Shakespeare ideas in works. Works of Shakespeare: list

The writing

The heyday of English drama began in the late 1580s, when a galaxy of writers appeared, now called "university minds": Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593), Thomas Kyd (1558-1594), Robert Greene (c. 1560-1592), John Lily (c. 1554-1606) and several others. The milestones marking the beginning of this heyday were two tragedies - “Tamerlane the Great” (1587) by K. Marlo and “Spanish Tragedy” by T. Kdda (c. 1587). The first marked the beginning of the bloody drama, the second - the genre of revenge tragedies.

There is every reason to believe that Shakespeare began his dramatic work c. 1590. In the first period of his work, he created a number of bloody historical dramas - the trilogy "Henry VI" and "Richard III" and the tragedy of revenge "Titus Andronicus". Shakespeare's first comedies, The Comedy of Errors and The Taming of the Shrew, were notable for their rather crude comedy, close to farces.

In 1593-1594, there was a turning point. Although Shakespeare never abandoned farce and clowning, in general his new comedies The Two Veronas, A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It, Twelfth Night , "The Merry Wives of Windsor" are distinguished by subtle humor. They are dominated by adventurous and adventurous motives and dominated by the theme of love.

Most of the historical plays of this period are colored by faith in the triumph of the best beginnings in public life, which is especially noticeable in three chronicle plays - "Henry IV" (two parts) and "Henry V". Although in them a dramatic struggle between the feudal lords is an indispensable element of action, a fair amount of humor is noteworthy in them. It is in "Henry IV" that the image of Falstaff appears - a masterpiece of Shakespeare's comedy.

The only tragedy of this period, which lasts until the end of the 16th century, is Romeo and Juliet (1595). Its action is imbued with deep lyricism, and even the death of young heroes does not make this tragedy hopeless. Although Romeo and Juliet die, reconciliation of the warring families of Montagues and Capulets takes place over their corpses, love wins a moral victory over the world of evil.

The tragedy "Romeo and Juliet" embodies Shakespeare's optimistic mood in the second period. In comedies and the only tragedy of these years, humanity triumphs over the bad beginnings of life.

At the turn of the 16th-17th centuries, a new turning point took place in Shakespeare's mindset. The first signs of it are felt in the historical tragedy "Julius Caesar" (1599). Her true hero, however, is not a great commander, but another Roman figure - Brutus, the sworn enemy of tyranny. He joins a conspiracy against Caesar, striving for sole despotic power, and participates in his assassination. Adherents of Caesar, and first of all Mark Antony, deceive the people with demagogic speeches, the Romans expel Brutus. The noble hero is defeated and commits suicide. Victory goes to the supporters of tyranny. The tragedy is that the people (namely, they play a decisive role in this tragedy) have not matured to understand who are their true and who are imaginary friends. Historical conditions have developed unfavorably for those who wished to establish noble ideals in life, and this is expressed in Julius Caesar.

Like other representatives of the new worldview, Shakespeare believed that the best beginnings should triumph over evil. However, he and his generation had to make sure that life went a different way. For three centuries European humanism has developed, preaching the need to reorganize life on new, more human principles. It is time to see the consequences of this. Instead, the negative traits of bourgeois development became more and more apparent in all aspects of life. The all-destroying power of gold was added to the remnants of the previous feudal-monarchical injustices.

Shakespeare felt with all his heart that humanistic ideals could not be realized in life. This is expressed in Sonnet 66. Although his translations by S. Marshak and V. Pasternak are more famous, I give another version:

* I call death, I can’t look anymore,
* How a worthy husband dies in poverty,
* And the villain lives in beauty and hall;
* How the trust of pure souls tramples,
* As chastity is threatened with disgrace,
* How honors are given to scoundrels,
* How strength droops before the insolent gaze,
* As everywhere in life the rogue triumphs,
* How arbitrariness mocks art,
* How thoughtlessness rules the mind,
* How painfully languishes in the clutches of evil
* All that we call good.
* If not for you, my love, I would have long ago
* I was looking for rest under the shadow of the coffin.
* Translation by O. Rumer

The sonnet was probably written in the late 1590s, when the turning point in Shakespeare's mentality began, leading to the creation of the tragedy Hamlet. It was created, apparently, in 1600-1601. Already in 1603 the first edition of the tragedy appeared. It was released without the permission of the author and the theater in which the play was playing, and was called the quarto of 1603.

7. THE HUMANISM OF WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE

It is interesting that almost at the same time in England, where national statehood had already taken place, centralized power was established, William Shakespeare (1564-1616), the largest humanist of the Late Renaissance, artistically comprehends the inconsistency, the tragedy of the already established relationship "man-society-state" .

In Shakespeare's tragedies ("King Lear", "Macbeth", etc.), explicitly or not, there is always a natural cosmos, which carries a completely opposite semantic load than that of Montaigne. This cosmos reflects a vague feeling that above the personal life, the consciousness of a "natural" person, some other all-defining world rises, within which the characters act. This world of transpersonal will is the sphere of social-state relations, subordinating the "natural" man without a trace to the norms of the state and making him a "state man".

