Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary
| 2455 Would step from this to this, {sence sure youe haue} 2455 | 3.4.71 |
|---|
1726 theon
theon
2455-2455+5 sence . . . difference] Theobald (1726, pp. 103): “There is an Addition, in several of the Copies, which, tho’ it has not the Sanction of any older Edition, that I know of, than the Quarto of 1637. yet has so much of the Style, Diction, and Cast of Thought peculiar to our Poet, that, I think, we may warrant it to be his, and not an Interpolation of the Players without that Authority. Perhaps, it was not written when he first finish’d the Play; or it was left out in the shortening the Play for the Representation, and so lost its Place in the first Editions, which were printed from the Players Copies. The Verses are these [quotes 2451-2455+5, with Q2 lines.]”
1733 theo1
theo1
2455-2455+5 sence . . . difference] Theobald (ed. 1733): “Mr. Pope has left out the Quantity of about eight Verses here, which I have taken care to replace. They are not, indeed, to be found in the two elder Folio’s, but they carry the Style, Expression, and Cast of Thought, peculiar to our Author; and that they were not an Interpolation from another Hand needs no better Proof, than that they are in all the oldest Quarto’s. The first Motive of their being left out, I am perswaded, was to shorten Hamlet’s speech, and consult the Ease of the Actor: and the Reason, why they find no Place in the Folio Impressions, is, that they were printed from the Playhouse castrated Copies. But, surely, this can be no Authority for a Modern Editor to conspire in mutilating his Author: Such Omissions, rather, must betray a Want of Diligence, in Collating; or a Want of Justice, in the voluntary Stifling.”
Theobald is here more insistent on the retention of these lines than he had been in Sh. Restored. A fuller collation has been done and the account of their omission is less ambivalent.
1740 theo2
theo2 = theo1 minus “The first Motive . . . the voluntary Stifling.”
1774 capn
capn
2455-2456+4 sence . . . . mope] Capell (1774, 1:1:140): “It is impossible to read the whole of this period, without seeing—that ‘Sense,’ in this place, is—reason, or understanding; and therefore ‘motion,’ in the line after this, should be restrain’d to such motion as is proper to those of her species; for if extended to motion in general, the position is not true: but, under this restraint, the reasoning is as it should be; that, since she mov’d and perform’d other actions that belong’d to humanity, the presumption was—she had the reason belonging to’t. The vague use of terms is notorious; and none are more abus’d in all languages, than those we should most of all be precise in, the terms that serve to distinguish the powers of our own soul: Sense, in philosophical usage, is—power of perception; and Reason—a faculty that compares those perceptions, unites, divides, and draws conclusions from all of them: but this faculty having either no being, or no exercise of any had perception been wanting, the root is consider’d as the tree, and Sense, in common notion, is —Reason. The term is us’d by and by, 3.4.79 (2456+3)], in it’s more proper signification—perception; namely, that we receive from external objects by impressions of the organs of sense: the whole line is emphatical; but, principally, the words ‘part’ and ‘true.’”
1778 v1778
v1778 = v1773 +
2455-2455+5 sence . . . difference] Steevens (ed. 1778): “The whole passage is wanting in the folio; and whichsoever of the readings be the true one, the poet was not indebted to this boasted philosophy for his choice. Steevens.”
1790 mal
mal
2455-2455+1 sence . . . difference] Malone (ed. 1790): “These words, and the following lines to the word difference, are found in the quarto, but not in the folio. Sense is sometimes used by Sh. for sensation or sensual appetite; as motion is for the effect produced by the impulse of nature. Such, I think, is the signification of these words here. So, in Measure for Measure: ‘—she speaks, and ‘tis Such sense, that my sense breeds with it.’ So, in Braithwaite’s Survey of Histories, 1614: These continent relations will reduce the straggling motions to a more settled and retired harbour.’ Sense has already been used in this scene, for sensations: ‘That it be proof and bulwark agains sense.’ Dr. Warburton for motion substituted notion, i.e. intellect. Malone.”
1791- rann
rann
2455 sence] Rann (ed. 1791-): “Some degree of understanding you must possess, to be capable of self-motion.”
1793 v1793
v1793 = v1785, mal minus note on omission
1805 Seymour
Seymour
2455-2455+1 sence . . . motion] Seymour (1805, p. 186): “‘Motion’ for volition, will, inclination; we still say of a voluntary act, it was of his own motion; sense, here, stands for reason, or the faculty of judging and comparing.”
