Success!
Even though the popular conventions were very strict that Shakespeare adhered to, His early work was still a “huge early success”. (Bevington) When the first history plays were performed He was catapulted to the wealth and fame that he was after. Today “Shakespeare is given more credit for pioneering in the genre of the English history play than he once was”. The text book then goes on to say that the character of Lord Talbot in 1Henry VI was well liked and “by the time Richard Duke of Gloucester had emerged from Henry VI plays to become King Richard III Shakespeare’s fame as a dramatist was assured.” The text book also says that “Shakespeare genius manifests itself in his early work”. The text book then goes on to say how His genius is manifest by what he learned from his predecessors and from the diversity depicted in his early plays. What He learned from his “predecessors” is seen by looking at how he copied that which is popular (which this blog already did), among other things. However, the biography quoted below called “Will and the World" by Stephen Greenblatt, argues that Shakespeare was more than just a guy writing to make a money.
“This is interesting to remember when you hear people glibly saying that Shakespeare was "merely" the Stephen King of his times. Usually, what they mean is he wasn't an intellectual giant, just a guy writing prolific quantities of popular fiction, as if there are scores of Governor General and Nobel-worthy geniuses lost in time. Shakespeare, in this view, is just a man who gives the masses the slop that they want so that he can make a buck. Its an attempt to diminish his work, to lower him to the status of a hack.”
In this blog post thus far we have argued that Shakespeare is just what Greenblatt resents, “just a man who gives the masses the slop that they want so that he can make a buck” but in the next section called “The Closing Act” we will identify the aesthetically pleasing beauty that made Shakespeare texts a work of art. The evidence surrounding his first written plays Henry IV parts 1-3 suggest that “a Buck” was his intentions as well as becoming noticed. By using the “slop” He first gave and contrasting it with Him at his finest we can identify the truly timeless art in His text and his character. The history plays were simply just the first ones written and also his brake out literature. Just like the famous Uncle Kracker had to pay his price to become famous by being the back up singer/D.J. to the unpleasant Kid Rock, so did Shakespeare have to sacrifice some of His artistic genius to pay the price to become noticed and then popular and that's okay. That's how life works, and that's how we learn more about are selves from those that influence us such as Shakespeare.
Some argue that Henry VI was not the first play that Shakespeare wrote. In an article by Eric Sims he identifies that E.A.J. Honigmann suggests that that Shakespeare starting writing plays sooner and that it should began with Titus Andronicus which he estimates was written in 1586 and The Two Gentlemen of Verona, But Sims then stats that “the majority of critics reject that.” There is very little information about what was going on in Shakespeare’s life other than the baptism of his twins. From the clear development of Shakespeare’s language and from when there is proof from when they were preformed scholars have been clearly able to identify which plays were written first. From those plays studies have been done to between thematic and political context of the earliest plays to determine that Henry VI came first in the chronology. (Sims) Regardless of what plays was first it doesn’t change what the circumstances are from published primary sources we know the circumstances Shakespeare was in as were stated above. It is no secret that Shakespeare’s family was in the middle of tough times previous to 1591. Some also argue that Shakespeare was enjoying success as a poet and acting previous to 1591. While that is certainly probable given that the text book makes that claim, we still know that he lived in an abbey and with friends and not with his family previous to 1590. And after He became wealthy and famous in 1594, He bought a house and lived with His family. He might have been successful as an actor and poet which could have aided His jump to fame as is stated by this blog but He was still broke and his family in tough times in 1590 and that’s a fact. So regardless of which play was written first or his “success” previous to his plays the circumstances of the Shakespeare’s in 1590 remains the same. The examples used by this blog are proof that his first plays were to make a buck. You could use those same proofs on other alleged first plays because those proofs were based on documented facts from the text book and Greenblatts biographies of Shakespeare. Even if Henry VI plays were not “one-off” plays but he was commissioned to write them, the facts remain that Shakespeare and His family needed money and play writing at that time was a great way to make money on the side while he continued to peruse he first love, acting. When parts 1-3 of Henry VI and the life of Shakespeare when he wrote them is contrasted with his last three plays and life of Shakespeare when he wrote them; the character, personality, and artistic beauty of Shakespeare comes to great light.
No comments:
Post a Comment