I just finished Stephen Greenblatt’s latest book, Tyrant, Shakespeare on Politics. I’ve read a number of his books, but this one was by far the most enjoyable. Greenblatt never mentions the very stable genius, even in the Acknowledgments, where he recalls the book’s genesis when “not so very long ago…I sat in a verdant garden in Sardinia and expressed my growing apprehensions about the possible outcome of an upcoming election.” Like so much else in the book the reference to the genius is clear but unspoken.
The book is an examination of Shakespeare’s treatment of tyrants, the main example being everyone’s favorite, Richard III, as well as runners up Macbeth, King Lear, Julius Caeser, Leontes (from A Winter’s Tale, one of the more obscure plays) and Coriolanus. He draws implicit parallels between all of them and the genius. Sometimes, they’re a bit strained, but often on the mark, and sometimes pretty funny, like this remark about Coriolanus’s decision to turn traitor against Rome by leading an enemy army against it:
The plot twist is worth dwelling upon. It is as if the leader of a political party long identified with hatred of Russia — forever saber-rattling and accusing the rival politicians of treason — should secretly make his way to Moscow and offer his services to the Kremlin.
In these uncertain times, it’s nice to have reason to hope, and Greenblatt’s ultimate conclusion is hopeful:
But Shakespeare believed that the tyrants and their minions would ultimately fail, brought down by their own viciousness and by a popular spirit of humanity that cold be suppressed but never completely extinguished. The best chance for the recovery of collective decency lay, he thought, in the political action of ordinary citizens.
The professor doth project too much, methinks, but that’s okay, the book is a fun read and I highly recommend it. Here’s hoping we ordinary citizens pull it off this time.
Post a Comment