Thursday, March 3, 2011

Shakespeare and Controversy


As I've been thinking about The Winter's Tale, I've been trying to figure out why Shakespeare was advocating the idea of sex and its benefit through the strong, triumphant character of Hermione (I talk about this in my previous blog post). At first my thought was that maybe Shakespeare was trying to break the mold a bit and introduce a taboo topic on the stage to try and spark a bit of social change. However, after doing a little research, I don't think this was his motive.

Dr. Burton reminded me of one of his former students, Becca, who contacted Phyllis Rackin and got some feedback from her. (Becca's blog). Here is a part of what Phyllis said:

"I doubt that the players were using their stages as platforms to advocate for social change. I think they were trying to make money and that their choice of plays that raised touchy questions about gender was largely dictated by popular interest in those questions. I think drama thrives on conflict, sensationalism, and social anxieties, and I think the big point to remember about the playhouses is that they were commercial."

After reading this, I'm thinking that this topic if sex is good or original sin was a controversial topic, and Shakespeare explored this to spark intrigue and make a few bucks. I want to further research this idea and what the common belief was during the Renaissance, and I think I'm well on my way. Hopefully my next post will include some solid research.

Comments (9)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
There is a glossary of sexual terms in Shakespeare in the Humanities Reference section that talks about how he infuses innuendos and sexual language and possibilities for his purpose. You might check that out. :)
1 reply · active 734 weeks ago
Thank you oh so much. I will definitely check it out.
I totally agree with Dr. Rackin. I think it might be beneficial in your research to maybe compare the issues presented in Shakespeare with the issues currently being presented in Hollywood. Obviously we have way more violence and sexual content, but they're both trying to appeal to the masses.
2 replies · active 734 weeks ago
That is a very good idea. I was thinking about researching the audiences of Shakespeare and comparing them to our modern day audiences and drawing some conclusions about society. I'm just hoping I can find enough solid research.
I think you'll be able to discover a fair amount, but I don't know how much you'll find out about the illiterate lower class!
I think a lot of the time Shakespeare writes to his audience about what they like. And I think they liked that kind of stuff, all the sexual sparse and jokes that go on, even in other plays lead up to this. If you look at Taming of the Shrew there is a lot of sexual innuendo that goes on in just one scene.
3 replies · active 734 weeks ago
I agree. It's kind of sad to me that Shakespeare was only writing to make money. I'm always wanting to draw conclusions about Shakespeare's beliefs and life from the content of his plays. But that's not really possible when I know he was just trying to please his audience. And I guess the audience really did like all the innuendos. Doesn't sound much different from today.
I really think that Shakespeare could have cared about both his writing and wanting to make money. There's nothing wrong with blending what we love to do with financial gain. After all, some plays like Henry V actually seem to be going against what society wanted. I may be wrong, but it seemed like the English loved Henry, but while Shakespeare does portray him as a great leader and king, he does plant some doubts about Henry's reasons to go to war. I wrote a post about this awhile ago if your interested: http://shakespeareglobal.blogspot.com/2011/01/hen...

Anyway, sorry this post is so long :p I just really feel that Shakespeare couldn't have been simply a greedy playwright. He just wrote so many beautiful and insightful things, not to mention his poetry, which didn't have a playhouse's audience.
I don't think that everything he wrote was just to make money. I'm sure that was a motive - it would be for me. But, in my idealized mind, I like to think he is teaching real lessons too. He addresses so many social issues and makes people really feel with his characters, I have to think there is something more to it than just putting cash in his pocket. - the great artists usually do have something deeper that fuels what they write, at least I like to think they do.

Post a new comment

Comments by