Preface to the plays of Shakespeare
-Samuel Johnson
About the Writer:
The life
span of Samuel Johnson is from 18 September 1709 to December 1784. Samuel
Johnson is also known as Dr. Johnson. He has given the great contribution to
English literature. He was Neo- classical critic which means who brings the balance
between Excellencies and fall of Shakespeare. He was born in Hichfield,
Staffordshire, England. His father was a bookseller. Due to an accident in
childhood he became partial deaf and partially lost his vision. He took
admission in Oxford University but he left it due to financial issues. He
started a private academy but it failed. Later, he decided to move to London.
There he started writing for ‘The gentlemen’s magazine’. After 9 years of work
he wrote ‘The dictionary of the English language.’ It gave his a great success
and popularity. He advertised to write ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ within one
year. But he was unable to complete. He published it after 9 years of proposal.
Other significant works of Johnson are ‘The dictionary of English language’, ‘The lives of the
past’, ‘Preface to Shakespeare’, ‘Rambler’.
In Introduction
to preface to Shakespeare:
The preface to the plays of Shakespeare was
published in 1765. It was of about 72 pages and 162 paragraphs. It was
publishes in two parts- 1.Criticised as a dramatist. 2.Criticised as an editor.
Samuel
Johnson’s preface to the plays of Shakespeare has been long considered as a
classic document of English literary criticism. In it Johnson sets forth his
editorial principles and gives an appreciative analysis of the ‘excellencies’
and ‘defects’ of the work of the great Elizabeth dramatist- Shakespeare.
Shakespeare
as a timeless & universal figure/ merits of Shakespeare: Other
dramatist could only gain attention by hyperbolic or aggravated characters.
But Shakespeare has not used any hyperbolic language to gain the attention of
readers.
“Shakespeare
has no hero; 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:
even when the agencies are supernatural the dialogue is level with life.”
Shakespeare
has no heroes in his plays; his scenes are only occupied by men, who act and
speak as the reader, reader thinks he should himself have spoken or acted on
the same occasion. We find flood of characters on Shakespearean works. This
shows us real people from society. They are the real deeply rooted characters
of society. This character shows us the basic instinct, basic emotions,
feelings also makes us laugh and moron in some situation. For a specific reason
Shakespeare’s drama are considered as the mirror of life. It represents human
sentiments in a very believable language. Shakespeare did not need any special
character as hero from nature, he choose them from real society. We feel these
characters to be real characters and them to be among us. Character in
Shakespeare’s drama are men and women and not king and queen. History requires
Roman queens and kings but he think only on men. Denims and Rymer (critic)
think his Romans are not sufficiently Roman. Voltaire (critic) criticises that
his king are not completely royal. Shakespeare has combined laughter and sorrow
at one place. Many critic objects to this, this to be wrong as the Greek
tradition or classical tradition of composition but here Johnson supports this
point that no life is divided of only sorrow or only happiness. Life is
combination of both happiness and sorrow. And by combining this two gave a new
form of literature that is tragicomedy. Shakespeare has united the powers of
exiting laughter and sorrow. According
to classic critic they say that it is not possible to instruct or please with these
two forms, so there should not be amalgamation of these two forms in one play.
Because teaching, giving instruction is the prime object of literature as per
classical critic. But here Johnson says that it is not needed because
Shakespeare has combined these elements so finely that we cannot very
consciously get, we are just involved in that particular play.
“… by
showing how great machinations and slender designs may promote or obviate one
another, and the high and the low co-operate in the general system by unavoidable
concatenation.”
So it is
easy to combine this high and cow elements as there are ups and down in
everyday life and some has been reflected.
Shakespearean
plays are categorised as tragedies, comedies and histories but according to Dr.
Johnson there is no fix rule or light to divide his plays. His plays are
generally the inter-mixture of all elements we cannot say that this plays belong
to a particular or special kind of category like history, comedy or tragedy.
There may be elements combined in one play. This becomes an amalgamated form
which Shakespeare has created. Following words of Johnson clearly states that
we cannot categories Shakespeare’s work…
“Through all
these denominations of the drama Shakespeare’s mode of composition is the same:
an interchange of seriousness and merriment by which the mind is softened at
one time, and exhilarated at another… he never fails to attain his purposes; as
he commands us, we laugh or mourn, or sit silent with quiet expectation, in tranquillity without indifference.”
What
Shakespeare wanted from the audience he did exactly the same; we laugh when we
see his comedies, we witness his tragedies we feel anxious when we see
histories. So this is the power of William Shakespeare, The great power of
string audience or reader.
Shakespeare’s
faults/ demerits/ drawbacks/ negatives: Dr. Johnson
talks about his demerits but still Dr. Johnson supports Shakespeare. He says
that this faults are not faults of Elizabethan age or the Shakespearean faults
but this faults are universal they can be found in any author, in any passage
of time.
1.Shakespeare
sacrifices virtues for his convenience: His first
defect is that he assigns most of evil in books or in men. He did not care
about virtues or morality, he didn’t care about instructions while for many
classical critic teaching in prime objective of literature and Shakespeare
fails in this objective. He sacrificed virtue to simplicity.
“His first
defect is that to which may be imputed most of the evil in books or in men. He
sacrifices virtue to convenience and is so much more careful to please than to
instruct, that he seems to write without any moral purpose.”
He carries
his person indifferently through right and wrong, and at the close failure
without further care.
2. Plots are
loosely connected:
The plots
are often loosely formed that sometimes he cannot comprehend his own design and
always seem to go for an easier option. It may be observed that in many of his
plays the later part is evidently neglected when of his plays the later part is
evidently neglected when he found himself near to the end of his work and in
view of his reward, he shortened the labour to snatch the profit.
“The plots
are often so loosely formed that very slight consideration may improve them,
and so carelessly pursued, that he seems not always fully to comprehend his own
design.”
3. Not followed
historical chronology accurately:
He has no
regard to distinct of time and place. Comic scene sometimes fall flat and all
the character appear same. The same problem continued in tragedy, it gets worst
as his labour is more.
4. Disproportionate
narration:
Narration of
dramatic poetry is naturally tedious. There is a sense of unequal pomp of
diction. It is sometimes inactive in the progress of the action.
“In
narration he affects a disproportionate pomp of diction and a weariness train
of circulation, and tells the incident imperfectly in many words, which might
have been more plainly delivered in few.”
5. Weak at
conceits and quibbles:
Conceits
& quibbles are significant elements in any language and it should be
included in great with use of quibbles and conceits. Shakespeare is fatal in
using them. It is nothing but the ornamental element of the language which
Aristotle had.
6. Not followed
any unities (no unities):
Shakespeare
didn’t follow any unities. He always neglected unities and violated those laws
which have been instituted and established by the joint authority of poet and
of critics. Shakespeare didn’t followed time and place. We find inaccuracy in chronology events happened in his plays. We find some events happen in
Alexandria & other in Rome this is also crossing line of classical rules of
composition. He didn’t follow any unity and just wrote as he wanted.
Conclusion/
end:
This preface
is significant in the whole literary criticism as this preface has given new
insights in the study of Shakespeare’s work. It is to the public how they look
at it, it is Dr. Johnson’s own opinion and own judgement.
