Skip to main content
  • 59 Accesses

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 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, Shakespeares 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.).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Johnson on Shakespeare, ed. Walter Raleigh (1908 ed.) pp. zol, 177.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 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.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics