Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary
| 2914 <Nature is fine in Loue, and where ’tis fine,> | 4.5.162 |
|---|
1723 pope1
pope1
2914-6 Pope (ed. 1723): “Or, perhaps, ‘Nature is fire in love, and where ’tis fire It sends some precious incense of it self After the thing it loves.’”
1733 theo1
theo1: AYL, Tro., Oth. //s
2914-6 Theobald (ed. 1733): “Mr. Pope seems puzzled at this Passage, and therefore in both his Editions subjoins this Conjecture. Perhaps, says He, Nature is fire in love, and where tis fire, ‘It sends some precious Incense of itself After the Thing it loves.’ I own, this Conjecture to me imparts no Satisfactory Idea. Nature is suppos’d to be the Fire, and to furnish the Incense too: Had Love been suppos’d the Fire, and Nature sent out the Incense, I should more readily have been reconcil’d to the Sentiment. But no Change, in my Opinion, is necessary to the Text; I conceive, that This might be the Poet’s Meaning. “In the Passion of Love, Nature becomes more exquisite of Sensation, is more delicate and refin’d; that is, Natural Affection, rais’d and sublim’d into a Love-Passion, becomes more inflamed and intense than usual; and where it is so, as People in Love generally send what they have of most valuable [sic] after their Lovers; so poor Ophelia has sent her most precious Senses after the Object of her inflamed Affection.” If I mistake not, our Poet has play’d with this Thought, of the Powers being refin’d by the Passions, in several other of his Plays. His Clown, in AYL [2.4.53-55 (835-37)], seems sensible of this Refinement; but, talking in his own Way, interprets it a sort of Frantickness. ‘We, that are true Lovers, run into strange Capers; but as All is mortal in Nature, so is all Nature in Love mortal in Folly.’ Again, in Tro. [4.4.3 (2391)] , the latter expresses herself concerning Grief, exactly as Laertes does here of Nature. ‘The Grief is fine, full, perfect, that I taste; And in its Sense is no less strong, that That Which causeth it.’ But Iago, in Oth. [2.1.214-217 (998-1000)], delivers himself much more directly to the Purpose of the Sentiment here before us. ‘Come hither, if thou bee’st valiant; as they say, base Men, being in Love, have then a Nobility in their Natures more than is native to them.’”
1747 warb
warb
2914 fine] Warburton (ed. 1747): “This is unquestionably corrupt. I suppose Shakespear wrote, ‘Nature is fal’n in love, and where ‘tis fal’n.
“The cause of Ophelia’s madness was grief, occasioned by the violence of her natural affection for her murder’d father; her brother, therefore, with great force of expression, says, Nature is fal’n in love, —’
“To distinguish the passion of natural affection from the passion of love between the two sexes, i.e. Nature, or natural affection is fal’n in love. And as a person in love is accustomed to send the most precious of his jewels to the person beloved (for the love-tokens which young wenches in love send to their sweethearts, is here alluded to) so when Nature (says Laertes) falls in love, she likewise sends her love-token to the object beloved. But her most precious jewel is Reason; she therefore sends that: And this he gives as the cause of Ophelia’s madness, which he is here endeavouring to account for. This quaint sentiment of Nature’s falling in love, is exactly in Shakespear’s manner, and is a thought he appears fond of. So in Romeo and Juliet, Affliction is represented as in love; ‘Affliction is enamour’d of thy parts.
“And thou art wedded to calamity.’ Nay Death, a very unlikely subject one would think, is put into a love fit: — ‘I will believe That unsubstantial death is amorous, &c.’”
1747-60? mBrowne
mBrowne
2914 fine] BROWNE (ms. Critical Notes on Warburton, ed. 1747): “fallin’] The question endeavoured to [be] solved by these lines, is how Ophelia came to lose her understanding upon the act of the loss of her Father as it was plainly occasioned by the [violence?] of her love for him. From the refined nature or delicacy of Love would—the absence of beloved objects delights in sending whatever the lover has of most value as tokens of his passion. and therefore he supposes Ophelia sent her Reason after her Father, to show her Love for him—Warb. reads ‘Nature is fallin’ in Love and where ‘tis fallin’’etc.
