Shakespeare's First Theatre Dug Up

One of Shakespeare's early playhouses has been discovered by the archeologists from Museum of London Archaeology(MOLA) in London. It is the place where Shakespeare's famous plays 'Henry V' and 'Romeo and Juliet' were first staged. It is a brilliant piece of news for both the historians and the fans of Shakespeare because they now have an insight into the place where the early productions of Shakespeare were performed. There are talks doing rounds that it might have been in use till Civil War in 1640s. The playhouse gets its name 'Curtain Theatre' from a nearby street Curtain Close. Before the completion of Globe in Southwark, this was the place where Shakespeare's plays were performed between 1597 and 1599.

'Waiting for Godot' as 'The Theatre of the Absurd'

The term ‘Theatre of Absurd’ was coined by Martin Esslin in his essay ‘The Theatre of Absurd’. The main exponents of this school were – Samuel Beckett, Arthur Adamov, Jean Genet. Although these writers oppose the idea of belonging to a particular school, yet their writings do have certain common characteristics on the basis of which they can be clubbed together in one category.
The term ‘absurd’ has also been linked to the mathematical term ‘surd’, which means a value that cannot be expressed in finite terms. In terms of literature, therefore, we can say that it refers to something that is irrational.
The concept of ‘absurd’ seems to have begun with Sartre’s philosophy. “The absurd is not a mere idea”, says Sartre, “it is revealed to us in a doleful illumination – getting up, tram, four hours of work, meal, sleep; Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday.” The idea is similar to what Camus expressed in his essay ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’. The point stressed here is, beginning all over again as if it were a new life. The actions of the absurd hero are meaningless and illogical.
In his play ‘Waiting for Godot’ Samuel Beckett presents before us a highly absurd situation of two tramps – Vladimir and Estragon – waiting for someone called Godot, who doesn’t come. Both the tramps follow the same routine everyday – come and stand under a tree, wait for Godot, indulge in some senseless activities, keep on waiting the whole day, decide to begin afresh the next day. Moreover, Act II of the play is a mere photocopy of the first act with only one or two changes. Lucky accompanied by his master Pozzo comes in the first act but in the second the situation is reversed – Lucky is the master, Pozzo is his slave, who is blind now. A boy comes to inform Vladimir and Estragon that Godot won’t come that day but he’ll definitely come the next day. In the second act too, a boy comes to deliver the same message. When asked by Vladimir and Estragon, he says that he’s the brother of boy, who came on the previous day. Through the repetitive pattern of the play, Beckett probably wants to drive home the point to the audience (now, readers) that the absurdity in man’s life makes him incapable of performing something new.
As far as the actions of the two tramps are concerned, they too are absurd. Estragon’s removal of his shoes, for instance, is an absurd as well as a funny scene. Their conversation also is on the absurdian lines of the ‘Theatre of the Absurd’. For example,

Valdimir: Let’s go
Estragon: Let’s go
(They both don’t move.)

Sartre was of the view that man is born in a void. The same idea manifests itself in the fact that Beckett’s characters stand outside the society. Here Beckett differs from the other ‘absurd’ writers, especially Adamov. Beckett’s characters stand outside the society as if rejected. But they converse with each other. On the other hand, Adamov’s characters stand within the society as outcasts and don’t converse with anyone.
It may however, be safely concluded that although the actions, event and dialogues are absurd, they are not completely meaningless. They do have a symbolic value. The theatre of absurd by presenting before us these ‘absurd’s situations wants to convey to us the essential absurdity of man’s life. Yet there is hope that ‘Godot might come tomorrow’.

Shakespeare's 'The Tempest' - an Overview

‘The Tempest’ is a part of the last group of plays written by Shakespeare. The other plays included in this group are ‘Winter’s Tale’, ‘Cymbeline’ and Pericles. ‘The Tempest’ has also been called ‘Shakespeare’s last will’, as it expresses his opinion about the way we should live and opinion different from that en his tragedies and comedies. The play belongs to the category called dramatic romances. The play tries to answer the moral question – ‘How to live?’ It presents a moral lesson so much so that it has been labeled as a Morality Play. Critics have seen in Prospero a reflection of Shakespeare himself, a sage who after suffering all the anguish of the soul had decided on a reposeful retirement to Stratford.
“Forgiveness and freedom are the keynotes of the play”, says Dowden while it is Verity, who states “Forgiveness and Reconciliation are the keynotes of the play”. ‘The Tempest’ is the story of a wronged man, Prospero. His Dukedom of Milan has been usurped by his brother Antonio, who hatched the conspiracy with the co-operation of Alonso (King of Naples) and Sebastian (Alonso’s brother). Prospero is expelled from the country and sent on a boat so that ti may drown in the storm. It is by god’s grace that Prospero accompanied by his infant daughter Miranda safely reaches and island unharmed by the sea-storm. Living on this almost uninhabited island (the only ones living there were – Caliban, a half-monster and some spirits), Prospero continues his habit of reading books of magic which were placed in the boat by his honest minister, Gonzalo. Prospero acquires so much power that he can do anything. Using his powers he brings his enemies to the same island. But when the time comes to punish them he does not do so. Instead he arouses a sense of guilt in them. He tells Ariel that his enemies are repentant of their past misdeeds which ‘sole drift of mine purpose doth extend it not a frown further’. All that wanted his enemies was to have ‘heart sorrow and a clear life ensuing’, that is remorse and repentance for their past misdeeds and a vow to lead a sinless life in future. Prospero had probably realized that the virtue of forgiveness is greater that the quality of vengeance:
“…the sweetness doth life
In virtue than in vengeance”
- a truth that Shakespeare too had understood at the fag end of his writing career. Even in his last speech (after he throws his books of magic into the sea), Prospero seems to be echoing Shakespeare’s view.
Prospero forgives his brother Antonio, also the King of Naples, Alonso and Sebastian. The only revenge (if we can call it one) he has upon his enemies is that by using magic he made Ferdinand, son of Alonso (King of Naples) fall in love with and pledge to marry Miranda. After the reconciliation Prospero will be re stored back his Dukedom, and Miranda will inherit both the Dukedom of Milan and Kingdom of Naples. The reconciliation takes place between the brothers – Antonio and Sebastian too are repentant of their evil designs and King of Naples too reconciles. Apart from these, there are others too who are reconciled to their near and dear ones. Ferdinand and Miranda are together once again after Prospero had made Ferdinand work as a log-man. Alonso is too glad to meet his son Ferdinand; both had presumed each other to be dead.
Another dominant characteristic of the play is the element of freedom. The play begins and ends with the idea of liberty. In the very beginning of the play we are informed that Ariel was set free by Prospero. Throughout the play Ariel, the airy spirit, requests Prospero to free him. Prospero had got the island rid from the clutches of the witch Sycorax, Caliban’s mother.
Earlier even Caliban had been forgiven and let free by Prospero but we learn that Caliban had tried to outrage the modesty of Miranda. So he was made a slave by Prospero. But at the end of the play, both Ariel and Caliban are set free by Prospero.
We also find the dominance of these keynotes in the Ferdinand-Miranda love story. Ferdinand is made to work as a ‘patient logman’ by Prospero to test his sincerity. Later he is set free and reconciled with Miranda. As Dowden has put it: “Shakespeare was aware that no life was ever lived which does not need to receive as well as to render forgiveness.”
The play is a dramatic romance, different from Shakespeare’s early comedies and tragedies. In a tragedy the events take a turn for the worse for the hero and the play ends with the hero’s sufferings, rather death. In a comedy, all is gay, the events are favourable and play ends on a cheerful note. While in a dramatic romance, there is a twist in-between, events change from unfavourable to favourable resulting eventually into a happy ending for the protagonist. Thus to state the essence of the play Dowden’s words are the most suitable: “true freedom of man consists in service”. Shakespeare presents before us this truth in the form of ‘one of the most perfect plays’ (as Hazlitt has called it). The play is a summation of the whole experience of Shakespeare – the lessons life had taught him.

The University Wits

The term University Wits is applied to a group of scholars, who wrote in the closing years of sixteenth century. They arrived in London from Oxford and Cambridge University and significantly influenced the development of Elizabethan literature. The group included – John Lyly, George Peele, Robert Greene, Christopher Marlowe, Thomas Lodge, Thomas Nashe and Thomas Kyd (he was also a part although he had studied at the Merchant Taylor’s School – an excellent place in itself).
At the time when the University Wits entered the scenario of the English drama, one of the prevailing traditions was the imitation of ancient Roman drama, for example, ‘Gorboduc’ and ‘Ralph Roister Doister’. The native tradition at that time was devoid of the artistic excellence of classical Greek and Roman drama. The special quality of the University Wits was that although they too looked up to the classical drama and had also woven the general pattern of the drama into their creations, yet they did not imitate it blindly. They gave to the English stage a kind of romantic drama, which became a source of inspiration for Shakespeare later on.

John Lyly (1554-1606) is the most famous for his prose romance ‘Euphues’. In all he wrote eight plays. In his plays he used a mixture of prose and poetry – symbolic of the coming together of the worlds of reality and romance.

Robert Greene (1558-92)) – The most interesting of the five plays written by Greene is ‘The Honourable History of Friar Bacon and Friar Bungay’. The other plays penned by him are:
(i) The Comical History of Alphonsus King of Aragon
(ii) A Looking Glass for London and England (written jointly with Lodge)
(iii) The History of Orlondo Furioso
(iv) The Scottish History of James, the Fourth

George Peele (1558-97)) – The following are the five plays penned by Peele:
(i) The Arraignment of Paris (a pastoral play)
(ii) The Battle of Alcazar (a romantic tragedy)
(iii) The Famous Chronicle of King Edward, the First (a chronicle play)
(iv) The Love of King David and Fair Bathsheba ( a kind of mystery play with a Biblical theme)
(v) The Old Wives’ Tale (a romantic satire on the current dramatic verse)
The variety that can be observed from the plays (belonging to different categories of dramas) we certainly say that Peele was a versatile writer.

Thomas Kyd (1557-97) – His only play ‘The Spanish Tragedy’ for which he used the Senecan model of a revenge tragedy. Some characteristic features of a revenge tragedy – murders, bloodshed, dreadful incidents, ghosts etc. – were all present in ‘The Spanish Tragedy’. But at the same time the drama was a departure from the Senecan tradition. Most of the action is reported in Senecan tragedy whereas it takes place on stage in Kyd’s drama. Even otherwise Kyd’s tragic hero was a departure from the prevailing tradition – he did not belong to the royal class rather he was an ordinary being. By introducing the quality of introspection in his hero he set up a precedent for Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

Christopher Marlowe (1564-93) – Marlowe has been called to be the most talented among the Wits. He wrote:
(i) Tamburlaine, the Great
(ii) Doctor Faustus
(iii) The Jew of Malta
(iv) Edward, the Second
(v) Parts of ‘The Massacre at Paris’ and ‘Dido Queen of Carthage’
Marlowe took the subject matter to a higher level – he used ambition as the theme instead of the revenge theme of Seneca. He showed the presence of a certain flaw in his hero – on the lives of the idea of a tragic hero of Aristotle. His effective use of the blank verse as the medium added another feather to his cap.

Among the lesser known University Wits were Thomas Nashe (1567-1601) and Thomas Lodge (1558-1625). According to the critics they have not contributed much to the growth of English literature.