• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Shakespeare

I always took it as a construct of the characters' imagination.

Having said that, it wouldn't be surprising (to me at least) if he did.
 
It seems WS lived a good number of years and if he never experienced such manifestations he would have been smart enough to use it as a crutch in his plays.
 
332nd said:
I always took it as a construct of the characters' imagination.

Having said that, it wouldn't be surprising (to me at least) if he did.
Click to expand...


That's the mass-hallucination theory, since multiple characters do report seeing the ghost. First it's Marcellus and Bernardo, who report it to Horatio, who sees the ghost and reports it to Hamlet and talks (after a fashion) to the ghost. I don't think that WS intended for that interpretation. I think it's a more straight-forward ghost story -- there really is a ghost of King Hamlet, and he really wants his son to get off his duff and get their revenge.

As for WS and his personal belief in ghosts -- not enough data to compute.
 
Ghosts are good drama for they are sort of like Superman ie beyond the reach of man and of course they aren't bothered by Krytonite:D
 
I would think he believed in them. Magic, Witchcraft, Spirits etc were taken to be everyday things.
 
hgc said:
That's the mass-hallucination theory, since multiple characters do report seeing the ghost. First it's Marcellus and Bernardo, who report it to Horatio, who sees the ghost and reports it to Hamlet and talks (after a fashion) to the ghost. I don't think that WS intended for that interpretation. I think it's a more straight-forward ghost story -- there really is a ghost of King Hamlet, and he really wants his son to get off his duff and get their revenge.

As for WS and his personal belief in ghosts -- not enough data to compute.
Click to expand...

Oh that's what makes WS so great imo. Multiple interpretations work so well with his material. Hell, I was part of a production of Hamlet that ran with the idea that Claudius was actually Hamlet's real father.
 
332nd said:
Oh that's what makes WS so great imo. Multiple interpretations work so well with his material. Hell, I was part of a production of Hamlet that ran with the idea that Claudius was actually Hamlet's real father.
Click to expand...

How could that work without changing the text? Hamlet is thirty and a thirty year affair is not in the text.
 
Last edited:
WS as a genius, likely decided ghosts were BS but ok for plays. But for the average yeoman the night was faced with only a candle. Whereas with our modern videos and recordings we are able to watch and listen to the departed and our imagination may not be a free ranging. Also, no church burns witches these days.
 
Last edited:
Shakespeare:
Henry IV Part 1 -- Act 3, Scene 1, Page 3
GLENDOWER:
I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
HOTSPUR:
Why, so can I, or so can any man,
But will they come when you do call for them?
Click to expand...

I think that Shakespeare was as rational as you or I (well I anyway :p)
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Shakespeare:
Henry IV Part 1 -- Act 3, Scene 1, Page 3


I think that Shakespeare was as rational as you or I (well I anyway :p)
Click to expand...
Very true. I could not compose a line of Hamlet etc. If he lived today what kind of literature do you think he would author? I would guess Sci FI.
 
Gord_in_Toronto said:
Shakespeare:
Henry IV Part 1 -- Act 3, Scene 1, Page 3


I think that Shakespeare was as rational as you or I (well I anyway :p)
Click to expand...

errrr. I think I go along with the earlier posters - "Nobody Knows".

Actually, I've always assumed that Shakespeare would not believe in ghosts because, well, he's Shakespeare. But, after actually giving it a bit of thought, it occurred to me that I'm a sceptic, this is a forum for sceptics, but almost all of Shakespeare's educated contemporaries were not sceptical - they might vacillate, but they were caught between the demon-haunted medieval world and the very beginnings of modern science. We look back on Shakespeare's time from beyond the Age of Reason.

Some examples from after Shakespeare's time:
Sir Thomas Brown, an ardent student of the latest science, believed in witches and ghosts.
So did the most intellectual (male) monarch England has ever had, James I.
Newton believed in astrology and Boyle in alchemy.

Examples of sceptics from Shakespeare's time:
Montaigne
Bacon

Anyway, who's to say that, Shakespeare didn't change his mind about things occasionally? I'll probably change my mind about this topic. And we know almost nothing about him personally.
 
Fellow Traveler said:
Do you think WS believed in Ghosts as in Macbeth etc; or was it a dramatic vehicle?
Click to expand...

Well, lest we have to leash in Senex's fertile imagination, let's not tell him, but.....

Different ghosts/different interpretations. Banquo's Ghost, as written could very well be seen as a product of Macbeth's imagination. Macbeth murdered Banquo but the plot failed because it wasn't Banquo he was after, but his heirs - his son was the equal target. (The 3 witches had predicted that Macbeth would be king and Banquo not, but that Banquo would sire a line of kings. Macbeth wanted to prevent that.)

More important is that the ghost is not seen nor reported by anyone else. It is solely visible to Macbeth. The ghost later shows up in a return of the three witches, confirming that a long line of his descendants would be king. But those are the only references - the banquet where the ghost appears to only Macbeth and the witches who are "magical" anyway. I don't personally believe Banquo's Ghost is meant to be an illusion from Macbeth's guilt, but as I said, the argument could be made. (Much better than arguing that about Hamlet's Father. Harrumph!)

Considering that at the time it was written it was widely believed that one of those actual descendants was sitting on the throne of England, and that Wm. Shakespeare was known for not currying royal disfavor, that is also arguably why Banquo is cleaned up (the real Banquo was actually heavily involved in the murder, unlike the fictional one).

I stated in the other thread that Shakespeare WROTE the ghosts to be real. I'm not sure if he believed in ghosts/spirits, or not. What is known is that his audience did and just like Stephen King, it doesn't matter if the demons, spooks, ghosts, etc.... could really exist or whether the author truly believes in them. What matters is that for the purposes of that drama or fiction the ghosts are real... in the story. (Unless the plot reveals otherwise.)
 
Senex said:
As far as I know Shakespeare's ghosts never bring new intelligence to the story. The interpretation that the ghost is all in the character's head always works.

And it works for a reason.
Click to expand...

How does Hamlet know how Claudius killed his father, if not from The Ghost?

Do you argue that the witches are real but Banquo's ghost is not? If the witches aren't real, how does Macbeth know he is Thane of Cawdor?

Also, the spirits in The Tempest and A Midsummer Night's Dream (Ariel, Puck) are clearly real in the context of the story. Ariel tells Prospero most of the things that happen offstage in the play. Is Prospero a charlatan?
 
Rosencrantz said:
How does Hamlet know how Claudius killed his father, if not from The Ghost?
Click to expand...
Poisoning was ubiquatous back then. No ghost was needed to tell you.
Do you argue that the witches are real but Banquo's ghost is not? If the witches aren't real, how does Macbeth know he is Thane of Cawdor?
Click to expand...
Never underestimate your neighbors' desire to mess with your head.
Also, the spirits in The Tempest and A Midsummer Night's Dream (Ariel, Puck) are clearly real in the context of the story. Ariel tells Prospero most of the things that happen offstage in the play. Is Prospero a charlatan?
Click to expand...
Let's stick with ghosts.
 
I've always considered Hamlet's dad's ghost to have been Polonius in disguise, trying to stir up trouble a la Littlefinger. Banquo's ghost, however, was a Shining-style mental projection send unconsciously by Mrs MacBeth, who doesn't know it but has multiple personalities. She's also one of the three witches.

And King Lear isn't King Lear, he's the fourth ungrateful daughter, driven to madness by her father's suicide and now convinced she is him.

I wrote a lot of papers in college, and alternately delighted and terrified my professors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom