: Weeeeey!
[Exeunt:]
SCENE III
Ophelia's Bedroom.
[Enter OPHELIA and LAERTES:]
LAERTES: I'm fucking off now. Watch Hamlet doesn't slip you one while I'm gone.
OPHELIA: I'll be fucked if he does.
[Exeunt:]
SCENE IV
The Battlements.
[Enter HORATIO, HAMLET and GHOST.:]
GHOST: Oi! Mush, get on with it!
HAMLET: Who did it then?
GHOST: That wanker Claudius. He poured fucking poison in my fucking ear!
HAMLET: Fuck me!
[Exeunt.:]
ACT II
SCENE I
A corridor in the castle.
[Enter HAMLET reading. Enter POLONIUS.:]
POLONIUS: Oi! You!
HAMLET: Fuck off, grandad!
[Exit POLONIUS. Enter ROSENCRANZ and GUILDENSTERN.:]
ROS & GUILD: Oi! Oi! Mucca!
HAMLET: Fuck off, the pair of you!
[Exit ROS & GUILD.:]
HAMLET: (Alone) To fuck or be fucked.
[Enter OPHELIA.:]
OPHELIA: My Lord!
HAMLET: Fuck off to a nunnery!
[They exit in different directions.:]
ACT III
SCENE I
The Throne Room.
[Enter PLAYERS and all COURT.:]
FIRST PLAYER: Full thirty times hath Phoebus cart...
CLAUDIUS: I'll be fucked if I watch any more of this crap.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE II
Gertrude's Bedchamber.
[Enter GERTRUDE and POLONIUS, who hides behind an arras.:]
[Enter HAMLET.:]
HAMLET: Oi! Slag!
GERTRUDE: Watch your fucking mouth, kid!
POLONIUS: (From behind the curtain) Too right.
HAMLET: Who the fuck was that?
[He stabs POLONIUS through the arras.:]
POLONIUS: Fuck!
[POLONIUS dies.:]
HAMLET: Fuck! I thought it was that other wanker.
[Exeunt.:]
ACT IV
SCENE I
A Court Room.
[Enter HAMLET, CLAUDIUS.:]
CLAUDIUS: Fuck off to England then!
HAMLET: Delighted, mush.
SCENE II
The Throne Room.
[Enter OPHELIA, GERTRUDE and CLAUDIUS.:]
OPHELIA: Here, cop a whack of this.
[She hands GERTRUDE some rosemary and exits.:]
CLAUDIUS: She's fucking round the twist, isn't she?
GERTRUDE: (Looking out the window.) There is a willow grows aslant the brook.
CLAUDIUS: Get on with it, slag.
GERTRUDE: Ophelia's gone and fucking drowned!
CLAUDIUS: Fuck! Laertes isn't half going to be browned off.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE III
A Corridor.
[Enter LAERTES.:]
LAERTES: (Alone) I'm going to fucking do this lot.
[Enter CLAUDIUS.:]
CLAUDIUS: I didn't fucking do it, mate. It was that wanker Hamlet.
LAERTES: Well, fuck him.
[Exeunt.:]
ACT V
SCENE I
Hamlet's Bedchamber.
[Enter HAMLET and HORATIO.:]
HAMLET: I got this feeling I'm going to cop it, Horatio, and you know, I couldn't give a flying fuck.
[Exeunt.:]
SCENE II
Large Hall.
[Enter HAMLET, LAERTES, COURT, GERTRUDE, CLAUDIUS.:]
LAERTES: Oi, wanker: let's get on with it.
HAMLET: Delighted, fuckface.
[They fight and both are poisoned by the poisoned sword.:]
LAERTES: Fuck!
HAMLET: Fuck!
[The QUEEN drinks.:]
GERTRUDE: Fucking odd wine!
CLAUDIUS: You drunk the wrong fucking cup, you stupid cow!
[GERTRUDE dies.:]
HAMLET: (Pouring the poison down CLAUDIUS'S throat) Well, fuck you!
CLAUDIUS: I'm fair and squarely fucked.
[CLAUDIUS dies.:]
LAERTES: Oi, mush: no hard feelings, eh?
HAMLET: Yer.
[LAERTES dies.:]
HAMLET: Oi! Horatio!
HORATIO: Yer?
HAMLET: I'm fucked. The rest is fucking silence.
[HAMLET dies.:]
HORATIO: Fuck: that was no ordinary wanker, you know.
[Enter FORTINBRAS.:]
FORTINBRAS: What the fuck's going on here?
HORATIO: A fucking mess, that's for sure.
FORTINBRAS: No kidding. I see Hamlet's fucked.
HORATIO: Yer.
FORTINBRAS: Fucking shame: fucking good bloke.
HORATIO: Too fucking right.
FORTINBRAS: Fuck this for a lark then. Let's piss off.
[Exeunt with alarums.:]
August 18, 2021
The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, William Shakespeare
The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, often shortened to Hamlet, is a tragedy written by William Shakespeare sometime between 1599 and 1602.
Set in Denmark, the play depicts Prince Hamlet and his revenge against his uncle, Claudius, who has murdered Hamlet's father in order to seize his throne and marry Hamlet's mother.
عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «هملت»؛ «سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک»؛ «تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک»؛ «هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک»؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: در روزهای ماه مارس سال 1972میلادی
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مسعود فرزاد؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، 1337، در 290ص؛ چاپ دوم 1346؛ موضوع سوگنمایش از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 16م
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: داریوش شاهین؛ تهران، جاویدان، 1344، در 278ص، مصور؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: محمود اعتمادزاده (م.ا. به آذین)؛ تهران، اندیشه، 1344، در 288ص؛ چاپ دوم فروردین 1351؛
عنوان: سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ ویراستار: هارولد جنکینز؛ مترجم: میرشمس الدین ادیب سلطانی؛ تهران، نگاه، 1385، در 395ص، فارسی انگلیسی، شابک 9643513297؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: آرش خیرآبادی؛ مشهد، پاژ، 1387، در 232ص؛ شابک 9789648904536؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ برگردان: رضا دادویی؛ تهران، آدورا، 1391، در 275ص، شابک 9786009307135؛
عنوان: تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: بهزاد جزایری؛ تهران، انتشارات پلک، 1393، در 412ص، شابک 9789642353187؛
عنوان: هملت شاهزا��ه ی دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: شیدا فروغی؛ قزوین، سایه گستر، 1393، در 48ص، شابک 9786003740082؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مهرداد پورعلم؛ تهران، انتشارات ایران، 1394، در 191ص؛ شابک 9786005347593؛
نمایشنامه ای تراژیک اثر «ویلیام شکسپیر» است که در سال 1602میلادی نوشته شده، و یکی از مشهورترین نمایشنامه های تاریخ ادبیات جهان به شمار است؛ نمایش نامه از آنجا آغاز میشود که «هملت شاهزاده دانمارک»، از سفر «آلمان» به قصر خود در «هلسینبورگ دانمارک» بازمیگردد، تا در مراسم خاکسپاری پدرش شرکت جوید؛ پدرش به گونه ای مرموز به قتل رسیده، کس از چند و چون قتل شاه آگاه نیست؛ «هملت» درمییابد، که مادر و عمویش با هم پیمان زناشویی بسته، و هم بستر شده اند؛ وسوسه ها و تردیدهای «هملت» هنگامی آغاز میشود، که روح شاه مقتول بر او نمایان میشود؛ روح به «هملت» میگوید که چگونه به دست برادر خویش به قتل رسیده است، و از «هملت» میخواهد انتقام باز ستاند؛ «هملت» در گیر و داری اشتباهاً پدر معشوقه اش «اوفلیا» را، به قتل میرساند، پدر «اوفلیا» در پشت پرده، مشغول جاسوسی بوده، و «هملت» اشتباهاً، او را «کلادیوس» پنداشته بود؛ «اوفلیا» از مرگ پدر آشفته میشود، و خود را در رودخانه ای غرق میکند؛ سرانجام پس از درگیری با «لایریتس»، برادر «اوفلیا»، که به خونخواهی خواهر و پدر برخاسته بود، «هملت» انتقام پدر خویش را، از عموی خویش نیز میگیرد؛ و در پایان نمایش هر دوی آنها، به همراه «گرترود» و برادر «اوفلیا» کشته میشوند
شخصیتهای نمایش عبارتند از: «کلادیوس: پادشاه دانمارک و عموی هملت»؛ «هملت: پسر شاه پیشین، و برادرزاده ی پادشاه کنونی»؛ «گرترود: ملکه ی دانمارک و مادر هملت»؛ «پولونیوس: لرد چمبرلین»؛ «اوفلیا: دختر پولونیوس و معشوقه ی هملت»؛ «هوراشیو: دوست هملت»؛ «لایریتس: پسر پولونیوس»؛ «کورنلیوس، روزنکرانس، گیلدسترن: دوستان هملت»؛ «مارسلوس: افسر»؛ «برناردو: افسر»؛ «فرانسیسکو: سرباز»؛ «رینالدو: خادم پولونیوس»؛ «شبح: پدر هملت»؛ «فورتینبراس: شاهزاده نروژ»؛ «گروه بازیگران دوره گرد»؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 11/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 26/05/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, often shortened to Hamlet, is a tragedy written by William Shakespeare sometime between 1599 and 1602.
Set in Denmark, the play depicts Prince Hamlet and his revenge against his uncle, Claudius, who has murdered Hamlet's father in order to seize his throne and marry Hamlet's mother.
عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «هملت»؛ «سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک»؛ «تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک»؛ «هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک»؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: در روزهای ماه مارس سال 1972میلادی
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مسعود فرزاد؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، 1337، در 290ص؛ چاپ دوم 1346؛ موضوع سوگنمایش از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 16م
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: داریوش شاهین؛ تهران، جاویدان، 1344، در 278ص، مصور؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: محمود اعتمادزاده (م.ا. به آذین)؛ تهران، اندیشه، 1344، در 288ص؛ چاپ دوم فروردین 1351؛
عنوان: سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ ویراستار: هارولد جنکینز؛ مترجم: میرشمس الدین ادیب سلطانی؛ تهران، نگاه، 1385، در 395ص، فارسی انگلیسی، شابک 9643513297؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: آرش خیرآبادی؛ مشهد، پاژ، 1387، در 232ص؛ شابک 9789648904536؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ برگردان: رضا دادویی؛ تهران، آدورا، 1391، در 275ص، شابک 9786009307135؛
عنوان: تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: بهزاد جزایری؛ تهران، انتشارات پلک، 1393، در 412ص، شابک 9789642353187؛
عنوان: هملت شاهزا��ه ی دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: شیدا فروغی؛ قزوین، سایه گستر، 1393، در 48ص، شابک 9786003740082؛
عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مهرداد پورعلم؛ تهران، انتشارات ایران، 1394، در 191ص؛ شابک 9786005347593؛
نمایشنامه ای تراژیک اثر «ویلیام شکسپیر» است که در سال 1602میلادی نوشته شده، و یکی از مشهورترین نمایشنامه های تاریخ ادبیات جهان به شمار است؛ نمایش نامه از آنجا آغاز میشود که «هملت شاهزاده دانمارک»، از سفر «آلمان» به قصر خود در «هلسینبورگ دانمارک» بازمیگردد، تا در مراسم خاکسپاری پدرش شرکت جوید؛ پدرش به گونه ای مرموز به قتل رسیده، کس از چند و چون قتل شاه آگاه نیست؛ «هملت» درمییابد، که مادر و عمویش با هم پیمان زناشویی بسته، و هم بستر شده اند؛ وسوسه ها و تردیدهای «هملت» هنگامی آغاز میشود، که روح شاه مقتول بر او نمایان میشود؛ روح به «هملت» میگوید که چگونه به دست برادر خویش به قتل رسیده است، و از «هملت» میخواهد انتقام باز ستاند؛ «هملت» در گیر و داری اشتباهاً پدر معشوقه اش «اوفلیا» را، به قتل میرساند، پدر «اوفلیا» در پشت پرده، مشغول جاسوسی بوده، و «هملت» اشتباهاً، او را «کلادیوس» پنداشته بود؛ «اوفلیا» از مرگ پدر آشفته میشود، و خود را در رودخانه ای غرق میکند؛ سرانجام پس از درگیری با «لایریتس»، برادر «اوفلیا»، که به خونخواهی خواهر و پدر برخاسته بود، «هملت» انتقام پدر خویش را، از عموی خویش نیز میگیرد؛ و در پایان نمایش هر دوی آنها، به همراه «گرترود» و برادر «اوفلیا» کشته میشوند
شخصیتهای نمایش عبارتند از: «کلادیوس: پادشاه دانمارک و عموی هملت»؛ «هملت: پسر شاه پیشین، و برادرزاده ی پادشاه کنونی»؛ «گرترود: ملکه ی دانمارک و مادر هملت»؛ «پولونیوس: لرد چمبرلین»؛ «اوفلیا: دختر پولونیوس و معشوقه ی هملت»؛ «هوراشیو: دوست هملت»؛ «لایریتس: پسر پولونیوس»؛ «کورنلیوس، روزنکرانس، گیلدسترن: دوستان هملت»؛ «مارسلوس: افسر»؛ «برناردو: افسر»؛ «فرانسیسکو: سرباز»؛ «رینالدو: خادم پولونیوس»؛ «شبح: پدر هملت»؛ «فورتینبراس: شاهزاده نروژ»؛ «گروه بازیگران دوره گرد»؛
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 11/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 26/05/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
May 25, 2024
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark…
I watched six different adaptations of Hamlet…
This is a review of sorts… All the quirks are deliberate…
Attempting Not to Be
Why didn’t time choose to stop?
How can the sun keep rising up?
How dare the earth still turn around?
Now that Ophelia’s drowned.
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:
A meandering road of sorrow,
The present drags, the future breaks,
I rush along without brakes.
I walk my path without a bless,
Into the void I confess.
Love is a promiscuous art,
Hate splits me apart.
Love’s no poem. Life’s no song.
Something always goes wrong.
The only mourner in this house of mirth,
My heart gets colder with every single breath,
And sleeping pills became my daily bread,
Now that Ophelia’s dead.
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:
From time I can’t borrow,
The present hurts, the future rapes,
I will eat these sour grapes.
I walk a trail of gory mess,
Into the void I digress.
Revenge tastes bittersweet
And vengeance is no feat.
Now that the distress is sown
Let me die on my own.
I watched six different adaptations of Hamlet…
This is a review of sorts… All the quirks are deliberate…
Attempting Not to Be
Why didn’t time choose to stop?
How can the sun keep rising up?
How dare the earth still turn around?
Now that Ophelia’s drowned.
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:
A meandering road of sorrow,
The present drags, the future breaks,
I rush along without brakes.
I walk my path without a bless,
Into the void I confess.
Love is a promiscuous art,
Hate splits me apart.
Love’s no poem. Life’s no song.
Something always goes wrong.
The only mourner in this house of mirth,
My heart gets colder with every single breath,
And sleeping pills became my daily bread,
Now that Ophelia’s dead.
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:
From time I can’t borrow,
The present hurts, the future rapes,
I will eat these sour grapes.
I walk a trail of gory mess,
Into the void I digress.
Revenge tastes bittersweet
And vengeance is no feat.
Now that the distress is sown
Let me die on my own.
November 7, 2020
Is it possible that I had only read the first 4 scenes and Hamlet already became one of my favorite male characters ever? YES!
Why?
He’s constantly wearing black and monologuing about how literally everything is hard and making everything more dramatic then it is, is so ME!?
And this is considered a tragedy (which in some ways it is) but I found it so funny (probably because I have a dark soul) and I will definitely reread this at any given moment of peace.
I absolutely loved this play, and I’m so happy that now I can say that I have read Shakespeare!
I’m a cultured woman now y’all. 🙌😂
Why?
He’s constantly wearing black and monologuing about how literally everything is hard and making everything more dramatic then it is, is so ME!?
And this is considered a tragedy (which in some ways it is) but I found it so funny (probably because I have a dark soul) and I will definitely reread this at any given moment of peace.
I absolutely loved this play, and I’m so happy that now I can say that I have read Shakespeare!
I’m a cultured woman now y’all. 🙌😂
October 27, 2020
یه اعتراف می خوام بکنم:
من قبلاً از بین کارهای شکسپیر، هملت رو اصلاً دوست نداشتم. عاشق اتللو و مکبث بودم، ولی از هملت خوشم نمی اومد اصلاً و نمی دونستم چرا معروف ترین اثر شکسپیره.
همه ى اين ها، تا وقتى شنيدم "بنديكت كمبربچ" نقش هملت رو بازى كرده. قبلاً اجراى سينمايى "مل گيبسون" رو ديده بودم، و راستش چندان كمكى نكرد كه هملت رو بيشتر دوست داشته باشم. اما بنديكت كمبربچ ماجراى ديگه ايه. با سختى اين اجرا رو پيدا كردم، و: موسيقى بى نظير، طراحى لباس بى نظير، طراحى صحنه ى بى نظير، نور پردازى بى نظير... اما همه ى اين ها فقط زيورهايى عارضى بودن گرد جوهر اصلى: بازى بى نظير.
عادت شكسپير اينه كه تقريباً هيچ كدوم از حالات شخصيت ها و لحن ديالوگ ها رو نمى نويسه و همه رو واگذار كرده به كارگردان و بازيگر. كلماتش همه خشك و بى جان هستن، و يك كارگردان و بازيگر خوب نيازه تا روح درستى به اين كلمات بدمه. يكى مثل بنديكت كمبربچ كه با دم مسيحايى ش به تك تك كلمات، شخصيت متمايزى بده، روح مستقلى بده، و حالات چهره اى به نمايشنامه اضافه كنه كه مثل شارح يك كتاب قديمى، جمله به جمله شرح بده كه چطور بايد هر جمله رو فهميد.
اوايل فيلم خیلی از دیالوگ ها رو متوجه نمی شدم به خاطر نثر قديمى شكسپير، و زيرنويس هم موجود نبود. به خاطر همین رفتم ترجمه ی "م.ا به آذين" (كه اتفاقاً از مترجم هاييه كه دوست دارم نثرشون رو) از نمایشنامه رو دانلود کردم. نمايشنامه رو باز گذاشتم کنار فیلم و همزمان فیلم رو می ديدم و ترجمه رو می خوندم، و به اين ترتيب بنديكت كمبربچ دست به دست م.ا به آذين، باعث شدن هملت با دوازده پله از قعر جدولِ نمايشنامه هاى محبوب من، به جايگاه صدرنشينى صعود كنه.
آنك من: شيفته و دوستدار هملت!
من قبلاً از بین کارهای شکسپیر، هملت رو اصلاً دوست نداشتم. عاشق اتللو و مکبث بودم، ولی از هملت خوشم نمی اومد اصلاً و نمی دونستم چرا معروف ترین اثر شکسپیره.
همه ى اين ها، تا وقتى شنيدم "بنديكت كمبربچ" نقش هملت رو بازى كرده. قبلاً اجراى سينمايى "مل گيبسون" رو ديده بودم، و راستش چندان كمكى نكرد كه هملت رو بيشتر دوست داشته باشم. اما بنديكت كمبربچ ماجراى ديگه ايه. با سختى اين اجرا رو پيدا كردم، و: موسيقى بى نظير، طراحى لباس بى نظير، طراحى صحنه ى بى نظير، نور پردازى بى نظير... اما همه ى اين ها فقط زيورهايى عارضى بودن گرد جوهر اصلى: بازى بى نظير.
عادت شكسپير اينه كه تقريباً هيچ كدوم از حالات شخصيت ها و لحن ديالوگ ها رو نمى نويسه و همه رو واگذار كرده به كارگردان و بازيگر. كلماتش همه خشك و بى جان هستن، و يك كارگردان و بازيگر خوب نيازه تا روح درستى به اين كلمات بدمه. يكى مثل بنديكت كمبربچ كه با دم مسيحايى ش به تك تك كلمات، شخصيت متمايزى بده، روح مستقلى بده، و حالات چهره اى به نمايشنامه اضافه كنه كه مثل شارح يك كتاب قديمى، جمله به جمله شرح بده كه چطور بايد هر جمله رو فهميد.
اوايل فيلم خیلی از دیالوگ ها رو متوجه نمی شدم به خاطر نثر قديمى شكسپير، و زيرنويس هم موجود نبود. به خاطر همین رفتم ترجمه ی "م.ا به آذين" (كه اتفاقاً از مترجم هاييه كه دوست دارم نثرشون رو) از نمایشنامه رو دانلود کردم. نمايشنامه رو باز گذاشتم کنار فیلم و همزمان فیلم رو می ديدم و ترجمه رو می خوندم، و به اين ترتيب بنديكت كمبربچ دست به دست م.ا به آذين، باعث شدن هملت با دوازده پله از قعر جدولِ نمايشنامه هاى محبوب من، به جايگاه صدرنشينى صعود كنه.
آنك من: شيفته و دوستدار هملت!
November 18, 2024
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark and, like Oscar the Grouch, I love it. And I love Hamlet. He can’t shut up, he’s a moody as hell bisexual and gets all philosophical while wanting everyone to think he’s losing his mind triggering a self-fulfilling prophecy of his mental health actually spiraling… okay so maybe I relate a bit too much. But this play rules and it has survived as a classic for a reason even if its characters don’t survive the play. Plus who doesn’t love a good revenge story? Especially one that has become a staple plot that has also led to great retellings like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead or even The Lion King and has so many elements that would later be revitalized as gothic tropes in literature and film.
This whole play is steeped in the interrogative mood that situates us in constant contemplation of ‘what a piece of work is man’ through a cavalcade of philosophical inquiries that move from sophism to existentialism. Of course ‘to be or not to be,’—one of the most quoted and recognizable lines of the play—is often considered to probe existentialist ideas long before Kierkegaard and Sartre would take up their pens and opens the play up as an investigation of identity and purpose that is, arguably, very existentially thematic. Much of the play asks ‘what is a man’ but is also Hamlet asking “who am I?” of himself as he schemes and stumbles through the ‘rotten’ state of the world. He also seems to express ideas of relativism central to the Sophists in lines such as ‘there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so,’ and this moral relativism coupled with a thirst for revenge adds a rather edgy and engaging texture to the narrative as it plunges forward into destruction and death.
It is also a coveted role on the stage and there is such an incredible list of people who have played Hamlet. Peter O'Toole, Laurence Olivier, Ralph Fiennes, Richard Burton, David Tennant, Kenneth Branagh, Christopher Plummer, Daniel Day-Lewis, Alan Cumming and many more. Even Ian McKellen played him in a recent age-blind cast production. Who wouldn't want to play Hamlet? But Ophelia as well, one of the more interesting characters who has certainly had a life of her own across literature.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet lives on, like many of his plays, for having a rather universal quality to them that appeals to the times no matter when in history it is revisited or performed. Themes of being trapped by circumstance, themes of betrayal, themes of the in-fighting of the ruling class dooming a nation under them, and themes of struggling with identity continue to trouble people in every era and Hamlet always offers an avenue for confronting these ideas. A fantastic play that stands out even in Shakespeare’s impressive canon of works.
