I don't think I can rate this, I will need to sit on it for a while.
What I will say though is... Hamlet is definitely queer.

Here's the thing about Hamlet: if you see it and you hate it, you saw a terrible Hamlet. I don't care if it's given critical acclaim - fuck off, Kenneth Branagh - Hamlet is supposed to be compelling, and if you didn't find the character compelling, that actor didn't do their job. You need a Hamlet who knows the character, not a Hamlet who wants to do grace to the character or some shit.

Here's the thing: I used to hate this play. Not lowkey hate, I fucking despised it. I thought it was boring and overrated and most of all, I thought Hamlet was a dick and a boring character. And then everything changed when the fire nation attacked when I saw Santa Cruz Shakespeare's 2016 production of Hamlet, starring actress Kate Eastwood Norris as Hamlet.


(CHECK OUT HER AND OPHELIA ON THE RIGHT!! THE BLACK COAT AND PURPLE DRESS!! IF ANY OF Y'ALL HAVE A DUBIOUSLY LEGAL RECORDING OF THIS SHIT PLEASE LINK ME)

I loved it. Not only did I love it; I loved it so much that my entire interpretation of the character changed. I keep using she/her pronouns to describe Hamlet because that actress has literally replaced the character in my head. And that is what Hamlet should be about. That is how you should feel after you watch a truly great production. You should feel like you've been inwardly changed as a person. You should also probably have cried at least once.


// HI GUYS. HERE ARE MY CHARACTER PERFORMANCE OPINIONS. HAVE FUN

➽ In general, every character's pain should matter. Every character needs to matter, every character needs to make you feel.

➽ Hamlet shouldn't be an asshole. Hamlet is a very complex character, and yeah, he does a lot of screwing around with people. But his interactions with Horatio, all his interactions excluding Claudius in 1.2, his love letter to Ophelia, and other's descriptions of his newfound madness as being out of character paint a very different picture. It is not compelling to watch an asshole be an asshole for four hours. You know what's far more compelling? A kind young man struggling with grief and anger, informed suddenly that he must become cruel and unkind.

Let's put emphasis on the “young” part. If you accept the first folio as real, the only line referring to his age establishes him as 20 at most. It is the second folio where the same line is changed to referring to a 23-year period since Yoric's death, rather than a 12-year period. As a result, the idea that he's thirty probably comes from dialogue changes as the Hamlet actor aged. I know no one read this, but Hamlet should be a teenager.

➽ A lot of people think of Ophelia's character as this very innocent virgin and I'm going to utterly disagree. Ophelia's character is about agency. Her character is doubted by all the other characters, yet keeps to her guns and continuously sticks up for herself. So many adaptations of this show will take away her agency and give it to the other characters, making her final mad scene seem silly and out of place. Do not let the narrative take her agency away. Emphasize her inner turmoil! Build up her ending madness!

On a related note: if scene 3.1 between Hamlet and Ophelia didn't make you cry, I'm vetoing it. You are supposed to care about these two characters, both separately and together. You are supposed to feel both of their pains. You are not, not, not supposed to only care for Hamlet because of his blinding angst over his girlfriend. Give this moment to Ophelia. Give her the agency she deserves.

➽ Give the villains characterization too. It is so, so important to get Gertrude right. One of the best scenes in this entire show, to me, is the closet scene between Gertrude and Hamlet. But you have to make Gertrude's character interesting. Her pain has to matter as much as anyone else's.

In general, y'all suck at portraying Claudius. He's obviously a bit of a smart villain in contrast to his heroic older brother, but that's not the extent of his characterization. Claudius is, in actuality, somewhat of a clever political player. You shouldn't love him, but if you hate him, this will not be as interesting a play.

VERDICT: I fucking love this show. Please watch it before you read it because it's not as good unless you've seen a really good production. Save yourself and skip Branagh - Tennant's a little better, actually.

