Believing

 in  Shakespeare  /    
Believing  in  God  

Michael  Ha7away  
New  York  University  in  London  
 Arriving  
•  ConversaAons  with  my  wife  
•  My  university  teachers  in  NZ  had  been  raised  in  the  
Cambridge  tradiAon  (close  reading,  a7enAon  to  words  on  
the  page)  and  I  eventually  studied  in  Cambridge  myself  
•  RESEARCH  ‘Shakespeare  and  the  Fairies’  for  the  BA  
–  Did  Shakespeare  ‘believe  in  fairies’?  
•  RESEARCH  ‘Believing  in  Shakespeare’  
–  Punning  Atle  
–  >  Hamlet’s  problem:    believing  in  the  Ghost  
•  TEACHING  My  students  tell  me  they  need  to  ‘believe  in’  
characters  or  situaAons  
•  Why  then  do  we  read  fantasy  literature?  
•  Not  describing  our  reacAons  accurately  enough    
•  We  ‘read’  performances  and  these  readings  are  models  for  ways  in  which  
we  read  other  texts,  including  Scriptures  
 ‘Believing  in’  the  Supernatural  in  the  Early  Modern  
Period  
• 
 
DisAnguish  ‘beliefs’  (espoused?)  from  ‘doctrines’  (taught?)?  
–  Some  periods  and  faith  communiAes  more  doctrinaire  than  others  

•  Beliefs  and  doctrines  change  according  to  the  forms  and  pressures  of  the  Ame    

•  Both  beliefs  and  doctrines,  scriptural  or  more  recent,  expressed  in  signs  

–  ‘ImaginaAve’  texts,  images,  plays,  music,  rituals  …  –  as  well  theological  texts  
–  We  don’t  just  see  these  or  are  moved  by  these  but  we  read  them  

•  Are  these  asser,ons  of  or  reflec,ons  upon  beliefs  and  doctrine?  
–  Should  we  disAnguish  what  is  signified  from  the  signifiers?  
 
•  Did  Shakespeare  ‘believe  in’  Ghosts?  
–  Doctrine  of  Purgatory  had  been  abolished  by  Reformers  
–  Ghosts  (and  fairies)  could  be  held  to  be  devils  

•  HAMLET  (to  Ghost)  

 Angels  and  ministers  of  grace  defend  us!  
 Be  thou  a  spirit  of  health  or  goblin  damned  …  ?    

•  Signs  can  be  possessed  of  a  longue  durée    

 
Tondal  and  the  Angel  See  a  Famous  King  in  
Purgatory  Doing  Penance  (1483)  
Bosch,  ‘Visions  of  the  Hereaber’,  ca  1500  
 Lafeu  to  Parolles,  in  All’s  Well  that  
Ends  Well  
•  Not  only  Purgatory  condemned  but  miracles  
–  In  this  play  Helena  cures  an  ailing  king  by  magic  

•  ‘They  say  miracles  are  past,  and  we  have  our  

 philosophical  persons  to  make  modern  and    familiar  
 things  supernatural  and  causeless.  Hence  is  it  that  
 we  make  trifles  of  terrors,  ensconcing    ourselves  into  
 seeming  knowledge  when  we  should  submit  
 ourselves  to  an  unknown  fear’  (AWW,  2.3.1-­‐5)  
 
•  Shakespeare  happy  to  use  ‘mouldy  tales’,  not  just  to  
entertain  but  to  think  and  explore,  show  how  people  
interpret  the  world  to  themselves  
 
 Did  Hamlet  Believe  (in)  the  Ghost?  
 
 

•  What  the  Ghost  commanded  was  problemaAc  and  possibly  

wrong    
–  Should  he  have  believed  him?  
 Evidence?  
BARNARDO    
How  now,  HoraAo?  You  tremble  and  look  pale.  
Is  not  this  something  more  than  fantasy?  
What  think  you  on’t?  
HORATIO    
Before  my  God,  I  might  not  this  believe  
Without  the  sensible  and  true  avouch  
Of  mine  own  eyes.  
 HORATIO  
MARCELLUS    
 HoraAo  says  ’As  but  our  fantasy,  
 And  will  not  let  belief  take  hold  of  him  
 Touching  this  dreaded  sight  twice  seen  of  us.  
 Therefore  I  have  entreated  him  along  
 With  us  to  watch  the  minutes  of  this  night,  
 That  if  again  this  appariAon  come  
 He  may  approve  our  eyes  and  speak  to  it.  
Do  We  ‘Believe  in’  Hamlet?  
 Dichotomies  (1):  Comprehending  vs  
Apprehending  
•    Students  of  Shakespeare  –  and  many  other  texts  –    have  
 been  programmed  to  ‘believe  in’  characters  etc.  
–  Designers  try  to  create  illusionisAc  scenery,  editors  tempted  to  
‘locate’  scenes  
 
