Shakespeare’s mastery of dialog is thrilling in its brevity and powerful in purpose. Within the course of a single line, even a few words, he conveys such depth of meaning. It feels as if he has a fountain of wonderful lines, but doles them out carefully to specific characters, lending them his voice to charm the reader. Some characters, like King Claudius, are given boring and mundane lines, turning the reader away and building in a sense of the antagonist. The hero, of course, is given the best turns of phrase: “A little more than kin, and less than kind!” Hamlet’s classic line is the soul of sarcasm. His snide retort offsets the fluffy and meaningless dialog spoke just prior by his uncle, conveying both Hamlet’s offense at his uncle’s recent marriage to Gertrude and internal, deeply personal woe. Within this, only his second line, we already clearly see Hamlet’s contempt for his uncle, the King, and foreshadow the conflict to come.
Almost every line Hamlet speaks is filled with sharp turns and quick wit. Only a few stanzas later, we are given a short soliloquy with not less than three of the most famous lines in all of English drama. First a bitter definition of depression, mourning and self loathing: “O, that this too too sullied flesh would melt / … / How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable / Seem to me all the uses of this world!” Followed next by a marvelous simile extolling the grace of his father: “So excellent a king; that was, to this, / Hyperion to a satyr;” which, by its contrast, enhances Hamlet’s internal pain. And followed closely by a classic pronouncement of anger toward his mother: “— Frailty, thy name is woman!” Hamlet quickly progresses through the classic series of reactions to grief within a single page.
Each time I read Shakespeare, the dialog becomes easier to understand and more powerful. I began by carefully reading each of the footnotes in the Bedford text. Most provided new insights that helped me understand the text. But soon, they became ponderous, breaking me out of the flow of the dialog. After a few pages, I stopped reading them entirely, focusing instead on the rhythm of the prose. I’m curious to know if others found the footnotes similarly distracting?
I did not read the footnotes version of our text, I have an old copy of Hamlet, printed in 1944. I relied on the watching of the Brannagh movie to refresh and then re-read the book. I love the writing too. The uses of many parallel examples that lead into seperate thoughts, but circle back to the main idea are amazing. Seeing someone speak it, is almost like hearing a foreign language, it can move so fast yet get its point accross perfectly. It also just allows the actors to really express feeling, emotion.
ReplyDeleteI have the NO FEAR SHAKESPEARE version where on one side of the page is the original version of the text, and the other side is an interpretation of the text, which I did find to be somewhat distracting. I would find myself accidentally switching pages in the middle of reading, reading the interpretation instead of the original. I would then have to go back and start over on the original. It was somewhat frustrating.
ReplyDeleteThe footnotes are there as a reference if the text becomes confusing. I tend to red them all the way through before reading the page that way I know what is being said and not get distracted by contently referring to them. After getting into the story I also found that I can ignore them altogether and just read the story they way it was meant to be read.
ReplyDeleteI didn't find the text too distracting, but it occasionally caused some disorientation to me. I did appreciate it though, especially since some of the words are completely different now than they were back then.
ReplyDelete