HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 2482 - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
2482 Enter Ghost...
1736 Stubbs
Stubbs
2482-85 Enter . . . . figure] Stubbs (1736, pp. 34): “His being obliged to break off his Discourse by the coming in of his Father’s Ghost once more, adds a certain Weight and Gravity to this Scene, which works up in the Minds of the Audience all the Passions which do the greatest Honour to human Nature. Add to this, the august and solemn Manner with which the Prince addresses the Spectre after his Invocation of the Celestial Ministers.”
1773 gent1
gent1
2482 Gentleman (ed. 1773): “For stage action, the Ghost is most happily introduced here; its appearance enlivens the plot, vastly, and relieves the scene, very much.”
1774 gent2
gent2 = gent1 minus “and . . . very much.”
1789 anon
anon: Kemble (performance)
2482 Anonymous (A Short Criticism . . . Kemble, 1789, pp. 16-18): <p.16> “when the Spirit makes his appearance, the agony that expresses itself in his countenance and action represents the most finished piece of acting I ever beheld; the scorn and contempt with </p.16><p.17> which his face is marked when he throws from him his uncle’s picture, and the filial affection that shews itself upon his pressing his father’s portrait to his lips, denotes the nicest discrimination and propriety of feeling. The late Mr. Henderson, if I remember rightly, instead of throwing away his uncle’s picture after Mr. Kemble’s manner, used, when he had set the difference between the men in the true light to his mother, with great composure to return it into his pocket. Far be it from me to pronounce a man of his most excellent judgement in the wrong in this point; he might have had the best reasons for so doing; but as he hath never publicly declared what those reasons were, it may not be thought conceited in the author of the present criticism to acknowledge that, according to his idea, Mr. Kemble’s manner is greatly to be preferred, as it exhibits a stronger picture of natural </p.17><p.18> feeling, and is a full declaration of the hatred and abhorrence he so justly feels against his infamous uncle: however, I submit my opinion, on this subject, to the judgement of abler critics than myself.” </p.18>
1820 Bicknell
Bicknell
2482 Bicknell (1820, pp. 176-6): <p.175> “It is not easy to imagine how this scene of the drama should be so managed as to present the Ghost to Hamlet and not at the same time to give it to his mother’s view. The present mode of representation is insufficient to satisfy our imagination; for the searching eye of the Queen is anxiously essaying to discover the object which Hamlet points to. If it were only visible to Hamlet, delusion is imperfect; for the spectators are witness of its presence. If it is the mere embodying of a form by Hamlet’s mental </p.175><p.176> vision, the Ghost should not be visible at all upon the stage, and then some of the speeches of the Prince would be inapplicable. Perhaps a method might still be tried, by which the difficulty would be obviated.
“If it were so ordered, that the Ghost glided in, near the extremity of the scene, behind the place where the Queen is standing, the speech of Hamlet to it might to her, naturally enough, have the air of madness. When the Queen exclaims, ‘Alas! he’s mad,’ a little stage management would bring her near the front of the stage, apparently absorbed in grief. At his time the Ghost, in a lower tone, addresses Hamlet. When the Queen, recovering, asks, ‘Whereon do you look?’ and Hamlet answers, ‘On him! on him!’ the Ghost vanishes. His mother still demands, ‘To whom to you speak this?’ The phantom still dwelling in his imagination, although no longer in his presence, he replies, ‘Do you see nothing there?’ Upon her alleging that she sees nothing, he, conscious that the vision has passed, demands, ‘DID you hear nothing?’ At this moment when she answers, ‘Nothing, but ourselves,’ the Ghost again enters, and glides out of the portal, visible to the eye of Hamlet, but transient ere his mother can turn to catch the vision.” </p.176>
1825 European Magazine
"Gunthio" pseudonym: his note responds to the difficulty expressed in editions before cald 1819 and also after
2518 habit as he liued] "Gunthio" (1825, pp. 341-2): “Here I may mention as worthy of notice, the curious stage-direction which occurs in the closet-scene, ’Enter the Ghost in his night gowne.’ [Q1 CLN 1551, TLN 2482. Q1 does not capitalize ghost.] This, and Hamlet’s exclamation, ’’My father, in his habite as he liued’ [here, Gunthio combines the Q2 and F1 orthography], evidently appear to denote that the Ghost’s costume on this occasion was different from that which appeared at the opening of the play; and though a night-gown and slippers would be thought too free and easy in these days of fastidious refinement, some kind of vestment more shadowy and less substantial than armour might here perhaps be assumed with good effect. The Ghost’s present style of dress is, however, as old as Rowe’s time, whatever the pristine garb might be, for the frontispiece to his edition of Hamlet [[1709,]] represents the spirit, armed ’exactly cap-a-pee’ [see CN 391] as we still see it.”