The key to Shakespeare's heroes is that their life takes place on two levels: personal ("natural individuality") and nationwide (social and civil). However, the heroes do not distinguish between these worlds: their subjectivity shakes the foundations of the world, even if they act in the circle of their own "natural" motives. The "core" of Shakespeare's tragedies is hidden in the contradictory unity of the individual and the nationwide. For example, in "Othello" the hero's personal world is shrouded in veils of superhuman cosmic forces. To Othello who committed the crime, it begins to seem that "now the moon and the sun will be completely eclipsed, the earth will shake in horror." This figurative row sets off that faceless, public-state that invades the fate of the hero.

Othello is a brilliantly guessed image of a person who is in a consistent (seemingly) unity of his own naturalness and sociality, "statehood, citizenship." Othello is a "natural" person (this is reinforced by the fact that he is a Moor), who has the right to love, hate, be gentle, stand up for a personal insult. At the same time, he is endowed with a "set" of certain rights and duties. In his soul, the norms of two spheres of life clashed - and he died.

The scene of the murder of Desdemona is far from the climax of the tragedy, as is sometimes presented in bad theater. Tragedy - in the scene of suicide. After finding out that Desdemona is innocent, Othello is still strong in spirit to live, and demands from those around him that he not be prevented from freely withdrawing. However, everything collapses when Othello hears that the republic deprives him of honor, that he is a prisoner and deprived of power. Life is no longer possible. He could not endure dishonor from the state. Othello dies not as the murderer of his wife (after all, he "came out of honor"), but as a man who, in defense of his personal honor, lost the honor of a citizen. Staying in two spheres of ethical life is the source and strength of the tragic in the fate of Othello.

At the end of the Renaissance, Shakespeare showed the existing discord between personal "natural" and social life. And at the same time, he showed that no one can cut the internal connection between these two spheres of the life of one and the same person - death is inevitable. But how then to live? The man turns out to be a character in search of an author.

CONCLUSION

Concluding the consideration of the philosophical searches of the Renaissance, it is necessary to note the ambiguity of assessments of its heritage. Despite the general recognition of the uniqueness of the Renaissance culture as a whole, for a long time this period was not considered original in the development of philosophy and, therefore, worthy of being singled out as an independent stage of philosophical thought. However, the duality and inconsistency of the philosophical thinking of this time should not belittle its significance for the subsequent development of philosophy, cast doubt on the merits of Renaissance thinkers in overcoming medieval scholasticism and creating the foundations of the philosophy of the New Age.

The English philosopher and moralist A. Shaftesbury (1671 - 1713) once remarked: any conflict between two spheres of life indicates either that society is imperfect, or that a person is imperfect in himself.

The revival was established in the dualism of the individual and the public-state, the empirical and the ideal, the emotional and the rational. The 17th century, on the basis of their opposition and analysis, tries to decide what is decisive in a person.

The Renaissance is one of the most fruitful stages in the development of European history. Revival is a point of choice in the historical process, when new ways of intellectual and civilizational development are being sought. Thinkers, on the one hand, return to the classical ancient heritage to a greater extent than was the case in medieval culture, and on the other hand, they discover a new world of man and nature.

So, the Renaissance, or the Renaissance, is an era in the life of mankind, marked by a colossal rise in art and science. The art of the Renaissance, which arose on the basis of humanism - a current of social thought that proclaimed a person the highest value of life. In art, the main theme has become a beautiful, harmoniously developed person with unlimited spiritual and creative possibilities. The art of the Renaissance laid the foundations of the European culture of the New Age, radically changed all the main types of art. Creatively revised principles of the ancient order system were established in architecture, and new types of public buildings were formed. Painting was enriched with a linear and aerial perspective, knowledge of the anatomy and proportions of the human body. Earthly content penetrated the traditional religious themes of works of art. Increased interest in ancient mythology, history, everyday scenes, landscapes, portraits. Along with the monumental wall paintings that adorn architectural structures, a picture appeared, oil painting arose. In the first place in art came the creative individuality of the artist, as a rule, a universally gifted person.

In the art of the Renaissance, the paths of scientific and artistic comprehension of the world and man were closely intertwined. Its cognitive meaning was inextricably linked with sublime poetic beauty; in its striving for naturalness, it did not descend to petty everyday life. Art has become a universal spiritual need.

Undoubtedly, the Renaissance is one of the most beautiful eras in the history of mankind.

