Shakespeare's Dramatic Art

Collected Essays

Wolfgang Clemen

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780367238728
• eBook ISBN: 9781136559082
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Letteratura
• Subtopic: Critica letteraria

First published in 1972. Studying Shakespeare's 'art of preparation', this book illustrates the relationship between the techniques of preparation and the structure and theme of the plays. Other essays cover Shakespeare's use of the messenger's report, his handling of the theme of appearance and reality and the basic characteristics of Shakespearian drama.

1

Shakespeare’s Art of Preparation. A Preliminary Sketch

INTRODUCTION

Preparation is one of the most important elements of drama, but at the same time it is the most difficult to isolate and to define. This applies to Shakespeare even more than to other dramatists. In his plays preparation is a wide and complex phenomenon, which is manifested in many different ways and which presents itself to us in diverse contexts. Up to the present no attempt has been made to describe Shakespeare’s art of preparation,¹ and the most probable explanation of this lies in the difficulty of delimiting and categorizing so varied and complex a process. For preparation may mean the announcement of a new character about to enter for the first time, but it may also mean the gradual working towards a catastrophe or a climax, extending over several acts; it may include the insertion of omens, portents, dreams and supernatural appearances, and may extend to the use of dramatic irony, of prophetic hints concealed in the imagery, and premonitions of the characters themselves.

Preparation can appear in one recurrent obvious device, but it may also operate through the structure of a whole scene, an act, or an extended dialogue, in which case it is much more difficult to demonstrate. Finally, what we call preparation is very closely linked with other aspects of dramatic art, with the technique of exposition, with the creation of dramatic tension, suspense and expectation, and even of dramatic contrast. How then are we to make the necessary distinctions and divisions?

In view of these difficulties it may at first seem advisable to examine individual aspects of Shakespeare’s art of preparation separately. One could for instance trace recurrent conspicuous devices, such as the use of omens and portents, or examine the part played by premonitions, or study the preparation for the first appearance of main characters – one could treat them as we treat clearly defined aspects like the aside. But in this way we cannot grasp the complexity of the subject; we do not see how Shakespeare usually, in aiming at a particular effect, works on several, different levels and with ‘infinite variety’, nor can we show how closely the different aspects of dramatic art are interwoven and conditioned by one another. In order to recognize and demonstrate the interdependence and co-operation of the individual means of preparation, it is advisable to abandon systematic treatment of this sort and make a new start proceeding in a selective way. One will have to omit some points of importance and refrain from going into questions related to the art of preparation yet mainly connected with other aspects of dramatic technique. An exhaustive discussion of dramatic preparation would in any case necessitate a whole book, probably a long one. The present study, concentrating on only eight plays (of which the selection will be justified on p. II) cannot therefore hope to be more than a preliminary sketch of a complex subject which calls for more detailed and full treatment in the future.

A brief study of the subject will have to limit itself to those forms of preparation which can be demonstrated by quotations. For as with other elements in drama there are some aspects of preparation which can be illustrated from the text and others which are much more difficult to demonstrate because they are less tangible and less evident in individual passages, affecting rather the whole ‘lay-out’ of an episode. Such forms of preparation would need a detailed interpretation of a whole scene or act in order to become manifest. We therefore give preference to forms of preparation which are articulated at particular points in the play.

Why is preparation in drama particularly important, and a distinctive characteristic of this genre? For one thing the dramatist works within limitations which do not apply to the story teller. The novelist may describe at length the setting in which his story is to take place, he may tell us something about the whereabouts of his characters, about their background, their ideas, their previous history. In the course of his narrative he can pause whenever he likes to record the changing conditions which are to influence the conduct of his characters, and he can analyse those factors which are to motivate and explain future actions. The dramatist cannot avail himself of this freedom. He must put all these elements, background, description, motivation, psychological analysis into dialogue. Gesture, setting and spectacle may help him in conveying these elements to the audience, but the spoken words of the characters will always remain his chief resource. Moreover, the need to limit length is a constant pressure on the dramatist. He must be economic, concise, selective. Condensation must be his aim and hence he must try to do several things at once. While informing the audience, he must carry on the conversation on the stage and make the characters reveal themselves; while painting the background and atmosphere he must move the action forward. He cannot pause to comment, describe, prepare and explain, unless this is done under another pretext by the characters themselves. This means that much of what belongs to the substance of preparation must be ‘smuggled in’ as an unobtrusive and convincing part of their utterance. A criterion for good drama is therefore the degree to which the matter which serves the purpose of information and preparation is turned into lively dialogue and action.

The less leisurely quality of drama as compared to the novel is connected, as was shown, with the fact that the dramatist has no opportunity for direct comment. This leads to a further distinction: not only is the progress of the action on the stage, during a scene, identical with the progress of the author’s narration, but also with the progress in the minds of the audience. While in a novel we can pause or slow down the tempo of reading for moments of retrospection, reflection and interpretation, and, on the other hand, can take in an elaborate description, an analysis of a state of mind at one sweeping glance, as it were, the play is in constant motion, and in watching it we proceed from one moment to the next. We cannot look back to the top of the page, we cannot obtain a comprehensive contemplation of a whole passage; we have to go on at the same speed at which the action on the stage proceeds. Steady progress, or – as Thornton Wilder put it – ‘forward movement’,¹ is one of the basic laws of drama.

Another criterion for good drama is therefore the degree to which we are drawn into this process; and on the other hand an understanding of the nature of it may give us a key to the principles underlying the art of preparation. In a successful play the audience not only watches what is happening on the stage at the present moment, but is also constantly looking out for what is going to happen next. We want to see and know more of what we have just seen, our minds are stretching forward, our awakened interest asks for continuation and clarification. The building up of impressions which is going on all the time in the minds of the audience while the play is in progress also includes a building up of expectations.² While fixing our attention on the immediate presence of the spectacle, the dramatist also keeps our imagination busy with speculations about the further development. What we see at the present moment we judge on the basis of what we have learned so far about the characters and on the basis of what we have been expecting all the time (only at the very beginning of the play is this different). But this does not mean that our previous knowledge and our expectations must always be fulfilled by the course of the action. The clash between expectation and fulfilment constitutes an important source of dramatic effect. Shakespeare, in his handling of the art of preparation, made rich use of it.

The ‘progress of time’ of which we have spoken also means that the dramatist is under greater pressure of time in shaping his plays than the novelist. A whole life’s tragedy may be compressed into a three hours’ ‘traffic of the stage’. More things happen as a rule, more conflicts and developments are presented to us, in a play than in a novel limited to three hours’ reading. Without proper preparation the audience would be overwhelmed by the impact of these inner and outer events following closely one upon another. Preparation, used subtly and unobtrusively, is a means for the dramatist to stretch out time, to create the illusion of ‘double time’, to convey to us the experience of the gradual ripening of a decisive action, of the seemingly slow approach of a catastrophe or crisis. We are ready to accept a radical change in a character’s mind or a fatal reversal of inter-human relationships though they may take place within half an hour’s time, because we have been led up to them little by little.

On the other hand, by informing us beforehand about the circumstances and conditions under which a climax, a catastrophe will take place, the dramatist may concentrate the audience’s entire attention on the emotional impact of the event, excluding all informative detail. Preparation thus becomes a means of economy, of saving up the resources of stagecraft.

Another aspect of the art of preparation derives from the foreknowledge of the audience. Shakespeare, as a rule, takes the audience into his confidence at an early stage. The audience thus possesses knowledge which is superior to that shared by the main character or characters. This foreknowledge makes the spectator watch the development of the play, the delusions, hopes, discoveries, the ‘false’ and the ‘right’ actions of the characters on the stage with a mixture of pleasure, apprehension, and critical detachment. He feels at once remote, looking at the play with an almost god-like prescience from a superior vantage-point and he also feels involved,¹ for he will suffer for and with the characters, looking through their false hopes and illusions and foreseeing the fatal consequences of their doings. He may identify himself with their reactions and attitudes and may at the same time judge and reject them on account of his superior knowledge. In his comedies Shakespeare made ample use of this ‘gap of awareness’, which has a direct bearing on the peculia...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Bibliographical Note
• Preface
• 1 Shakespeare’s Art of Preparation. A Preliminary Sketch
• 2 Shakespeare’s Use of the Messenger’s Report
• 3 Past and Future in Shakespeare’s Drama
• 4 Shakespeare’s Soliloquies
• 5 Appearance and Reality in Shakespeare’s Plays
• 6 Shakespeare and the Modern World
• 7 Characteristic Features of Shakespearian Drama
• 8 How to Read a Shakespeare Play
• Index of Authors
• Index of Plays