Ed. note: Gunthio’s note is placed here as well as in 2482 to indicate the similarity between his note and Collier’s.
1843 col1
col1: xref.
2482 Collier (ed. 1843): “‘Enter the Ghost in his night-gown,’ is the stage-direction in the quarto, 1603, affording proof that at that date, and in this scene, the spirit was not appareled as when it had before appeared on the platform. This is important, because it completely explains Hamlet’s exclamation in this scene, ‘My father, in his habit as he lived’ [3.4.135 (2518)]. See the Introduction. In the other quartos and in the folios it is only ‘Enter Ghost.’”
1847 verp
verp: col1
2482 Verplanck (ed. 1847): “The quarto of 1603, shows how the poet’s intention was carried into effect; for there we meet with the stage-direction, ‘Enter the Ghost in his night-gown.’—Collier.”
1848 Strachey
Strachey
2482 Strachey (1848, p. 75): “the Ghost once more appears, ‘to whet this almost blunted purpose.’ It is his last appearance; there is not henceforth any allusion to him, not even in Horatio’s speech at the end of the play, in which he promises to give a full account of the whole matter. Henceforth Hamlet’s course is one of action, and the Ghost fades into a forgotten dream.”
1854 del2
del2
2482 Delius (ed. 1854): “Q. A. hat die Bühnenweisung: Enter the Ghost in his night-gown, woraus wenigstens hervorgeht, dass Sh. den Geist zu der Zeit, als der Text von Q. A. zu Papiere gebracht wurde, im Nachtkleide auftreten liess, nicht wie im ersten Acte in voller Rüstung.” [Quarto A has the stage direction Enter the ghost in his night-gown from which it is evident at least that at the time when the text of Quarto A was put on paper Sh. had the ghost appear in night clothes, not in full armor as in the first act.]
1856 hud1 (1851-6)
hud1 ≈ del2 +: xref. magenta underlined
2482 Hudson (ed. 1851-6): “When the Ghost goes out, Hamlet says,—‘Look, how it steals away! my father, in his habit as he liv’d ’ [3.4.135 (2518)]. It has been much argued what is meant by this; that is, whether the Ghost should wear armour here, as in former scenes, or appear in a different dress. The question is set at rest by the stage-direction in the first quarto: ‘Enter the Ghost, in his night-gown.’ H.”
Hudson takes Q1 to be authoritative here.
1858 col3
col3 = col1 +
2482 Collier (ed. 1858): “If, therefore, the Ghost did not wear a ‘night-gown,’ he was unarmed in the time of the old annotator.”
1861 wh1
wh1 ≈ hud1 (xref.)
2482 White (ed. 1861): “The 4to. of 1603, ‘Enter the Ghost in his night gowne.’ Hamlet says afterwards, My father in his habit as he lived. [3.4.135 (2518)]’ It is to be observed that the Ghost at this appearance is visible only to Hamlet.”
1867 ktlyn
ktlyn ≈ hud1 minus xerf.
2482 Keightley (1867, p. 294): “Enter Ghost in his night-gown] I have given this stage-direction from the 4to 1603, as it is quite incongruous to suppose that the Ghost appeared in armour in a room of the palace; and as Hamlet says, ‘My father in his habit as he lived!’ As the Ghost makes but one short speech, I think, if it could be so managed, it would be more psychologic and effective for him to remain invisible, except to Hamlet mentally, and his voice only be heard by the audience.”
1869 tsch
tsch: Erdmann
2482 Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Q1 hat die Bühnenweisung: Enter the Ghost in his night gown, offenbar, weil die folgenden Worte: My father in his habit as he lived, 135, missverstanden wurden. Der Dichter deutet an, dass die Erscheinung diesmal eine wesentlich andere ist, als im ersten Acte. Dort war sie auch fremden Personen sichtbar, während sie hier sich ausschlisslich dem Prinzen zeigt, und selbst Gertrud unsichtbar bleibt. Dort trat sie körperhaft, in Waffen, mit schwerer Anklage auf, hier ist ihr Wesen l u f t a r t i g schattenhaft, ihre Haltung v e r s ö h n l i c h . Die Abweichung hat zu vielfachen Erklärungen Veranlassung gegeben. Man beachte, dass H. den Geist diesmal anredet: What would thy gracious figure, dein "heiliges Bildniss." Der Dichter denkt sich hier den Geist bereits in ein Stadium getreten, in welchem die Erlösung für ihn nicht mehr fern ist, wobei Shaksp. sich auf die mittelalterliche Ansicht stützt, dass, wie nach dem Tode der Leib allmählich in die Elemente zurückgeht, ebenso der Geist allerdings später als der Körper von dem Gestirn aufgesogen wird, von dem er auf Erden abhing. Geister können nach Paracelsus daher noch lange nach dem Tode an den Orten erscheinen, an die sie durch ihre I m a g i n a t i o n gebunden sind, aber auch sie schwinden allmählich dahin und verlieren Sinn und Bewusstsein. S. Erdmann, Gesch. d. Phil. I. p. 518.” [Q1 has the stage direction: Enter the Ghost in his night gown, evidently because the following words, My father in his habit as he lived, 135, were misunderstood. The poet indicates that the appearance this time is a significantly different than in the first act. There it was also visible to outsiders, while here it is shown only to the prince, and remains invisible even to Gertrude. There it appeared bodily in armor with a serious complaint; here it is insubstantially shadowy, its behavior conciliatory. This softening has given rise to a variety of explanations. Note that Hamlet addresses the Ghost this time: What would thy gracious figure, your holy image. The poet is here thinking of the ghost as already in the state where his dissolution is no longer distant. In this Sh. is relying on the medieval view that after death, just as the body gradually goes back into the elements, so the spirit is later drawn up into the constellation to which it belonged on earth. According to Paracelsus spirits can long after death appear on earth at places to which they are attached by rheir imagination, but they too gradually disappear and lose mind and consciousness. See Erdmann, Gesch. d. Phil. p. 518.]
1872 hud2
hud2 = hud1 + xref.
2482 Hudson (ed. 1851-6): “See, however, note 23, of this scene [3.4.138 (2521)].”
1872 del4
del4 = del2
1872 cln1
cln1
2482 Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “In the quarto of 1603 the stage direction is ‘Enter the ghost in his night gowne,’ that is, in his dressing-gown.”
1875 Marshall
Marshall
2482 Marshall (1875, pp. 50-51): <p.50> “[Hamlet] is interrupted by the entry of the Ghost, clad now, not in complete armour, but in the ordinary dress of every day, or rather, as the stage direction has it in the first Quarto (1603), ‘in his night gowne,’ as if he were going to the bed that his wife had so cruelly dishonoured.
“The appearance of the Ghost in this scene is essentially different, in every point, both to its appearance in the pre- </p.50><p.51> sence of Marcellus, Horatio, and Bernardo, and to its second in the presence of Hamlet, Horatio, and Marcellus. On both these occasions the apparition was visible to every one present, though it refused to speak until along with Hamlet. Now the ghost is seen and heard by Hamlet alone. To the Queen both the form of the spectre, and the words it speaks, are but as empty air.” </p.51>
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ col3, elze1, Keightley (Exp.), cln1
2482 Furness (ed. 1877): “Collier (ed. 2): The stage direction of Q1 shows that at that date, in this scene, the spirit was not apparelled as when it had before appeared on the platform. This is important, because it completely explains Hamlet’s exclamation in line [3.4.133 (2516)]. In the (MS) it is unarmed. If, therefore, the Ghost did not wear a ‘nightgown,’ he was unarmed at the time of the old annotator. Elze: ‘Who,’ asks Goethe (Nachgelassene Werke, vol. v, p. 61), in reference to the stage-direction in Q1, ‘does not feel a momentary pang on comprehending this? to whom it is not repulsive? And yet when we grasp it, and reflect upon it, we find that it is the right way.’ The Ghost is not here introduced, as in Act I, in warlike guise, but in his every-day clothing . . . . We must not be too precise in the matter of this nightgown,—it refers to the ordinary clothes of the old king. Keightley (Exp. p. 294): As the Ghost makes but one short speech, if it could be so managed, it would be more psychologic and effective for him to remain invisible, except to Ham. mentally, and his voice only be heard by the audience. Clarendon: Nightgown here is the same as dressing-gown.”
1877 col4
col4 = col3 minus “This is important . . . old annotator.”
1877- Tannenbaum
Tannenbaum: v1877 (citing Steevens on steele at 637); Mac., MND //s; xrefs.
2482 Tannenbaum (n.d., pp. 379-380): <p.379> “Most Shn. scholars are, I think, inclined to regard the Ghost who appears to Hamlet in the closet-scene as the same unhappy spirit who unfolded a harrowing tale of adultery, regicide and incest on the battlements of Elsinore. The Queen’s </p.379><p.380> inability to see the Ghost they explain on the theory that according to the superstitious beliefs of the day, a Ghost could be visible to some and invisible to others. If, they say, he could be invisible to some, he could also be inaudible to them.
“That Sh. intended us to recognize the Ghost in the closet-scene as a subjective phenomenon, the result of Hamlet’s intensely agitated mental condition, is certain—at any rate, for me—from the following considerations:
“a) The Ghost appears, not in complete steel, but ‘in his habit as he lived’ [3.4.135 (2518)]. One of the Quartos says he appeared ‘in his night gowne’ (i.e., in his dressing-gown). It would be manifestly absurd to think that Ghosts were provided with changes of raiment in the underworld. Hamlet’s father, in accordance with ancient custom, was buried in armor from head to foot, cap-a-pe. That this was so, is shown by Steevens’s quotation from Olans Wormius (see Furness’s Variorum Hamlet, [vol 1]. p. 91. If, then, Sh. subsequently makes a point of a change in the Ghost’s vestments we may be sure that he does so for a purpose. What that purpose was is clear enough. He wishes us to apprehend the subjective nature of the apparition in Act 3. Hamlet, greatly perturbed by the happenings of the day (the conflict with the urge to end the heartache by self-slaughter, the discovery of Ophelia’s perfidy, the realization of being constantly spied upon, the demonstration of the King’s guilt, the discovery that he is to be shipped off to England, the omission of the opportunity to kill the King’s unprepared soul). has just killed Polonius and indulged in a wild and whirling tirade against his uncle-father, ‘a murderer and a villain, . . . a vice of Kings, a cutpurse of the empire and the rule, . . . a thing of shreds and patches” [3.4.96-102 (2475-83)]. The juxtaposition of the portraits of his uncle and his father, combined with the disgusting images of lust he has just conjured up, brings about a frenzied mental state in which he sees his father’s spirit ‘in his habit as he lived’, as he is depicted in the counterfeit presentment hanging before him. Nothing else could have calmed Hamlet at this moment. But for that visitation the soul of Nero might indeed have entered his bosom.
“b) At no time in the play could the Ghost more unjustly have charged Hamlet with vacillation and delay. There needed </p.380><p.381> no Ghost come form the grave to whet Hamlet’s ‘almost’ blunted purpose. The real Ghost knew better than that. Hamlet’s impatience, his self-reproaches, are ‘projected into the mouth of the creation his own heated fantasy had evoked.’
“c) In the mouth of the real Ghost the words ‘thy almost blunted purpose’ would be inappropriate. After all, what was Hamlet’s purpose? Did the Ghost have more knowledge of that than we have? Was it merely to kill the King? or was it to bring him to justice? or to a confession of his crime? or what? The Ghost evidently foresaw that his purpose would require considerable time. Had he not enjoined Hamlet, however he pursued this act, not to taint his mind (i.e., not to lapse into pessimism, not to become a misanthrope <n.> Or does the Ghost mean to warn Hamlet against becoming insane, or against permitting his better and higher intellectual self to be dominated by is lower self? Whichever he means, he implies a considerable lapse of time). </n.> and not to contrive against his mother aught? All this implied time. The Ghost has no just cause for upbraiding Hamlet with delay, and therefore no cause for appearing on the scene at this time. The spectre which Hamlet saw in his mother’s closet was of his own making.
“That Sh. was well acquainted with the phenomenon of hallucination is sufficiently attested by the following quotations: ‘Louers and mad men . . . .coole reason euer comprehends’ etc. MND [5.1.4-6 (1796-98)]. ‘Is this a Dagger . .. heat-oppressed Braine?’ Mac. [2.1.33-39 (613-19)]. ‘This bodiless creation ecstacy Is very cunning in.’ Ham. [3.4.138 (2521)].” </p.381>
1883 wh2
wh2 ≈ wh1
2482 White (ed. 1883): “The quarto of 1603, recording what the spectator saw, has Enter Ghost in his night gown, that is, in his dressing gown. Hamlet imagines that he sees his father in his customary dress in his private apartments, as he says afterwards ‘in his habit as he lived.”