This whole play is steeped in the interrogative mood that situates us in constant contemplation of ‘what a piece of work is man’ through a cavalcade of philosophical inquiries that move from sophism to existentialism. Of course ‘to be or not to be,’—one of the most quoted and recognizable lines of the play—is often considered to probe existentialist ideas long before Kierkegaard and Sartre would take up their pens and opens the play up as an investigation of identity and purpose that is, arguably, very existentially thematic. Much of the play asks ‘what is a man’ but is also Hamlet asking “who am I?” of himself as he schemes and stumbles through the ‘rotten’ state of the world. He also seems to express ideas of relativism central to the Sophists in lines such as ‘there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so,’ and this moral relativism coupled with a thirst for revenge adds a rather edgy and engaging texture to the narrative as it plunges forward into destruction and death.
It is also a coveted role on the stage and there is such an incredible list of people who have played Hamlet. Peter O'Toole, Laurence Olivier, Ralph Fiennes, Richard Burton, David Tennant, Kenneth Branagh, Christopher Plummer, Daniel Day-Lewis, Alan Cumming and many more. Even Ian McKellen played him in a recent age-blind cast production. Who wouldn't want to play Hamlet? But Ophelia as well, one of the more interesting characters who has certainly had a life of her own across literature.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet lives on, like many of his plays, for having a rather universal quality to them that appeals to the times no matter when in history it is revisited or performed. Themes of being trapped by circumstance, themes of betrayal, themes of the in-fighting of the ruling class dooming a nation under them, and themes of struggling with identity continue to trouble people in every era and Hamlet always offers an avenue for confronting these ideas. A fantastic play that stands out even in Shakespeare’s impressive canon of works.
March 19, 2024
"ما معنى الرحمة إذا لم تملك الوقوف في وجه الحقيقة، فتردَّنَا عن الشر إن نوينا، وتُقِيلنَا منه إن عَثَرنا؟ "
هاملت ...أحد روائع الكلاسكيات العالمية..
كتبها ويليام شكسبير الغني عن التعريف أكيد الذي يعد أشهر مؤلف مسرحي عرفه التاريخ ومن أشهر أعماله تاجر البندقية ،روميو وجولييت ،عطيل ،مكبث و الملك لير...
تُعد هاملت أطول المسرحيات التي كتبها شكسبير، حيث وصلت وقت عرضها إلى خمسة ساعات في النسخة الأصلية كما إنها تعتبر من أكثر الأعمال الأدبية قوة وتأثيراً في العالم و كانت من أكثر أعماله شهرة خلال حياته..
المسرحية مكونة من ٤ فصول بجانب مقدمة طويلة في بداية الكتاب بس مقدمة مهمة و ساعدتني كتير في فهم الأحداث وقد قرأتها بترجمة خليل مطران و كانت ممتازة...
تدور أحداث المسرحية حول قصة انتقام الأمير هاملت من عمه كلوديوس الذي قتل أخاه ثم تزوج أرملته (والدة هاملت) و استولي علي العرش..
علي الرغم من صعوبة بعض المفردات إلا أن الحوارات كانت رائعة و مليئة بالأسئلة الوجودية و الفلسفية...
شكسبير ألقي الضوء علي جانب مهم من شخصية هاملت وهو التردد أو الحيرة وذلك عندما قال جملته الشهيرة..أكون أو لا أكون..
"أكون أو لا أكون؟ تلك هي المسألة، أيُّ الحالتين أمْثَلُ بالنفس؟ أتَحَمُّلُ الرجم بالمقاليع وتَلَّقي سهام الحظِ الأنكد، أم النهوضُ لمكافحةِ المصائب.."
كل واحد فينا مع إختلاف الظروف بيفكر زي هاملت كتير..يكون أو لا يكون..يتكلم و لا يسكت..ياخد موقف في حياته و لا يستسلم...
مسرحية رائعة و علي الرغم إني قرأتها قبل كدة و في الغالب درسناها كلنا في المدرسة إلا إني أعتقد إن كل مسرحيات شكسبير تستحق قراءة تانية و بتأني لإنها حقيقي ممتعة..
"من مصائب هذه الحياة أن تحتاج أحيانًا الفضيلةُ إلى التماس الغفران من الرذيلة.."
هاملت ...أحد روائع الكلاسكيات العالمية..
كتبها ويليام شكسبير الغني عن التعريف أكيد الذي يعد أشهر مؤلف مسرحي عرفه التاريخ ومن أشهر أعماله تاجر البندقية ،روميو وجولييت ،عطيل ،مكبث و الملك لير...
تُعد هاملت أطول المسرحيات التي كتبها شكسبير، حيث وصلت وقت عرضها إلى خمسة ساعات في النسخة الأصلية كما إنها تعتبر من أكثر الأعمال الأدبية قوة وتأثيراً في العالم و كانت من أكثر أعماله شهرة خلال حياته..
المسرحية مكونة من ٤ فصول بجانب مقدمة طويلة في بداية الكتاب بس مقدمة مهمة و ساعدتني كتير في فهم الأحداث وقد قرأتها بترجمة خليل مطران و كانت ممتازة...
تدور أحداث المسرحية حول قصة انتقام الأمير هاملت من عمه كلوديوس الذي قتل أخاه ثم تزوج أرملته (والدة هاملت) و استولي علي العرش..
علي الرغم من صعوبة بعض المفردات إلا أن الحوارات كانت رائعة و مليئة بالأسئلة الوجودية و الفلسفية...
شكسبير ألقي الضوء علي جانب مهم من شخصية هاملت وهو التردد أو الحيرة وذلك عندما قال جملته الشهيرة..أكون أو لا أكون..
"أكون أو لا أكون؟ تلك هي المسألة، أيُّ الحالتين أمْثَلُ بالنفس؟ أتَحَمُّلُ الرجم بالمقاليع وتَلَّقي سهام الحظِ الأنكد، أم النهوضُ لمكافحةِ المصائب.."
كل واحد فينا مع إختلاف الظروف بيفكر زي هاملت كتير..يكون أو لا يكون..يتكلم و لا يسكت..ياخد موقف في حياته و لا يستسلم...
مسرحية رائعة و علي الرغم إني قرأتها قبل كدة و في الغالب درسناها كلنا في المدرسة إلا إني أعتقد إن كل مسرحيات شكسبير تستحق قراءة تانية و بتأني لإنها حقيقي ممتعة..
"من مصائب هذه الحياة أن تحتاج أحيانًا الفضيلةُ إلى التماس الغفران من الرذيلة.."
October 28, 2022
بين العبقرية و الجنون شعرة. فهل ادعى هاملت الجنون ليثأر لمقتل أبيه أم أنه جن فعلا و تصرفاته بعد ذلك هي قمة الجنون؟
في مسرحية لم ينج منها أحد من السيف أو السم أو الغرق ... هل خسر الجميع و فاز الجمهور؟
تبدأ الحكاية بموت الملك و عودة ولده هاملت إلى الدنمارك لتولي العرش فيجد أن أمه قد تزوجت عمه الذي اعتلى العرش فيصاب بالإكتئاب الشديد حزنا على والده و أمه و عرشه. يتصور طيف ��بيه الذي يصرح له بأنه مات بالسم صريع مؤامرة من زوجته و أخيه و يطالب ابنه بالثأر فتتصاعد الأحداث الدرامية ذات النكهة الفلسفية كعادة العبقري وليام شكسبير حتى النهاية في مشهد ميلودرامي مؤثر يموت فيه هاملت بعد أن انتقم لوالده و أراق بركة من الدم بها من الضحايا اللذين لا ذنب لهم أكثر مما بها من الخونة المستحقين للقتل.
هل تستحق الحياة الموت من أجلها؟ فماذا سيبقى بعد الموت؟ و هل الشرف في لذة العيش أم في الاستغناء عن الملذات في سبيل تحقيق الذات؟
عندما هتف هاملت بعبارته الشهيرة أكون أو لا أكون .. تلك هي المشكلة. هل سلك الدرب الوعر الذي أفضى إلى حل المشكلة أم أنها ازدادت تعقيدا؟ ما جدوى الحياة أصلا و هي مليئة بالشر و المطامع و لن ينج منها أحد مهما اقترف من خير أو شر؟
مسرحية تم تقليبها على كل الوجوه منذ عدة مئات من السنين و ما زالت طازجة حتى الأن حتى أن دم هاملت ما زال ينزف و صوته يتردد بالأسئلة التي ليس لها أجوبة.
August 10, 2022
"Un sueño no es en sí más que una sombra."
“Hamlet” forma parte de esa tríada perversa escrita por Shakespeare junto a “Macbeth” (mi preferida de todas) y “El Rey Lear”.
Ninguna de sus otras obras alcanzan este nivel de perversidad y traiciones (tal vez, “Otelo”, aunque no la leí).
Hamlet tiene las mismas dudas y contradicciones que Macbeth con la diferencia de que utilizando su supuesta locura pelea contra todas las adversidades incluyendo la presión que el fantasma de su padre le impone cuando ya en el primer acto le advierte que fue asesinado por su propio hermano quien a su vez desposa a su viuda, la reina Gertrudis para ocupar el trono.
El planteo de la trama nos acerca potencialmente a otra tragedia impecable, la mejor de todas según Aristóteles, llamada “Edipo Rey” de Sófocles. Aquí como en la tragedia griega los lazos parentales afectan negativamente al personaje principal quien debe resolver “todos los problemas del mundo” como confiesa Hamlet por allí por sí mismo para llegar a la verdad.
La maldad inherente de Claudio ejercida sobre su tiránica manera de gobernar mancha, complica y condiciona a Hamlet, quien debe luchar desde lo más bajo para conseguir la descubrir la verdad y en medio de toda esta mezcla de odios y traiciones van apareciendo personajes que tironean al rey y al príncipe para bien o para mal, tal es el caso de Polonio, Laertes y Horacio.
El papel de Ofelia no es menor, no va en zaga de lo que sucede y será el detonante del final que como en toda obra de Shakespeare incluye una serie de enfrentamientos, regueros de sangre y muerte por todas partes.
El lenguaje, los coloquios, los monólogos y las disertaciones de los personajes elevan lo poético y lo bello de esta obra de Shakespeare (que si no me equivoco es una de las más extensas) a niveles de una brillantez y perfección sin precedentes y que sentaron las bases para todo lo que vino después.
William Shakespeare logró generar en Inglaterra y en la literatura un punto de inflexión y un camino a seguir y dejar su literatura en lo más alto y a punto tal de que hoy sigue siendo insoslayable su importancia.
“Hay cosas en el cielo y en la tierra, Horacio, que exceden lo que ha soñado tu filosofía” dice Hamlet en una escena.
Esa frase está dedicada a nosotros los lectores, quienes de una u otra manera estamos muchas veces destinados a aprender de la sabiduría de grandes como Shakespeare que la literatura es la más completa de las artes.
Siempre deberíamos recordar esto.
“Hamlet” forma parte de esa tríada perversa escrita por Shakespeare junto a “Macbeth” (mi preferida de todas) y “El Rey Lear”.
