1. Soliloquy: Talking to the Audience
EN301: Shakespeare and Selected Dramatists of his Time

2. What is a soliloquy? soliloquy, n. Pronunciation: /səˈlɪləkwɪ/
Etymology: < Latin sōliloquium (introduced by St. Augustine), < sōli-, sōlus alone + loqui to speak.
1a. An instance of talking to or conversing with oneself, or of uttering one’s thoughts aloud without addressing any person.
(Oxford English Dictionary)

3. Soliloquy in Doctor Faustus
FAUSTUS. Settle thy studies, Faustus, and begin To sound the depth of that thou wilt profess. [...] Is to dispute well logic’s chiefest end? Affords this art no greater miracle? Then read no more; thou hast attained the end. A greater subject fitteth Faustus’ wit. [...] These metaphysics of magicians And necromantic books are heavenly, Lines, circles, signs, letters, and characters – Ay, these are those that Faustus most desires. O, what a world of profit and delight, Of power, of honour, of omnipotence Is promised to the studious artisan! All things that move between the quiet poles Shall be at my command. (A-text, )
To whom is he speaking? Note use of second, then third, then first person.

4. Psychomachia in Doctor Faustus
Enter the Good Angel and the Evil Angel GOOD ANGEL. O Faustus, lay that damned book aside And gaze not on it, lest it tempt thy soul And heap God’s heavy wrath upon thy head! Read, read the Scriptures. That is blasphemy. EVIL ANGEL. Go forward, Faustus, in that famous art Wherein all nature’s treasury is contained. Be thou on earth as Jove is in the sky, Lord and commander of these elements. Exeunt [Angels] FAUSTUS. How am I glutted with conceit of this! (A-text, )
Good Angel and Evil Angel use same term of address as Faustus does to himself.

5. Direct address and complicity
AARON Now climbeth Tamora Olympus’ top, Safe out of fortune’s shot, and sits aloft, Secure of thunder’s crack or lightning flash; […] Then, Aaron, arm thy heart and fit thy thoughts To mount aloft with thy imperial mistress, And mount her pitch whom thou in triumph long Hast prisoner held fettered in amorous chains, And faster bound to Aaron’s charming eyes Than is Prometheus tied to Caucasus. Away with slavish weeds and servile thoughts! I will be bright, and shine in pearl and gold To wait upon this new-made empress. To wait, said I? – to wanton with this queen, This goddess, this Semiramis, this nymph, This siren, that will charm Rome’s Saturnine And see his shipwreck and his commonweal’s. ( )
To whom is he speaking? Himself? Us? Both at once?

6. Harry Lennix as Aaron, dir. Julie Taymor, 1999

7. Direct address and complicity
Note influence of Medieval Vice
Why does Aaron get the most soliloquies in the first half of the play? What does this do to our relationship with him?

8. Direct address in Titus
Titus (3 lines, )
Marcus (7 lines, )
Tamora? (possible aside of 7 lines, )
Young Lucius (4 lines of asides in 4.2)
Aaron (25 lines, )
Aaron (aside of 7 lines, )
Aaron (two one-line asides in 2.1)
Aaron (9 lines, )
Aaron (9 lines, )
Tamora (aside of 5 lines, )
Tamora (2-5 lines, )
Titus (aside of 3 lines, )
Aaron (aside of 3 lines, )
Titus (7 lines to the ‘earth’, )
DISCLAIMER: It may not be this simple to count, especially if the audience is addressed as the people of Rome…
Aaron (asides totalling 8 lines, and 201-5)
Lucius (13 lines, )

9. Direct address or thinking aloud?
Another disclaimer: the text is not a coded set of instructions so much as the basis for creative response. There’s no single “right” way to perform it.
Peter Brook:
‘The Deadly Theatre approaches the classics from the viewpoint that somewhere, someone has found out and defined how the play should be done.’ (1968: 14)
Some critics, however, express a clear preference one way or the other…

10. Direct address or thinking aloud?
Bert O. States:
‘In fact, the only characters in tragedy who “work” with the audience seem to be clowns and villains. […] It would be unthinkable for a character like Lear or Macbeth – or even Hamlet, who is brother to the clown – to peer familiarly into the pit because there is something in the abridgement of aesthetic distance that gives the lie to tragic character and pathos. A character who addresses the audience immediately takes on some of the audience’s objectivity and superiority to the play’s world.’ (1983: 366)
Andrew Gurr:
‘…the explanatory soliloquy or aside to the audience was a relic of the less sophisticated days which developed into a useful and more naturalistic convention of thinking aloud, but never entirely ceased to be a convention.’ (1992: 103)

