Part 42: A Living Mousetrap: Ophelia's Owl
What are owls famous for eating — even a dozen in a single night?
Mice.
What does Hamlet call the play by which he hopes to catch the conscience of the king?
“The Mousetrap” [1].
Ophelia sat with Hamlet at his playlet, heard him call it “The Mousetrap.” She soon references a folktale in which a baker’s daughter is ungenerous with a beggar at the door (Jesus or a fairy in disguise), and as punishment, is changed into an owl [2].
Into a living mousetrap.
(And the owl asks, “Who? Who?”
First words of the play: “Who’s there?”)
The name “Gertrude” may point to a Christian saint famous for getting rid of mice [3]. I have argued that, by drinking the poison cup, Gertrude builds a better mousetrap, catching the conscience of Claudius [4].
So there is a trilogy of mouse-trapping characters in the play: Hamlet, Ophelia, and Gertrude.
But Ophelia’s owl reference is usually not viewed by scholars, critics, teachers and students as a reference to a living mousetrap. Why?
Perhaps a reductionist impulse? It is easier to “decode” literary references or symbols (treating them as ciphers instead of something richer), so it’s popular to treat Ophelia’s owl as an omen of disaster (biblical) [5] and death (noted in other Shakespeare plays [6]), or a symbol of wisdom (via Greek mythology and Athena [7]).
Yet Owls can be omens of death, AND symbols of wisdom.
But why neglect their diet?
One 13th century bestiary depicted an owl as a Jew [8]; a 12th century bestiary compares the owl to Jesus [9], famous for reaching out to those who lived in the “darkness” of sin, and for meeting at night with the Pharisee, Nicodemus [10].
But still, no mention of an owl’s diet. (Nor of how mice need not symbolize/embody evil….)
It’s very possible that, in Shakespeare’s time, the fact that owls eat mice was even more widely known than today, as some owls were raised then as pets [11].
I have been studying Hamlet for years, and until this past week, never noticed the mouse-diet connection with Ophelia’s owl reference.
I am especially grateful to Madalina Dobraca [12], Dr. John Langdon [13], and Jean-François Vernay [14] for their good influence that helped me arrive at the insight.
~~~~~~~
NOTES: All references to Hamlet are to the Folger Shakespeare Library online version: https://shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/hamlet/entire-play/
[1] 3.2.261. Hamlet’s naming of the playlet “The Mousetrap” is widely believed to be a reference to St. Augustine of Hippo’s assertion that the cross on which Jesus was crucified was a mousetrap for the devil: Satan believed he had triumphed, but the resurrection soon proved he had been defeated.
[2] 4.5.47-49. Regarding Ophelia’s reference to the tale of the owl as the baker’s daughter, a sort of folktale retelling of the gospel tale of the rich man and Lazarus (and recalling that the ghost refers to Lazarus in describing the effect he thinks the poison had on his skin), see my post of April 27, 2021:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-begggar-lazarus-at-bakers-door-in.html
[3] Shakespeare names Hamlet's mother “Gertrude,” perhaps after St. Gertrude of Nivelles, said to have rid her convent’s storeroom of mice by the power of prayer; images of her often show mice climbing up her staff. See my post of March 26, 2024:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2024/03/part-37-sts-gertrude-pilgrims-lovers.html
[4] On Gertrude drinking from the poison cup as potentially a better mousetrap for Claudius, see my post of March 19, 2024:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2024/03/part-36-gertrude-builds-better.html
[5] For biblical references to owls, see: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/owl-2
“Referring to his sighing and emaciated body by reason of his suffering, the psalmist (Ps. 102:6–7) compares himself to "a ka'at of the wilderness." Its Hebrew name denotes vomiting (meki) in a reference apparently to the fact that, as do other owls, it regurgitates the bones of its prey.”
“The Bible contains at least 11 names of owls. Of these the tinshemet, ka'at, kos, yanshuf, shalakh, and bat ya'anah are mentioned in the lists of unclean birds in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.”
“Psalms (102:7), is probably the little owl (Athene noctua glaux), its Hebrew name being onomatopoeic. It has no "ears," that is, no crest of feathers. Symbolizing, as it did, wisdom to the ancient Greeks because of its large wide-open eyes, it appeared on the coins of Athens.”
(So it may be possible for wide-open eyes to anticipate death, and to be wise…)
The article also point to various names of owls in the following biblical passages:
Lev. 11:16-18;
Deut. 14:15-17;
Isa. 13:21, 14:23, 34:11,13,14,15;
Zech. 2:14;
Micah 1:8
II Chron. 11:15).
[6] ‘The general of the French forces, facing an English emissary in Henry VI, Part 1, calls him “Thou ominous and fearful owl of death, / Or nation’s terror and their bloody scourge!” (4.2.15) Similarly, when Richard III receives bad news on the battlefield, he reacts by shouting “Out on you, owls! Nothing but songs of death” and striking the messenger: “There, take thou that till thou bring better news” (4.4.536-537). When in King Henry VI, Part 3 the titular king wants to wound Richard, he says “The owl shrieked at thy birth, an evil sign” (5.6.36). [...]
Shakespeare’s most famous ominous owl, however, appears in Macbeth. As Lady Macbeth waits for her husband to kill the king, Duncan, she hears a tell-tale cry:
“Hark!—Peace. / It was the owl that shrieked, the fatal bellman, / Which gives the stern’st good-night. He is about it.” (Macbeth 2.2.4-6)’
Swenson, Haylie. “Owls in the early modern imagination: Ominous omens and pitiable sages,” May 26, 2020. https://www.folger.edu/blogs/shakespeare-and-beyond/owls-prophecy-omens-wisdom-shakespeare/
[7] “In classical Greek and Roman art, owls appear alongside Athena/Minerva as symbols of far-sightedness, wisdom, and prophecy, and this idea still had currency in early modern England.”