Ninguna de sus otras obras alcanzan este nivel de perversidad y traiciones (tal vez, “Otelo”, aunque no la leí).
Hamlet tiene las mismas dudas y contradicciones que Macbeth con la diferencia de que utilizando su supuesta locura pelea contra todas las adversidades incluyendo la presión que el fantasma de su padre le impone cuando ya en el primer acto le advierte que fue asesinado por su propio hermano quien a su vez desposa a su viuda, la reina Gertrudis para ocupar el trono.
El planteo de la trama nos acerca potencialmente a otra tragedia impecable, la mejor de todas según Aristóteles, llamada “Edipo Rey” de Sófocles. Aquí como en la tragedia griega los lazos parentales afectan negativamente al personaje principal quien debe resolver “todos los problemas del mundo” como confiesa Hamlet por allí por sí mismo para llegar a la verdad.
La maldad inherente de Claudio ejercida sobre su tiránica manera de gobernar mancha, complica y condiciona a Hamlet, quien debe luchar desde lo más bajo para conseguir la descubrir la verdad y en medio de toda esta mezcla de odios y traiciones van apareciendo personajes que tironean al rey y al príncipe para bien o para mal, tal es el caso de Polonio, Laertes y Horacio.
El papel de Ofelia no es menor, no va en zaga de lo que sucede y será el detonante del final que como en toda obra de Shakespeare incluye una serie de enfrentamientos, regueros de sangre y muerte por todas partes.
El lenguaje, los coloquios, los monólogos y las disertaciones de los personajes elevan lo poético y lo bello de esta obra de Shakespeare (que si no me equivoco es una de las más extensas) a niveles de una brillantez y perfección sin precedentes y que sentaron las bases para todo lo que vino después.
William Shakespeare logró generar en Inglaterra y en la literatura un punto de inflexión y un camino a seguir y dejar su literatura en lo más alto y a punto tal de que hoy sigue siendo insoslayable su importancia.
“Hay cosas en el cielo y en la tierra, Horacio, que exceden lo que ha soñado tu filosofía” dice Hamlet en una escena.
Esa frase está dedicada a nosotros los lectores, quienes de una u otra manera estamos muchas veces destinados a aprender de la sabiduría de grandes como Shakespeare que la literatura es la más completa de las artes.
Siempre deberíamos recordar esto.
August 29, 2022
Here's the thing about Hamlet: if you see it and you hate it, you saw a terrible Hamlet. I don't care if it's given critical acclaim - fuck off, Kenneth Branagh - Hamlet is supposed to be compelling, and if you didn't find the character compelling, that actor didn't do their job. You need a Hamlet who knows the character, not a Hamlet who wants to do grace to the character or some shit.
Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changedwhen the fire nation attacked when I saw Santa Cruz Shakespeare's 2016 production of Hamlet, starring actress Kate Eastwood Norris as Hamlet.
(CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)
I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once.
// HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN
➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel.
➽ Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.
Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.
➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!
On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.
➽ Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's.
In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play.
VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually.
Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube
Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changed
(CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)
I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once.
// HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN
➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel.
➽ Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.
Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.
➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!
On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.
➽ Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's.
In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play.
VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually.
Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube
December 1, 2024
IN PRAISE OF FOLLY!
"Thus are all things represented in counterfeit, yet without this is no living!"
Desiderius Erasmus, In Praise of Folly.
Hamlet goes nuts because he wants to somehow truly Live in a counterfeit world. He tells Horatio at the outset he's going to put on an antic disposition...
Fact is, though, seeing a Ghost has Driven him Antic! He's now crazy as a coot.
When the counterfeit world forces is into a corner at our Coming of Age - and we're labelled from that point on - the world WINS. We don't like it, but there it is.
The freedom of childhood now gone, we either pay obeisance to the True and Counterfeit State of Things or - like Hamlet - act weird over in a corner, as Dostoevsky's Underground Man does.
What's WRONG with Hamlet, folks? Better yet, what's RIGHT with him? All's well, he says, with him. Logically he just HAS to be nuts in a loony tunes world.
He knows cause the World knows. And he drops out of polite society, which sugarcoats its hidden knowing. So, out of spite, the World gives a label to such noncompliant ones.
And Hamlet? Freud says he has an unresolved Oedipal complex. And T.S. Eliot says his emotions have no "Objective Correlative," which means, I guess that he cannot link any FACTS together to express his anxiety.
But, dear Sigmund and dearer Tom, our world is skewed - and you know it. It doesn't FORGIVE. Because the State of Denmark is in charge. And that state is rotten.
So, bottom line, as the great philosophe Jacques Derrida says, our consciousness - Hamlet's, and Ours - is APORETIC. The world is unjust. It favours the Phony.
Not the Authentic. And Hamlet is Authentic.
Which means he's a tangled knot!
Therefore the Bard never successfully resolved the incredible Tensions of his play - hence, only four stars. You see, he never sugercoats it. But, man oh man, did we 18-year-olds dig our teeth into its words and its plot back in 1968!
We loved it. THIS, guys, was COMING OF AGE. No wonder I was a dud.
My friend Brian bought a powerful motorbike, Robert Pirsig's chosen weapon of Resistance. Camus wrote Resistance, Rebellion and Death. If the Establishment had a bone to pick with us real items our lock was Pick Proof.
For me too. I buried myself in existentialism. And that's the main reason MY consciousness has Remained aporetic all these years. I had no choice. If I couldn't win, I had to resist. And Bad luck has hounded my every act ever since.
I've been perched on my aporia for 50 years.
I loved this play because it showed me how to find a peaceful hiatus from its storm, now and then:
No! I am not Prince Hamlet (I said)
Nor was meant to be!
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, and a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, Almost ridiculous -
Almost, at times, the Fool.
I'm other words I SAW THROUGH myself, all the way to the Emptiness.of all play acting.
Those words of T.S. Eliot heralded the beginning of long-delayed precarious peace for me.
The key, to me, was in the Gospel: "resist not evil." On a personal and not, however, international level - which remains in God's hands. That we can only pray about.
Resist not evil, because violence breeds further violence. KNOW that there's a solution for our pain. That solution is an outsider's authenticity.
Its way of Fractured Peace is best...
Even if its aporia has to be a personal MARTYRDOM:
For such is, in the end, our Unbalanced Purgatory and its final product, Everlasting Peace.
"Thus are all things represented in counterfeit, yet without this is no living!"
Desiderius Erasmus, In Praise of Folly.
Hamlet goes nuts because he wants to somehow truly Live in a counterfeit world. He tells Horatio at the outset he's going to put on an antic disposition...
Fact is, though, seeing a Ghost has Driven him Antic! He's now crazy as a coot.
When the counterfeit world forces is into a corner at our Coming of Age - and we're labelled from that point on - the world WINS. We don't like it, but there it is.
The freedom of childhood now gone, we either pay obeisance to the True and Counterfeit State of Things or - like Hamlet - act weird over in a corner, as Dostoevsky's Underground Man does.
What's WRONG with Hamlet, folks? Better yet, what's RIGHT with him? All's well, he says, with him. Logically he just HAS to be nuts in a loony tunes world.
He knows cause the World knows. And he drops out of polite society, which sugarcoats its hidden knowing. So, out of spite, the World gives a label to such noncompliant ones.
And Hamlet? Freud says he has an unresolved Oedipal complex. And T.S. Eliot says his emotions have no "Objective Correlative," which means, I guess that he cannot link any FACTS together to express his anxiety.
But, dear Sigmund and dearer Tom, our world is skewed - and you know it. It doesn't FORGIVE. Because the State of Denmark is in charge. And that state is rotten.
So, bottom line, as the great philosophe Jacques Derrida says, our consciousness - Hamlet's, and Ours - is APORETIC. The world is unjust. It favours the Phony.
Not the Authentic. And Hamlet is Authentic.
Which means he's a tangled knot!
Therefore the Bard never successfully resolved the incredible Tensions of his play - hence, only four stars. You see, he never sugercoats it. But, man oh man, did we 18-year-olds dig our teeth into its words and its plot back in 1968!
We loved it. THIS, guys, was COMING OF AGE. No wonder I was a dud.
My friend Brian bought a powerful motorbike, Robert Pirsig's chosen weapon of Resistance. Camus wrote Resistance, Rebellion and Death. If the Establishment had a bone to pick with us real items our lock was Pick Proof.
For me too. I buried myself in existentialism. And that's the main reason MY consciousness has Remained aporetic all these years. I had no choice. If I couldn't win, I had to resist. And Bad luck has hounded my every act ever since.
I've been perched on my aporia for 50 years.
I loved this play because it showed me how to find a peaceful hiatus from its storm, now and then:
No! I am not Prince Hamlet (I said)
Nor was meant to be!
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, and a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, Almost ridiculous -
Almost, at times, the Fool.
I'm other words I SAW THROUGH myself, all the way to the Emptiness.of all play acting.
Those words of T.S. Eliot heralded the beginning of long-delayed precarious peace for me.
The key, to me, was in the Gospel: "resist not evil." On a personal and not, however, international level - which remains in God's hands. That we can only pray about.
Resist not evil, because violence breeds further violence. KNOW that there's a solution for our pain. That solution is an outsider's authenticity.
Its way of Fractured Peace is best...
Even if its aporia has to be a personal MARTYRDOM:
For such is, in the end, our Unbalanced Purgatory and its final product, Everlasting Peace.
June 4, 2007
Shakespeare is an adept poet and master of the language. He layers on jokes, puns, and references everywhere. He has a massive output of work, and a number of different plots. When we compare him to other authors, it is difficult to find anyone who stacks up--but then, we're often comparing him to the wrong people.
Shakespeare didn't write books or pamphlets or epics, he wrote plays: short pieces of drama that were meant to be fast-paced and exciting. That they are mainly experienced today as bound books and not theatrical productions does not change their origins. If one wants to look at the achievements of Shakespeare, he should be compared to someone of a similar bent.
He should be compared with prolific writers known for catchy jokes and phrases. Writers who reuse old plots, making fun of their traditions. Writers of work meant to be performed. Writers who aim for the lowest common denominator, while still including the occasional high-minded political commentary. He should be compared to the writers of South Park; or the Simpsons; or MAD Magazine.
Shakespeare was meant to be lowbrow and political, but now it only reads that way to those who are well-educated enough to understand his language, reference, and the political scene of the time. If you do know the period lingo, then his plays are just as filthy as any episode of South Park.
For example, the word 'wit' refers to a fellow's manhood (this one comes up a lot), here's an example from Much Ado About Nothing:
Plus there's the title of that play, which references the fact that 'nothing' was slang for a woman's maidenhead, which occurs also in Hamlet:
He was also not one to pass up a good cunt joke.
Shakespeare often refers to mythology because that was the standard pool of reference for authors at the time. Family Guy references 1980's pop culture. Is that any less esoteric? How esoteric will Mr. T be after 400 years (assuming he doesn't find his way into the latest testament of the bible anytime soon)?
Additionally, all of Shakespeare's magnificent plots were lifted, sometimes whole cloth, from other books and histories, just like how sit coms reuse 'episode types' or borrow plots from popular movies. Shakespeare was not quite as visionary or deep as he is often given credit for. Rather, he was always so indistinct with the motives and thoughts of his characters that two critics could assign two completely different and conflicting motives, but find both equally well-supported.
Is Shylock evil because he's a Jew, evil despite the fact, or evil because of the effects of racism on him? You can make a case for all three. Marlowe (the more practised and precise writer) never left interpretation to chance, and where has it gotten him?