1885 macd
macd: xref.
2482 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Q1 has Enter the ghost in his night gowne. It was then from the first intended that he should not at this point appear in armour—in which, indeed, the epithet gracious figure could hardly be applied to him, though it might well enough in one of the costumes in which Hamlet, was accustomed to see him—as this dressing-gown of Q1. A ghost would appear in the costume in which he naturally imagined himself walking among the fortifications of the castle. But by the words lower down [3.4.135 (2518)]—‘My Father in his habite, as he liued,’ the Poet indicates, not his dressing-gown, but his usual habit, i.e. attire.”
1890 irv2
irv2 ≈ cln1 + Mac. // magenta underlined
2482 Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “In Q1. the stage-direction is the rather ludicrous one, Enter the Ghost in his nightgown. But nightgown no doubt means a dressing-gown (‘his habit as he liv’d’), as in Mac. [2.2.67-8 (734-35)]: ‘Get on your nightgown, lest occasion call us, And show us to be watchers.’”
Note appears in a letter to Dr. Oswald, dated November 27, 1898.
1903 p&c
p&c ≈ v1877 (Goethe)
2482 Porter & clarke (ed. 1903): “Q1 added in his night gowne, i.e., dressing-robe. The absence of this direction in later texts, perhaps, makes Goethe’s commendation pointless, who at first found it repulsive, but afterward right, that the ghost should come first in armor and now in everyday clothing.”
1904 ver
ver: xrefs.
2482 Enter Ghost] Verity (ed. 1904): “The precise moment of the Ghost’s intervention corresponds with the reproof in [3.4.110-115 (2490-5)] and the previous admonition to Hamlet [1.5.84-88 (769-73)].”
1907 Salvini
Salvini
2482 Salvini (Putnam’s Monthly, 1907, p. 353): “I am convinced that if Sh. had written this play in modern times, he would have omitted the appearance of the ghost on the stage, leaving all to the imagination of the public. Of course, at the time that the tragedy was written, the audience was not always educated and intelligent and it was necessary to be plain. But from actual experience, I state positively that the scene grows far more impressive by excluding the ghost from the stage. It rests then with the actor to give the illusion that Hamlet sees the spirit. This he does by listening to its words and repeating them as if under supernatural compulsion. To my mind, it is better than the modern idea of seeing, by means of an electric flashlight effect, a human being.”
1914 Dowden
Dowden
2482 Dowden (1914, p. 282): “The ghost of Hamlet (in the Queen’s chamber) was certainly a visible ghost on the Elizabethan stage. You remember old Goethe’s interest in the stage direction of the just discovered first Quarto, the ghost here wearing his night-gown, i.e. dressing-gown? But in some modern rendering the ghost has been omitted as only a creature of Hamlet’s brain.”
1934 cam3
cam3 ≈ irv (Mac. //); ≈ Tannenbaum (xref.)
2482 Wilson (ed. 1934): “I adopt the S.D. from Q1, which almost certainly informs us of what took place on Sh.’s stage. ‘Night-gown’=‘dressing-gown (cf. Mac. [2.2.67-68 (734-35)], appropriate to the Queen’s bedroom as the armour was to the battlements. Cf. [3.4.135 (2518)] ‘in his habit as he lived.’”
1936 cam3b
cam3b: rowe
2482 Wilson (ed. 1936): “S.D. The picture in Rowe (v. add. Note l. 53) shows the Ghost in armour and with truncheon.”
1937 pen1
pen1 ≈ cln1
2482 Harrison (ed. 1937): “The First Quarto reads Enter the Ghost in its night gown, i.e. dressing gown.”
1939 kit2
kit2: Chapman analogue
2482 Kittredge (ed. 1939): “There is no room for discussion whether this is a ‘subjective’ or an ‘objective’ ghost—whether it is a figment of Hamlet’s brain or an actual apparition. Ghosts had the power, it was believed, of appearing and speaking to one person while remaining invisible and inaudible to all others present. The fact that a speech is given to the Ghost settles the question. If he were a delusion, Hamlet would merely imagine that he heard his words, and, if the audience needed to know what Hamlet imagined he heard, he would himself repeat them. There is a similar situation in Chapman’s tragedy The Revenge of Bussy d’Ambois, v, 1 (Pearson ed., II, 166). Guise and Clermont are conversing when the ghost of Bussy appears, calls for vengeance, and vanishes. Clermont, Bussy’s brother, sees and hears the ghost, but Guise perceives nothing, ‘Guise. Why stand’st thou still thus, and applyest thine eares And eyes to nothing? Clermont. Saw you nothing here? Guise. Thou dream’st, awake now; what was here to see? Clermont. My Brother’s spirit, vrging his reuenge. Guise. Thy Brother’s spirit! Pray thee, mocke me not.’ Clermont convinces Guise that the apparition is not imaginary; but Hamlet does not convince his mother. Since she thinks him insane, his seeing the Ghost is, to her, a symptom of his insanity.”
