一部人类心灵咏唱出的伟大史诗，崇高和卑下、可怕和可笑、英雄和丑角的奇妙的混合，完成于1601年的《哈姆雷特》，是文艺复兴时期的巨人——莎士比亚戏剧创作的最高成就。哈姆雷特是一个刻画得极为成功的艺术形象，他像我们每一个人一样真实，但又要比我们伟大。哈姆雷特在我心目中始终是一个英雄，一个充满了悲剧美的英雄。悲剧具有一种深刻的美，悲剧存在的意义就在于，它不只是为了赢得人们一滴同情的眼泪，而是要通过悲剧产生、发展、结局的整个过程唤起人们对生命意义的严肃思索。莎士比亚所塑造的哈姆雷特这一艺术形象及其性格特点，正是遵循了悲剧艺术的特征，从而使哈姆雷特的塑造取得了巨大的成功。在《哈姆雷特》这一不朽剧作中，始终存在着善良与邪恶等一系列激烈的矛盾冲突。哈姆雷特作为该剧的主要角色，他的命运不可避免地处于这激烈矛盾冲突的漩涡之中。身为王子的哈姆雷特被莎翁塑造为生命之美的典型，他年轻英俊，坚毅勇敢，热爱自己的国家，热爱自己的父王和母后，有着心爱的恋人奥菲莉娅，可以说，他的生命正处于人生最美好的时刻。然而，这美好的生命时光瞬息之间又消失了，他是处于一种什么样的环境之中呢？我们看到，当时的丹麦宫廷一片混乱，老王奇怪地驾崩，王后改嫁新王，国外敌军压境，国内群情激愤、一触即发，而宫中却在通宵达旦地酗酒取乐，这一切，都在哈姆雷特年轻美好的生命中投下了巨大的阴影，从而使他郁郁寡欢，认为人间不过是“一个荒芜不治的花园，长满了恶毒的莠草”，这些已经为王子年轻的生命注入了悲剧的因素。随着老王鬼魂的出现，宫廷内幕的揭开，谋杀罪行的暴露，王子心中烈火的燃起，悲剧的帷幕拉开了……面对阴险奸诈的新王，哈姆雷特开始了孤身复仇的行动：为了复仇，他失手杀死了恋人的父亲；为了复仇，他佯装疯狂失去了深爱的情人；为了复仇，他对软弱的母亲冷言相向；为了复仇，他忍受着失去友情的痛苦。最后，在一场血淋淋的宫廷决斗中，他虽然杀死了阴险狡诈的新王，但自己的生命也结束在这“牢狱”般的宫廷中。鲁迅曾经说过：“悲剧就是将人生的有价值的东西毁灭给人看。”哈姆雷特作为一个深受广大群众爱戴的王子，他身上具备整顿局势、治理国家、报仇雪恨的能力。然而面对着以阴险奸诈的新王为代表的强大的封建势力，作为一个资产阶级人文主义者，他始终把这种和人民紧密相连的事业看做个人的仇恨而孤军奋战，因此，他的悲剧既是真善美与邪恶力量相冲突的悲剧，也是一个人文主义者时代的悲剧。《哈姆雷特》这部巨作给我的力量与思索是巨大而无穷的……
《哈姆雷特》读后论文 “有一千个观众，就有一千个哈姆雷特。”这是句流传已久并引起我无限好奇的话。当《哈姆雷特》这本书终于放在我的面前时，我翻开它，如同打开了魔法盒子，为它惊奇，被它吸引。我仿佛去到了丹麦王室，在哈姆雷特身边陪他成长，看着他由一个充满希望的快乐王子蜕变成一个反复延宕的忧郁王子。一股钻心的痛向我袭来，泪水在我脸上肆意流淌，是为这可怜的王子而心痛，也是为人类丑陋的灵魂而哭泣。 王子在大学时代曾说过：“人是万物的灵长。”他认为世界是纯洁美好的，他父母的归关系是人类中最和谐的，他父亲是最完美的国王。他以为他的世界如处子般纯洁，没有半颗沙砾。然而，当王子回到丹麦时，他的世界彻底改变了，黑暗笼罩着他，侵蚀着他的纯洁。父皇死了，母后改嫁了，叔父登基了。这一连串的打击将他的思绪搅混了。随着鬼魂的出现真相大白！光明彻底从他的世界消失，沉重的负担压在王子并不宽厚的肩上，他知道他的责任不仅仅是要报仇，而且要重整乾坤。 假若王子此时肯向人求救，也许历史将会改写。但是王子崇尚的是个人英雄主义，而且由于宗教思想的作祟，他的反复延宕，一次又一次错过了手刃仇人的机会，最终众叛亲离，与仇人同归于尽，丹麦皇室也从此覆灭。这不仅让我想起项羽，项羽也是个个人英雄主义者，喜欢逞匹夫之勇，不依靠众人的力量。在鸿门宴中，他有绝佳的机会弑杀刘邦，然而他也反复延宕，纵虎归山，最终造成四面楚歌，乌江自刎的悲剧结局。 哈姆雷特与项羽都有许多机会可以扭转乾坤，改变结局，但他们却一次又一次错过，这些都是性格使然，但是这些性也是他们的饿魅力所在。他们都是光明磊落的英雄，从他们身上我们可以看见人类的真善美。也许王子只适合生活在光明而纯洁的世界，在他死前的刹那，他或许看到了永恒的光明。 哈姆雷特又是极其珍视感情的,在他以装疯来躲避过忙的迫害时,他依然抑制不住对奥菲丽亚的思念,不忍心让他因自己的装疯而痛苦,而冒着受到国王怀疑的危险给他写了一首小诗:Doubt that the stars are fire;Doubt that the sun do not move;Doubt rruth to be a liar;But never doubt i love.就是这样，哈姆雷特在对命运的抉择中构造了自己的悲剧。原来他完全可以屈从于自己的命运，不去探索父亲死去的真相。但哈姆雷特的性格不允许他带着一个疑问生活在庸庸碌碌之中，所以他毅然走上了找寻真相的道路。“Things standing thus unknown，shall live behind me ！”在一个除了目标再也没有任何尺度来衡量善恶的世界里，勇敢地作出抉择，然后坦然的接受自己的命运，这就是哈姆雷特永恒的魅力之所在吧？ 在沙翁所有的作品里，《哈姆雷特》或许是最受争议的一部，也是最受注目的一部。你在十六岁时或许会被《罗米欧与朱丽叶》感动的潸然泪下，却觉得《暴风雨》不知所云；当你60岁时，又可能深深的被后者所带有的神秘色彩所打动而对人生有所感悟，而前者却已经无法再次激起你心中的波澜......但是无论你在人生的那个阶段,当你经厉了一场丰富而深刻的精神生活,当你提升了自己的人格,重新发现发现一个全新的自我,你总是能在《哈姆雷特》里找到一些你会觉得那似乎应该是属于永恒与不朽的东西。因为他谈到人生的抉择，谈到了一个生活在特定的历史与生活环境下的人在对他的个人而言是独特的而对于全人类来说又是普遍的命运面前做出的人生抉择。在只有从过去所积累的有限经验可以凭借或依托的情况下所选择的人生之路。从某中意义上说，他的经验也代表了我们的经验，他所面对的命运在我们人生的某个阶段里也是我们所要面对的。我们面对绝望的存在，在矛盾中摸索真理，在迷雾中找寻真相，在两难问题里作出行动，在一个失去标准与可以衡量标准的尺度的世界里重建价值的体系与精神大厦。 《哈姆雷特》是莎士比亚悲剧中的代表作品。在思想内容上达到了前所未有的深度和广度，深刻的揭示出封建末期社会的罪恶与本质特征。 就人物性格的内在表现来看，《哈姆雷特》是最令人觉得扑朔迷离的，或者说是最富于哲学意味的。其中如父王为恶叔所弑，王位被篡，母后与凶手乱伦而婚，王储试图复仇而装疯卖傻等情节，均可见于古老的北欧传说，特别是丹麦历史学家所著的《丹麦史》中。这些尘封已久的原始资料，本来只记载着一些粗略的情节和苍白的姓名，毫无性格于动作可言，但是在莎士比亚的笔下，读者却发现自己生活在一群鲜活的人群中间，几乎和他们休憩相关，祸福与共。特别不可思议的是，其中出现了一个几百年来令世人叹为观止而有莫测高深的光辉典型。围绕这个主人公，可以提出很多问题。例如哈姆雷特是真疯还是假疯？这个性格的典型意义在哪里？这些问题都不是单凭剧情就可以解决的。 要充分认识和正确评析本剧的中心人物，必须全面照顾他的性格和环境相矛盾的复杂性，认识他从“时代脱臼了，真糟糕，天生我要把它板正过来”这句豪言壮语，到“生存还是毁灭，这是一个值得考虑的问题”这句绝望的叹息的全部心里背景。实际上，哈姆雷特的尴尬在于以一个纤弱而又明达的心灵肩负着与其行为能力不相称的重任。用歌德的说法：“这是一株橡树给我栽在一个只应开放娇嫩的花朵的花瓶里。”哈姆雷特，一个纯洁，高尚，有道德，有知识，有决心，只能以思想代替行为，不可能成为英雄的人，就是那个“花瓶”；那项他承担不起，几乎连渺茫的希望都没有，但又决不可推卸的复仇重任，就是那株“橡树”。 一旦“橡树”的根须膨胀开来，“花瓶”就非给挤破不可，这就是悲剧。在哈姆雷特身上，人的脆弱性和环境的残暴性是如此的相反而又相成，以至这个独特的性格在内涵方面显得致密而厚重，在外延方面也显得博大而深广。正是这样，有的专家便声称，哈姆雷特并不是一个客观的过时的角色，而是我们每个人自己。 莎士比亚不属于一个时代而属于全世纪，他的戏剧就象灿烂星空中的北斗，为人们指引着方向。 “生存还是毁灭，这是一个值得考虑的问题”他提出这个问题正是哲学的基本命题。因为刚刚发生在他身上的这些事引发了他对人生哲理的思考，在他的人生中诸事顺逆的时候，他是不会考虑到这个问题的，那时他看到的只是人生的光亮面，那时的生活无疑是美好的，而现在，突如其来的这场悲剧迫使他正视生活阴暗的一面和人性丑陋的一面。 可以说，哈姆雷特对人生中阴暗的那一面还是有比较深刻的了解的。过去他对这一切只是视而不见而已。如今残酷的现实迫使他面对这一切。他预感到，自己已经被不可避免的拖入到一个悲剧的命运中。如果他父亲真是被害死的，那么为父报仇就成了他一生中不可推卸的使命。而他的敌人又是当今的国王，要想杀死他，肯定不是一件容易的事，但无论多么困难，杀父之仇是不能不报的，而他当前的任务是要想出一个巧妙的办法来核实他的叔父是否杀害了他的父亲。阴谋，暗算与残杀，这些是违背哈姆雷特善良纯真的本性的，但又是他复仇的使命所必须的。处在人生中花样年华的哈姆雷特背上了沉重的复仇使命，心中整日充满仇恨，使他内心阴暗而沉重，他陷入了无法自拔的痛苦的深渊。 对于死亡的“重重的顾虑使我们全变成了懦夫，决心的赤热的光彩，被审慎的思维盖上了一层灰色，伟大的事业在这一种考虑之下，也会逆流而退的。失去了行动的意义”。哈姆雷特在生死问题上的疑惑也预示着他在未来复仇行动上的犹豫不决，放过了一个轻而易举的复仇机会。那仅仅因为在复仇祈祷的时候，杀死他有可能使他进入天堂，那就太便宜了他。 这一段心理活动的描写表现了他对人生无法解答的根本问题哲理的思考，这个问题可以说对整个人类，都具有普遍的意义。
《哈姆雷特》是莎士比亚的作品，主要讲的是一个王子为父报仇，杀了他的叔叔的 故事 。下面是我带来的关于莎士比亚《哈姆雷特》中的人文主义思想的内容，欢迎阅读参考!莎士比亚《哈姆雷特》中的人文主义思想 范文 ：试论莎士比亚《哈姆雷特》中的人文主义思想 摘要：莎士比亚是文艺复兴时代英国乃至整个欧洲最伟大的资产阶级人文主义作家。在西方戏剧史和世界文学中享有崇高的地位。他的作品深刻的反映了16世纪至17世纪的英国现实，集中代表了整个欧洲文艺复兴的文学成就，为世界文学做出了巨大的贡献。《哈姆雷特》是莎士比亚最著名的悲剧之一代表了莎士比亚最高的艺术成就。本文主要通过对悲剧《哈姆雷特》的创作背景及内容的分析与研究来探索莎士比亚的人文主义思想表现及其意义。 关键词：莎士比亚;《哈姆雷特》;人文主义 一、《哈姆雷特》的创作背景 1.1 人文主义的诞生及其发展 人文主义有很深的历史渊源。其中的人本思想和理性精神来自古希腊罗马 文化 ，其平等、博爱的思想来自基督教精神。近代欧洲人文主义思想诞生于文艺复兴时期的意大利。人文主义(也叫人本主义)是文艺复兴的核心思想。人文主义精神是一种乐观向上、积极进取的人生观和价值观。它反对教会的来世观念和禁欲主义，肯定人的崇高地位，主张一切以“人”为本，要求把人的思想、感情、智慧从宗教神学的束缚中解放出来，肯定现世生活，歌颂爱情和个性解放，针对封建压迫和封建等级制度，人文主义鼓吹仁慈、博爱，纯真的友谊和崇高品德，提倡个性自由。总之，人文主义反映了新的时代精神，它体现出了意气风发，朝气蓬勃和乐观进取的精神，极大地冲击了腐朽的封建思想文化，为人们的精神世界开辟了一个崭新的天地。 人文主义在意大利诞生以后，就开始不断地向外传播，并且不断的得到发展。大约在15世纪、16世纪传到英国。人文主义思想在欧洲得到了广泛的传播同时，也不断地为愈来愈多的人所接受。莎士比亚就生活在这个封建制度开始瓦解，新兴资产阶级开始上升的大转折时期。当时中世纪以宗教神学为代表的蒙昧主义思想走向没落，资产阶级以个人主义为中心的世界观日益深入人心，“人文主义”在社会思潮中开始占据统治地位。正是在这个背景下莎士比亚写出了悲剧《哈姆雷特》来反映资产阶级人文主义思想同封建势力的较量和斗争，大胆地批判封建制度的残酷黑暗及对人性的禁锢，并以先进力量的暂时失败为结局，来控诉封建等级制度和封建思想的罪恶。莎士比亚的创作为人文主义思想在英国和欧洲的传播起了巨大的推动作用。 需要指出的是：人文主义者反封建思想而不反封建王权，反教会腐败、教会愚弄而不反宗教本身。绝大多数的人文主义思想者都是拥护王权的基督教教徒。