Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Samuel Johnson's thoughts on Variety in Hamlet

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007

    Samuel Johnson's thoughts on Variety in Hamlet

    I was wondering what everyone thinks of Samuel Johnson's thoughts on Hamlet. He speaks about variety throughout Shakespeare's works, and it is particularly intriguing to see what he says about Hamlet. Take a moment to look over Johnson's ideas and please reply and let myself as well as others know what you think about his ideology, whether you agree or disagree. There are many instances throughout the play that show one way or the other. Here it is:

    If the dramas of Shakespeare were to be characterised, each by the particular excellence which distinguishes it from the rest, we must allow to the tragedy of Hamlet the praise of variety. The incidents are so numerous, that the argument of the play would make a long tale. The scenes are interchangeably diversified with merriment and solemnity; with merriment that includes judicious and instructive observations, and solemnity, not strained by poetical violence above the natural sentiments of man, New characters appear from time to time in continual succession, exhibiting various forms of life and particular modes of conversation. The pretended madness of Hamlet causes much mirth, the mournful distraction of Ophelia fills the heart with tenderness, and every personage produces the effect intended, from the apparition that in the first act chills the blood with horrour, to the fop in the last, that exposes affectation to just contempt.
    The conduct is perhaps not wholly secure against objections. The action is indeed for the most part in continual progression, but there are some scenes which neither forward nor retard it. Of the feigned madness of Hamlet there appears no adequate cause, for he does nothing which he might not have done with the reputation of sanity. He plays the madman most, when he treats Ophelia with so much rudeness, which seems to be useless and wanton cruelty.

    Hamlet is, through the whole play, rather an instrument than an agent. After he has, by the stratagem of the play, convicted the King, he makes no attempt to punish him, and his death is at last effected by an incident which Hamlet has no part in producing.

    The catastrophe is not very happily produced; the exchange of weapons is rather an expedient of necessity, than a stroke of art. A scheme might easily have been formed, to kill Hamlet with the dagger, and Laertes with the bowl.

    The poet is accused of having shewn little regard to poetical justice, and may be charged with equal neglect of poetical probability. The apparition left the regions of the dead to little purpose; the revenge which he demands is not obtained but by the death of him that was required to take it; and the gratification which would arise from the destruction of an usurper and a murderer, is abated by the untimely death of Ophelia, the young, the beautiful, the harmless, and the pious.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    did other people reply?

Similar Threads

  1. Your Thoughts on Performing Hamlet
    By Nirome in forum Hamlet
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 06-04-2007, 10:00 PM
  2. Decoding Shakespeare
    By SiHAc in forum Hamlet
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-03-2007, 10:56 AM
  3. The Ghost
    By Hamleto in forum Hamlet
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 04-29-2007, 08:12 AM
  4. Horatio
    By Virgil in forum Hamlet
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: 11-26-2006, 02:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts