What a beautiful morning! I will finish writing PREFACE of my graduation thesis I wrote 40 years ago. 40 years have changed me so much. I think it a miracle that I've lived to be 62.
This is continued from yesterday's article.
(the graduation thesis I wrote 40 years ago)
-----------------------------------
There are two types of genius in the literary world. One is a man who shows a wonderful creative genius in his works and the other a man who creates an enduring masterpiece by means of wise and excellent adaptation from the existing books.
William Shakespeare belongs to the latter. He composed most of his plays, drawing their materials from the old stories which were already well-known among people in his days.
King Lear is not the exceptional. The story of King Lear is a very old one. The first book that tells us the story is said to be Historia Regum Britanniae by Geoffrey of Monmouth. In the 14th century it is found in Gesta Romanorum and in the next century many historians and poets came to take up the story as materials of their works.
John Higgins in A Mirror for Magistrates, William Warner in Albion's England, Edmund Spenser in Faerie Queene, or Holinshed's Chronicles. In 1602, a play titled The True Chronicle History of King Lear and His Three Daughters, Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella was published. Shakespeare is said to have written his play King Lear a few years later. Those books which Shakespeare had beside him, when he wrote King Lear, are said to have been Holinshed's Chronicles and The True Chronicle History of King Lear.
The important thing is not whether Shakespeare had source books or not, but how he put his construction on them in order to make his play fresh and vivid. In this point Shakespeare succeeded to admiration and he created the greatest play that was quite different from all those books from which he drew its material. I think it will be interesting and meaningful to study King Lear comparing with its source books, but I did not have enough time to do it.
(to be continued)
This is continued from yesterday's article.
(the graduation thesis I wrote 40 years ago)
-----------------------------------
There are two types of genius in the literary world. One is a man who shows a wonderful creative genius in his works and the other a man who creates an enduring masterpiece by means of wise and excellent adaptation from the existing books.
William Shakespeare belongs to the latter. He composed most of his plays, drawing their materials from the old stories which were already well-known among people in his days.
King Lear is not the exceptional. The story of King Lear is a very old one. The first book that tells us the story is said to be Historia Regum Britanniae by Geoffrey of Monmouth. In the 14th century it is found in Gesta Romanorum and in the next century many historians and poets came to take up the story as materials of their works.
John Higgins in A Mirror for Magistrates, William Warner in Albion's England, Edmund Spenser in Faerie Queene, or Holinshed's Chronicles. In 1602, a play titled The True Chronicle History of King Lear and His Three Daughters, Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella was published. Shakespeare is said to have written his play King Lear a few years later. Those books which Shakespeare had beside him, when he wrote King Lear, are said to have been Holinshed's Chronicles and The True Chronicle History of King Lear.
The important thing is not whether Shakespeare had source books or not, but how he put his construction on them in order to make his play fresh and vivid. In this point Shakespeare succeeded to admiration and he created the greatest play that was quite different from all those books from which he drew its material. I think it will be interesting and meaningful to study King Lear comparing with its source books, but I did not have enough time to do it.
(to be continued)