他们对《圣经》的原文进行重新认识和解释，从里边找出人生而平等，不分种族，无论贵贱都是上帝的选民和仁慈、宽恕、博爱的思想，并将这些思想发展成最原始的自由、平等、博爱的伦理道德也就是我们常说的资产阶级的人道主义精神。因此，从某种意义上说，人文主义是对古代文化与中世纪文化的 总结 性继承、发展和变革，是人本精神和基督教精神的结合。 1.2 基于人文主义思想的取材 《哈姆雷特》是莎士比亚的代表作。丹麦王子为父报仇的故事最早见于12世纪丹麦历史学家撒克莱•格拉马提库斯的《丹麦史》中。文艺复兴时期法国作家贝尔佛莱斯特的《剧故事》中也有类似内容。一般认为《哈姆雷特》是根据托马斯基德的同名旧剧和其《西班牙悲剧》改编而来。哈姆雷特的故事发生在中世纪的欧洲，当时欧洲正处于封建教会势力和封建王权势力统治之下。虽然如此，但是莎士比亚并没有局限于教会和封建势力统治之下，而是通过基于人文主义观点处理原来的题材，运用巧妙的艺术构思和娴熟的艺术技巧，把人文主义思想融入到作品中去，用人文主义的观点和思想同封建思想文化和教会势力对抗。把只是单纯为父报仇的故事改编为社会悲剧，使它具有强烈的时代气息和深刻的社会意义，大大深化了故事的主题。 二、人文主义思想在《哈姆雷特》中的表现 1.1 哈姆雷特的故事情节 《哈姆雷特》讲述的是丹麦王子哈姆雷特在德国人文主义思想中心威登堡大学求学，他的父亲突然暴死，得到父王的噩耗后，他立即回国奔丧。其时，叔父克劳迪斯正要登上王位，母亲正匆匆要改嫁给新王。一连串不幸的消息使他痛苦不已，抑郁寡欢，厌世之情开始在他灵魂深处产生。正当新王与母后举行婚礼的狂欢之夜,父亲的鬼魂在城堡上空出现,向王子诉说自己的死亡真相，告诉他自己是被弟弟克劳迪斯谋杀而死的，克劳迪斯趁他午睡时,将毒草汁滴入他的耳中,毒死了他。 父亲的鬼魂要王子为他报仇。哈姆雷特下决心替父复仇，为证实叔父谋杀父亲的真相，他开始装疯，在众人面前装出一副精神失常、语言癫狂的样子。阴险狡诈、诡计多端的克劳迪斯开始怀疑起哈姆雷特，先后派遣哈姆雷特的老同学去试探他，被哈姆雷特看穿识破。一天，哈姆雷特乘一个戏剧班子进宫演出之机，授意他们演出了一出凶杀戏《捕鼠机》，邀请新王和王后一起前来观看。这出戏讲的是在维也纳发生的一个蓄意杀兄案，内容是一个维也纳的公爵被他的一个近亲在花园里毒死，不久这个凶手还取了公爵夫人的爱。他通过这出戏来影射其叔父克劳迪斯的行为，来证实事情的真伪。果然，在观看演出中，哈姆雷特发现新王面容失色、惊慌失措、坐立不安，戏未终场，便仓皇退席。鬼魂的话得到证实，哈姆雷特断定新王确是弑父篡位的叔父!与此同时，克劳迪斯为搞清哈姆雷特“演戏”的意图,授意王后找哈姆雷特谈话,同时派波洛涅斯躲在内宫帷幕后面偷听。哈姆雷特的母亲责备他对克劳迪斯无礼。哈姆雷特反唇相讥，言辞激烈，气得母亲一阵尖叫, 呼喊救命。帷幕后面也跟着发出声响。听到帷幕后的声响，哈姆雷特误以为克劳迪斯在偷听,便拔剑将其刺死。可倒下的却是老波洛涅斯。克劳迪斯害怕哈姆雷特会伤害自己，想出一个借刀杀人之计,匆匆派人把哈姆雷特遣送到英国,暗中让他们携信给英主,让英主处掉他。 在去英国的途中,哈姆雷特发现新王的信件,将计就计,改写了文句,让遣送他的人到英国替他送死,自己则借通过海盗的帮助返回丹麦。这时奥菲利娅因父亲被爱人杀死、爱人哈姆雷特被遣离国,伤心过度,精神失常，后溺水身亡。波洛涅斯之子雷欧提斯纠集一伙反叛者要为父报仇。不久,哈姆雷特和雷欧提斯在奥菲利娅的葬礼上相遇。仇人见面，分外眼红。雷欧提斯向哈姆雷特提出挑战。阴险的克劳迪斯唆使雷欧提斯与哈姆雷特比剑决斗,他在雷欧提斯的剑尖上涂了毒药,在哈姆雷特身旁放了一杯毒酒，阴谋让哈姆雷特或死于剑下,或饮鸩身亡。在决斗中，哈姆雷特取胜。比剑休息时分，雷欧提斯乘其不备,用毒剑刺伤了哈姆雷特。哈姆雷特顿时警觉, 夺下毒剑也反刺对方。雷欧提斯知道自己不能活命,当众披露了克劳迪斯的毒计。这时王后因误饮了毒酒而死。哈姆雷特怒不可遏,怀着新仇旧恨,用毒剑、毒酒一齐加于克劳迪斯，杀死克劳迪斯，惩罚了这个元凶，报了父仇，同时自己亦毒发身亡。四人同归于尽，哈姆雷特在临死前嘱咐好友霍拉旭继续他未尽的事业让人们认识社会的真实面貌，更好地正视它、改造它。 1.2 人文主义在人物形象哈姆雷特中的体现 哈姆雷特算是世界文学史上最具争议性的艺术形象。所谓“一百个人就有一百个哈姆雷特”，就概括了这个艺术典型的复杂性。把它视为文艺复兴时代人文主义思想家的观点占主流。哈姆雷特是莎士比亚极力塑造的一个人文主义者的典型形象。 在《哈姆雷特》中冲突始终围绕王子为父报仇这个中心展开。哈姆雷特出身王室，却在当时新文化中心的德国威登堡大学接受人文主义 教育 ，他接受了许多与传统和教会截然不同的人文主义新思想和新观念。认为人是“了不起的杰作”,是“宇宙的精华!万物的灵长!”而世界则是“一栋壮丽的帐幕”，一个“金黄色的火球点缀着的庄严屋宇”，表现出当时人文主义所特有的民主意识与人性光辉。哈姆雷特是个典型的学者型王子，他文武全才，光明磊落，而且作为艺术典型，人文主义的长处和局限在其言行中得到了生动的体现。一方面，哈姆雷特观察敏锐，长于思考和分析，具有思想家的全部素质。 他由个人的不幸想到普遍的苦难，由宫廷阴谋看到时代动乱，从而把个人复仇提到重整乾坤的高度。他曾多次问自己：“除了我—倒霉的我以外，谁还能改变这‘混乱颠倒的世界’?这就是哈姆雷特改造社会的人文主义的世界观。另一方面，作为一个人文主义者，他过分相信自己，太重理想。虽然，他勇于探索，但往往脱离实际，虽然受到人民群众的热爱，却不相信他们，始终使自己处于孤立的地步。在作品中，哈姆雷特说：“那是一个荒芜不治的花园，长满恶毒的秀草”，世界“是一所很大的牢狱”。这些意象象征性地告诉我们，上帝失落了，而魔鬼却活着，世界变成冷酷的世界，变成一个颠倒的时代。这样一个时代的哈姆雷特却是一个处于理想与现实中的矛盾人物形象，是一个人文主义者。哈姆雷特不具备一个王子，未来国王的气度和胆略。哈姆雷特在复仇中一再拖延，错过许多良机，比如在克劳狄斯忏悔的时候，他完全有能力有机会把罪恶的国王杀死，而他却以为克劳狄斯是在向神忏悔，这个时候杀死他不仁慈，会受到神的责怪。这从一个侧面反映了哈姆雷特的人文主义精神，却更能反映他遇事的不果断和缺乏勇气。一个王者通常是不讲游戏规则的，哈姆雷特为他所具的人文主义气质所害，导致最后悲剧的发生。 从以上的分析我们可以知道:《哈姆雷特》中的人文主义首先体现在哈姆雷特对人类的态度上,还体现在他对人和事物的平等观念上，更体现在主人公哈姆雷特的性格特征上。 1.3 人文主义在内容上的体现 《哈姆雷特》是一出人文主义思想家的悲剧，在这部悲剧中，莎士比亚的人文主义思想得到了充分的实现。莎士比亚在哈姆雷特身上寄托着自己的理想。哈姆雷特是人文主义思想者理想的代表人物，剧中他与克劳迪斯的冲突真实地反映了人文主义思想与英国现实社会的尖锐矛盾，反映了伊丽莎白女王统治末年的英国现实。 戏剧一开头, 莎士比亚就展现了一幅丑恶的社会画面：丹麦发生宫廷政变,老国王被害,王位被野心家和阴谋家克劳迪斯窃取。在新王的统治下，社会黑暗、政治腐败、外敌压境、民怨沸腾，窃取得来的王位岌岌可危。哈姆雷特与文艺复兴时期的许多先进人物一样崇尚科学，重视理智，不轻信，不盲从。父亲鬼魂出现之后，他仍然冷静观察，冷静思考，提醒自己“要先得一些比这更切实的证据”。他说：“能够把感情和理智调整得那么适当，命运不能把他玩弄于指掌之间”。在别人眼里，他也是当时多才多艺的人文主义者的典范。奥菲莉娅描述他是“朝臣的眼睛、学者的辩舌、军人的利剑、国家所瞩望的一朵娇花;时流的明镜、人伦的典范、举世瞩目的中心。”这样的一个“可爱的王子”，自然会得到民众的拥戴，这点，连他的敌人克劳狄斯都不得不承认。 克劳狄斯一再说：“他是为胡涂的群众所喜爱的”，“一般民众对他都有很大的好感”。但是，他的人文主义理想却与丑恶的现实发生了矛盾。他从威登堡回国后所看到的一切使他非常失望，国内展现在他面前的是“压迫者的凌辱、傲慢者的冷眼，被轻蔑的爱情的惨痛、法律的迁延，官吏的横暴和费尽辛勤所换来的小人的鄙视。”生活对他来说，成了一个沉重的负担。在他认识到世间混乱的同时，他幸福而美满的家庭也遭受了巨变，他所崇拜和热爱的父亲突然死去，他所爱的母亲很快就同他新登基的叔父结了婚，叔父登基后过着“酗酒取乐”糜烂生活，而且还得到朝臣的拥护。邻帮挪威蠢蠢欲动。宫廷腐化堕落，社会动荡不安，国家处于内忧外患的严重时刻。这一系列事件使他认识到了生活中的丑恶与阴暗，一个人文主义者的生活理想，开始破灭了。但人文主义并没有在他身上消亡，而是成为鞭策他的动力。他站在一个人文主义者的高度上，渐渐的认识到他的行动不单单是为父报仇，而是与整个国家的命运息息相关。他有责任和义务改造这个混乱不堪的世界。他的这种崇高的精神，正体现了人文主义者的思想。在作品中，莎士比亚还表达了他对社会底层的劳苦大众的深切同情，尖锐地抨击了社会上层统治阶级的贪婪和残忍。反映了人文主义自由、平等、博爱的思想和反封建腐败的思想。 三、《哈姆雷特》的人文主义思想及其意义 莎士比亚在《哈姆雷特》中将人类发展过程中的问题展现出来但是他并没有找到变革社会的途径和方式。在作品中，哈姆雷特虽然杀死了敌人，但仅仅是除掉了一个恶人，而不是整个人文主义者整个理想和事业上的成功。他自己也认识到这一点，临死前他希望好友霍拉旭把他的故事讲述给世人，让人们认识社会的真实面貌，更好地正视它、改造它。哈姆莱特所处的时代封建势力虽然已经腐朽但仍占统治地位，并有原始积累时期出现的新的罪恶势力与之结合，在力量对比方面暂时还大大超过了人文主义所代表的新生力量。而哈姆雷特所代表的人文主义者本身又有很大的局限性。他们把社会的斗争看作“善”与“恶”的斗争，把改革社会的希望寄托在开明君主身上。在政治上是改良主义者，在行动上是孤军作战者。 哈姆雷特是个具有先进理想并勤于思索的人文主义者。他的理想和严酷的现实发生了尖锐的矛盾。精神的危机，理想的破灭，使他悲郁愤懑，痛苦异常，也促使他不断思索，加深对社会的认识。他从家庭的变故看到宫墙外的社会问题，有强烈的责任感，然而只相信个人的作用，强调思想的力量，因而矛盾重重，思考多于行动，时时感到忧郁、茫然，行动犹豫、延宕。生活在英国新兴势力还处于幼稚阶段的哈姆雷特，找不到也不可能找到正确的途径，最后他虽然奋然一击，与敌人同归于尽，但忧郁始终伴随着他，伟大的理想并未实现。莎士比亚在哈姆雷特身上寄托了人文主义的美好理想，但是哈姆雷特的性格特征和悲剧结局也反映了人文主义的思想危机和致命弱点。 哈姆雷特所处的时代和人文主义的局限性决定了他不可能去发动群众，依靠群众，因此只能孤军奋战，最后被封建的恶势力所吞没。从某种意义上说，哈姆雷特的悲剧不仅仅是一出个人的悲剧，而是人文主义者和整个时代的悲剧。然而，作为一个悲剧人物和一个人文主义者的典型代表，哈姆雷特的意义并不在于它是否成功的消灭了罪恶，改造了现实，重整了乾坤，而在于他揭示了理想与现实的距离，先进与落后之间的矛盾，以及缩短这种距离、解决这种矛盾的必要性和迫切性。另外，他对于人和世界的看法也加深了我们对于文艺复兴时期人文主义理想与精神的了解。 作为一个典型的人文主义者的代表，哈姆雷特以他悲壮的死讴歌了个性的尊严，赢得了对封建的旧制度旧思想和黑暗势力精神上的胜利，鼓舞了后世人文主义思想者的斗争和不屈的斗志。他那崇高的品格、忧国忧民的使命感和热情高昂的思想力量，作为一种永恒的精神财富，也必将为 爱好 正义的人所珍视。 参考文献 莫洛佐夫.《莎士比亚传》.许海燕，吴俊忠译 湖南人民出版社1984年 《莎士比亚全集》 朱生豪译 人民教育出版社 1994年11月 金元浦.张良村等.《外国文学史》华东师范大学 2004年1月第一版 刘念慈.曾繁亭等.《外国作家作品专题研究》山东人民出版社 2001年6月第一版 王玮.李宏图.《世界通史教程近代卷》山东人民出版社 2004年8月第三版 庄锡昌.刘文明等《西方文化史》高等教育出版社 1999年6月第一版 莎士比亚《哈姆雷特》简介 《哈姆雷特(Hamlet)》是由威廉·莎士比亚创作于1599年至1602年间的一部悲剧作品。戏剧讲述了叔叔克劳狄斯谋害了哈姆雷特的父亲，篡取了王位，并娶了国王的遗孀乔特鲁德;哈姆雷特王子因此为父王向叔叔复仇。《哈姆雷特》是莎士比亚所有戏剧中篇幅最长的一部。本剧是前身为莎士比亚纪念剧院的英国皇家莎士比亚剧团演出频度最高的剧目。 世界著名悲剧之一，也是莎士比亚最负盛名的剧本，具有深刻的悲剧意义、复杂的人物性格以及丰富完美的悲剧艺术手法，代表着整个西方文艺复兴时期文学的最高成就。同《麦克白》、《李尔王》和《奥赛罗》一起组成莎士比亚“四大悲剧”。 