John Milton’s “On Shakespeare. 1630” was included in the preface of William Shakespeare’s plays in the Second Folio. It should come as no surprise that the poem extols the Bard’s unique brilliance and declares that no physical statue or monument could ever do justice to his greatness. Rather, the orator contends that Shakespeare’s literary creations endure eternally in the emotions and thoughts of his listeners. Even kings can only dream of such a “tomb,” the speaker claims.
The poem explores the relationship between art and immortality. In context of the poem, the relationship between art and immortality is addressed through the expression on Shakespeare’s creative brilliance. The poet opines that neither money nor armies can purchase Shakespeare’s creativity which is the foundation of his immortality. He has permanently cemented himself in “our wonder and astonishment.” Shakespeare lives on in the minds of every new generation, which is a far better homage to anything carved out of stone than anything else; “powerful rhyme” can “outlive” “marble” and “gilded monuments.” The speaker claims that Shakespeare doesn’t require a physical memorial since he would always be remembered by readers in their hearts and thoughts—a destiny that even kings can only hope for.
The poem also mentions the transformation of art into immortality. According to the speaker, the readers who consume the works and art of Shakespeare makes him eternally alive in their hearts. Shakespeare’s writings, according to the speaker, have left such a “deep impression” on readers that they have turned them into “marble.”
The poem explicitly encapsulates the contrast between political figures and an ordinary playwright like Shakespeare. Shakespearean works and his creative musings lingers in the minds and hearts of the readers which the fate even the politicians and kings cannot claim it. The speaker also goes on to say that the eternal fame and renown image cannot readily be claim by political figures in all their power and authority. The distinction is clearly elucidated in the poem between the achievements of Shakespeare in contrast with the monarchs and political personas.
Additionally, the poem positions Shakespeare as a colossus among the other poets. Shakespeare’s “easy numbers,” or the elegance and beauty of his prose (the term “numbers” alludes to poetic meter), are contrasted with the “slow-endeavouring art” of other poets by the speaker. Shakespeare therefore reduces other authors to “shame.” The speaker implies that other poets toil and suffer over their work, yet they are nothing compared to Shakespeare.
There is a glorification on Shakespearean art and his creativity. The speaker seems to appreciate his achievements and contribution to literary writings and commemoration of physical monuments for Shakespeare cannot give reverence. In the context of the poem, Shakespeare doesn’t require a “star-y pointed pyramid” or “piled stones” to honor him, whereas those other authors would want for such tributes. The speaker of this poem contends that no physical monument could do the Bard honor. Actually, just a “weak witness” to Shakespeare’s “name” would be left by those opulent tombs. Shakespeare’s art is described in the poem as “astonish[ing]” in the sense that it is so effortless that even a “star-ypointing pyramid” would be ashamed of it.
Shakespeare lives on in a way that only he can: in a class by himself because his work speaks for itself. Kings “would wish to die” if they could only be remembered with such affection, despite their great wealth and power. Thus, the poem essentially makes the claim that Shakespeare was the greatest writer of all time.
2 Replies to “Critical Analysis of John Milton On Shakespeare”