The Importance of the Origin of the First Quarto of Hamlet Essays

The Importance of the Origin of the First Quarto of playlet Ofel Alas, what a change is this? Ham But if thou wilt needes marry, marry a foole, For wisemen know well enough, What monsters you make of them, to a Nunnery goe. Ofel Pray God restore him. Ham Nay, I have heard of your painting too, God hath giuen you one face, And you make your selues another, --HAMLET, Prince of Denmarke, The First Quarto The form of address page of the second quarto of Hamlet claims that the textbook beneath it is Newly imprinted and enlarged to almost as much / againe as it was, according to the true and perfect / Coppie. Taking this at face value, three facts demand follow That there is at least one earlier edition (or else this one could not be newly imprinted...again) that the earlier edition was shorter (or else this one could not be enlarged) and that this quarto does not include some lines from the perfect Coppie (since it is almost as much). Indeed, a First Quarto exists dated a year earl ier (1603) Q1 is shorter some 1600 lines and the Folio does restore certain seemingly authorial passages. It appears as if I.R., the printer, or N.L., the publisher, is correct on all possible counts. We cannot purge condemn I.R. or N.L. for self-interested advertising. They admit that their copy is almost, but not quite, perfect.* Thus we might wish to take seriously one further point that the title page tries to make, namely, that the earlier quarto was neither true nor perfect, and therefore is corrupted not simply in its brevity, but also in the presentation of the text which it actually does contain. This would mean that Q1 did not use the true and perfect Coppie as its copy-text. It does not seem preposterous to rephras... ...ay. The strategic early placing of the To be or not to be, I theres the point monologue gives it less weight than it has in Q2, as if it were the beginning of Hamlets train of thought as opposed to the turning point we ofttimes think it is when we take aim a modern edition. Indeed, the point is more absolute than the question. Hamlet does not fight with himself to solve a line, but merely expresses what that problem is. To argue that this is oversimplification is to oversimplify it is a revision. It is an Elizabethan argument, positing that a truly revengeful Hamlet would definitely shy away from suicide for hope of salvation, part the confused avenger Hamlet would probably shy away from suicide for fear of punishment. That in itself sheds light on the pop psychology of the day, and thus how we ought to read Hamlets psychology in the context of its time.