莎士比亚《哈姆雷特》创作背景 十六、十七世纪之交，英国正处在封建制度向资本主义制度过渡时期，这个时期是英国历史进程中的一个巨大转折。 伊丽莎白统治的繁荣时期，资产阶级支持王权，而王权正好利用资产阶级，两方面不仅不对立，还结成了暂时的同盟。由于政局比较稳定，社会生产力获得了迅速的发展。这种新兴资本主义生产关系的发展，虽然加速了封建社会的崩溃，却仍然是依靠残酷地剥削农民来进行的。詹姆斯一世继位以后，专制集权被进一步推行，资产阶级和劳动人民的反抗遭到了大肆镇压。社会矛盾进一步激化，它从根本上动摇了封建秩序，同时为十七世纪英国资产阶级革命准备了条件，莎士比亚的创作正是对这个时代的艺术的深刻的反映。 《哈姆雷特》是借丹麦八世纪的历史反映十六世纪末和十七世纪初的英国社会现实。当时的英国，如前所述，是一个“颠倒混乱的时代”，而《哈姆雷特》正是“这个时代的缩影”。剧中哈姆雷特与克劳迪斯的斗争，象征着 新兴资产阶级人文主义者与反动的封建王权代表的斗争。通过这一斗争，作品反映了人文主义理想同英国黑暗的封建现实之间的矛盾，揭露了英国封建贵族 地主阶级与新兴资产阶级之间为了争夺权力而进行的殊死较量，批判了王权与封建邪恶势力的罪恶行径。 文艺复兴运动使欧洲进入了“人”的觉醒的时代，人们对上帝的信仰开始动摇。在“个性解放”的旗帜下“为所欲为”，这是当时的一种时代风尚。这一方面是思想的大解放，从而推动了社会文明的大发展;另一方面，尤其是到了文艺复兴的 晚期，随之产生的是私欲的泛滥和社会的混乱。面对这样一个热情而又混乱的时代，人到中年的莎士比亚，已不像早期那样沉湎于人文主义的理想给人带来的乐观与浪漫，而表现出对理想与进步背后的隐患的深入思考，《哈姆莱特》正是他对充满隐患 而又混乱的社会的一种审美观照。 猜你喜欢： 1. 莎士比亚的励志故事 2. 名著读后感2000字 3. 哈姆雷特读后感 4. 人教版高二历史必修3第二单元检测试题及答案 5. 《世界的文化杰作》练习题及答案
Hamlet and Ophelia, by Dante Gabriel RossettiPrince Hamlet is the main character in Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet.Views of HamletPerhaps the most straightforward view sees Hamlet as seeking truth in order to be certain that he is justified in carrying out the revenge called for by a ghost that claims to be the spirit of his father. The most standard view is that Hamlet is highly indecisive, which is the view as proposed by Coleridge, and a number of other critics. "Shakespeare wished to impress upon us the truth, that action is the chief end to existence". The 1948 movie with Laurence Olivier in the title role is introduced by a voiceover: "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind."T.S. Eliot offers a similar view of Hamlet's character in his critical essay, "Hamlet and His Problems" (The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism). He states, "We find Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' not in the action, not in any quotations that we might select, so much as in an unmistakable tone...".Others see Hamlet as a person charged with a duty that he both knows and feels is right, yet is unwilling to carry out. In this view, all of his efforts to satisfy himself of King Claudius' guilt, or his failure to act when he can, are evidence of this unwillingness, and Hamlet berates himself for his inability to carry out his task. After observing a play-actor performing a scene, he notes that the actor was moved to tears in the passion of the story and compares this passion for an ancient Greek character, Hecuba, in light of his own situation:Hamlet reclines next to Ophelia in Edwin Austin Abbey's The Play Scene in Hamlet"O, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!Is it not monstrous that this player here,But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,Could force his soul so to his own conceitThat from her working all his visage wan'd;Tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect,A broken voice, and his whole function suitingWith forms to his conceit? And all for nothing!For Hecuba?What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,That he should weep for her?" […]Etymology of HamletHamlet’s name is one filled with meaning and controversy. The name Hamlet occurs as early as the tenth century. His name is easily derived in form from Belleforest and the lost play from Amlethus of Saxo, and remaining in this form is then derived from its Latin form of the old Jutish Amlethoe. From this point the name can be divided into sections with common meanings. In terms of etymology the root name of Hamlet is an Icelandic noun, Amlooi, meaning ‘fool.’ However this name is derived from the way that Hamlet acts in the play and is not in all actuality the true Etymology of the name since the meaning is found through the actions of Hamlet. The second way of translating the name is by analyzing the noun aml-ooi into ‘raving mad’ and the second half, amla into ‘routine’. Later these names were incorporated into Irish dialect as Amlodhe. As phonetic laws took their course the name’s spelling changed eventually leaving it as Amlaidhe. This Irish name was given to a hero in a common folk story. The route of this name is ‘furious, raging, wild.’ These are all meanings of which Shakespeare would have been aware of when deciding on the name for his longest play.[1]AsimovAnother view of Hamlet, advanced by Isaac Asimov in his Guide to Shakespeare, holds that his actions are attributable not to indecision, but to multiple motivations: his desire to avenge the wrong done to his father, coupled with his own ambition to succeed to the throne. The tragic error committed by Hamlet, in Asimov's view, is his overreaching wish to see Claudius damned, and not merely dead, which prevents him from killing Claudius at the opportune moment.Influence of the ReformationMarcellus, Horatio, Hamlet, and the Ghost by Henry Fuseli.It has also been suggested that Hamlet's hesitations may also be rooted in the religious beliefs of Shakespeare's time. The Reformation had generated debate about the existence of purgatory (where King Hamlet claims he currently resides). The concept of purgatory is a Catholic one, and was frowned on in Protestant England. It is possible that Hamlet's own logic ought to be taken seriously. Hamlet says that he will not kill his uncle because death would