{"id":5805,"date":"2023-05-22T18:28:36","date_gmt":"2023-05-22T23:28:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/?p=5805"},"modified":"2023-05-22T18:28:36","modified_gmt":"2023-05-22T23:28:36","slug":"a-poet-of-liberty-how-shakespeare-upheld-and-advanced-our-appreciation-of-liberty-and-wariness-about-unlimited-authority","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/a-poet-of-liberty-how-shakespeare-upheld-and-advanced-our-appreciation-of-liberty-and-wariness-about-unlimited-authority\/","title":{"rendered":"A poet of liberty? How Shakespeare upheld and advanced our appreciation of liberty and wariness about unlimited authority"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Michael Grossberg<\/a><\/p>\n

Does Shakespeare still matter?<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And does the world\u2019s greatest playwright have important things to say to libertarians, other freedom lovers and those millions still wrestling in the 21st\u00a0<\/sup>century with tyranny, war, slavery and other poisonous fruits of statism?<\/p>\n

As a veteran theater critic, I\u2019d argue yes on both counts!<\/p>\n

So does a thoughtful essay by Michael Lucchese reviewing and comparing two recent books about Shakespeare and his views on liberty and authority in the Law and Liberty journal.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Lucchese makes a persuasive and nuanced case that the two books share an overlapping and unifying perspective about the Bard despite their focus on different aspects of Shakespeare\u2019s character and perspective.<\/p>\n

While R. V. Young\u2019s Shakespeare and the Idea of Western Civilization<\/em><\/a>\u00a0gives readers a sense of Shakespeare as \u201ca poet of tradition,\u201d the late Nalin Ranasinghe\u2019s Shakespeare\u2019s Reformation: Christian Humanism and the Death of God<\/em><\/a>\u00a0gives readers \u201ca sense of Shakespeare as a poet of liberty,\u201d Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\u201cAlthough a definite tension exists between Young and Ranasinghe\u2019s interpretations, they both capture essential elements of Shakespeare\u2019s writing. He was a poet of both\u00a0<\/em>tradition and\u00a0<\/em>liberty\u2014and that is why his poetry forms the foundation of the modern Western mind,\u201d Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

Although Shakespeare has fallen on hard times in an era when too many students and teachers who should know better superficially dismiss him as a “dead white male,” Young and Ranasinghe’s books probe more deeply and find perennial truths and lasting art in Shakespeare’s plays.<\/p>\n

“Young is rightly concerned… that the contemporary academy\u2019s contempt for authority has produced little except desiccated Shakespeare scholarship. Postmodernism, critical theory, and other nihilistic academic trends lead many who professionally study Shakespeare into realms of strange obsessions. Rather than wrestle with the words he wrote, he is too often treated as a source or expression of sexism, racism, and imperialism,” Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

“But instead of refuting postmodern interpretations, Young chose to counter the critics by expositing Shakespeare\u2019s plays. \u201cMy hope is to provide a model of humanistic education, of teaching in the liberal arts,\u201d he writes, \u201cinsofar as the study of Shakespeare is a part of the enterprise, especially in the English-speaking world.\u201d In large part, Young succeeds in this mission. These essays are shining examples of what serious literary scholarship ought to be,” Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Lucchese also admires Ranasinghe, who sadly died before he was able to complete his research and finish his book (later completed by others.)<\/p>\n

“Ranasinghe\u2019s central thesis is that Shakespeare is the Renaissance\u2019s greatest champion. The Renaissance was a great intellectual movement to put the human person at the center of Europe\u2019s political and cultural life, liberating the people from political oppression and, at the same time, reintroducing them to the classical philosophical tradition,” Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

“In this context, Ranasinghe holds that Shakespeare\u2019s plays offer \u201can esoteric vindication of the human soul itself,\u201d the heart of the Renaissance, \u201cagainst the looming backdrop of the Counter-Reformation in Europe and the Puritan perversion of English Anglicanism.\u201d In his \u201cre-telling of Classical and English history,\u201d Ranasinghe argues, \u201cShakespeare is thus tying poetry to history and giving us an alternate, if playful, account of Western civilization.”<\/p>\n

THE CORRUPTIONS OF ABSOLUTE POWER<\/strong><\/p>\n

Many of Shakespeare’s plays dramatize the excesses and corruptions of power.<\/p>\n

“Ranasinghe suggests, then, Shakespeare\u2019s humanistic vision for politics consists in dethroning all forms of absolute power,” Lucchese writes.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Whether exercised by a tyrant or a mob or an oligarchic junto, absolute power is inimical to the common good. It perverts its wielders and degrades society. It violates the precepts of classical philosophy and the new covenant of love announced in Christ\u2019s gospel. In his tragedies and histories, Shakespeare dramatically depicts over and over again the corrupting grip absolute power holds on tyrants, oligarchs, and demagogues\u2014and the bloody consequences of unlimited authority.”<\/p>\n