Blog | Goodreads | Twitter | Youtube

‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، بدونِ تردید بسیاری از شما با این اثرِ مشهور آشنایی دارید و یا آن را خوانده اید
‎در زیر چکیده ای بسیار مختصر از این نمایشنامه را برایتان مینویسم
*************************
‎عزیزانم، <هملت> پسرِ پادشاه دانمارک است... پادشاه به دستِ برادرش (عمویِ هملت) به قتل میرسد و این برادرِ قاتل، تاج و تخت پادشاه را تصرف کرده و حتی با زنِ پادشاه، یعنی زن برادرش نیز ازدواج میکند
‎از همین روی <هملت> پس از دودلی و تردیدِ بسیار برای انتقام و خونخواهیِ پدر، برمیخیزد
‎میتوان اینگونه تفسیر کرد که: <هملت> عاشقِ مادرِ خویش است و نسبت به عمویش که مادرش را تصاحب کرده است، حسادت میکند... <هملت> در اثرِ این عشق و حسدِ ناپسند و غیر متعارف، پریشان شده و احساسِ گناه میکند و به همین دلیل از تصمیمی که برایِ انتقام گرفته بود، منصرف شده و از این انتقام جوئی فرو میماند
‎برخی از پژوهشگران و روانشناسان معتقد هستند که: نمایشنامهٔ <هملت> انعکاسِ شخصیتِ " ادوارد دو ور" میباشد که احتمالاً همان <شکسپیر> حقیقی است
‎پدرِ "ادوارد دو ور" در زمانِ کودکیِ او میمیرد و مادرش سریع با مردِ دیگری ازدواج میکند.. به همین دلیل او با مادرش به جنگ و ستیز میپردازد
------------------------------------------------
‎امیدوارم از خواندنِ این اثرِ هنری لذت ببرید
‎<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

Re-read 9/9/18. Still probably the best thing ever written.

Last New Year's Eve, I was the designated driver for my group of friends. After ringing in the new year with lots of champagne (for them, not for me), I dutifully and responsibly drove them all home, making multiple stops all over town. By 1:30am, I had dropped off the last person and was a block away from my own home when another vehicle veered into my lane and blinded me with extremely bright lights. I swerved... and hit a vehicle parked on the street that I didn't even see until it was all over. My car was totaled, the car I hit was totaled, I had a broken hand and foot from the airbag and the impact of the collision, and the drunk MFer without a designated driver that caused the entire thing drove off in his not-wrecked white Honda Pilot with a smiley face bumper sticker. One block from my house, damn it.

I was pissed. This street is not a through-street; 95% of travelers on this street live in this neighborhood. Once I became mobile again, I became obsessed with finding this asshole. I drove around the neighborhood every chance I could looking for that SUV. I had fantasies of finally locating him and smashing up the Honda Pilot with my rental car. Then, when he came outside his home to investigate, I would demolish his hand and foot with a baseball bat and then take off. Truth be told, that was the first fantasy scenario. The more I obsessed about it, the grander the revenge fantasy became. Torches, snakes, and poison were all part of the revenge plot at some point.

A few weeks later, I saw it. White Honda Pilot with a smiley face bumper sticker was sitting in the driveway of a home a few streets away from mine. I pulled over on the side of the road and sat there for a very long time rehashing my revenge plots and figuring out the minute details. Then I started my car and drove home.

Because revenge is complicated. If I had gone through with the plot, I could have hurt myself. I could have hurt someone else. I would have most definitely received an even larger increase in my car insurance than I was already getting. God wouldn't have been happy with me because of the whole "Vengeance is mine" thing. I couldn't bring myself to do it. There could only be one result of my action or my inaction -- an accident that already happened and increased my car insurance rates.

And that's Hamlet in a nutshell. Shakespeare quite brilliantly turned the revenge play upside down. Hamlet, the young man seeking revenge, can't bring himself to do it. Hamlet knew that it was expected for him to seek revenge for an honor code violation, but he also knew that religion opposes revenge and could place his soul in jeopardy if he were to carry it out. So, he convinced himself that the ghost of his father might not be real and that he needed more proof. When he got his proof, he talked himself out of his revenge plot when he had the perfect opportunity because he convinced himself that killing a murderer while the murderer is praying would result in sending the murderer to heaven. He obsessively and continuously overthinks everything, even the fact that he overthinks everything. He doesn't know what to do because he realizes everyone is a liar and everyone is hiding something, and he hates that, but he does the same thing in order to figure out what's going on. He was driving around the neighborhood looking for a white Honda Pilot for the entire play.

In the graveyard scene, though, Hamlet finally gets it. There could only be one outcome whether he took his revenge or not, and that outcome was eventual death. Regardless of what we do or don't do, death is coming for all of us. One day we will be nothing but a skull without a tongue with which we can tell our stories. We all need excellent and loyal people for friends who can be our tongues when we are no longer able to speak for ourselves. Long live the Horatios of the world.

Hamlet is about the complexities of the human personality: the internal ups and downs, the thoughts that go through our heads when we're trying to sleep at night, the constant struggle to figure out what we are supposed to be doing. It isn't about a conflict between multiple people; it is about the conflicts we experience within ourselves. No wonder this is thought of as the best thing ever written. It is about putting on one face for the world and another for our alone time. It is about finding out that people you trust aren't that trustworthy. It is about that search for the white Honda Pilot that ends up with your lying in bed at night wondering if you're doing the right thing. After all these years, Hamlet is still relatable. Hamlet is all of us on any given day. And maybe even every day.

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, William Shakespeare

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, often shortened to Hamlet, is a tragedy written by William Shakespeare sometime between 1599 and 1602.

Set in Denmark, the play depicts Prince Hamlet and his revenge against his uncle, Claudius, who has murdered Hamlet's father in order to seize his throne and marry Hamlet's mother.

عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «هملت»؛ «سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک»؛ «تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک»؛ «هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک»؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش: در روزهای ماه مارس سال 1972میلادی

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مسعود فرزاد؛ تهران، بنگاه ترجمه و نشر کتاب، 1337، در 290ص؛ چاپ دوم 1346؛ موضوع سوگنمایش از نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 16م

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: داریوش شاهین؛ تهران، جاویدان، 1344، در 278ص، مصور؛

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: محمود اعتمادزاده (م.ا. به آذین)؛ تهران، اندیشه، 1344، در 288ص؛ چاپ دوم فروردین 1351؛

عنوان: سوگنمایش هملت شاهپور دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ ویراستار: هارولد جنکینز؛ مترجم: میرشمس الدین ادیب سلطانی؛ تهران، نگاه، 1385، در 395ص، فارسی انگلیسی، شابک 9643513297؛

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: آرش خیرآبادی؛ مشهد، پاژ، 1387، در 232ص؛ شابک 9789648904536؛

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ برگردان: رضا دادویی؛ تهران، آدورا، 1391، در 275ص، شابک 9786009307135؛

عنوان: تراژدی هملت : پرنس دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: بهزاد جزایری؛ تهران، انتشارات پلک، 1393، در 412ص، شابک 9789642353187؛

عنوان: هملت شاهزاده ی دانمارک؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: شیدا فروغی؛ قزوین، سایه گستر، 1393، در 48ص، شابک 9786003740082؛

عنوان: هملت؛ سروده: ویلیام شکسپیر؛ مترجم: مهرداد پورعلم؛ تهران، انتشارات ایران، 1394، در 191ص؛ شابک 9786005347593؛

نمایش‌نامه‌ ای تراژیک اثر «ویلیام شکسپیر» است که در سال 1602میلادی نوشته شده، و یکی از مشهورترین نمایش‌نامه‌ های تاریخ ادبیات جهان به شمار است؛ نمایش نامه از آنجا آغاز می‌شود که «هملت شاهزاده دانمارک»، از سفر «آلمان» به قصر خود در «هلسینبورگ دانمارک» بازمی‌گردد، تا در مراسم خاکسپاری پدرش شرکت جوید؛ پدرش به گونه ای مرموز به قتل رسیده‌، کس از چند و چون قتل شاه آگاه نیست؛ «هملت» درمی‌یابد، که مادر و عمویش با هم پیمان زناشویی بسته، و هم بستر شده‌ اند؛ وسوسه‌ ها و تردیدهای «هملت» هنگامی آغاز می‌شود، که روح شاه مقتول بر او نمایان می‌شود؛ روح به «هملت» میگوید که چگونه به دست برادر خویش به قتل رسیده‌ است، و از «هملت» می‌خواهد انتقام باز ستاند؛ «هملت» در گیر و داری اشتباهاً پدر معشوقه‌ اش «اوفلیا» را، به قتل می‌رساند، پدر «اوفلیا» در پشت پرده، مشغول جاسوسی بوده، و «هملت» اشتباهاً، او را «کلادیوس» پنداشته بود؛ «اوفلیا» از مرگ پدر آشفته می‌شود، و خود را در رودخانه‌ ای غرق می‌کند؛ سرانجام پس از درگیری با «لایریتس»، برادر «اوفلیا»، که به خونخواهی خواهر و پدر برخاسته بود، «هملت» انتقام پدر خویش را، از عموی خویش نیز می‌گیرد؛ و در پایان نمایش هر دوی آنها، به همراه «گرترود» و برادر «اوفلیا» کشته می‌شوند

شخصیتهای نمایش عبارتند از: «کلادیوس: پادشاه دانمارک و عموی هملت»؛ «هملت: پسر شاه پیشین، و برادرزاده ی پادشاه کنونی»؛ «گرترود: ملکه ی دانمارک و مادر هملت»؛ «پولونیوس: لرد چمبرلین»؛ «اوفلیا: دختر پولونیوس و معشوقه ی هملت»؛ «هوراشیو: دوست هملت»؛ «لایریتس: پسر پولونیوس»؛ «کورنلیوس، روزنکرانس، گیلدسترن: دوستان هملت»؛ «مارسلوس: افسر»؛ «برناردو: افسر»؛ «فرانسیسکو: سرباز»؛ «رینالدو: خادم پولونیوس»؛ «شبح: پدر هملت»؛ «فورتینبراس: شاهزاده نروژ»؛ «گروه بازیگران دوره گرد»؛

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 11/06/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 26/05/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

Hamlet is one of my favourite pieces of literature of all time. I have referenced so many times and re-read often, why?

Not because of the story. Yes, it is another brilliant play by the genius that is William Shakespeare, but more importantly I fell in love with the many quotes, expressions and profound statements that the book is peppered with, which have made their way into our daily lives, in common dialogue and means of expression.

A play / book that has stood the test of time and is one of the most quoted books in history. The magic lies in it’s ability to use a few words that would take the rest of us a hundred words to explain, and yet it is written so eloquently and succinctly without ambiguity.

My father taught me a lot of these phrases growing up and I was using them in my daily life without knowing that they had originated from Hamlet. So I keep a copy of Hamlet close to me in memory of my father and because this book has found its way into my heart. You have to connect with Shakespeare's language to enjoy but for me Hamlet is a beautifully written masterpiece.

Some of my favourite quotes are:

"this above all, to thine own self be true",
“Though this be madness, yet there is method in't.”
“God hath given you one face, and you make yourself another.”
“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
"to be, or not to be: that is the question",
“To die, to sleep - To sleep, perchance to dream",

Everyone should read Hamlet once. It is not long but its effects are long lasting. A stunning piece of literature.

2023/48

The first time I heard about Hamlet was while watching a Disney movie, perhaps when I was an 8-year-old kid and knew absolutely nothing about the play. In that scene of Freaky Friday, where Lindsay Lohan had to answer what the central conflicts in Hamlet are, she did answer, and then the teacher gave her an F. She got an F and was bewildered by her result. That's everything I could recollect. Then, a few days after finishing up the play, I wanted to see why she was wrong; I went to Disney Plus, looked for that scene, and listened to what she had said: it turned out that she was right. The reason why the teacher didn't approve her answer is something I can't understand or recall—I didn't want to watch the whole movie either—but her answer was precisely what I needed at the moment. I read Hamlet, but honestly, I am not entirely sure if I did read it, if that makes sense.

Without considering that I 'read' Romeo and Juliet more than a decade ago, Hamlet is my first Shakespeare, and also the first time reading it in its original English. I don't remember having trouble reading Romeo and Juliet back then, or struggling to make out what the author wanted to say. Perhaps it was the translation that helped me follow the story easily or the fact that everyone knows how it ends (the ending, by the way, was beyond my expectations). Unfortunately, my story with Hamlet is a little different.
Even though I enjoyed some parts of the story, I can't say I enjoyed the book as a whole, as I found myself looking up as many words as I needed to see and know what was happening. Not only did I find different verb conjugations—along with thou, thee, thine, thy, etc. that was the norm back then—but also many archaic terms that made my experience incredibly overwhelming. I know, when it comes to Shakespeare, you need to be mentally and physically prepared—I had a headache after finishing Act 3, and not precisely due to the storyline—and realize that this won't be an easy task. I can't even imagine reading this in high school, like those students in that movie—nor can I picture myself being tested on Shakespeare at that age (maybe I was just a lazy student). For instance, reading Don Quijote in my Spanish class in high school back then would have been outrageously boring—I haven't read the book yet, I'm just guessing based on what other students usually say about it—knowing that my taste in books was not the same at that time.