•  ‘Characters’  are  not  simply  substanAal  fully  ‘rounded’  
beings,  resembling  people  like  us,  to  be  apprehended,  or  
seen  (in  the  mind’s    eye)    
 
•  Rather  they  are  also  complex  signs  requiring  to  be  
comprehended,  or  read  
 
•  They    come  into  being  through  the  agency  of  both  texts  and  
our  minds  
–  So  is  there  an  unchanging  enAty  for  us  to  ‘believe  in’?  
 Dichotomies  (2):  ‘Believing  in’  vs  
‘Believing  that’  
•  ‘Believing  in’  
–  CogniAon,  commitment  
–  The  Apostle’s  Creed:    ‘I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty  …’    
–  The  Nicene  Creed:    ‘We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father,  the  
Almighty  …  ’  

•  ‘Believing  that’  
–  Lending  or  giving  assent  to  assent  to  a  verifiable  statement  
–  Indicates  a  ‘proposiAonal  amtude’  
–   ‘I  believe  that  “In  the  beginning  was  the  Word”’  

•  My  surmise  is  that  many  people  when  reciAng  the  Creed  may    
consider  they  are  asserAng  the  existence  of  God  rather  than  
expressing  their  trust  in  Him  
 Theseus vs Hippolyta (1)
HIPPOLYTA      
'Tis  strange,  my  Theseus,  that  these  lovers    speak  of.  
THESEUS  [cannot  believe  in]  
 More  strange  than  true.  I  never  may  believe  
 These  anAque  fables,  nor  these  fairy  toys.  
 Lovers  and  madmen  have  such  seething  brains,  
 Such  shaping  fantasies,  that  apprehend  
 More  than  cool  reason  ever  comprehends.  
 The  lunaAc,  the  lover,  and  the  poet  
 Are  of  imaginaAon  all  compact.  
 One  sees  more  devils  than  vast  hell  can  hold:  
 That  is  the  madman.  The  lover,  all  as  franAc,  
 Sees  Helen's  beauty  in  a  brow  of  Egypt.  
 The  poet's  eye,  in  a  fine  frenzy  rolling,  
 Doth  glance  from  heaven  to  earth,  from  earth  to  heaven,  
 And  as  imaginaAon  bodies  forth  
 The  forms  of  things  unknown,  the  poet's  pen  
 Turns  them  to  shapes,  and  gives  to  airy  nothing  
 A  local  habitaAon  and  a  name.  
 Theseus  vs  Hippolyta  (2)  
 Such  tricks  hath  strong  imaginaAon  
 That  if  it  would  but  apprehend  some  joy  
 It  comprehends  some  bringer  of  that  joy;  
 Or  in  the  night,  imagining  some  fear,  
 How  easy  is  a  bush  supposed  a  bear!  
 
 HIPPOLYTA  [believes  that]  
   But  all  the  story  of  the  night  told  over,  
 And  all  their  minds  transfigured  so  together,  
 More  witnesseth  than  fancy's  images,  
 And  grows  to  something  of  great  constancy;  
 But  howsoever,  strange  and  admirable.    
 Mark  1:15:  ‘adpropinquavit  regnum  
Dei:  paenitemini  et  credite  evangelio  
[trust  (?)  the  gospel]’  (Vulgate)  
•  ‘the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand:  repent  ye,  and  
believe  the  gospel’    
•  (KJB,  New  English  Bible  )  
•  ‘the  kingdom  of  God  has  come  near;  repent,  
and  believe  in  the  good  news’  
•  (Bible:    New  Revised  Standard  Version)  
 S.  T.  Coleridge  
In  this  idea  originated  the  plan  of  the  'Lyrical  
Ballads';  in  which  it  was  agreed  that  my  
endeavours  should  be  directed  to  persons  and  
characters  supernatural,  or  at  least  romanAc,  
yet  so  as  to  transfer  from  our  inward  nature  a  
human  interest  and  a  semblance  of  truth  
sufficient  to  procure  for  these  shadows  of  
imaginaAon  that  willing  suspension  of  disbelief  
for  the  moment,  which  consAtutes  poeAc  faith.    
                   (Emphasis  added)  
 Dichotomies  (3):    ‘Thinking  about’  vs  
‘Thinking  with’  
•  Thinking  about  /  thinking  with  
•  Parables  and  accounts  of  miracles  
•  ‘Facts’  
–  The  genealogies  in  OT  as  ‘reality  effects’,  there  to  
authenAcate  other  parts  of  the  narraAve  
•  Pyrrhus  in  Hamlet  
Neoptolemus  (Pyrrhus)  Kills  Priam  
PYRRHUS,  ca  1500  
 Reading Pyrrhus

