The Aging of Hamlet"Books are by no means dead things, but contain within them such a power of life as to be as active as was that soul of which they are the offspring" Milton I read Hamlet the other day. It had changed considerably since I last read it. Hamlet himself was a little thinner, I thought; but he had also mellowed considerably; he was a little less cynical and a little more tolerant than before. Polonius was decidedly more senile than before. Ophelia was less foolish and more pathetic than ever. Laertes was exactly the same: that kind of young man does not change; but Osrichad had clearly grown up. The queen was a little fatter; and it seemed to me that the king's teeth needed attention. These were the main changes I noticed in the play... Some will say that this is fantastic nonsense and that it was I who changed, not the play. Many imagine that when a work of art leaves the hand of the master, it remains forever in its immutable beauty, although subsequent generations may think differently, seeing it from different angles. It is to highlight the fallacy of this common opinion that I write this essay. The error arises from considering a great work of art as a dead thing; while the distinguishing characteristic of everything created by genius is that it is alive and not dead. When Milton says that "books are not absolutely dead things, but contain within themselves such a power of life as to be as active as the soul of which they are the offspring," his statement is at once too broad and too narrow: too broad , because it is not true of all books, but only of a very select minority, the majority being as dead as rams; too narrow because……middle of paper……Those creations that have so much vitality in them are the works that we call “inspired”; perhaps, without distorting the language too much, we can say that this is the very meaning of "inspiration": putting the spirit into lifeless matter. It is scarcely necessary to mention the obvious fact that many things which at the time of their production pass for works of art are entirely uninspired and therefore have in them no principle of vitality, no lasting life. Most of the works written by Shakespeare's contemporaries are uninspired and therefore dead works. Although I personally take great pleasure in reading them, I always feel, after an hour or two in their company, as if I were walking among specimens - some curious, some beautiful - in a museum. cases; immutable things, things fixed forever in the frozen immobility of death.