Bram's Reviews > The Tempest
The Tempest
by
by
Knowing that The Tempest is most likely Shakespeare's final play, it's hard to avoid noticing the hints of retirement in the text. Toward the end of the final act, Prospero solemnly describes the conclusion of his practice of the magic arts, just as Shakespeare might describe the end of his writing career:
Have I given fire and rifted Jove's stout oak
With his own bolt; the strong-based promontory
Have I made shake and by the spurs pluck'd up
The pine and cedar: graves at my command
Have waked their sleepers, oped, and let 'em forth
By my so potent art. But this rough magic
I here abjure, and, when I have required
Some heavenly music, which even now I do,
To work mine end upon their senses that
This airy charm is for, I'll break my staff,
Bury it certain fathoms in the earth,
And deeper than did ever plummet sound
I'll drown my book.
Beyond this connection, it’s fun if idly fruitless to try to expand the Prospero-as-Shakespeare angle. For example, Prospero, the Duke of Milan, was usurped by his brother. Was Shakespeare replaced as the king’s or the populace’s most favored playwright? Perhaps he was eclipsed by or had a falling out with Ben Jonson, who felt confident enough to be the first to publish a written collection of his plays (something Shakespeare never did) and who mocked Shakespeare and his Tempest subject matter in one of his own plays, Bartholomew Fair. As I said, it’s idle speculation, particularly when engaged in by someone unfamiliar with the time period. But the text does seem to encourage some autobiographical reading, and it’s certainly fun to consider the possibilities.
One thing that continues to impress me about Shakespeare is his refusal to create blameless heroes. Even if we end up feeling very sympathetic toward someone, there's always something to nag us and remind us that this character isn’t irreproachable. In the Richard II—Henry IV—Henry V cycle, Hal has a remarkable and redemptive character arc, but he must abandon his rowdy friends most cruelly to achieve this. As someone who wants to love and celebrate Hal unreservedly, this fact is like a thorn that pokes me every time I cheer too loudly during the St. Crispin's Day speech.
Like Hal, Prospero has a troubling relationship that mars his character. As mentioned above, he was usurped. But then he became the usurper, enslaving an 'uninhabited' island's sole inhabitant (and therefore the ruler of sorts), Caliban, and treating him harshly. (For the record, Caliban's witch mother usurped the original fairies of the Island, Ariel et al., when she was dropped off by some sailors while pregnant.) The story of the enslavement is morally complicated, it's true. Caliban was apparently well-treated, if still usurped, before he attempted to rape Prospero's daughter, thus leading to the mistreatment and his begrudging service as we encounter them during the three hours of the play (side note: Before Jack Bauer and 24, Shakespeare had already created a drama where the play length occurs in real time). There's also the troubling distinction between Prospero's two slaves, Caliban and Ariel. Caliban, a hideous semi-human monster, is rude and bitter and therefore 'deserves' his slave state and cruel treatment, while obedient Ariel is set free at the story's end. But because Prospero is leaving the island to return to Milan at the conclusion, even Caliban can look forward to freedom once again.
And so in the end, Prospero wins us over with his capacity for forgiveness and his desire to do everyone a good turn, while only desiring to finish off his days in Milan “where/Every third thought shall be my grave.” While he spends much of the play spooking those who’d wronged him with spirit visitations and magical scenes, he eventually leaves anger and vengeance behind. Interestingly, it’s the nonhuman spirit slave Ariel who encourages Prospero to be humane and compassionate:
ARIEL
Your charm so strongly works 'em
That if you now beheld them, your affections
Would become tender.
PROSPERO
Dost thou think so, spirit?
ARIEL
Mine would, sir, were I human.
PROSPERO
And mine shall.
Hast thou, which art but air, a touch, a feeling
Of their afflictions, and shall not myself,
One of their kind, that relish all as sharply,
Passion as they, be kindlier moved than thou art?
Though with their high wrongs I am struck to the quick,
Yet with my nobler reason 'gainst my fury
Do I take part: the rarer action is
In virtue than in vengeance.
Perhaps this suggestion had to come from a nonhuman since treating kindly those who’ve wronged us can seem most unnatural. Shakespeare seems to recognize that this type of forgiveness, especially offered to those who have intentionally affected one’s life for the worse, is exceptionally difficult to bestow. But he also seems to recognize that overcoming this difficulty is well worth it, perhaps more for the sake of the forgiver than that of the forgiven.
Have I given fire and rifted Jove's stout oak
With his own bolt; the strong-based promontory
Have I made shake and by the spurs pluck'd up
The pine and cedar: graves at my command
Have waked their sleepers, oped, and let 'em forth
By my so potent art. But this rough magic
I here abjure, and, when I have required
Some heavenly music, which even now I do,
To work mine end upon their senses that
This airy charm is for, I'll break my staff,
Bury it certain fathoms in the earth,
And deeper than did ever plummet sound
I'll drown my book.
Beyond this connection, it’s fun if idly fruitless to try to expand the Prospero-as-Shakespeare angle. For example, Prospero, the Duke of Milan, was usurped by his brother. Was Shakespeare replaced as the king’s or the populace’s most favored playwright? Perhaps he was eclipsed by or had a falling out with Ben Jonson, who felt confident enough to be the first to publish a written collection of his plays (something Shakespeare never did) and who mocked Shakespeare and his Tempest subject matter in one of his own plays, Bartholomew Fair. As I said, it’s idle speculation, particularly when engaged in by someone unfamiliar with the time period. But the text does seem to encourage some autobiographical reading, and it’s certainly fun to consider the possibilities.
One thing that continues to impress me about Shakespeare is his refusal to create blameless heroes. Even if we end up feeling very sympathetic toward someone, there's always something to nag us and remind us that this character isn’t irreproachable. In the Richard II—Henry IV—Henry V cycle, Hal has a remarkable and redemptive character arc, but he must abandon his rowdy friends most cruelly to achieve this. As someone who wants to love and celebrate Hal unreservedly, this fact is like a thorn that pokes me every time I cheer too loudly during the St. Crispin's Day speech.
Like Hal, Prospero has a troubling relationship that mars his character. As mentioned above, he was usurped. But then he became the usurper, enslaving an 'uninhabited' island's sole inhabitant (and therefore the ruler of sorts), Caliban, and treating him harshly. (For the record, Caliban's witch mother usurped the original fairies of the Island, Ariel et al., when she was dropped off by some sailors while pregnant.) The story of the enslavement is morally complicated, it's true. Caliban was apparently well-treated, if still usurped, before he attempted to rape Prospero's daughter, thus leading to the mistreatment and his begrudging service as we encounter them during the three hours of the play (side note: Before Jack Bauer and 24, Shakespeare had already created a drama where the play length occurs in real time). There's also the troubling distinction between Prospero's two slaves, Caliban and Ariel. Caliban, a hideous semi-human monster, is rude and bitter and therefore 'deserves' his slave state and cruel treatment, while obedient Ariel is set free at the story's end. But because Prospero is leaving the island to return to Milan at the conclusion, even Caliban can look forward to freedom once again.
And so in the end, Prospero wins us over with his capacity for forgiveness and his desire to do everyone a good turn, while only desiring to finish off his days in Milan “where/Every third thought shall be my grave.” While he spends much of the play spooking those who’d wronged him with spirit visitations and magical scenes, he eventually leaves anger and vengeance behind. Interestingly, it’s the nonhuman spirit slave Ariel who encourages Prospero to be humane and compassionate:
ARIEL
Your charm so strongly works 'em
That if you now beheld them, your affections
Would become tender.
PROSPERO
Dost thou think so, spirit?
ARIEL
Mine would, sir, were I human.
PROSPERO
And mine shall.
Hast thou, which art but air, a touch, a feeling
Of their afflictions, and shall not myself,
One of their kind, that relish all as sharply,
Passion as they, be kindlier moved than thou art?
Though with their high wrongs I am struck to the quick,
Yet with my nobler reason 'gainst my fury
Do I take part: the rarer action is
In virtue than in vengeance.
Perhaps this suggestion had to come from a nonhuman since treating kindly those who’ve wronged us can seem most unnatural. Shakespeare seems to recognize that this type of forgiveness, especially offered to those who have intentionally affected one’s life for the worse, is exceptionally difficult to bestow. But he also seems to recognize that overcoming this difficulty is well worth it, perhaps more for the sake of the forgiver than that of the forgiven.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Tempest.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Comments Showing 1-27 of 27 (27 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
RandomAnthony
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Feb 28, 2010 08:10AM
Excellent review, Bram...this is my favorite Shakespeare...my middle son's middle name is "Tempest". Great analysis, sir.
reply
|
flag
By 'him' do you mean Shakespeare? That's an interesting question and I hadn't considered it. Shakespeare's always seemed 'outside' Christendom, in the sense that he does almost no moralizing in the traditional Christian sense and he always seems to link religion to political power plays. What are your thoughts on this? There's so much to explore in your second point. Shakespeare was clearly aware of the New World colonizing going on at the time (this was probably written a few years after the Jamestown settlement) and the interactions with 'natural' indigenous people. The Caliban-Prospero relationship is really complicated by the fact that their history is summed up in a short back story. While Caliban's advances to Miranda are understandably deplored by the civilized Italians, Caliban makes the simple, obvious point that he wanted to populate the island with little Calibans. He was just acting on his nature, which seemed justified and right to him. But this sort of mammalian instinct got him enslaved. I'm not exactly sure what we're to make of all this.
RandomAnthony wrote: "Excellent review, Bram...this is my favorite Shakespeare...my middle son's middle name is "Tempest". Great analysis, sir."That's awesome, RA--what a cool idea for a name. And thanks! This play feels pretty distinct from the rest of his work and I think many of the themes/ideas will really stick with me.
I agree completely, by the way, that there's a sense of finality, of looking back, of reconciliation, in this play...I can't separate The Tempest from its chronology in his work, either.
Yes, I think that's probably right. Perhaps Shakespeare was religious in the way that Church heretics have often been. I.e. his understanding of religion, while sincere, may have simply been antagonistic to the Church and its power-hungry brand of faith. It's hard to say. I guess I was basing my suggestion on the fact that he revels in certain areas (particularly sex) that seem too liberal even for modern liberal Christians. There's surprisingly little that's taboo with Shakespeare, and he makes many 19th and 20th century writers look like complete prudes by comparison. So I guess if he was a self-proclaimed Christian believer, in many ways he'd be considered ahead of his time even today.
Yeah, my historical knowledge is quite poor, so I'm ready to take your word on the matter. I have pretty much no idea what the religious climate was like in Elizabethan/Jacobean England. Still, I think it's a little difficult to make assumptions about Shakespeare's religious beliefs based on the texts that I've read. While religion was likely the primary influence on his understandings of morality, there seems to be nothing that's especially religious in tone in The Tempest outside of the 'forgiving one's enemies' concept. At the time I was writing the review though, I wasn't actually thinking of this idea in terms of religion: there's a lot of pragmatic value in what Prospero does since his daughter ends up marrying the Prince's son and he's given back his dukedom.
Ah, yes sorry--I think I've been mostly rambling in my responses. He doesn't dwell much on retirement/death or forgiveness beyond what I've quoted. I felt like there was less internal conflict present than a simple sort of resignation to/acceptance of his fate. The 'I wish you all well and now I must leave' kind of thing. Am I on topic/close to what you were asking? :)
Please do! I tried to rent Prospero's Books on Netflix, but apparently it's never been released on DVD in the States. I've heard good things--have you seen it? I'd really like to see a performance of this one...it could bump me to 5 stars.
Bram wrote: "I tried to rent Prospero's Books on Netflix, but apparently it's never been released on DVD in the States..."I actually love this film but it's not a strict version of the play and the director, Peter Greenaway, can be a bit tough to chew on for many. I happen to be a big fan. But the film is visually lush with all these amazing BOOKS! And John Gielgud is wonderful as always. I do hope it becomes available at some point soon.
I actually like Mazursky's modern telling of the story (with a very young Molly Ringwald as Miranda). It's a bit on the fluffy side but fun and a great cast.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084776/
Ah, nice, I hadn't heard of the Mazursky version. Prospero's Books sounds pretty enticing--if only I still had a VHS player. Whoa, the audience gets to 'party on the dance floor' at The Donkey Show? What does that even mean.
I agree with your assessment of my needs, Elizabeth. I got a fever...and the only prescription is more Shakespeare. At the very least, I should be able to get to the free Boston Common performance this July/August.
Elizabeth wrote: "the really boring Talisman Ring (but, shhh, don't tell the other Bodice Rippers I said that)"(I totally agree)
Oooh, that looks great. But it looks like you have to be a BAM member or something to get tickets :(
Well, sounds like it's too late to try to sell your friend, but Measure for Measure is definitely the least comedic/lighthearted of the comedies I've read. Great play but very heavy. The Duchess of Malfi looks pretty interesting though. Are you going to read it first?
Elizabeth, is Measure for Measure considered more of a 'minor' Shakespeare work? And if so, why do you think that is? So I downloaded Prospero's Books last night and watched the first 20 mintues...whoa. Visually enthralling--can't wait to watch the rest.