HAMLET
The rugged Pyrrhus, he whose sable arms,
Black as his purpose, did the night resemble
When he lay couchèd in the ominous horse,
Hath now this dread and black complexion smeared
With heraldry more dismal. Head to foot
Now is he total gules, horridly tricked
With blood of fathers, mothers, daughters, sons,
Baked and impasted with the parching streets,
That lend a tyrranous and damnèd light
To their vile murders. Roasted in wrath and fire,
And thus o’er-sized with coagulate gore,
With eyes like carbuncles the hellish Pyrrhus
Old grandsire Priam seeks.” (2.2.455-67)
 Playing Pyrrhus

FIRST PLAYER
Anon he finds him,
Striking too short at Greeks. His antique sword,
Rebellious to his arm, lies where it falls,
Repugnant to command. Unequal match,
Pyrrhus at Priam drives, in rage strikes wide;
But with the whiff and wind of his fell sword
Th’ unnervèd father falls. Then senseless Ilium,
Seeming to feel his blow, with flaming top
Stoops to his base, and with a hideous crash
Takes prisoner Pyrrhus’ ear. For lo, his sword,
Which was declining on the milky head
Of reverend Priam, seemed i’ th’ air to stick.
So, as a painted tyrant, Pyrrhus stood,
And, like a neutral to his will and matter,
Did nothing.
 Religious  Texts  and  Poetry  
•  ‘The  Bible  as  Literature’  
•  Religious  texts  as  (mere)  ‘poems’  
•  Poetry  oben  denigrated  
–  Plato:    ‘there  is  an  old  quarrel  between  philosophy  
and  poetry’  (Republic,  607b5-­‐6)  
–  No  categorical  disAncAon  between  poetry  
(‘feelings,  emoAons,  fantasies’)  and  prose  
(‘ma7ers  of  fact’)  
 HeurisAc  (InvesAgaAve)  WriAng  
•  Writers  in  pre-­‐RomanAc  rhetorical  tradiAons  (including  Biblical  
authors)  started  from  the  ‘inven:on’  (retrieval)  of  topics    

•   Shakespeare’s  wriAng  as  much  heurisAc  [exploratory]  as  

expressive  
–  Figures  of  speech,  etc.,  not  just  vehicles  but  inves,ga,ve  tools  
for  thought  

•  CHORUS  [to  Henry  V]  

O  for  a  muse  of  fire,  that  would  ascend  
The  brightest  heaven  of  inven:on  (Prologue.1-­‐2)  
 
–  The  inven:on  was  to  have  a  satyr  lodged  in  a  liOle  spinet  …  
who  …  advanced  his  head  above  the  top  of  the  wood  …    
Ben  Jonson,  The  Entertainment  at  Althorp,  1616  
Ben  Jonson’s  Tribute  to  Shakespeare  
                   …    he  
 Who  casts  to  write  a  living  line,  must  sweat,  
         …    and  strike  the  second  heat  
 Upon  the  Muses’  anvil;  turn  the  same,  
 (And  himself  with  it)  that  he  thinks  to  frame.  
             (emphasis  added)  
 Ideas  andTexts  
•  ProblemaAse  ideas  ‘in’  texts  
–  Ideas  are  not  things  
•  Become  self-­‐conscious  when  you  use  metaphors  such  
as  ‘underlying’,  or  preposiAons  such  as  ‘behind’  or  
‘beneath’  
 Archbishop  Rowan  
•  I  have  assumed  that  Dostoyevsky  is  not  
presenAng  to  us  a  set  of  inconclusive  
arguments  about  ‘the  existence  of  God,’  for  
and  against,  but  a  ficAonal  picture  of  what  
faith  and  the  lack  of  it  would  look  like  in  the  
poliAcal  and  social  world  of  his  day.  
   Rowan  Williams,  Dostoevsky:    Language,    
   Faith  and  Fic,on,  (London,  ConAnuum,    
   2008),  p.  4.  
 Conclusions  
•  Oh  what  a  textualised  world!  
•  Degas  vs  Mallarmé:  
•  DEGAS:    ‘What  a  business!  My  whole  day  gone  on  a  
 blasted  sonnet,  without  gemng  an  inch  further...and  it  
 isn’t  ideas  I’m  short  of  ...  I’m  full  of  them,  I’ve  got  too  
 many  ...  ‘      
MALLARMÉ:    ‘But  Degas,  you  can’t  make  a  poem  with    ideas  
 –  you  make  it  with  words!’  
   Paul  Valéry,  Degas,  Manet,  Morisot,  trans.  David  
     Paul  (Princeton  N.J.:  Princeton  University  Press,    
     1989),  p.  62