哈姆雷特参考文献论文集

Hamlet and Ophelia, by Dante Gabriel RossettiPrince Hamlet is the main character in Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet.Views of HamletPerhaps the most straightforward view sees Hamlet as seeking truth in order to be certain that he is justified in carrying out the revenge called for by a ghost that claims to be the spirit of his father. The most standard view is that Hamlet is highly indecisive, which is the view as proposed by Coleridge, and a number of other critics. "Shakespeare wished to impress upon us the truth, that action is the chief end to existence". The 1948 movie with Laurence Olivier in the title role is introduced by a voiceover: "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind."T.S. Eliot offers a similar view of Hamlet's character in his critical essay, "Hamlet and His Problems" (The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism). He states, "We find Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' not in the action, not in any quotations that we might select, so much as in an unmistakable tone...".Others see Hamlet as a person charged with a duty that he both knows and feels is right, yet is unwilling to carry out. In this view, all of his efforts to satisfy himself of King Claudius' guilt, or his failure to act when he can, are evidence of this unwillingness, and Hamlet berates himself for his inability to carry out his task. After observing a play-actor performing a scene, he notes that the actor was moved to tears in the passion of the story and compares this passion for an ancient Greek character, Hecuba, in light of his own situation:Hamlet reclines next to Ophelia in Edwin Austin Abbey's The Play Scene in Hamlet"O, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!Is it not monstrous that this player here,But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,Could force his soul so to his own conceitThat from her working all his visage wan'd;Tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect,A broken voice, and his whole function suitingWith forms to his conceit? And all for nothing!For Hecuba?What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,That he should weep for her?" […]Etymology of HamletHamlet’s name is one filled with meaning and controversy. The name Hamlet occurs as early as the tenth century. His name is easily derived in form from Belleforest and the lost play from Amlethus of Saxo, and remaining in this form is then derived from its Latin form of the old Jutish Amlethoe. From this point the name can be divided into sections with common meanings. In terms of etymology the root name of Hamlet is an Icelandic noun, Amlooi, meaning ‘fool.’ However this name is derived from the way that Hamlet acts in the play and is not in all actuality the true Etymology of the name since the meaning is found through the actions of Hamlet. The second way of translating the name is by analyzing the noun aml-ooi into ‘raving mad’ and the second half, amla into ‘routine’. Later these names were incorporated into Irish dialect as Amlodhe. As phonetic laws took their course the name’s spelling changed eventually leaving it as Amlaidhe. This Irish name was given to a hero in a common folk story. The route of this name is ‘furious, raging, wild.’ These are all meanings of which Shakespeare would have been aware of when deciding on the name for his longest play.[1]AsimovAnother view of Hamlet, advanced by Isaac Asimov in his Guide to Shakespeare, holds that his actions are attributable not to indecision, but to multiple motivations: his desire to avenge the wrong done to his father, coupled with his own ambition to succeed to the throne. The tragic error committed by Hamlet, in Asimov's view, is his overreaching wish to see Claudius damned, and not merely dead, which prevents him from killing Claudius at the opportune moment.Influence of the ReformationMarcellus, Horatio, Hamlet, and the Ghost by Henry Fuseli.It has also been suggested that Hamlet's hesitations may also be rooted in the religious beliefs of Shakespeare's time. The Reformation had generated debate about the existence of purgatory (where King Hamlet claims he currently resides). The concept of purgatory is a Catholic one, and was