Preface to Hamlet

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING CHIEFLY PERTAINS TO THE NEW FOLGER LIBRARY EDITION. William Shakespeare's "Hamlet" is arguably the most famous play ever written in the English language; it presents the world with questions and characters that have been the subject of thespian and scholarly debate ever since the Prince of Denmark's first appearance on the stage of London's Globe Theatre. Probably written and first performed in 1601 (estimates vary between 1600 and 1602), the play draws on Saxo Grammaticus's late 12th/early 13th century chronicle "Gesta Danorum," which includes a popular legend with a similar plot centering around a prince named Amleth; as well as several more contemporaneous sources, primarily Francois de Belleforest's "Histoires Tragiques, Extraicts des Oeuvres Italiennes de Bandel" (1559-1580), which expands on the story told in the "Gesta Danorum," and a lost play known as the "Ur-Hamlet" (i.e., original "Hamlet"), sometimes also attributed to Shakespeare, but equally likely written by a different author a few decades earlier. Another work frequently cited in this context is 16th century playwright Thomas Kyd's "Spanish Tragedie." Pursuant to Shakespeare's wishes and like all of his works, "Hamlet" was not immediately published, and the original manuscript did not survive. However, in the absence of copyright laws or other forms of protection of what today would be called the playwright's intellectual property rights, first bootleg copies (so-called quartos) based on transcripts made during or after performances began to appear in 1603. Yet, it would not be until 1623 - seven years after Shakespeare's 1616 death - that his former fellow actors John Hemmings and Henry Condell published 36 of his plays (including this one) in a collection known as the First Folio. As no print version of any of Shakespeare's plays has a bona fide claim to its author's first-hand blessings, ever since the Bard's death the world is left with numerous questions about his characters' motivations and psychological makeup; first and foremost, in this particular case: who is this Prince of Denmark anyway, and what's driving him - is he a reluctant suicide or reluctant avenger? A Renaissance man? Wrecked by Freudian guilt? Genuinely mad, or merely putting on a clever act of deception? Or is he someone else entirely? - Indeed, we're even left in doubt as to what exactly it was that Shakespeare meant his characters to say, with all attendant interpretative consequences: Does the Prince wish for his "too too sullied" or his "too too solid" flesh to "melt, thaw, and resolve itself into a dew" in his first major soliloquy (Act I, Scene 2)? Does he really contemplate "the stamp of [that] one defect" which may fatally taint the perception of a man's other virtues, "be they as pure as grace," before meeting his father's ghost (I, 4)? Does Polonius, when sending Reynaldo on a spying mission after Laertes, refer to his scheme as "a fetch of wit" or "a fetch of warrant"

I hated Shakespeare in high school, partly because I could only understand about one word out of every three. Recently -- that is, thirty years post-high-school -- I forced myself to read it again, in the Signet edition, and was dumbfounded at how different my response was. All the difficult terms were explained at the bottom of each page in footnotes. I learned the difference between the two terms of address, "Sir" and "Sirrah," and a lot of other things as well. As an adolescent I asked myself why the hero didn't just kill Claudius right of the bat and have done with it. The reason, it seemed to me, is that there wouldn't have been any play. Hamlet refuses to use his sword on his uncle for the same reason the Indians don't shoot the horses when they're chasing the stagecoach. What a change time has wrought. I guess when you're a kid you don't know the meaning of the term "moral doubt" because so many things seem black and white. It takes a certain degree of maturation to realize that murdering a king because some ghost told you to is a bit morally -- well, fuzzy. For instance, can you be absolutely certain that you're doing it to avenge your father instead of being jealous about your mother's affections? Questions like that, which a thoughtful adult might ask himself, are enough to give anyone pause. It's a fascinating tragedy. Probably the best film about it is still Olivier's from 1947 or 1948, which won an Academy Award if that still means anything. The signet edition is extremely helpful too in providing brief critical essays that review the play from differing perspectives, the Freudian, the feminist, and so on.

This review refers to the Caedmon Audio/Full Cast Recording edition(HarperCollins) of "Hamlet".... The first thing I need to clarify is exactly which audio edition this is. If you are on the product page with a light purple box pictured, this is the 1963, full cast recording, complete play in 5 acts, starring Paul Scofield as "Hamlet.It is not, as the audio file editorial states the one with Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson. And if the Scofield performance is what you'd like to hear, you are in for a real treat.(You can enlarge the product picture to see a better view of the box) The entire cast including Diana Wynyard as Gertrude,Roland Culver as Claudius, Donald Houston as Laertes and Zena Walker as Ophelia turn in powerful performances and will captivate your imagination no matter how many versions of this brilliant play you have heard, or seen. Paul Scofield("A Man For All Seasons") is masterful as the complex Hamlet, wanting revenge for his father's death, yet torn by his own conscience. There are so many different versions of Shakespeare's "Hamlet", and on this taped set you will find a performance worthy of his genius.It is one you will want to listen to many times and well worth the price. After listening to it at home, I now bring it with me in my car to keep me company in traffic and on long trips. This three tape set(6 sides) has the entire play, Ronsencrantz and Guildenstern included,in five acts. The entire play runs about 3 1/2 hours, each side of the tapes running between 30 to 45 minutes. The scenes are nicely seperated by music and the sound quality remastered(1995) in Dolby B is excellent.Although the tapes are not enclosed in their own cassette cases, there are individual cardboard holders inside the box for each. A brilliant performance that you will remember, and one we are fortunate to have on these fabulous recordings. more great audio book experiences: Great Expectations (The Classic Collection) The London Tapes (City Tapes) Carrie The Shipping News A Christmas Carol Les Miserables (Focus on the Family Radio Theatre) Enjoy...Laurie

The Shakespeare Made Easy series makes reading the Elizabethan English understandable with the use of side-by-side text as oppose to traditional footnotes and annotation. By removing what is a reading obstacle for many, the plays of Shakespeare can be enjoyed for their brilliance and depth.With the side-by-side text, I found myself unconsciously bouncing between the 'old' and the 'new' English based on my interest and comprehension of the words and the play. With the translated version, for example, it made reading Hamlet's famous soliloquies a pleasure to ponder and to begin to understand.The editor's Introduction gives a concise overview of the life and times of William Shakespeare. It is certainly enough for the casual reader, and but just a rudimentary beginning for any serious student.I have a better understanding of Hamet today than I did when I was in college more than two decades ago. The Shakespeare Made Easy series makes reading these great plays fun at any age; and probably a prerequisite for the undergraduate.