Going through King Lear, I am mainly drawn to questions regarding the literary style of the play. Earlier in the course, we defined humanism as the influence of classical pieces on Elizabethan Renaissance literature. In this sense, the "pagan" references of King Lear are expected, and understandably familiar to Shakespeare's audience. I, however, was surprised to note the influence of Geoffery of Monmouth's Historia regum Britanniae. In a time when playwrights and authors were attempting to move away from the medieval literature, Shakespeare called upon it for inspiration for what would be one of his most successful plays. I am interested in what his audience's response must have been to this source--were they familiar with Geoffery's work? I also would like to see a translation of the piece by which Shakespeare was inspired for comparison. While Shakespeare widdled and reinvented the English language, it seems counter-intuitive for him to rely on the language's past. This sort of inspiration draws a whole new definition of humanism.
The idea of the folio versus the quarto is also intriguing to me, and also raises questions to the authenticity of a number of Shakespeare's plays. It is reassuring to think that the influence of his actors is minimal, but what sorts of historical references do scholars have when deciding which version is more "accurate." It also seems counterproductive to consider both at the same time. Perhaps it's my generation's obsession with a perfect and instant answer, but I would be more comfortable if a more "authentic" version could be specifically identified.
No comments:
Post a Comment