Talk:Hamlet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Hamlet is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 27, 2008.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Shakespeare (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Theatre (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Elizabethan theatre
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elizabethan theatre, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the theatre and dramatic literature in England between 1558 and 1642 on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Language and literature.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 


Leading Tragedian?[edit]

The article says, "He [Shakespeare] almost certainly created the title role for Richard Burbage, the leading tragedian of Shakespeare's time." However, the article on Edward Alleyn says "He was rated by common consent as the foremost actor of his time; his only close rival was Richard Burbage." The inconsistency is obvious. So I suggest a change in the Hamlet article language, replacing "the leading tragedian..." with "the leading actor of Shakespeare's company the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later the King's Men." I'll go ahead and make the change, since I do think it needs to be made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.136.212 (talk) 15:05, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. I disagree with this change. That Alleyn is "the foremost actor" is not necessarily in conflict with Burbage being "the leading tragedian" ("tragedians" are a subset of "actors"). Furthermore, the text in this article is quadruply cited (to Taylor, Banham, Hattaway, and Thomson), while the relevant part of Alleyn's article is cited to internetshakespeare.uvic.ca (which, while not a poor source per se, must be given less weight relatively speaking).
Further, I find the related prose changes to be needlessly complicating (the new information brings little added value, but at steep cost to prose quality).
I am therefore going to revert your entire edit. --Xover (talk) 19:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Opera adaptations[edit]

It seems odd to me that this article makes no mention of opera adaptations of the play, a topic covered thoroughly in many other Shakespear play articles on wikipedia. There should at least be a mention of Ambroise Thomas's Hamlet in this article which undoubtedly the most important opera adaptation. Several other composers have adapted the play. Please see here for other examples. 4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Deterioration of the References section[edit]

I just quickly scanned the References section and note quite a bit of deterioration in the form of references to bare URLs, footnotes with the whole citation in the note (instead of Author Date), and some that at least superficially appear to be to very low quality sources. I've added a cleanup of this to my todo list and when I get around to it I plan to not just fix these but also backtrack the relevant refs back to the main body text and prune mercilessly where I think there is correlation between poor sourcing and poor additions to the article. You may consider this fair warning. :-)

While I'm at it I may (not sure yet, it's a big job and may not be worth it) also convert everything over to citation templates to ensure consistent formatting and enabling structured metadata (most likely using {{sfn}}, {{efn}}, {{reflist}}, and {{notelist}}).

Comments or objections would be most welcome, but preferably before I start work on it so I don't waste my time. It'll probably be at least a couple of weeks (and I'm apt to be distracted, so may well be longer), but please do share your comments sooner rather than later so that we have time to reach a proper consensus. I know most of the regular editors in the Shakespeare project don't check this talk page very frequently so I like to leave plenty of time for interested editors to be able to comment. --Xover (talk) 18:25, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Video game mention[edit]

If this is going to be categorized under "Plays adapted into video games", wouldn't it be worth mentioning the video game somewhere?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet_(video_game) Rampage470 (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Salvageable bit from Philosophy?[edit]

I've removed the following bit from the Philosophical section.

Text moved from Philosophical section

Nevertheless, if the sentence is analysed in the textual context[1] it is easy to understand how Hamlet was being sarcastic: "Man delights not me", he concludes. Amaral[2] argues that this is the result of melancholy. This condition was a main subject of philosophy in this epoch. After a period of confidence in reason's ability to unveil reality (Renaissance), 'Mannerism' started questioning its power. Hamlet shows traces of this. In this sense, Hamlet is not feigning madness, but he is indeed trapped between the world everybody expects him to see (the lies told by Claudius and accepted by all, i.e. social decorum) and the world revealed to him by knowledge (the reality of the murdering, as testified by his father's ghost). This condition of being trapped between two different ways of seeing reality was also pictured by Shakespeare's contemporary Cervantes, in Don Quixote. This profound meditation was examined by the philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer in The World as Will and Representation. Schopenhauer uses Hamlet to clarify his main argument. He argues that the world as we see it is a conjunction of representations. These representations are formed by the projection of our will towards the world. We can only see objects of our desires. In this sense he argues that only art could show us that reality is such a construct. Exactly as Hamlet did: "If the whole world as representation is only the visibility of the will, then art is the elucidation of this visibility, the camera obscura which shows the objects more purely, and enables us to survey and comprehend them better. It is the play within the play, the stage on the stage in Hamlet." [3]

In his openness to embrace the ghost's message, Hamlet assuages Horatio's wonderment with the analytical assertion, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."


References

  1. ^ Hamlet Act II, scene 2 "and indeed, it goes so heavily with my disposition; that this goodly frame the earth, seems to me a sterile promontory; this most excellent canopy the air, look you, this brave o'er hanging firmament, this majestical roof, fretted with golden fire: why, it appeareth no other thing to me, than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours. What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an Angel! in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world! The paragon of animals! And yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so."
  2. ^ http://www.dominiopublico.gov.br/pesquisa/DetalheObraForm.do?select_action=&co_obra=110021
  3. ^ Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation, Vol. I, translated by E. F. J. Payne, Dover Publications, 1969, pp. 266–267.

I can't make heads not tails of the text, and it is in any case in dire need of copy-editing, and the two cites are suboptimal (one looks like someone's dissertation, in Portugese I think, and the other looks like a pretty blatant copyvio). Anyways, I've removed it from the article but I'm leaving it here in case someone feels like having a go at salvaging it. --Xover (talk) 20:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)