send him straight to heaven, while his father (having died without foreknowledge of his death) is in purgatory doing penance for his. Hamlet's opportunity to kill his uncle comes just after the uncle has supposedly made his peace with God. Hamlet says that he would much rather take a stab at the murderer while he is frolicking in the incestuous sheets, or gambling and drinking, so he could be sure of his going straight to Hell.Freudian interpretationErnest Jones, following the work of Freud, held that Hamlet suffered from the 'Oedipus complex'. He said in his essay "The Oedipus-Complex as An Explanation of Hamlet's Mystery: A Study in Motive":His moral fate is bound up with his uncle's for good or ill. The call of duty to slay his uncle cannot be obeyed because it links itself with the call of his nature to slay his mother's husband, whether this is the first or the second; the latter call is strongly "repressed," and therefore necessarily the former also.Interestingly, Harold Bloom did a "Shakespearean Criticism" of Freud's work in response.As a mirror of the audienceInnokenty Smoktunovsky as Hamlet in the acclaimed 1964 film by Grigori Kozintsev.It has also been suggested that Hamlet, who is described by Ophelia as "th’ expectancy and rose of the fair state, / The glass of fashion and the mould of form" (Act III, Scene i, lines 148-9), is ultimately a reflection of all of the interpretations possessed by other characters in the play—and perhaps also by the members of an audience watching him. Polonius, most obviously, has a habit of misreading his own expectations into Hamlet’s actions ("Still harping on my daughter!"), though many other characters in the play participate in analogous behaviour.Gertrude has a similar tendency to interpret all of her son’s activities as the result of her "o’erhasty marriage" alone. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tend to find the stalled ambitions of a courtier in their former schoolmate’s behaviour, whereas Claudius seems to be concerned with Hamlet’s motivation only so far as it reveals the degree to which his nephew is a potential threat. Ophelia, like her father, waits in vain for Hamlet to give her signs of affection, and Horatio would have little reason to think that Hamlet was concerned with anything more pressing than the commandment of the ghost. And the First Gravedigger seems to think that Prince Hamlet, like that "whoreson mad fellow” Yorick, is simply insane without any need for explanation. Several critics, including Stephen Booth and William Empson have further investigated the analogous relationship between Hamlet, the play, and its audience.Nevertheless, over the last four centuries Prince Hamlet has become an icon in the entire western consciousness: the definition of what it means to be intelligent, and perhaps, fully human.Hamlet's parallels with other charactersOne aspect of Hamlet's character is the way in which he reflects other characters, including the play's primary antagonist, Claudius. In the play within a play, for instance, Gonzago, the king, is murdered in the garden by his nephew, Lucianus; although King Hamlet is murdered by his brother, in the Mousetrap , the regicide is a nephew, like Prince Hamlet. However, it is also worth noting that each of the characters in the play-within-a-play maps to two major characters in Hamlet, an instance of the play's many doubles:Lucianus, like Hamlet, is both a regicide and a nephew to the king; like Claudius, he is a regicide that operates by pouring poison into ears.The Player King, like Hamlet, is an erratic melancholic; like King Hamlet, he is poisoned via his ear while reclining in his orchard.The Player Queen, like Ophelia, attends to a character that is "so far from cheer and from [a] former state"; like Gertrude, she remarries a regicide.Hamlet is also, in some form, a reflection of most other characters in the play (or perhaps vice versa):Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Pyrrhus are all avenging sons. Hamlet and Laertes both blame Claudius for the death of their fathers. Hamlet and Pyrrhus are both seized by inaction at some point in their respective narratives and each avenges his father. Hamlet and Fortinbras both have plans that are thwarted by uncles that are also kings.Hamlet, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Osric and Polonius are all courtiers.Hamlet, his father, Bernardo, Marcellus, Francisco, Fortinbras and several other characters are all soldiers.Hamlet and his father share a name (as do Fortinbras and his father).Hamlet, Horatio, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Laertes are all students.Hamlet, his father, Gertrude and Claudius are all members of the Royal Family. Each of them is also killed by poison -- poison that Claudius is responsible for.Hamlet and Ophelia are each rebuked by their surviving parent in subsequent scenes; the surviving parent of each happens to be of the opposite gender. Both also enter scenes reading books and there is a contrast between the (possibly) pretend madness of Hamlet and the very real insanity of Ophelia.Hamlet, Horatio, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Claudius are each "lawful espials" at some point in the play.
