Shakespeare is great because in his work there is a just representation of general
human nature. His characters are the faithful representations of humanity. His characters
are universal but they are individual also. They are also true to the age, sex or profession to which they belong. They are also true to type.
His works are a storehouse of practical axioms and domestic wisdom. From them can be formulated a philosophy of life of great practical value in real life. That his plays are a just representation of human nature is also seen in the fact the love is not all. Love is only one of the many passions and as his plays mirror life, they represent other passions as well. Undue importance is not attached to any one passion. His characters are not exaggerated. He has no heroes, but only human beings. Thus his plays increase our knowledge of human nature.
Shakespeare has been criticized for mixing comedy and tragedy. But Johnson defends
him as follows: In the use of tragic-comedy, Shakespeare is true to nature. In real life also
there is a mingling of the good and evil, joys and sorrows, tears and smiles and so in
mixing tragedy and comedy Shakespeare merely holds a mirror to nature. Tragi-comedy is nearer to life than either tragedy or comedy, and so it combines within itself the pleasure as well as the instruction of both. The interchange of the serious and the gay, of the comic and tragic, does not interrupt the progress of the passions, i.e. it does not result in any weakening of effect. Moreover, it should be remembered that all pleasure consists in variety. Tragi comedy can satisfy a greater variety of tastes.
Comedy came natural to him, and not tragedy. In tragedy he writes with great appearance of toil and study what is written at last with little felicity; but in comic scenes he seems to produce without labour what no labour can improve. His comic scenes are natural and, therefore, durable. The language of his comic scenes is the language of real life. Shakespeare has serious faults, serious enough to obscure his many excellences:
- He sacrifices virtue to convenience, and is so much more careful to please than to
instruct. - His plots are loosely formed.There are many faults of chronology and many anachronisms in his plays.
- Often his jokes are gross and licentious.
- In his narration there is much pomp of diction and circumlocution.
- What he does best, he soon ceases to do.
- He is too fond of puns and quibbles. For a pun he sacrifices reason, propriety and truth.
Johnson defended Shakespeare and the Three unities. His histories being neither comedies nor tragedies are not subject to the ‘classic’ rules of criticism which were devised for tragedies and comedies. The only Unity they need is consistency and naturalness in character, and this Shakespeare has imparted to them. In his other works, he has well maintained the Unity of Action. He is the poet of nature, and his plots have the complexity and variety of nature. But his plots have a beginning, a middle, and an end, one event is logically connected with another.
He shows no regard for the Unities of Time and Place, and in the opinion of Johnson,
these Unities have given more trouble to the poet than pleasure to the auditor. When a
spectator can imagine the stage to be Alexandria and the actors to be Antony and
Cleopatra, he can surely imagine much more. Drama is a delusion and delusion has no
limits. The spectators know the stage is a stage, and the actors are actors. There is no
absurdity in showing different actions at different places. The Unity of Time also has no validity. A drama imitates successive actions, and just as they may be represented at successive places, so also they may be represented at different period, separated by several years. The only condition is that the events so represented should be connected with each other with nothing but time intervening between them. In short the unities are not essential to drama. Their violation often results in variety and instruction. The rules may be against Johnson but he justifies Shakespeare on grounds of nearness to life and nature.
Summary of Johnson Letter to Lord Chesterfield
Summary of Samuel Johnson The Good Sort of Woman
