Published 2014.
“What appeared in Bunbury’s closet was a ghost in this
sense, the trace of the forgotten or repressed memory of “Hamlet” before
“Hamlet”, a sign that something was – is – missing from our understanding of
the Shakespeare text. Like the ghost of Hamlet’s father, Q1 returns in such a
questionable shape that we will speak to it.”
In “Hamlet After Q1 – An
Uncanny History of the Shakespearean Text”
“Enter the Ghost in his nightgown”
In “Hamlet After Q1 – An Uncanny History of the
Shakespearean Text”
Every
Shakespearean worth his or her salt knows there’s no stage direction regarding
the scene when the Ghost enters Gertrud’s closet (I’m talking about the Folio
version). Despite Hamlet’s references to “the adulterous bed,” it’s simply not
true that there was a bed onstage, as later became usual. A “closet” in
Shakespeare’s time was not a bedroom. Indeed, Q1 never mentions the word
“closet,” which is introduced in Q2 and repeated in the Folio. Lesser also
approaches the differences between the “To be or Not to Be” versions. Previously
I’d already read Q2 and the FF editions, but it’s the first I’ve read Q1 (see
link below at the end of the post). Comparing them, I can find 'issues' in Q2
and FF that Q1 “solved”, such as Hamlet mentioning the murder of Hamlet, the
father, to his mother, but their never discussing it again; in Q1 she clearly rebuffs
being aware of it. Ah! I knew it! Also Horatio is the source of local awareness
when the recent groundwork for war is discussed in Act 1, Scene 1 but he seems
just arriving at court and ignorant in Act 1, Scene 2… Moreover Horatio
observes Ophelia being nutty in Act 4, Scene 5 but seems not to have mentioned
it to Hamlet when later they stumble upon her funeral.
Regarding the
“To or not to Be” soliloquy I’ll give here the 3 versions. Judge for yourself:
Q1: “To be, or not to be, I there's the point,
To Die, to sleep, is that all? Aye all:
No, to sleep, to dream, aye marry there it goes,
For in that dream of death, when we awake,
And borne before an everlasting Judge,
From whence no passenger ever returned, […]”
FF: “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. To die, to sleep--
No more--and by a sleep to say we end […]”
Q1: “O, these are sins that are unpardonable.
Why, say thy sins were blacker than is jet, Yet may contrition make them as
white as snow. Ay, but still to persevere in a sin, It is an act ’gainst the
universal power. Most wretched man, stoop, bend thee to thy prayer. Ask grace
of heaven to keep thee from despair.”
FF: “Try what repentance can. What can it not?
Yet what can it, when one can not repent? O wretched state! O bosom black as
death! O limèd soul that, struggling to be free, art more engaged! Help,
angels. Make assay. Bow, stubborn knees, and heart with strings of steel, be
soft as sinews of the newborn babe.”
Q1, written in
1603, brings a whole dramatization centralised on the dramatic action concentrating
both into prose and verse. In Q1, I was able to see the Shakespeare as an actor
and theatre director, because the text is full of information about the
universe of theatre, and Hamlet looks at the throne with a stronger desire to
access the higher echelons of power. Some aspects of the play, as the seven
deaths, are all interlaced in succession of the King, and they are the results
of Shakespeare’s theatre acumen, and they are not incidental questions of a
"real" kingly succession.
Q1 is the
earliest on record, and is almost never performed, giving up its place to the
more well-known FF-version. I, for one, never watched it on stage. Some
differences abound, some are minor, some not so minor, and some are plainly
amusing: “Why, what a dunghill idiot
slave am I!” Some differences are huge, throwing away huge parts of text or
adding scenes. Since I’m so familiar with the FF-version text of Hamlet, I was
keenly aware of those shifts on Hamlet Q1’s text. Instead of the infinite
variety of memorable lines bringing about memories of all those famous
performers who’ve said those famous lines, I was able to pour all of my
attention into what was on this Q1-version.
If I didn’t know
that this play was called Hamlet and if I didn’t know it had also some lines
from the FF-version, I’d swear this play should be called Ophelia. I’ve always
felt bad for Ophelia, overshadowed by men and driven to lethal dementia, but
the character usually just rings a distant pitiful note in Hamlet’s tragedy,
finally pushing him over the edge. In the Q1-version, through her simplicity
and physical commitment, I witnessed an Ophelia with a depth I’d never seen
before. It encapsulates Ophelia’s dementia and fills it with hair-rising
emotion. There’s nothing superfluous here, nothing extraneous, nothing forced
when it comes to Ophelia. Even though Ophelia feels like a star in this
version, and as if that weren’t enough, Shakespeare shows us a fine Horatio as
well. I’d love to see this play
performed, just to see Corambis (Polonius in the FF-version), Ophelia and
Laertes’ father, giving Hamlet an ingenious gallant flavour, solidifying the
world of the play and delivering well-timed humor. This version of Hamlet also gives
Hamlet’s mother Gertrude some extra juicy bits…What Olivier could have done
with this version instead of having used the FF-version with all that Freudian
mambo-jumbo…
NB: I’ve used
the Shakespeare
Quartos Archive (best used with Firefox) while reading Zachary Lesser’s
book.