frowned on in Protestant England. It is possible that Hamlet's own logic ought to be taken seriously. Hamlet says that he will not kill his uncle because death would send him straight to heaven, while his father (having died without foreknowledge of his death) is in purgatory doing penance for his. Hamlet's opportunity to kill his uncle comes just after the uncle has supposedly made his peace with God. Hamlet says that he would much rather take a stab at the murderer while he is frolicking in the incestuous sheets, or gambling and drinking, so he could be sure of his going straight to Hell.Freudian interpretationErnest Jones, following the work of Freud, held that Hamlet suffered from the 'Oedipus complex'. He said in his essay "The Oedipus-Complex as An Explanation of Hamlet's Mystery: A Study in Motive":His moral fate is bound up with his uncle's for good or ill. The call of duty to slay his uncle cannot be obeyed because it links itself with the call of his nature to slay his mother's husband, whether this is the first or the second; the latter call is strongly "repressed," and therefore necessarily the former also.Interestingly, Harold Bloom did a "Shakespearean Criticism" of Freud's work in response.As a mirror of the audienceInnokenty Smoktunovsky as Hamlet in the acclaimed 1964 film by Grigori Kozintsev.It has also been suggested that Hamlet, who is described by Ophelia as "th’ expectancy and rose of the fair state, / The glass of fashion and the mould of form" (Act III, Scene i, lines 148-9), is ultimately a reflection of all of the interpretations possessed by other characters in the play—and perhaps also by the members of an audience watching him. Polonius, most obviously, has a habit of misreading his own expectations into Hamlet’s actions ("Still harping on my daughter!"), though many other characters in the play participate in analogous behaviour.Gertrude has a similar tendency to interpret all of her son’s activities as the result of her "o’erhasty marriage" alone. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tend to find the stalled ambitions of a courtier in their former schoolmate’s behaviour, whereas Claudius seems to be concerned with Hamlet’s motivation only so far as it reveals the degree to which his nephew is a potential threat. Ophelia, like her father, waits in vain for Hamlet to give her signs of affection, and Horatio would have little reason to think that Hamlet was concerned with anything more pressing than the commandment of the ghost. And the First Gravedigger seems to think that Prince Hamlet, like that "whoreson mad fellow” Yorick, is simply insane without any need for explanation. Several critics, including Stephen Booth and William Empson have further investigated the analogous relationship between Hamlet, the play, and its audience.Nevertheless, over the last four centuries Prince Hamlet has become an icon in the entire western consciousness: the definition of what it means to be intelligent, and perhaps, fully human.Hamlet's parallels with other charactersOne aspect of Hamlet's character is the way in which he reflects other characters, including the play's primary antagonist, Claudius. In the play within a play, for instance, Gonzago, the king, is murdered in the garden by his nephew, Lucianus; although King Hamlet is murdered by his brother, in the Mousetrap , the regicide is a nephew, like Prince Hamlet. However, it is also worth noting that each of the characters in the play-within-a-play maps to two major characters in Hamlet, an instance of the play's many doubles:Lucianus, like Hamlet, is both a regicide and a nephew to the king; like Claudius, he is a regicide that operates by pouring poison into ears.The Player King, like Hamlet, is an erratic melancholic; like King Hamlet, he is poisoned via his ear while reclining in his orchard.The Player Queen, like Ophelia, attends to a character that is "so far from cheer and from [a] former state"; like Gertrude, she remarries a regicide.Hamlet is also, in some form, a reflection of most other characters in the play (or perhaps vice versa):Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Pyrrhus are all avenging sons. Hamlet and Laertes both blame Claudius for the death of their