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

Line 3768, etc. - 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.

3768 King. I doe not think’t.	5.2.295

3769 Laer. And yet {it is} <’tis> almost {against} <’gainst> my conscience.

1854 Walker

Walker

3769 Walker (1854, p. 177): <p. 177>“we should read with the Folio,—’And yet’t is almost ‘gainst my conscience.’” </p. 177>

Walker here deals with ‘dissolutè’ of pronunciation in “conscience,” which would have three syllables; hence, his agreement with the folio, which elides enough syllables to allow this to scan.

1864-68 c&mc

c&mc

3769 conscience] Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1864-68, rpt. 1874-78): “This symptom of relenting is not only a redeeming touch in the character of Laer. (and Sh., in his large tolerance and true knowledge of human nature, is fond of giving these redeeming touches even to his worst characters), but it forms a judiciously interposed link between the young man’s previous determination to treacherously take the Prince’s life and his subsequent revealment of the treachery. From the deliberate malice of becoming the agent in such a plot, to the remorseful candor which confesses it, would have been to violent and too abrupt a moral change, had not the dramatist with his usual skill, introduced this connecting point of half compunction.”

1877 v1877

v1877 ≈ clarke

3769 conscience] Clarke (apud Furness, ed. 1877): “This symptom of relenting is not only a redeeming touch in the character of Laer. (and Sh., in his large tolerance and true knowledge of human nature, is fond of giving these redeeming touches even to his worst characters), but it forms a judiciously interposed link between the young man’s previous determination to take the Prince’s life treacherously, and his subsequent revealment of the treachery. From the deliberate malice of becoming the agent in sucha plot, to the remorseful candor which confesses it, would have been to violent and too abrupt a moral change, had not the dramatist, with his usual skill, introduced this connecting point of half compunction.”

1882 elze2

elze2≈ Walker

3769 Laer. And yet it is almost against my conscience] Elze (ed. 1882): “[Q1]: ‘And yet it goes almost against my conscience; [F1] And yet ‘tis almost ‘gainst my conscience. The agreement of [Q1] and [Q2] (apart from goes for is) decides against [F1], the more so as the reading of [F1] requires conscienceto be pronounced as a trisyllable.”

1885 macd

macd

3769 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “He has compunctions, but it needs failure to make them potent.”

1934 Wilson

Wilson

3769 Wilson (1934, 2:233): <p. 233> “Here [with Q2’s reading of it is and against] Mr Bayfield would, I have little doubt, declare for Q2 without hesitation [over F1]; and he might quote the Cambridge text and Dr Johnson himself on his side. Yet if we take ‘conscience’ as a trisyllable, as it always is in Shakespeare, it is difficult to read the Q2 line as anything but prose.” </p. 233>

1939 kit2

kit2 ≈ v1877 w/o attribution

3769 Laer. And yet it is almost against my conscience]

1980 Frye, Northrop

Frye

3769 Frye (1980, p. 97): “Just as Hamlet, in spite of the powerful push to revenge given by the Ghost, could not bring himself to assassinate Claudius without warning, so Laertes, with both father and sister to avenge, feels ashamed of his poisoning scheme [3132-9].”

1985 cam4

cam4 contra rowe

3769 Edwards (ed. 1985): “Rowe made this an aside, and many editions follows. But it is possible that Laertes is speaking directly to the king. The reader, actor or director must make his own decision, and an editor’s stage direction ought not to restrict his freedom.”