Shakespeare was an inspired and prolific author, and his effect on writing and talent for aphorism cannot be overstated. I think he probably wrote the King James version because it is so pretty. However, he is not the be-all and end-all of writing.
His popularity and central position in the canon comes mainly from the fact that you can write anything you like about his plays. Critics and professors don't have to scramble, or even leave their comfort zone. Shakespeare's work is opaque enough that it rejects no particular interpretation. No matter your opinions, you can find them reflected in Shakespeare; or at least, not outright refuted.
His is a grey world, and his lack of agenda leaves us pondering what he could possibly have been like as a person. His indirect approach makes his writing the perfect representation of an unsure, unjust world. No one is really right or wrong, and even if they were, there would be no way to prove it.
I don't know whether this makes him the most or least poignant of writers. Is the author's absence from the stories the most rarefied example of the craft, or is it just lighthearted pandering? Either way, he's still a clever, amusing, insightful, and helplessly dirty fellow.
Shakespeare didn't write books or pamphlets or epics, he wrote plays: short pieces of drama that were meant to be fast-paced and exciting. That they are mainly experienced today as bound books and not theatrical productions does not change their origins. If one wants to look at the achievements of Shakespeare, he should be compared to someone of a similar bent.
He should be compared with prolific writers known for catchy jokes and phrases. Writers who reuse old plots, making fun of their traditions. Writers of work meant to be performed. Writers who aim for the lowest common denominator, while still including the occasional high-minded political commentary. He should be compared to the writers of South Park; or the Simpsons; or MAD Magazine.
Shakespeare was meant to be lowbrow and political, but now it only reads that way to those who are well-educated enough to understand his language, reference, and the political scene of the time. If you do know the period lingo, then his plays are just as filthy as any episode of South Park.
For example, the word 'wit' refers to a fellow's manhood (this one comes up a lot), here's an example from Much Ado About Nothing:
Don Pedro: I said that thou hadst a great wit. Yay, said she, a great gross one. Nay, say I, a fine wit. Yay, said she, a fine little one. Nay, said I, a good wit. Just, said she, it hurts nobody.
Plus there's the title of that play, which references the fact that 'nothing' was slang for a woman's maidenhead, which occurs also in Hamlet:
Hamlet: That's a fair thought to lie between a maid's legs.
Ophelia: What is, my lord?
Hamlet: Nothing.
He was also not one to pass up a good cunt joke.
Shakespeare often refers to mythology because that was the standard pool of reference for authors at the time. Family Guy references 1980's pop culture. Is that any less esoteric? How esoteric will Mr. T be after 400 years (assuming he doesn't find his way into the latest testament of the bible anytime soon)?
Additionally, all of Shakespeare's magnificent plots were lifted, sometimes whole cloth, from other books and histories, just like how sit coms reuse 'episode types' or borrow plots from popular movies. Shakespeare was not quite as visionary or deep as he is often given credit for. Rather, he was always so indistinct with the motives and thoughts of his characters that two critics could assign two completely different and conflicting motives, but find both equally well-supported.
Is Shylock evil because he's a Jew, evil despite the fact, or evil because of the effects of racism on him? You can make a case for all three. Marlowe (the more practised and precise writer) never left interpretation to chance, and where has it gotten him?
Shakespeare was an inspired and prolific author, and his effect on writing and talent for aphorism cannot be overstated. I think he probably wrote the King James version because it is so pretty. However, he is not the be-all and end-all of writing.
His popularity and central position in the canon comes mainly from the fact that you can write anything you like about his plays. Critics and professors don't have to scramble, or even leave their comfort zone. Shakespeare's work is opaque enough that it rejects no particular interpretation. No matter your opinions, you can find them reflected in Shakespeare; or at least, not outright refuted.
His is a grey world, and his lack of agenda leaves us pondering what he could possibly have been like as a person. His indirect approach makes his writing the perfect representation of an unsure, unjust world. No one is really right or wrong, and even if they were, there would be no way to prove it.
I don't know whether this makes him the most or least poignant of writers. Is the author's absence from the stories the most rarefied example of the craft, or is it just lighthearted pandering? Either way, he's still a clever, amusing, insightful, and helplessly dirty fellow.
May 11, 2022
i am not sure of many things, but there's one thing i know with the utmost certainty and it's that hamlet and horatio explored each other's bodies. multiple times.
August 8, 2023
“One may smile, and smile, and be a villain.”
Hamlet ~~ William Shakespeare
Richard Burton
I recently discovered that my non-existent HAMLET review has 51 likes. With that many likes, I figured I better buckle down and write a proper review for this amazing piece of theatre.
It's no wonder William Shakespeare’s HAMLET is so famous and beloved. HAMLET provides all the ingredients of a thrilling plot, while offering some of literature’s most breathtaking poetry and philosophical reflection. In Shakespeare’s paranoid Denmark, young love is throttled by fear, and friends are driven to become enemies, while a melancholic, young prince rages against a scheming uncle who married his mother after having killed his brother, King Hamlet.
John Gielgud
The story of Prince Hamlet, robbed of his father and of his rightful seat on the throne of Denmark, HAMLET has, over the years, became one of theatre’s most thrilling dramas. The love and betrayal coincide in this story to make one of the most shocking endings of Shakespeare’s work ever.
Madness, revenge, mortality, lust, and religion are words that can describe Hamlet. Not the play HAMLET, but Prince Hamlet, the boy. The only word that is needed to describe HAMLET, the play, is tragedy.
HAMLET is not a difficult read, being that we are so familiar with the text; if you look past the words on the paper and see the meaning of HAMLET you may find that the young prince Hamlet isn’t so different from you and me.
The story of a prince robbed of his father and of his rightful crown as king of Denmark, HAMLET has, over the years, became one of the most exciting tragedies ever written. Love and betrayal coincide in this story to make one of the most shocking endings of Shakespeare’s work ever.
John Barrymore
Prince Hamlet’s father, King Hamlet of Denmark, is dead. The king’s brother, Claudius, has attained the throne and married widowed Queen Gertrude — all done with such tasteless haste that the funeral bak’d meats did coldly furnish forth the wedding tables. On top of all the sneaky corruption, Denmark is under threat of invasion from Norway. But as everything seems to be falling out of place for the young prince of Denmark, he seems to have struck gold of the sorts.
The dead king rests uncomfortably and one night appears to Prince Hamlet on the castle walls. As young Hamlet receives the message, to set out revenge of the death of his father, the castle stirs after Hamlet’s remarks to seeing the spirit.
In order to complete the quest Prince Hamlet undertakes for his father, he must make himself seem mad, but is he truly mad? This is the one questions that actors, directors and critics have debated for centuries. The only person who truly answer that question died in 1616. Shakespeare has left this question open; Hamlet may well be mad, he may be playing on the fact that others read his actions that way to be able to better ready his revenge.
There is also a great deal of ambiguity about his mother’s views. She seems to allow that she is very naïve and doesn’t really know what’s going on, yet one gets the strong textual clues that she knows quite well what her new husband has done, and she’s trying very hard to not know.
In the end the entire mess comes crashing down in tragic deaths of nearly everyone.
Sarah Bernhardt
HAMLET, in addition to being gripping from the first line to the last line, is also just filled with famous lines and speeches, slices of Shakespeare’s writing that are so worthy of the fame they have achieved from the most famous “To be of not to be” speech to one-liners of great significance.
For centuries, HAMLET has been the theatre's cornerstone of the diversion of madness and revenge, and when these two are mixed, they create something much bigger than all of us. But what is Hamlet’s true nature? Does Hamlet know his own nature? As a director, I see a hero caught up in a villainous situation ~~ a young man of full of anger, filled mourning, who has no idea how to proceed in his corrupt world. Therefore, this is why we can all relate to Hamlet, as we are all stuck in a corrupt world with no idea how to proceed.
Benedict Cumberbatch
Hamlet ~~ William Shakespeare
Richard Burton
I recently discovered that my non-existent HAMLET review has 51 likes. With that many likes, I figured I better buckle down and write a proper review for this amazing piece of theatre.
It's no wonder William Shakespeare’s HAMLET is so famous and beloved. HAMLET provides all the ingredients of a thrilling plot, while offering some of literature’s most breathtaking poetry and philosophical reflection. In Shakespeare’s paranoid Denmark, young love is throttled by fear, and friends are driven to become enemies, while a melancholic, young prince rages against a scheming uncle who married his mother after having killed his brother, King Hamlet.
John Gielgud
The story of Prince Hamlet, robbed of his father and of his rightful seat on the throne of Denmark, HAMLET has, over the years, became one of theatre’s most thrilling dramas. The love and betrayal coincide in this story to make one of the most shocking endings of Shakespeare’s work ever.
Madness, revenge, mortality, lust, and religion are words that can describe Hamlet. Not the play HAMLET, but Prince Hamlet, the boy. The only word that is needed to describe HAMLET, the play, is tragedy.
HAMLET is not a difficult read, being that we are so familiar with the text; if you look past the words on the paper and see the meaning of HAMLET you may find that the young prince Hamlet isn’t so different from you and me.
The story of a prince robbed of his father and of his rightful crown as king of Denmark, HAMLET has, over the years, became one of the most exciting tragedies ever written. Love and betrayal coincide in this story to make one of the most shocking endings of Shakespeare’s work ever.
John Barrymore
Prince Hamlet’s father, King Hamlet of Denmark, is dead. The king’s brother, Claudius, has attained the throne and married widowed Queen Gertrude — all done with such tasteless haste that the funeral bak’d meats did coldly furnish forth the wedding tables. On top of all the sneaky corruption, Denmark is under threat of invasion from Norway. But as everything seems to be falling out of place for the young prince of Denmark, he seems to have struck gold of the sorts.
The dead king rests uncomfortably and one night appears to Prince Hamlet on the castle walls. As young Hamlet receives the message, to set out revenge of the death of his father, the castle stirs after Hamlet’s remarks to seeing the spirit.
In order to complete the quest Prince Hamlet undertakes for his father, he must make himself seem mad, but is he truly mad? This is the one questions that actors, directors and critics have debated for centuries. The only person who truly answer that question died in 1616. Shakespeare has left this question open; Hamlet may well be mad, he may be playing on the fact that others read his actions that way to be able to better ready his revenge.
There is also a great deal of ambiguity about his mother’s views. She seems to allow that she is very naïve and doesn’t really know what’s going on, yet one gets the strong textual clues that she knows quite well what her new husband has done, and she’s trying very hard to not know.
In the end the entire mess comes crashing down in tragic deaths of nearly everyone.
Sarah Bernhardt
HAMLET, in addition to being gripping from the first line to the last line, is also just filled with famous lines and speeches, slices of Shakespeare’s writing that are so worthy of the fame they have achieved from the most famous “To be of not to be” speech to one-liners of great significance.
For centuries, HAMLET has been the theatre's cornerstone of the diversion of madness and revenge, and when these two are mixed, they create something much bigger than all of us. But what is Hamlet’s true nature? Does Hamlet know his own nature? As a director, I see a hero caught up in a villainous situation ~~ a young man of full of anger, filled mourning, who has no idea how to proceed in his corrupt world. Therefore, this is why we can all relate to Hamlet, as we are all stuck in a corrupt world with no idea how to proceed.
Benedict Cumberbatch
May 2, 2020
Updated review February 2017:
This is my third time reading Hamlet and, like a fine wine... you know the rest. I read the same copy I've had lying around for years with one page of notes on the left and the play on the right. This time I was able to read most of the play without notes which was pretty awesome. Just had to glance over to figure out what some of the words meant, but I actually got the story this time. It's taken me three tries with a book that helps me cheat, but boy oh boy I finally got this down.
It's beautiful! I loved it! It really hits a variety of genres and kept me turning the pages. It was weird... I read it pretty slowly to breathe in the language and take my time with it, even reading it out loud at times until my wife made me shut up. I tried to get her to play the female parts, but she wasn't feeling it. I guess she really just had the Queen of Ophelia so her options were limited. But yeah, I read it slowly but it also seemed to fly by at the same time.
Hamlet is a very complex guy who goes through a range of emotions as the story unfolds. His monologues are just really great poetry that I wish I could memorize and just belt out randomly on a street corner or while I'm in the grocery store contemplating another unhealthy snack. To be or not to be... I loved the monologues. I loved when things just went nuts at times. The ending was just crazy and awesome. It's just a daggum fantastic story, and you should give it a shot if you haven't already. Find a copy that helps you and breaks down the language and all that. It's good.
I've got Macbeth on the shelf, too. Might be time to revisit it and then tackle more Shakespeare. I've gotta be in the right mindset though. Can't just be reading all this nonsense all the time. I have real books waiting to be read, too. Books with real words and stuff.
Previous review:
I once asked a friend of mine if he liked Shakespeare to which he responded, "I don't dislike Shakespeare". That's exactly how I feel about him, too.
In high school I was forced to read Romeo and Juliet and Julius Caesar. My thoughts on Shakespeare haven't really changed much in the past 15 years. His stories are great, but they were written so long ago that it's not always fun to read. I appreciate the hell out of the guy, but he will never be my first choice (or second or third) when I'm looking for something new to read.
That being said, this was my favorite play to read through. Maybe I'm older now and find it easier and more enjoyable to read this stuff for pleasure rather than because I may have a pop quiz over the third act. I thought the story was fantastic and was surprised by how many lines I recognized from just being a human and dabbling in a little bit of culture every now and then.
Would I have ever read this if it wasn't being read in a group to prepare for Infinite Jest? Nope. But, I did and I'm glad I took the time to do it.
This is my third time reading Hamlet and, like a fine wine... you know the rest. I read the same copy I've had lying around for years with one page of notes on the left and the play on the right. This time I was able to read most of the play without notes which was pretty awesome. Just had to glance over to figure out what some of the words meant, but I actually got the story this time. It's taken me three tries with a book that helps me cheat, but boy oh boy I finally got this down.
It's beautiful! I loved it! It really hits a variety of genres and kept me turning the pages. It was weird... I read it pretty slowly to breathe in the language and take my time with it, even reading it out loud at times until my wife made me shut up. I tried to get her to play the female parts, but she wasn't feeling it. I guess she really just had the Queen of Ophelia so her options were limited. But yeah, I read it slowly but it also seemed to fly by at the same time.
Hamlet is a very complex guy who goes through a range of emotions as the story unfolds. His monologues are just really great poetry that I wish I could memorize and just belt out randomly on a street corner or while I'm in the grocery store contemplating another unhealthy snack. To be or not to be... I loved the monologues. I loved when things just went nuts at times. The ending was just crazy and awesome. It's just a daggum fantastic story, and you should give it a shot if you haven't already. Find a copy that helps you and breaks down the language and all that. It's good.
I've got Macbeth on the shelf, too. Might be time to revisit it and then tackle more Shakespeare. I've gotta be in the right mindset though. Can't just be reading all this nonsense all the time. I have real books waiting to be read, too. Books with real words and stuff.
Previous review:
I once asked a friend of mine if he liked Shakespeare to which he responded, "I don't dislike Shakespeare". That's exactly how I feel about him, too.
In high school I was forced to read Romeo and Juliet and Julius Caesar. My thoughts on Shakespeare haven't really changed much in the past 15 years. His stories are great, but they were written so long ago that it's not always fun to read. I appreciate the hell out of the guy, but he will never be my first choice (or second or third) when I'm looking for something new to read.
That being said, this was my favorite play to read through. Maybe I'm older now and find it easier and more enjoyable to read this stuff for pleasure rather than because I may have a pop quiz over the third act. I thought the story was fantastic and was surprised by how many lines I recognized from just being a human and dabbling in a little bit of culture every now and then.
Would I have ever read this if it wasn't being read in a group to prepare for Infinite Jest? Nope. But, I did and I'm glad I took the time to do it.
November 17, 2024
The first time I read this book I was in highschool. It was an 80-page book. The story was so short and simple, so I wondered "Why so many people say this is such a complex play/book?". A couple of years later, I bought a special edition of 592 pages: Too much? No! Why not? Because the play was written in Shakespearean English, and every single word that was not in standard English was explained at the bottom of the page, it explained the context, the uses you can have from that word.
Ok, so I read that version and it wasa pain in the ass. Not because it was a bad story at all, but now I truly understand people who say that Shakespeare was such a special writer, and I agree!
Well, about the story... Fascinating! I loved how Shakespeare made of Hamlet such a special character. It was very difficult for Hamlet to take action, it was like "almost, almost!"
I feel Shakespeare wanted to express himself on Hamlet. His multiple personalities during the play reminded me of Shakespeare's life a bit.
On the other hand, I really LOVED how this play ends... What a bloody and violent ending, Terrific!
Recommended? Absolutely, but a simple version, because the original might be too difficult and slow to read.
Ok, so I read that version and it was
Well, about the story... Fascinating! I loved how Shakespeare made of Hamlet such a special character. It was very difficult for Hamlet to take action, it was like "almost, almost!"
I feel Shakespeare wanted to express himself on Hamlet. His multiple personalities during the play reminded me of Shakespeare's life a bit.
On the other hand, I really LOVED how this play ends... What a bloody and violent ending, Terrific!
Recommended? Absolutely, but a simple version, because the original might be too difficult and slow to read.
November 25, 2020
According to reports, Gillian Flynn is set to release a retelling of Hamlet as part of the Hogarth Shakespeare project in 2021, so this felt like the right time to reread this delightful Shakespeare play. Enjoyed all over again!
January 21, 2021
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?
... and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural
shocks
That flesh is heir to ...
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the
rub ... what dreams may come ...
Must give us pause:
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover’d country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.
Act III, Scene I
Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?
... and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural
shocks
That flesh is heir to ...
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the
rub ... what dreams may come ...
Must give us pause:
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover’d country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.
Act III, Scene I
February 23, 2024
Oh, how much ink has spilled on this excellent Shakespeare work and how many tears will have shedding for it, I dare not imagine.
Also, I will not pretend to do a review that you would not have read probably dozens of times or even bring new elements you would not already know but only know this piece. Admittedly, this is a tragedy (therefore, as the name suggests, nothing very encouraging), but what poetry in these verses, what beauty in this bittersweet madness the Prince of Denmark believes he has reached, the young Hamlet.
Is he mad? I don't think so. He saw a specter, that of his father murdered by his uncle but who never felt the presence by his side of a loved one who had recently disappeared, and what is more, in more than questionable conditions. I cannot say that I have never experienced this feeling or at least wanted to believe it. The specter, therefore, reveals to his son how his brother did it to assassinate him and demand revenge!
So Hamlet's mind is tortured, it is true, but who wouldn't be after such a revelation? So what does he have to do? Take the sword and spill the blood again? For his part, the King, Claudius, sensing the danger, does everything to remove Hamlet from the kingdom of Denmark to preserve his place on the throne.
Hamlet, therefore, finds himself alone in the face of his fate because, although the presence of this specter at the castle has been revealed to him by three guards and by his friend Horatio, on whom else can he count? Who will believe it? He will take for granted, which will well arrange the affairs of his uncle or others who would be just as greedy for power as he and who have dedicated their cause to Claudius. Because, as everyone knows, the Prime Minister (to name nothing but him) must be faithful to the one he serves and devote his most remarkable devotion to him.
I will not say more about the plot because I think once again that I will only repeat what has already been said many and many times, but I insist on the point that this work, although 'this is a drama in which a lot of blood will flow, is a thing of beauty. To read and reread without fail!
Also, I will not pretend to do a review that you would not have read probably dozens of times or even bring new elements you would not already know but only know this piece. Admittedly, this is a tragedy (therefore, as the name suggests, nothing very encouraging), but what poetry in these verses, what beauty in this bittersweet madness the Prince of Denmark believes he has reached, the young Hamlet.
Is he mad? I don't think so. He saw a specter, that of his father murdered by his uncle but who never felt the presence by his side of a loved one who had recently disappeared, and what is more, in more than questionable conditions. I cannot say that I have never experienced this feeling or at least wanted to believe it. The specter, therefore, reveals to his son how his brother did it to assassinate him and demand revenge!
So Hamlet's mind is tortured, it is true, but who wouldn't be after such a revelation? So what does he have to do? Take the sword and spill the blood again? For his part, the King, Claudius, sensing the danger, does everything to remove Hamlet from the kingdom of Denmark to preserve his place on the throne.
Hamlet, therefore, finds himself alone in the face of his fate because, although the presence of this specter at the castle has been revealed to him by three guards and by his friend Horatio, on whom else can he count? Who will believe it? He will take for granted, which will well arrange the affairs of his uncle or others who would be just as greedy for power as he and who have dedicated their cause to Claudius. Because, as everyone knows, the Prime Minister (to name nothing but him) must be faithful to the one he serves and devote his most remarkable devotion to him.
I will not say more about the plot because I think once again that I will only repeat what has already been said many and many times, but I insist on the point that this work, although 'this is a drama in which a lot of blood will flow, is a thing of beauty. To read and reread without fail!
October 12, 2022
oh yeah, I read Hamlet again… on LIVE, out loud, in its entirety…because of course I did
October 27, 2018
I bought a skull as my only prop for Halloween dress-up, and I hope someone will recognise that I will be Hamlet. As spontaneous actions always need to be followed by bookish contemplation for full satisfaction, I am preparing for the event by rereading the whole play.
Somewhere in the middle I started laughing at Hamlet's advice to Ophelia: "To the nunnery!" For who wants to end up a breeder of sinners? I rejoiced at the fact that fake news are as old as the rotten state of states in general, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern made my day, several times. I loved the play inside the play, and what it tells us of Shakespeare's idea regarding the power of literature to move and affect people on the deepest level.
I quite coldly skim the overquoted "to be or not to be", and stop cold at "Faith! Her privates we."
Her privates we? Meaning the middle parts of fortune? I have Manning's book at home, and I have been meaning to read it forever, and I didn't have a clue that the title was a quote from Hamlet, and that it referred to female genitals.
I am not even at the point yet in the play where my skull makes an appearance, alas Yorick!, but I have already started a new book based on my rereading of Hamlet.
That is what happens to readers, - stories affect them, they react, and that reaction generates new action, followed by new stories, in eternity - a precious circle. That's Hamlet. Hamlet is human in a rotten state. Who knows whether he is insane or not? I guess it depends on who you ask.
I am still feeling kind towards him. Ophelia's fate is still in the future, as is the cathartic show effect of taking up the bodies to the stage.
When going to bed later, after finishing the last acts, Maestro Shakespeare may be out of my favour again.
But that is another story...
Somewhere in the middle I started laughing at Hamlet's advice to Ophelia: "To the nunnery!" For who wants to end up a breeder of sinners? I rejoiced at the fact that fake news are as old as the rotten state of states in general, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern made my day, several times. I loved the play inside the play, and what it tells us of Shakespeare's idea regarding the power of literature to move and affect people on the deepest level.
