‘Father and Mother is One Flesh’: Hamlet and the Problems of Paternity

  • Ann Thompson
  • Neil Taylor

Abstract

Shakespeare’s Hamlet must be one of the world’s best-known stories. It has for example been filmed more often than any other narrative with the single and rather surprising exception of Cinderella.1 Yet people get it wrong. The printer of the 1623 First Folio text apparently made a slip in Hamlet’s apology to Laertes just before the duel in the final scene. In both the 1603 and the 1604 Quarto texts, Hamlet claims that any wrong he has done Laertes (by killing his father, for example, and driving his sister to madness and death) was committed accidentally: ‘I have shot my arrow o’er the house / And hurt my brother, (V.ii. 243–4).2 In the Folio text he says ‘I have shot my arrow o’er the house / And hurt my mother’. Horace Howard Furness in his 1877 Variorum edition of the play quotes Joseph Hunter’s 1845 speculation in support of ‘mother’: ‘The change in the Folio might have been made by Shakespeare after he retired to Stratford, the passage as it originally stood coming too near to an incident which had recently occurred in the family of Greville in that neighbourhood, where one of them had by misadventure killed his brother with an arrow.’3 Furness nevertheless prints ‘brother’ as do all other editors of the play, including those who privilege the Folio as Shakespeare’s own revision of his earlier text; they assume ‘mother’ is simply a misreading and correct it without feeling any need to comment.

Keywords

Ghost Burial Editing Rene Hemel 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    This claim was made by Luke McKernan of the National Film and Television Archive in a programme note for the June 1994 season of Hamlet films at the National Film Theatre, London. McKernan is co-author with Olwen Terris of Walking Shadows: Shakespeare in the National Film and Television Archive (London: British Film Institute, 1994).Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Joseph Hunter, New Illustrations of the Life, Studies, and Writings of Shakespeare (London: J.B. Nichols and Son, 1845) II, p. 265.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Anonymous compiler of publicity brochure for Shakespeare on Film, part of the Everybody’s Shakespeare International Festival, Barbican Centre, London, October–November 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 6.
    Gary Taylor (ed.), Henry V (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982) p. 61.Google Scholar
  5. 7.
    T.J.B. Spencer (ed.) Hamlet (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1980) p. 352.Google Scholar
  6. 8.
    ‘Fratricide and Cuckoldry: Shakespeare’s Doubles’, reprinted in Murray M. Schwartz and Coppélia Kahn (eds), Representing Shakespeare (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980) pp. 70–109.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    Violence and the Sacred, Patrick Gregory trans. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977).Google Scholar
  8. 10.
    Eric Sams, The Real Shakespeare (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995). See also Sams’ note ‘Hamnet or Hamlet, That is the Question’, Hamlet Studies (1995) pp. 94–8.Google Scholar
  9. 11.
    Harold Jenkins (ed.), Hamlet, The Arden Shakespeare (London: Methuen, 1982).Google Scholar
  10. 13.
    ‘Mousetrap and Rat Man: An Uncanny Resemblance’, in Tetsuo Kishi, Roger Pringle and Stanley Wells (eds), Shakespeare and Cultural Traditions (Newark: University of Delaware, 1994) p.357.Google Scholar
  11. 15.
    T.S. Eliot famously called Hamlet an artistic failure in his Atheanaeum essay on ‘Hamlet and his Problems’ (1919), reproduced in H. Bloom (ed.), Hamlet (New York: Chelsea House, 1990) pp. 43–6.Google Scholar
  12. 17.
    Page 84, line 1, in Graham Holderness and Bryan Loughrey (eds), The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet Prince of Denmarke (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992).Google Scholar
  13. 18.
    Paul Werstine, ‘The Textual Mystery of Hamlet’, Shakespeare Quarterly 39 (1988), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 20.
    Barbara Mowat, ‘The Form of Hamlet’s Fortunes’, Renaissance Drama 19 (1988) 97–126.Google Scholar
  15. 23.
    G.R. Hibbard (ed.), Hamlet, The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987).Google Scholar
  16. 25.
    See Michel Foucault’s chapter on the ‘Stultifera Navis’, in his Madness and Civilisation: a History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, R. Howard trans. (London: Tavistock, 1967) pp. 3–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ann Thompson
  • Neil Taylor

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations