VI) Annotate of the following.
a) Which fourteen hundred years ago were nail'd For our advantage on the
bitter cross
With us to watch the minutes of this night;
That if again this apparition come.
He may approve our eyes and speak to it.
c)
It seems then that the tidings of this broil
Brake off our business for the Holy Land.
d)
So frown'd he once, when, in an angry parle,
He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.
For which, they say, you spirits oft walk in death,
Speak of it: stay, and speak! Stop it, Marcellus.
f) Which makes him prune himself, and bristle upThe crest of youth against
your dignity.
g) Forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting, The perfume and suppliance
of a minute; No more.
h) Without corrival, all her dignities: But out upon this half-faced fellowship!
PLEASE ANSWER FASTLY.
I WILL MARK AS BRAINLIEST ANSWER FASTLY.
Answers
Answer:
A Word to the Reader
How many a book on Shakespeare has been prefaced with a sort of shamefaced apology for “another book on Shakespeare.” Anyone who feels that way should never have produced such a book. For my part, I believe we are nearer the beginning than the end of our understanding of Shakespeare’s genius. Poetry forever makes itself over for each generation, and I cannot conceive a time that will not be able to ask with profit what Shakespeare has to say specifically to it. Twice within three decades our own time has called on its younger generation to avenge a wrong with the making of which it had nothing to do. For whom, then, if not for us, was Hamlet written? To whom, if not to us, did King Lear direct the question, “Is there any cause in nature that makes these hard hearts?” and of what age if not the atomic did Albany make his prediction:
It will come,
Humanity must perforce prey on itself,
Like monsters of the deep.
Ours is a time that would have sent the Greeks to their oracles. We fail at our peril to consult our own.
Nor do I apologize for the length of this book. Maurice Morgann, in the eighteenth century, wrote one of the best books on Shakespeare ever published. When it was done, he was a bit appalled by its length. “The Book is perhaps, as it stands, too bulky for the subject,” he remarked, having his quiet joke (it was on Falstaff), “but if the Reader knew how many pressing considerations, as it grew into size, the Author resisted, which yet seemed intitled to be heard, he would the more readily excuse him” Though the evidence may seem against me, I have exercised a like restraint. This book could easily have been several times as long. It is far longer than Morgann’s. But, after all, he was writing of one character; I am compelled to bring in scores.
“Shakespeare deserves to be considered in detail;—a task hitherto unattempted.” He does, and Morgann, following his own injunction, was about the first so to consider him. Books by the shelf-full have been written on Shakespeare since the publication of An Essay on the Dramatic Character of Sir John Falstaff. Many of them are crowded with specific references and quotations. Yet it is surprising how few of them have considered the poet “in detail” in Morgann’s sense, how true his “a task hitherto unattempted” still remains. Any book that considers Shakespeare in detail is bound to be a long book.
Answer:
Which fourteen hundred years ago were nail'd For our advantage on the
bitter cross