LITERATURE

1. Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man Part 1 - M: RAS, 2005

2. Losev A.F. "Aesthetics of the Renaissance". - M, 2006

3. Motroshilova N.V. The birth and development of philosophical ideas. M., 2004

4. Pico della Mirandola. Speech about the dignity of man // Man. M., 2003

5. Philosophy. A. G. Spirkin. Publishing house "Gardariki", 2006

6. Philosophy. Tutorial. I. M. Nevleva. Publishing house "Russian Business Literature", 2006

7. Bruno J. Dialogues. M., 1949

8. Pico della Mirandola J. Speech about the dignity of man. // Aesthetics of the Renaissance. M., 1981

9. Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. I. M. 1987

10. Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. III. M. 1987

11. Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. I. M. 1987

Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man Part 1 - M: RAS, 2005, p.11

Losev A.F. "Aesthetics of the Renaissance". - M, 2006, p.16

Motroshilova N.V. The birth and development of philosophical ideas. M., 2004, p.29

Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man Part 1 - M: RAS, 2005, p.26

Losev A.F. "Aesthetics of the Renaissance". - M, 2006, p.25

Motroshilova N.V. The birth and development of philosophical ideas. M., 2004, p.41

Synergetics (from the Greek sinergos - acting together) is a theory of self-organization that arose in the 70s of the XX century (I.Prigozhin, G.Hagen). He studies the processes of transition of open non-equilibrium systems from less to more ordered forms of organization, from chaos to order. In theology, the term "synergy" is used, understood as the cooperation of man with God in the creation of salvation.

Gurevich P.S. Philosophy of man Part 1 - M: RAS, 2005, p.29

Bruno J. Dialogues. M., 1949. S.291.

Pico della Mirandola J. It's about the dignity of man. // Aesthetics of the Renaissance. M., 1981. S. 249.

Pico della Mirandola J. It's about the dignity of man. // Aesthetics of the Renaissance. M., 1981. S.250.

Losev A.F. "Aesthetics of the Renaissance". - M, 2006, p.54

Montaigne M. Experiments. Book one. M.-L., 1954. S. 194, 203, 205, 201, 205.

Motroshilova N.V. The birth and development of philosophical ideas. M., 2004, p.64

Motroshilova N.V. The birth and development of philosophical ideas. M., 2004, p.68

Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. I. S. 195.

Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. III. S. 291.

Philosophy. A. G. Spirkin. Publishing house "Gardariki", 2006, p.36

Philosophy. Tutorial. I. M. Nevleva. Publishing house "Russian Business Literature", 2006, p.57

Montaigne M. Experiments. Book. I. C. 204.

Philosophy. A. G. Spirkin. Publishing house "Gardariki", 2006, p.68

They became one of the sources of Giordano Bruno's teachings about the infinity of the Universe. The philosophical and theological views of Nicholas of Cusa can serve as a vivid example of the cardinal property of the entire philosophy of the Renaissance - the desire to reconcile various scientific and religious movements in line with one doctrine. In science, it is noted that the ancient teachings influenced the development of the worldview of Kuzants...

Relations, first of all, in the sphere of economy, it is during this period that science develops, relations between church and state change, and the ideology of humanism is formed. 2 The main features of the philosophy of the Renaissance 2.1 Humanism - the rise of a person If in medieval society corporate and class ties between people were very strong, and a medieval person was perceived all the more valuable as ...

Prepared the formation of experimental mathematical science and mechanistic materialism XYII - XYIII centuries. 3. The main directions of development of Western European philosophy in the Renaissance The main directions of the philosophy of the Renaissance include the following areas: humanistic, natural-philosophical and socio-political. humanist direction. Renaissance humanism - ...

Chapter VII

Scientific and philosophical ideas of the Renaissance in the worldview of Shakespeare. - Three cultural types: Henry V, Falstaff and Hamlet. - Henry V. - Falstaff.

We know how ardently and actively Shakespeare responded to the poetry of the Renaissance, but how did he react to its thought? Indeed, in addition to Boccaccio, Petrarch, Rabelais, the same era produced Galileo, Giordano Bruno, Montaigne, Bacon. Shakespeare was even born in the same year as Galileo; Bruno lived in London for about two years from 1583 and enjoyed great popularity in secular and literary societies. A volume of Montaigne's writings was preserved as if with Shakespeare's inscription, and Bacon created his philosophy, one might say, next to Shakespeare the playwright. Researchers have long discovered and continue to discover in his work many echoes of the scientific Renaissance, especially from the works of Bruno and Montaigne. But it is not the particulars that occupy us, but the general warehouse of Shakespeare's thought. Did Petrarch's leading rival stand at the same height as the reader of philosophers?

One can argue about Shakespeare's individual scientific views. In our opinion, for example, the best German connoisseurs of Shakespeare are wrong when they deny the poet's belief in a new astronomical system. Hamlet's obviously mocking letter to Ophelia does not prove anything, and Ulysses' speech in Troilus and Cressida about the subordination of the planets to the Sun is by no means a defense of Ptolemy. On the other hand, it can be doubted that Shakespeare clearly understood the law of blood circulation, announced by Harvey only two years after the death of the poet. Even more dubious are Shakespeare's ideas about gravity. But the conclusions of psychiatrists, on the other hand, are quite reliable. Shakespeare, in his views on the mentally ill, in his amazingly accurate knowledge of ailments, was two centuries ahead of his contemporaries. There was still a deep conviction in the intrigues of Satan, and the sick were subjected to the most severe tortures; the poet, on the other hand, was able to unravel the soil and causes of diseases and even pointed to healing, humane means. Ophelia, Lady Macbeth, King Lear are immortal monuments of brilliant penetration into the most complex secrets of nature and truly cultural ideas about suffering humanity...

