Shakespeare fanatics, I need you!!

If you don't know anything about Shakespeare, you might as well stop reading here.

I am writing a term paper on Shakespeare's tragicomedies. The topic is "the concepts of friendship", and I'm mainly concentrating on "The Merchant of Venice" and "Hamlet". I'm also using Bacon's essay of friendship to aid me, but I'm kind of getting nowhere with it.

I am reading the Arden editions.

What's worse, that I have to find and read and include things from at least 5 peer reviewed documents. I have no effing clue where to find them, since all the databases that I stumbled on are limited to their own students or staff, must be paid for, etc.

I'm kind of getting desperate here, because its due in a week and I'll have to pay a huge amount of money if I fail this.

So yeah guys, I could use all the help I can get, especially with the peer reviewed essays or journals on where to get them.

Any kind of help would be great.

Thanks in advance.

Don't you have a campus library? The librarians can help you with that.

Mage246 said:

Don't you have a campus library? The librarians can help you with that.

Click to expand...

That's the problem, I was an exchange student for a short period, and I don't have any library access there. My home Uni is very limited in this field as well.

Larmantine said:

If you don't know anything about Shakespeare, you might as well stop reading here.

I am writing a term paper on Shakespeare's tragicomedies. The topic is "the concepts of friendship", and I'm mainly concentrating on "The Merchant of Venice" and "Hamlet". I'm also using Bacon's essay of friendship to aid me, but I'm kind of getting nowhere with it.

I am reading the Arden editions.

What's worse, that I have to find and read and include things from at least 5 peer reviewed documents. I have no effing clue where to find them, since all the databases that I stumbled on are limited to their own students or staff, must be paid for, etc.

I'm kind of getting desperate here, because its due in a week and I'll have to pay a huge amount of money if I fail this.

So yeah guys, I could use all the help I can get, especially with the peer reviewed essays or journals on where to get them.

Any kind of help would be great.

Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing you are a Uni student? If so, you'll have access to your Uni's online database. I'd suggest social sciences index.

Even free and readily available stuff like Jstor could probaby more than suffice.

With that said . . . more and more peer-review stuff is being made available to the interwebz public and if you only have to find a small handful, you can probably find what you need, even without access to uni database server.

Here, I'll give you some pointers go here

https://www.google.com/

Type in "advanced search" or "google advanced search" which will lead you here:

http://www.google.ca/advanced_search?hl=en

(well . . . maybe not the .ca part . . . for some reason, several of my machines still seem to think I live in Canada, but anyway, just about the same difference).

With a bit of patience, a focus on miminalism some combinations typed into the "Exact word or Phrase" and/or "All these words" can yield truckloads of stuff.

I typed in:

All these words: shakespeare jstor
Exact word or phrase: friendship

and this was on the first page of hits: Shakespeare and the Ethics of Friendship by John D. Cox, from Religion and Literature, peer-reviewed journal.

Huh, thanks man. Anyone who has read the plays has to suggest anything?

What were your points initially going into this topic? Also, how long until the essay is due? On the topic of "friendship" in the Merchant of Venice and Hamlet, some key points to consider will be Bassanio/Antonio and Hamlet/Horatio for positive examples of friendship, and Rosencrantz-Guildenstern/Hamlet and Gratiano/Antonio, maybe, for negative examples.

Vermillion_Hawk said:

Also, how long until the essay is due?

Click to expand...

Larmantine said:

I'm kind of getting desperate here, because its due in a week and I'll have to pay a huge amount of money if I fail this.

Click to expand...

Aha. Stupid mistake on my part. Well in that case normally I'd say with one week left and no scholarly sources you're not doing too great, a comprehensive knowledge of the plays in question would probably save you here, but otherwise it's more going to be about getting sources and quotes in time.

Anthropoid's advice is spot on. Your online database is going to give you the best bet for the time you have. I would pay particular attention to theses and dissertations on related topics as they can provide you both with new ideas to incorporate in your own essay and solid bibliographies to lead you to other relevant sources. Just be careful to cite them properly if you choose to repeat a concept they present verbatim.

Thanks for posting.

Vermillion_Hawk said:

What were your points initially going into this topic? Also, how long until the essay is due? On the topic of "friendship" in the Merchant of Venice and Hamlet, some key points to consider will be Bassanio/Antonio and Hamlet/Horatio for positive examples of friendship, and Rosencrantz-Guildenstern/Hamlet and Gratiano/Antonio, maybe, for negative examples.

Click to expand...

Yeah well, the prime characters on my topic are Hamlet and Horatio from Hamlet and Antonio and Bassanio from tMoV. Truth is, I don't know Hamlet by heart, but it seems he's having more of a stoic approach on things, friendship included. It seems, on the other hand, that in that Antonio/Bassanio have something from romanticism, although romanticism wasn't present at that time period.

Larmantine said:

Thanks for posting.