Hamlet and Ophelia, by Dante Gabriel RossettiPrince Hamlet is the main character in Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet.Views of HamletPerhaps the most straightforward view sees Hamlet as seeking truth in order to be certain that he is justified in carrying out the revenge called for by a ghost that claims to be the spirit of his father. The most standard view is that Hamlet is highly indecisive, which is the view as proposed by Coleridge, and a number of other critics. "Shakespeare wished to impress upon us the truth, that action is the chief end to existence". The 1948 movie with Laurence Olivier in the title role is introduced by a voiceover: "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind."T.S. Eliot offers a similar view of Hamlet's character in his critical essay, "Hamlet and His Problems" (The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism). He states, "We find Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' not in the action, not in any quotations that we might select, so much as in an unmistakable tone...".Others see Hamlet as a person charged with a duty that he both knows and feels is right, yet is unwilling to carry out. In this view, all of his efforts to satisfy himself of King Claudius' guilt, or his failure to act when he can, are evidence of this unwillingness, and Hamlet berates himself for his inability to carry out his task. After observing a play-actor performing a scene, he notes that the actor was moved to tears in the passion of the story and compares this passion for an ancient Greek character, Hecuba, in light of his own situation:Hamlet reclines next to Ophelia in Edwin Austin Abbey's The Play Scene in Hamlet"O, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!Is it not monstrous that this player here,But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,Could force his soul so to his own conceitThat from her working all his visage wan'd;Tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect,A broken voice, and his whole function suitingWith forms to his conceit? And all for nothing!For Hecuba?What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,That he should weep for her?" […]Etymology of HamletHamlet’s name is one filled with meaning and controversy. The name Hamlet occurs as early as the tenth century. His name is easily derived in form from Belleforest and the lost play from Amlethus of Saxo, and remaining in this form is then derived from its Latin form of the old Jutish Amlethoe. From this point the name can be divided into sections with common meanings. In terms of etymology the root name of Hamlet is an Icelandic noun, Amlooi, meaning ‘fool.’ However this name is derived from the way that Hamlet acts in the play and is not in all actuality the true Etymology of the name since the meaning is found through the actions of Hamlet. The second way of translating the name is by analyzing the noun aml-ooi into ‘raving mad’ and the second half, amla into ‘routine’. Later these names were incorporated into Irish dialect as Amlodhe. As phonetic laws took their course the name’s spelling changed eventually leaving it as Amlaidhe. This Irish name was given to a hero in a common folk story. The route of this name is ‘furious, raging, wild.’ These are all meanings of which Shakespeare would have been aware of when deciding on the name for his longest play.[1]AsimovAnother view of Hamlet, advanced by Isaac Asimov in his Guide to Shakespeare, holds that his actions are attributable not to indecision, but to multiple motivations: his desire to avenge the wrong done to his father, coupled with his own ambition to succeed to the throne. The tragic error committed by Hamlet, in Asimov's view, is his overreaching wish to see Claudius damned, and not merely dead, which prevents him from killing Claudius at the opportune moment.Influence of the ReformationMarcellus, Horatio, Hamlet, and the Ghost by Henry Fuseli.It has also been suggested that Hamlet's hesitations may also be rooted in the religious beliefs of Shakespeare's time. The Reformation had generated debate about the existence of purgatory (where King Hamlet claims he currently resides). The concept of purgatory is a Catholic one, and was frowned on in Protestant England. It is possible that Hamlet's own logic ought to be taken seriously. Hamlet says that he will not kill his uncle because death would send him straight to heaven, while his father (having died without foreknowledge of his death) is in purgatory doing penance for his. Hamlet's opportunity to kill his uncle comes just after the uncle has supposedly made his peace with God. Hamlet says that he would much rather take a stab at the murderer while he is frolicking in the incestuous sheets, or gambling and drinking, so he could be sure of his going straight to Hell.Freudian interpretationErnest Jones, following the work of Freud, held that Hamlet suffered from the 'Oedipus complex'. He said in his essay "The Oedipus-Complex as An Explanation of Hamlet's Mystery: A Study in Motive":His moral fate is bound up with his uncle's for good or ill. The call of duty to slay his uncle cannot be obeyed because it links itself with the call of his nature to slay his mother's husband, whether this is the first or the second; the latter call is strongly "repressed," and therefore necessarily the former also.Interestingly, Harold Bloom did a "Shakespearean Criticism" of Freud's work in response.As a mirror of the audienceInnokenty Smoktunovsky as Hamlet in the acclaimed 1964 film by Grigori Kozintsev.It has also been suggested that Hamlet, who is described by Ophelia as "th’ expectancy and rose of the fair state, / The glass of fashion and the mould of form" (Act III, Scene i, lines 148-9), is ultimately a reflection of all of the interpretations possessed by other characters in the play—and perhaps also by the members of an audience watching him. Polonius, most obviously, has a habit of misreading his own expectations into Hamlet’s actions ("Still harping on my daughter!"), though many other characters in the play participate in analogous behaviour.Gertrude has a similar tendency to interpret all of her son’s activities as the result of her "o’erhasty marriage" alone. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tend to find the stalled ambitions of a courtier in their former schoolmate’s behaviour, whereas Claudius seems to be concerned with Hamlet’s motivation only so far as it reveals the degree to which his nephew is a potential threat. Ophelia, like her father, waits in vain for Hamlet to give her signs of affection, and Horatio would have little reason to think that Hamlet was concerned with anything more pressing than the commandment of the ghost. And the First Gravedigger seems to think that Prince Hamlet, like that "whoreson mad fellow” Yorick, is simply insane without any need for explanation. Several critics, including Stephen Booth and William Empson have further investigated the analogous relationship between Hamlet, the play, and its audience.Nevertheless, over the last four centuries Prince Hamlet has become an icon in the entire western consciousness: the definition of what it means to be intelligent, and perhaps, fully human.Hamlet's parallels with other charactersOne aspect of Hamlet's character is the way in which he reflects other characters, including the play's primary antagonist, Claudius. In the play within a play, for instance, Gonzago, the king, is murdered in the garden by his nephew, Lucianus; although King Hamlet is murdered by his brother, in the Mousetrap , the regicide is a nephew, like Prince Hamlet. However, it is also worth noting that each of the characters in the play-within-a-play maps to two major characters in Hamlet, an instance of the play's many doubles:Lucianus, like Hamlet, is both a regicide and a nephew to the king; like Claudius, he is a regicide that operates by pouring poison into ears.The Player King, like Hamlet, is an erratic melancholic; like King Hamlet, he is poisoned via his ear while reclining in his orchard.The Player Queen, like Ophelia, attends to a character that is "so far from cheer and from [a] former state"; like Gertrude, she remarries a regicide.Hamlet is also, in some form, a reflection of most other characters in the play (or perhaps vice versa):Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Pyrrhus are all avenging sons. Hamlet and Laertes both blame Claudius for the death of their fathers. Hamlet and Pyrrhus are both seized by inaction at some point in their respective narratives and each avenges his father. Hamlet and Fortinbras both have plans that are thwarted by uncles that are also kings.Hamlet, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Osric and Polonius are all courtiers.Hamlet, his father, Bernardo, Marcellus, Francisco, Fortinbras and several other characters are all soldiers.Hamlet and his father share a name (as do Fortinbras and his father).Hamlet, Horatio, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Laertes are all students.Hamlet, his father, Gertrude and Claudius are all members of the Royal Family. Each of them is also killed by poison -- poison that Claudius is responsible for.Hamlet and Ophelia are each rebuked by their surviving parent in subsequent scenes; the surviving parent of each happens to be of the opposite gender. Both also enter scenes reading books and there is a contrast between the (possibly) pretend madness of Hamlet and the very real insanity of Ophelia.Hamlet, Horatio, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Claudius are each "lawful espials" at some point in the play.
[1]李英安. 东西方导演眼中的哈姆雷特[D]. 上海戏剧学院: 上海戏剧学院,2010. [2]袁仑. 《哈姆雷特》中的延宕[D]. 复旦大学: 复旦大学,2010. [3]阿胜 编译. “哈姆雷特”上演新版复仇记[N]. 医药经济报,2004-07-16(A06). [4]邱食存. 不朽的哈姆雷特——从雷奥提斯与哈姆雷特之异论起[J]. 陇东学院学报(社会科学版),2006,(3). [5]邵雪萍. 《丹麦王子哈姆雷特的悲剧》与后现代的相遇——《哈姆雷特谋杀案》为解读莎剧开辟新思路[J]. 戏剧文学,2011,(3). [6]黄金京. 《哈姆雷特》与圣经原型——《哈姆雷特》在艺术形式上对圣经原型的借鉴[J]. 怀化学院学报,2011,(3). [7]孙艳娜. “人人都是哈姆雷特”——论林兆华对《哈姆雷特》的主题再创[J]. 四川戏剧,2010,(1). [8]高睿. 《哈姆雷特》中的“死亡”推动——谈《哈姆雷特》中的故事情节设计[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(3). [9]夏倩. 永远的哈姆雷特——哈姆雷特性格之我见[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(3). [10]周佳彬. 《哈姆雷特》之独白赏析——哈姆雷特复仇之路上的痛苦与挣扎[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(17). [11]陈玉虹,刘洪泉. 哈姆雷特的性格悲剧——莎士比亚的《哈姆雷特》[J]. 太原城市职业技术学院学报,2009,(1). [12]郭晨子. 360°的哈姆雷特 评以色列卡梅尔剧团《哈姆雷特》[J]. 上海戏剧,2009,(5). [13]杨淑敏. 一个无鸾和一千个哈姆雷特——从《夜宴》和《哈姆雷特》看电影与戏剧文学的形象塑造[J]. 电影评介,2006,(23). [14]郭晨子. 陌生了的哈姆雷特 多声部的《哈姆雷特1990》[J]. 上海戏剧,2008,(12). [15]黄立丰. 给《哈姆雷特》批评史加上一个女性主义的补遗——女性表演、批评与再创作《哈姆雷特》的历史[J]. 内蒙古电大学刊,2008,(5). [16]罗文敏. 综观哈姆雷特性格延宕批评之得失——兼论哈姆雷特延宕之因[J]. 兰州交通大学学报,2004,(2). [17]顾胜. 行动与迟疑:一个哈姆雷特式的悖论——《哈姆雷特》“To be or not to be”独白段细读[J]. 常熟高专学报,2004,(5). [18]张全辉. 走向十字架的哈姆雷特——分析第一千零一个哈姆雷特形象[J]. 曲靖师范学院学报,2004,(5). [19]庞凤琴. 哈姆雷特新论——从哈姆雷特的独白说起[J]. 文科教学,1995,(2). [20]荣国. 再谈哈姆雷特──哈姆雷特悲剧原因的分析[J]. 淄博师专学报,1995,(3). [21]续枫林. “一千零一个哈姆雷特”——从悲剧《哈姆雷特》变喜剧想到的[J]. 新疆社科论坛,1995,(3). [22]W.J.罗尔弗 ,王维昌. 关于哈姆雷特和《哈姆雷特》一剧的问题[J]. 安徽师大学报(哲学社会科学版),1981,(2). [23]刘戈. 《哈姆雷特》一部完整的欧洲史——谈《哈姆雷特》的人物象征[J]. 怀化师专学报(哲学社会科学版),1987,(1). [24]李小蓓. 对真理的求索——试析哈姆雷特与哈姆雷特世界的悲剧冲突[D]. 苏州大学: 苏州大学,2001. [25]中国社会科学院 刘志明. 与有关马克思主义的两种看法商榷[N]. 社会科学报,2005-02-24(004). [26]王文渊. 哈姆雷特,被“80后”解构 话剧《哈姆雷人》[J]. 上海戏剧,2010,(4). [27]何湘君. 从《哈姆雷特》看《少年维特之烦恼》——试解析维特之死[J]. 宁波教育学院学报,2006,(6). [28]马庆霞. 哈姆雷特与J.阿尔弗雷德.普鲁弗洛克比较之初探[J]. 聊城大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(2). [29]刘红英,于治领. 《哈姆雷特》中素体诗的语言功能[J]. 求实,2011,(S1). [30]王小琳,郝春静. 解读哈姆雷特的悲剧人生[J]. 商业文化(下半月),2011,(6). [31]丁伟. 哈姆雷特延宕的性格因素分析[J]. 新乡学院学报(社会科学版),2011,(3). [32]崔化. 跨越时空的精神对接——哈姆雷特与昆丁的个体悲剧结构比较[J]. 中国矿业大学学报(社会科学版),2011,(2). [33]欧阳文明. 《哈姆雷特》中奥菲莉娅的悲剧分析[J]. 成功(教育),2011,(7). [34]程瑜瑜. 阳光下的哈姆雷特——后现代主义观照下的《狮子王》[J]. 文艺评论,2011,(7). [35]于珊. 从哈姆雷特与伍子胥的复仇看中西伦理的不同[J]. 大众文艺,2011,(12). [36]常宇星. 从《哈姆雷特》看莎士比亚的人文主义精神[J]. 剑南文学(经典教苑),2011,(2). [37]刘翼斌. 《哈姆雷特》主题之辨[J]. 贵州社会科学,2011,(7). [38]曹艳云. 哈姆雷特的“延宕”与其王权意识[J]. 高等函授学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(10). [39]曹艳春. 越轨的王子——社会学“越轨”视角下的哈姆雷特[J]. 戏剧文学,2010,(12). [40]王荣. 透过马克思看《哈姆雷特》——我眼中的马克思主义文艺理论[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(23). [41]白塔娜. 析哈姆雷特延宕复仇的原因(英文)[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(10). [42]张世锋. 浅谈common在《哈姆雷特》中的反讽效果[J]. 现代交际,2010,(11). [43]宣晓晏. 毒入灵魂——哈姆雷特延宕性格解析[J]. 浙江万里学院学报,2010,(6). [44]李梦馨. 作为“经典中心”的中心——论《哈姆雷特》[J]. 南方文坛,2011,(1). [45]孙建光. 本我回归——哈姆雷特向死而生的心路历程[J]. 西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(6). [46]张卫东. 从精神分析学看哈姆雷特的延宕[J]. 今日南国(中旬刊),2010,(12). [47]苗琳娜. 《哈姆雷特》双关语的汉译对比[J]. 天津市经理学院学报,2010,(6). [48]齐佩. 从拉康理论看《哈姆雷特》悲剧[J]. 中小企业管理与科技(上旬刊),2011,(1). [49]王建华. 哈姆雷特形象的现代阐释[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(6). [50]谢晓科. 背离与统一——堂吉诃德和哈姆雷特比较[J]. 湖北第二师范学院学报,2011,(1).