“Which he explains; Natural affection is grown amourant [?] and sends this Love token i.e. for reason etc. but first this is a very strained construction, and 2nd what any good writer would use the word fallin as here in the 2d place.”
Transcribed by Owen, under ECR’s supervision. Ms 0.12.575 Isaac Hawkins Browne (1705-1760), Critical Notes on the Plays of Shakespeare.
1765 john1
john1, john2 = warb +
2914 fine] Johnson (ed. 1765): “These lines are not in the quarto, and might have been omitted in the folio without great loss, for they are obscure and affected; but, I think, they require no emendation. Love, says Laertes, is the passion by which nature is most exalted and refined, and as substances refined and subtilised, easily obey any impulse, or follow any attraction, some part of nature, so purified and refined, flies off after the attracting object, after the thing it loves. ‘As into air the purer spirits flow, And separate from their kindred dregs below, So flew her soul.’”
1765- mDavies
mDavies: see Davies 1784
2914 [Davies] (ms. notes in Johnson, ed. 1765, opp. 8, 265): “Our Author has more than once observed that human Nature is refined & exalted by the passion of Love & and tho’ there may be some affectation there is—certainly no very great obscurity in the passage— Iago says to Roderigo ‘If thou hast that in thee Wch now I believe more than ever, to wit corragio & [illegible] For they say base minds being in love have then a nobility in their nature &c.’”
Transcribed by BWK.
1773 mstv1
mstv1: warb
2914 fine] Steevens (ms. notes in Steevens, ed. 1773): “Dr Warburton reads, ‘Nature is fallen in love, and where ‘tis fall’n. The cause of Ophelia’s madness as grief, occasion’d by the violence of her natural affection for her brother murdered father. To distinguish the passion of natural affection from the love of the two sexes, her brother says, Nature, or natural affection is fall’n in love. And as a person in love usually sends the most precious of its jewels to the person beloved, so when Nature falls in love, she also sends her love token to the object beloved: But her precious jewel is reason; she therefore sends that. And thus he gives as the cause of Ophelia’s madness.”
1774 capn
capn
2914 C
apell (1774, 1:1:143-4): <p.143>“It is </p.143><p.144> not very clear, what ‘
love’ the speaker means in this place; whether natural affection, or the passion properly call’d so: it should seem the former, by the sentence it comes immediately next to. Be that as it may;—the Poet’s thought in these lines, is—that
love, of whatever kind it be, subtilizes
nature, meaning—our passions; and often to that degree, that they go (as ‘twere) out of themselves, and draw the reason along with them, in their fervour for the object attracting them: This fervour, he calls in another place (p.36 [2.1.99-100 (999-1000)])‚ love’s ‘
violent property;’ and makes Polonius derive from it the madness of Hamlet, as Laertes does Ophelia’s here.”
1778 v1778
v1778 = v1773 +
2914 fine] Steevens (ed. 1778): “The meaning of the passage may be—that her wits, like the spirit of fine essences, flew off or evaporated. Steevens.”
1784 ays1
ays1 = john 1 minus note on Q2 omission
1784 Davies
Davies: john1; see mDavies 1765-
2914-6 Davies (1784, p. 125): “Ophelia’s case was very distressful.—Her love to Hamlet had the sanction of Polonius, with the approbation of the King and Queen. The lover, by mistake, kills the father. This bar, to union with the man she loved, could not be removed. Madness was the natural consequence.—Dr. Johnson’s explanation of the passage above cited is very elegant; but the doctrine it inculcates is, that love refines our natures. So Iago to Roderigo, in Othello, ‘If thou be’st valiant, as they say, base men, being in love, have then a nobility in their natures more than is native to them.’”
1791- rann
rann
2914 fine in Loue] Rann (ed. 1791-): “refined by it so far, in some instances, reason, like the subtile spirit of essences, flies off in the pursuit of the attracting object—just so have Ophelia’s wits evaporated.”
1793 v1793
v1793 = v1785 +
2914 fine] Steevens (ed. 1793): “Fine, however, sometimes signifies artful. So, in AWW [5.3.268 (2997)]: ‘Thou art too fine in thy evidence.’ Steevens.”
1819 anon ann
anon ann (1819, p. 10) = john1 minus view on Folio “emendation”
1819 cald1
cald1: contra john; Oth., MM, Tro., Son. //s
2914-6 Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Fine, or of an ethereal character and nature—partaking of immortality, of the soul’s essence: for, as love is the highest refinement of which our nature is capable; as it detaches us from ourselves, extinguishing that selfishness otherwise inseparable from us, by making the beloved object dearer to us than our own preservation or existence; where it is found in purity and sincerity, its aerial spirit, some effluvia or diviner particles of the flame, some emanations of soul, subtilizing and dissolving their links with the grosser and more material substance of our frame, will (or eagerly we persuade ourselves that they will) fly off, aspire after, make their effort to blend themselves with that to which they are most congenial, and with which, in idea at least, they only can assimilate. This must, of course, take place in a case, where, by an abrupt severance, the soul is suddenly bereft (and whatever other cause might with her co-operate, or be principal, this, from his last interview with Ophelia, would, to Laertes, appear the leading one) of the partner of its being, its other self; for the passion of the soul says, they are One. And here, let it be remembered, that, upon this topic generally, unity is vitality: do away this, and either it is gone, or it assumes a very different denomination.
“Dr. Johnson may perhaps say, without affectation, that these lines are obscure and affected. They are, in our conception, of a very different character: and so far from being such, and fit, as he says, to be expunged, we think, that these abstractions and this high mood, beyond their intrinsic value, teach us, that what Milton derived from Plato and the Greek philosophy, our author could draw from nature and his own resources alone.
“The general idea or maxim inculcated in the first part of this sentence, and afterwards so beautifully and philosophically amplified, we find insisted upon in Oth. [2.1.214-217 (998-1000)] They say, base men, being in love, have then a Nobility in their natures, more than is native to them.’ II. 1. Iago.
“And the term itself is also employed by our author, when speaking of the highest and most exquisite qualities and properties of our nature. ‘Spirits are not finely touched, But to fine issues.’ MM [1.1.35-36 (41-42)]. Duke.
“And, ‘Those that with the fineness of their souls By reason guide his [i.e., its] execution.’ Tro. [1.3.209 (669)]]. Ulyss.
“And, ‘Love—or some joy too fine, Too subtle-potent, and too sharp in sweetness For the capacity of my ruder powers.’ Ib. [3.2.23-24 (1655-56)]
Tro.
“And, in the following Sonnet, does he not advance and illustrate his own more particular and philosophical doctrine, contained in the second part of the above sentence? ‘It is thy wil, thy Image should keepe open My heavy eielids to the weary night? Dost thou desire my slumbers should be broken, While shadowes like to thee do mocke my sight? Is it thy spirit, that thou send’st from thee So farre from home into my deeds to prye, To find out shames and idle houres in me, The skope and tenure of thy jelousie? O no, thy love though much, is not so great.’ LXI. 4to. 1609.”
1826 sing1
sing1
2914 Singer (ed. 1826): “The meaning appears to be, Nature is refined or subtilised by love, the senses are rendered more ethereal, and being thus refined, some precious portions of the mental energies fly off, or are sent after the beloved object; when bereft of that object they are lost to us, and we are left in a state of mental privation:—’Even so by love the young and tender wit Is turned to folly.’ ‘Love is smoke, rais’d with the fume of sighs; Being urg’d a fire sparkling in lovers’ eyes; Being vex’d, a sea nourish’d with lovers’ tears: What is it else?—a madness,’ &c.”
1832 cald2
cald2: Oth. //
2914-6 Caldecott (ed. 1832): “Is refined, is by the quality or chemical process of that Passion of its dross, of all its grosser particles.
“See ‘Nature would not invest herself in such shadowy fashion without some instruction.’ Oth. [4.1.39-40 (2416-7)]. O.”
1854 del2
del2
2914-6 Delius (ed. 1854): “die Natur, die in ihrer Liebe so zart ist, sendet dem Geliebten in die Gruft ein Abbild ihrer Zartheit nach; sie hat dem leiblichen Tode des Polonius den geistigen der Ophelia folgen lassen.” [Nature, who is so tender in her love, sends an image of her tenderness to her entombed beloved; she has let Ophelia’s mental death follow the physical death of Polonius.]
1857 fieb
fieb: john, v1778 (“the meaning . . . evaporated”)
2914-6 Fiebig (ed. 1857): “These lines are not in the quarto, and might have been omitted in the folio without great loss. Johnson calls them obscure and affected, thinking though, they require no emendation. Love, says Laertes, is the passion by which nature is most exalted and refined; and as substances, refined subtilised, easily obey any impulse, or follow any attraction, some part of nature, so purified and refined, flies off after the attracting object, after the thing it loves: ‘As into air the purer spirits flow/And separate from their kindred dregs below/So flew her soul.’ Steevens says, the meaning of the passage may be—That her wits. like the spirit of fine essences, flew off and evaporated.”
1858 col3
col3
2914-6 Collier (ed. 1858): “This hemistich [4.5.164 (2916)] and the two preceding lines are only in the folios, and they are struck through with a pen in the corr. fo. 1632, probably because they were not understood.”
1864a glo
glo: xref.; H5 //
2914 fine] Clark & White (ed. 1864a [1865] 9: glossary, Fine): “sb. end. Ham. [5.1.89 (3280)]; V.T. to make fine or specious. H5 [2.2.137 (766)].”
1865 hal
hal = v1793 +
2914 fine] Halliwell (ed. 1865): “These lines are not in the quarto, and might have been omitted in the folio without great loss, for they are obscure and affected; but, I think, they require no emendation.”
1868 c&mc
c&mc
2914-6 Nature . . .
Loue]
Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868, rpt. 1878): “These three concluding lines are in the Folio, though omitted in the Quartos. We interpret them to mean, ‘Nature is refined by love; and being thus refined, the most precious of it spiritual essence readily exhales when bereft of the object beloved.’”
1869 tsch
tsch
2914 Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Man verstehe: Die Natur in der Liebe ist ja eben zart; so auch zeigte sich O.’s zärtliche Anhänglichkeit an den Vater. Wo aber diese zarte Natur zum Vorschein kommt, da schickt sie bei der Trennung irgend ein kostbares Zeichen ihrer selbst dem Gegenstande nach, auf den die Liebe gerichtet war. Opheliens Geist irrt daher immer noch um das Grab des Vaters und dann wieder dem fernen Geliebten nach.” [This should be understood: Nature in love is indeed tender, and so Ophelia’s tender dependence on her father is shown. Where this tender nature appears, however, it is appropriate that at parting she send a costly souvenir of herself after the object to which the love was directed. Ophelia’s spirit thus still wanders around the grave of the father and then again after the distant beloved.]
1872 cln1
cln1
2914-6 Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “The sense is obscurely expressed. ‘Fine’ seems to mean ‘delicately tender,’ and ‘instance’ ‘proof’ or ‘example.’ ‘The thing it loves’ is here Polonius, the ‘precious instance’ Ophelia’s natural soundness of mind. Her sanity has followed her father to the grave.”
1873 rug2
rug2: In Memoriam analogue
2914-6 Moberley (ed. 1873): “Nature is so spiritualized by love, that it sends its most precious functions one by one after dear ones lost, as instances or samples of itself, till none remain. A recent poet, with more cheerful development of this thought, imagines a mutual interchange of gifts and powers between the dead and the living. (In Memoriam, 1xiv.): ‘Since we deserved the name of friends, And thine effect so lives in me, A part of mine may live in thee, And move thee on to noble ends.’”
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ theo1, warb, john, col3
2914 fine]
Furness (ed. 1877): “
Theobald: In the passion of love, nature becomes more exquisite of sensation, is more delicate and refined; and where it is so, as people in love generally send what they have of most valuable [sic] after their lovers, so poor Ophelia has has sent her most precious senses after the object of her inflamed affection.
Warburton: The cause of Ophelia’s madness was grief, occasioned by the violence of her natural affection for her murdered father; her brother, therefore, with great force of expression, says, Nature is
fal’n in love, and where ‘tis fal’n.’ [Thus Warburton’s text.] To distinguish the passion of
natural affection from the passion of love between the two sexes
, i.e. Nature, or natural affection is fal’n in love.
Johnson: These lines might have been omitted in the Folio without great loss, for they are obscure and affected; but, I think, they require no emendation.
