August 29, 2018
Shakespeare, for me, is difficult reading. My excuses don’t excuse me but I can at least share them with you. (1) An opening page lists the actors by name but I can’t picture them. When the script names an actor I don’t have a face or voice to associate with the name. (2) Occasionally scenes change markedly without my knowing the intended shift geographically or dramatically. (3) King James English can be a big challenge.
Nonetheless, when Joy and I paid big bucks to see a September rendition of Shakespeare’s “Coriolanus” in Stratford, Ontario, I knew that I would make good effort to understand beforehand what we would be seeing.
From Amazon I bought a Signet Classic Coriolanus, first published in 1966. I read it. Like many classic dramas, it comes in five acts, more than enough to fill three hours on stage. My reading took much longer. I got the gist of it, thanks in part to program notes for “Coriolanus” presented by Indianapolis Shakespeare Company.
“In the tribal world of the play, Rome is threatened by outside forces, and the people, out of fear, rely on a strong man, Caius Martius Coriolanus, to save them. But his ferocity as a warrior comes at a price more dangerous than any invading army.”
I got it … basically. But then Signet Classic comes to my aid with commentaries and most important, a part of Plutarch’s “The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans” first published in 1579 and here translated by Sir Thomas North..
Confession: throughout years of teaching Composition and World Literature at Goshen College, I heard the name Plutarch but never consulted his work. I perked up because Shakespeare is now believed to have based his Coriolanus on Plutarch’s Coriolanus. The print in this translation was small; nonetheless in a paragraph or so, I was hooked and remarkably informed. Shakespeare’s “Coriolanus” immediate takes on a richness and significance I missed in my reading the play.
In writing history instead of a stage play, Plutarch could present a larger scene and show the reasons for the development of political crisis. Coriolanus didn’t appear ex nihilo onto the scene but is shown to be a particular child growing into a particular military figure. In the following paragraph Coriolanus is identified by his family name Martius.
“But Martius, being more inclined to the wars than any other gentleman of his time, began from his childhood to give himself to handle weapons, and daily did exercise himself therein; and he esteemed outward armor to no purpose, unless one were naturally armed within. Moreover he did so exercise his body to hardness and all kind of activity, that he was very swift in running, strong in wrestling, and mighty in griping, so that no man could ever cast him. Insomuch as those that would try masteries with him for strength and nimbleness would say when they were overcome, that all was by reason of his natural strength and hardness of ward, that never yielded to any pain or toil he took upon himself.” (160)
I could understand better the play’s very first scene where commoners are demanding corn after Plutarch explained the political caste system that separated the common people from the Senate, supported by the wealthy. A consulship served the Senate.
And most importantly, Coriolanus’ obstinacy, his terrifying single-minded violence, his unwillingness to humble himself — all of these characteristics revealed in his relationship with the common people and even the Senate, made it believable that he would turn against his own people.
These days, dramatic artists see the contemporary tone of this work. “The play is remarkable and important at this moment in time because, among other things, it is a cautionary tale about the fragility of democracy.” (Program notes, Indianapolis Shakespeare Company. I predict that “Coriolanus” will be mounted on many stages, professional, civic and academic in this upcoming year.
jdanielhessblog 