Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

As with much of William Shakespeare’s work, it is difficult to determine exact dates of writing and production of Hamlet, but most scholars place the appearance of the play at around 1599-1602.

There are three primary published texts:

First Quarto -1603 � often referred to as the “bad quarto�

Second Quarto � 1604 � referred to as the “good quarto�

First Folio � 1623 � published after Shakespeare’s death, and included his “Complete Works�


For our discussions, I strongly recommend you acquire a copy of the Second Quarto version. The Second Quarto is considered to be the most complete as a literary work, and likely to be the version which Shakespeare might have “authorized�, although as with all academic subjects, there is some disagreement about the particulars of that argument. Most modern editions will specify which version is used in the book. Anyway, try to locate a Second Quarto version if you can.


Wikipedia page for William Shakespeare:




Wikipedia page for Hamlet:




Both of the Wikipedia pages include links to numerous sources for texts, interpretations, critical approaches, etc.

Feel free to use this thread to ask questions and post links to resources for William Shakespeare and his play, Hamlet.

Also, if you’ve written a review of the book, please post a link to share with the group.

is a wonderful resource where various performers talk about the play and the character of Hamlet. What they have to say is quite fascinating.

However, it may be better to listen to it after you've read the play, if you don't want any preconceived ideas interfering with your first exposure to it.

I was leafing through the supporting material in my old Norton Critical edition (yes, I'm another fan of those) and decided to look up the latest edition to see what supplements were added. The new (well, 2010) edition has an entirely new editor and the contents are radically different.

The old Hoy edition (Hamlet: An Authoritative Text, Intellectual Backgrounds, Extracts from the Sources, Essays in Criticism) deals with how death, spirits, and the nature of man were viewed by Shakespeare's contemporaries, and provides two sources for the Hamlet story. The new Miola edition (Hamlet (Critical Editions)) seems to pay more attention to classical writings (Dante, the Bible) and modern criticism of the play, with only one of the original sources of the story.

I always welcome an excuse to revisit Hamlet, and this time I have a bunch of supplementary material to read following the play: Fortinbras, Hamletmachine, and Dogg's Hamlet, Cahoot's Macbeth are all at the ready.

For the main text, I will be using the Cyrus Hoy edition of the Norton Critical, though I will be using supporting material from both Norton criticals.

Mkfs wrote: "I was leafing through the supporting material in my old Norton Critical edition (yes, I'm another fan of those) and decided to look up the latest edition to see what supplements were added. The new..."

Do you know which Quarto or Folio they used?

Both are Second Quarto.

There is an interesting Oxford edition released in 2008 that is First Folio: an attempt to recreate the play as it was staged, back in the Day.

Perhaps next time I'll use that one.

Mkfs wrote: "Both are Second Quarto.

There is an interesting Oxford edition released in 2008 that is First Folio: an attempt to recreate the play as it was staged, back in the Day.

Perhaps next time I'll use ..."

I'm just finishing up an online course on Hamlet. The first folio includes a scene between Gertrude and Horatio where we get some insight into her feelings about her son. In some ways, this small exchange humanizes Gertrude and affects our perception of her. I'll see if I can find the text and post it here.

Conversation relocated from the Act 1 Discussion:



Elizabeth wrote: Tracy, I've always wanted to see Shakespeare done in authentic accents, i.e. American Appalachian (at least that's what my linguistics professors taught me--that that accent is the closest to 16 century England; what the Brits call "received pronunciation" is only about 200 years old).

Poncho wrote: Elizabeth, you remind me of this video,

which I found a while ago though I didn't know any of Shakespeare's work at the time. Is this what your teacher was talking about?

Elizabeth wrote: Thanks, Poncho; the video was neat. But it's not what I was talking about. Watch one called "Appalachian English" and you'll see what I mean. E.g. my father used a lot of Shakespearean (not to say Chaucerian) speech forms: "cloomb" for "climbed"; "holp" for "helped," etc.

Relocated from the ACT I discussion, some advice about reading Shakespeare out loud:


Elizabeth wrote: Note to all Shakespeare beginners; I used to tell my classes this: Read it aloud! It was not meant to be read silently; in fact, the optimum is to read it aloud with a partner.


Justin wrote: Great point, Elizabeth! I'm having a great time reading this aloud to my wife. I don't always think she's listening, but then she'll laugh at a line or two (or my attempt to read it). It's been a fun way to spend snowy evenings.

My high school teacher had us read it aloud. At first, we were a sceptical crowd, but saying it out loud made many of us much more engaged and curious. Great suggestion, Elizabeth.

Thanks, Jim, for the link to the father and son demonstrating the difference the Old Pronunciation makes. I will want in the future to seek out Shakespeare delivered in OP. I have always suspected because of the non-working rhymes that there were more puns and word play inShakespeare than apparent in today's print editions.

I am enjoying the comments of all participants as I read Hamlet with the group. Looking forward to the discussion of Infinite Jest.

Linda wrote: "Thanks, Jim, for the link to the father and son demonstrating the difference the Old Pronunciation makes. I will want in the future to seek out Shakespeare delivered in OP. I have always suspected ..."

Glad you enjoyed the video. Poncho found and posted it.

I started Infinite Jest a few days ago and I can't help but see the links with Hamlet.

Jim wrote: "I started Infinite Jest a few days ago and I can't help but see the links with Hamlet. "

I've never had any desire to read Infinite Jest, but the Hamlet connection might make me do it. Still deciding.

A couple of Hamlet-related things that have cropped up since this year's re-read:

The introduction to The Works of Thomas Kyd contains a section on the in which the editor, Boas, makes his case for Thomas Kyd being the author of the Ur-Hamlet. For our purposes, the most interesting piece of evidence is that the narrative differences between Shakespeare's Hamlet and the are all present in Kyd's Spanish Tragedy: the ghost demanding vengeance, Hamlet's interest in Ophelia, the character of Laertes, the play-within-a-play to catch out the villain. At the very least, one could view Shakepseare's play as an attempt to ride on the success of Kyd's popular revenge play, using Saxo's Amleth story (and/or the alleged Ur-Hamlet) as a suitable vehicle.

The second thing is a book I stumbled upon at the Strand today: The Mystery of Hamlet, King of Denmark. This is a collection of four plays that serve as a prologue to Hamlet. I'll give it a read over the holidays, maybe post an update if there is anything good.