Swenson, “Owls in the early modern imagination…”
“The convention of associating these nocturnal birds with wisdom goes all the way back to ancient Greeks and Romans depicting owls with the goddess of wisdom, Athena/Minerva.”
Blieszner, Anne Marie, “Owls: Always a Hoot?” March 17, 2016, Medieval Studies Research Blog, University of Notre Dame's Medieval Institute. Accessed 4/22/2024. https://sites.nd.edu/manuscript-studies/tag/owl/
[8] “Owls, who are day-blind and live in darkness, were used to represent Jews in medieval England, who were said to have rejected the light of Christ and live in the uncleanliness of religious blasphemy.” / “Anthropomorphic owl meant to resemble a Jew; bestiary, 2nd quarter of the 13th century, England; British Library, Harley MS 4751, f. 47 r.
Blieszner, “Owls: Always a Hoot?”
[9] “The Aberdeen bestiary presents a positive moralization of owls, saying that they represent Christ, who lived in the darkness (or away from view, like the owl) because he wanted to save sinners who also lived in darkness away from the light of God.” (The Aberdeen is a 12th century bestiary.)
Blieszner, “Owls: Always a Hoot?”
[10] The Pharisee Nicodemus wanted to keep it a secret that he was meeting with Jesus, because of what the other Pharisees and Jews might think; the gospel account famously has Jesus tell him we must be born again, and Nicodemus takes this too literally, asking how he can go back into his mother’s womb. Jesus clarifies that it is a rebirth of the spirit (John 3:1–21).
There is similar word-play, and taking words too literally, in Shakesperae’s Hamlet: Polonious asks Hamlet what he is reading, and Hamlet replies, “Words, words, words.” (2.2.210) This and other similar occurrences paint Hamlet as resembling his beloved court fool, Yorick.
[11] “It was probably relatively common to see owls in England since there are five different species of owls there, and the smallest were sometimes brought up as pets.”
Swenson, “Owls in the early modern imagination…”
[12] Madalina Dobraca, in her wonderful series on words and their definitions, had a very recent post with an image of Albrecht Dürer’s “Little Owl,” which triggered my fresh reflection on Ophelia’s owl as a living mousetrap. Her series always encourages an expansion of ideas and understanding.
[13] In his blog, Ghost of Shakespeare, and in personal correspondence, Dr. John Langdon has often exemplified, and reminded me of the importance of, attending not only to scholarly conclusions about works of literature, but more importantly, thinking outside the box, and often attending carefully to sensory experience, which helps push one beyond the limitations of scholarly assumptions, and also to take ownership of one’s reflections on literature and the realities it evokes.
[14] In his book, The Seduction of Fiction: A Plea for Putting Emotions Back Into Literary Interpretation, author and scholar Jean-François Vernay notes that many students find literature boring because it is often taught in such a way that it appeals too much to the assumptions of teachers and scholars, and not enough to emotion. Emotional connections might also enable students to take more intimate ownership of their reading, and this can lead to new insights.
COLLAGE IMAGES
Top left:
Annunciation Triptych (Merode Altarpiece). Crop: Far right panel of triptych. Workshop of Robert Campin Netherlandish, ca. 1427–32. Public domain, via The Met Museum:
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/470304
Top center:
The Owl, by Valentine Cameron Prinsep (1838–1904). Crop. First exhibited in 1863. Public domain via https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Il_Barbagianni_The_Owl_by_Valentine_Cameron_Prinsep.jpg
Top right:
From “Et in Arcadia ego” (detail/crop), circa 1618, by Giovanni Francesco Barbieri (Guercino, 1591–1666). Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica, Palazzo Barberini. Public domain, via
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Et-in-Arcadia-ego.jpg
Bottom left and bottom right:
From “Mice” (detail/crops), c. 1600, by Jacob de Gheyn II (1565 - 1629). Public domain, via https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/mice-jacques-de-gheyn-ii/awGAaRL3ONtDjw?hl=en
Bottom center:
From Adam and Eve” (detail, lower left, crop), 1504, engraving by Albrecht Dürer, (1471–1528). Morgan Library & Museum. Public domain, via https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/Albrecht_D%C3%BCrer%2C_Adam_and_Eve%2C_1504%2C_Engraving.jpg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
INDEX OF OPHELIA POSTS:
My 2023 series on Ophelia, and earlier Ophelia posts:
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2023/10/index-of-ophelia-posts-2023-series-and.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
YOU CAN SUPPORT ME on a one-time "tip" basis on Ko-Fi:
https://ko-fi.com/pauladrianfried
IF YOU WOULD PREFER to support me on a REGULAR basis,
you may do so on Ko-Fi, or here on Patreon:
https://patreon.com/PaulAdrianFried
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Disclaimer: If and when I quote or paraphrase bible passages or mention religion in many of my blog posts, I do not intend to promote any religion over another, nor am I attempting to promote religious belief in general; only to explore how the Bible and religion influenced Shakespeare, his plays, and his age.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for reading!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My current project is a book tentatively titled Hamlet’s Bible, about biblical allusions and plot echoes in Hamlet.
Below is a link to a list of some of my top posts (“greatest hits”), including a description of my book project (last item on the list):
https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/2019/12/top-20-hamlet-bible-posts.html
I post every week, so please visit as often as you like and consider FOLLOWING.
To find the FOLLOW button, go to the home page: https://pauladrianfried.blogspot.com/
see the = drop-down menu with three lines in the upper left.
From there you can click FOLLOW and see options.
Comments
Post a Comment