Wait, wait – so the King of Norway is so thrilled that his nephew did as he was told that he gave him a boatload of money and orders to start a different war than the one he just almost got in trouble for? You catch your nephew about to bully some kid and tell him to stop. Then, when he does, you give him a hefty allowance and point out some other kid to bully, this time with your permission. This does not strike me as either good parenting or good leadership.
Author: erainbowd
Which he in brief obeys Receives rebuke from Norway, and in fine Makes vow before his uncle never more To give th’assay of arms against your majesty.
This vow is rather specifically personal, it seems to me. The vow to forgo th’assay of arms against his majesty is not a vow to never attack Denmark. Just the current king. Which, frankly, is probably all Claudius really cares about. As long as nobody’s invading his country on his watch, he’s probably not too concerned. But that’s a tentative balance – the previous vow only held true with the previous king and so, with every change in leadership, the vows must be newly tested and then renewed again? This is a very precarious peace.
Whereat grieved, That so his sickness, age and impotence Was falsely born in hand, sends out arrests on Fortinbras;
Fortinbras seems like kind of dick.
He swoops in to attack Denmark over an old argument at the first sign of political shift and tries to do it without his uncle knowing. He makes an attempt to make one preparation for war look like another, so his sick uncle is fooled. It’s kind of treasonous when you get right down to it. But, of course, in a few lines, we’ll see that Fortinbras isn’t punished for this action – just rewarded for stopping it. Spoiled dickish Fortinbras.
Upon our first, he sent out to suppress His nephew’s levies, which to him appeared To be preparation ‘gainst the Polack, But, better looked into, he truly found It was against your highness;
Seems like MANY things could be better looked into.
The default is to glance, to gloss, to glide over things, just let them roll.
Here, a war could have started if someone hadn’t spoken up and the man in charge hadn’t better looked into the situation.
I have been pulling back the curtain over how theatre gets made in America, getting a better look and wishing that, in general, the business were better looked into by people who could do something about it. I feel like Cassandra shouting “Look at this! Look here!” with no recourse to change it.
Most fair return of greetings and desires.
I love formal speech like this. It always has a Star Trekky vibe – a meeting of peoples of different worlds, relying on formality and courtesy to get them through. No one would say something like this casually. It is inevitably accompanied with a stiffness in the body, perhaps a bow, a salute, a curtsy. I think we must read something ancient in this formality. It must be a signal to our reptilian brains somehow. A kind of intentional posturing of “I come in peace.” And I wonder why. Why might formality be reassuring? Is the image of someone restraining themselves, in both speech and body, a signal that they will restrain themselves from violence? Does it broadcast “I am careful. I am in control. I will not draw my sword.”?
Say, Voltemand, what from our brother Norway?
If Voltemand and Cornelius are the king’s good friends, then it would seem that Voltemand is the better friend of the two, or at least the one he feels most comfortable talking to. It almost feels like Cornelius is the woman at the meeting – that even though she may have the higher status, the guys will always talk to the other guys. Or maybe they held an election and Voltemand was voted the guy to talk while Cornelius was voted the guy to smile and nod. Or hold the luggage. I guess that’s how status works in general. #1 speaks to #2 and #2 speaks to #3 and so on. And of course, it just makes me curious about Cornelius.
Welcome, my good friends.
Now the ambassadors are his good friends?
Really? I guess since they bring good news.
If they came back from Norway all downcast and chagrined, I suspect
they might not be such good friends of the King.
I guess, you bring good news, you get promoted up the friendship chain.
Well, we shall sift him.
Like flour for a cake
Like gold from a stream
Shake all the little grains from one space to the next.
We shall shake his shoulders and his words will fall from him –
either in little soft piles that call out to be touched
or the sand will fall out, leaving little shiny bits behind in the pan
or maybe both –
little piles of flour, topped with gold.
I doubt it is no other but the main, His father’s death and our o’erhasty marriage.
She’s not wrong. She’s missing (perhaps) a crucial bit of information
(some stuff about a ghost and a murder) but it could all be pretty much tied
to these two events fundamentally.
Gertrude’s not a dummy. She understands a few things – both about her son
and the world. Smart cookie, that Gertie.
He tells me, my dear Gertrude, he hath found The head and source of all your son’s distemper.
We are ever looking for the cause.
It is the cause, it is the cause, my soul.
Or what we are hoping to be the cause.
We want to know the trigger when the gun’s been fired. Why? What made him do that? What made him lose his marbles? It must have BEEN something. An event? A disappointment? A sudden cruelty or act of violence? But the truth of these things, the truth of real madness (not the kind you make up to throw murderous uncles off your scent) rarely has a trigger. It is highly unsatisfying to probe the onset of it and find no trigger, no smoking gun, just a possible change in brain chemistry or some wiring that just sort of came loose.
There is no satisfaction to be had, no explanation that makes sense, no context to insure us that it won’t happen to us. Because it could. It could.