Was Shakespeare Conservative?
I've just returned from the National Review cruise, where I finally had a chance to finally meet in person several Ricochet contributors and members. It was like a huge podcast, minus Richard Epstein. In between Caribbean stops, over-eating at the buffet, and gambling the night away, NR put on a number of fascinating panels.
One of my favorites was the panel on conservative novelists, which featured Ricochet contributors Andrew Klavan and James Lileks, among others. Klavan made the daring claim that Shakespeare was conservative. Although he was set upon by others–interestingly, the more British a panelist's accent, the more he took exception–I was persuaded. He pointed to, and I thought of while he was thinking, Henry V as a clear example in his favor. What do Ricochet members think? Any plays that prove, or undermine, Klavan's point?
- Comment (42)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments :
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
John Yoo
I've just returned from the National Review cruise, where I finally had a chance to finally meet in person several Ricochet contributors and members. It was like a huge podcast, minus Richard Epstein.
I'll be on the Weekly Standard cruise here in a couple of weeks and it didn't occur to me until now that we might have some Ricochet members there. I was already aware that a few contributors would be on the cruise. I'll be sure to report back!
Apr '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
John Grant: Shakespeare was, like Plato, principally interested in presenting all the different aspects of the phenomena he depicts. In other words, he was not a partisan of particular causes in the ordinary way of looking at these things.
But he was conservative in the sense that he did not think human nature could be transformed. Shakespeare's universe is moral to the point of ruthlessness. Those who make mistakes, even if they are well-intentioned, are punished harshly. Think of Lear and Cordelia! Of course this is especially evident in the tragedies and histories; the comedies (and romances, if that is a genuine genre) are more complicated.
I wonder if Shakespeare is not suggesting that knowledge is virtue. ·
There are all sorts of villains who prosper, though, such as Vincentio in Measure for Measure, or, well, Henry V. There are also good people who suffer, such as Rozencrantz.
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
James Of England
John Grant: Shakespeare's universe is moral to the point of ruthlessness. Those who make mistakes, even if they are well-intentioned, are punished harshly. Think of Lear and Cordelia! Of course this is especially evident in the tragedies and histories; the comedies (and romances, if that is a genuine genre) are more complicated.
I wonder if Shakespeare is not suggesting that knowledge is virtue. ·
There are all sorts of villains who prosper, though, such as Vincentio in Measure for Measure, or, well, Henry V. There are also good people who suffer, such as Rozencrantz. · Nov 19 at 12:51pm
Vincentio is not a villain--he restores decency to dissolute Vienna. I don't see why Rosenkrantz is good; he is a treacherous spy working on behalf of the man who murdered Hamlet's father! Henry V is a mixed character. On the one hand he wishes to unify/pacify an England rent by civil war, on the other hand he begins an unjust foreign war to do so. But his project fails ultimately. England is not united because of Henry V. One might say he wins the battle but loses the war.
Mar '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
What evidence did Klavan give to support his argument? Did he explain how Shakespeare believed in small government, free market capitalism, and a strong military? ; )
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
John, can you imagine the Limeys' horror when they returned home to find this excellent article in the Daily Mail about the Vatican's reaffirmation of its longstanding belief that Shakespeare was a Catholic. In Hamlet, he speaks of the uniquely Catholic doctrine of Purgatory.
Edited on Nov 19, 2011 at 2:03pmEWTN (Catholic Channel) has been on this for quite some time producing original content about the notion. Until Current TV, or MSNBC start claiming him as a liberal, I'm going with conservative Catholic Doctrinaire, living according to a strict adherence to the Magistarium.
May '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
Joe Escalante
EWTN (Catholic Channel) has been on this for quite some time producing original content about the notion. Until Current TV, or MSNBC start claiming him as a liberal, I'm going with conservative Catholic Doctrinaire, living according to a strict adherence to the Magistarium. · Nov 19 at 1:59pm
Edited on Nov 19 at 02:03 pm
Didn't late 16th/early17th century Anglicans believe in Purgatory too?
May '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
I find the worldview that comes across in Shakespeare entirely harmonious with Catholicism. It is a conspicuously sacramental view of reality, for one instance; it displays a profound reverence for the priesthood and for consecrated virginity for another. But, I must say I dislike the effort to prove by way of the texts that the author must have been a professed Catholic. What difference does it make? And how silly will be look if more evidence turns up about the author's life that proves definitively that he was not a Catholic?
FWIW, Oxford (who I really am convinced is the true author) spent most of his life a high Anglican, but did at one point convert to Catholicism, then reverted.
Edited on Nov 19, 2011 at 2:23pmJun '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
I have always been amazed and repelled by the academic navel-gazing that produces theories based esoteric textual analyses designed to prove propositions that, in the end, don't matter (or matter very little).
All of this is, I believe, the result of the degradation of the Humanities. The poor graduate students must throw themselves into yet one more study of Shakespeare that only proves that more and more can be said about less and less. Nevertheless, whether Shakespeare was a Catholic or not is much more interesting and relevant than reassessing his works in light of queer theory.
Katievs: You need to open a thread on the "who wrote Shakespeare's plays" theme. I've not studied the issue, and have simply assumed that it was Shakespeare. This is an issue I'd like to know more about.
Edited on Nov 19, 2011 at 3:55pmApr '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
John Grant
Vincentio is not a villain--he restores decency to dissolute Vienna. I don't see why Rosenkrantz is good; he is a treacherous spy working on behalf of the man who murdered Hamlet's father! Henry V is a mixed character. On the one hand he wishes to unify/pacify an England rent by civil war, on the other hand he begins an unjust foreign war to do so. England is not united because of Henry V. One might say he wins the battle but loses the war. ·
Vienna is dissolute because of Vincentio, but I will agree that the silences on his character, particularly the final proposal, are ambiguous. Rozencrantz is given to believe he's helping out his friend from university, and the friend's father's behest. Henry V isn't particularly trying to unite England (which is fairly united). He's trying to unite it with France, which he briefly achieves, while claiming to be forced into war by a mild taunt.
Would you take Ophelia, or Macduff's saintly son as virtuous characters poorly treated? All's Well that Ends Well's Bertram as a villain who does OK?
Oct '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
No. What could be positive evidence for this proposition?
1. The statements of Shakespeare's characters. But these are the statements of characters, not the playwright. They show what Bertram, Jacques, and Lear believe, not what William Shakespeare believed.
2. The fates of Shakespeare's characters. But Shakesperare took his plots from other stories. What interested him was not so much the consequences of actions but the behavior that surrounded those actions.
3. The "spirit" of the plays. But it is impossible to disentangle this "spirit" from the general spirit of Elizabethan England. Insofar as modern conservatives value old values--say, religious belief or patriotism--any conservatism we perceive in Shakespeare's plays could simply be an artifact of the time.
Shakespeare and conservatives do both recognize the immutability of character, rather than its malleability, but this belief in and of itself isn't enough for us to deem someone conservative, as most great writers and thinkers feel the same about character; Blake and Nietzsche are good examples, and they simply transcend the liberal/conservative dichotomy.
Aug '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
I do not pretend what Shakespeare thought, but each of the plays in the Richard II, to Henry V is built around the evils of sovereign debt and the burden of taxation on the commonwealth. Each play begins with issues of sovereign debt and even the comic sequence in Henry IV part 1 can be read as a brutal parody of royal taxation.
In Richard II, Shakespeare gives us strongest metaphors for the destructive power of taxation I have come across. I am working with a colleague to write about the "caterpillars of the commonwealth," and John of Gaunt's claim that Richard was turning the verdant paradise into a "pelting farm." Even Henry V opens with the Archbishop planning to support the war in order to avoid the church being taxed.
Dec '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
Part 1
I have always viewed Shakespeare as a product of his times. It is the high renaissance, the reformation is in it's infancy and Protestants are still being completely suppressed. The Church has limited intellectual life to the sub-scientific and limited economic life to merchantilism. Henry's England has taken a dangerous gamble in breaking with Rome. Both France and Spain are very powerful and have no intention of leaving the Church. When Henry dies and Elizabeth takes the thrown the historical plot that shapes the Shakespearean Era is hatched. Phillip of Spain sees Elizabeth as a weak ruler. This temps him to try a full assault on England and conquer the country bringing it back to the Church. In this mission he has plenty of allies and resources and the image of the 'girl' Queen as easy prey in his mind.
Dec '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
Part 2
The defeat of the Armada is a complete miracle. Without the storm the Armada probably would have succeeded. Instead England is saved. From 1588 untill 1640 England is Anglican, safe and a beacon of freedom for everyone in Europe. Shakespeare reflects the ebulliant mood of an English destiny especially guaranteed by divine intervention. He is expressing love of country in high renaissance conceptual style. He really doesn't speak in terms that could be mistaken for the Reformation or the Enlightenment. However, he is a great observer of the human condition. In plays like the Merchant of Venice he shows the negative traits of the high renaissance. The Church outlaws banking for Christians and retains absolute political authority. The Jews fill the necessary role of the money lender as credit was as necessary to economic life then as it is now. This sets up a conflict that is both bad for business and bad for moral social life. In the Tempest Prospero's relation with Caliban is one of master and slave. Shakespeare is unable to find reason to hope that this will ever change. Ideas of democracy and public education are foreign to his frame of reference.
Dec '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
Part 3
Shakespeare is a conservative but the values he is conserving are not ours. A short time later John Milton writes his epic poetry. In Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained, and Samson Agonistes, Milton shows almost a modern sensibility. Here is a quote from Samson Agonistes that is much more the ideas that we would call 'conservative'.
But what more oft in Nations grown corrupt,
And by thir vices brought to servitude,
Then to love bondage more then Liberty, [ 270 ]
Bondage with ease then strenuous liberty;
And to despise, or envy, or suspect
Whom God hath of his special Favour rais'd
As thir Deliverer; if he aught begin,
How frequent to desert him, and at last [ 275 ]
To heap ingratitude on worthiest deeds?
Apr '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
James Gawron: Part 2
The defeat of the Armada is a complete miracle. Without the storm the Armada probably would have succeeded. Instead England is saved.
I take it, then, that you disbelieve Bacon hired saboteurs in the Spanish shipyards?
May '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
tabula rasa
Katievs: You need to open a thread on the "who wrote Shakespeare's plays" theme. I've not studied the issue, and have simply assumed that it was Shakespeare. This is an issue I'd like to know more about. · Nov 19 at 3:54pm
Don't get me started, TR! Think how I've already tested the patience of my fellow members by posting on birth control and Catholic teaching.
I'm afraid I'll get thrown out of membership by general acclamation, or, rather, whatever acclamation's opposite is.
Edited on Nov 20, 2011 at 6:58amRe: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
katievs
tabula rasa
Katievs: You need to open a thread on the "who wrote Shakespeare's plays" theme. I've not studied the issue, and have simply assumed that it was Shakespeare. This is an issue I'd like to know more about. · Nov 19 at 3:54pm
Don't get me started, TR! Think how I've already tested the patience of my fellow members by posting on birth control and Catholic teaching.
I'm afraid I'll get thrown out of membership by general acclamation, or, rather, whatever acclamation's opposite is. · Nov 20 at 6:57am
Edited on Nov 20 at 06:58 am
I'm only teasing but this seems like a perfect time to quote Jody Bottum:
May '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
I'm only teasing but this seems like a perfect time to quote Jody Bottum:
Nov 20 at 7:40am
OMG, I totally fit the bill! Well, not totally. I don't have much to say about money. And my "theory" about the Jews isn't really one, either, I guess. But when it comes to Shakespeare, I go the full Joe Sobran.
Apr '11
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
J. D. Fitzpatrick: No. What could be positive evidence for this proposition?
1. The statements of Shakespeare's characters. But these are the statements of characters, not the playwright. They show what Bertram, Jacques, and Lear believe, not what William Shakespeare believed.
2. The fates of Shakespeare's characters. But Shakesperare took his plots from other stories. What interested him was not so much the consequences of actions but the behavior that surrounded those actions.
3. The "spirit" of the plays. But it is impossible to disentangle this "spirit" from the general spirit of Elizabethan England. Insofar as modern conservatives value old values--say, religious belief or patriotism--any conservatism we perceive in Shakespeare's plays could simply be an artifact of the time.
Shakespeare and conservatives do both recognize the immutability of character, rather than its malleability, but this belief in and of itself isn't enough for us to deem someone conservative, as most great writers and thinkers feel the same about character; Blake and Nietzsche are good examples, and they simply transcend the liberal/conservative dichotomy.
Having the values of a Christian era when the civilian government was tiny and foreign policy robust? Good enough for me.
Oct '10
Re: Was Shakespeare Conservative?
James Of England
J. D. Fitzpatrick: No. What could be positive evidence for this proposition?
3. The "spirit" of the plays. But it is impossible to disentangle this "spirit" from the general spirit of Elizabethan England. Insofar as modern conservatives value old values--say, religious belief or patriotism--any conservatism we perceive in Shakespeare's plays could simply be an artifact of the time.
Having the values of a Christian era when the civilian government was tiny and foreign policy robust? Good enough for me. · Nov 20 at 11:34am
Just make sure to give the label "conservative" to those who were responsible for the tiny government and the robust foreign policy. Shakespeare had no say in these matters, and the plays, whatever their characters say about government and foreign policy, give no evidence that he himself cared for one policy over another.