No--I'd love to read Merry Wives. I'm reading Lear now, but I should be able to start that later this week. I'd love to discuss M for M at any point. I also found it very interesting and have been thinking about it a good deal.
I'm just reading this review and the comments now. Bram, I really like this, and especially the nuanced discussion of the "natives" and slaves of the island. I've always loved this play for many reasons, but one of them is its wonderful exploration of the 'civilizing' ideals of European colonialism. That "were I human," bit is so great. Can't wait to get started on my own re-read.I also wanted to say that I agree with you, Elizabeth, in your perception of Shakespeare participating Christian society of his time, even if we can't know what he believed. I definitely see religion in a LOT of Shakespeare's plays- Hamlet is the first that comes to mind (I wrote a long paper on religion in Hamlet in school- Catholic/Protestant/Atheism), As You Like It is another (one that I do think straight up moralizes), Twelfth Night has some of it (though Shakespeare is largely making fun of overly moralistic people), too.
I think you're right about ideas of forgiveness and closure making it into his last plays (or at least struggling with forgiveness), especially ideas about making up for mistakes in earlier life- The Tempest, Winter's Tale, Cymbeline, Lear. I haven't read Coriolanus, Pericles or Timon of Athens, so I can't say if those corroborate the theory, though.
Bram wrote: "So I downloaded Prospero's Books last night and watched the first 20 mintue..."Wow, where did you snag a copy? I'd love to see this again as it's been ages. I've only seen it in the theatre but more than once. I go crazy for all the insane books.
I'm really liking Lear so far, although I'm still in the first act. Your comment above is making me want to read more late-period Shakespeare--I feel like I was kind of groping in the dark with my comments on this since it's the only later work I've read. Kimley--are you familiar with BitTorrent file sharing? That was my last resort and it worked out. It seems bizarre that it remains unreleased in the US (on DVD), but that does indeed seem to be the case.
Unfortunately I don't have anything interesting to add at the moment, but I'm even more eager to revisit now! :) Derek Jarman's Tempest is one of my favorite films, and though there are some formalist lines that can be drawn between him and Greenaway, I much prefer the former. The quote on my profile, "Oh how Shakespeare would have loved cinema!," was actually referring to his work on The Tempest.
I feel like I was kind of groping in the dark with my comments on this since it's the only later work I've read.Oh no, my own education is far from complete. And you have read Hamlet, which has a lot of the stuff I'm talking about in it, so I think you've maybe got the idea. I'm glad you're liking Lear so far!
Your discussion of Measure for Measure is making me move that up my list, BTW. I'd always heard it described as a "minor" work as well.
Measure was one of the six plays I was taught for a Shakespeare class I took. I didn't like it initially but it's now one of my favorites. I think it's been considered problematic for two reasons. 1. So much of it takes place in either a prison and a whorehouse. Although that makes the "moated grange" scene stand out so much more, there's not much middle ground. It's the worst of humanity vs. humanity closed off from the world.
2. The ending seems to come out of nowhere, although I think now that is seen as Shakespeare perhaps becoming disenchanted with the comedic form itself.
Awesome, just put Jarman's version at the top of the queue. I just saw that Julie Taymor's making an adaptation with Helen Mirren (as Prospera--protagonist gender switch) et al. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1274300/). I really liked her take on Titus Andronicus, so I'm looking forward to this.
Good points, Dave. Your first point is actually one of the things that seems to work in the play's favor (or at least to set it apart)--it sticks with the seedier side of
Hamlet! Hamlet! Hamlet! I know people think it's overrated but I love it.
I don't think it is overrated! I think I love it almost as much as you do, Elizabeth (though possibly only almost! :)). There's just endless amounts to discuss and ponder. One never comes to the bottom of it, and I love that! On top of the ridiculously amazing language, of course. No worries about gushing!
Dave, thanks for the information on Measure for Measure- I'm really interested by your comment about him growing disenchanted with the form. Huh. I really must read this.
The idea that The Tempest was Shakespeare's final play is rather out-dated scholarship: Cardenio (a lost play), All is True and The Two Noble Kinsmen were most likely written after The Tempest:http://www.amazon.co.uk/William-Shake...
Click on "Table of Contents" on the left. The list is in conjectured chronological order with dates in brackets. The editors of the Oxford Complete Works are world renowned Shakespeare scholars.
Ah, interesting. I guess it still remains the last surviving play he wrote by himself. Perhaps he intended to retire and Fletcher managed to talk him out of it by promising to let him write just the fun parts of All Is True and The Two Noble Kinsmen (if there are any...I wouldn't know).