有人说他是一位孤军奋斗，忧郁跌宕，最后征服一切困难，萌芽和上升时期资产阶级精神面貌的王子 他又是一个代表先进人们为了把人类从压迫中解放出来，热烈的寻求人生的理想和精神枷锁解脱方式，成为解放人类的光荣战斗中的一员杰出战士 他还是为了人类美好的理想，反抗社会罪恶的一个人文主义思想家 他更是处于精神危机中的理想与现实冲突中的人，甚至有浓厚的宗教神学色彩和封建意识 ………… ………… 他是哈姆雷特 “一千个读者就有一千个哈姆雷特”，每一位读者对于哈姆雷特的形象，都有属于自己的独特见解。以上的文字是他人对哈姆雷特的解读，而我认为他只是一个“孩子”罢了。哈姆雷特的性格特征的最突出表现无疑是他的优柔寡断.面对着父亲被毒杀,母亲被占有,王权被窃取,国家被觊觎的家仇国恨,哈姆雷特有强烈的复仇愿望:"我的运命在呐喊,使我全身每一根微细的血管都变得像怒狮的筋骨一样坚硬.""安息吧,安息吧,受难的灵魂!好,朋友们,我以满怀的热情,信赖着你们两位;要是在哈姆莱特的微弱的能力以内,能够有可以向你们表示他的友情之处,上帝在上,我一定不会有负你们.让我们一同进去;请你们记着无论在什么时候都要守口如瓶.这是一个颠倒混乱的时代,唉,倒楣的我却要负起重整乾坤的责任!来,我们一块儿去吧."宣誓,哈姆雷特用这种毅然绝然的方式表达着自己复仇的坚定信念.但另一方面,哈姆雷特对杀死仇人这一看似简单的举动却表现出了常人难以理解的疑虑情结,他本来有好几次杀死仇人的绝佳机会,但在这种情结的作祟下,复仇计划一次次功亏一篑.当他偶遇到仇人在为自己的罪孽祈祷时,复仇的想法只是一闪而过,接着他就转入了时机价值的思考:"现在我正好动手,他正在祷告.我现在就干,他就一命归天,我也就报仇了.这需要算一算.一个恶汉杀死了我的父亲,我这个独生子把这个恶汉却送上天堂"于是,哈姆雷特复仇首先变成了一场思想斗争. 一面是杀父之仇的切齿之痛,父亲亡灵的声声追讨,另一面是对生命价值严肃思考,与生俱来的忧郁秉性.哈姆雷特在这二者之间苦苦的徘徊."要不是怕一死就去了没有人回来的那个从未发现的国土,怕那边还不知会怎样,因此意志动摇了,因此便宁愿忍受目前的灾殃,而不愿投奔另一些未知的苦难 这样子,顾虑使我们都成了懦夫,也就这样子,决断决行的本色上了惨白的一层思虑的病容;本可以轰轰烈烈的大作大为,由于这一点想不通,就出了别扭,失去了行动的名分." 一个复仇计划就这样演绎成了一次痛苦的思想突围.在这个突围的过程中,哈姆雷特不断的看到社会的黑暗,力图让自己融入这种灰暗的世界中去,用敌人同样的手段来对付敌人;但是人道与正义的信仰却做着本能的抵抗.在这种针锋相对的思想冲突中,哈姆雷特进行着艰难的蜕变和抉择."人是多么了不起的一件作品!理性是多么可贵!力量是多么无穷!仪表和举止是多么端整,多么出色!论行动,多么像天使!论了解,多么像天神!宇宙之华!万物之灵!可是,对于我,这点泥土里提炼出来的玩意儿算得了什么呢 "这里"哈姆雷特是以一种讥讽的口气讲的这段话,"这是哈姆雷特对人的地位的怀疑,也是哈姆雷特的一种时代秩序观念的反映.他用怀疑的眼光去审视周围的一切:人性的虚伪,世态的炎凉,天道的不公,最后,终于到达了这种怀疑状态的顶点:"生存还是毁灭 "而他的当务之急是复仇,有重振国家.这种对于生命意义的超负荷的思考,无疑对哈姆雷特优柔寡断的性格起到了推波助澜的作用.性格决定命运.这是真理.哈姆雷特的悲剧性格为他的悲剧命运埋下了伏笔.在这种性格之下,他被复仇的意念苦苦煎熬.复仇成了他的全部.而这一切,导致他对懦弱的母亲冷语相向,对心爱女子的视而不见,导致他亲手杀死爱人的父亲,导致他最终落入仇人的布下的圈套.最后,复仇的愿望终于实现了,可是一切美好的东西也都破碎了:哈姆雷特的雄心壮志,爱人如花的生命,母亲脆弱的生存. 这就是悲剧,其根源就在与哈姆雷特优柔寡断的性格,这就是性格的悲剧.看完了哈姆雷特后,给我们很大的触动,在他的性格使然下,哈姆雷特制造出了一个人性的悲剧,让人反省.
Hamlet and Ophelia, by Dante Gabriel RossettiPrince Hamlet is the main character in Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet.Views of HamletPerhaps the most straightforward view sees Hamlet as seeking truth in order to be certain that he is justified in carrying out the revenge called for by a ghost that claims to be the spirit of his father. The most standard view is that Hamlet is highly indecisive, which is the view as proposed by Coleridge, and a number of other critics. "Shakespeare wished to impress upon us the truth, that action is the chief end to existence". The 1948 movie with Laurence Olivier in the title role is introduced by a voiceover: "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind."T.S. Eliot offers a similar view of Hamlet's character in his critical essay, "Hamlet and His Problems" (The Sacred Wood: Essays on Poetry and Criticism). He states, "We find Shakespeare's 'Hamlet' not in the action, not in any quotations that we might select, so much as in an unmistakable tone...".Others see Hamlet as a person charged with a duty that he both knows and feels is right, yet is unwilling to carry out. In this view, all of his efforts to satisfy himself of King Claudius' guilt, or his failure to act when he can, are evidence of this unwillingness, and Hamlet berates himself for his inability to carry out his task. After observing a play-actor performing a scene, he notes that the actor was moved to tears in the passion of the story and compares this passion for an ancient Greek character, Hecuba, in light of his own situation:Hamlet reclines next to Ophelia in Edwin Austin Abbey's The Play Scene in Hamlet"O, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!Is it not monstrous that this player here,But in a fiction, in a dream of passion,Could force his soul so to his own conceitThat from her working all his visage wan'd;Tears in his eyes, distraction in's aspect,A broken voice, and his whole function suitingWith forms to his conceit? And all for nothing!For Hecuba?What's Hecuba to him, or he to Hecuba,That he should weep for her?" […]Etymology of HamletHamlet’s name is one filled with meaning and controversy. The name Hamlet occurs as early as the tenth century. His name is easily derived in form from Belleforest and the lost play from Amlethus of Saxo, and remaining in this form is then derived from its Latin form of the old Jutish Amlethoe. From this point the name can be divided into sections with common meanings. In terms of etymology the root name of Hamlet is an Icelandic noun, Amlooi, meaning ‘fool.’ However this name is derived from the way that Hamlet acts in the play and is not in all actuality the true Etymology of the name since the meaning is found through the actions of Hamlet. The second way of translating the name is by analyzing the noun aml-ooi into ‘raving mad’ and the second half, amla into ‘routine’. Later these names were incorporated into Irish dialect as Amlodhe. As phonetic laws took their course the name’s spelling changed eventually leaving it as Amlaidhe. This Irish name was given to a hero in a common folk story. The route of this name is ‘furious, raging, wild.’ These are all meanings of which Shakespeare would have been aware of when deciding on the name for his longest play.[1]AsimovAnother view of Hamlet, advanced by Isaac Asimov in his Guide to Shakespeare, holds that his actions are attributable not to indecision, but to multiple motivations: his desire to avenge the wrong done to his father, coupled with his own ambition to succeed to the throne. The tragic error committed by Hamlet, in Asimov's view, is his overreaching wish to see Claudius damned, and not merely dead, which prevents him from killing Claudius at the opportune moment.Influence of the ReformationMarcellus, Horatio, Hamlet, and the Ghost by Henry Fuseli.It has also been suggested that Hamlet's hesitations may also be rooted in the religious beliefs of Shakespeare's time. The Reformation had generated debate about the existence of purgatory (where King Hamlet claims he currently resides). The concept of purgatory is a Catholic one, and was frowned on in Protestant England. It is possible that Hamlet's own logic ought to be taken seriously. Hamlet says that he will not kill his uncle because death would send him straight to heaven, while his father (having died without foreknowledge of his death) is in purgatory doing penance for his. Hamlet's opportunity to kill his uncle comes just after the uncle has supposedly made his peace with God. Hamlet says that he would much rather take a stab at the murderer while he is frolicking in the incestuous sheets, or gambling and drinking, so he could be sure of his going straight to Hell.Freudian interpretationErnest Jones, following the work of Freud, held that Hamlet suffered from the 'Oedipus complex'. He said in his essay "The Oedipus-Complex as An Explanation of Hamlet's Mystery: A Study in Motive":His moral fate is bound up with his uncle's for good or ill. The call of duty to slay his uncle cannot be obeyed because it links itself with the call of his nature to slay his mother's husband, whether this is the first or the second; the latter call is strongly "repressed," and therefore necessarily the former also.Interestingly, Harold Bloom did a "Shakespearean Criticism" of Freud's work in response.As a mirror of the audienceInnokenty Smoktunovsky as Hamlet in the acclaimed 1964 film by Grigori Kozintsev.It has also been suggested that Hamlet, who is described by Ophelia as "th’ expectancy and rose of the fair state, / The glass of fashion and the mould of form" (Act III, Scene i, lines 148-9), is ultimately a reflection of all of the interpretations possessed by other characters in the play—and perhaps also by the members of an audience watching him. Polonius, most obviously, has a habit of misreading his own expectations into Hamlet’s actions ("Still harping on my daughter!"), though many other characters in the play participate in analogous behaviour.Gertrude has a similar tendency to interpret all of her son’s activities as the result of her "o’erhasty marriage" alone. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tend to find the stalled ambitions of a courtier in their former schoolmate’s behaviour, whereas Claudius seems to be concerned with Hamlet’s motivation only so far as it reveals the degree to which his nephew is a potential threat. Ophelia, like her father, waits in vain for Hamlet to give her signs of affection, and Horatio would have little reason to think that Hamlet was concerned with anything more pressing than the commandment of the ghost. And the First Gravedigger seems to think that Prince Hamlet, like that "whoreson mad fellow” Yorick, is simply insane without any need for explanation. Several critics, including Stephen Booth and William Empson have further investigated the analogous relationship between Hamlet, the play, and its audience.Nevertheless, over the last four centuries Prince Hamlet has become an icon in the entire western consciousness: the definition of what it means to be intelligent, and perhaps, fully human.Hamlet's parallels with other charactersOne aspect of Hamlet's character is the way in which he reflects other characters, including the play's primary antagonist, Claudius. In the play within a play, for instance, Gonzago, the king, is murdered in the garden by his nephew, Lucianus; although King Hamlet is murdered by his brother, in the Mousetrap , the regicide is a nephew, like Prince Hamlet. However, it is also worth noting that each of the characters in the play-within-a-play maps to two major characters in Hamlet, an instance of the play's many doubles:Lucianus, like Hamlet, is both a regicide and a nephew to the king; like Claudius, he is a regicide that operates by pouring poison into ears.The Player King, like Hamlet, is an erratic melancholic; like King Hamlet, he is poisoned via his ear while reclining in his orchard.The Player Queen, like Ophelia, attends to a character that is "so far from cheer and from [a] former state"; like Gertrude, she remarries a regicide.Hamlet is also, in some form, a reflection of most other characters in the play (or perhaps vice versa):Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Pyrrhus are all avenging sons. Hamlet and Laertes both blame Claudius for the death of their fathers. Hamlet and Pyrrhus are both seized by inaction at some point in their respective narratives and each avenges his father. Hamlet and Fortinbras both have plans that are thwarted by uncles that are also kings.Hamlet, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Osric and Polonius are all courtiers.Hamlet, his father, Bernardo, Marcellus, Francisco, Fortinbras and several other characters are all soldiers.Hamlet and his father share a name (as do Fortinbras and his father).Hamlet, Horatio, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Laertes are all students.Hamlet, his father, Gertrude and Claudius are all members of the Royal Family. Each of them is also killed by poison -- poison that Claudius is responsible for.Hamlet and Ophelia are each rebuked by their surviving parent in subsequent scenes; the surviving parent of each happens to be of the opposite gender. Both also enter scenes reading books and there is a contrast between the (possibly) pretend madness of Hamlet and the very real insanity of Ophelia.Hamlet, Horatio, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Claudius are each "lawful espials" at some point in the play.
