ABSTRACT

The analysis of style in drama is a way of cultivating attentive reading, of increasing fidelity to the author’s intention as that is realized in language. Both Mustapha and Richard II reveal a vigorous use and development of the styles available, especially the poetic styles, in late sixteenth-century England, and both Greville and Shakespeare disclose their intentions to evoke the emotions of woe or wonder, the two aspects of the single emotional effect of tragedy, the most fully human response to death. Greville’s intention is more explicit, Shakespeare’s more subtle. The analysis of style is, in the first instance, a way of emphasizing the reader’s point of view. Whatever aspect of the drama the writer first considers, he must finally embody his intention in language, and the reader must realize that intention from language – even actors must first read their lines. Yet speech is not merely a technique or a method subordinate to other things; it is also, as George Whalley remarks, ‘one of the principal resources of human action’. 1 It should be possible, therefore, to shift the analysis of style to emphasize the writer’s point of view. What implications do Shakespeare’s styles have for the form of his drama? To what extent does poetic style determine other elements of the dramatic action? In order to open these questions and in order to test the approach that I have developed for Mustapha and Richard II, I wish to consider certain crucial moments in one of Shakespeare’s greatest and most mature plays, The Tragedy of Macbeth.