Talk:To be, or not to be
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Presentation format
Guys, English is my second language so what I am going to say may sound strange but bear with me. This is not a poem, it is a play; right? So why it is written/presented in this format? It is hard to read and follow in this format! Why not write it as it is spoken in the play? Something like:
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 the heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation devoutly to be wish'd,
To die, to sleep; to sleep perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; for in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause: there's the respect that makes calamity of so long life; for who would bear the whips and scorns of time, the oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, the insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes when he himself might his quietus make with a bare bodkin?
I find this format easier to read and understand! It has continuity but needs good punctuations to make it easier to follow. 82.70.40.190
Shakespeare wrote in a form called iambic pentameter, which is a style you'll see throughout any of his poetry or plays. It consists of lines with five (the 'penta' in pentameter) iambic feet, which consist of two syllables. Hence, all of his lines are ten syllables long. It's a specific poetic form of the time and part of his genius, hence all his works are reproduced as such. Wtstar 03:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pith & Doth
"pith" and moment or "pitch" and moment? I think it's pitch, my version of the play, published by Cambrigde University press states pitch.
I have seen it written both ways, apparently pitch is what it was supposed to be, or at least that's what some discussions of the topic tend to to conclude. A related question though, isn't it supposed to be "doth" and not "does" in the phrase, "conscience doth make cowards of us all"? -- JD
[edit] Anagram
The first three lines are an anagram of "In one of the Bard's best-thought-of tragedies, our insistent hero, Hamlet, queries on two fronts about how life turns rotten".
..Okay, why is this in this article (despite the fact that it's amusing?) Would this be in EB?
- Eric 2 July 2005 22:38 (UTC)
Eric, I think we can be pretty sure of who found the anagram...can't we? But it is still pretty cool...cmdr out
Shouldn't we say that "In one of the Bard's..." is an anagram of the first three lines, rather than vice versa?
I like the anagram. I was also amused by the Klingon translation. Invaluable! Aroundthewayboy 20:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spelling of bourn(e)
I dont know if this edit was correct - I can find links with both spellings, but I'm not an authority on this, so leaving it unchanged ..
[edit] Ophelia
This might be nitpicking, but "Soft you now..." is not part of the soliloquy. Ophelia is there and he is addressing her. I'm not going to cut it, because it'll probably be seen as incomplete, but there ought to be a note that the soliloquy ends at "...lose the name of action."
- Everytime I've heard the soliloguy recited, that part was included. Plus, aren't his parents hiding behind the curtain the whole time to spy on him and Ophelia? Doesn't that make it a monologue? Acetic Acid 08:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- It's a break in topic of the soliloquy. He could be talking directly to her (Ophelia) or to himself. It all depends on how the actor and director wants to portray it. It's a great part to put in emotion between the two characters. One could make Ophelia more initimately involved with Hamlet's troubles or leave her out completely. I think Kenneth Branagh went with the former, easing her into the end of the soliloquy. --tyger 19:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- I find it difficult to view the "Soft ..." line as anything other than a reaction to Ophelia's entrance. I certainly wouldn't view it as a part of the soliloquy. By the way, AA's suggestion that the presence of the Claudius and Polonius means this is not a soliloquy is false, as it's not directed to them. I do feel the last words should not be there. I'm going to take them out, but if someone reverts them, then I'll leave it be.
[edit] Parody
Does not Mark Twain's parody of this soliloquy in Huck Finn deserve mention?
[edit] Suicide?
This soliloquy is not considering suicide; rather, it is considering life or death in the sense of taking revenge on Claudius's life. Hamlet has arguably ruled suicide out in Act I, scene 2, when he says
|
O that this too too sullied flesh would melt, |
he has ruled suicide out as a viable option: God's law does not permit it. He may wish it later in the play; this doesn't mean he considers it a possibility. Any thoughts? A strolling player 05:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I think this is your opinion, but it seems to conflict with what the majority of analysis concludes. The section you quoted seems to me to be saying that if only God didn't condemn suicide, it would make it that much easier for him to choose it. In other words, it's only another coin on the scale of "to be or not to be," and not necessarily the coin that tips the scale.
- I think Hamlet thinks he struggles with suicidal tendencies, but recognizes that he's to "cowardly" to do it, as he as well as admits in the soliloquy. This continues until Ophelia's funeral when he's faced with the harsh reality of death and makes him reassess the value of life, and his life.