1826 sing1
sing1: contra warb
2455-2455+1 sense . . . motion] Singer (ed. 1826): “Sense here is not used for reason; but for sensation, feeling, or perception: as before in this scene:—‘That it be proof and bulwark against sense.’ Warburton, misunderstanding the passage, proposed to read notion instead of motion. The whole passage in brackets is omitted in the folio.”
1853 coln
coln
2455 step]
Collier (1853, p. 427): “i.e. from his father to his uncle: Hamlet is exalting the first, and debasing the last; and the expression, ‘Would step from this to this,’ is feeble and inexpressive, while a slight alteration in one word makes a vast difference:—‘And what judgment Would
stoop form this to this?’”
1853 Singer
Singer
2455 step] Singer (1853, p. 265): “I must confess that I cannot see the advantage that stoop would have over the old reading ‘step’ in the following passage in Hamlet’s remonstrance with his mother:— [quotes 2452-5] and why the old text, which is most likely the language of the poet, be considered ‘feeble and inexpressive?’”
Singer is “vindicating” Sh. from “the interpolations and corruptions” advocated by Collier.
1854 del2
del2: col2
2455 step] Delius (ed. 1854): “Der alte Corrector liest stoop für step, und Collier stimmt ihm bei, weil Sh’s Lesart “schwach und ausdruckslos” sei. Wenn jeder Herausgeber erst so nach dem Gutdünken seiner individuellen Aesthetik mit dem verständlichen, authentich feststehenden Texts des Dichters wird umspringen dürfen, dann wird allerdings eine neue Aera für die Shaksperekritik anbrechen und von der alten wenig übrig bleiben. Bis dahin aber wird es rathsam sein, nicht ohne Noth und Autorität zu ändern; etwaige “schwache und ausdruckslose” Stellen wird der Dichter dann selbst verantworten müssen und können.” [The Old Corrector reads stoop for step, and Collier agrees with him because Sh’s version is weak and expressionless. If every editor is allowed to fool around according to his own individual aesthetic opinion with the poet’s understandable, authentically established text, then of course a new era will dawn for Sh. criticism and little will be left of the old. Until then, however, it will be advisable not to make changes without need and authority; the poet himself must and can then be responsible for any weak and expressionless passages that occur.]
1857 fieb
fieb: MM //
2455-2455+1 sence . . . motion] Fiebig (ed. 1857): “Sense in the meaning of the faculty or power by which external objects are perceived, sensation, perception by means of the senses; thence, perception of intellect, reason. Motion is for the effect produced by the impulse of nature. Sense has already been used in this scene, for sensation: ‘That it be proof and bulwark against sense.’ So, in MM [1.4.58 (410-11)], most appositely, where both the words occur: ‘—One who never feels The wanton suns and motions of the sense.’”
1858 col3
col3
2455 step] Collier (ed. 1858): “The received text has always been the tame word step for ‘stoop;’ ‘stoop is from the corr. fo. 1632, with evident fitness, in reference to the disadvantageous comparison Hamlet is drawing.”
1860 stau
stau ≈ fieb (MM //) + Oth. //s magenta underlined
2455 sence . . . haue] Staunton (ed. 1860): “The meaning we apprehend to be,—‘Sense (i.e. the sensibility to appreciate the distinction between external objects) you must have, or you would no longer feel the impulse of desire. This signification of ‘motion’ might be illustrated by numerous examples from our early writers, but the accompanying out of Sh. will suffice: ‘—one who never feels The wanton stings and motions of the sense.’ MM [1.4.58 (410-11)]. ‘—A maiden never bold; Of spirit so still and quiet, that her motion Blush’d at herself.’ Oth. [1.3.95-97 (435-37)]. ‘but we have reason to cool our raging Motions, our carnal stings,’ &c. Ibid. [1.3.329-30 (683-84)].”
1866b cam1
cam1: Ingleby (mQ5)
2455 step] Clark and Wright (ed. 1866): “The reading ‘stoop’ for ‘step’ is found in manuscript in the margin of a copy of the Quarto of 1637, which has been kindly lent us by Dr. Ingleby. The other readings in this play referred to as ‘Anon. conj. MS.’ or ‘Anon. MS.’ are from the same source.”