Undoubtedly, the poet himself carried out the most important conquest of the new time, which was marked by the development of free thought, the victory of personal experience over traditions and prejudices. And the implementation was quite conscious. Richard II, deposed from the throne, considers the discord between him, the king, and the requirements of the time to be one of the reasons for his fall. Subsequently, Coriolanus will express even more vigorously the ideas of inevitable and certainly legitimate progress:

If we obeyed the custom in everything, no one would dare to sweep away the dust of antiquity, and the truth would forever sit behind the mountains of delusions!

And here the patrician expresses the truth, not for the sake of the pleasure of arrogant self-will, but in the name of personal dignity and noble independence from the habits and demands of the crowd.

But the sources of personal freedom are thought, enlightenment, the knowledge of life and nature, and Shakespeare zealously defends all these foundations of civilization:

In learning is the power, By which we soar to heaven, In ignorance is God's curse.

So says one of the heroes of the second part of Henry VI, and we do not know whether these words belong exactly to Shakespeare; but they are constantly confirmed by the undoubtedly genuine thoughts of the poet in other plays. Father Francis calls "experience" a "companion of science" (Much Ado About Nothing), and other heroes carefully emphasize the unreliability of the old medieval way of life. Richard II and the Venetian Antonio are unanimous about the abuses of interpretation of the Holy Scriptures that flourished in the Catholic realm. The king is confused by the opposite conclusions that thought can draw from texts. Antonio - in response to Shylock's biblical story in justification of usury - points to the art even of villains to hide behind sacred authority. The poet is convinced that dialectics and malicious intent will be able to "consecrate and season with texts and cover with external decoration" any delusion.

And he shows the validity of this thought by a life example - in an eloquent scene at the burial of Ophelia.

Obviously, Shakespeare fully assimilated the main ideas of the philosophical and critical teachings of his era, and the speeches of his heroes often breathe the energy of Luther's denunciations. But the great preacher of the Reformation, who shook the power of tradition, did not find immediate satisfaction in his personal thought either. On the contrary, the new man had to redeem his liberation through the most severe torments of doubt and endless research. Luther at times fell into despair, experienced the real suffering of Prometheus in search for one clear, unshakable truth. The same legacy went to his descendants. And Shakespeare knows how much enticing charm, but also the thorns lurk in independent mental work - and Hamlet's world motive begins to sound even in Richard's meditation:

Thoughts are the same people; Like them, they can never find peace or be satisfied with themselves.

It is clear that the poet will sincerely and mercilessly rise up against all fanaticism - theoretical, moral and religious. He will subject to ridicule and punishment the frivolous or hypocritical enemies of the natural laws of human nature, he will destroy puritan hypocrisy and intolerance, and one of his cheerful heroes will express the meaning of this humane and liberation struggle in this way: "Either you think - because you are virtuous, this cannot be no pies or wine in the world?" (Twelfth Night).

Thanks to the breadth of his worldview, Shakespeare could cover in his work the main types of different cultural epochs and fulfill the high purpose of art indicated by Hamlet - to embody his age and his time in their true features. He had to act in the transition of the old life to the new path. He saw and personally experienced the collision of the progressive principles of the Reformation and the Renaissance with the customs and authorities of the Middle Ages. Before his eyes, the rapid development of the liberated nature and thought, feelings and mind took place; he himself resolutely took the side of freedom and progress. From the very first works, he began to defend the new and after some time captured a number of psychological types that embody the various historical currents of the era. One of them, a type of medieval man. Others, the brightest, extreme representatives of the two main ideas of the Renaissance: free natural instincts and free critical thought. All three heroes are depicted with great care and strength, but not all of them are equally simple and accessible in terms of psychological composition. The primacy in clarity and integrity belongs, of course, to the hero of antiquity.

Prince Gal, later King Henry V, is one of the most popular figures in English dramatic chronicles, and Shakespeare, for example, undoubtedly used one of the early plays - The Glorious Victories of Henry V. But for us the question of actual borrowings is again not essential, psychology is always original the property of our poet, and he knows how to raise a historical figure to the height of a universal type. The moral development of Heinrich, his nature, his vices and talents - all this is a perfect reflection of the Middle Ages, a brief but complete history of a whole period of human culture, eliminated from the scene by the people of the Renaissance.

Prince Gal - an ideally healthy, normal young man - enjoys youth with all the power and ardor of Anglo-Saxon blood. He is the embodied contrast to the thoughtful but naive philosopher - the king of Navarre and consistently reproduces the worldly wisdom of the poet, scattered in comedies.

He does not at all intend to force his nature with deliberate art and a deliberate school of morality. The anxiety of abstract thought is also completely alien to him; for him, as for a medieval person, all higher questions are resolved by those who should know this. Carelessly and without further ado, he slyly takes life as it is given, does not make ideal and impossible demands on it. But an innately balanced, full-night nature will not wither and unwind in a whirlwind of pleasures. And the prince from the experiences of his youth will not endure either disappointment or a decline in moral strength. Experiments will only be a manifestation of a powerful physical organism. They are not so much the result of frivolity and a thirst for pleasure as an excess of blood and energy. The prince has nothing to spend this surplus on: his father, suspicious and autocratic, does not allow him to participate in state affairs - the son labors in a tavern and plays the role of king with Falstaff, sometimes not refusing much more responsible fun. But the moral element and the organic common sense of the prince are unshakable. They make a brilliant young man out of the heir to the throne, they will create the wisest and most popular ruler out of the king. The Prince is every moment aware of his passions, and we believe his promise to appear later like the sun, only temporarily covered by "despicable clouds." This is not only strength, but also a deep consciousness of it, and, consequently, firmness and confidence in actions, proud modesty and restrained, unobtrusive, but in no way invincible nobility. And we see how Prince Gal, Falstaff's drinking companion, is transformed into the Prince of Wales and a courageous warrior. We are present at the amazing scene of the duel of a born and humble hero with the brilliant knight Percy: how much valor and calm power, and so little words and effect! The prince even unquestioningly concedes the glory of his victory to Falstaff. The war is over, and the prince is again a prankster and a reveler. Falstaff is unable to understand the mysteries of this transformation; Henry's simple but morally powerful psychology is a mystery to him, and when the prince decides to "bury all the ancient vices in the grave with his father" and be worthy of power and the throne, Sir John sees no point in a completely natural history. Meanwhile, stormy youth, even for Henry the Sovereign, was not in vain. He personally knew the life of the common people, the hopes and soul of the last of his subjects; on the throne, he will be the most national and practically knowledgeable ruler. In his youth he was not a dreamer - now he will not be an idealist, the creator of broad political plans; all his activities are inextricably linked with the essential reality, without the slightest interference of theories and ideas. This is an efficient owner of a huge state house with all the advantages and disadvantages of an exceptionally practical mind; the same yeoman, soldier, only in a vast field. The poet depicts his touching participation in ordinary soldiers, a rare ability to get close to their life and moral world, and it is in the mouth of Henry V that he puts an enthusiastic speech to the English settlers. Finally, - this is the only scene of its kind - we see the king's declaration of love to the princess, by no means more cunning and elegant than the novel of any English sailor!

Such is the ideal man of the old age, organically strong, spiritually uncomplicated, directly intelligent and chivalrous, in general, whole and happy in his wholeness. New currents have brought into being incomparably more complex natures, and this complexity is the deeper, the nobler the current. The simplest and most accessible ideal of the Renaissance is freedom of feeling, unlimited epicureanism, extreme opposition to the medieval oppression of the flesh and the denial of the earth. This opposition was not slow to create its own philosophy and establish freedom of instincts on ideological foundations. They are known even to the heroines of Boccaccio, and the reasoning of one of them is especially curious for us. We have to deal, apparently, with the most exceptional example of depravity and unscrupulousness, and yet we hear distant echoes of these horrors even in the most elegant poet of the Italian Renaissance.

A lady comes to an experienced woman - to ask for help in some kind of love and not particularly moral enterprise. She immediately agrees and even hurries to refute any objections of strict moralists in advance.

"My daughter, the Lord knows - and He knows everything - that you will do very well. Even if you did not do this for some reason, you, like every young woman, should have done so, so as not to lose the time of youth, because for a man of understanding there is no sorrow higher than the consciousness that he has missed the time. And what the hell are we good for, having grown old, if not only to guard the ashes by the fire ... "

The author himself unconditionally approves of this philosophy and, having told one or another love story, often very reprehensible to the generally accepted moral view, he ends with a prayer to the Lord, "so that He, by His holy mercy, will lead" to the happiness just described and him, the narrator, and "everything Christian souls who desire it."

Naturally, Boccaccio's heroines honor Cupid "on a par with God" and for this "devotion" they count on bliss even in a future life...

Now imagine that such a "religion" will fall into the hearts and heads of people of incomparably more powerful temperaments and abundant physical strength than Italian ladies - it will fall into the sons of a nation that over the centuries has generated a huge number of heroic figures, considered in its family the Norfolks, Ghents as ordinary phenomena. , even Richards ...

