Around 18 BC, Quintus Horatius Flaccus wrote in his Ars Poetica, obviously in Latin, ‘sometimes even the good Homer sleeps’. This phrase has become proverbial as ‘even Homer nods’ which means that even the greatest writers sometimes make mistakes. Shakespeare too.
If he don't know much about geography, he's not that great on history either. Shakespeare has several anachronisms in his work. In Act Two Scene Three of Julius Caesar, Cassius hears a clock strike and says “The clock has stricken three” which is quite clever since the first striking clock was invented in China in the first century AD and only reached Italy in the 1200s. In Antony and Cleopatra, Cleo wants to play billiards but ‘billiards’ emerged as a sport (outside, ie a version of croquet) in the 1340s. And in Henry IV, set in 1402, turkeys are mentioned. Despite the English name suggesting they come from the Ottoman Empire and the French name suggesting they come from India, the birds are native to Central America and so were unknown in Europe before Columbus sailed the ocean blue in fourteen hundred and ninety-two; the arrived in England in 1541.
More serious, IMHO, are internal inconsistencies. In the second scene of Measure for Measure, Mistress Overdone, the brothel madam, meets Lucio and two gentlemen in the street and tells them that Claudio has been arrested for getting his girlfriend pregnant. Lucio and his mates then exeunt and Pompey, the pimp, arrives. He proceeds to tell Mrs O that Claudio has been arrested, and why; she appears to have no knowledge whatsoever of the information she had just told Lucio. I can only presume that Shakespeare wrote two versions of this scene (possibly someone in the cast said: ‘Hey Will, wouldn’t it be better if Pompey told Mrs O this bit’) and that somehow when the folio was printed both were included.
More seriously, in my view, is an offence against dramatic psychology later in the play. Much of the plot hinges on Isabella refusing to yield her virginity to hypocritical Angelo even though this would save her brother’s life. Nevertheless, she is prepared to have Mariana pretend to be Isabella and sacrifice her own honour to Angelo in the famous ‘bed trick’ proposed by the Duke (a man who is supposed to be enforcing the laws against immorality). Isabella has to persuade Mariana to do this. Wouldn’t it be a wonderful piece of theatre to have the holier than thou Isabella use ingenious arguments to convince Mariana to break the law not to mention strict social taboos in pursuit of this ultimate deception. A challenge worthy of a genius playwright. But Shakespeare ducks it. The persuasion happens off stage. How long does it take for Mariana to agree to Isabella’s immoral and illegal suggestion? Five and a half lines. Five and a half lines? It seems unlikely that Isabella has time even to explain the idea, let alone for Mariana to agree.
I think Shakespeare was a superb dramatist but he wasn’t perfect. I think that putting him on a pedestal, and treating the plays as poetry rather than dramatic entertainments, prevents us from appreciating how his work developed, how he improved from the early works of Henry VI and Two Gentlemen to the masterpiece tragedies of Hamlet, Macbeth and Lear.
Take The Winter’s Tale. In Act Four, the King’s son Florizel, who is in love with shepherd girl Perdita, goes to the sheep-shearing celebration in disguise, dressing as a shepherd. Later in the scene, Florizel swaps clothes with Autolycus ... to disguise himself. Even though he is already disguised. Anyway. Autolycus is now, presumably, wearing shepherd’s clothes. But a few lines later in the scene these garments enable Autolycus to pass himself off as an aristocrat. Versions I have seen all show Florizel reverting to aristocratic garments before swapping with Autolycus but there is neither line for stage direction that justifies this transformation. I presume someone in the original cast must have pointed this problem out to Shakespeare at some point ... ‘Hey, Will, great play and all that but I was just wondering ...’
Still with The Winter’s Tale, it is well known that Perdita, who comes from Sicily, is stranded on the sea-coast of Bohemia, a land-locked country; this mistake by Shakespeare was probably because in Pandosto, his source, which was written by Robert Greene, the man who called Will an 'upstart crow', Perdita travels from Bohemia to Sicily, which does of course have a coastline; Shakespeare simply swapped the places over.
Still with The Winter’s Tale, it is well known that Perdita, who comes from Sicily, is stranded on the sea-coast of Bohemia, a land-locked country; this mistake by Shakespeare was probably because in Pandosto, his source, which was written by Robert Greene, the man who called Will an 'upstart crow', Perdita travels from Bohemia to Sicily, which does of course have a coastline; Shakespeare simply swapped the places over.
Shakespeare makes another geographical howler when, in Two Gentlemen of Verona, as we have seen, Valentine travels from Verona to Milan by sea. He’d have to travel to Venice, sail all the way down Italy's East coast, around the 'boot heel' of Italy and then either round Sicily or through the rather dangerous Messina Straits, all the way up the west coast to, perhaps, Genoa, and then overland from Genoa. The overland route (which he takes when making the return journey) would be much shorter (see map) even though it would take 36 hours on foot. (in comparison, the two overland sections of the 'sea' route are 27 hours on foot to Venice and 34 hours on foot from Genoa, so the overland sections of the 'sea' route are by themselves more than 50% longer than the overland route!).
If he don't know much about geography, he's not that great on history either. Shakespeare has several anachronisms in his work. In Act Two Scene Three of Julius Caesar, Cassius hears a clock strike and says “The clock has stricken three” which is quite clever since the first striking clock was invented in China in the first century AD and only reached Italy in the 1200s. In Antony and Cleopatra, Cleo wants to play billiards but ‘billiards’ emerged as a sport (outside, ie a version of croquet) in the 1340s. And in Henry IV, set in 1402, turkeys are mentioned. Despite the English name suggesting they come from the Ottoman Empire and the French name suggesting they come from India, the birds are native to Central America and so were unknown in Europe before Columbus sailed the ocean blue in fourteen hundred and ninety-two; the arrived in England in 1541.
More serious, IMHO, are internal inconsistencies. In the second scene of Measure for Measure, Mistress Overdone, the brothel madam, meets Lucio and two gentlemen in the street and tells them that Claudio has been arrested for getting his girlfriend pregnant. Lucio and his mates then exeunt and Pompey, the pimp, arrives. He proceeds to tell Mrs O that Claudio has been arrested, and why; she appears to have no knowledge whatsoever of the information she had just told Lucio. I can only presume that Shakespeare wrote two versions of this scene (possibly someone in the cast said: ‘Hey Will, wouldn’t it be better if Pompey told Mrs O this bit’) and that somehow when the folio was printed both were included.
More seriously, in my view, is an offence against dramatic psychology later in the play. Much of the plot hinges on Isabella refusing to yield her virginity to hypocritical Angelo even though this would save her brother’s life. Nevertheless, she is prepared to have Mariana pretend to be Isabella and sacrifice her own honour to Angelo in the famous ‘bed trick’ proposed by the Duke (a man who is supposed to be enforcing the laws against immorality). Isabella has to persuade Mariana to do this. Wouldn’t it be a wonderful piece of theatre to have the holier than thou Isabella use ingenious arguments to convince Mariana to break the law not to mention strict social taboos in pursuit of this ultimate deception. A challenge worthy of a genius playwright. But Shakespeare ducks it. The persuasion happens off stage. How long does it take for Mariana to agree to Isabella’s immoral and illegal suggestion? Five and a half lines. Five and a half lines? It seems unlikely that Isabella has time even to explain the idea, let alone for Mariana to agree.
I think Shakespeare was a superb dramatist but he wasn’t perfect. I think that putting him on a pedestal, and treating the plays as poetry rather than dramatic entertainments, prevents us from appreciating how his work developed, how he improved from the early works of Henry VI and Two Gentlemen to the masterpiece tragedies of Hamlet, Macbeth and Lear.
Comments
Post a Comment