I’m not sure what Shakespeare’s trying to tell us here with this. The numbers don’t necessarily add up. There are twelve rounds, I guess? And if Laertes is only three points ahead of Hamlet, Claudius still wins. Is this twelve to nine? That this is meant to be the final score? That he’s laying odds on the final score being Laertes = 12, Hamlet = 9? Or is it that the odds are that?
But if they only play twelve rounds, how could Laertes get 12 points and Hamlet 9? They’d have to play 21 rounds to get that score. Or – points would have to be worth more than one on occasion. Is a hit worth three points? So Hamlet gets three hits and Laertes four in order to win? Or maybe it’s twelve somethings?
The math is funny.
But maybe that’s on purpose. To make it obvious that this weird competition is a set up and Hamlet’s about to get screwed with a sword.
The king, sir, hath laid, that in a dozen passes Between yourself and him, he shall not exceed you Three hits.
I just read Samuel Johnson’s note on this and it makes me like Samuel Johnson a lot. “This wager I do not understand” and “It is sufficient that there was a wager.”
I’d like to have a text-off with Samuel Johnson.
I mean, I know he’s dead.
But.
His attack on the text- and by attack – I mean approach – is something I quite connect to. On Genius, the commenter has labeled Johnson’s comment as “cranky” and maybe that’s why I like it – though I don’t see it that way.
I likewise do not understand the terms of this wager. They are quite complicated and it is not clear how anyone wins or loses. It is sufficient that there was a wager.
Why is this “imponed,” as you call it?
If only Hamlet asked more probing questions. If only he pulled on these tiny threads a little harder and saw them through to the dark intentions at the center of this thing. He might make it out of this play alive instead of falling into a trap, instead of getting killed. He gets nihilistic not long after this moment.
That’s the French bet Against the Danish.
This sounds very much like a reference to something that we no longer know what the points of reference are. Like – probably there was some joke about the French versus the Danish. Because that’s a thing. Yes.
Those swords are French. But Laertes is Danish. And Claudius may be Danish – but Barbary horses aren’t. Maybe these particular Barbary horses were born in Denmark but their Danishness is not their most important point. It feels like there must have been some bet or joke or something between those two countries round about when Shakespeare was writing this.
Six Barbary horses Against six French swords, their assigns and three liberal-conceited carriages.
What sort of arena could such a fight be in? Horse versus sword? And would either be manned or would it just be six swords laying around on the ground with all their gear and six horses prancing around – probably just ignoring swords. I mean – without a person to interfere with these things, pretty much nothing would happen. The trouble would begin when the swords got people behind them, and probably likewise the horses.
But, on:
I am on a little bit of an adventure. It’s kind of a tour. I started at my friend’s place in a small city in California. Today she drove me to Los Angeles. It is odd to make such a transition. To go from my home in New York to essentially a suburban life – my friend’s suburban life – and then to a city that I really don’t know at all.
I feel like I need an adjustment period.
*
It’s now been a couple of years since I went on that adventure. From this tiny apartment where I’ve been sheltering since Covid struck us, it is nice to revisit this moment in the middle of an adventure.
I would it might Be hangers till then.
I’m a little obsessed with how little there is to this joke with the carriages and hangers and canons. Like, I get that the funny part seems to be imagining a guy walking down the street with canons hanging off his lips. That is the funny part. But it would be a whole lot funnier if the hangers were an aspect of the joke. If it could somehow also be making a hangman joke (a hanger being another word for an executioner – another way to say hangman) or if it were a dirty joke. To have the centerpiece of the joke be canons at the hip…I don’t know. It feels a little simple for Shakespeare. He is not wont to go so far for a one image joke.
The phrase would be more German to the matter, if we Could carry cannon by our sides.
German comes from germaine – which is related to being of a family – of the same parents or grandparents. But the people of Germany – that German – comes from a totally different root somehow? German being Latin. Germaine being French. Which of course comes from The Latin. So perhaps german has some German roots, too. But the funny bit of language is that a German could be german.
The carriages, sir, are the hangers.
When it comes to hanging, Shakespeare is USUALLY making a joke. He’s usually making a dick joke and/or a joke about execution.
So I’m trying very hard to make this line a joke somehow – even if only a joke at Osric’s expense.
Hangers could also be a reference to balls.
Could carriages as well? I mean – it’s just too good of an opportunity – a totally meaningless conversation about sword paraphernalia and you’re NOT going to include some dirty jokes? I just don’t see how Shakespeare could resist such a thing.
But I also don’t see a way to make this line work in a dirty way with any real likelihood.
I could deliver it as such – but it would require the laughter of Hamlet and Horatio to really sell it.
I knew you must be edified by the margent ere you had done.
Even while teasing the prince, Horatio still uses formal language. It is an interesting distance and ease – a combination of collegial informality of teasing about academic marginalia AND a royal distance with his “You.”
The Hamlet Project 