1868 c&mc
c&mc
2455 sence]
Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868, rpt. 1878): “Here used for ‘appreciation,’ ‘perception’; power to discriminate the differences in external objects.”
1869 tsch
tsch: xrefs.
2455 sence] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “sense, wie an dem madness u. v. 161 ersichtlich wird, ist, wie lat. sensus, Besinnung, Selbstbewusstsein (animal quod s e n s u caret. Quis persona furore detenta s e n s u m non habet. JCt.) Im höchsten Stadium des Liebesrausches ist das Bewusstsein doch nicht in dem Grade Sclave der Leidenschaft, dass nicht noch ein wenig Unterscheidungsfähigkeit übrig bliebe; 9 Zeilen später ist sense im eigentlichen Sinne gebraucht. - Sehr fein lässt der Dichter zur Entschuldigung der Mutter den Geist schon I. 5. 43 sagen: that adulterate beast with witch craft of his wit, with traiterous giftswon to his shameful lust the will etc.” [sense as can be seen in madness below, line [3.4.161 (2544+1)], is like Latin sensus, consciousness, self-assurance (animal quod s e n s u caret. Quis persona furore detenta s e n s u m non habet. JCt.). Even in the highest transport of love, the mind is not so much the slave of passion that it has no power of distinction at all; 9 lines later sense is used with its usual meaning? The poet very cleverly has the ghost excuse the mother in [1.5.42 (729)] by saying: that adulterate beast with witch craft of his wit, with traiterous giftswon to his shameful lust the will etc.]
1870 rug1
rug1
2455-2455+1 sense . . . motion] Moberley (ed. 1870): “You must have perception, else how could you still have desire?”
1872 cln1
cln1 ≈ fieb (MM //) + contra warb (see n. 2455+1) magenta udnerlilned
2455-6 sence . . . motion] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “here, as in line 38, feeling, and motion is emotion, as in MM [1.4.58 (410-11)]: ‘The wanton stings and motions of the sense.’ Warburton unnecessarily changed it to ‘notion.’”
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ col3, elze1
2455 step]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Collier (ed. 2):
Stoop is from the (MS) with evident fitness, in reference to the disadvantageous comparison Ham. is drawing.
Elze pronounces this a brilliant emendation.”
v1877 ≈ warb (see n. 2455+1), cap, v1778, mal, stau, cln1, rug1
2455 sence]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Warburton: From what philosophy our editors learn this, I cannot tell. Since
motion depends so little upon
sense, that the greatest part of
motion in the universe is amongst bodies devoid of
sense. We should read: ‘Else, could you not have
notion.
i.e. intellect, reason, &c. This alludes to the famous peripatetic principle of
Nil fit in intellectu,
quod non fuerit in sensu.
Capell (1, 140): ‘Sense’ is
reason; since she
moved and performed other actions that belonged to humanity, the presumption was she had the
reason belonging to it.
Steevens: Whichsoever of the readings be the true one, the poet was not indebted to this boasted philosophy [referred to by Warburton] for his choice.
Malone: ‘Sense’ has been already used for sensation in line 38 [2420], above.
Staunton: The meaning is: ‘Sense (
i.e. the sensibility to appreciate the distinction between external objects you must have, or you would no longer feel the
impulse of desire.’ This signification of ‘motion’ might be illustrated by numerous examples from our early writers, but the accompanying out of Sh. will suffice:
MM. [1.4.58 (410-11)];
Oth. [1.3.95-97 (435-37);
Ibid. [1.3.329-30 (683-84)].
Clarendon: ‘Motion’ is emotion, as in
MM cited above.
Moberly inclines to Staunton’s explanation.”
1877 neil
neil: Aristotle
2455 sence . . . motion] Neil (ed. 1877): “According to Aristototle’s Physics, ‘All motion has its origin in the soul, and therefore motion is a sign of intelligence or sense.’”
1878 rlf1
rlf1: stau (MM //) without attribution; rug1
2455-2455+1 sence . . . motion] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “Sense = sensibility, sensation; and motion = impulse, desire (as in MM [1.4.58 (410-11)]: ‘The wanton stings and motions of the sense,’ etc.). ‘You must have perception, else how could you still have desire?’ (M.).”
1881 hud3
hud3
2455-2455+2 sence . . . appoplext] Hudson (ed. 1881): “There is some confusion here, owing to the different meanings with which sense is used. The first sense is sensation; the second refers to the mind. In our usage, the word brain would best combine those meanings, thus: ‘You have brains, else you could not have motion; but, surely, your brain is palsied.’ The idea seems to be, that her mind is not merely untuned, as in madness, but absolutely quenched or gone.—In ‘madness would not err,’ the meaning is, ‘madness would not so err.’”
1882 elze2
elze2: col2
2455 Would step] Elze (ed. 1882): “Collier (MS) would stoop, a very ingenious conjecture; there is, however, no necessity of altering the text.”
elze2: Greenwood, Nicholson, Neil
2455 sence . . . haue] Elze (ed. 1882): “In The Athenaeum, Feb. 27, 1875, p. 302 Mr George Greenwood refers the reader to Aristotle, De Anima, II, 3, and shows that there is, indeed, a very curious coincidence between Aristotle’s doctrine and Hamlet’s lines. See also Dr. B. Nicholson’s paper in The Athenæum 1875, II, 449 seq. and Mr Neil ad loc. — In F1 this passage as far as such a difference is omitted.”
1889 Barnett
Barnett
2455 sence] Barnett (1889, p. 51): “feeling.”
1889-90 mTaylor
mTaylor
2455 from this to this] Taylor (ms. notes in PB 83, HTC, 83, not in Shattuck’s catalogue): “1 Throws down picture.”
“Oct 9th. Hamlet produced at Covent-Garden theatre 1793. Hamlet in the Vandyke drawing & has ever since been fixed in costume of black satin & bugles. A new mode of treating the pictures of the late & the present king though applauded by certain critics was unquestionably wrong. The late king was a half-length on the wall & the present a miniature worn by her majesty as a bracelet.
“The small hand portraits generally used would hardly ____(?) the full length portraiture implied in the words ‘A station like the Herald Mercury.’”
Set of comments above are interleaved with pp. 71-2. Prompt business is numbered: #3, p. 71 refers to 2437; #1, p. 72 refers to 2455; both are in PB #82. Illegible word may be “convey.” Annette Fern suggested it and I think this reading is reasonable in context; however, it is not offered without reservation.
1890 irv2
irv2 ≈ cln1 (MM //)
2455-56 sence . . . motion] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “Compare MM [1.4.58 (410-11)]: ‘The wanton stings and motions of the sense.’”
1891 dtn
dtn
2455 step] Deighton (ed. 1891): “transfer itself, pass; with the idea of passing from what is good to what is bad.”
dtn
2455 sure] Deighton (ed. 1891): “certainly.”
1899 ard1
ard1
2455-6 sence . . . motion] Dowden (ed. 1899): “sense, feeling; motion, impulse, desire, as frequently in Sh.”
1900 ev1
ev1: xrefs.
2455 sence] Hereford (ed. 1900): “perceptive sensibility. In [3.4.71, 72 (2455-2455+1)] the emotional aspect of the world is prominent, in [3.4.72, 73 (2455+1-2455+2)] the intellectual.”
1903 rlf3
rlf3 = rlf1 minus rug1
1931 crg1
crg1
2255-2455+1 sence . . . motion] Craig (ed. 1931): “Sense and motion are functions of the middle of sensible soul, the possession of sense being the basis of motion.”
1934 Wilson
Wilson
2455-57 Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 1: 28-9): <1:28> “It will be noticed that the cut leaves the second part of 2455+5 to follow neatly upon the first part of 2455 without any </1:28><1:29> break in the metre, while the second half of 2456+4 is attached to the broke 2457 in F1 thus: ‘O shame! where is thy Blush? Rebellious Hell,’ which likewise makes a satisfactory line of verse.” </1:29>
1934 rid1
rid1
2455 sence] Ridley (ed. 1934): “perception.”
1934 cam3
cam3: MSH; ≈ ev1
2455-2455+5 sence sure . . . difference] Wilson (ed. 1934): “F1 omits. MSH. pp. 28, 167. For ‘sense,’ ‘emotion,’ ‘ecstasy,’ v. G. ‘In [3.4.71, 72 (2455-2455+1)] the emotional aspect of the word (sense) is prominent, in [3.4.72, 73 (2455+1-2455+2)] the intellectual’ (Herford).”
