What are the general ‘defects’ that Dr. Johnson finds
with Shakespeare’s works?
Introduction. In his Preface , Johnson first
considers the excellences of Shakespeare and then turns to his defects. He does
not consider Shakespeare as a faultless or perfect dramatist. On the contrary,
he is of the opinion that Shakespeare’s faults are profound enough to overwhelm
the merits if they had only belonged to some other dramatist. Johnson sets
down, these faults just as they appear to him, without prejudice or
superstitious veneration. Here he values, truthfulness more than courtesy. It
is said that once Johnson told one of his contemporaries that it was necessary
to point out Shakespeare’s faults in order that his merits may – be better
appreciated. However, in his ultimate assessment of Shakespeare he does not
seem to bother much about the numerous faults which he himself has pointed out.
This makes us feel that Johnson is paying lip service to neo-classicism and
does not attach serious importance to the defects which his neo-classical
affiliation obliges him to notice and criticize.
Virtue is not distributed wisely. According to Johnson, Shakespeare’s first and foremost defects is that
‘he sacrifices virtue to convenience’ and plays more attention to conveying
pleasure than instruction. It seems to Johnson that Shakespeare writes without
any moral purpose. There is much of moral wisdom in his plays but they are
indirectly stated : “His precepts and axioms drop from him casually. Johnson also points out
that Shakespeare does not make a just distribution of good and evil—that he
does not observe poetic justice. Johnson laments that Shakespeare does not
always unambiguously present his virtuous characters being victorious over the
evil ones. Rather, he takes his characters through right and wrong
indiscriminately and dismisses them carelessly at the end. The didactic message
that may be derived from their situation is hardly made explicit; it is left to
chance. One may attribute this defect to the barbarity of the age in which
Shakespeare lived, but Johnson is not ready to condone the fault. He says : “It
is a always a writer’s duty to make the world better, and justice is a virtue
independent of time or place”. We do not have any doubt that it is Johnson’s
training and practice as a neo classical critic which leads him to lay such an
emphasis on explicit moralizing or didacticism.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.