Quote Origins?

Anyone know who this quote is from?
"it's not that Hamlet thinks too much but too clearly"
I'd like to use it in a paper as I think it reinforces my point well. But I'd rather not quote air, assuming I haven't mangled it too badly or re-interpreted it in a way that supports my position more conveniently.

Anyone who's reviewed the play has written that; your instructor is probably looking for you to write something along those lines.

It's weird. It's not actually for an English class, but for Psychology. I'm seeking to refute Freud's view that Hamlet's procrastination in killing Claudius stems from castration anxiety and identification.

There's a bunch of directions you can take it from there, since the Freudian interpretation is the most common one, and anything Freudian is a sitting duck for critique. Logic over reason, inertia, etc, are all valid.

StarHalo said:

Logic over reason

Click to expand...

Er, logic over emotion, or reason over emotion, duh. That's what I get for dealing with Freudian interpretation of Shakespeare at 2 in the morning.. :shakehead

slightly off topic, but it reminds me of Othello

"remember me as someone who loved not too wisely, but too well"
:thinking:

I assume youve tried a google search with quotation marks?

Crenshaw

Yeah, I think I've butchered it. It's ok though. The paper is written. Now I just have to hand it in. "The readiness is all":naughty:
It's kind of odd. I went with Freud but sidestepped Oedipus. There are just better tools in psychoanalysis to figure the cause of Hamlet's indecision. Plus it leads to all these really excessively overt oedipal iterations of Hamlet, like the one starring Mel Gibson in 1990. Which is really a bit of an overstatement of the Oedipus complex.

I would like to ask an honest question. Shakespeare wrote Hamlet and he made him indecisive to further add drama to the plot. Hamlet was a fictional person, so is it valid to try to psychoanalyze his decisions? If anything, wouldn't the analysis actually be of Shakespeare and how he thought someone like Hamlet would act?

Off topic I know, but I am curious as to your thoughts on this.

RocketTomato said:

I would like to ask an honest question. Shakespeare wrote Hamlet and he made him indecisive to further add drama to the plot. Hamlet was a fictional person, so is it valid to try to psychoanalyze his decisions? If anything, wouldn't the analysis actually be of Shakespeare and how he thought someone like Hamlet would act?

Off topic I know, but I am curious as to your thoughts on this.

Click to expand...

The question is, did shakespeare make hamlet indecisive to further the plot, or was it another reason?

even better, how sure can one be that hamlet is indecisive? Its possible he was acting indecisive to complement is acting "madness"

Thats why people like analysing shakespeare, cos its fun to think of all that stuff.

Crenshaw

RocketTomato said:

I would like to ask an honest question. Shakespeare wrote Hamlet and he made him indecisive to further add drama to the plot. Hamlet was a fictional person, so is it valid to try to psychoanalyze his decisions? If anything, wouldn't the analysis actually be of Shakespeare and how he thought someone like Hamlet would act?

Off topic I know, but I am curious as to your thoughts on this.

Click to expand...

It's a good point. You're right. Which is one of the reasons I think the Oedipus complex is a bit absurd to use on Hamlet. Because Hamlet is not a real person, and the Oedipus complex is subconscious. What is clearly observable is what is Shakespeare wrote about his delaying based on some religious concerns. Which fits better with the Id, Ego, Superego structure, and doesn't delve too far into Hamlet's "subconscious" which I suppose could be seen as Shakespeare's. I think the Oedipus complex explanation reaches too far and greatly oversimplifies what should be a complicated play. In all it's just a mental exercise, it shouldn't be taken too seriously.

RyanA said:

It's a good point. You're right. Which is one of the reasons I think the Oedipus complex is a bit absurd to use on Hamlet. Because Hamlet is not a real person, and the Oedipus complex is subconscious. What is clearly observable is what is Shakespeare wrote about his delaying based on some religious concerns. Which fits better with the Id, Ego, Superego structure, and doesn't delve too far into Hamlet's "subconscious" which I suppose could be seen as Shakespeare's. I think the Oedipus complex explanation reaches too far and greatly oversimplifies what should be a complicated play. In all it's just a mental exercise, it shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Click to expand...

Theres another dimension. Im actually studying theatre as an actor, and all that stuff suddenly becomes central to your study, because even if hamlet is not a real person, you as the actor has to inhibit, and BE hamlet.

Crenshaw

Crenshaw, that's awesome.:twothumbs
Hamlet is the man. At least 15 times more gangster than rambo. I'm serious, back then people fought with big steel needles 3-4 feet long that were designed to penetrate the ribs and destroy the heart. That's hardcore.:devil:

It's interesting to note that the TV show "Sons of Anarchy" incorporates some of the themes from Hamlet. Tragic structure is just awesome, it's like knowing a train wreck is coming and not being able to look away.

Well im not actually getting to PLAY hamlet at any point yet, sadly. I have done a demetrius monologue (midsummer nights' dream), which entails AS much background work, and played King Ferdinand from love's labour's lost. I even tried my hand at the famous "to be or not to be"
(which is incomplete without the following sentences, MAN it annoys me when people use it cos its the only bit of shakespeare they know),

but i think The role is a bit heavy for my skill level at the moment, and out of respect, not gonna touch it till im more experienced.

I absolutely love shakespeare though. I used to pay so much attention to singular words when i studied it in high school, etc, but studying it as a dramatic work makes a fair bit of difference in what you pay attention to, and opens up a whole other world of interpretation.

As for tv, never seen that, but i have seen some great tv recently. Eureka (aka A Small town called eureka) on what i believe is the scifi channel, is pretty awesome. The themes going on there really draw you in, and make you empathize for the characters.

Crenshaw