"And therefore, as a stranger, give it welcome" : A Peakian transformation of Hamlet

This post is far removed from scientific theorizing; it sprang from a tendency in me toward literary criticism, but it's subject is very much related to Tony's eidolon/daemon dyad, and hopefully can at least facilitate discussion.

It has been a source of my profound and overwhelming gratitude to Tony, that his eidolon/daemon dyad theory has - at least for me - cast a new light on all, illuminating in all directions: "everything is new, and yielding!". . .

I do not know if any fellow-bloggers are as fond of the play, Hamlet, as am I, but I have noticed as of late that it now seems brimming with eidolon/daemon references. Even the meeting with the ghost now strikes me as Hamlet in inner dialogue with his daemon. The brilliant and classic critiques and commentary by Earnest Jones and Theodore Reik were Oedipal in their focus and brought much insight and pleasure; however, viewing through Tony's lens has increased such, very much so, for me.
I have now found a pattern - a subtext - in the play, which had before escaped me, in which I see for the first time Hamlet struggling with a second self (i.e., daemonic influence, take over). Certain of his cryptic lines are now both more poignant and more revealing.

To list a few, in no particular oder (as they come from memory; I have written/presented on this play so often I feel that I can trust myself well in this regard) - The following are all from Hamlet's own mouth: [spoken by H. to the ghost] "I will follow thee, call thee Hamlet."; "Hamlet from himself be taken away"; "Hamlet does it not; Hamlet denies it"; "Hamlet [though he act]is yet of the faction wronged"; "I have that within which passeth show [surpasses his own appearance]; "shall I couple hell?" [join with an alien force]; "the body is with the king, but the king be not with the body" [i.e., the eidolon is with the daemon, yet the latter is detached and autonomous]; "he was my dying voice; the rest is silence"[of the daemon territory]. . .
There is as well visible to me for the first time a trajectory of progress, a sense not of Hamlet's madness - feigned or actual - but of a subordination to his higher self which he initially fights but finds increasingly seductive (" 'tis now the very witching time of night[daemon time]. . now I could do such bitter business as the day would quake to look upon[eidolon does not comprehend the daemon's quest]"). The dialectical process, initiated by the daemon, followed furtively by the eidolon, is revealed.
I cannot describe the way in which Tony's concept has altered this play - a life long treasure of my soul - to the point where I feel it has been rendered fully whole , at last: To my thinking, this is no small feat. The shadow of the Bard touched by Tony's concept: alchemy across the centuries! How odd, but somehow beautiful. How can I not be grateful for such transubstantiation? This is magic to a literary soul. That it was unintentional, unknown by the agent! All the more potent for its action at a distance (and spooky as well). In any case, such windfalls are few and far between.
Moreover, even Tony's theme which runs throughout ITLAD regarding TLE/schizophrenic onset is quite evident now: Hamlet speaks of "time" being somehow "set out of joint", and something has altered his thinking, "by my fare, I cannot reason"; he makes claims of perception and process both being "askew"; that he feels odd, a stranger in his own court and land, and "my imagination's all afoul." His odd comments to Horatio upon the castle platform (Horatio hears the bell strike quite loudly the hour; Hamlet's response: "Indeed, I heard it not" ) become clear: He has crossed the border, he is already, as Peake says, "falling out of time". Obviously all issues from the playwright himself, and Shakespeare at age 36 was clearly experiencing something uncanny and disturbing. A biographical study confirms this.
An interesting aside, perhaps also daemonic in its origin: Reik himself speaks of the age of about 36-38 (Ortega y Gasset places it at 26, but I think that is far from correct)as being one of profound import for the superior man, of a rising of "the man within the man"; Freud speaks of a second such movement, from about 50-53, with a point of extreme danger requiring survival at the age of 51-2 (my own husband fell just at this point). . . In any case, while I am fully aware that not all are obsessive Hamlet fans as I have been since age 28, I do think the parallels to be found within the play to Tony's dyad are profound; and hopefully this will counterbalance and compensate for the importunity of going on at such length regarding my literary passion (or perhaps not). But I will let is stand: Surely it is proper and fitting to express gratitude to Tony, for that which seems akin to the miraculous.