Abstract
Response problems, as I have said, take us beyond character. But they all refer back to character, directly or indirectly, since a play’s every word is channelled through a dramatic speaker. We must therefore consider the mode of existence of a dramatic character, and ask how an audience engages with a Hamlet or Lear. In this chapter I shall argue that in creating his tragic heroes Shakespeare often used impressionistic devices that leave the spectator in uncertainties. Just as Troilus exclaims ‘this is, and is not, Cressid’ (v. 2. 144), we are bewildered by the Hamlet or Lear that we think we know: I propose to examine our relationship with the characters, our special ways of ‘knowing’ them, after which we shall be ready to ask more searchingly how we respond. It will be assumed that the reader is familiar with recent work on dramatic character — with historical criticism and with the replies it provoked.1 And, now that the historical dust has settled, I shall also assume that we may guardedly speak of Shakespeare’s characters as life-like.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See, for example, S. L. Bethell, Shakespeare and the Popular Dramatic Tradition (1944); J. V. Cunningham, Woe or Wonder: The Emotional Effect of Shakespearian Tragedy (University of Denver Press, 1951); William Rosen, Shakespeare and the Craft of Tragedy (Harvard University Press, 196o); Maynard Mack, ‘Engagement and Detachment in Shakespeare’s Plays’, in Essays on Shakespeare and Elizabethan Drama in Honor of Hardin Craig, ed. R. Hosley (1963); J. R. Brown, Shakespeare’s Plays in Performance (1966); Norman Rabkin, Shakespeare and the Common Understanding (1967); Stephen Booth, ‘On the Value of Hamlet’, in Reinterpretations of Elizabethan Drama, English Institute Essays, ed. N. Rabkin (1969); B. Beckerman, Dynamics of Drama (New York, 197o); Arthur C. Kirsch, Jacobean Dramatic Perspectives (University of Virginia, 1972.).
Johnson on Shakespeare, ed. Walter Raleigh (1908 ed.) pp. zol, 177.
See Maurice Morgann’s Essay on the Dramatic Character of Sir John Falstaff (1777). In Daniel A. Fineman’s splendid edition of Morgann’s Shakespearian Criticism (Oxford, 1972.), Morgann’s pioneer work on the audience’s response to dramatic ‘impressions’ is carefully explained.
Copyright information
© 2002 E.A.J. Honigmann
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Honigmann, E.A.J. (2002). Impressions of ‘Character’. In: Shakespeare: Seven Tragedies Revisited. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230503038_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230503038_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-99582-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-50303-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Literature & Performing Arts CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)