Friday, May 8, 2020
What Freud thinks of HAMLET
Oh boy would Freud have SO MUCH TO SAY TO HAMLET — the end of the ART AND AUDIENCE packet!
6 comments:
INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT COMMENTING!!! If you are a current student of mine please include your first and last name somewhere. (You don’t have to log in to make a comment, but if you log in with your gmail account your name and image will be there automatically). Ask QUESTIONS, or give OPINIONS WITH REASONS or ADD something to the discussion with EXAMPLES! If for some reason your comments disappear — JUST EMAIL ME YOUR COMMENTS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well this was interesting & disturbing!
ReplyDeleteI was wondering if there was anything included in the play that implies Claudius could be Hamlet's biological father? Or is it more of just questioning that possibility based off of Hamlet's similar behavior to him?
-Delaney Murray
The reason the theory exists is that it unifies some of the different mysteries — it explains why Hamlet has such a hard time killing Claudius (because he suspects that this is his biological dad but is not sure) why he is obsessed with his mother’s sex life (because her ranging sexual desires may have caused her to have an affair that resulted in his birth) and why he is mean to Ophelia (the situation with him mom is so unbearable that he displaces it only Ophelia accusing her of being lustful and deceitful in excess of her situation). That combined with the detail that Hamlet Sr was at battle in another country when Hamlet was born and that Hamlet is more like Claudius than Hamlet Sr (tho I think his real spiritual father is Yorrik)
DeleteDamn this is interesting and funny. Ive never even thought about the possibility of Claudius being Ham’s dad! That is such an interesting idea and now i need to know the truth.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Adlin
There is no truth here, as Foucault would point out! Just competing interpretations! It goes on FOREVER
DeleteI like the fact that Laurence Olivier was inspired by and choose to closely observe Freud's philosophy in his adaptation of HAMLET, but I am also troubled about whether or not this makes the work more or less original, just like in general, cinematic adaptations of literary works of art do not possess the same spirit as their source material (i.e. the book was better than the movie!). Perhaps I am not being appreciative enough, though, as the newer version of the art, whether it have philosophy embedded or be comprised as a completely new take, is still art (like how Luhrmann's ROMEO AND JULIET adaptation, which I have yet to fully see, is wonderful despite not necessarily following the intentions of Shakespeare).
ReplyDeleteMovies are often MUCH better than books — Godfather, Solaris, Fight Club, Psycho, Vertigo, Third Man, I COULD GO ON. I think a heavy engagement with freud is too unusual not to result in originality but I take you point. Intentions are hard to see — that R&J might be my favorite Shakespeare
Delete