AYJW

Parrot Trick Training

Poicephalus

Parrot Forum

     Shakespeare, in his "A Midsummer Night’s Dream," uses his characters to cast a sense of derision over the use of the imagination. “The lunatic, the lover and the poet” are thrown together all on one line, and it is implied that the latter two are as crazy as the first. (Midsummer Night’s Dream, V.1.7) Despite this seeming scorn for plays and their ilk, Shakespeare is implementing a strong irony. Characters who scorn the imagination are no more than imaginings themselves – and, by this, Shakespeare is actually reinforcing a positive image of plays of the imagination.
     Theseus’s denial of imagination’s worth reads more as apophasis than as any true refutation. Even as he scorns the poet for giving “airy nothing/ A local habitation and a name,” he vividly conjures images through metaphor. (V.1.18) Indeed, he is no more than an imagining named by a poet himself – which lends the writing further depth on multiple levels. On Shakespeare’s level, Theseus as a character lends himself well to irony; he is a sort of Fool in disguise. His witty wordplay and flowing metaphors are backed by his confidence that “such shaping fantasies…[are] more than cool reason ever comprehends.” (V.1.5) Theseus considers himself a creature of cool reason – and thus enters the irony, for he disbelieves his own existence.
     Only some of the audience may have understood the irony. Shakespeare’s plays had a wide audience, and both nobles and ‘groundlings’ – that is, peasants – attended. The playwright’s humor had to keep all classes entertained; the nobles because they sponsored the theater (and increased his fame), and the groundlings because their rotten fruit would otherwise voice their displeasure.  Theseus’s character, in his irony, is subtle comedy for the educated class, while the mechanicals play a similar role through more blunt means.
     Theseus, as an added level of irony, spends a fair amount of time voicing his disdain for the imagination, and for plays – and then, just after that, he chooses a play for the night’s entertainment. He disregards “some satire, keen and critical” in favor of Pyramus and Thisbe, in fact. (V.1.58) One would think that, as the representative of cool reason, Theseus would opt to listen to something less fanciful, but he belies his own position against the imagination and chooses an “airy nothing” instead. (V.1.17) It is in this direct contradiction that Shakespeare cinches the irony of Theseus. Even so, once he has chosen Pyramus and Thisbe, Theseus maintains his stand: “the best in this kind [plays] are but shadows.” (V.1.224) If this were true, and he believed it, why would he then choose a ‘shadow’ for entertainment? Why not choose something more ‘real,’ something that has more of an effect on the world? The simple answer is that plays themselves do affect the world. For even this ‘shadow,’ Pyramus and Thisbe, does in the end draw some emotion from its watchers – Theseus says “this passion, and the death of a dear friend, would go near to make a man look sad.” (V.1.303) Hippolyta furthers his sentiment, adding “Beshrew my heart but I pity the man.” (V.1.305) If the worst of plays can draw such emotion, then plays hold power indeed.
     In yet a further interpretation, Theseus may act as a sort of metaphor for the nobles in the audience. He is a character the higher class can relate to – he is witty, educated, and logical. He was in several other plays and myths, and thus would have already been familiar to much of the audience. The parallel between Theseus and the nobles is strong, since both he and the nobles are watching a play. The message Shakespeare is sending through this is twofold: first, the play hints that – even if you cannot see it – magic may exist, and second, Shakespeare is bolstering his own play’s appearance and safety. He portrays the lovers and Theseus as patient of the mechanicals’ poor acting and flat play; if they can find mirth and feeling in such an obvious blunder as Pyramus and Thisbe, surely Shakespeare’s own audience can find a bit of humor in his comparatively brilliant work.
     Shakespeare’s choice of Pyramus and Thisbe as his ‘play within a play’ is a complex one. On one hand, it bolsters his own play’s appearance. However, it seems an odd choice if his goal is to present a positive image of imaginative plays. Nevertheless, I would argue that it presents just such an image. First, though, perhaps a definition of ‘positive image’ is in order: by this, I mean that Shakespeare’s portrayal of plays and imagination in "A Midsummer Night’s Dream" supports the idea that both are valid. Shakespeare’s work shows that all plays – even poor works, such as Pyramus and Thisbe – do affect the world around them, and are valuable in their ability to do so.
     The first of these affirmations, that plays affect the world around them, is proven by Theseus’s own words. As a character, Theseus represents the world of cool reason – hence, if he is affected by a play, then plays affect the world, and can affect even the most sarcastic among us. Further, if the play which affects Theseus is the lowest of its kind, it follows that any better written work should have the same power. Since Theseus states that the play “would go near to make a man look sad,” we can surmise that the former two premises have, indeed, been met. (V.1.304)  It would not fit his character to outright speak his emotion (particularly since he has been so scornful until now), and so Shakespeare pulls in Hippolyta to clarify his meaning with her next line. She speaks of her pity, and Theseus does not mock her for it – likely because he feels the same way. Hence, plays can affect the world of cool reason, just as they have affected and drawn emotion from Theseus.
     That an ability to draw emotion and affect the world is valuable seems just an extension of the previous argument. However, Shakespeare stops just short of pulling this argument to its fullest strength, and simply has Theseus say that “this palpable-gross [obviously dull] play hath well beguiled the heavy gait of night.” (V.1.384; bracketed note from Folger, p.168) Thus, though the representative of cool reason has stated that plays ‘do have their uses’ (namely entertainment), he has not fully admitted the uses of imagination. But his actions belie his words, for it was he who chose the play over the satire, and he who chose to let the actors continue until the play’s conclusion.
     It would seem that, in the end, Theseus’s argument against imagination is no more than apophasis. Even while he denies the worth of works of the imagination, calling them ‘shadows,’ later dialogue reveals his own ability to be affected by such shadows. His very denial creates an irony that reinforces the positive image of plays which Shakespeare wishes to portray; that is, it shows that plays do matter, whether or not you believe they can affect the world – just as, in the play, magic does have a hand, whether or not its subjects believe in it. To strengthen his message, Shakespeare draws parallels between the cynical ‘voice of reason,’ Theseus, and the nobles in his intended audience. Thus, said nobles might see how little good Theseus’s cynicism ultimately did him, and that, as he was wrong in disbelieving in the fairies’ power over the lovers, he might be wrong in disbelieving the worth of imagination and plays, and their power over the world of cool reason.


Source:
     Shakespeare, William. Edited: Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine. A Midsummer Night's Dream. Folger Shakespeare Library ed. New York: Washington Square Press Drama, 1993.