After Hamlet
Two Perspectives
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4550668 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michal Kobialka (0000-0002-6698-4140, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1986 |
| Volume | 38 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 196 |
| Publication date | 1986-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theatre Journal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0192-2882 • E-ISSN: 1086-332X |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3208119 |
| OpenAlex | W2327235134 |
| Language | EN |
Shakespeare's plays have a long tradition of being altered and adapted to suit different cultural tastes. This tendency to regularize the texts began at least as early as the Restoration; e.g., Dryden's All for Love (1677), an attempt to improve Antony and Cleopatra, and Tate's happy ending in King Lear (1681). A tradition of alteration and imitation initially established in England has spread to other countries. Hamlet serves as a good example: it was common practice in nineteenth-century productions of the play to omit Fortinbras. Moreover, most Shakespearean burlesques of the same century did not include this character.' Fortinbras seemed unnecessary and unwanted due to the scanty treatment afforded him in the original play.2 Rather than trying to
Art · HAMLET (protein complex · Literature · Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |