HW Home	Previous CN	View CN	View TNM	View TNI	Next CN

Line 3474 - Commentary Note (CN)

Commentary notes (CN):

1. SMALL CAPS Indicate editions. Notes for each commentator are divided into three parts:

In the 1st two lines of a record, when the name of the source text (the siglum) is printed in SMALL CAPS, the comment comes from an EDITION; when it is in normal font, it is derived from a book, article, ms. record or other source. We occasionally use small caps for ms. sources and for works related to editions. See bibliographies for complete information (in process).

2. How comments are related to predecessors' comments. In the second line of a record, a label "without attribution" indicates that a prior writer made the same or a similar point; such similarities do not usually indicate plagiarism because many writers do not, as a practice, indicate the sources of their glosses. We provide the designation ("standard") to indicate a gloss in common use. We use ≈ for "equivalent to" and = for "exactly alike."

3. Original comment. When the second line is blank after the writer's siglum, we are signaling that we have not seen that writer's gloss prior to that date. We welcome correction on this point.

4. Words from the play under discussion (lemmata). In the third line or lines of a record, the lemmata after the TLN (Through Line Number] are from Q2. When the difference between Q2 and the authors' lemma(ta) is significant, we include the writer's lemma(ta). When the gloss is for a whole line or lines, only the line number(s) appear. Through Line Numbers are numbers straight through a play and include stage directions. Most modern editions still use the system of starting line numbers afresh for every scene and do not assign line numbers to stage directions.

5. Bibliographic information. In the third line of the record, where we record the gloss, we provide concise bibliographic information, expanded in the bibliographies, several of which are in process.

6. References to other lines or other works. For a writer's reference to a passage elsewhere in Ham. we provide, in brackets, Through Line Numbers (TLN) from the Norton F1 (used by permission); we call these xref, i.e., cross references. We call references to Shakespearean plays other than Ham. “parallels” (//) and indicate Riverside act, scene and line number as well as TLN. We call references to non-Shakespearean works “analogues.”

7. Further information: See the Introduction for explanations of other abbreviations. Click here for more information about browsing the entries and here for more information about the special symbols used in Hamletworks. Click the question mark icon above to remove this help message.

Notes for lines 2951-end ed. Hardin A. Aasand

For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.

3474 Ile doo’t, doost <thou> come heere to whine?	5.1.2

mtby2 1723-33? ms. notes in pope1

mtby2

3474 heere] Thirlby (ms. notes in Pope, ed. 1723 [1723-33?]): “hither but]] I fancy Mr. Pope added it to fill up the verse.”

1853 Col

Col = new note

3474 Ile doo’t] Collier (1853, p. 430): <p. 430>“P. 332 [of col1]. When Hamlet tells Laertes, as the line is printed every where,—’I’ll do’t.—dost thou come here to whine?’ the line clearly wants two syllables; and the corrector of the folio, 1632 [mcol1], makes Hamlet emphatically repeat, ‘I’ll do’t,’ which perfects the measure:—’I’ll do’t: I’ll do’t .—dost thou come here to whine?’ This repetition was probably omitted by the printer accidentally.

The whole speech, beginning, ‘This is mere madness,’ [3482-6] is given to the King in the folios; but it is evident that at least part of it could not have been uttered by him: a new prefix, in the margin of the second folio, assigns the three last lines to the Queen, while the two first are continued as </p. 430> <p. 431> before. In the quartos the Queen delivers all five lines; but it seems more likely that the King should interpose to tell the spectators of the funeral,—’This is mere madness; And thus a while the fit will work on him.’ In consistency with this view, the King, just afterwards, desires Horatio to follow Hamlet, who had rushed out.</p. 431>

1853 Colb

Colb ≈ Col

3474 Ile doo’t]

1853 Sing

Sing : Col

3474 Ile doo’t] Singer (1853, p. 267): “The interpolation of the second I’ll do’t in Hamlet’s speech is as unnecessary as unwarranted; and the transfer of the two lines from the Queen to the King interferes with the consecutive consistency of the whole speech, which is rightly given to the Queen.”