“Ranasinghe\u2019s Shakespearean politics holds that the common good must be grounded in human freedom. The chief characteristic of the human soul is its ability to love, and Ranasinghe believes Shakespeare rejects the notion that any central authority is competent to direct and order a soul\u2019s loves. Power must always be limited, then, to preserve freedom and the possibility of love.”<\/p>\n

Lucchese’s essay<\/a> is worth reading in its entirety.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>A THEATER CRITIC’S PERSPECTIVE<\/strong><\/p>\n

As a newspaper theater critic for more than four decades, I can attest to the truths and insights that Lucchese finds in these two books.<\/p>\n

I have seen few plays that have dramatized the corruptions and abuses of power – and the terrible consequences that can disrupt civil society and undermine civilization itself – as profoundly and dramatically as Macbeth, Julius Caesar <\/em>and Richard III.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/em>Contrary to the common view that Macbeth<\/em> is a tragic drama about ambition (however misdirected), it’s theme is more specifically and explicitly about the abuses and corruptions of power. \u00a0Moreover, the chief character flaw in its title character and his conniving wife is not “ambition” per se (which can be benign, depending on its objective, and appropriate, if not unbalanced) but unbridled power-lust – far more dangerous and deadly than any of the other so-called “seven deadly sins.”
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

Meanwhile,\u00a0Romeo and Juliet, <\/em>perhaps the\u00a0<\/em>greatest romantic tragedy, can be seen as not only a moving love story but also as a still-relevant social-issue drama implicitly championing the rights of two young adults to love and marry as they choose.
\n\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

While class and social barriers between \u201ctwo warring tribes\u201d largely prevented Romeo and Juliet from joining in matrimony, today\u2019s audiences easily can grasp the deeper theme and apply it more broadly today to the rights of consenting adults to overcome today\u2019s persistent tribalism and choose to love each other \u2013 no matter their gender, sexual orientation, race, religion or ethnicity.
\n
\n<\/em>Perhaps less obviously, A Midsummer Night\u2019s Dream<\/em>, Much Ado About Nothing\u00a0<\/em>and other Shakespeare comedies often explore how people strive to take advantage of what limited but genuine freedom they have to exercise their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (No matter if the unanticipated results often prove the Bard\u2019s observation \u201cwhat fools these mortals be” and how we all ultimately become “fools for love.”)<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Of course, the Bard wasn\u2019t a modern \u201clibertarian.\u201d<\/p>\n

No one was in the 15th\u00a0<\/sup>and 16th\u00a0<\/sup>centuries, since modern libertarianism didn\u2019t exist until the past half-century or so. Yet, the desire for liberty has roots in the human soul and surfaces anew in every generation.<\/p>\n

Shakespeare felt the allure of liberty and the threat of absolute power.<\/p>\n

And he created memorable characters who feel it, too. That’s a powerful legacy, which we moderns should not minimize or ignore.<\/p>\n

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>* Prometheus winners:\u00a0<\/strong>For the full list of Prometheus winners, finalists and nominees \u2013 for the annual Best Novel and Best Classic Fiction (Hall of Fame) categories and occasional Special Awards \u2013 visit the enhanced\u00a0Prometheus Awards page\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>on the LFS website, which now includes convenient links to the full set of published appreciation-reviews of past winners.<\/p>\n

* Read\u00a0\u201cThe Libertarian History of Science Fiction,\u201d<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0an essay in the international magazine\u00a0Quillette<\/em>\u00a0that favorably highlights the Prometheus Awards, the Libertarian Futurist Society and the significant element of libertarian sf\/fantasy in the evolution of the modern genre.<\/p>\n

*\u00a0Watch\u00a0 <\/strong>videos <\/strong>of past Prometheus Awards ceremonies, Libertarian Futurist Society panel discussions with noted sf authors and leading libertarian writers, and other LFS programs on the Prometheus Blog\u2019s\u00a0Video page.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
\n*\u00a0Join us<\/strong>! To help sustain the Prometheus Awards,\u00a0join\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>the Libertarian Futurist Society (LFS), a non-profit all-volunteer association of freedom-loving sf\/fantasy fans.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Michael Grossberg Does Shakespeare still matter? And does the world\u2019s greatest playwright have important things to say to libertarians, other freedom lovers and those millions still wrestling in the 21st\u00a0century with tyranny, war, slavery and other poisonous fruits of statism? As a veteran theater critic, I\u2019d argue yes on both counts! So does a … Continue reading A poet of liberty? How Shakespeare upheld and advanced our appreciation of liberty and wariness about unlimited authority<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8],"tags":[1981,883,1961,1954,536,1958,1955,1982,1957,1959,1960,288,1953,1956],"class_list":["post-5805","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-review","tag-a-midsummer-nights-dream","tag-authority","tag-julius-caesar","tag-law-and-liberty","tag-liberty","tag-macbeth","tag-michael-lucchese","tag-much-ado-about-nothing","tag-ranasinghe","tag-richard-iii","tag-romeo-and-juliet","tag-shakespeare","tag-tradition","tag-young"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pe8nGl-1vD","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5805","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5805"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5805\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5884,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5805\/revisions\/5884"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5805"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5805"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lfs.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5805"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}