[1]李英安. 东西方导演眼中的哈姆雷特[D]. 上海戏剧学院: 上海戏剧学院,2010. [2]袁仑. 《哈姆雷特》中的延宕[D]. 复旦大学: 复旦大学,2010. [3]阿胜 编译. “哈姆雷特”上演新版复仇记[N]. 医药经济报,2004-07-16(A06). [4]邱食存. 不朽的哈姆雷特——从雷奥提斯与哈姆雷特之异论起[J]. 陇东学院学报(社会科学版),2006,(3). [5]邵雪萍. 《丹麦王子哈姆雷特的悲剧》与后现代的相遇——《哈姆雷特谋杀案》为解读莎剧开辟新思路[J]. 戏剧文学,2011,(3). [6]黄金京. 《哈姆雷特》与圣经原型——《哈姆雷特》在艺术形式上对圣经原型的借鉴[J]. 怀化学院学报,2011,(3). [7]孙艳娜. “人人都是哈姆雷特”——论林兆华对《哈姆雷特》的主题再创[J]. 四川戏剧,2010,(1). [8]高睿. 《哈姆雷特》中的“死亡”推动——谈《哈姆雷特》中的故事情节设计[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(3). [9]夏倩. 永远的哈姆雷特——哈姆雷特性格之我见[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(3). [10]周佳彬. 《哈姆雷特》之独白赏析——哈姆雷特复仇之路上的痛苦与挣扎[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(17). [11]陈玉虹,刘洪泉. 哈姆雷特的性格悲剧——莎士比亚的《哈姆雷特》[J]. 太原城市职业技术学院学报,2009,(1). [12]郭晨子. 360°的哈姆雷特 评以色列卡梅尔剧团《哈姆雷特》[J]. 上海戏剧,2009,(5). [13]杨淑敏. 一个无鸾和一千个哈姆雷特——从《夜宴》和《哈姆雷特》看电影与戏剧文学的形象塑造[J]. 电影评介,2006,(23). [14]郭晨子. 陌生了的哈姆雷特 多声部的《哈姆雷特1990》[J]. 上海戏剧,2008,(12). [15]黄立丰. 给《哈姆雷特》批评史加上一个女性主义的补遗——女性表演、批评与再创作《哈姆雷特》的历史[J]. 内蒙古电大学刊,2008,(5). [16]罗文敏. 综观哈姆雷特性格延宕批评之得失——兼论哈姆雷特延宕之因[J]. 兰州交通大学学报,2004,(2). [17]顾胜. 行动与迟疑:一个哈姆雷特式的悖论——《哈姆雷特》“To be or not to be”独白段细读[J]. 常熟高专学报,2004,(5). [18]张全辉. 走向十字架的哈姆雷特——分析第一千零一个哈姆雷特形象[J]. 曲靖师范学院学报,2004,(5). [19]庞凤琴. 哈姆雷特新论——从哈姆雷特的独白说起[J]. 文科教学,1995,(2). [20]荣国. 再谈哈姆雷特──哈姆雷特悲剧原因的分析[J]. 淄博师专学报,1995,(3). [21]续枫林. “一千零一个哈姆雷特”——从悲剧《哈姆雷特》变喜剧想到的[J]. 新疆社科论坛,1995,(3). [22]W.J.罗尔弗 ,王维昌. 关于哈姆雷特和《哈姆雷特》一剧的问题[J]. 安徽师大学报(哲学社会科学版),1981,(2). [23]刘戈. 《哈姆雷特》一部完整的欧洲史——谈《哈姆雷特》的人物象征[J]. 怀化师专学报(哲学社会科学版),1987,(1). [24]李小蓓. 对真理的求索——试析哈姆雷特与哈姆雷特世界的悲剧冲突[D]. 苏州大学: 苏州大学,2001. [25]中国社会科学院 刘志明. 与有关马克思主义的两种看法商榷[N]. 社会科学报,2005-02-24(004). [26]王文渊. 哈姆雷特,被“80后”解构 话剧《哈姆雷人》[J]. 上海戏剧,2010,(4). [27]何湘君. 从《哈姆雷特》看《少年维特之烦恼》——试解析维特之死[J]. 宁波教育学院学报,2006,(6). [28]马庆霞. 哈姆雷特与J.阿尔弗雷德.普鲁弗洛克比较之初探[J]. 聊城大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(2). [29]刘红英,于治领. 《哈姆雷特》中素体诗的语言功能[J]. 求实,2011,(S1). [30]王小琳,郝春静. 解读哈姆雷特的悲剧人生[J]. 商业文化(下半月),2011,(6). [31]丁伟. 哈姆雷特延宕的性格因素分析[J]. 新乡学院学报(社会科学版),2011,(3). [32]崔化. 跨越时空的精神对接——哈姆雷特与昆丁的个体悲剧结构比较[J]. 中国矿业大学学报(社会科学版),2011,(2). [33]欧阳文明. 《哈姆雷特》中奥菲莉娅的悲剧分析[J]. 成功(教育),2011,(7). [34]程瑜瑜. 阳光下的哈姆雷特——后现代主义观照下的《狮子王》[J]. 文艺评论,2011,(7). [35]于珊. 从哈姆雷特与伍子胥的复仇看中西伦理的不同[J]. 大众文艺,2011,(12). [36]常宇星. 从《哈姆雷特》看莎士比亚的人文主义精神[J]. 剑南文学(经典教苑),2011,(2). [37]刘翼斌. 《哈姆雷特》主题之辨[J]. 贵州社会科学,2011,(7). [38]曹艳云. 哈姆雷特的“延宕”与其王权意识[J]. 高等函授学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(10). [39]曹艳春. 越轨的王子——社会学“越轨”视角下的哈姆雷特[J]. 戏剧文学,2010,(12). [40]王荣. 透过马克思看《哈姆雷特》——我眼中的马克思主义文艺理论[J]. 中国科技信息,2010,(23). [41]白塔娜. 析哈姆雷特延宕复仇的原因(英文)[J]. 语文学刊(外语教育与教学),2010,(10). [42]张世锋. 浅谈common在《哈姆雷特》中的反讽效果[J]. 现代交际,2010,(11). [43]宣晓晏. 毒入灵魂——哈姆雷特延宕性格解析[J]. 浙江万里学院学报,2010,(6). [44]李梦馨. 作为“经典中心”的中心——论《哈姆雷特》[J]. 南方文坛,2011,(1). [45]孙建光. 本我回归——哈姆雷特向死而生的心路历程[J]. 西南交通大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(6). [46]张卫东. 从精神分析学看哈姆雷特的延宕[J]. 今日南国(中旬刊),2010,(12). [47]苗琳娜. 《哈姆雷特》双关语的汉译对比[J]. 天津市经理学院学报,2010,(6). [48]齐佩. 从拉康理论看《哈姆雷特》悲剧[J]. 中小企业管理与科技(上旬刊),2011,(1). [49]王建华. 哈姆雷特形象的现代阐释[J]. 时代文学(上),2010,(6). [50]谢晓科. 背离与统一——堂吉诃德和哈姆雷特比较[J]. 湖北第二师范学院学报,2011,(1).
