Shakespeare is such a poet and
dramatist of the world who has been edited and criticized by hundreds of
editors and critics Dr. Samuel Johnson is one of them. But among the literary
criticisms about Shakespeare, ‘‘Johnson’s edition was notable chiefly for its sensible interpretation’s and critical evaluations of Shakespeare as
a literary artist.’’ As a true critic in his Preface to Shakespeare, Johnson has pointed out Shakespeare’s merits or excellences as well as demerits. Let us now discuss Shakespeare’s merits as stated by Johnson.
Shakespeare’s greatness lies in the
fact that he is ‘‘the poet of nature’’. Jonson says,
‘‘Shakespeare is, above all writers, at least above all modern writers, the poet of nature, the poet that holds up to the reader a faithful mirror of human nature.’’
His writings represent the ‘ general nature’, because he knows ‘‘Nothing
can please many, and please long, but just representations of general nature.’’
Therefore his characters are ‘‘the
genuine progeny of common humanity.’’ ‘‘In the writing
of other poets a character is too often an individual; in those of Shakespeare it is commonly a species.’’ Thus Johnson
indicates the universal aspects of Shakespeare’s writings.
Shakespeare’s dialogue ‘‘is often so evidently determined by the incident which produces it,
and pursued with so much ease and simplicity, that it seems scarcely to claim the merit of fiction, but to have been gleaned by diligent selection out of
common conversation and common occurrences".
Shakespeare's treatment of love
proves his following realism. Dramatists in general give an excessive
importance to the theme of love. But to Shakespeare ‘‘love is only one of many passions, and as it has no great influence
upon the sum of life.’’ In Shakespeare’s
Macbeth, King Lear, Julius Caesar, love interest hardly has any place.
Johnson further comments on Shakespeare's characterization.
He says,
‘‘Shakespeare has no heroes; his scenes are occupied only by men, who act and speak as the reader thinks that he should himself have spoken or acted on the same occasion.’’
On the contrary, other
dramatists portray their characters in such a hyperbolic or exaggerated way that
the reader can not suit them to their life.
Johnson defends Shakespeare
for his mingling of the tragic and comic elements in his plays on grounds of
realism ‘exhibiting the real state of sublunary nature.’’ Because, Shakespeare's plays
express ‘‘the course of the world, in which the loss of one is the gain of
another, in which at the same time, the reveler is hasting to his wine, and
the mourner burying his friends,(in which the malignity of one is sometimes
defeated by the floric of another; and many mischiefs and many benefits are
done and hindered without design.’’)
‘‘The end of writing is to instruct;
the end of poetry is to instruct by pleasing.’’ And the
mingled drama can convey all the instruction of tragedy or comedy, for it best represents the life.’’
Johnson regards Shakespeare’s mingling
of tragedy and comedy as a merit, because he can not ‘‘recollect
among the Greeks or Romans a single writer who attempted both.’’
‘‘Shakespeare always makes nature
predominance over accident. His story requires Romans but he thinks only on
men.’’
In his Preface to Shakespeare,
Dr. Samuel Johnson brings out the excellences first, then he turns to his
demerits. Johnson does not consider him a faultless dramatist- even he takes
the faults ‘‘sufficient to obscure and overwhelm any other merit.’’ That is Shakespeare’s faults are serious
enough to overwhelm the merits if they had only belonged to other dramatists.
Discussion of Shakespeare’s demerits will better show
the merits of Shakespeare .
Shakespeare’s first
defect is –
‘‘He sacrifices virtue to convenience and is so much more careful to please then to instruct that he seems to write without any moral purpose.’’
Moreover, he lacks poetic
justice-‘‘ he makes no just distribution of good or evil.’’
Here we can not agree with
Johnson. He himself called Shakespeare a ‘poet of nature’. But now he can not come out of the tradition of his age-
explicit moralizing or didacticism. Actually, Shakespeare gives us a picture
of life as whatever he sees. Didacticism which is expected from a true artist can not be
a basic condition of art. Thus here we see Johnson’s
dualism in evaluating Shakespeare.
Shakespeare’s plot
construction has also faults. According to Johnson, the plots are often ‘loosely formed’ and ‘carelessly pursued’. ‘‘He omits opportunities of instructing or delighting which the
development of the plot provides to him." Moreover, ‘‘in
many of his plays the latter part is evidently neglected.’’
This charge is, to some extent true. The readers loose dramatic interest in the second half of Julius
Caesar. But The Merchant of Venice shows a perfect
sense of plot construction.
Johnson’s another
charge against Shakespeare is regarding distinction of time and place. He
attributes to a certain nation or a certain period of history, the customs,
practices and opinions of another. For example, we ‘‘find
Hector quoting Aristotle’’ in Troilus and Cressida.
However, Johnson regards that
it is not a fault of Shakespeare to violate laws of unities ‘established
by the joint authority of poets and critics’. Rather
this violation proves ‘‘the comprehensive genius of
Shakespeare’’. Actually a drama indicates successive
actions. Therefore, just as they man be represented at successive places, so
also they may be represented at different periods, separated by several years.
And so, Shakespeare violates the unities of time and place. And according to Johnson
‘‘the unities of time and place are not essential to a
just drama’’, and ‘‘they are
always to be sacrificed to the nobler beauties of variety and instruction’’. On the other hand the plays scrupulously following the unities are
just ‘‘ the product of superfluous and ostentatious art.’’ However, Shakespeare observes the unity of action.
Shakespeare’s another
faults in the eye of Johnson is his over fondness for quibbles. ‘‘A quibble was to him the fatal Cleopatra for which he lost the world
and was content to lose it.’’ But to say Johnson here
sacrifices his strong common sense for the sake of an eloquent metaphor.
Shakespeare's comic dialogue is
often coarse. The gentlemen and the ladies in comic scenes,. show little delicacy or rafinement and are hardly to
be distinguised from the clowns.
His tragic plays become worse
in proportion to the labour he spends on them.
His narration shows an undue
pomp of diction and unnecessary verbiage and repetition.
His declamations of set
speeces are generally cold and feeble.
What he does best, he soon ceases to do. He no sooner begins to arouse
the readers sympathy than he counteracts himself.
Notes on Shakespeare by the same writer:
Its really helpful........ thnx a lot M.Ali
ReplyDeleteoh!really great.
ReplyDeletethanks,it tells us what to quote
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting !
ReplyDeletewow
ReplyDeleteALLAH RAZI OLSUN
ReplyDeleteThanks a Lot M.Ali its realy very helpful :)
ReplyDeletethank yOu once again :)
fankew :) It worked alot :)
ReplyDeleteYou have done a nice job bro. :-)
ReplyDeleteVery precise ...thanks :) harsha yadav
ReplyDeleteVery precise .thanks :)
ReplyDeletenice friend ..
ReplyDeleteVery useful I can get an overall view
ReplyDeleteIts really good work.thanks a lot
ReplyDeleteWowww really a vry fantastic answer.. I ws luking for it n finally I got it.. Thanx a lot 👍
ReplyDeletepresented as a whole,,, complete work,,, thanks
ReplyDeletethanks for such a good writings,it helps me a lot.
ReplyDeleteAwesome article...informative,good effort
ReplyDeletebrief and to the point
ReplyDeleteThanks for this notes. It helps me alot
ReplyDeleteThank you it saved my time & found all points which I needed.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much. It was very helpful.
ReplyDeleteMuhammad Ali Sahib, it is a tremendous article which has summarized the Johnson's preface.
ReplyDeleteVery helpful...Thank you so much
ReplyDeleteVery Useful. Thank you so much
ReplyDeleteQuite well...I liked your way of writing the answer
ReplyDeleteBest wishes to you.