(E-content developed by Dr N. A. Jarandikar)
“Preface to Shakespeare”
Dr
Samuel Johnson’s “Preface to Shakespeare” was published in 1765.
It is an important contribution to English literary criticism. Johnson was a neo-classical
critic and writer, and Shakespeare is considered as the romantic writer.
But Dr Johnson is completely impartial when he judges Shakespeare.
Shakespeare’s Merits according to Dr Johnson:
1. Truthfulness to nature: According to Johnson, the
fundamental necessity of artistic greatness is truthfulness to nature. This guides
Johnson to make a number of observations about Shakespeare’s greatness. For
instance, the characters of Shakespeare speak in the language of everyday life. Johnson states that
Shakespeare’s characters are not affected by the practices of certain places or
by the incidents of short-lived trends.
2.
Blending of tragedy and comedy: Shakespeare has blended tragedy and comedy in most of his plays. Johnson
defends this blending of tragic and comic on the grounds of the neoclassical
theory. For the neoclassicist, art is a realistic portrayal of mankind. On this
ground, one can defend Shakespeare’s exercise of blending comic and tragic
elements, for such a blending shows real human life which partakes good and
bad, delight and sadness. Through his plays, Shakespeare presents a world where all human efforts and activities have similar
significance.
3.
Negligence of unities: Johnson supports Shakespeare’s negligence of the unities of time, place,
and action. The neo-classicists emphasised the three unities. Supporting
Shakespeare Johnson states that the action of his dramas is dependent on some
conventions which the spectator takes gladly. For example, if the audience can
accept that the person standing on the stage is Julius Caesar or Antony, then
the spectators can also approve of moving scenes from one place to another.
Johnson on Shakespeare’s Demerits in the Preface to
Shakespeare:
1.
Negligence of virtue: Johnson says that Shakespeare’s biggest defect is that he abandons virtue
to pleasure. According to Johnson, Shakespeare didn’t write his plays because he wanted to convey any moral
purpose. Instead, he wanted to convey delight and pleasure through his
plays. Johnson also states that Shakespeare did not pay much attention
to ‘poetic justice’; he develops his characters regardless of their right
and wrong actions and at the end expels them casually.
2.
Loose plots: The second defect that Johnson points out about Shakespeare’s plays is
the plot. Johnson’s complaint is that Shakespeare’s plots are loosely
knit and if he had paid a little more attention and time, he could have
improved. Johnson also implies that the end part of Shakespeare’s plays is
promptly rounded off. And for this reason, the end parts of his plays do not
seem as artistically ordered as their earlier sections.
3.
Anachronism: Another defect that Johnson points out about Shakespeare’s plays is
an anachronism. Johnson says that in Shakespeare’s plays the
conventions, ideas, and manners of one age or country are used randomly for
another age or country. This creates a sense of impossibility within a play.
For example, on one occasion in Shakespeare’s play, Hector quotes the words
of Aristotle, which is unrealistic on a historical basis.
4.
Shakespeare’s dialogues: Another defect that Johnson points out about Shakespeare’s plays is
his dialogues. Johnson claims that the manner in which the comic
characters indulge is generally gross and immoral. Because most of his
characters are guilty of this, it often becomes hard to differentiate between
refined characters and low characters.
5.
Shakespeare’s conceits and word-play: Johnson turns critical about Shakespeare’s tendency to use conceits and word-play. Johnson
states that Shakespeare’s love for conceit and puns ruins many paragraphs which
are otherwise sorrowful and warm. Shakespeare’s unrestrained love for quibbles
and puns guides him to produce meaningless just as will-o-the-ship deceive
a traveler. For Shakespeare his excessive love for pun proved to a fatal
Cleopatra.