1854 del2

del2

3474 Ile doo’t]Delius (ed. 1854, Nachwort): “Die künstlerische Pause, welche Shakspere hinter I’ll do’t eintreten lässt, vertand der alte Corrector so wenig, dass er sich bemüht sie auszufüllen, freilich auf die wohlfeilste Manier, indem er Hamlet dasselbe noch einmal sagen lässt: I’ll do’t: I’ll do’t.—Collier vermuthet, der Setzer habe das zweite I’ll do’t zufällig ausgelassen Dieser Zufall müsste aber drei verschiedenen Setzern passirt sein, dem der Q.A., dem der Qs. und dem der Fol., denn alle diese von einander unabhängigen Ausbagen haben I’ll do’t nur einmal.” [The artful pause, which Shakespeare allows to enter after I’ll do’t, the old Corrector understood so little that he takes the trouble to pad it, freely in a cheap manner, in which he has Hamlet say the same line once more: I’ll do’t: I’ll do it—Collier supposed the compositor had left out the second “I’ll do’t” by accident. This accident must have been passed on through three different compositors, that of [Q1], that of the Qq and that of the Folio, if all of these independent publications have I’ll do’t only once. ]

1857 elze1

elze1: mcol1

3474 Ile doo’t] Elze (ed. 1857): "MC verdoppelt diese Worte, wodurch er den Vers fünfffüssig gemacht hat. Mommsen P.-S. 367 findet dem MC zu Liebe gerade diese Verdopelung sehr passend." [mcol1 doubles these words, by which it made the verse five [metric] feet.Mommsen P.-S 367 finds very suitable mcol1’s affection for even this doubling.]

1882 elze2

Elze2

3474 Ile doo’t] elze (ed. 1882): “In order to produce a regular blank-verse Mr. Collier (MS [mcol1]) has repeated the words Ile doo’t, whilst an anymous critic (apud Furness) proposes to read I’ll do it too. Ile doo’t is, however, the unanimous reading of [Q1] (doot), [Q2] and [F1]. The correct way of completing the line, in my opinion, is by adding Laertes: Dost thou come heere to whine Laertes? Compare notes on § § 59 [918], 62 [972], 172 [2745] and 195 [can not find corresponding note here]. 213 [3435].”

1885 Mull

Mull

3474-6 Mull (ed. 1885, pp. lvii): <p. lvii> “‘Dost thou come heere to whine, To outface me with leaping in her graue, [To] be buried quick with her? and so will I; And if thou prate of mountains, let them throw Millions of acres on us till our ground, Singeing its [sic] pate against the burning zone, Make Ossa like a wart; nay, an thou’lt mouth, I’ll rant as well as thou.’ The alterations I have made in the punctuation of this passage are of importance. The punctuation of all the editions is as follows: ‘Dost thou come heere to whine? To out-face me with leaping in her graue? Be buried quicke with her, and so will I; And, if thou prate of mountains, let them throw Millions of Acres on vs, till our ground, Singeing its [sic] pate against the burning zone, Make Ossa like a wart! Nay an thou’lt mouth, I’ll rant as well as thou.’ Here Hamlet is made to ask two questions, but I contend that he propounds three, as shown by my treatment; and the lines immediately following demonstrate that there are three. He rehearses and declaims them thus—

“(1) So will I be buried alive with her:

“(2) If thou prate of mountains of earth being thrown over you, let them be thrown over me too:

“(3) And if thou’lt mouth or whine, I’ll rant as well as thou.

“The accepted treatment erroneously gives the imperative form to the verb ‘Be buried,’ when it should obviously be the indicative as in the two previous lines, and treated as one of three questions. The passage is mutilated by not closing the series of interrogatories at the middle of [3476]; thus the emphatic character of Hamlet’s reply immediately following is rendered weak and feeble, as also are the other two.” </p. lvii>

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3474 doost come] Wilson (1934, 2:251) sees the Q2 reading as reflecting a “probable” omission of the Ff reading.