Assessment: Task 2
‘In tragedy he [Shakespeare] is always struggling after some occasion to be comic’ (Samuel Johnson). Discuss the blending of comedy and tragedy in two plays on this module.
As Johnson suggests in his Preface to Shakespeare (Johnson, 2004), Shakespeare is always striving to be comic after ‘some occasion’ in his tragedies, which in certain tragedies, such as what is thought to be the first tragedy written by Shakespeare, Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008), could be considered ‘black comedy’. Whereas, in his later works such as The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008), a blending of both comedy and tragedy is apparent, to form the sub-genre ‘tragicomedy’. The following essay will discuss the merging of both comedy, and tragedy in Shakespeare’s plays to create this subgenre, and will also investigate how Shakespeare combined these genres in various other ways.
When discussing the meaning of ‘tragicomedy’ in their text, The Politics of Tragicomedy (McMullan and Hope, 1992), Gordon McMullan and Jonathan Hope reflect upon Lois Potter’s statement that ‘the evidence suggests that the term ‘‘tragicomedy’’, in the public theatre, never quite lost its sixteenth-century meaning: a play which contained both tragic and comic elements’ (McMullan and Hope, 1992, 4), declaring that a ‘tragicomedy’ is simply a play which combines some of the elements that would be considered tragic, or comic in their own respective genres. Tragic elements that often emerge in Shakespearean tragedies include beginning with either a marriage, or the consequences of a marriage, multiple deaths often those of characters of importance, or high class, and with a clear focus on a protagonist who should have a fault which contributes to their downfall, also allowing for moments of reflection through monologues. In contrast, elements of comedy include some form of confusion in the middle of the plot that is ultimately straightened out at the end of the play, possible mistaken identities often through disguise, and an ending in marriage, or the arrangements of a marriage. Black comedy on the other hand, describes a subgenre of comedy that uses humour to convert a more serious topic, or a topic that would not often be discussed into a humorous one.
The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) also explores the blending of comedy and tragedy in more depth and is often considered a ‘tragicomedy’. The text begins with a shipwreck of the main characters which sets out the main plot, followed by a subplot which explains how the protagonist of the novel and the rightful Duke of Milan, Prospero, and his daughter, Miranda came to reside on the island, which Prospero states was ‘By foul play, as thou sayst, were we heaved thence’ (1.2, 63). The use of ‘foul play’ suggests that it was a treacherous act that placed the Duke and his daughter on the island, which immediately sets the foundation of the play up as a tragedy, with clear elements of treachery and revenge. This element of betrayal is extended further when Sebastian, brother of the King of Naples and Antonio, Duke of Milan plot to kill the current King of Naples, Alonso, ‘If he were that which now he’s like – that’s dead – Whom I with this obedient steel […] Can lay to bed for ever’ (2.1, 280-282). This suggests that various characters within the play are willing to murder characters in high power, whom they are also related to, in order to gain power themselves, which further reflects aspects of Shakespearean tragedy, although the actual death of a character is not an element of tragedy present in The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008). As part of Antonio’s agreement with Alonso, he must pay him an annual sum of money and allow Naples to control the Duke of Milan and further states that he will use his ‘obedient steel’ to commit the murder of Alonso in order to place Sebastian in a position of power over Naples. There is a sense of irony in this statement as the use of ‘obedient’ suggests that Antonio is able, and willing to follow orders, whereas his previous actions oppose this idea, and it appears that his ideas are in aid of his debts to Naples being dissipated, rather than seeking to help a friend. Each element investigated thus far places The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) in the genre of tragedy, although the events throughout the text also contain elements of comedy.
As previously discussed, the elements of a Shakespearean comedy often include a problem, or some form of confusion that is solved at the conclusion of the play, which are both apparent in The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) as the multiple subplots in the text and the separation of the characters into smaller groups amplify the confusion of the events surrounding the characters. The problems surrounding power and betrayal are also resolved at the end of the play as Prospero declares that as the characters are ‘penitent, the sole drift of (his) purpose doth extend not a frown further’ (5.1, 28-30) and requests the release of the characters from his control. This therefore elaborates on the text as a ‘tragicomedy’ as although there are elements of betrayal, once each of the characters show remorse, they are freed, and the play concludes with all of the events resolved. A further element of comedy that also contributes to the subgenre ‘tragicomedy’ is the prospect of marriage, or a wedding ceremony towards the end of the play, and following their confessions of love for one another, Miranda claims ‘I am your wife if you will marry me’ (3.1, 83), offering her hand in marriage to Ferdinand, the prince of Naples. As the play begins with various problems, some of which could be considered elements of tragedy, that are all eventually forgiven and arrangements of a marriage being prepared in addition to this, it is clear The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) can be considered a ‘tragicomedy’, using comedy and elements of a Shakespearean comedy following difficult situations that could be considered tragic.
The first of Shakespeare’s tragedies also examines the blending of comedy and tragedy, with a specific focus on ‘black comedy’, rather than what is often considered a Shakespearean comedy. As Jennifer Wallace proposes in her article Tragedy and Laughter (Wallace, 2013), it is ‘commonly assumed that there is a fundamental distinction between “unhappiness” and the “comical” and that tragedy portrays ‘the main hero as noble and statuesque’ whereas comedy ‘relies on a spectrum of jokes, trickery, slapstick and good humor, is dismissed as relatively lightweight’ (Wallace, 2013). Here, Wallace is suggesting that there is a clear division between what is considered to be humorous, or what would be considered a comedy, and an unhappy state, which is often the case in most of Shakespeare’s tragedies. However, the protagonist Titus, in Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) upon receiving the severed heads of two of his son’s responds ‘Ha, ha, ha! […] Why, I have not another tear to shed’ (3.1, 263-265). This presents one of the key elements of black comedy in the text as Titus’ response to an event that would otherwise be considered tragic, is laughter, which he later defends as being the only reaction conceivable as he is not able to cry any longer. The crossover between the elements that Wallace suggests are often distinct, those of unhappiness and comedy are evident here as Titus’ response to unhappiness, is the instinctive response often given to comedy, which also reflects the blending of both tragedy and comedy in the text. The element of black comedy is also present when the Emperor of Rome, Saturninus, requests a mutilated hand in exchange for the lives of two of Titus’ sons, to which Marcus and Lucius, Titus’ brother and son respectively, argue over whose hand should be chopped and delivered to the Emperor. The black comedy is amplified here as the two men debate over who is least worthy, and thus who is less deserving of keeping their hand as they dispute ‘My hand shall go’, to which Lucius responds ‘By heaven, it shall not go!’ (3.1, 176). This debate lessens a topic which would typically be considered serious, as it is a matter of life or death for Titus’ sons, into a dispute that may perhaps be considered humorous to an audience watching the two men deliberate over the loss of a hand, during a performance of the play.
The aspect of black comedy is expanded further when Titus plots his revenge against Tamora, the empress of Rome, as he murders her two sons and declares that ‘in that paste let their vile heads be baked […] So now bring them in, for I’ll play the cook, and see them ready against their mother comes’ (5.2, 200-205). This places Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) in the genre of revenge tragedy as there are multiple deaths throughout the text, including those of Demetrius and Chiron who are served to their mother in the form of a pie. The prospect of revenge is evident here, as Titus not only murders the two men, but allows their mother to eat their remains which could perhaps be considered so excessively gruesome, it is no longer a tragic element, but instead must be viewed in a lighter way. This idea is adapted through the stage directions given as they state for Titus to enter, dressed ‘like a cook’ (5.3, 25), which emphasises Shakespeare’s struggle with tragedy, and the need for a comic element to follow, as the entrance of Titus dressed as a cook would amplify the comical element to what would ordinarily be considered a tragic event. The use of black comedy in Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) often emerges following a tragic, or gruesome event in the text which shifts the focus and tone of the event, and the text as a whole away from the dark, tragic elements into more humorous, lighter elements. This overall embodies Johnson’s statement on the blending of comedy and tragedy, and the reflection of how it is in tragedies that Shakespeare is always ‘struggling after some occasion to be comic’ (Johnson, 2004), as the use of black comedy throughout indicates this struggle.
