Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary
| 2586 Eenter King {, and Queene, with Rosencraus} | .. |
|---|
2586+1 {and Guyldensterne}.
1733- mtby3
mtby3
2586-2586+1 Rosencraus and Guyldensterne] Thirlby (1733-): “What are they brought in for? only P[ope] d[eletes] . . . .”
Transcribed by BWK, who adds: “I would have expected Rowe to delete as well.”
1747-53 mtby4
mtby4 ≈ mtby3
2586-2586+1 Rosencraus and Guyldensterne] Thirlby (1747-53): “for what purpose? Only to be sent out again.”
Transcribed by BWK, who adds: “Then he has a xref to SD 2619-20 [p. 217] and another word I cannot make out.” I cannot make this out either.
1765 john1/john2
john1
2586 Johnson (ed. 1765): Act IV Scene I] “This play is printed in the old editions without any separation of the Acts. The division is modern and arbitrary; and is here not very happy, for the pause is made at a time when there is more continuity of action than in almost any other of the scenes.”
1819 cald1
cald1 = v1813 +
2586 Caldecott (ed. 1819): Act IV Scene I] “It had been better, perhaps, at the end of Sc. 3.”
Caldecott refers to location for beginning of ACT IV.
1854 del2
del2
2586-2586+1 Delius (ed. 1854): “Die alten Ausgaben des Hamlet haben hier weder eine Act- noch Scenenbezeichnung. Nach Q. A. blieb die Königin, nachdem Hamlet mit dem Leichnam des Polonius sich entfernt, auf der Bühne, und zu ihr kamen der König und die Herren: Enter the King and Lords. Auch die Bühnenweisung der Fol. lässt die Königin, nach Hamlet’s Weggang, auf dem Theater bleiben und den König allein zu ihr auftreten, ohne Rosencrantz und Guildenstern. In den Qs. steht: Enter King, Queen, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, und auf diese Notiz hin hat zuerst R o w e hier den vierten Act beginnen lassen. Der Uebereinstimmung wegen ist es rathsam, von dieser einmal eingeführten Ordnung nicht mehr abzugehen, so wenig sie auch im Sinne des Dichters feststehen mag.” [The old editions of Hamlet have here neither an act nor a scene indication. According to Quarto A, the queen remained on the stage after Hamlet left with Polonius’ corpse, and the king and the lords came to her: “Enter the King and Lords.” The stage direction of the Folio edition also has the queen remain on stage after Hamlet’s departure and the king come to her alone without Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. In the Quartos is: Enter King, Queen, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and it is based on this notice that Rowe first had the fourth act begin here. For consistency it is advisable not to change this order again, however little it may agree with the poet’s intention.]
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ john, cald1, elze
2586-2586+1 Furness (ed. 1877): “
Johnson: This modern division into Acts is here not very happy, for the pause is made at a time when there is more continuity of action than in almost any other of the scenes.
Caldecott suggests, and
Elze agrees with him, that Act IV should begin with the present 4.4. The latter suggests that probably, as indicated by the Qq, the Queen goes to seek out the King as soon as Ham, has left her, and having met him in the gallery, enters with him and his courtiers one of the King’s apartments.”
1881 hud3
hud3: cald, elze
2586-2586+1 Hudson (ed. 1881): “Modern editions, generally, make the fourth Act begin here. None of the old copies have any marking of the Acts and Scenes, after the second Scene of the second Act; and it seems very clear that there is no sufficient interval or pause in the action to warrant the beginning of a new Act in this place. I therefore agree with Caldecott and Elze that Act IV. ought to begin with the fourth Scene after.”
1885 macd
macd: Capell (apud cam1)
2586 Mac Donald (ed. 1885): “Here, according to the editors, comes ‘Act IV.’ For this there is no authority, and the point of division seems to me very objectionable. The scene remains the same, as noted from Capell in Cam. Sh., and the entrance of the king follows immediately on the exit of Hamlet. He finds his wife greatly perturbed: she has not had time to compose herself.
“From the beginning of Act II., on to where I would place the end of Act III., there is continuity.”
1904 ver
ver ≈ john; xrefs.
2586 Verity (ed. 1904): “‘This modern division into Acts [see 1.1, first note} is here not very happy, for the pause is made at a time when there is more continuity of action than in almost any other of the scenes’– Johnson. (F.) Dramatically a more natural break is at the end of 4.4 (Hamlet’s departure for England). On the modern stage the Act is usually made, with great theatrical effect, to end at [3.4.179 (2555)] (“worse remains behind”). For stage-purposes the question of length has to be considered.”
1934 Wilson
Wilson
2586-2586+1 Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 1:38): <1:38>“The scene, following immediately on the conversation in the bedroom between Hamlet and his mother, which leaves the Queen weeping and distraught upon the stage, is oddly headed in Q2 Eenter King, and Queene, with Rosencraus and Guyldensterne; oddly, I say, for not only is an entry for the Queen superfluous when she is already ‘on,’ but Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are quite obviously in the way, so much so that the Queen has to get rid of them at once by bidding them ‘Bestow this place on vs a little while.’ How this awkward situation arose is a Q2 problem which does not concern us at the moment. What we have to notice is the simple and efficient manner in which F1 deals with it: it reads Enter King and cuts out Rosencrantz and Guildenstern together with the words addressed to them. To my mind had we no other evidence than this, we should be justified in concluding that the F1 text was in some way derived from acting copy.” </1:38>
1934 cam3
cam3 ≈ john
2586 Wilson (ed. 1934): “Rowe, following q. 1676, introduced this act-division, which is ‘not very happy, for the pause is made at a time when there is more continuity of action than in almost any other of Scenes’ (Johnson).”
cam3: MSH
2586-7 Eenter King, and Queene, with Rosencraus and Guildensterne] Wilson (ed. 1934): S.D.] “Q2 “Eenter [sic] King, and Queene, with Rosencraus and Guyldensterne.’ F1 ‘Enter King.’ The S.D. in Q2 is doubly remarkable, seeing that Gertrude is already ‘on’ at the end of 3.4, and that Ros. and Guild. are brought in to be dismissed at once. Perhaps some intervening scene or episode has been omitted. MSH. pp. 38, 91-2.”
