Paul Adrian Fried / HAMLET'S BIBLE

In many editions of Shakespeare's Hamlet, when the prince gives advice to the actors and says they should avoid the kind of bad acting that "out-Herods Herod," footnotes often explain it by referring to the older Herod I, supposedly responsible for a "slaughter of innocents," a killing of male children at the time of the Nativity of Jesus—and also a biblical literary allusion to the slaughter of male infants at the time of the birth of Moses as related in Hebrew scriptures. But Herod I is not the only Herod editors could have chosen: They could have noted a later Herod, Herod Antipas. Why might this be a poor editorial decision, to mention only Herod I, and omit mention of Herod Antipas? Because as the Christian scriptures tell the tale (Mk 6:14-29, Mt 14:1-12), Herod Antipas divorced his first wife and married Herodias, the divorced wife of his brother. When his new stepdaughter danced for Herod Antipas and his guests, she danced so well that he offered he...

WHICH HAMLET? Many choices, Shakespeare fans: 1. The First (“bad”/unauthorized) Quarto (1602-3) reflects perhaps an early draft, or a shorter script for countryside touring while playhouses were closed? 2. Later came the Second (expanded, approved) Quarto (1604). 3. Still later came the First Folio (1623). 4. Eventually, some scholars created editions of Hamlet that combined most of the unique passages from both the Second Quarto and the First Folio, making a MUCH longer text overall— as if each word from Shakespeare were from an angel. (The Kenneth Branagh version uses this long, combined text.) But Shakespeare was no angel. Some prefer the First Folio because it might represent Shakespeare’s “last word” on the final (best?) text. This is also limiting: Perhaps he tailored each reversion to his changing times, and the last draft was not the best/last word, but more relevant to its times—and careful of its censors? 5. So this justifies what #dramaturgs and #directo...