Aime Cesaire’s A Tempest highlights the imperialist notions found in The Tempest. In discussions of postcolonial undertones, a controversial issue has been about how these messages should be interpreted. On one hand, political commentator George Will argues that works of literature should be enjoyed for its aesthetic value rather than the context that they were written in. On the other hand, professor Stephen Greenblatt disagrees because of the plethora of evidence that spells out an author’s intended purpose. Others even maintain that only the authors can tell us the real meanings of their works. However, this is impossible in Shakespeare’s case, and I believe that people need to be able to draw their own conclusions on The Tempest based on prior knowledge of the political undertones in the play.
George Will wants readers to enjoy and understand literature for what they think it is, not what the MLA says is right. To him, people should be able to interpret works the way they understand them, and political messages in readings are becoming all too apparent thanks to the educated elite. But Stephen Greenblatt defends his views and argues that it’s impossible to not take note of the imperialist messages in The Tempest. He stresses the value of the cultural heritage found in the play. In order to fully understand Shakespeare and other writers, it is important for the student to understand that Shakespeare drew upon the politics of his time to write.
I have to agree with Greenblatt on the issue. Writers are influenced by their surroundings and culture, and we should acknowledge the fact. Our interpretations just can’t be so far reaching that they alienate the reader with their ambiguity. Nevertheless, people need to be able to base their conclusions of a work on what they understand, not what they are told to understand, like Will wants.
No comments:
Post a Comment