Here is my argument that Shakespeare "outwitted" many poets by making
his works appear overtly like ancient myths to the future audience,
while the same works appeared as politically correct to his present day
audience. Spenser went overboard on "translating" current politics into
poetry overtly, as though he was hired to do so for the cause of the
state (like Vergil and in a sense Horace, though I'd argue that
Spenser's vision was less independent of the circumstances of his source
of income than was theirs), or for the cause of spirit (like Dante with
Beatrice).
Spenser is a brilliant poet. I continue to believe he made a strategic
mistake as an artist (like Joyce, in my opinion) ...
Kevin
--------------------------------
James C. Nohrnberg wrote:
> I think James has to be on the throne (and in the audience centrally,
> as that audience's cynosure) for Macbeth's horror at the seat of honor
> being pre-occupied by Banquo's ghost (in place & anticipation of
> Banquo's future lineage), to have its full dramatic effect as double
> entendre. But the prediction that James the Cradle King would occupy
> the throne, I would argue, is being made -- via the changelling boy --
> as early as Midsummer Night's Dream, even if it was no fair guessing.
>
|