Shakespeare is one of the most analysed and “criticised” poet in the history
of literature. Why Shakespeare? The answer is easy. He is not only most
analysed but also the most popular dramatist that has ever existed.
Shakespeare’s drama has been fascinating his audience and readers through the
centuries. The plots of Shakespeare’s drama seem to be simple, dealing with
human and social themes like love, marriage, murder, intrigue, complot and
revenge. On a first sight, they remember us of a good and entertaining
Hollywood Film. But is this all what Shakespeare has to say through his
drama? Did he really intend to write commercial plays, without giving a deeper
sense to his literary work? I don’t think so. I think Shakespeare achieved
through his “simple” plots to get deeply into the minds and souls of his
audience, in order to make them conceive the complexity of their own lives and
feelings. I do not intend to find out his personal message in the drama or to
interpret his intentions. I will rather concentrate on his work and try to find out,
what kind of message Shakespeare’s comedy transmitted to his audience and
above all to his experienced readers, better said, to his literary critics. My paper
shall reveal the complexity and the deep psychological meaning of
Shakespeare’s comedy. Returning to my first question why Shakespeare? I
would like to answer it, by quoting one of my favourite critics, Northrop Frye:
“For all that has been written about it, Shakespearean comedy still seams to me widely misunderstood and underestimated, and my main thesis, that the four romances are the inevitable and genuine culmination of the poet’s achievement, is clearly less obvious to many than it is to me.” 1
I consider Frye’s assumption on Shakespearean comedy the adequate answer to
my question. In this paper I intend to seek the deep sense of A Midsummer
Night’s Dream and The Tempest, by posting them in a mirror of changing critical approaches, beginning with the mythological view, continuing with the
political and new critical perspective and ending with my personal notes. My
main purpose in this paper is to demonstrate that Shakespeare’s comedy does
not only have a delighting function but also exercises a deep psychological
impact on the old and new generations. In my opinion he was not only a genius
of the drama, but also an initiator of the renaissance of mythical and archaic
values in the modern world.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1. Why Shakespeare’s comedy
1.2. Methodology
Chapter 2: Northrop Frye’s – A natural Perspective
2.1. An introduction into Shakespearean Comedy and Romance
Chapter 3: A Midsummer Night’s Dream
3.1. The plot
3.2. The mythological perspective
3.3. The political perspective – an approach of new historical view
3.4. A Midsummer Night’s Dream in a mirror of psychological and psychoanalytic criticism
Chapter 4: The Tempest
4.1. The plot
4.2. Fairytale or myth?
4.3. The postcolonial perspective – The Tempest – a paradigm of colonization?
4.4. The Tempest – an allegory on Shakespeare’s retirement from the theatre?
Chapter 5: New critical approaches on Shakespeare’s comedy
5.1. A short introduction into the Modern Theories of Literature
5.2. New Criticism
5.3. Deconstruction
5.4. New criticism, Deconstruction and Shakespeare
Chapter 6: Personal view
Research Objectives and Themes
The primary objective of this work is to explore the deep psychological and symbolic layers of Shakespeare’s plays A Midsummer Night’s Dream and The Tempest by analyzing them through various critical lenses, ranging from mythological perspectives to postcolonial and deconstructive readings, to demonstrate how these works bridge archaic and modern complexities.
- Application of Northrop Frye's mythological and structural perspectives on Shakespearean comedy.
- Political analysis of authority and power structures using New Historicism and Cultural Materialism.
- Psychological and psychoanalytic interpretation of the plays as allegories of Shakespeare’s career stages.
- Examination of the limits and applicability of modern literary theories like New Criticism and Deconstruction on dramatic texts.
Excerpts from the Book
1.1. Why Shakespeare’s comedy?
Shakespeare is one of the most analysed and “criticised” poet in the history of literature. Why Shakespeare? The answer is easy. He is not only most analysed but also the most popular dramatist that has ever existed. Shakespeare’s drama has been fascinating his audience and readers through the centuries. The plots of Shakespeare’s drama seem to be simple, dealing with human and social themes like love, marriage, murder, intrigue, complot and revenge. On a first sight, they remember us of a good and entertaining Hollywood Film. But is this all what Shakespeare has to say through his drama? Did he really intend to write commercial plays, without giving a deeper sense to his literary work? I don’t think so. I think Shakespeare achieved through his “simple” plots to get deeply into the minds and souls of his audience, in order to make them conceive the complexity of their own lives and feelings. I do not intend to find out his personal message in the drama or to interpret his intentions. I will rather concentrate on his work and try to find out, what kind of message Shakespeare’s comedy transmitted to his audience and above all to his experienced readers, better said, to his literary critics. My paper shall reveal the complexity and the deep psychological meaning of Shakespeare’s comedy. Returning to my first question why Shakespeare? I would like to answer it, by quoting one of my favourite critics, Northrop Frye:
“For all that has been written about it, Shakespearean comedy still seams to me widely misunderstood and underestimated, and my main thesis, that the four romances are the inevitable and genuine culmination of the poet’s achievement, is clearly less obvious to many than it is to me.”