Cupid here will inevitably turn into a deity of the most frank and by no means elegant and not poetic sensuality, longing for the "flying hour" will become a frantic cry and insane indomitable pursuit of the grossest sins of the mortal body, all covers and tricks will disappear - only defiant and often cynical passion will remain. ... Falstaff is the most typical English embodiment of the physical ideal of the Renaissance. He is frankly depraved, cynically unprincipled, a humble servant of his belly. And in all these vices, he is only an extreme and at the same time, in English, an integral and consistent exponent of the practice and morality of the Renaissance. The natural rights of human nature to love, earthly happiness are not enough for him, simple freedom of feeling is not enough - he needs an orgy, a riot, a whole storm of instincts, just like the English of the Middle Ages needed uprisings, civil strife - for "the movement of blood and juices of life", according to aptly an eyewitness account, the Bishop of York. It is not enough for Falstaff to destroy pedantry, scholasticism, scientific theories that disfigure the natural course of life - he will generally go against everything that is not material and not sensual and will generally reject all concepts and ideas: honor, conscience, truth. He will not confine himself to recognizing rights behind "pies and wine" - he will fill his existence with them only, just as he will reduce the feeling of love to corrupt debauchery. In a word, this is the same fanatic of new views that scholasticism and asceticism used to create. This is the opposite pole for Malvolio and even more "virtuous" people, for those very Puritans who, under Shakespeare, thundered curses even at poetry and the theater.

From the basic position of Falstaff, the most selfless son of the Renaissance, all other features of his psychology follow. Falstaff is a coward because he values ​​life here too much; to gray hair considers himself a young man, because youth is the highest good for such a "wise man"; finally, Falstaff is unusually gifted and original. These properties are developed by the poet with the same force as the depressing morality of the hero, and in them lies the secret of the strange attraction that surrounds the personality of Falstaff.

The fact is that Falstaff is still a product of a liberating, progressive trend. True, he brought completely legitimate and healthy aspirations to the point of absurdity and ugliness, but the original grain could not disappear without a trace. Falstaff is a representative of the natural and humane compared to the "virtuous" Malvolio. For Falstaff - life and light, on the side of his enemies - moral death and the darkness of slavery or hypocrisy. And, undoubtedly, Shakespeare, who knew contemporary "saints" so closely, involuntarily had to have a certain sympathy for his sinner, in any case, condescendingly look at falsity alongside fanaticism.

And he gave Falstaff a brilliant gift of wit, gaiety, gave him the ability to captivate others and seriously bind them to himself. He reached the point where we feel sorry for the great sinner, when he is rejected and punished by the king, we sympathize with the simple but heartfelt story of his death and understand the tears of Falstaff's friends and servants... This man, who absorbed all the scum (Sediment, thick that fell to the bottom, settled, standing out from the muddy liquid (Dictionary of V. Dahl).) of his time, also borrowed the spark of his genius - and it, like gold, does not lose its luster or value to the end.

The poet urgently wanted to show that he was creating exactly one of the types of his era. Already in the comedy The End is the Crown of Things, the approaching breath of the epic was felt. Parol is rewarded with many of Falstaff's traits - boastfulness, cowardice, and his attitude towards the count is reminiscent of Falstaff's "friendship" with the prince. But Parol can be successfully tied to the type of boastful warrior in the old comedy: he is just an impudent and pathetic fanfaron, there is not a trace of Jack's incomparable "philosophy", his inexhaustible humor and ingenious resourcefulness in him. The password is out of time and space, Falstaff is an English knight of the 16th century. Internal and external wars completely destroyed many of the most noble families and ruined even more noble estates. The old chivalry fell into decline - both morally and financially - and whiled away its life among all sorts of unseemly acts and tricks: in happy cases, profitable marriage alliances with plebeian families, and then just a fake dice game, nightly robberies, drinking parties at the expense of patrons. All this is reproduced in the chronicle, and Falstaff, with his grandiose figure, continues the gallery of comic types familiar to us from the era of Shakespeare. But the poet, with amazing skill, was able to merge such apparently heterogeneous signs of the time: the decline of the aristocracy and the influence of the Renaissance. It turns out that the extremes of the new Epicurean hobbies, moral unscrupulousness and all kinds of adventurism are most naturally embodied in the personality of a ruined knight, and in the fall he retained aristocratic claims to a careless parasitic life. The class pride of the good-natured and materially helpless Falstaff by nature added only an extra amusing feature to this abyss of wit and comedy.

But Falstaff was destined to appear in the most unexpected guise, not characteristic of his philosophy and his character. They say that Elizabeth was delighted with Sir John of the Chronicle, wished to see him in the role of a lover, and according to the will of the Queen, Shakespeare began a new play and finished it in two weeks.
Elizabeth, Queen of England in a large royal outfit. Engraving by Christine de Passe, after a painting by Isaac Olivier. The inscriptions on the engraving (above): "God is my helper." Under the coat of arms: "Always unchanged". Below: "Elizabeth, B.M., Queen of England, France, Scotland and Virginia, the most zealous defender of the Christian faith, now resting in Bose"

This took place, in all probability, in the spring of 1600. On March 8, the comedy Sir John Oldcastle was played for the Queen. That was the name of Falstaff before - the poet changed the name, having learned that Oldcastle was a famous Puritan in his time and suffered for his beliefs. But in what chronological relation the Merry Wives of Windsor, remade from Sir John Oldcastle, stand to Henry IV, it is difficult to decide: maybe they arose after the first part of the chronicle, and maybe after the second and even after Henry V. For the queen, the poet could resurrect his hero, but for us, in fact, the fate of Falstaff as a character is important.

