![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 2001: Re: Wittenberg and Paris
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@ws.bowiestate.edu) Date: 02/06/01
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 12.0275 Tuesday, 6 February 2001 From: Sean Lawrence <seanlawrence@writeme.com> Date: Monday, 05 Feb 2001 08:11:54 -0800 Subject: 12.0266 Re: Wittenberg and Paris Comment: Re: SHK 12.0266 Re: Wittenberg and Paris >At least, you COULD (as I do) understand the grim joke >differently. When "Hamlet" was written, ALL of the differing confessions >"unchurched" other Christians. John Donne, after leaving the Roman >church, and before and after entering the English church, consistently >expressed his fear that the effect of this "unchurching" would be to >drive men into disbelief, by making God appear a tyrant (for reasons >that were political, rather than religious). This is fascinating, especially the reference to Falkland, which I cut but read. I'm wondering whether the move towards ecumenism should be confused with a move towards atheism, however, as the quotation below seems to indicate: >My own (frankly, helplessly speculative) >guess would be that, if you want literary evidence for the practical and >historical truth of Donne's fear about how good Christians would be (and >were} driven into disbelief by the differing confessions, it is there in >"Hamlet", "Macbeth" and "King Lear". In Shakespearean tragedy, not to >mention plays like "Measure for Measure", the real or putative >references to Christianity always and only increase the terror, and are >never a source of consolation. Could the characters not just be abandoning their all-too providentialist or dogmatic faiths towards a view of the divine as really transcendent? The gods in Lear, especially, seem to have a strong existential relationship to the characters who propose them. But abandoning such gods might be a positive step towards a view of God as alterior, as something more than a political construct. Cheers, Seán.
|
|
|||||