艾略特说：“哈姆雷特有恋母倾向。”因此，海伦.米勒写下了《哈姆雷特机器》。
论文题目即文章的题名，题目犹如“文眼”,能准确反映论文特定的核心内容，至关重要。下面是我带来的关于美国文学论文题目的内容，欢迎阅读参考!美国文学论文题目(一) 1. 从伊丽莎白和达西的爱情管窥英国人的婚恋观 2. 浅析永别了武器的艺术风格 3. 论傲慢与偏见中的金钱与婚姻 4. 通过《莎菲女士的日记》和《三个金币》比较 5. 弗吉尼亚.沃夫与丁玲的女权主义思想 6. 呼啸山庄中的爱与仇 7. 浅谈《最后一个莫西干人》的风景和种族文化冲突 8. 论《觉醒》中的象征主义 呼啸山庄中的环境分析 9. 论《觉醒》中的象征主义 10. 简爱的双重性----简爱眼中的女权主义与平等主义 11. 《双城记》中狄更斯的人道主义思想 12. 海明威作品中的女性形象 13. 乱世佳人中两位女性之对比 14. 苔丝悲剧及其成因 15. 对大卫•科波菲尔的性格分析 16. 论《了不起的盖茨比》中美国梦的破灭 17. 从《傲慢与偏见》看女性意识 18. 儿子和情人中人际关系探讨 19. 浅析《了不起的盖茨比》中美国梦的破灭 20. 黑暗的召唤--分析《麦克白》中女巫及其预言 21. 论《飘》的社会价值及斯嘉丽人物性格 22. 论《鲁宾逊漂流记》中的资本主义倾向 美国文学论文题目(二) 1、海明威战争小说中的人道主义分析 2、解读《老人与海》的主题思想 3、王子复仇记》主题分析 4、哈姆雷特之性格分析 5、论悲剧《李尔王》的艺术技巧 6、浪漫主义文学与新古典主义文学之对比研究 7、王国维的“出入说”与华兹华斯的诗论 8、由爱反映出的个性-《简.爱》中情爱的分析 9、浅析王尔德的文艺主张 10、托马斯.哈代-一个传统主义者还是现代主义者 11、苔丝：一个纯洁的女人 12、殖民地时期美国文学的特点 13、华盛.欧文-真正的美国文学之父 14、清教与美国文学 15、论马克吐温的艺术风格 16、论亨利詹姆斯的“国际题材” 17、美国现实主义文学运动的特点 18、美国梦与美国噩梦-试析《大人物盖茨比》 19、当代汉语文学与外国文学的联系 20、《章鱼》：有的放矢的一本小说 美国文学论文题目(三) 1. 价值观的碰撞-中美交流的根本冲突 2. 《鲁滨逊漂流记》中的个人主义 3. 早期美国现实主义小说初探 4. 自由之旅-析马克.吐温哈克贝里.费恩历险记 5. 浅谈哈代“性格与环境”小说中的“性格”和“环境”的关系 6. 海明威小说的叙述声音 7. 从嘉莉妹妹的形象看德莱塞的女性观 8. 《红字》中的海斯特?白兰形象解读 9. 《白鲸》的宗教意义透视 10. 《老人与海》中主人公圣地亚哥的命运新析 11. 从《永别了，武器》看海明威的写作技巧 12. 论海明威作品中的女性形象 13. 《欲望号街车》的幻想与现实的对立 14. 静水流深-----罗伯特?弗罗斯特诗歌 15. 《喧哗与骚动》的象征意义 16. 哈代小说中的自然主义 17. 《太阳依旧升起》中“迷惘的一代” 18. 白色和红色-----苔丝的双重象征色 19. 挣扎于“围城”中的悲剧人物-方鸿渐 20. 论《红字》中海斯特和丁梅斯代尔对爱情、罪恶、生活的态度 21. 关于斯佳丽的生活观 猜你喜欢： 1. 英美文学类论文范文 2. 浅谈英美文学论文 3. 英美文学论文范文 4. 英美文学方向毕业论文 5. 美国文化学术论文格式要求
哈哈，记得以前一时激动写过来着，只可惜现在不知道在那个旮旯里了
学术堂整理了十五个好写的英语专业毕业论文题目供大家进行参考：1. 英语中的性别歧视（Sex Discrimination in English Language ）2. 电影《乱世佳人》长期受到青睐的原因（Gone with the Wind – Why This Movie Has the Lasting Popularity）3. 广告英语特点分析（An Analysis of Language Features in English Advertisement）4. 美国青少年教育问题浅析（An Attempting Study of the Problems of American Adolescents）5. 简爱自我价值的实现（The Realization of Jane Eyre’s Self-Worth ）6. 自由贸易与保护主义（Free Trade Versus Protectionism）7. 如何在课堂上调动学生的积极性（How to Promote Motivation in the Classroom）8. 在英语教学中运用“交际法”提高学生的交际能力（Using CLT in English Teaching to Improve Students’ Communicative Competence）9. 文化差异对跨文化交际的影响（The Influence of Cultural Difference Upon Cross-cultural Communication）10. 论基督教对中世纪早期西欧文化的影响（On Christianity’s Influence Upon European Culture in the Early-stage Middle Ages ）11. 《哈克贝利费恩历险记》是一部种族主义小说吗？（The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn-a Racist Novel?）12. 第二语言学习中的文化学习（Culture Learning in Second Language Learning）13. 试论哈姆雷特的两个主题（On the Two Themes of Hamlet）14. 谚语中的文化差异（Cultural Differences in Proverbs）15. 浅谈电视暴力和儿童的关系（TV Violence and Children）
从哈姆雷特性格分析看他悲剧的必然性A Character Analysis of Shakespeare's “Hamlet” 哈姆雷特悲剧的原因分析The Reason Analysis of Hamlet Tragedy 论哈姆雷特的悲剧Comments on the Tragedy of Hamlet 论约翰济慈作品中所体现出的“美”The Beauty in the Works of John Keats 浅谈阿甘正传中所折射出的女权主义The Feminism Reflected in the Novel Forrest Gump 圣地亚哥:伟大而非完美的老人-对《老人与海》中老人的性格分析The Old Man and The Sea-Santiago-A Great Old Man Not Perfect 依莎贝尔阿彻的婚姻悲剧-对淑女的画像的主题研究On the Marriage Tragedy of Isabel Archer-A Thematic Study of the Portrait of a Lady 论淘姆索亚的性格特征Thesis on the Characteristics of Tom Sawyer 美国社会文化的缩影-浅谈淘姆索亚历险记中淘姆索亚的人物性格特征The Mirror of American Social Culture-Remarks on the Characteristics of Tom Sawyer in The Adventure of Tom Sawyer 论飘中的人物魅力On the Charm of Characters in Gone with the Wind 论飘中的女性生存意识Thesis on Female Survivalism in Gone with the Wind 分析飘中斯嘉丽的个人魅力Analyze Scarlett’s Personal Fascination in Gone with the wind 浅谈《乱世佳人》中的创业精神Remarks on the Business Spirit in Gone With the Wind 对玛格丽特�6�1米切尔《飘》中四个人物的性格分析Character Analysis on the Four Characters in Magrett Mitcell’s Gone with the Wind 斯佳丽的性格分析Personage Analysis of Scarlett 从希斯克里夫的性格演变过程看他的艺术价值Analysis on Heathcliff's Artistic Value through the Evolution Process of His Character 论呼啸山庄中希斯克里夫的悲剧命运On the Tragic Destiny of Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights 从白鲸看人与自然的关系Relationship between Mankind and Nature-from Analysis of Moby Dick 简评夏洛特.勃朗蒂的《简爱》On Charlotte Brontё’s Jane Eyre 浅谈美国文化在小说阿甘正传中的反映Tentative Reflections of American Culture in the Novel Forrest Gump 保尔·莫瑞尔永不消逝的恋母情结—对儿子与情人中男主人公的心理研究The Non-passing of Paul Morel’s Oedipus Complex—A Study of the Hero’s Psychology in Sons and Lovers 浅析玻璃动物园中劳拉的玻璃心An analysis on Laura's Glasslike Heart in the Glass Menagerie 论《傲慢与偏见》中达西的人物性格特点Character Analysis of Darcy in Pride and Prejudice 呼啸山庄中希斯克列夫人物性格的双重性分析呼啸山庄中希斯克列夫自私自恋性格的分析Analysis of Selfishness and Narcissism in Heathcliff’s Characters-On the Theme of Wuthering Heights 浅谈简爱中的女权运动Feminism in Jane Eyre 回到小屋-浅析汤姆叔叔的小屋中的象征意义及其特点Back to the Cabin-analysis of symbols and characters in Uncle Tom's Cabin 《双城记》中西德尼伯尔顿的人物性格分析A Brief Analysis of Character Sydney Carton “A Tale of Two Cities” 普拉斯诗中的死亡意象The Death Image in Sylvia Plath’s Poems 对永别了武器中男主人公亨利的性格分析On the Character of Frederic Henry in A Farewell to Arms 心路历程－论雪莱的自由之路The Heart's Progress---About Shelley's Freedom Road 浅谈了不起的盖茨比中的象征主义The Symbolism in the Great Gatsby 论《老人与海》中的象征主义The Symbolism in The Old Man and the Sea 双城记中的仁爱主题Thesis on the Kind-heartedness theme in “A Tale of Two Cities” 论《哈克贝利费恩历险记》中对种族主义的误解On Misperception of Racism in the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn 论《傲慢与偏见》与《德伯家的苔丝》中男女主人公的爱情Analysis on Love of Protagonists in Pride and Prejudice and Tess of the d’Urbervilles 简爱中女主角的性格分析An Analysis of the Character of the Heroine in Jane Eyre 达洛维夫人性格分析Character Analysis of Mrs. Dalloway 从庞德英译汉诗《长干行》看其意象派风格Ezra Pound's Imagist Style in Translating a Chinese Poem As Seen from The River-Merchant's Wife：A Letter 浅谈简爱的性格特征An Analysis of the Character of the Heroine in Jane Eyre 《阿甘正传》：五十到八十年代美国社会的全景展示Forrest Gump: A Panoramic Reflection of American Society from 1950s to 1980s 论欧亨利作品中的“真爱和美德”主题Thesis on the Main Theme of Pure Love and Beautiful Virtue in O. Henry’s Writings 浅谈《卡斯特桥市长》中的悲剧The Tragedy in The Mayor of Casterbridge 浅谈托马思﹒哈代小说中的悲剧效果Tragic Effect of Thomas Hardy's Novels 对永别了武器中男主人公的性格特征发展的分析An Analysis of the Development of the Hero’s Character in A Farewell to Arms 从黑人女性主义视角看《宠儿》中的弑婴母题On the Motif of Infanticide in Beloved from a Black Feminist Perspective 美国华裔文学作家伍美琴的裸体吃中餐中的母女关系Reflections on the Mother-Daughter Relationship in the Eating Chinese Food Naked “神性”与“人性”冲突引发的爱情悲剧 德伯家的苔丝悲惨生活的根源Tess of the D’Urbervilles―A Comment on the Sources of Tess’ Tragic Life 海明威，“失落的一代”的代言人Ernest Hemingway, the Spokesman of the “Lost Generation” 试析《还乡》命运驱使下的人物性格On Characters under the Influence of Fatalism in The Return of Native 《呼啸山庄》中的爱与恨 Love and Hate in Wuthering Heights 夏洛特和简爱性格对比研究The Comparative Study of Characteristics between Charllote Bronte and Jane Eyre 苔丝的悲剧原因分析On Causes of Tess’ Tragedy 论呼啸山庄中人性的复苏The Reviving of Humanity in “Wuthering Heights” 浅谈傲慢与偏见中简.奥斯丁对待婚姻的态度Jane Austen's Attitude toward Marriage in Pride and Prejudice 浅谈威尼斯商人中夏洛克的性格特征On the Character of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice 浅谈飘中斯嘉丽的人物形象The Figural Analysis of Scarlett in Gone with the Wind 浅谈艾玛的自知之明Self-Knowledge of Emma 论简爱的独立性格The Independence of Jane Eyre 从系统功能语法的角度分析《玩偶之家》Analysis of A Doll’s House from the Systemic-functional Grammar 论《哈姆雷特》的悲剧色彩 通过德伯家的苔丝研究哈代的创作思想On Thomas Hardy’s Creative Thinking through Tess of the D’Urbervilles 从鲁滨逊的复调理论看人定胜天 大卫科波菲尔中主要人物的人性对比Comparison of Some Characters’ Human Nature in David Copperfield