In comedy, his morality is at the same level, but the same cannot be said about his mind. Before, Falstaff did not consider his appearance to be captivating for women - now he is full of self-deception on this account; before, he could hardly have fallen into repeated and very transparent swindles and subjected his person to ridicule and insults of the philistines and petty-bourgeois; but most importantly, was Sir John able to reach such cowardice and repentance, which are portrayed as a result of his misadventures? It is true that Falstaff, at the hour of his death, cries out to the Lord and curses the sherry, but this by no means proves the inclination of such a sinner by nature and by reason to repentance and moral truths. On the other hand, it is by no means natural for our poet to compose plays for the sake of final teachings. But even if the Falstaff of the chronicle could get caught in the most stupid alteration, he would hardly talk about his journey in a laundry basket with such frankness, as the Falstaff of the comedy does to the imaginary Mr. Brooke. With all the riddles, one impression is quite certain: the comedy was written hastily. This, incidentally, explains its prosaic form. The scenes were set with a predetermined intention - to amuse the audience with curious incidents and in a particularly funny way to present the protagonist, who is least fit for a knight of love. Naturally, the last mockery of Falstaff under such conditions could have ended with the complete humiliation of the hero, leading him through all the steps of senile stupidity to miserable tearful repentance. In terms of the content of the comedy itself, this outcome is plausible, but only the comedy itself should not be viewed as a logical continuation of the chronicle, although the hero retains some common features in all plays.
Shakespeare theater. Engraving from the London "Rishgitz Collection". Depicts one of the theaters of the early 17th century.

Regardless of Falstaff's role, The Merry Wives of Windsor stands in stark contrast to Shakespeare's other comedies. There, the action takes place in an ideal atmosphere of subtle feelings and lyrical idylls (the only exception is the Taming of the Shrew), and only occasionally the sounds of everyday life burst into poetic harmony when jesters appear on the stage. In the Merry Wives of Windsor, on the contrary, everyday life reigns supreme. Moreover, everyday life is provincial, simple-hearted, sometimes rude, little poetic, although not devoid of a kind of humor. Almost all the actors are from the simple class and are not able to pour out their feelings in the privileged form of sonnets and canzones. Only one ray of the usual Shakespearean lyricism is thrown into this gray atmosphere: among the prosaic fathers and mothers, the romance of a daughter and her lover, full of all the freshness of first love. But most of the scenes were to please the undemanding taste of Elizabeth: the poet wrote a lively, frank farce and, for the sake of amusement, even partly sacrificed his incomparable hero. The emergence of such a play is all the more original because it coincided with the work of the poet on a work of a completely different nature. This piece is Hamlet.

The heyday of English drama began in the late 1580s, when a galaxy of writers appeared, now called "university minds": Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593), Thomas Kyd (1558-1594), Robert Greene (c. 1560-1592), John Lily (c. 1554-1606) and several others. The milestones marking the beginning of this heyday were two tragedies - “Tamerlane the Great” (1587) by K. Marlo and “Spanish Tragedy” by T. Kdda (c. 1587). The first marked the beginning of the bloody drama, the second - the genre of revenge tragedies.

There is every reason to believe that Shakespeare began his dramatic work c. 1590. In the first period of his work, he created a number of bloody historical dramas - the trilogy "Henry VI" and "Richard III" and the tragedy of revenge "Titus Andronicus". Shakespeare's first comedies, The Comedy of Errors and The Taming of the Shrew, were notable for their rather crude comedy, close to farces.

In 1593-1594, there was a turning point. Although Shakespeare never abandoned farce and clowning, in general his new comedies The Two Veronas, A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Merchant of Venice, Much Ado About Nothing, As You Like It, Twelfth Night , "The Merry Wives of Windsor" are distinguished by subtle humor. They are dominated by adventurous and adventurous motives and dominated by the theme of love.

Most of the historical plays of this period are colored by faith in the triumph of the best beginnings in public life, which is especially noticeable in three chronicle plays - "Henry IV" (two parts) and "Henry V". Although in them a dramatic struggle between the feudal lords is an indispensable element of action, a fair amount of humor is noteworthy in them. It is in "Henry IV" that the image of Falstaff appears - a masterpiece of Shakespeare's comedy.

The only tragedy of this period, which lasts until the end of the 16th century, is Romeo and Juliet (1595). Its action is imbued with deep lyricism, and even the death of young heroes does not make this tragedy hopeless. Although Romeo and Juliet die, reconciliation of the warring families of Montagues and Capulets takes place over their corpses, love wins a moral victory over the world of evil.

The tragedy "Romeo and Juliet" embodies Shakespeare's optimistic mood in the second period. In comedies and the only tragedy of these years, humanity triumphs over the bad beginnings of life.

