Shakespeare

Shakespeare - Moral Value

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Moral Value


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

7. “It is impossible to understand Shakespeare if one does not consider the moral values which gave his plays their structure and meaning. In Shakespeare there is a profound interpenetration of moral and of aesthetic values.”

Watson believes any attempt to separate Shakespeare from the time in which he lived while analyzing the playwright’s work will lead to invalid statements and a thesis based on present attitudes and contemporary class structure. Moral issues pertaining to English Renaissance society cannot be ignored.

Women were not permitted to appear on stage, much less allowed to interpret a writer’s words, or assume the duties of a man. Today, women perform and critique Shakespeare in great numbers, revitalizing our perspective. Feminism has modernized literary criticism, making it impossible to stay within the moral values of the Renaissance.

Shakespeare - Allegory and Symbolism

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Allegory and Symbolism


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

6. “Part of Shakespeare’s greatness lies in his ambiguity. Therefore we can consider his plays a rich mine for a wide variety of interpretation of ‘meaning’ and ‘pattern.’ The critic should seek for allegory and symbolism and thus discover meanings which will be suggestive, though not necessarily definitive or final.”

Not everyone values vagueness. For a critic, an ambiguous work is a blank page waiting to be filled. The more interpretations that can be gleaned from a play, the better it is for an academic. Some scholars carry this procedure to an extreme, reaching for symbols and allegories where none exist.

All literature is potentially ambivalent. Life itself is contradictory with hidden meaning. A savvy reader must be aware that every piece of criticism is as much a statement of the pundit’s personality as it is a valid interpretation.

The lack of finality, the never-ending hashing over of any writer’s words, does nothing but provoke new criticism and encourage new scholars. As time passes, the accumulation of material on Shakespeare has become overwhelming, even intimidating, giving the impression that his work is incomprehensible to the majority. Shakespeare wrote for the majority. It is only today that he has been classified as a literary, opposed to a commercial, playwright. Looking for meanings that are suggestive, though not definitive, is an activity engaged in by colleges and universities.

Shakespeare - Meaning and Interpretation

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Meaning and Interpretation


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

5. “The ‘meaning’ of Shakespeare’s plays changes in accordance with the preconceptions and bias of each new generation of readers. The ‘meaning’ is subjective, not objective.”

Every academic since the English Renaissance has sought meaning in Shakespeare’s work. All find it, and all are right, from a limited standpoint. When a critic searches for a message, a moral, or a purpose in a piece of literature, the quest will lead to a treasure. This treasure may be self-created, but it has value to those who respect literary analysis.

A new generation brings a fresh outlook on life, applied to everything from food to Shakespeare. A so-called objective reader is filled with ideas and attitudes that color the material, and when this work is filtered through a selected lens, distortions, both good and bad, result.

This process is comparable to a cameraman regarding a scene he wants to film for a specific reason. He will choose an angle, add or remove light, and often apply a filter to create the desired effect. In the end, this scenario will be the cinematographer’s work of art, not a naked view of what he captured with his camera.

All criticism of Shakespeare is subjective, based on cultural, religious, and educational background.

Shakespeare - Tragedy and Religion

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Tragedy and Religion


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

4. “Religious values are absent from Shakespearean tragedy since the tragic view and the religious view are incompatible.”

One issue that makes the tragic view and the religious view incompatible is suicide. From a Christian standpoint, killing oneself is a sin, inconsistent with church doctrine. Self-destruction depicted as noble or admirable is perceived as the ultimate cowardice. In this sense, a tragedy cannot be religious in the Western world.

Since most critics who analyze Shakespeare are Western in culture and belief, the term “religious” will often be synonymous with “Christian.” The tragic element can be lessened if a writer approaches the suicidal character with condemnation, yet Shakespeare was not inclined to do this. He presents a story in a straightforward manner without judging every action, making a scriptural view difficult to maintain.

Shakespeare - Christianity and the Renaissance

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Christianity and the Renaissance


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

3. “The Renaissance was a Christian age. Therefore Shakespeare, like every other writer of his age, must have been profoundly influenced by Christianity.”

Since Christianity had a tight hold on the morals of the Renaissance, often counterproductive to advancement in the arts and sciences, Shakespeare would have felt an inhibiting impact. The conflicts of the Reformation would have helped him portray interesting, diverse characters and tension-filled scenes, but the church would have been a hindrance, not an aid, to creative achievement. As he wrote, he sought ways to express himself without offending people or inviting censorship.

Euphemism, an affected though ornate way of writing, was one stylistic method. John Lyly started this tradition. Shakespeare learned from Lyly and applied this technique. Although the use of flowery, suggestive phrases with a distinct, rhythmic sound is far more pronounced in Lyly’s plays and novels, its application in Shakespeare’s material is noticeable. Euphemism made it possible for a playwright to say anything, even describe sexual acts, by the strategic placement of words. Only the educated would have understood, one reason why no one stopped careful writers in an age of prudish restraint.

Scholars who incorporate religious beliefs in the interpretation of Shakespeare’s work are making a mistake. In the development of a scene, Shakespeare would have been capable of seeing a situation from the viewpoint of a Christian or an atheist based on the needs of his plot.

Shakespeare - Philosophical Value

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Philosophical Value


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

2. “Since Shakespeare was not a philosopher, he was not concerned with questions of value.”

Shakespeare explored questions of value as they relate to his plays and the portrayal of his characters. Even a story that attempts to avoid any philosophical statement makes one in the act of refraining. It is impossible for a writer to put an idea to paper without consciously or subconsciously weaving buried notions and perceptions into the fabric of the plot. A playwright might make a divergent assertion, or through the vivid depiction of a protagonist, take a social stance.

The tougher the character—the stronger the impact—the deeper the meaning. Scholars may disagree on what his connotations imply, but messages are threaded throughout Shakespeare’s dramatic words. Like fine gold filament that catches the eye, his hidden nuances invite philosophical pondering.

Shakespeare - Point of View

Shakespeare (Brice Stratford)
Credit: Brice Stratford
(Wikimedia Commons)


Shakespeare: Point of View


“Shakespeare and the Renaissance Concept of Honor” is based on a thesis presented to Harvard University in 1950. Curtis Brown Watson divides his work into two parts. The first discusses the Renaissance idea of honor, the second addresses William Shakespeare’s use of this concept.

A good source that presents original analysis, this study is essential for students of history and English literature. Published by Princeton University Press in 1960, the text is important to understand the definition of honor in Shakespeare’s time and encourages the scholar to develop an independent interpretation of the playwright’s work.

Watson provides a list of seven critical approaches in “Foreword to Part II: Does Drama Have a Moral Function?” He invites us to judge which position has the greatest relevance.

1. “Shakespeare was an objective dramatist who tried to describe every aspect of the human scene without committing himself to the point of view of any of his dramatic creations.”

Although Shakespeare may have written objectively, it would have been impossible to portray a character without committing himself to a point of view. Understanding the motivation behind a protagonist’s actions is essential to a playwright’s success. This does not mean that a writer must empathize with a villain, but lifelike presentation involves the ability to understand the reasons behind immoral behavior.

Shakespeare portrayed historical and tragic figures with realism. He desired to make these remote individuals accessible for the duration of a play. The average theater patron of the Renaissance went to see his productions for the entertainment alone. If Shakespeare had not committed himself to the viewpoints of his notable characters, his fame would have been short-lived.