kit2: standard (Q1 SD)
2482 Kittredge (ed. 1939): “These words are in the First Quarto only. The Ghost appears, not (as in Act I) in armour, but ‘in his habit as he lived’; in his dressing gown, attire suitable for the privacy of his own apartment.”
1958 mun
mun: (Q1 SD)
2482 Enter Ghost] Munro (ed. 1958): “Q1 ‘Enter the ghost in his night gown.’ A nightgown was a loose gown for undress.”
1974 evns1
evns1
2482 Evans (ed. 1974): SD night-gown] “dressing gown.”
1980 pen2
pen2
2482 Spencer (ed. 1980): “Q1 has ‘Enter the ghost in his night gowne’ (i.e. dressing-gown), probably reflecting stage practice. It appears at the climax of Hamlet’s tirade, presumably as he is about to tell his mother the circumstances of the murder.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4
2482 Hibbard (ed. 1987): Enter Ghost in his night-gown] “It seems right to preserve this direction from Q1 for several reasons. It is the only indication we have of how the Ghost appeared in this scene in Sh’s day. Moreover, its precision leaves little room for doubt that it represents what the reporter recalled. Nor is there anything incongruous about the night-gown, so long as one remembers that what is signifies is a dressing-gown and, it can be assumed, a very splendid one at that, certainly not a thing ‘of shreds and patches.’ Above all, however, the night-gown has at least two functions: it reminds the audience that it is night on the stage; and, in its domesticity, it suggests that old Hamlet is about to play a rather different role from that of the martial figure of the first act. In fact, our last glimpse of ‘the majesty of buried Denmark,’ showing him ‘in his habit as he lived’, modifies our previous impression of him greatly by bringing out his humanity.”
1997 evns2
evns2 = evns1
2001 Greenblatt
Greenblatt
2482 Greenblatt (2001, pp. 222-3), discussing the Q1 SD “Enter the ghost in his night gowne”: “He is, in this staging, a figure not of the battlements nor of the throne room, but of the closet or the bedroom. [. . . ] </p. 222><p. 223> Perhaps, too, for an audience that still recalled the old tales, the transformation from armor to nightgown would lightly echo those multiple hauntings in which spirits from Purgatory displayed their progressive purification by a gradual whitening of their robes.” </p. 223>
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: JC //; Dessen, Thomson, Hibbard, Greenblatt, Phelps
2482 Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Q1’s [stage direction] is often quoted and sometimes adopted by editors of Q2/F reasoning that it indicates what originally happened onstage. Nightgowns are frequently specified in plays of the period; Dessen and Thomson note 40 examples under ’nightgown’. Perhaps the appearance of Caesar in his nightgown, accompanied by ’Thunder & Lightning’ (JC 2.2), and later as a ghost in a night-time scene in Brutus’ tent when Brutus has called for his ’gown’ (4.3), is a relevant parallel, even an influence on Q1. If we assume Q1 is correct, the contrast here with the fully armed Ghost of Act 1 is striking: Hibbard claims it ’modifies our previous impression of him greatly by bringing out his humanity’. Greenblatt suggests that the change ’would lightly echo those multiple hauntings in which spirits from Purgatory displayed their progressive purification by a gradual whitening of their robes’ (Purgatory, 223). A more prosaic reason might be that, if the actor playing the King was doubling the Ghost, a nightgown could be put on quickly over his previous costume and taken off again for his next entry (in Q1 there are 21 lines between the Ghost’s exit and the King’s entry at the equivalent of the beginning of 4.1 (see Q1 11.82-103). Phelps (147) claims that Irving in 1874 was the first to stage the Ghost dressed in this way, though this was more than 50 years after the rediscovery of Q1. Some productions precede the Ghost’s entry with a clock striking, as in 1.1 and sometimes in 1.4).”
391 2482 2518

Copyright ©2024 hamletworks.org. All rights reserved.