compare Shakespeare and dante by thomas carlyle text? elaborate please
Answers
Explanation:
Carlyle on Shakespeare
Nicole X Nicole X
8 years ago
Advertisements
On Heroes, Hero- Worship and The Heroic in History
Thomas Carlyle, the Scottish Essayist and Historian believed in the importance of heroic leadership which can be found in the book, “On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History”, a compilation of a series of lectures. In the lecture which later formed the essay, “The Hero as a Poet. Dante; Shakespeare”, he speaks highly of the two jeweled poets, Dante Alighieri, the Father of the Italian language; and England’s national poet, William Shakespeare, wherein he glorifies the poet to the stature of a hero.
Speaking about the English poet in his lecture, Thomas Carlyle opines that what Homer was to Greece, and Dante to the Middle Age, likewise Shakespeare was to the Modern Age. Shakespeare has achieved that status and ranking as to be placed on a pedestal at par with Homer and Dante. Carlyle claims that as in the writings of Homer we can envision Old Greece, similarly Shakespeare’s works captures Old Europe in different ways. According to Carlyle, the “sovereign” poet, Shakespeare, “with his seeing eye, with his perennial singing voice, was sent to take note” of the changing times in Europe.
Carlyle goes on to tell us how had it not been Shakespeare’s prosecution for deer-stealing, we perhaps would never hear of him as a poet. All events are interconnected in a way, and in this manner too, the world gets to hear of the great poet Shakespeare. Carlyle uses nothing but superlatives to praise Shakespeare. He calls him priceless; calmness of depth; placid of joyous strength; great soul, true and clear; like a tranquil unfathomable sea. The ease with which Shakespeare achieves perfection is puzzling to Carlyle.
Shakespeare is further on compared to an immaculately built house which makes us forget the rude disorderly quarry it was built from. The finished product, that is, Shakespeare, is so perfect, that we forget from what raw material he was made with. In the same manner, his finished plays are just as perfect as he is, and discerning the raw material used to make the play is not possible. The insight with which Shakespeare arranged the plot in his plays is in itself an art and shows the true intelligence of the man.
Carlyle asserts that not even the scientific works of intellect of Sir Francis Bacon is earthly and secondary in comparison to Shakespeare, implying Shakespeare’s work to be divine. If anyone from the modern times could be compared to Shakespeare, Carlyle believes that only the German Poet Goethe is somewhat comparable to the English Poet.
Carlyle further makes a mention about Shakespeare’s skill at amalgamating the intellectual and moral nature of man. He does this beautifully in his works so there is continuity in nature. He calls Shakespeare the greatest intellect most of which isn’t seen by many. Carlyle terms this as the, ‘Unconscious Intellect’ and also claims that there is more virtue in Shakespeare than he is even aware off. In his speech he quotes Novalis’ opinion of the writer saying, “Those dramas of him are products of nature too, deep as Nature as herself. Carlyle believes Shakespeare’s art is not Artifice but something that grows from the depths of nature. He possesses Natural talent which pours out when he writes. Despite knowing the poet so well, we don’t know much about his own life’s sorrows or struggles. It bewilders Carlyle “how a man delineate a Hamlet, a Coralanus, a Macbeth, so many sufferings heroic heart, if his own heroic hear had never suffered”, at the same time all of this is juxtaposed with overflowing love of laughter. Nonetheless, he had the fortitude and won the proverbial battle as far as comparison with Dante is concerned. This victory can be seen through all his writings.
Thomas Carlyle through the words of August Wilhelm Schlegel and Marlbourough reveals to us the historic nature of Shakespeare’s works. While Wilhelm Schlegel calls them ‘National Epic’ Marlborough confesses to have learnt English history only through reading of his plays.