FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38  
39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   >>   >|  
ked. Can we define this 'action' further by describing it as a conflict? The frequent use of this idea in discussions on tragedy is ultimately due, I suppose, to the influence of Hegel's theory on the subject, certainly the most important theory since Aristotle's. But Hegel's view of the tragic conflict is not only unfamiliar to English readers and difficult to expound shortly, but it had its origin in reflections on Greek tragedy and, as Hegel was well aware, applies only imperfectly to the works of Shakespeare.[6] I shall, therefore, confine myself to the idea of conflict in its more general form. In this form it is obviously suitable to Shakespearean tragedy; but it is vague, and I will try to make it more precise by putting the question, Who are the combatants in this conflict? Not seldom the conflict may quite naturally be conceived as lying between two persons, of whom the hero is one; or, more fully, as lying between two parties or groups, in one of which the hero is the leading figure. Or if we prefer to speak (as we may quite well do if we know what we are about) of the passions, tendencies, ideas, principles, forces, which animate these persons or groups, we may say that two of such passions or ideas, regarded as animating two persons or groups, are the combatants. The love of Romeo and Juliet is in conflict with the hatred of their houses, represented by various other characters. The cause of Brutus and Cassius struggles with that of Julius, Octavius and Antony. In _Richard II._ the King stands on one side, Bolingbroke and his party on the other. In _Macbeth_ the hero and heroine are opposed to the representatives of Duncan. In all these cases the great majority of the _dramatis personae_ fall without difficulty into antagonistic groups, and the conflict between these groups ends with the defeat of the hero. Yet one cannot help feeling that in at least one of these cases, _Macbeth_, there is something a little external in this way of looking at the action. And when we come to some other plays this feeling increases. No doubt most of the characters in _Hamlet_, _King Lear_, _Othello_, or _Antony and Cleopatra_ can be arranged in opposed groups;[7] and no doubt there is a conflict; and yet it seems misleading to describe this conflict as one _between these groups_. It cannot be simply this. For though Hamlet and the King are mortal foes, yet that which engrosses our interest and dwells in our memory at le
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38  
39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
conflict
 

groups

 
persons
 
tragedy
 

characters

 

feeling

 

Macbeth

 

passions

 

Antony

 
opposed

combatants

 

Hamlet

 
action
 
theory
 
misleading
 

describe

 
mortal
 
Bolingbroke
 

representatives

 

heroine


stands

 

simply

 

memory

 

dwells

 

represented

 
houses
 
Brutus
 

Cassius

 

engrosses

 

Richard


Octavius
 
Julius
 

interest

 

struggles

 
Duncan
 
increases
 

defeat

 

external

 

antagonistic

 
arranged

Cleopatra

 

Othello

 

difficulty

 
personae
 

majority

 
dramatis
 

figure

 

shortly

 

origin

 

reflections