Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- Shakespeare, William (2) (remove)
On July 17, 1904, Hugo von Hofmannsthal wrote in his notebook: "'Elektra' […] Die Verwandtschaft und der Gegensatz zu Hamlet waren mir auffallend". He reiterated the parallels in two letters to two different addressees, Christiane Thun-Salm (October 12, 1903) and Ernst Hladny (ca. 1909-1911), and in 1912 he wrote to Richard Strauss, whose opera based on the play had premiered in 1909, about the similarity between the two royal children: "[D]a sind alle Grundmotive identisch, und doch, wer denkt bei Elektra an Hamlet!" Indeed, comparing William Shakespeare’s "Hamlet" (ca. 1600) and Hugo von Hofmannsthal's "Elektra" (1903) may not seem to be the most obvious task to undertake. At first glance, the English Renaissance humanism of "Hamlet" may appear utterly incompatible with the Viennese fin-de-siècle modernism of "Elektra", but the parallels and similarities of the two plays far exceed the mere fact that both protagonists are children of murdered kings whose mothers pick their new lovers from among their relatives. In fact, I should like to suggest that "Elektra" is a direct response to "Hamlet", and should be read as the modernist continuation of the humanist Prince of Denmark and his "antic disposition".
In recent times a whole range of theoretical approaches in literary and cultural studies have been inspired by linguistic and philological issues, by questions concerning the functioning of language as well as the conceptual history of cardinal terms of our cultural heritage. Among these approaches the work of the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben stands out as a particularly interesting case. Indeed, Agamben's approach can serve to illustrate how a concern with language animates the making of theory. This becomes perhaps most evident in one of Agamben's less widely read texts, namely his "Sacrament of language", an investigation of the historical genealogy and cultural significance of the oath. [...] In Agamben's inquiry into the genealogy of the 'sacramento' he seeks to find out how the oath functions as a linguistic procedure and what issues are involved in this operation. In the following explanations Linda Simonis proceeds in three steps: First, she retraces Agamben's historical and linguistic analysis of the oath and tries to expose the basic lines and principal thrust of his reasoning (I). In a second step, she then turns to a concrete literary example, i. e. the oath-taking scene in Shakespeare's "Hamlet" (II). In an attempt to re-interpret this famous scene, the proposed analysis aims to unfold, in the light of Agamben's approach, some of its less obvious aspects of meaning and implications. To conclude, Simonis asks what insights and conclusions can be drawn from this analysis with regard to Agamben's theoretical approach and in how far the latter can be said to gain from its linguistic awareness and its concern with commissive speech (III).