11. Direct address or thinking aloud?
Bridget Escolme, on the other hand, critiques Gurr’s ‘post- nineteenth century assumption about theatrical progress’ (2005: 7), and points out that States’ description of an actor ‘peering’ into the pit assumes modern rather than Elizabethan theatrical conditions: ‘audience in darkness, actor with bright lights shining into his/her eyes’ (2005: 70).
When David Warner played Hamlet for the RSC in 1965, one critic noted:
‘This is a Hamlet desperately in need of counsel, help, experience, and he actually seeks it from the audience in his soliloquies. That is probably the greatest triumph of the production: using the Elizabethan convention with total literalness. Hamlet communes not with himself but with you. For the first time in my experience, the rhetoric spoken as it was intended to be, comes brilliantly to life.’ (Ronald Bryden, New Statesman, 27 August 1965)

12. Hamlet’s first lines
Hamlet’s first line is often played as an aside, but is not necessarily.
Hamlet has no speeches marked ‘aside’, in fact. Alan C. Dessen points out that ‘Shakespeare apparently did not use the term as part of his working vocabulary’ (1995: 52).
Tendency since Warner to play the first line as open defiance; ‘actions that a man might play’
First Folio, 1623

13. Hamlet’s first soliloquy
Actor and director Michael Pennington argues that in the first soliloquy, Hamlet speaks ‘with a shocking candour new to the play’ (1996: 40).
David Warner ‘did not use the soliloquy to bond with the audience […]; he rather assumed their collusion and let off steam. The character established was a rebellious prince who did not respect authority’ (Maher 1992: 54).
First Folio, 1623

14. ‘Now I am alone…’ First Folio, 1623
The last of these questions, suggests Pennington, ‘hangs in the air’ (1996: 75).
Note scansion / lineation: ‘For Hecuba’, ‘Yet I’, ‘Ha!’, ‘Oh Vengeance!’ (in F only), ‘A scullion… I have heard’
Pennington argues that Hamlet ‘must surely have got an answer’ to some of these questions at the Globe, and ‘even in these restrained days, the responses sit at the front of our mouths’ (1996: 75).

15. Mark Rylance as Hamlet, Shakespeare’s Globe, 2000
‘Now I am alone…’
‘I remember a boy, no more than 12, only just able to look over the front of the stage from the yard, nodding his head when I asked, ‘Am I a coward?’. I had to separate him from the rest as I proceeded to castigate them all for not calling me a coward.’ (Rylance 2003: 134)
David Warner as Hamlet,
RSC, 1965
Mark Rylance as Hamlet, Shakespeare’s Globe, 2000

16. ‘To be, or not to be…’ Second Quarto, 1604
‘The Christian inhibition against self-slaughter which Hamlet recognised in his first soliloquy has gone now, replaced by fear, and his typical strengths have deserted him. […] There is no personal pronoun at all in its thirty-five lines, so it is in a sense drained of Hamlet himself: although the cap fits, it also stands free of him as pure human analysis.’ (Pennington 1996: 81)
‘Although the content of this speech was very contemplative and personal, Warner never questioned that it should be given to the audience. Indeed, he felt that this soliloquy was the most direct of all of them. He saw it as sharing his dilemma with them (“after all, he’d shared everything else!”) and “debating gently” the very serious options.’ (Maher 1992: 56)
Second Quarto, 1604

17. Mark Rylance as Hamlet, Shakespeare’s Globe, 2000
‘To be, or not to be…’
Mark Rylance:
‘I found if I came out speaking “to be or not to be” as if it had not been cooked before, but I was cooking it at that very moment, ingredient by ingredient … it provoked a different response from the audience. Shakespeare comes to life when we speak and move with the audience in the present, particularly with famous speeches like that one. … if you actually take it step by step, you know, “to be or not to be, that is the question”; then imagine the audience saying, “What do you mean, that is the question?” And go on, “Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”, there is a sense of dialogue with the audience who are playing the role of Hamlet’s conscience at that moment.’ (Rylance 2008: )
Mark Rylance as Hamlet, Shakespeare’s Globe, 2000

18. ‘Now might I do it…’ Second Quarto, 1604 First Folio, 1623
Note differences in lineation; speech as cliffhanger (Tennant and Stewart); canonical pose; double soliloquy.
Second Quarto, 1604
First Folio, 1623

19. Lars Eidinger as Hamlet, Schaubühne Berlin, 2008
‘Now might I do it…’
As Lars Eidinger’s Hamlet debated killing Claudius, pre- filmed footage of an audience applauding played behind him. When I saw the production at London’s Barbican theatre in 2011, Hamlet’s speech descended into a torrent of action-movie clichés (‘You killed my father, you’re fucking my mother, and that’s why you’re going to die!’), before Eidinger broke off and asked the audience, ‘Is this what you want to see?’.
Lars Eidinger as Hamlet, Schaubühne Berlin, 2008

