HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 240 - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
240-240+1 Polo. <He> Hath my Lord {wroung from me my slowe leaue} 
See CN 240-240+1 for complete set for this line

1880 Tanger
Tanger
240 Hath] Tanger (1880, p. 122): The absence of he from Q2 “seems to be a simple accidental omission.”
1885 macd
macd contra Tanger
240 Hath] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “H’ath—a contraction for He hath.
1934 Wilson
Wilson MSH
240 Wilson (1934, pp. 110-11) <p.110> ascribes the missing “He” in Q2 to a combination of accidents. </p. 110> <p. 111> Sh. probably used a for he, and then there was a a:o mistake. The compositor then attached the o to the SP. “The fact that all Polonius’ other speeches in the text are headed ‘Pol. ’ bears out the supposition.” </p.111>
Ed. note: But the a would have been A, and a compositor is not likely to mistake a capital A for a lower case o.

Wilson MSH
240 Wilson (1934, p. 247) lists He among the words certainly om. in Q2.
1980 pen2
pen2
240-2 Spencer (ed. 1980): “Polonius’s first speech is characterful: he takes thirty-three words to say yes.”

pen2
240 slowe] Spencer (ed. 1980): “reluctantly given.”
1982 ard2
ard2: Wilson +
240 Polo. Hath] Pol. He hath: Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Dover Wilson explains the omission of the pronoun in Q2 by suggesting that ’Polo. Hath’ represents a misreading of ’Pol a [= he] hath’ (MSH, pp. 110-11). Yet although Q2 invariably uses ’Pol.’ for the speech-heading elsewhere, it would not be unlike Shakespeare to write ’Polo’ on the first occasion and ’Pol’ subsequently.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4 ≈ Tanger without attribution
240-240+2 wroung . . . consent] Hibbard (ed. 1987), relying on Q1’s version for support, believes the F1 compositor omitted the Q2-only lines by accident. Q1CLN 168 ("forced graunt") bears a resemblance to "hard consent,"and thus the omitted lines indicate that the acting text contained something like Q2’s lines absent from F1.
1988 bev2
bev2: standard
240 Hath] Bevington (ed. 1988): “he has.”
1992 fol2
fol2: standard
240-240+1 wroung . . . petition] Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “i.e., finally persuaded me to allow him“
2003 Thompson
Thompson: Popple
240-1 Thompson (2003, pp. 97-8): "<p. 97>The range of possibilities for Polonius can be illustrated from an eighteenth-century </p. 97> <p. 98> commentator William Popple, who commented (in 1735) on what had become the traditional way of performing the character’s opening lines when he replies to the king’s question as to whether he has given his son Laertes permission to return to Paris. Popple notes:
Here is the most simple, plain, unstudied, unaffected reply that could be given. Yet how is this spoke and acted? The eyes are turned obliquely and dressed up in a foolish leer at the king, the words intermittently drawled out with a very strong emphasis, not to express a father’s laughter. . . the voice toned like the squeak of a bagpipe.
Polonius at this point was not just comic but farcical."</p. 98>
240 240+1 240+2 241