Love (says Laertes), is the passion by which
nature is most exalted and
refined, and as substances,
refined and subtilised, easily obey any impulse, or follow any attraction, some part of nature, so purified and
refined, flies off after the attracting object, after the thing it loves.
Clarendon: ‘Fine’ seems to mean ‘delicately tender,’ and ‘instance’ ‘proof’ or ‘example.’ ‘The thing it loves’ is here Polonius, the ‘precious instance’ Ophelia’s natural soundness of mind. Her sanity has followed her father to the grave.”
Collier (ed. 2): Lines [4.5.162-164 (2914-166)]are struck through with a pen in the (MS), probably because they were not understood.”
1877 neil
neil ≈ cald1 (Oth. //)
1878 rlf1
rlf1 = rug2
2914-6 Rolfe (ed. 1878): “M. paraphrases the passage thus: ‘Nature is so spiritualized by love that it sends its most precious functions one by one after dear ones lost, as instances or samples of itself, till none remain.’”
1883 wh2
wh2
2914-6 White (ed. 1883): “Somewhat obscure; but the sense is unmistakable: fine = sensitive; instance = proof, example. Ophelia’s sensitiveness of nature has caused her reason to follow her father.”
1885 macd
macd
2914 fine] Mac Donald (ed. 1885): “delicate, exquisite.”
macd
2914-6 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “‘where ‘tis fine’: I suggest that the it here may be impersonal: ‘where things, where all is fine,’ that is, ‘in fine soul’; then the meaning would be, ‘Nature is fine always in love, and where the soul also is fine, she sends from it’ &c. But the where may be equal, perhaps, to whereas. I can hardly think the phrase means merely ‘and where it is in love.’ It might intend—’and where Love is fine, it sends’ &c. The ‘precious instance of itself,’ that is, ‘something that is a part and specimen of itself,’ is here the ‘young main’s wits’: they are sent after the ‘old man’s life,’—These three lines are not in Q2. It is not disputed that they are from Shakspere’s hand: if the insertion of these be his, why should the omission of others not be is also?”
1888 macl
macl
2914-6 Maclachlan (ed. 1888): "Poverty of thought, and poverty and obscurity of expression in these lines, and the tastelessness of such an addition here, make me place them within brackets as being post-Shakespearean.”
1889 Barnett
Barnett: rug2 (In Memoriam analogue)
2914 fine] Barnett (1889, p. 56): “tender, delicate. Cf. In Memoriam, 65. 3—‘Since we deserved the name of friends, And think effect so lives in me, A part of mine may live in thee And move thee on to noble ends.’ For a rather different idea.”
1890 irv2
irv2 ≈ macd
2914 fine] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “delicate, tender.”
1891 dtn
dtn
2914-6 Deighton (ed. 1891): “where love is concerned, nature shows herself in her tenderest form, and in such cases it sends some precious proof of itself (here Ophelia’s soundness of mind) as a tribute of affection to follow to the grave that which was so dear to it (here her father).”
1899 ard1
ard1 ≈ cln1 without attribution
2914-6 Dowden (ed. 1899): “Nature is delicate (or accomplished) in love, and sends Ophelia’s sanity after Polonius as a precious token (or sample) of itself.”
1913 tut2
tut2
2914-6 Goggin (ed. 1913): “’nature is so refined (or made delicate) by love that it sends some precious part of itself as a sample or specimen of itself after the loved object.’ Here the ‘precious instance’ is Ophelia’s sanity which nature has sent after Polonius.”
1934 cam3
cam3: MSH; xrefs.; 2H4 //
2914-6 Wilson (ed. 1934): “(F1) Q2 omits. MSH. pp. 96-7. A high-flown sentimental way of saying that Oph.’s sanity has followed Pol. to the grave. No one seems to have noticed that ‘nature’ here = natural or filial affection (cf. Introd.. p. xxxiii; [1.5.81 (766)]; [3.2.394 (2265)]; [5.2.231 (3683)], [5.2.244 (3697)] and 2H4 [4.5.39 (2562)] ‘nature, love and filial tenderness’). To paraphrase: Filial love is exquisite in its working, and will sacrifice its most precious possession as a proof of its affection for the dear departed. v. G. ‘fine,’ ‘instance.’”