20. ‘How all occasions…’
This soliloquy appears only in the Second Quarto.
It gives Hamlet a very different ‘arc’…
CAPTAIN. Truly to speak, and with no addition, We go to gain a little patch of ground That hath in it no profit but the name.
( )
Note historical context and its implications (compare David Tennant).
Note ‘what is a man’ (recalling ‘what a piece of work is a man’ from earlier)
Note also location on a border.
Second Quarto, 1604

21. ‘How all occasions…’
‘Gielgud viewed “How all occasions” as a “very important soliloquy” that showed Hamlet’s state of mind as “clear, noble, and resolved” before he went to England, with a “clear understanding of his destiny and desire.” Here was an assertion of the Victorian notion of the noble prince who valued honour above “the death of twenty thousand men.” After World War II and Vietnam, it would become less and less popular to find inspiration in Fortinbras, and, in fact, his portrayal on the stage would become more and more brutal and dictatorial.’ (Maher 1992: 14)

22. ‘How all occasions…’
Escolme describes the change in the character/spectator relationship following Hamlet’s last soliloquy:
‘As a clown’s skull is replaced in its grave, as Ophelia is newly laid in hers, it seems we must also say goodbye to the complex theatrical subjectivity of Hamlet, as he slips back into a simpler moral frame where there can be no questioning of man’s inevitable fate.’
In Mark Rylance’s performance at the Globe, this shift was, suggests Escolme, nothing less than a ‘bereavement of the spectator’ (2005: 73).

23. ‘How all occasions…’
Bertolt Brecht described Hamlet’s final soliloquy as ‘the turning point’ at which ‘he succumbs to Fortinbras’ drums of war’ (1948: 101).
‘After at first being reluctant to answer one bloody deed by another, and even preparing to go into exile, he meets young Fortinbras at the coast as he is marching with his troops to Poland. Overcome by this warrior-like example, he turns back and in a piece of barbaric butchery slaughters his uncle, his mother and himself, leaving Denmark to the Norwegian. These events show the young man… making the most ineffective use of the new approach to Reason which he has picked up at the University of Wittenberg.’ (1948: 100-1)
Note inaccuracies regarding plot!
Also, Brecht’s dictum for the spectator: ‘The sufferings of this man appal me, because they are unnecessary…’

24. ‘How all occasions…’ Arnold Kettle puts the same idea more subtly:
‘Hamlet is not merely a Renaissance prince. Along with Marlowe’s Faustus he is the first modern intellectual in our literature and he is, of course, far more modern as well as much more intelligent than Faustus. And his dilemma is essentially the dilemma of the modern European intellectual: his ideas and values are in a deep way at odds with his actions. […]
Hamlet, the prince who has tried to become a man, becomes a prince again and does what a sixteenth-century prince ought to do – killing the murderer of his father, forgiving the stupid, clean- limbed Laertes, expressing (for the first time) direct concern about his own claims to the throne but giving his dying voice to young Fortinbras… The end then, is, in one sense, almost total defeat for everything Hamlet has stood for. But it is an acceptance of the need to act in the real world, and that is a great human triumph.’ (245-6)

25. References
Brecht, B. (1948) ‘A Short Organum for the Theatre’ in Cole, T. [ed.] (2001) Playwrights on Playwriting: from Ibsen to Ionesco, New York: Cooper Square Press,
Brook, P. (1968) The Empty Space, London: Penguin.
Dessen, A. C. (1995) Recovering Shakespeare’s Theatrical Vocabulary, Cambridge: C. U. P.
Escolme, B. (2005) Talking to the Audience: Shakespeare, Performance, Self, London & New York: Routledge.
Gurr, A. (1992) The Shakespearean Stage, : Third Edition, Cambridge: C. U. P.
Kettle, A. (1964) ‘Hamlet in a Changing World’, in Hoy, C. [ed.] (1992) Hamlet: A Norton Critical Edition, 2nd ed., New York: W. W. Norton,

26. References
Maher, M. Z. (1992) Modern Hamlets and their Soliloquies, Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
Pennington, M. (1996) Hamlet: A User’s Guide, London: Nick Hern.
Rylance, M. (2003) Play: A Recollection in Pictures and Words of the First Five Years of Play at Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre, London: Shakespeare’s Globe.
Rylance, M. (2008) ‘Research, Materials, Craft: Principles of Performance at Shakespeare’s Globe’, Carson, C. & Karim- Cooper, F. [eds] Shakespeare’s Globe: A Theatrical Experiment, Cambridge: C.U.P.,
States, B. O. (1983) ‘The Actor’s Presence: Three Phenomenal Modes’, Theatre Journal 35: 3,