Advertisement

‘Eyes Without Feeling, Feeling Without Sight’: The Sense of Sight in Hamlet

  • Bríd PhillipsEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Shakespeare Studies book series (PASHST)

Abstract

Can we believe what we see? The question is insistently and inconclusively raised in Hamlet through mention of the word ‘eye’ and imperative verbs such as ‘look’ and ‘see’. Theories of vision in early modern literature were driven by the work of Galen and mediated through the writings of thinkers such as Thomas Wright, Anthony Munday, and George Hakewill. In this chapter I examine the complex interplay between vision and emotion in Hamlet: a play in which the fallibility of vision is repeatedly connected to our inability to definitively read the emotions of others. I also consider the idea of emotional blindness and the gap between sight and emotional awareness in Hamlet.

Bibliography

  1. Anglicus Bartholomaeus. Batman Uppon Bartholome: His Booke De Proprietatibus Rerum, 1582 With an Introduction and Index by Jurgen Schafer. Translated by Stephen Batman. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1976.Google Scholar
  2. Anglin, Emily. ‘“Something in Me Dangerous”: Hamlet, Melancholy, and the Early Modern Scholar’. Shakespeare 13, no. 1 (2014): 15–29.Google Scholar
  3. Aquinas, Thomas. Philosophical Texts. Translated by Thomas Gilby. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1951.Google Scholar
  4. Bright, Timothy. A Treatise of Melancholie, London 1586. Amsterdam: Theatrum Orbis Terrarum/Da Capo Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, Stuart. Vanities of the Eye: Vision in Early Modern European Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
  6. Cranmer, Thomas. The Byble in English: That Is to Saye the Content of All the Holy Scrypture, Both of the Olde and Newe Testament with a Prologe Thereinto, Made by the Reuerende Father in God, Thomas Archebyshop of Cantorbury. London, 1541.Google Scholar
  7. Crooke, Helkiah. Mikrokosmographia: A Description of the Body of Man. Together with Controuersies Thereto Belonging. Collected and Translated Out of All the Best Authors of Anatomy, Especially Out of Gasper Bauhinus and Andreas Laurentius. London, 1615.Google Scholar
  8. Davies, Sir John. Nosce teipsum This Oracle Expounded in Two Elegies 1. Of Humane Knowledge. 2. Of the Soule of Man, and the Immortalitie Thereof. London, 1599.Google Scholar
  9. Diehl, Huston. ‘Horrid Image, Sorry Sight, Fatal Vision: The Visual Rhetoric of Macbeth’. Shakespeare Studies 16 (1983): 191–203.Google Scholar
  10. Eisaman Maus, Katharine. Inwardness and Theater in the English Renaissance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. El-Bizri, Nader. ‘Classical Optics and the Perspective Traditions Leading to the Renaissance’. In Renaissance Theories of Vision. Edited by John Shannon Hendrix and Charles H. Carman, 11–30. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2010.Google Scholar
  12. Erasmus, Desiderius. Collected Works of Erasmus: Spiritualia and Pastoralia: Exomolgesis and Ecclesiastes. Volume 68. Edited by Frederick J. McGinness. Translated by Michael J. Heath and James L. P. Butrica. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015.Google Scholar
  13. Escolme, Bridget. ‘Costume, Disguise, and Self-Display’. In Shakespeare’s Theatres and the Effects of Performances. Edited by Farah Karim-Cooper and Tiffany Stern, 118–140. London and New York: Bloomsbury, 2014.Google Scholar
  14. Essary, Kirk. ‘Fiery Heart and Fiery Tongue: Emotion in Erasmus’ Ecclesiastes’. Erasmus Studies 36 (2016): 5–34.Google Scholar
  15. Galen. On the Usefulness of the Parts of the Body. Volume 2. Translated by Margaret Tallmadge May. New York: Cornell University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
  16. Hakewill, George. The Vanitie of the Eie. Oxford, 1615.Google Scholar
  17. Hoeniger, David F. Medicine and Shakespeare in the English Renaissance. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  18. Holderness, Graham. ‘Review Article: Shakespeare and Perception’. Critical Survey 26, no. 3 (2014): 92–108.Google Scholar
  19. Lyne, Raphael. ‘Shakespeare, Perception and Theory of Mind’. Paragraph 37, no. 1 (2014): 79–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McDermott, Jennifer Rae. ‘Perceiving Shakespeare: A Study of Sight, Sound, and Stage’. Early Modern Literary Studies 19 (2009): 5.1–38.Google Scholar
  21. Meek, Richard. Narrating the Visual in Shakespeare. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate, 2009.Google Scholar
  22. Munday, Anthony. A Second and Third Blast of Retrait from Plaies and Theaters. London, 1580.Google Scholar
  23. Munday, Anthony. The Defence of Contraries. Theatrum Orbis Terrarum. Amsterdam: Da Capo Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  24. Montaigne, Michel de. The Complete Essays of Michel De Montaigne. Edited and translated by M. A. Screech. London: Allen Lane, 1991.Google Scholar
  25. Nordland, Marcus. The Dark Lantern: A Historical Study of Sight in Shakespeare, Webster, and Middleton. Göteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 1999.Google Scholar
  26. Outterson-Murphy, Sarah. ‘“Remember Me:” The Ghost and Its Spectators in Hamlet’. Shakespeare Bulletin 34, no. 2 (2016): 253–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ovid. The XV Bookes of P. Ouidius Naso, Translated Oute of Latin into English Meeter, by Arthur Golding Gentleman, A Worke Very Pleasaunt and Delectable. Translated by Arthur Golding. London, 1567.Google Scholar
  28. Ovid. Metamorphoses Books IX–XV. Translated by Frank Justus Miller. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
  29. Oxford English Dictionary Online. June 2017. Oxford University Press. www.oed.com.
  30. Parker, Patricia. ‘Black Hamlet: Battening on the Moor’. Shakespeare Studies 31 (2003): 127–164.Google Scholar
  31. Prince, Kathryn. ‘Drama’. In Early Modern Emotions. Edited by Susan Broomhall, 92–94. Abingdon: Routledge, 2016.Google Scholar
  32. Scot, Reginald. The Discoverie of Witchcraft. London: William Brome, 1584.Google Scholar
  33. Shakespeare, William. Othello. The Arden Shakespeare. Edited by E. A. J. Honigmann. London: Bloomsbury, 2004.Google Scholar
  34. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. The Arden Shakespeare. Edited by Ann Thompson and Neil Taylor. London: Bloomsbury, 2006.Google Scholar
  35. Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. The Arden Shakespeare. Edited by David Daniell. London: Bloomsbury, 2014.Google Scholar
  36. Thorne, Alison. Vision and Rhetoric in Shakespeare: Looking Through Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000.Google Scholar
  37. Tudor, Faye. ‘“All in Him Selfe as in a Glass He Sees”: Mirrors and Vision in the Renaissance’. In Renaissance Theories of Vision. Edited by John Shannon Hendrix and Charles H. Carman, 171–186. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate, 2010.Google Scholar
  38. Wilson, Thomas. The Arte of Rhetorique, 1553. Amsterdam: Theatrvm Orbis Terrarvm/Da Capo Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  39. Woolgar, C. M. The Senses in Late Medieval England. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  40. Wright, Thomas. The Passions of the Mind in General. Edited by William Webster Newbold. New York: Garland, 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ARC Centre of Excellence for the History of EmotionsThe University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations