WAS IT A MISTAKE TO WRITE HAMLET? T.S. Eliot’s rules for literature lead him to some unusual judgments. For example, he concludes that: “CORIOLANUS may be not as “interesting” as HAMLET, but it is, with ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA, Shakespeare’s most assured artistic success.” Eliot winds up by implying that Shakespeare should not have written HAMLET. Not only shouldn’t he have written it, but Eliot finds it baffling that he even tried to attempt it: “We must simply admit that here Shakespeare tackled a problem which proved too much for him. Why he attempted it at all is an insoluble puzzle….” Kids, Eliot’s judgmental approach was not unusual when I was studying literature some fifty years ago. Of the several critics whose essays we were assigned on Milton, all but one (the great C.S. Lewis) thought it was a great mistake for Milton to have written PARADISE LOST.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
- Nick: Further informing my perspective was that in the writings of classical Romans the middle-aged authors opined...
- ARE PEOPLE LESS VIOLENT? (COMMENT). (2)
- Dick Weisfelder: My prior comment was just in the context of sports. Whether or not from Pinker, I have seen the...
- erik: It seems doubtful that human nature has changed. The most likely explanation would be that modern culture gives...
- HOW BANKS PREPARED FOR A U.S. DEFAULT. (2)
- GREECE’S ADVANTAGE IN THE CHICKEN GAME. (2)
- Nick: That makes sense. It reminds me of the stories Pater Familias would tell me about how in Boston the person with...
- Dick Weisfelder: Greece seems to me to be playing a game that Karl Deutsch called “underdog.” While one...
- FOOTBALL PLAYERS DELIBERATELY CAUSING CONCUSSIONS? (3)
- Nick: It was my understanding that boxing gloves were to protect the puncher’s hands and not the...
- Dick Weisfelder: Remember the Roman arenas? Bare knuckled boxing? Such injuries were taken as natural and accepted in...
- Mary Jane Schaefer: This isn’t about football. Or even sportsmanship. Well, it is about sportsmanship. But what...
- A 25 % CHANCE OF A EURO DEFAULT? (1)
- Nick: The fact that this has gone on for so long is pretty perplexing. The Economist is referring back to articles it...
- DECIDING WHAT KIND OF PATIENT YOU ARE. (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: One can be very open to new technology, but also risk averse. The recent debates about how to...
- “A COMFORT BLANKET FOR THE SMUG”? (1)
Meta
In graduate school, we read by assignment a book of essays by T.S. Eliot. I wish I could remember the title. Anyway, I thought it was a terrible book, full of cranky quibbles and totally unenlightening. When I had an interview with my professor, William E. Buckler, I asked him why we were reading this book. Perhaps he took this as a personal attack. His reply was, “Because WE don’t burn books.” At the time I was taken aback by the illogic of this. Now, in retrospect, I think he was just trying to put me in the hot seat where he thought I was putting him. But I had naively thought he would have an answer, what he thought this book was going to contribute to our literary educations. His reply seemed absurb. Were there no alternatives between assigning a book and burning it?
Anyone who wishes that Hamlet had never been written is either jealous, crazy, or both. In this case, probably both.
Jealous, crazy, or perhaps wishing to draw attention to himself.