I quite coldly skim the overquoted "to be or not to be", and stop cold at "Faith! Her privates we."
Her privates we? Meaning the middle parts of fortune? I have Manning's book at home, and I have been meaning to read it forever, and I didn't have a clue that the title was a quote from Hamlet, and that it referred to female genitals.
I am not even at the point yet in the play where my skull makes an appearance, alas Yorick!, but I have already started a new book based on my rereading of Hamlet.
That is what happens to readers, - stories affect them, they react, and that reaction generates new action, followed by new stories, in eternity - a precious circle. That's Hamlet. Hamlet is human in a rotten state. Who knows whether he is insane or not? I guess it depends on who you ask.
I am still feeling kind towards him. Ophelia's fate is still in the future, as is the cathartic show effect of taking up the bodies to the stage.
When going to bed later, after finishing the last acts, Maestro Shakespeare may be out of my favour again.
But that is another story...
November 27, 2012
“Madness in great ones must not unwatch’d go.”
I don’t know what to say about Hamlet. I could go on about how it is a story of madness and revenge. I could talk about the bonds of family loyalty, the sacrifices of love, the breaches of trust and their deleterious effects on the psyche. But this is old news—Hamlet has been around for over four hundred years. What could I possibly say that hasn’t already been said?
When my wife saw I was reading Shakespeare, her snippy comment went something like, “What are you reading that for? Don’t you you have enough drama in your life?” Which, thanks Cristina, and yes I suppose I do, but what of it? Drama can be so much freaking fun. There is a reason it sells, a reason there are countless dramatic television shows on the air, countless box office films released each year rehashing the same old dramatic plotlines (some to great effect; others, not so much). And there is a reason people are still reading Shakespeare centuries upon centuries after his death: they are fun, they are witty, they are ever so dramatic.
Hamlet is no exception. With plot elements involving fratricide, lethal potions, mistaken identity, forgery of correspondence, espionage and treachery, along with a solid dose of hanging out with the ghosts of dead relatives, one could imagine I’m reviewing an episode of General Hospital. But what is Hamlet if not a soap opera for the Elizabethans? It is an epically tragic train wreck crammed into five tiny acts.
What makes this piece of drama so timeless, though, is that its action is served in such perfect complement by its depiction of character. We all know what Prince Hamlet is going to do before he does it. Hamlet himself, even while doubting his abilities and struggling with his resolve, knows how it’s going to all play out. Why else would he be so cruel to Ophelia? And yet it is this internal turmoil that fuels our interest in the action. It might seem like an ordinary train wreck at its surface, but upon deeper inspection it is a train wreck in whose conductors and engineers we have a vested interest.
So, witty discourse meets fast-paced drama meets penetrating character introspection? It almost makes me wonder what would have become of Luke and Laura had William Shakespeare been in charge of the script.
I don’t know what to say about Hamlet. I could go on about how it is a story of madness and revenge. I could talk about the bonds of family loyalty, the sacrifices of love, the breaches of trust and their deleterious effects on the psyche. But this is old news—Hamlet has been around for over four hundred years. What could I possibly say that hasn’t already been said?
When my wife saw I was reading Shakespeare, her snippy comment went something like, “What are you reading that for? Don’t you you have enough drama in your life?” Which, thanks Cristina, and yes I suppose I do, but what of it? Drama can be so much freaking fun. There is a reason it sells, a reason there are countless dramatic television shows on the air, countless box office films released each year rehashing the same old dramatic plotlines (some to great effect; others, not so much). And there is a reason people are still reading Shakespeare centuries upon centuries after his death: they are fun, they are witty, they are ever so dramatic.
Hamlet is no exception. With plot elements involving fratricide, lethal potions, mistaken identity, forgery of correspondence, espionage and treachery, along with a solid dose of hanging out with the ghosts of dead relatives, one could imagine I’m reviewing an episode of General Hospital. But what is Hamlet if not a soap opera for the Elizabethans? It is an epically tragic train wreck crammed into five tiny acts.
What makes this piece of drama so timeless, though, is that its action is served in such perfect complement by its depiction of character. We all know what Prince Hamlet is going to do before he does it. Hamlet himself, even while doubting his abilities and struggling with his resolve, knows how it’s going to all play out. Why else would he be so cruel to Ophelia? And yet it is this internal turmoil that fuels our interest in the action. It might seem like an ordinary train wreck at its surface, but upon deeper inspection it is a train wreck in whose conductors and engineers we have a vested interest.
So, witty discourse meets fast-paced drama meets penetrating character introspection? It almost makes me wonder what would have become of Luke and Laura had William Shakespeare been in charge of the script.
February 13, 2016
Well, I’m an English literature student and I absolutely love Shakespeare’s plays. This is nothing unusual or exciting. Most English student’s live for Shakespeare. So far I’ve enjoyed reading, and studying, everything of his that’s popped up on the reading list until this came along. My reaction surprised me most of all, I never expected to find something of Shakespeare’s that I not only dislike, but also detest. This is also one of his most revered plays, and it’s also considered one of his greatest tragedies. So I’m somewhat dumfounded at my reaction. This play was frustrating, annoying and damn right revolting.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: ‘who has the right to actually criticise this masterpiece?’ Well no one does. Objectively speaking it is, of course, a work of sheer brilliance. But, that doesn’t mean I have to like it or enjoy reading it. Today I sat through three hours of my lecturer praising this and calling it one of Shakespeare’s most important plays because it marked an important change within his career as dramatist and development as a writer. That’s all well and good, I can see that; and I appreciate that. However, Hamlet is one of the most idiotic and self-obsessed characters in creation. His inaction defines him as a tragic character, but to my mind that’s just silly. He caused his own death and the death of everyone in the play; yes, again, this makes his inaction tragic but it was also completely self-defeating; it boarded upon the absurd. The man needed a slap and a reality check, I just find him so unbearably frustrating.
I’m not arguing against the play’s literary merit, so please don’t get defensive with me in the comments section. It is an iconic piece of literature; it can’t be denied. However, I am going to lay down three points of reasoning as to why I disliked it so.
1. A crap idea for revenge
Hamlet’s revenge makes no sense; it is completely illogical. His uncle has killed his farther; he has personally murdered his own brother by pouring poison into his ear. This man, Claudius, has no empathy; he has no conscience. If a man can so callously kill his own brother, then, surely, logically speaking, trying to appeal to his sense of regret is almost pointless. He’s murdered his brother and has taken his place. He’s filled that role; he doesn’t care who he’s killed in the process. But, yet, somehow, this cold hearted man is deeply affected by his deed that is manifested in Hamlet's mock play. The idea for revenge shouldn’t have worked, but it did. Claudius admits his guild, in prayer, and sets Hamlet into a more crazed state. How is this revenge?
2. Hamlet is a fool
Hamlet needed to step and truly consider his situation; yes, he does this in five soliloquies, but he never considered one angle; he never considers that his inaction could lead to a worse result that acting directly. He stages a play for the King to get revenge after much indecisiveness. The most direct action of revenge would have been to simply run the King through with a sword in the throne room or to poison him in kind. This would have made him a murderer, so it was off the table. He could have clenched his fists, and grinded his teeth, and just got on with the situation. But, to do so would be to ignore his father’s spirits’ request for revenge. So he could not really go down either route, but to do neither is worse than simply ignoring one. It leads to the bloodbath that is the final scene, which forced his hand. On a character level, I think of Hamlet as a coward who, ultimately, causes his own fate. This isn’t why I dislike him; he makes the play a tragedy, but it’s the illogical nature of his actions that condemns him in my estimation. He has two roads before him, and instead of taking either he forces a third road that is more detrimental than either.
3. He is too self-obsessed
Hamlet barely considers anyone else. To his mind, his uncle marrying his mother is incest. In renaissance England this was as bad as full blown incest. Claudius and Gertrude were only in-laws: siblings by marriage. So by today’s standards it’s not that immoral. Regardless, though Hamlet doesn’t consider how his mother feels about this. He is repulsed by the notion, but she could be in love or she could be in the more likely eventuality of a forced marriage. Hamlet doesn’t consider her feelings; he is just repulsed by the idea of their marriage rather than the emotions and bond that may or may not be involved. This doesn’t make him a bad person, but, when considered with my other two points, I think it make him somewhat idiotic, selfish and frustrating.
I simply dislike this play because I’m practically repulsed by its “tragic hero.” I recognise that this is an unpopular opinion, and I cannot help but think that I should have liked the play. But, Hamlet just infuriates me far too much for me to overlook my dissatisfaction with him and admire the play's formal features. I just cannot personally like it.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: ‘who has the right to actually criticise this masterpiece?’ Well no one does. Objectively speaking it is, of course, a work of sheer brilliance. But, that doesn’t mean I have to like it or enjoy reading it. Today I sat through three hours of my lecturer praising this and calling it one of Shakespeare’s most important plays because it marked an important change within his career as dramatist and development as a writer. That’s all well and good, I can see that; and I appreciate that. However, Hamlet is one of the most idiotic and self-obsessed characters in creation. His inaction defines him as a tragic character, but to my mind that’s just silly. He caused his own death and the death of everyone in the play; yes, again, this makes his inaction tragic but it was also completely self-defeating; it boarded upon the absurd. The man needed a slap and a reality check, I just find him so unbearably frustrating.
I’m not arguing against the play’s literary merit, so please don’t get defensive with me in the comments section. It is an iconic piece of literature; it can’t be denied. However, I am going to lay down three points of reasoning as to why I disliked it so.
1. A crap idea for revenge
Hamlet’s revenge makes no sense; it is completely illogical. His uncle has killed his farther; he has personally murdered his own brother by pouring poison into his ear. This man, Claudius, has no empathy; he has no conscience. If a man can so callously kill his own brother, then, surely, logically speaking, trying to appeal to his sense of regret is almost pointless. He’s murdered his brother and has taken his place. He’s filled that role; he doesn’t care who he’s killed in the process. But, yet, somehow, this cold hearted man is deeply affected by his deed that is manifested in Hamlet's mock play. The idea for revenge shouldn’t have worked, but it did. Claudius admits his guild, in prayer, and sets Hamlet into a more crazed state. How is this revenge?
2. Hamlet is a fool
Hamlet needed to step and truly consider his situation; yes, he does this in five soliloquies, but he never considered one angle; he never considers that his inaction could lead to a worse result that acting directly. He stages a play for the King to get revenge after much indecisiveness. The most direct action of revenge would have been to simply run the King through with a sword in the throne room or to poison him in kind. This would have made him a murderer, so it was off the table. He could have clenched his fists, and grinded his teeth, and just got on with the situation. But, to do so would be to ignore his father’s spirits’ request for revenge. So he could not really go down either route, but to do neither is worse than simply ignoring one. It leads to the bloodbath that is the final scene, which forced his hand. On a character level, I think of Hamlet as a coward who, ultimately, causes his own fate. This isn’t why I dislike him; he makes the play a tragedy, but it’s the illogical nature of his actions that condemns him in my estimation. He has two roads before him, and instead of taking either he forces a third road that is more detrimental than either.
