Dr Samuel Johnson’s ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ is a landmark work of Shakespearean criticism that remains influential to this day. Published in 1765, the preface marked a significant departure from earlier approaches to Shakespeare, and its impact on subsequent criticism cannot be overstated. To understand its significance, it is necessary to place it in the context of 18th century Shakespearean criticism.
At the time Johnson was writing, Shakespeare was already regarded as a great writer, but his plays were not always understood or appreciated in the way they are today. In the 18th century, there was a tendency to view Shakespeare’s works as flawed and lacking in the qualities that were thought to make literature great. This was partly due to changing literary tastes, which emphasized clarity, order, and decorum, and partly due to a lack of understanding of the Elizabethan and Jacobean theatrical conventions that Shakespeare was working with.
One of the key features of 18th century Shakespearean criticism was a focus on what was seen as Shakespeare’s lack of adherence to the classical rules of drama. These rules, based on the work of Aristotle, emphasized the importance of unity of time, place, and action, as well as the need for a clear and logical plot. Shakespeare’s plays, with their multiple plots, sprawling timeframes, and often chaotic action, were seen as violating these rules, and therefore as inferior to the works of classical dramatists like Sophocles and Euripides.
Another common feature of 18th century Shakespearean criticism was a tendency to ‘correct’ Shakespeare’s works, either by editing them to conform to contemporary standards of language and style, or by rewriting them entirely. This was done in an attempt to make the plays more accessible to audiences, but it often resulted in the loss of the qualities that made Shakespeare’s writing unique and powerful.
Johnson’s ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ can be seen as a response to these trends in criticism. Rather than attempting to ‘correct’ Shakespeare, Johnson sought to understand and appreciate him on his own terms. He recognized the complexity and ambiguity of Shakespeare’s works, and argued that these qualities were a strength rather than a weakness. He also rejected the idea that Shakespeare was inferior to classical dramatists, arguing instead that he had a different kind of greatness that was no less valid.
One of the key themes of Johnson’s preface is the importance of ‘nature’ in Shakespeare’s writing. Johnson argues that Shakespeare’s genius lay in his ability to capture the essential nature of human experience, rather than in his adherence to the rules of classical drama. He writes: “Shakespeare is above all writers, at least above all modern writers, the poet of nature; the poet that holds up to his readers a faithful mirror of manners and of life.”
For Johnson, Shakespeare’s works were valuable precisely because they captured the messiness and unpredictability of human experience, rather than attempting to impose order and clarity on it. This was a radical departure from the prevailing view of Shakespeare’s works as flawed and chaotic.
Another key theme of Johnson’s preface is the idea that Shakespeare’s greatness lay in his ability to create complex and realistic characters. Johnson argues that Shakespeare’s characters are not mere stock types, but are fully realized individuals with their own unique personalities and motivations. He writes: “Shakespeare has no heroes; his characters are interesting by their felicity of expression, and adroitness of reply…his persons act and speak by the influence of those general passions and principles by which all minds are agitated.”
This emphasis on character was also a departure from earlier criticism, which tended to focus more on plot and structure. Johnson’s recognition of the importance of character in Shakespeare’s works would go on to influence later critics, and is still a central feature of Shakespearean criticism today.
Another important aspect of Johnson’s preface is his defense of Shakespeare’s use of language. At the time, there was a tendency to view Shakespeare’s language as outdated and difficult to understand. Johnson, however, recognized the power and beauty of Shakespeare’s language, and argued that it was an essential part of his artistry. He writes: “Shakespeare’s language…is natural, forcible, and various; suited to the passion which it expresses, and to the characters who use it.”
Johnson’s defense of Shakespeare’s language was a significant departure from the prevailing view at the time, and helped to establish Shakespeare’s reputation as a great writer with a unique and powerful voice.
In conclusion, Samuel Johnson’s ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ marked a significant departure from earlier approaches to Shakespearean criticism. By emphasizing the importance of nature, character, and language in Shakespeare’s works, Johnson helped to establish Shakespeare’s reputation as a great writer with a unique and powerful voice. His ideas would go on to influence later critics, and are still central to our understanding and appreciation of Shakespeare today. In the context of 18th century Shakespearean criticism, Johnson’s preface represented a significant shift away from the prevailing view of Shakespeare’s works as flawed and chaotic, and helped to establish Shakespeare as a major figure in the literary canon.
khanindradutta's Blog 