That being said, I completely liked Hamlet as a character, his character development was outstanding and his interaction with the rest of the characters was accurate and palpable. The dialogue is also masterfully done—even though I didn't understand some expressions, but that will be for the second read—and Hamlet's monologue is the best part of the play, in my opinion. It feels as if you were in the castle and plotting to kill the king yourself.
The ending, well, it was laughable. I completely forgot that this also happened in Romeo and Juliet, and at that time it was surprising, even memorable (only speaking of the ending), but this time, notwithstanding the tragedy, I couldn't help but laugh at the way the play ends, abruptly and with a chain of unfortunate events.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure this won't be my last Shakespeare, and as a matter of fact, I'm looking forward to picking up the next one soon (it won't be this year though, I'm not that crazy).

Talking to a friend of mine the other day, I told him that I read Hamlet and I wanted to understand its content a little more; he said he also read it a few years ago and saw two adaptations based on the story. I asked, 'Would you recommend I watch them too?' Immediately after he said, 'Well, don't watch Mel Gibson's version,' 'Why not? Is it that bad?' I asked. 'Not really, it's just that Hamlet in the movie is not the twink I imagined he was when I read the play,' then, well, I just burst out laughing. We don't need to explain anything else.

My rating on a scale of 1 to 5:

Quality of writing [4/5]
Pace [3/5]
Plot development [3.5/5]
Characters [4/5]
Enjoyability [3/5]
Insightfulness [5/5]
Easy of reading [2.5/5]
Photos/Illustrations [N/A]

Total [25/7] = 3.57

I don't have any earth-shattering insights to share from this most recent of god-knows-how-many readings, but this time through I was struck by:

1) what a damn fine piece of stagecraft this is, from the suspenseful, moody opening on the castle battlements to the solemn dead march carrying the prince offstage, and

2) how Shakespeare seems to want Hamlet's personality--particularly the wellspring of his actions (and lack of action)--to remain an enigma, and that he achieves this by infusing the character with so much of himself--so much wit and poetry, so much despondency and savagery--that the result is that the audience simply bows before the great mystery of human personality, and that this reverence for the unknown lurking in the heart of an extraordinary man intensifies the sense of pity, horror and waste that fills us at the end of the play.

عاشقِ آن خضوع و خشوعی هستم که بعد از خواندن و تمام کردنِ یک شاهکار به آدم دست می‌دهد. یک جور آرام‌گرفتن و رام‌شدن است.

پ.ن. : بعد از خواندنش، نمایشِ "هملت" با کارگردانی لیندزی ترنر را هم دیدم. تجربه فوق‌العاده‌ای بود :))

The genius in Shakespeare is that the text is so full of poetry and ambiguity that it can be interpreted (and often with reason) is diametrically opposed ways. TS Elliott thought it was a hack job whereas Coleridge saw it as a play about melancholy and inaction, Freud says Oedipus and AC Bradley sees a hero awakening to his fate. Somewhere in there, one must read the text for oneself and revel in its beauty and violence.

I watched both the 1948 film version by Laurence Olivier (2h46) and the 1996 version by Kenneth Branagh (4h) and found that they were both fascinating. Olivier brings out the more Freudian interpretation and Branagh the more Bradley-influenced one. I preferred the Branagh version for its relative adherence to the text with a few minor exceptions: he moved the "Angels and ministers of grace defend us" soliloquy from the middle of Act I sc IV to the beginning of Act I sc V, and also the "Tis now the witching time of night" speech at the end of Act III sc ii to near the end of III.iii when Hamlet is contemplating the murder of the praying Claudius and he removed Claudius' speech in IV.v after "O Gertrude, Gertrude!" entirely. I am in agreement that the first two changes keep the action moving and also the poetic narrative in place. I am more puzzled by the removal of Claudius' speech though because he speaks of Ophélia's madness and the arrival of Laertes. Given the hasty scene that follows, the final lines of that speech,
"Like to a murd'ring piece in many places
Gives me a superfluous death." IV.v. 95-95

This is an interesting forebodoing. But then the film was already 4h hours long...

Hamlet is a sort of porte-manteau: he carries in him all of our own insecurities: should I believe the Ghost? Is my mother who I think she is? Should this new reality push me to suicide? How can it be just for 20000 men to die for an eggshell? He hesitates during Claudius' prayer not wanting to send him to heaven and yet as he exits, the king admits that he wasn't really praying:

"My words fly up, my thoughts remain below.
"Words without thoughts never to heaven go." III.iii 97-98

so it is all pointless. It takes him, as Bradley points out, four acts to move into action, but it is now too late to arrest the inexorable forward march of fate. Hamlet is also a mise-en-abime, a picture within a picture within a picture as Branagh beautifully portrays Hamlet before a mirror (behind which hide Polonius and Claudius) for the "to be or not to be" speech. And this is truly what makes it such powerful literature, such unforgettable theatre. I feel that sometimes Hamlet is trying to resist the pull of fate and in this passage, he reminds me of Michael Corleone in Godfather II (was Coppola inspired by Shakespeare in his screenwriting? Was Puzo?):

The time is out of joint. O cursèd spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!" I.v 188-189

I am having a hard time writing this review because, as over four centuries have passed since it was penned, most likely in 1600-01, so much has been written about Shakespeare and Hamlet that I feel that what I am writing must sound contrived or rebaked. One thing that did strike me in any case was the sardonic sense of humor that Hamlet has, right up until the end. He displays such a range of emotions and emotional states that it makes him feel so very real.

What makes this so incredibly real is the staging. Having Hamlet expounding on existence (yeah, the one you know by heart) walking into the room with Ophelia (oh, but why did you let Claudius and your idiot father Polonius talk you into this), Hamlet exploding into a rage, “To a nunnery, go!” and then storming off. I think Branagh’s filming of this with mirrors was exquisite. It is theater right on the precipice of reality.

Reading Hamlet is something most only do because they have to in high school. I would say that it speaks only superficially to teenagers because of the Elizabethan language and culture. It is, however, an extraordinary read as an adult full of intrigue and, for the modern reader, déjà vus of a sort because so many phrases we take for granted are found in it. Enjoy!

Fino's Reviews of Shakespeare and Shakespearean Criticism
Comedies
The Comedy of Errors (1592-1593
The Taming of the Shrew (1593-1594)
The Two Gentlemen of Verona (1594-1595)
Love's Labour's Lost (1594-1595)
A Midsummer Night's Dream (1595-1596)
The Merchant of Venice (1596-1597)
Much Ado About Nothing (1598-1599)
As You Like It (1599-1600)
Twelfth Night (1599-1600)
The Merry Wives of Windsor (1600-1601)
All's Well That Ends Well (1602-1603)
Measure for Measure (1604-1605)
Cymbeline (1609-1610)
A Winter's Tale (1610-1611)
The Tempest (1611-1612)
Two Noble Kinsmen (1612-1613)

Histories
Henry VI Part I (1589-1590)
Henry VI Part II (1590-1591)
Henry VI Part III (1590-1591)
Richard III (1593-1594)
Richard II (1595-1596)
King John (1596-1597)
Edward III (1596-1597)
Henry IV Part I (1597-1598)
Henry IV Part II (1597-1598)
Henry V (1598-1599)
Henry VIII (1612-1612)

Tragedies
Titus Andronicus (1592-1593)
Romeo and Juliet (1594-1595)
Julius Caesar (1599-1600)
Hamlet (1600-1601)
Troilus and Cressida (1601-1602)
Othello (1604-1605)
King Lear (1605-1606)
Macbeth (1605-1606)
Anthony and Cleopatra (1606-1607)
Coriolanus (1607-1608)
Timon of Athens (1607-1608)
Pericles (1608-1609)

Shakespearean Criticism
The Wheel of Fire by Wilson Knight
A Natural Perspective by Northrop Frye
Shakespeare After All by Marjorie Garber
Shakespeare's Roman Plays and Their Background by M W MacCallum
Shakespearean Criticism 1919-1935 compiled by Anne Ridler
Shakespearean Tragedy by A.C. Bradley
Shakespeare's Sexual Comedy by Hugh M. Richmond
Shakespeare: The Comedies by R.P. Draper
Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics by Stephen Greenblatt
1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare by James Shapiro

Collections of Shakespeare
Venus and Adonis, the Rape of Lucrece and Other Poems
Shakespeare's Sonnets and a Lover's Complaint
The Complete Oxford Shakespeare

every now and then i think. maybe hamlet isn't actually that good. maybe it's overrated. i mean, it is one of the most famous works in the western literary canon, it can't actually be THAT good, surely i am just mentally ill. and then i reread hamlet and it's like. ok. never mind. why do i have this revelation annually? great question. you see, there's something wrong with me,

We need more characters who are as unhinged as Hamlet. That man has never thought about a single word that’s left his mouth.