3. He is too self-obsessed
Hamlet barely considers anyone else. To his mind, his uncle marrying his mother is incest. In renaissance England this was as bad as full blown incest. Claudius and Gertrude were only in-laws: siblings by marriage. So by today’s standards it’s not that immoral. Regardless, though Hamlet doesn’t consider how his mother feels about this. He is repulsed by the notion, but she could be in love or she could be in the more likely eventuality of a forced marriage. Hamlet doesn’t consider her feelings; he is just repulsed by the idea of their marriage rather than the emotions and bond that may or may not be involved. This doesn’t make him a bad person, but, when considered with my other two points, I think it make him somewhat idiotic, selfish and frustrating.
I simply dislike this play because I’m practically repulsed by its “tragic hero.” I recognise that this is an unpopular opinion, and I cannot help but think that I should have liked the play. But, Hamlet just infuriates me far too much for me to overlook my dissatisfaction with him and admire the play's formal features. I just cannot personally like it.
July 22, 2022
When a play is considered the best ever written by the greatest author in history, well a serious reader ( maybe not too serious) must take a look and see, I for sure was not disappointed, a marvelous written view of human nature the good and the bad. Hamlet is a kindly man, and longtime student (over ten years not too dedicated it seems), at the University of Wittenberg,Germany . But his carefree life is destroyed, when his father dies suddenly. Having the misfortune to be a Prince of Denmark, he just wanted to have fun...Duty demands, going back to the royal palace at Elsinore immediately, the royal castle overlooking the
cold Baltic Sea, which controls its entrance. The new King, his uncle has married Hamlet's mother the Queen! And thus gaining the throne, just a month after the King's funeral quite shamelessly thinks Hamlet.The ruler was an elective office then so the Prince is still the Prince not the King. More shocking still, the ghost of the late sovereign appears (or the devil), above the walls of the castle in the depth of night and tells his son that he was murdered, can you imagine how his son reacts in the darkness in the creepy setting . By his own brother, what a situation for poor Hamlet to be and his mother involved too, the family honor demand revenge however the family are the killers...Others, the royal guards witness this frightening episode.The father wants satisfaction you can guess what... And you think you have problems! What will Hamlet do. The Prince becomes very melancholic, procrastinating, condemning himself for his weakness, relatives and friends become concerned about the behavior, is Hamlet insane? Telling Ophelia his sweetheart, he loves her, nevertheless later to her face to become a nun. She the daughter of Polonius a counselor to Claudius, the new ruler such a quandary. Spying for Claudius, Polonius is slain by the Prince who kills the wrong man. Who mistakes him hiding behind a curtain, for the odorous King. Claudius plots with the help of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two former school friends of his nephew , an inept pair of halfwits. To eliminate Hamlet, he has been making threats against his uncle.A long voyage to England with the evil two, which the Prince, will never return home.Sounds good to Hamlet, he needs to get away from the vile machinations. Besides Ophelia's brother will come back soon to Denmark and he wants blood. And on the horizon possible war against Norway , also becomes a very real possibility.Time to get out of town of course.But he does come back, mysteriously alone you need not wonder how. The first thing the Prince sees is the digging in a graveyard, with friend Horatio by his side.The skull of Yorick his father's jester is uncovered, Hamlet remembers him. Holding the clown's head in his hands he tells Horatio and the gravedigger how Yorick used to carry him on his back, the pathos flow out over the site unashamedly . Making jests to everyone he met Yorick was a merry man but no more.Sadly no more...."The Rest is Silence". A beautiful end to an unmatched skillful product of human endeavors.
cold Baltic Sea, which controls its entrance. The new King, his uncle has married Hamlet's mother the Queen! And thus gaining the throne, just a month after the King's funeral quite shamelessly thinks Hamlet.The ruler was an elective office then so the Prince is still the Prince not the King. More shocking still, the ghost of the late sovereign appears (or the devil), above the walls of the castle in the depth of night and tells his son that he was murdered, can you imagine how his son reacts in the darkness in the creepy setting . By his own brother, what a situation for poor Hamlet to be and his mother involved too, the family honor demand revenge however the family are the killers...Others, the royal guards witness this frightening episode.The father wants satisfaction you can guess what... And you think you have problems! What will Hamlet do. The Prince becomes very melancholic, procrastinating, condemning himself for his weakness, relatives and friends become concerned about the behavior, is Hamlet insane? Telling Ophelia his sweetheart, he loves her, nevertheless later to her face to become a nun. She the daughter of Polonius a counselor to Claudius, the new ruler such a quandary. Spying for Claudius, Polonius is slain by the Prince who kills the wrong man. Who mistakes him hiding behind a curtain, for the odorous King. Claudius plots with the help of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two former school friends of his nephew , an inept pair of halfwits. To eliminate Hamlet, he has been making threats against his uncle.A long voyage to England with the evil two, which the Prince, will never return home.Sounds good to Hamlet, he needs to get away from the vile machinations. Besides Ophelia's brother will come back soon to Denmark and he wants blood. And on the horizon possible war against Norway , also becomes a very real possibility.Time to get out of town of course.But he does come back, mysteriously alone you need not wonder how. The first thing the Prince sees is the digging in a graveyard, with friend Horatio by his side.The skull of Yorick his father's jester is uncovered, Hamlet remembers him. Holding the clown's head in his hands he tells Horatio and the gravedigger how Yorick used to carry him on his back, the pathos flow out over the site unashamedly . Making jests to everyone he met Yorick was a merry man but no more.Sadly no more...."The Rest is Silence". A beautiful end to an unmatched skillful product of human endeavors.
March 24, 2016
“All that is amiable and excellent in nature is combined in Hamlet, with the exception of one quality. He is a man living in meditation, called upon to act by every motive human and divine, but the great object of his life is defeated by continually resolving to do, yet doing nothing but resolve.”
Lecture XII, STC.
As much as I admire Coleridge and with the boldness of having read Hamlet only once and therefore being aware I haven’t even managed to scratch the surface of the Paragon of Tragedies, I dare to antagonize the poet and proclaim that I resist the idea of linking Hamlet’s moral idealism to reprehensible inaction.
The Prince of Denmark’s obsession is to think, not to act, and in spite of having been dethroned by his duplicitous uncle, he seems to count with the favor of the common people. But Hamlet can’t help being haunted by the sickness of life and he retreats into the abyss of his inwardness. He is plagued by endless questions that paralyze him in meditation: “What a piece of work is a man!... And yet to me what is this quintessence of dust?”.
In the opening scene of Act I, a melancholic dejection has already taken hold of The Prince and, whether in self-preservation or in fear of foul reality, he engages in deluded gibberish easily attributable to a man whose reason has abandoned him.
And yet his inquisitive soliloquies are infused with the elucidating sharpness of a genius, someone with great intellectual capacity who taunts with puns and riddles that contain receding depths and layers and layers of meaning in them.
“The widow being oppressed, the orphan wronged,
The taste of hunger, or a tyrant’s reign,
And thousand more calamities besides,
To grunt and sweat under this weary life,
When that he may his full quietus make,
With a bare bodkin, who would this endure,
But for a hope of something after death?”
Spontaneous philosopher or irredeemably insane?
The world of Hamlet is phantasmagorical, in constant disruption with the burdens of the past, the betrayals of the present and the falsehood of the future. Everybody around him seems to have hidden agendas. He observes, he ponders, he pretends not to see the King’s debasing lust and murderous greed, Polonius’ machiavellian maneuvers, the Queen’s disgusting shallowness, Ophelia’s gullible innocence. Yet his keen eyes discern it all…but at what cost?
“Great wit to madness nearly is allied"
The afflictions of life require greatness of spirit and Hamlet meets his fate fully aware that logic, reason and justice are not enough to disentangle the quandaries of existence. In the course of the action though, a transformation has taken place in him, the doubtful Prince has grown in wisdom and is ready to submit to providence without repudiating the world. The welfare of the Kingdom, the sense of honor, the corroding lust or ambition, all dissolve in the spectacle of beholding the spirit of man blossoming and most triumphant… in defeat.
Lecture XII, STC.
As much as I admire Coleridge and with the boldness of having read Hamlet only once and therefore being aware I haven’t even managed to scratch the surface of the Paragon of Tragedies, I dare to antagonize the poet and proclaim that I resist the idea of linking Hamlet’s moral idealism to reprehensible inaction.
The Prince of Denmark’s obsession is to think, not to act, and in spite of having been dethroned by his duplicitous uncle, he seems to count with the favor of the common people. But Hamlet can’t help being haunted by the sickness of life and he retreats into the abyss of his inwardness. He is plagued by endless questions that paralyze him in meditation: “What a piece of work is a man!... And yet to me what is this quintessence of dust?”.
In the opening scene of Act I, a melancholic dejection has already taken hold of The Prince and, whether in self-preservation or in fear of foul reality, he engages in deluded gibberish easily attributable to a man whose reason has abandoned him.
And yet his inquisitive soliloquies are infused with the elucidating sharpness of a genius, someone with great intellectual capacity who taunts with puns and riddles that contain receding depths and layers and layers of meaning in them.
“The widow being oppressed, the orphan wronged,
The taste of hunger, or a tyrant’s reign,
And thousand more calamities besides,
To grunt and sweat under this weary life,
When that he may his full quietus make,
With a bare bodkin, who would this endure,
But for a hope of something after death?”
Spontaneous philosopher or irredeemably insane?
The world of Hamlet is phantasmagorical, in constant disruption with the burdens of the past, the betrayals of the present and the falsehood of the future. Everybody around him seems to have hidden agendas. He observes, he ponders, he pretends not to see the King’s debasing lust and murderous greed, Polonius’ machiavellian maneuvers, the Queen’s disgusting shallowness, Ophelia’s gullible innocence. Yet his keen eyes discern it all…but at what cost?
“Great wit to madness nearly is allied"
The afflictions of life require greatness of spirit and Hamlet meets his fate fully aware that logic, reason and justice are not enough to disentangle the quandaries of existence. In the course of the action though, a transformation has taken place in him, the doubtful Prince has grown in wisdom and is ready to submit to providence without repudiating the world. The welfare of the Kingdom, the sense of honor, the corroding lust or ambition, all dissolve in the spectacle of beholding the spirit of man blossoming and most triumphant… in defeat.
January 23, 2014
Jesus Christ what a year no way could this get worse now they're hacking away at each other with their swords and I'm supposed to look interested oh well done Hamlet despite everything he's still my son that was a lovely feint pretty worried about Laertes though he looks so crazy first his dad and then his sister wish I could do something to help oh come on who am I kidding it's Hamlet I'm worried about of course God what am I going to do that poor kid is totally fucked and he thinks it's all my fault I told Claudius it wasn't smart to hush up what happened to Kingy they'd only believe he'd done it was I right or was I right of course with the two of us carrying on it did look suspicious don't blame people for jumping to conclusions I wish he hadn't broken up with Ophelia she seemed like such a nice girl everything just got worse after that he was so mean to her takes after his father that way know how she felt there were moments I could have jumped in the river myself and then lecturing me on my sex life I couldn't believe it honestly teenagers all think they've invented sex they can't imagine anyone over twenty still does it I'm only thirty-six for crying out loud I'm in my sexual prime not that I was getting much before Claudius noticed me poor old Kingy completely hopeless in bed have to hand it to Claudius even if he is a bastard he's the first man who's ever given me an orgasm can't imagine what Hamlet would say if I told him that bad enough as it is oh for Christ's sake Laertes what do you think you're doing that's not a real sword you know sweet Mary mother of God I need a drink but if Claudius sees me he'll start going on again about my alcohol consumption I'll wait until his back is turned and grab a quick one before he notices right here's my chance one glass won't k---
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 24,614 reviews