The Poetics & Shakespeare

The question: Does Castelvetro offer new insights on Aristotle?

My answer: No. The introduction gave us our first clue that Castelvetro was an unreliable interpreter/mediator between Aristotle and Castelvetro’s audience because he aims to align himself with Aristotle but, in fact, offers a meandering rather than parallel interpretation.

Castelvetro offered an interesting perspective on the Poetics and drama nevertheless. As I read “The Poetics of Aristotle Translated and Explained,” I found myself stopping to compare Castelvetro’s interpretation/supplementations to English Renaissance theatre, wondering how much his translation and interpretation influenced the Elizabethan playwrights. I can think of particular violations by the three most well-known playwrights—William Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe and Ben Johnson—but I can also think of particular instances that adhere to the Aristotelian tenets of tragedy and comedy. I know it seems dumb, but I’ve been familiar with Aristotle’s Poetics almost as long as I’ve been familiar with Shakespearean literature/theatre and never until reading Castelvetro had I considered the influence of the former on the latter. The Comedy of Errors, I believe, follows Aristotle’s unities of action, time, and place. And, The Tempest might as well. However, most of Shakespeare’s plays violate all three rules of unity; although, many do conform to other aspects, such as letting the audience know a summary of events that already took place outside of the limited boundaries of action, time, and place. In other words, Shakespeare often has characters report historical or biographical summaries to keep help the audience make sense of plot while keeping the action, time, and place contained.

Beyond the unities, I’ve been contemplating how Elizabethan plays use catharsis, tragic flaw, and fear and pity. I’m thinking of Macbeth, Hamlet, and Titus Andronicus respectively.