1934 cam3 Glossary
cam3: xrefs.
2455-2455+5 sence] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary): “feeling, perceptive, sensibility; [3.4.38, 3.4.71, 3.4.161(2420, 2455+1, 2544+1)]; (with a quibble on ‘sense’=one of the five senses).”
1939 kit2
kit2: xrefs.; Ven. //
2455-2456+4 sence sure . . . mope] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “You have life and the faculty of motion. Hence I infer that you have also the faculty of perception by the senses. But surely all your five senses must be paralyzed. Mere insanity could not cause you to make such a mistake in choosing; for madness never so thoroughly suspended the action of the five senses as not to leave some fragment of one of them—enough to enable you to choose where the difference was so enormous (‘to serve in such a difference’). That sense means ‘sensuous perception’ in [3.4.71, 74 (2455, 2455+3)] (as in [3.4.80 (2456+3)], not ‘intellect,’ is clear from Hamlet’s appeal to sight, feeling, hear[ing, and smell. Cf. Ven. 433-444. Motion means ‘normal bodily motion,’ as contrasted with paralysis: she ‘lives and moves and has her being.’”
1974 evns1
evns1 = rid1 + magenta underlined
2455 sence] Evans (ed. 1974): “sense perception, the five senses.”
1980 pen2
pen2
2455 sence] Spencer (ed. 1980): “The exact meaning is uncertain; perhaps ‘control of the senses’, or ‘ability to apprehend and distinguish’, or ‘sexual desire’.”
1982 ard2
ard2: xref.
2455 step from this to this] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Cf. [1.5.47-51 (734-8)].”
ard2: xrefs.
2455 Sense] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “the senses collectively (as often), and the faculty of perceiving through them. Cf. [3.4.78-80 (2456+1-2456+3)] and n.”
1984 chal
chal
2455 sence] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “i.e. the use of the senses.”
1984 klein
klein: contra Wilson
2455-2455+5 sence . . . difference] Klein (ed. 1984): “Wilson sides with many in his remark about the cuts in F1 (cf. below, lines [3.4.78-81 (2456+1-2456+4)], {3.4.162-166 (2544+1-2544+5)], [3.4.202-210 (2577+1-2577+9)]: “Sh. himself could hardly have pruned his own verse more tenderly” (MSH, p.29, cf. 27 and 166-69). Yet one must stress that the striving for a shorter text, however sporadic (and not very massive), which one notices generally in F1, has sacrificed in 3.4 mainly passages which involve massive problems, thus pointing to someone else. And the later cuts are far less smooth than this one.”
1985 cam4
cam4
2455-2455+5 sence . . . difference] Edwards (ed. 1985): “The difficulty of extracting meaning from this passage must support the theory that Sh. himself was dissatisfied with it. ‘Sense’ initially means ‘feelings’, but in the next two lines means ‘reason’. The general idea seems to be that something worse than madness has happened to Gertrude’s ‘sense’ because even if she was mad she could not prefer Claudius to her former husband.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4: Eliot
2455-2455+5 Hibbard (ed. 1987, Appendix): “Like the three passages peculiar to Q2 that follow it, this one appears to have been cut from F for good aesthetic reasons. All four run to excess. They smack of self-indulgence on the part of the hero and, possibly, of the author also. The play is stronger for their exclusion and far less open to the kind of attack T. S. Eliot made on it in his essay of 1919.”
1988 bev2
bev2 ≈ evns + magenta underlined
2455 sence] Bevington (ed. 1988): “perception through the five senses (the functions of the middle or sensible soul).”
1993 dent
dent
2455-2455+5 sence] Andrews (ed. 1993): “In this passage the word means (a) the senses by which one perceives, (b) common sense, and (c) sensual appetite.”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: 2456+1-4 xref; Edwards, Hibbard, Theobald
2455-55+5 Sense. . . difference] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “This passage and that at 76-9 [2456+1-4] are not in F; Edwards argues that Shakespeare was dissatisfied with them and intended to delete them; Hibbard goes further and claims, ’They smack of self-indulgence on the part of the hero and, possibly, of the author.’ Earlier editors and commentators, such as Theobald, were more open-minded; he conjectures of the first passage, ’Perhaps it was not written when he first finish’d the Play; or it was left out in the shortning the Play for the Representation’ (Restored, 103).”
2455