1939 kit2
kit2: xrefs.
2586 Kittredge (ed. 1939): “The Quarto of 1676 is the oldest text to begin a new Act here. That Rosencrantz and Guildenstern enter with the King has excited some surprise among the moderns. Obviously the Queen enters by one door, from her apartment; and the King and his companions at the other door, from a conference in which Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have probably received their commission and have announced their readiness to depart. See [3.3.2 (2274), 3.3.24-26- (2297-9)].”
1947 cln2
cln2 : rowe, john
2586 Rylands (ed. 1947): “This act division introduced by Nicholas Rowe in 1709, following the Quarto of 1676, is, as Dr. Johnson noted, not very happy and it should be disregarded. The first three scenes of this Act are really one scene, and are the aftermath of what has gone before, no change of scene being required on the unlocalized Elizabethan stage. The murder of Polonius strengthens Claudius’s determination to banish Hamlet. Claudius’s first thought is of his own escape. He is no coward but his nerve is shaken and he hurries on the action.”
1974 evns1
evns1
2586 Evans (ed. 1974): “4.1. Location: The Castle.”
1980 pen2
pen2
2586 Spencer (ed. 1980): “As there is clearly no real lapse of time between this and the previous scene, the traditional act division is unreasonable; but it is preserved for readers’ convenience.”
1982 ard2
ard2: contra Greg, john, Smith, Dover Wilson; Tamburlaine analogue, Rom. //; xrefs.
2586 Jenkins (ed. 1982): “‘It is a disaster that editors have followed a late quarto in choosing this of all points at which to begin a new act’ (Greg, SFF, p. 333). The action is continuous, the Queen remaining on stage. ln. Johnson had already observed that an act-division here is ‘not very happy’. Instead of inventing an exit for the Queen which all three texts lack, editors would have done better to follow F in omitting Q2’s superfluous entry-direction for her. Cf. Irwin Smith, SQ, xviii, 13. It is against all convention for a character to leave the stage at the end of one scene and immediately re-enter in another. It is not essential to suppose, as most editors do, a change of place (though cf. [4.1.35 (2623)], and if it were, there are many instances of such a change without a break in the stage-action: e.g. Rom. 1.4-5 (‘They march about the Stage, and Servingmen come forth with Napkins’); I Tamburlaine, 5.1.63ff. (where the Virgins go from Damascus to pleased with Tamburlaine). Cf. also above, [2.2.286 (1244-5)] ln. Hence the Queen need not leave the stage in order to interrupt the King in conference with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, and Dover Wilson’s suggestion that a scene may have been cut out is otiose, as is Greg’s assumption that, rather than have the King ‘enter the Queen’s apartment’, Shakespeare must have intended a new scene to begin here (SFF, p. 322).”
ard2: xref.
2586-+1 Rosencraus and Guyldensterne] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Their appearance with the King here, though silent and but momentary (and accordingly dropped from F), is dramatically very pointed—after the stress just laid [3.4.202-210 (2577+1-2577+9)] on their role as Hamlet’s escort.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4: Q6, rowe, john
2586 Enter King] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “While all three of the earliest texts provide an exit for Hamlet, none of them does for the Queen, who, as Claudius’ first words make plain, remains on stage deeply distressed. Q2, however, creates confusion by including her in its direction for this entry. The Quarto of 1676 sought to straighten out the tangle by starting a fresh scene and a fresh act, 4.I, at this point, though it made no provision for getting Gertrude off stage after Hamlet leaves her. The example it set was, unfortunately, followed by Rowe and most subsequent editors. Dr. Johnson recognized this absurdity, and said of it: ‘This modern division into Acts is here not very happy, for the pause is made at a time when there is more continuity of action than in almost any other of the scenes.’ Nevertheless, he kept the division. It is retained here because it makes for easy reference, and because it serves to bring out the fact that all the traditional divisions in the play are editorial, and therefore have no authority.”
1988 bev2
bev2
2586 Eenter . . . Queene] Bevington (ed. 1988): “(Some editors argue that Gertrude never exits in 3.4 and that the scene is continuous here, but the second quarto marks an entrance for her and at [4.1.35 ((2623)]35 Claudius speaks of Gertrude’s closet as though it were elsewhere. A short time has elapsed during which the King has become aware of her highly wrought emotional state).”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: 2622-25, 2629 xrefs; TxC //
2586-86+1 Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Q2’s [stage direction] has been taken to justify a new scene (and indeed a new act), although there has been no exit for the Queen from 3.4. The only other textual excuse for this notoriously problematic division is the King’s statement at 4.1.34-5 [2622-25] that ’Hamlet in madness hath Polonius slain / And from his mother’s closet hath he dragged him’, implying a change of location from the closet which was the location of 3.4. The corresponding [stage direction] in F is merely ’Enter King’, which may justify the continuation of the scene at least until the Exeunt of the King and Queen at 4.1.45 [2629]: TxC assumes ’a deliberate change of staging.’”
2586 2586+1