fathers. Hamlet and Pyrrhus are both seized by inaction at some point in their respective narratives and each avenges his father. Hamlet and Fortinbras both have plans that are thwarted by uncles that are also kings.Hamlet, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Osric and Polonius are all courtiers.Hamlet, his father, Bernardo, Marcellus, Francisco, Fortinbras and several other characters are all soldiers.Hamlet and his father share a name (as do Fortinbras and his father).Hamlet, Horatio, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Laertes are all students.Hamlet, his father, Gertrude and Claudius are all members of the Royal Family. Each of them is also killed by poison -- poison that Claudius is responsible for.Hamlet and Ophelia are each rebuked by their surviving parent in subsequent scenes; the surviving parent of each happens to be of the opposite gender. Both also enter scenes reading books and there is a contrast between the (possibly) pretend madness of Hamlet and the very real insanity of Ophelia.Hamlet, Horatio, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Claudius are each "lawful espials" at some point in the play.

[1]李英安. 东西方导演眼中的哈姆雷特[D]. 上海戏剧学院: 上海戏剧学院,2010. [2]袁仑. 《哈姆雷特》中的延宕[D]. 复旦大学: 复旦大学,2010. [3]阿胜 编译. “哈姆雷特”上演新版复仇记[N]. 医药经济报,2004-07-16(A06). [4]邱食存. 不朽的哈姆雷特——从雷奥提斯与哈姆雷特之异论起[J]. 陇东学院学报(社会科学版),2006,(3). [5]邵雪萍. 《丹麦王子哈姆雷特的悲剧》与后现代的相遇——《哈姆雷特谋杀案》为解读莎剧开辟新思路[J]. 戏剧文学,2011,(3). [6]黄金京. 《哈姆雷特》与圣经原型——《哈姆雷特》在艺术形式上对圣经原型的借鉴[J]. 怀化学院学报,2011,(3). [7]孙艳娜. “人人都是哈姆雷特”——论林兆华对《哈姆雷特》的主题再创[J]. 四川戏剧,2010,(1). [8]高睿. 《哈姆雷特》中的“死亡”推动——谈《哈姆雷特》中的故事情节设计[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(3). [9]夏倩. 永远的哈姆雷特——哈姆雷特性格之我见[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(3). [10]周佳彬. 《哈姆雷特》之独白赏析——哈姆雷特复仇之路上的痛苦与挣扎[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(17). [11]陈玉虹,刘洪泉. 哈姆雷特的性格悲剧——莎士比亚的《哈姆雷特》[J]. 太原城市职业技术学院学报,2009,(1). [12]郭晨子. 360°的哈姆雷特 评以色列卡梅尔剧团《哈姆雷特》[J]. 上海戏剧,2009,(5). [13]杨淑敏. 一个无鸾和一千个哈姆雷特——从《夜宴》和《哈姆雷特》看电影与戏剧文学的形象塑造[J]. 电影评介,2006,(23). [14]郭晨子. 陌生了的哈姆雷特 多声部的《哈姆雷特1990》[J]. 上海戏剧,2008,(12). [15]黄立丰. 给《哈姆雷特》批评史加上一个女性主义的补遗——女性表演、批评与再创作《哈姆雷特》的历史[J]. 内蒙古电大学刊,2008,(5). [16]罗文敏. 综观哈姆雷特性格延宕批评之得失——兼论哈姆雷特延宕之因[J]. 兰州交通大学学报,2004,(2). [17]顾胜. 行动与迟疑:一个哈姆雷特式的悖论——《哈姆雷特》“To be or not to be”独白段细读[J]. 常熟高专学报,2004,(5). [18]张全辉. 走向十字架的哈姆雷特——分析第一千零一个哈姆雷特形象[J]. 曲靖师范学院学报,2004,(5). [19]庞凤琴. 哈姆雷特新论——从哈姆雷特的独白说起[J]. 文科教学,1995,(2). [20]荣国. 再谈哈姆雷特──哈姆雷特悲剧原因的分析[J]. 淄博师专学报,1995,(3). [21]续枫林. “一千零一个哈姆雷特”——从悲剧《哈姆雷特》变喜剧想到的[J]. 新疆社科论坛,1995,(3). [22]W.J.罗尔弗 ,王维昌. 关于哈姆雷特和《哈姆雷特》一剧的问题[J]. 安徽师大学报(哲学社会科学版),1981,(2). [23]刘戈. 《哈姆雷特》一部完整的欧洲史——谈《哈姆雷特》的人物象征[J]. 怀化师专学报(哲学社会科学版),1987,(1). [24]李小蓓. 对真理的求索——试析哈姆雷特与哈姆雷特世界的悲剧冲突[D]. 苏州大学: 苏州大学,2001. [25]中国社会科学院 刘志明. 与有关马克思主义的两种看法商榷[N]. 社会科学报,2005-02-24(004). [26]王文渊. 哈姆雷特,被“80后”解构 话剧《哈姆雷人》[J]. 上海戏剧,2010,(4). [27]何湘君. 从《哈姆雷特》看《少年维特之烦恼》——试解析维特之死[J]. 宁波教育学院学报,2006,(6). [28]马庆霞. 哈姆雷特与J.阿尔弗雷德.普鲁弗洛克比较之初探[J]. 聊城大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(2). [29]刘红英,于治领. 《哈姆雷特》中素体诗的语言功能[J]. 求实,2011,(S1). [30]王小琳,郝春静. 解读哈姆雷特的悲剧人生[J]. 商业文化(下半月),2011,(6). [31]丁伟. 哈姆雷特延宕的性格因素分析[J]. 新乡学院学报(社会科学版),2011,(3). [32]崔化. 跨越时空的精神对接——哈姆雷特与昆丁的个体悲剧结构比较[J]. 中国矿业大学学报(社会科学版),2011,(2). [33]欧阳文明. 《哈姆雷特》中奥菲莉娅的悲剧分析[J]. 成功(教育),2011,(7). [34]程瑜瑜. 阳光下的哈姆雷特——后现代主义观照下的《狮子王》[J]. 文艺评论,2011,(7). [35]于珊. 从哈姆雷特与伍子胥的复仇看中西伦理的不同[J]. 大众文艺,2011,(12). [36]常宇星. 从《哈姆雷特》看莎士比亚的人文主义精神[J]. 剑南文学(经典教苑),2011,(2). [37]刘翼斌. 《哈姆雷特》主题之辨[J]. 贵州社会科学,2011,(7). [38]曹艳云. 哈姆雷特的“延宕”与其王权意识[J]. 高等函授学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(10). [39]曹艳春. 越轨的王子——社会学“越轨”视角下的哈姆雷特[J]. 戏剧文学,2010,(12). [40]王荣. 透过马克思看《哈姆雷特》——我眼中的马克思主义文艺理论[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(23). [41]白塔娜. 析哈姆雷特延宕复仇的原因(英文)[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(10). [42]张世锋. 浅谈common在《哈姆雷特》中的反讽效果[J]. 现代交际,2010,(11). [43]宣晓晏. 毒入灵魂——哈姆雷特延宕性格解析[J]. 浙江万里学院学报,2010,(6). [44]李梦馨. 作为“经典中心”的中心——论《哈姆雷特》[J]. 南方文坛,2011,(1). [45]孙建光. 本我回归——哈姆雷特向死而生的心路历程[J]. 西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(6). [46]张卫东. 从精神分析学看哈姆雷特的延宕[J]. 今日南国(中旬刊),2010,(12). [47]苗琳娜. 《哈姆雷特》双关语的汉译对比[J]. 天津市经理学院学报,2010,(6). [48]齐佩. 从拉康理论看《哈姆雷特》悲剧[J]. 中小企业管理与科技(上旬刊),2011,(1). [49]王建华. 哈姆雷特形象的现代阐释[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(6). [50]谢晓科. 背离与统一——堂吉诃德和哈姆雷特比较[J]. 湖北第二师范学院学报,2011,(1).