William Shakespeare, Research Paper Example

Abstract

It could easily be argued that, in reference to all the arts, no single person is more esteemed as an artist than William Shakespeare, and most certainly in regard to the written word. Shakespeare’s impact on humanity, beginning with the earliest days of his career as a poet and playwright, has never diminished; rather, successive generations continually seek to reinterpret his work, finding within it strikingly modern aspects. While Shakespeare was very much a creation of his own time as an artist, the enduring quality of his work stamps it as the essence of all great art, in that it lives on as a potent and beautiful reflection of life.

Introduction

Not surprisingly, the most difficult challenge in discussing Shakespeare lies in how extensively the man and his work have been already explored. Entire libraries, and for hundreds of years, have been exclusively devoted to him. To this day, scholars debate the latent intentions and meanings found in all his plays and poetry, as modern audiences never fail to respond to new performances of the plays.

It is, nonetheless, valuable to examine Shakespeare in one particular light: that of how his times and circumstances helped to shape his genius. It is likely that Shakespeare’s brilliance would have found avenues of expression in any age, and employed the world around him at any period to explore the intricate workings of humanity. The Elizabethan Age, however, and the intense national spirit occurring all around him as he embarked on his London life, provided Shakespeare with an extraordinarily rich field in which to work. In capturing the intrigues, excitement, and feeling of the Elizabethan Age, Shakespeare wrote for any age in which change, danger, pride, and passion are evident.

The Man and His Life

A genuine benefit of the many years of Shakespearean study is that, finally, the long-running disputes as to his actual identity are fading. It is understandable that people would be suspicious of evidence of so much genius emanating from one pen, and that of a modestly educated country boy. This viewpoint, however, is inherently flawed from the start, as it always has been; genius never relies upon education, and it is both disturbing and somewhat absurd that many scholars have fiercely put forth Shakespearean “candidates” simply because they, like Francis Bacon or Christopher Marlowe, had better schooling. The processes of genius, as mysterious as they are, do not conform to such easy foundations.

Then, and most obviously, there is the matter of the man named William Shakespeare, who most clearly lived in England at this time. For a long time, the inevitably sketchy records of his life fueled theories that he may not have actually lived, but this has been revealed as nonsense. The reality is that there is a substantial amount of documentation regarding the family, life, legal dealings, and career activities of the man. There is also the testimony, not always favorable, of his peers, as when the 1592 pamphlet of Robert Greene famously insulted Shakespeare, referring to him as an “upstart crow”. Essentially, “…It makes one thing clear: Shakespeare was known, and even resented as a rising and successful writer” (Fido, 1978, p. 37). Above all, as has been noted by many historians, no one has ever produced a single, plausible reason why an author of that time would want his highly successful and praised works to be known as the product of a known, popular actor of the period.

Briefly, it is established that Shakespeare was an ambitious, careful, hard-working man of his time. His sonnet dedications to Southampton, Lord Henry Wriothesley, are purely Elizabethan tributes, lavish in praise and designed to secure patronage. Shakespeare sought, after achieving London success, to obtain a coat of arms and be classed a gentleman, and he diligently attended to maintaining his fortunes in his home town of Stratford. “…The records of William Shakespeare’s life show him to have been…a businessman dealing in corn…a land-owner, money-lender, and property-dealer…” (Dawkins, 2004, p. 23).

This has, ironically, caused concern for Shakespearean scholars; they are not happy that such a brilliant poet should have paid so much attention to finances and status. This, however, is as unfounded a criticism as that which claims that a lack of high education could not produce great art. Genius, again, may arise within any sort of man at all, and the art does not bother about what else the artist attends to in his life.

Shakespeare Reflecting His Times

A crucial factor in the subjects and nature of Shakespeare’s art was how it continually represented his age, and in more than one fashion. On one level, the plays are filled with loving references to country life, and in this Shakespeare was reflecting the feelings of the Londoners in his audiences. England was, of course, agriculturally-based, and few city people did not feel that there was something unnatural in being removed from the beauties of nature. It is likely Shakespeare himself always longed to return to the country scenes of his boyhood, particularly as he settled back in Stratford in later years.

Then, as the sonnets have been excruciatingly analyzed, it becomes evident that Shakespeare was deliberately and forcefully trying to ingratiate himself as much as possible with Lord Wriothesley, and this was very much the right path for a young artist of his time to follow. Patronage was crucial if new talent was to survive, and Elizabethan society encouraged what to modern perceptions would appear as groveling. Again, and interestingly, the art of the poems renders the reasons behind their creation of no matter, as Shakespeare’s purchase of the biggest house in his home town had nothing to do with the genius of the plays.

The greatest link between Shakespeare’s work and his age, however, lies in play after play. These works were never randomly written, and the artist Shakespeare fed off of, and enhanced, the spirit and political feelings of the people around him. By the late 1580s, when young Shakespeare was carving out his London career, England was in the grip of a fever of patriotism unlike any other in its history. War with Spain was coming, and this was the perfect time to celebrate in drama the great houses of the Tudors and the Plantagenet monarchs, as in the Henry series, and most specifically in Henry V. The British were eager to celebrate their national greatness, and Shakespeare was more than happy to oblige.

On a more defined level, there was The Merry Wives of Windsor, with the central character of Sir John Falstaff. He had been a comic player in the Henry IV plays, and there is strong evidence that Shakespeare wrote Windsor only because Elizabeth herself wanted to see more of him. Performing at court was a great honor, and it is known that Shakespeare’s histories were well-received by Elizabeth; it stands to reason, then, that the author would be eager to please her further.

Most Significant Work

There are thousands of scholarly articles, stretching back over centuries, all of which insist that one Shakespeare play is “greater” than the others. In a very real sense, this is no argument that can ever be won. The art within the brevity and raw power of Macbeth is more profound than the lyrical beauty of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, or the opposite is true. This is the dilemma when the art is so abundant from one source.

Hamlet, however, always manages to stand alone, both in popular reception and in critical analysis. It is truly extraordinary, and a ghost story that defies all form and brings the audience as deeply into a disturbed mind as any drama ever has. The form was old, by the time Shakespeare approached it, and he took it apart and put it back together. In the process, he created what may be the most unique and universally recognized dramatic figure ever known, and one who exists as a total entity: “Hamlet…is the only literary-dramatic character who can be said to possess and manifest an authorial consciousness all his own, one not to be confused with Shakespeare’s” (Bloom, 2008, xiii). Shakespeare’s art rarely revealed limitations, and he was at his most superb when scenes of living permitted him to explore the channels of human thought and desire, as in Hamlet. The enduring quality of Shakespeare’s work stamps it as the essence of all great art, in that it lives on as a potent and beautiful reflection of life.

References

Bloom, H. (2008.) Bloom’s Shakespeare Through the Ages: Hamlet. New York, NY: Infobase Publishing.

Dawkins, P. (2004.) The Shakespeare Enigma. London, UK: Polair Publishing.

Fido, M. (1978.) Shakespeare. Maplewood, NJ: Hammond Incorporated.