Skip to main content

The Problem Plays

 







There are three plays by Shakespeare that are collectively referred to as the “problem plays.” They are not called problem plays because there is anything particularly wrong with them, or because they are problematic. (To be fair, there are things in these as in other Shakespeare plays that a modern audience might take issue with, but that is not why they are called problem plays). They are called problem plays because whether they are comedies or tragedies, they deal with societal problems. They have dark subject matter and they tend to be cynical. They juxtapose broad comedy with harsh dramatic situations (I suspect another reason they are called problem plays is because they are difficult to categorize). Resolutions tend not to be clear-cut. The good guy doesn’t necessarily get the girl, and the bad guy may not be punished. It was unusual for a playwright of the time to write plays like this. Comedies were supposed to be funny all the way through with a well-defined happy ending. Tragedies were supposed to be serious drama with a resolutely sad ending. Shakespeare was not averse to breaking the rules. His plays tend to be more complex than his contemporaries.

The first time I saw Measure for Measure I was in my mid-twenties. I had seen a few of his plays by then. I knew the general rule that comedies had happy endings and tragedies had sad endings. But I remember watching measure for Measure saying to myself, “what’s this?” It seemed to be a dark drama, and then this guy popped out who was hilariously funny. Then it would get dark again. As the play drew close to near the end, I still did not know if this was going to end happily or not. Would Isabella be okay? Would Angelo get what he deserved? Would Claudio die? It was actually suspenseful in a way I had never seen a Shakespeare play be suspenseful. Maybe that was the point. As you may have guessed by now, Measure for Measure is one of the problem plays (the other two plays that scholars call the problem plays are All’s Well that Ends Well, and Troilus and Cressida). Measure for Measure is a comedy, but it deals with things like sexual assault, a fanatical adherence to the letter of the law, vengeance, abuse of power, and lust. Measure for Measure also has what I would describe as the most Christian moment in all of Shakespeare. Lots of people call themselves Christians who live their lives completely divorced from the teachings of Jesus. That was as true in Shakespeare’s day as in ours. But when Isabella sees Angelo brought for justice before the Duke, this man who had abused his power, sexually blackmailed her, and who had killed her brother (she believed), no one would have blamed her for asking for his head. Instead, when such a punishment is proposed, she begs the Duke for mercy on his behalf. Almost nobody (no matter what their religion) would find it in their hearts to do this. But this is one novice who has taken her vows seriously. We, in the audience all want Angelo killed, but then Isabella shames us with her words.

The problem plays not only skirt the line between comedy and tragedy, but examine moral dilemmas. Central characters find themselves torn between what they want to do and what they should do. Unlike the pure love story in Romeo and Juliette, the love story in Troilus and Cressida turns cynical and tainted. The problem plays also have unlikeable characters: Bertram and Parolles in All’s Well the Ends Well, Angelo in Measure for Measure, Pandarus and Thersites in Troilus and Cressida. Nobody went to the theater in 1602 to watch characters like these. Yet to a modern audience, complex, even unlikeable characters make a story more interesting.   

Some writers add other plays to the list of problem plays like Hamlet, The Merchant of Venice, The Winter’s tale, and Timon of Athens. They all have elements of the above, but for my money, Measure for Measure, the one that caused me to scratch my head and say ‘what is this?’ is the most problematic (in a good way) of the problem plays.

Star Liner

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Child of the . . .

  What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school.   It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bureaucrats

  I am one of those nameless, faceless bureaucrats. Yes, that is my job. Though I actually have a name; I even am rumored to have a face. Bureau is the French word for desk, so you could say bureaucrats are “desk people.” In short, I work for the government. I sometimes have to deliver unpleasant news to a taxpayer. I sometimes have to tell them that the deed they recorded won’t work and they will have to record another one with corrections. Or we can’t process their deed until they pay their taxes. I can understand why some of these things upset people. The thing is, we don’t decide these things. It is not the bureaucrats that make the laws. The legislature writes the laws. We are required to follow the law.   If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at the legislature. Or maybe get mad at the voters who voted the legislature in (That’s you, by the way). The same thing happens when the voters vote in a new district, or vote for a bond, or a new operating levy for an ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...
Post a Comment
Read more