- Phemeral 05:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- From what I have read, Hamlet does not come across to me as a suicider either! I don’t know how these analysts came to such conclusion, I have read a couple of them but I am not convinced yet. The way I see it, Hamlet is suffering the huge pain of losing his father and he is considering different ways/options that would end the pain (including doing nothing, taking revenge, and suicide) and he comes to conclusion that doing nothing is not an option, suicide may end his suffering but does not eliminate the guilty.
- Passage from the Final Soliloquy:
- How all occasions do inform against me, and spur my dull revenge! What is a man, if his chief good and market of his time be but to sleep and feed? a beast, no more.
- Sure, he that made us with such large discourse; looking before and after, gave us not that capability and god-like reason to fust in us unused.
- Now, whether it be bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple Of thinking too precisely on the event, a thought which, quarter'd, hath but one part wisdom and ever three parts coward, I do not know why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do;' Since I have cause and will and strength and means to do't.
- Let’s not forget that the play intends to make us think about all the options and decide for ourselves which one we would chose. 82.70.40.190
[edit] Which edition?
Which edition/collection of Shakespeare's works is being quoted from here? The actual text quoted from needs to be referenced. Also, I agree with the comment that the soliliquoy ends at "action", or maybe at "soft you now" (which is Hamlet telling himself to be quiet). Carcharoth 01:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Related lines in the play
"To be or not to be..." "...so like the king that was and is the question of these wars"
Hamlet ... And let those that play your clowns speak no more than is set down for them; for there be of them that will themselves laugh, to set on some quantity of barren spectators to laugh too; though, in the mean time, some necessary question of the play be then be considered...
What is the necessary question of Hamlet? When the “clowns speak”, it is “then to be considered.”
First Clown
Give me leave. Here lies the water; good: here stands the man; good; if the man go to this water, and drown himself, it is, will he, nill he, he goes,--mark you that; but if the water come to him and drown him, he drowns not himself: argal, he that is not guilty of his own death shortens not his own life.
Second Clown
But is this law?
First Clown
Ay, marry, is't; crowner's quest law.
Hamlet
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?
If Hamlet took arms against the king (a sea of troubles), he would very likely lose his own life in the attempt. Such an action might be considered suicide, which would cost Hamlet his soul. However if he waits for the king to initiate the attack (if the water come to him), then he is not guilty of his own death. The king didn’t try to kill Hamlet until after Hamlet tried to kill the king (but killed Polonius by mistake). In the end, Hamlet killed the king only after the King had indirectly killed Hamlet (via Laertes’ poisoned sword).
Before we leave the clowns, let’s dig a little deeper.
Hamlet
How long hast thou been a grave-maker?
First Clown
Of all the days i' the year, I came to't that day that our last king Hamlet overcame Fortinbras.
Hamlet.
How long is that since?
First Clown
Cannot you tell that? every fool can tell that: it was the very day that young Hamlet was born
Was this then Hamlet's "inheritance" - a graveyard?
Hamlet (standing over a grave)
The very conveyances of his lands will hardly lie in this box; and must the inheritor himself have no more, ha?
To be or not to be -- what? That is the question. After Horatio had explained that the impending war was caused by a duel over land fought by Hamlet's father, whose ghost they had just seen, Bernardo replied:
I think it be no other but e'en so:
Well may it sort that this portentous figure
Comes armed through our watch; so like the king
That was and is the question of these wars.
To be or not to be... so like the king that was and is the question of these wars - that is Hamlet’s dilemma. Ray Eston Smith Jr 19:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] danish translation
could we get at least two people fluent in Danish check this up? I can't speak a word, but this sure could be embarrassing, if the translation did not match up.-- ExpImptalkcon 01:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Edit summary
I was bold and changed [1] the article quite a bit. I admit I have gotten carried away in the Interpretations part (I had initially intended to just improve the style), but hopefully not enough to set off anyone's BS detector. ;) All the additions are based on something I've read, not the original research. I'll try to provide sources later.
I also shortened the References (formerly: "Uses") in Popular Culture part, only leaving those that refer to the monologue in the name (of the movie, band, etc.) itself. For the arguably most recognized passage from the English literature, listing all instances when a character in a novel or a verse of the song quotes/paraphrases it, is just silly.
Other changes I made should be self-explanatory. Carecrow 19:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