Vermillion_Hawk said:

What were your points initially going into this topic? Also, how long until the essay is due? On the topic of "friendship" in the Merchant of Venice and Hamlet, some key points to consider will be Bassanio/Antonio and Hamlet/Horatio for positive examples of friendship, and Rosencrantz-Guildenstern/Hamlet and Gratiano/Antonio, maybe, for negative examples.

Click to expand...

Yeah well, the prime characters on my topic are Hamlet and Horatio from Hamlet and Antonio and Bassanio from tMoV. Truth is, I don't know Hamlet by heart, but it seems he's having more of a stoic approach on things, friendship included. It seems, on the other hand, that in that Antonio/Bassanio have something from romanticism, although romanticism wasn't present at that time period.

Click to expand...

I have always thought that the main theme of Hamlet is human selfishness and stupidity. Virtually every character in that play is irrational, selfish, and stupid.

Here we have a Kingdom about to be invaded by a larger threat, and how are these various aristocratic figures behaving, bickering and scheming amongst themselves, apparently succumbing to superstition, paranoia, or just plain psychosis, rage, jealousy and vindictiveness. Its a tragedy through and through because virtually every character in there undoes themselves or falls prey to the selfishness and cruelty of others.

Without going back and rereading the thing closely, I'd have to say that, the ovearching message of Hamlet, as it relates to friendship is that, it is a facade, something you cannot actually count on. Hamlet's MOTHER, presumably the one person whom he should be most able to trust, has clearly betrayed his father, and schemes throughout to manipulate and control him. His two friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern essentially betray him by agreeing to spy on him. Hamlet doesn't exactly seem to serve anyone's best interests, either any of his would-be friends or his own. It has been years since I read the thing in full but, if memory serves, you'd be hard pressed to find any exemplars of true loyalty, comraderie or friendship in that piece.

With respect to Horatio . . . is he even a real person? I do not recall any scene where anyone exchanges in dialogue with Horatio, other than Hamlet himself. Perhaps Horatio is merely Hamlet's conscience or to put it in Freudian terms his super-ego?

Anthropoid said:

Larmantine said:

Thanks for posting.

Vermillion_Hawk said:

What were your points initially going into this topic? Also, how long until the essay is due? On the topic of "friendship" in the Merchant of Venice and Hamlet, some key points to consider will be Bassanio/Antonio and Hamlet/Horatio for positive examples of friendship, and Rosencrantz-Guildenstern/Hamlet and Gratiano/Antonio, maybe, for negative examples.

Click to expand...

Yeah well, the prime characters on my topic are Hamlet and Horatio from Hamlet and Antonio and Bassanio from tMoV. Truth is, I don't know Hamlet by heart, but it seems he's having more of a stoic approach on things, friendship included. It seems, on the other hand, that in that Antonio/Bassanio have something from romanticism, although romanticism wasn't present at that time period.

Click to expand...

I have always thought that the main theme of Hamlet is human selfishness and stupidity. Virtually every character in that play is irrational, selfish, and stupid.

Here we have a Kingdom about to be invaded by a larger threat, and how are these various aristocratic figures behaving, bickering and scheming amongst themselves, apparently succumbing to superstition, paranoia, or just plain psychosis, rage, jealousy and vindictiveness. Its a tragedy through and through because virtually every character in there undoes themselves or falls prey to the selfishness and cruelty of others.

Without going back and rereading the thing closely, I'd have to say that, the ovearching message of Hamlet, as it relates to friendship is that, it is a facade, something you cannot actually count on. Hamlet's MOTHER, presumably the one person whom he should be most able to trust, has clearly betrayed his father, and schemes throughout to manipulate and control him. His two friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern essentially betray him by agreeing to spy on him. Hamlet doesn't exactly seem to serve anyone's best interests, either any of his would-be friends or his own. It has been years since I read the thing in full but, if memory serves, you'd be hard pressed to find any exemplars of true loyalty, comraderie or friendship in that piece.

With respect to Horatio . . . is he even a real person? I do not recall any scene where anyone exchanges in dialogue with Horatio, other than Hamlet himself. Perhaps Horatio is merely Hamlet's conscience or to put it in Freudian terms his super-ego?

Click to expand...

On the Hamlet's mother (Gertrude) thing, it's very, very explicitly said that she was never complicit to Claudius' plot. In fact she probably is one of the few "innocent" (so to speak) characters in the play. As for the treatment of Hamlet itself, its theme is not only irrationality but rather the irrationality of an excess of rationality. Hamlet, being the educated man that he is, ponders and thinks and deliberates just about everything he does before he does it, hence the lengthy internal monologues. It is through this rational treatment of his problems that he becomes a ridiculous figure, as he is like "Hecuba, all tears", as he terms his mother earlier - he claims to want to act decisively but in order to decisively act he requires inordinate and unreal amounts of deliberation. In a perfect world that would be fine, but Hamlet's world is far from perfect, and is, in my opinion, a more accurate reflection of reality. When Hamlet does act, it is far too late and he is slain.

Horatio provides a nice foil to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in Hamlet in terms of what "true friendship" consists of. You're entirely right in that Horatio doesn't have any meaningful or drawn-out conversation with Hamlet - Horatio is generally fairly silent in their discussions and, as memory serves, the discussions they do have are more of a banter as opposed to the dramatic monologues and speeches found in the rest of the play. With Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, however, Hamlet has significantly more drawn-out conversations, occasionally skirting topics central to the elements of the play. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, however, are utterly false in their nature in the play during their interactions with Hamlet. They end up dead for their treachery, whereas Horatio, at the end, is willing to die for his friend, being "more an antique Roman than a Dane". It provides an interesting contrast, where outward displays of friendship are not necessarily truthful, and it is in the actions of the characters that one can find the extent of their friendships.

This is especially true in the Merchant of Venice. My memory of this play is a little more hazy than with Hamlet, but as I recall, Salerio and Solanio and Gratiano are all fairly good friends with Antonio in the beginning, where Antonio is said to be very well-to-do, but when Antonio is in real trouble it is only Bassanio who truly steps up and tries to garner support or aid for Antonio in the form of Portia, assisted somewhat by Gratiano. Also keep in mind how deep into trouble Antonio was willing to put himself in for his friend Bassanio's personal ventures. Thus you can again see how friendship is being portrayed as something a bit deeper than superficial social gestures, according to Shakespeare at least.

Interesting! You probably have a better handle on it than me; I'm working from memories of the play (refreshed with a wiki glimpse) read or watched perform 5, 10 maybe 15 years ago.

Still, I find the idea that Gertude was "not complicit" in her husbands murder, then shacks up with the brother in short order after his death to be rather unbelievable. If nothing else, she was gullible or uncaring. Actually now that I think about it, isn't there some dialogue between Hamlet and Gertrude where he more or less accuses her of that, i.e., not of having been an accomplice, but of being a dupe?

Merchant of Venice . . . sheeze, can barely remember any of the characters in that. Pound of flesh is all that comes to mind 

Basically Gertrude is portrayed as being, yes, a dupe and an innocent who happened to fit in perfectly with Claudius' plans. There is a lot of scholarship saying that she was in fact one of the instigators in the murder, but within the context of the play, I found, at least, that her as an innocent is the more likely scenario.

Vermillion_Hawk said:

Basically Gertrude is portrayed as being, yes, a dupe and an innocent who happened to fit in perfectly with Claudius' plans. There is a lot of scholarship saying that she was in fact one of the instigators in the murder, but within the context of the play, I found, at least, that her as an innocent is the more likely scenario.

Click to expand...

Okay. So you wouldn't really disagree that

I have always thought that the main theme of Hamlet is human selfishness and stupidity. Virtually every character in that play is irrational, selfish, and stupid.

Click to expand...

Being "innocent" isn't a good excuse for being gullible and/or stupid  at least from the standpoint of "doing the right thing." I would argue that, marrying Claudius was not the "right thing" for Gertrude to do so quickly after the death of her husband, whether she understood that Claudius murdered him or not.

Try Google Scholar.

Anthropoid said:

Vermillion_Hawk said:

Basically Gertrude is portrayed as being, yes, a dupe and an innocent who happened to fit in perfectly with Claudius' plans. There is a lot of scholarship saying that she was in fact one of the instigators in the murder, but within the context of the play, I found, at least, that her as an innocent is the more likely scenario.

Click to expand...

Okay. So you wouldn't really disagree that

I have always thought that the main theme of Hamlet is human selfishness and stupidity. Virtually every character in that play is irrational, selfish, and stupid.

Click to expand...

Being "innocent" isn't a good excuse for being gullible and/or stupid  at least from the standpoint of "doing the right thing." I would argue that, marrying Claudius was not the "right thing" for Gertrude to do so quickly after the death of her husband, whether she understood that Claudius murdered him or not.

Click to expand...

Well when I say "innocent" basically all I'm saying is that she had no knowledge of the plot to formulate her decisions with. Essentially, yes, I would agree there, since I also think that what she did was not necessarily the "right thing" - she couldn't really perceive what was right in said circumstances, and regardless of that, made a bit of a mistake anyways. that being said, I don't think that human selfishness and stupidity is the main theme of the play. None of the main players are "stupid", with the exception of maybe Polonius. Claudius, Hamlet and Laertes are all very smart in their own actions in the play. It's more, I would think, a look at how that can work to their demise, when their own intelligence is a weapon that requires a mere slight shift in perspective to undermine them.

But I thought you just said that "Hamlet was so enthralled with analyzing that he was ineffective."

Stupid might be a very simple way to gloss that but seems fair to me.

Put that way yes, stupid would work.

Intersting arguments you have there guys. I didn't quite get the fact that you said before that Horatio might have been a fruit of Hamlet's mind, since he was present with the guardsmen at the beginning of the play, while hamlet was hiding in a chamber doing his "to be or not to be" thing.