1934 cam3 Glossary
cam3: xrefs.; Wiv., Oth. //s
2914 fine] Wilson (ed. 1934, Glossary): “(sb.), (i) exquisite, subtle, highly wrought; [2.2.444 (1488)]; [4.5.162 (2914)]; (ii) (a) pure, unalloyed, (b) egregious, consummate (in a contemptuous sense; cf. Wiv. [5.1.18 (2418)] the finest mad devil of jealousy’ and Oth. [4.1.150 (2536)] ‘I was a fine fool to take it’); [5.1.108 (3297)].”
1939 kit2
kit2 ≈ john
2914-6 Kittredge (ed. 1939): “Dr. Johnson’s paraphrase is (as usual) highly satisfactory: ‘Love, says Laertes, is the passion by which nature is most exalted and refined, and as substances refined and subtilised, easily obey any impulse, or follow any attraction, some part of nature, so purified and refined, flies off after the attracting object, after the thing it loves.’ Nature is ‘human nature.’”
1942 n&h
n&h ≈ irv2
2914 fine Neilson & Hill (ed. 1942): “delicate.”
1947 cln2
cln2 = Wilson + magenta underlined
2914-6 Rylands (ed. 1947): “‘Nature’ as elsewhere (particularly in King Lear) implies family affections. Dover Wilson paraphrases thus: ‘Filial love is exquisite in its working, and will sacrifice its most precious possession as a proof of its affection for the dear departed.’ The ‘precious token’ in this case is Ophelia’s sanity.”
1947 yal2
yal2
2914-6 Cross & Brooke (ed. 1947): “When we love, nature refined or subtilizes us so that some precious part of ourselves goes like an ‘instance’ (memento or farewell gift) after what we love. Thus Ophelia’s wits have followed Polonius in death.”
1957 pel1
pel1
2914 fine] Farnham (ed. 1957): “refined to purity.”
1974 evns1
evns1 ≈ pel1
2914 fine in] Evans (ed. 1974): “refined or spiritualized by.”
1980 pen2
pen2
2914-6 Spencer (ed. 1980): “filial love is, by nature, very sensitive; and such is its sensitivity that it sends some most precious token of itself to the object of its love – in this case, Ophelia’s sanity departs with her father Polonius. Laertes’s language is typically strained.”
1982 ard2
ard2 ≈ john + magenta underlined
2914-6 Jenkins (ed. 1982): “These ‘obscure and affected’ lines (Johnson) have often given trouble but may be paraphrased: Human nature, when in love, is exquisitely sensitive, and being so, it sends a precious part of itself as a token to follow the object of its love. Thus, the fineness of Ophelia’s love is demonstrated when, after the loved one has gone, her mind goes too. The commentators, with Laertes, always apply the general statement to Ophelia’s love for her father, but the play leaves it open to us to apply it also to her love for Hamlet.”
1984 chal
chal ≈ evns1
2914 fine] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “refined (to its essence).”
1985 cam4
cam4
2914 Edwards (ed. 1985): “Love refines our nature, and this refined nature sends part of itself after the loved one. That is, Ophelia has parted with some of her wits to send to Polonius. This conceit, too absurd even for Laertes, is not in Q2, and its found only in F. Is it possible that for once the Q2 compositor noted a deletion mark overlooked by the playhouse scribe?”
1987 oxf4
oxf4
2914-6 Hibbard (ed. 1987): “i.e. ‘Love . . . is the passion by which [human] nature is most exalted and refined; and as substances, refined and subtilised, easily obey any impulse, or follow any attraction, some part of nature, so purified and refined, flies off after the attracting object, after the thing it loves’.”
1988 bev2
bev2 ≈ chal
2914 fine in] Bevington (ed. 1988): “refined by.”
1993 dent
dent
2914-6 Andrews (ed. 1993): “Nature (and human nature in particular) is shown to be most ’fine’ (pure, refined) when it manifests itself through Love; and where it is present in its noblest form (as in Ophelia’s love for her father), it sends some precious part or sign (‘Instance’) of itself (in this case, Ophelia’s ‘Wits’ or sanity) to the object of its devotion (the ‘Poor Man’s Life’).”
2914