At the turn of the 16th-17th centuries, a new turning point took place in Shakespeare's mindset. The first signs of it are felt in the historical tragedy "Julius Caesar" (1599). Her true hero, however, is not a great commander, but another Roman figure - Brutus, the sworn enemy of tyranny. He joins a conspiracy against Caesar, striving for sole despotic power, and participates in his assassination. Adherents of Caesar, and first of all Mark Antony, deceive the people with demagogic speeches, the Romans expel Brutus. The noble hero is defeated and commits suicide. Victory goes to the supporters of tyranny. The tragedy is that the people (namely, they play a decisive role in this tragedy) have not matured to understand who are their true and who are imaginary friends. Historical conditions have developed unfavorably for those who wished to establish noble ideals in life, and this is expressed in Julius Caesar.

Like other representatives of the new worldview, Shakespeare believed that the best beginnings should triumph over evil. However, he and his generation had to make sure that life went a different way. For three centuries European humanism has developed, preaching the need to reorganize life on new, more human principles. It is time to see the consequences of this. Instead, the negative traits of bourgeois development became more and more apparent in all aspects of life. The all-destroying power of gold was added to the remnants of the previous feudal-monarchical injustices.

Shakespeare felt with all his heart that humanistic ideals could not be realized in life. This is expressed in Sonnet 66. Although his translations by S. Marshak and V. Pasternak are more famous, I give another version:

* I call death, I can’t look anymore,
* How a worthy husband dies in poverty,
* And the villain lives in beauty and hall;
* How the trust of pure souls tramples,
* As chastity is threatened with disgrace,
* How honors are given to scoundrels,
* How strength droops before the insolent gaze,
* As everywhere in life the rogue triumphs,
* How arbitrariness mocks art,
* How thoughtlessness rules the mind,
* How painfully languishes in the clutches of evil
* All that we call good.
* If not for you, my love, I would have long ago
* I was looking for rest under the shadow of the coffin.
* Translation by O. Rumer

The sonnet was probably written in the late 1590s, when the turning point in Shakespeare's mentality began, leading to the creation of the tragedy Hamlet. It was created, apparently, in 1600-1601. Already in 1603 the first edition of the tragedy appeared. It was released without the permission of the author and the theater in which the play was playing, and was called the quarto of 1603.

The Question of Shakespeare's Moral Ideal

The question of Shakespeare's moral ideal raises great difficulties. They note that his ideal is a smart, noble, educated person, but this statement is devoid of specificity, since the modern schoolchild does not always understand the requirements for a person in the Renaissance.

Consequently, the moral ideals of the author, as well as the theme, idea, intent of the work are not perceived by students clearly enough before working with the teacher. Therefore, the teacher, relying on the material studied in the lessons of history about the Renaissance, first of all illuminates at the very first lesson the main ideas of humanists in the social and religious fields and the moral principles based on these ideas. He points out that the Renaissance overthrew the gloomy dominance of the church and proclaimed the idea of ​​antiquity about the harmonious development of man. The manual for high school students noted that "the principle of the free development of the human personality becomes the ideological banner of the Renaissance." A person again receives the right to openly express his thoughts, to refute, to doubt, to comprehend the unknown. A critical mind with a broad education is one of the main features of a Renaissance man. If a person knows how to think and feel, then, from the point of view of humanists, he is beautiful, no matter who he is, no matter what class he belongs to.

According to his moral principles, Shakespeare was a worthy son of his era. “An enemy of medieval ideas about hereditary nobility, religious fanaticism, racial prejudice, etc., Shakespeare in his works objectively affirms the principle of equality, the moral equivalence of people of all classes, all races and religions,” writes A. Smirnov in the introductory article to the collection playwright's writings. Shakespeare always ardently sympathizes with young heroes, and especially heroines, who defend their feelings from the house-building way of life. A. Smirnov also points out that Shakespeare highly appreciates "the truth in human relations, the truthfulness of thoughts and feelings."

I am the spirit, I am your father.

Feigned at night

wander,

And languish in the middle of the fire during the day.

While the sins of my earthly nature

Do not burn to ashes ... .. "

« Laertes

His death, the mystery of the funeral.

Where the sword and emblem of the bones did not overshadow

Without splendor, without due

rite

Cry loudly from heaven to

earth."

2. Do the heroes have doubts before revenge?

« Hamlet

…Spirit presented to me

Perhaps there was a devil ....

and, perhaps…..

He leads me to death. to me

need

Return support.

« Laertes

How did he die? I'm not a fool

endure.

Loyalty to hell! Oaths to

black demons!

Fear and piety into the abyss

Bezdie!...

King

…Who will hold you?

Laertes

My only will ... "

3. What moral qualities of Hamlet and Laertes are revealed in their statements?

« Hamlet

Call me what

any instrument,

even if you can me

torment, but play to me

you can not"

« Laertes

Sovereign, I am with you;

Especially when you choose

Me with your tool"