Character Analysis of Shakespearean Plays I. Character analysis —character evaluation as the best way to start the analysis of

Character Analysis of Shakespearean Plays
    Good morning, everyone. Last time I just gave a brief introduction to the Shakespearean play, today we will go further to discuss together how to understand a Shakespearean play. The most obvious way to begin an interpretation of a Shakespearean play is by evaluating the characters. [1] Any play involves characters in a particular setting, doing particular things. The plot will develop a conflict, which will usually inflict pain or distress on some people, and will lead to a final resolution of sorts in which some characters may die or be punished severely, while others survive or triumph or get substantially rewarded. Hence, one clear entry into such a work is to put the characters on trial: Who is good? Who is bad? Why do certain people act in certain ways? Do any of the characters change? Where are my sympathies as I make my way through this play? As an interpreter, I am, in essence, the judge, and how shall I apportion my verdicts?
    Interpreting a play by analyzing the characters in it, judging them, and coming to some final evaluation of them is a natural way to approach Shakespeare for three main reasons. The first is that these are plays, and they inevitably feature active characters more or less recognizably like people around us. That, indeed, is the chief appeal of the genre. [2] So it is entirely natural to treat the play as we treat life itself, by responding to the people we see, the actions they carry out, the words they use, and the decisions they make. On the basis of these observations we will come to some conclusions about the characters and will discuss the play in those terms.
    [3] The second reason is that Shakespeare is famous, more than anyone else, for his astonishing ability to create interesting, complex, and natural characters. Unlike many other dramatists whose characters do not invite very complex investigation, Shakespeare has the ability to fill a play with scores of characters, each of whom talks in a language and acts in a way which indicates a sharply focused individual personality with a very particular response to experience. Hence, it is, once again, natural to treat them as fully realized people whose conduct requires an evaluative judgment.
    Then, too, the fact that we are dealing with plays always keeps the approach through character analysis alive,[4] because theatre productions depend upon individual actors, and individual actors need to reflect upon the motivations for their characters. They have to, in a sense, discover their human qualities and become the stage people whose lives they enact. Thus, the dramatic tradition of continuing to mount Shakespeare productions ensures that the analysis of character will remain a powerful force in the interpretation of the plays.
    The third major reason why character analysis is an important approach to Shakespeare’s plays is (as Harold Bloom has repeatedly pointed out) that Shakespeare’s characters are often intrigued or puzzled by their own characters. That is, they make their characters part of the dramatic "problem" of the fiction we are exploring. When, for example, Hamlet or Macbeth or Othello starts to wrestle with his own character, trying to understand his own motivation, feelings, and actions, that moment places the nature of the character as an essential element in the work (in a way that is markedly different from texts in which a character’s personality does not create particular problems for him). [5] In other words, the plays themselves put character analysis directly on the table.
    The approach to a Shakespeare play which places the analysis of character at the centre of the process was particularly strong in the nineteenth century, [6] and the literary interpretations from that period often illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of that approach. [7] The great value of character analysis is that it always reminds us that, whatever else we may want to talk of, the central concern is particular human beings. Whatever else King Lear is about, it is centrally about a suffering old man, whose unique character brings upon him almost unimaginable suffering. Whatever we make of Hamlet, we cannot forget that the people in the play drive Ophelia insane and lead her to suicide, and that she is an innocent and loving young woman. [8] Focusing upon the characters in the play always keeps us in touch with a major reason why Shakespeare matters — his works constantly illuminate human nature in all sorts of moving ways.
    That said, however, treating the interpretation of a play as primarily a matter of evaluating character can create problems. [9] One major problem, of course, is that in many instances we do not know enough about a character to arrive at a sufficiently full understanding of his or her personality. We know almost nothing of Hamlet’s childhood, or Bolingbroke’s inner thoughts, or Lady Macbeth’s sexuality. [10] Thus, key elements required in any lull character analysis are missing. Of course, we can speculate on such matters, but such speculations can often end up in inconclusive and often trivial debates, because there is not enough evidence. So we can find criticism by the analysis of character degenerating into explorations of the girlhood of Shakespeare’s heroines, endless arguments about whether or not the Macbeths had any children, how old Hamlet might be or whether he is really insane or not, whether Falstaff is a coward or not, how black Othello really is, or what Antony and Cleopatra really talk about when they are alone together. Shakespearean plays are great inheritance as well as wealth for the humankind. The characters in his plays give us lots of insights to know and to talk with Shakespeare’s soul. I hope my lecture has led you on the way to the thought of this great player. Thank you for listening.