I consider Frye’s assumption on Shakespearean comedy the adequate answer to my question. In this paper I intend to seek the deep sense of A Midsummer Night’s Dream and The Tempest, by posting them in a mirror of changing critical approaches, beginning with the mythological view, continuing with the political and new critical perspective and ending with my personal notes.
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1: Introduction: Outlines the motivation for analyzing Shakespeare’s comedies and establishes the research focus on uncovering deep psychological meanings within his dramatic works.
Chapter 2: Northrop Frye’s – A natural Perspective: Introduces Northrop Frye’s critical principles, emphasizing the mythological structure and the "delight and instruct" functions of Shakespearean comedy.
Chapter 3: A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Provides a comprehensive analysis of the play, exploring its plot, mythological foundations, political authority, and psychoanalytic allegories related to Shakespeare’s youth.
Chapter 4: The Tempest: Discusses the play as Shakespeare’s late work, examining its mythological elements, postcolonial interpretations of colonization, and its role as an allegory for the playwright’s retirement.
Chapter 5: New critical approaches on Shakespeare’s comedy: Evaluates the suitability of New Criticism and Deconstruction as analytical tools for Shakespearean drama, weighing their methodologies against the inherent nature of the texts.
Chapter 6: Personal view: Offers the author’s final synthesis, concluding that the plurality of interpretation is central to appreciating Shakespeare’s enduring work.
Keywords
Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, The Tempest, Northrop Frye, Mythology, New Criticism, Deconstruction, Cultural Materialism, Colonialism, Psychoanalysis, Archetype, Allegory, Literature, Authority, Dramaturgy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The work aims to analyze the deep-seated meanings, mythological structures, and political implications within two of Shakespeare’s most significant comedies, A Midsummer Night’s Dream and The Tempest.
Which critical theories are applied to the plays?
The author applies a diverse set of critical theories, including Northrop Frye’s mythological criticism, New Historicism, Cultural Materialism, psychoanalytic criticism, New Criticism, and Deconstruction.
What is the core research question?
The study asks whether Shakespeare’s "simple" plots contain deeper messages for audiences and how different critical approaches can uncover these complexities, while addressing whether a "right interpretation" is even possible.
What methodology does the author use?
The author uses a comparative and analytical approach, initially grounding the study in Northrop Frye’s literary theory and then testing the limits of modern critical methodologies when applied to Shakespeare’s dramatic works.
How is the main body structured?
The main body is structured by analyzing specific plays through distinct thematic chapters (mythological, political, and psychoanalytic) and concluding with a section on the applicability of modern literary theories.
Which keywords best describe the work?
Key terms include Shakespeare, mythological structure, cultural materialism, colonial discourse, psychoanalytic criticism, deconstruction, and the authorial role in literary meaning.
How does the author interpret the magic in the plays?
The author interprets magic as an allegorical device reflecting Shakespeare’s own artistic career: A Midsummer Night’s Dream represents the beginning of his "magic" in London, while The Tempest signifies his renunciation of magic and retirement to Stratford.
What is the conclusion regarding "right interpretation"?
The author concludes that seeking a single "right" interpretation is less important than appreciating the plurality of perspectives, as every reader brings their own experiences and sensitivity to the text.
How does the author view the "masterlessness" and "savagism" in The Tempest?
These concepts are explored through Paul Brown’s colonial discourse analysis, where the author examines how the play reflects the expansionist and political concerns of the Elizabethan era, characterizing the play as a "limit text" rather than a mere paradigm of colonization.
Why are New Criticism and Deconstruction considered only partially applicable?
The author argues that New Criticism fails to account for the author’s presence (the "anima"), while Deconstruction, although allowing for an infinity of meanings, risks ignoring the crucial historical, political, and social contexts that define the work.
- Quote paper
- Cornelia Kaltenbacher (Author), 2007, 'A Midsummer Night’s Dream' and 'The Tempest' in the mirror of changing critical approaches, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/92718