Wallace’s definition of tragedy and comedy can also be applied to both The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) and Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) through the blending of the definitions to create a definition of ‘tragicomedy’ using Wallace’s ideas. As she broadly states, in tragedy the protagonist must be ‘noble and statuesque’ (Wallace, 2013), and thus to be categorised as a tragicomedy should also include ‘jokes, trickery, slapstick and good humor’ (Wallace, 2013). Through this definition, both texts could partially be considered a tragicomedy, as the protagonist in each text, both Prospero and Titus are considered noble, although both characters also establish a revenge plot in their respective texts. There are also elements of trickery associated with each of the revenge plots as Titus ‘tricks’ Tamora into eating a pie with her sons baked in it, and Prospero also ‘tricks’ his enemies into believing they have been shipwrecked to disorder them.
In summary, the blending of tragedy and comedy in Shakespeare’s plays can be explored in various different ways, examining the ways in which the blending of the genres differed in each text, both of which were concluded to be part of one of two specific subgenres to comedy, the ‘tragicomedy’ and ‘black comedy’. As suggested by Samuel Johnson, and investigated throughout this essay, the blending of comedy and tragedy is created through Shakespeare’s ‘struggle’ after some occasion, often considered tragic, to be comic, which is apparent in both texts. The Tempest’s (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008) overall approach to the blending of both genres is much more solemn than in Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) as although there are tragic elements at the beginning of the play, each problem is solved or forgiven by the conclusion, including the marriage of two young lovers, which is characteristic of a Shakespearean comedy. A Shakespearean tragicomedy can thus be described as a play in which there are bad occurrences at the opening of the play which could be considered tragic or which could have led to dangerous circumstances, with an aspect of confusion in the middle, and an ending conventional of a comedy. Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) however presents a more sinister outlook on the events within the text, blended with elements of dark humour to form what could be considered as ‘black comedy’. Similar to the events that take place during The Tempest (Shakespeare and Orgel, 2008), Titus Andronicus (Shakespeare and Waith, 2008) follows a revenge plot, which ultimately leads to the destruction of multiple characters, including the protagonist, unlike the first text. This automatically places the text in the tragedy genre as it contains a death, or multiple deaths in the plot, lacking any specific reconciliation between the characters at the end, but rather a continuous revenge scheme. This revenge scheme also acts as the downfall of the protagonist of the text as revenge seems to be his sole focus throughout, further amplifying the text as a tragedy. Although, minor humorous events and stage directions in the play develop various ‘tragic’ moments into occasions that may be viewed as fairly comical, or that make the event not seem as severe. The effect of the black comedy therefore shifts the focus of the play away from violence and revenge, towards a genre that is somewhat easier to comprehend. Overall, Shakespeare blends both comedy and tragedy in both of his texts in multiple ways creating two subgenres to explain this merging. It is also clear that as Johnson suggests, Shakespeare ‘is always struggling after some occasion to be comic’ (Johnson, 2004).
Bibliography
• Shakespeare, W. and Orgel, S. (2008). The Tempest. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Shakespeare, W. and Waith, E. (2008). Titus Andronicus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Johnson, S. (2004). Preface to Shakespeare. [eBook] Available at: http://gutenberg.org/cache/epub/5429/pg5429-images.html. [Accessed: 06/01/2017]
• McMullan, G. and Hope, J. (1992). The Politics of Tragicomedy. London: Routledge.
• Wallace, J. (2013). Tragedy and Laughter. Comparative Drama, [online] 47(2). Available at:http://lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/docview/1459142072?accountid=13827 [Accessed: 06/01/2017]
Word count excluding bibliography and title: 2256 words