Shakespeare has been viewed by critics both as a secular writer who affirmed the dual nature of man and as a Christian allegorist whose work has a submerged but positive and elaborate pattern of Christian meaning. In Shakespeare and the Outer Mystery, Robert H. West explores the philosophical and supernatural elements of five Shakespearean dramas—Macbeth, Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, and The Tempest. Through his analysis, West discovers Shakespeare's respect for the mysteries of existence but no clear definition of the philosophical and moral context of his play worlds. An artistic motivation leads Shakespeare to use these elements ambiguously to create a dramatic effect rather than to teach a moral or ideological lesson.

THE SHAPE WAS A MAN. WILL GRASPED HIS LEFT ARM AND TRIED TO HAUL HIM UP ONTO THE RIVERBANK. THE BALD HEAD, THROWN BACK, TRAILED GRAY, WISPY STRAGGLES OF HAIR. THE DEAD MOUTH HUNG OPEN, A BLACK GAP IN THE PALE BLUR OF FACE, AND THE EYES SEEMED TO BE OPEN TOO. EVEN IN THE DARKNESS I KNEW THAT TERRIBLE FACE, FOR I HAD SEEN IT EARLIER THAT DAY AS IT WRITHED IN ANGER. IT WAS THE FACE OF OLD FARMER SPEIGHT, AND HE WAS DEAD.

Employing the analytical psychology of Carl Jung, Matthew A. Fike provides a fresh understanding of individuation in Shakespeare. This study of "the visionary mode" - Jung s term for literature that comes through the artist from the collective unconscious - combines a strong grounding in Jungian terminology and theory with myth criticism, biblical literary criticism, and postcolonial theory. Fike draws extensively on the rich discussions in the Collected Works of C. G. Jung to illuminate selected plays such as A Midsummer Night s Dream, The Merchant of Venice, The Henriad, Othello, and Hamlet in new and surprising ways. Fike s clear and thorough approach to Shakespeare offers exciting, original scholarship that will appeal to students and scholars alike.

Drawing on recent advances in historical knowledge, the author describes contemporary attitudes toward issues such as rebellion, conscience, regicide, incest, retribution, and mourning. His investigation reveals a number of convincing new reasons for viewing Hamlet not as an irresolute young man but as a vigorous and determined figure in confrontation with the moral dilemmas of his age. By understanding the play in its original terms, we find that it takes on new depth and power for our own time. Originally published in 1984. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

Hamlet's Problematic Revenge: Forging a Royal Mandate provides a new argument within Shakespearean studies that argues the oft-noted arrest of the play’s dramaturgical momentum, especially evident in Hamlet’s much delayed enactment of his revenge, represents in fact a succinct emblem of the “arrested development” in the moral maturity of the entire cast, most notably, Hamlet himself—as the unifying disclosure and tragic problem in the play. Settling for unreflective and short-sighted personal gratifications and cold comforts, they truantly elbow aside a more considerable moral obligation. Again and again, all yield this duty’s commanding priority to a childishly self-regarding fear of offending those in nominal positions of power and questionable positions of authority—figures, like Ophelia and Hamlet’s fathers, for instance, demanding an unworthy deference. While Hamlet fails to consider with loving regard the improved well-being of the larger community to which he owes his existence and, fails to interrogate the moral adequacy of the Ghost’s command of violent reprisal (two things he never does nor even contemplates doing), “all occasions” in the play “do inform against” him and merely “spur a dull revenge”—not, as he interprets his own words, arguing the need for greater urgency in his vendetta, but, instead, to “inform against” the criminality of that very course itself. His revenge therefore can be argued as “dull,” not because he cannot summon the wherewithal to enact it more bloodily, but because in obsessing about it ceaselessly he remains unreceptive to its “dull” or “unenlightened” opposition to the evil he hopes to eradicate. Hamlet does not avenge his father; this book argues that he becomes him. Amidst a wealth of previously unremarked figurative mirrorings, as well as much of the seemingly digressive material in Hamlet within Shakespearean studies, Hamlet’s Problematic Revenge brings to light a new interpretation of the tragic problem in the play.

Battenhouse's Shakespearean tragedy: Its art and Christian premises, Irving Ribner's Patterns in Shakespearian tragedy, Virgil K. Whitaker's The mirror up to nature: The techniques of Shakespeare's tragedies, and Robert Grams Hunter's Shakespeare and the mystery of God's judgments. Waters questions, for example, Battenhouse's validity of Christian theological and didactic emphases on the old purgation theory of catharsis. His approach differs also from Northrop Frye's views on the tragedies in Northrop Frye on Shakespeare, an archetypal approach to representative plays including the tragedies.

Building on current scholarly interest in the religious dimensions of the play, this study shows how Shakespeare uses Hamlet to comment on the Calvinistic Protestantism predominant around 1600. By considering the play's inner workings against the religious ideas of its time, John Curran explores how Shakespeare portrays in this work a completely deterministic universe in the Calvinist mode, and, Curran argues, exposes the disturbing aspects of Calvinism. By rendering a Catholic Prince Hamlet caught in a Protestant world which consistently denies him his aspirations for a noble life, Shakespeare is able in this play, his most theologically engaged, to delineate the differences between the two belief systems, but also to demonstrate the consequences of replacing the old religion so completely with the new.

This work directs attention to the various structural devices by which Shakespeare creates and sustains anticipation in his audience whil simultaneously provoking them to participate in the tragic protagonist's anguish.