Skip to main content

Familial Feeling and Humanist Habits of Intellection in Hamlet

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Emotional Settings in Early Modern Pedagogical Culture
  • 109 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter demonstrates that the humanist-educated Hamlet can never erase his learning, despite its being wholly inadequate to the emotional turmoil occasioned by his father’s death and mother’s remarriage. Owens charts this incommensurability in Hamlet’s first soliloquy and in the contrasts between Horatio and Hamlet, both of them Wittenberg scholars, in their respective encounters with the Ghost. Owens’ close reading of the first soliloquy gauges the pressure that builds up when the humanist rhetorical and intellectual practices that condition Hamlet’s thinking and emotions and that structure his moral perspective cannot accommodate familial feelings. Through detailed comparison of the addresses to the Ghost, Owens underscores the extent to which Hamlet is motivated by strong filial feeling that runs counter to humanist education that protects Horatio.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, Joseph Quincy. Ed. Hamlet. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, Janet. Suffocating Mothers: Fantasies of Maternal Origins in Shakespeare’s Plays, Hamlet to the Tempest. New York; London: Routledge, 1992. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, A.C. Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth. London: Macmillan, 1904. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwait, Richard. The English Gentlewoman. London, 1631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bristol, Michael. “Funeral Baked Meats: Carnival and the Carnivalesque in Hamlet.” In Hamlet: Case Studies. Ed. Susanne Wofford. Bedford: St. Martin’s Press, 1993: 348–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Martin. “Hamlet’s Delay: An Attempt at Synthesis.” Master’s Thesis. Oregon State University, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Shakespearean Criticism. 1930. 2 vols. Ed. Thomas Middleton Raysor. Everyman Library Edition. New York: Dutton, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, William. “The Language of Felt Experience.” Language and Literature IX.2 (2000): 99–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, Derek. Shakespeare, Revenge Tragedy and Early Modern Law. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Engle, Lars. “How Is Horatio Just? How Just Is Horatio?” Shakespeare Quarterly 62.2 (2011): 256–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erlich, Avi. Hamlet’s Absent Father. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1977. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garber, Marjorie. Coming of Age in Shakespeare. London: Methuen, 1981. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. “Hamlet: Giving Up the Ghost.” In Shakespeare’s Ghost Writers: Literature as Uncanny Causality. New York: Methuen, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenblatt, Stephen. Hamlet in Purgatory. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2001. Print

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, Elizabeth. “Fellow Students: Hamlet, Horatio, and the Early Modern University.” Shakespeare Quarterly 62 (2011): 205–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holbrook, Peter. Shakespeare’s Individualism. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hui, Andrew. “Horatio’s Philosophy in Hamlet.” Renaissance Drama 41.1/2 (Fall 2013): 151–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutson, Lorna. Circumstantial Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2015.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. The Invention of Suspicion: Law and Mimesis in Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, Susan. Passion and Action: The Emotions in Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1997. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Ernest. Hamlet and Oedipus. New York: W. W. Norton, 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kottman, Paul. “Review of Shakespeare’s Individualism by Peter Holbrook.” Shakespeare Quarterly 64. 1 (2013): 107–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kris, Ernst. Psychoanalytical Explorations in Art. New York: International Universities Press, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Rhodri. Hamlet and the Vision of Darkness. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2017. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, Peter. Elizabethan Rhetoric: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margalit, Avishai. The Ethics of Memory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press, 2002. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Peter. Mother Leakey and the Bishop: A Ghost Story. Oxford Univ. Press, 2007. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, Ann. Printed Commonplace Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1996. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, Catherine. Uncommon Tongues: Eloquence and Eccentricity in the English Renaissance. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2013. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria. Ed. and Trans. Donald A. Russell. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, Esther Gilman. “’Go Not to Wittenberg: Hamlet’s Negation of Luther.” Unpublished paper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, Kiernan. “Hamlet and Revenge.” British Library: Discovering Literature. 15 March 2016. Online.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schalkwyk, David. “Unpacking the Heart.” In Shakespeare’s Hamlet: Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlegel, August. A Course of Lectures on Dramatic Art and Literature (1808). Trans. John Black and A.J.W. Morrison. London: G. Bell and Sons, 1876.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semler, Liam. “A Proximate Prince: The Gooey Business of Hamlet Criticism.” Sydney Studies in English 32 (2006): 97–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Revised edition. Ed. Ann Thompson and Neil Taylor. London: Bloomsbury Arden, 2016. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. The Life of King Henry V and The Tragedy of King Richard II: The Complete Works of Shakespeare. Revised edition. Ed. Hardin Craig and David Bevington. Glenview: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spenser, Edmund. The Faerie Queene. 2nd edition. Ed. A.C. Hamilton. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoll, Elmer Edgar. Hamlet: An Historical and Comparative Study. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1919.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tromly, Fred. Fathers and Sons in Shakespeare: The Debt Never Promised. Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press, 2010. Print.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickers, Brian. “Epideictic and Epic.” New Literary History 14.3 (1983): 497–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warley, Christopher. “Specters of Horatio.” ELH 75.4 (2008): 1023–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J. Dover. What Happens in Hamlet. London: Macmillan, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Thomas. The Arte of Rhetorique (1563). STC (2nd ed.) 25799.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judith Owens .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Owens, J. (2020). Familial Feeling and Humanist Habits of Intellection in Hamlet. In: Emotional Settings in Early Modern Pedagogical Culture. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43149-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics