Can Shakespear's works be considered (in some cases) "absurdist"?

Question

"Absurd" is a literary and philosophical term, so please ONLY answer if you have some idea of what you're talking about.

I just read The Winter's Tale, and so many details in it seem to me "absurd".

When I read up on the background of absurdism, though, I'm not so confident anymore ....

Does absurdism refer only to existentialism in the sense that everything in life is meaningless?

I'm trying to see if I can extend the term into my work on the play.

Answer 1

On the whole no. It requires working from a viewpoint that simply wasn't available to Shakespeare.

The minority angle is that yes, you can find details which fit into an existential and absurdist framework. But' while I can't know, I'm pretty sure that Shakespeare would have said only that life sometimes presents the appearance of absurdity.

Personally I've not learned to appreciate The Winter's Tale, which seems more chaotic and arbitrary than truly absurd.

Now, "Life's a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" (Macbeth), now that is a statement of life's absurdity. Poor players, all of us.

Answer 2

Any character that's thrown into a world and has to act without reason must come to grips with the absurd -- and any fleshed out character should confront reality in this way. Because lack of moral dilemma does nothing for a character at all. We are interested in the character; the characterization of the character happens through his particular way of choosing this or that. That's human sympatico. There is no other way to do it.

But the work cannot be judged on the dealings of characters alone. When there are great truths to convey, the work is didactic. An absurdist piece resists this hypostatization -- these morals to adduce. As a rule, a tragedy hinges the moral on the hubris of the hero. Comedy only ever plays with convention, using our prejudices to call attention to the ridiculously false. The theater of the absurd does not do this. If you laugh, you laugh at yourself as well, if you find transcentendal truths--- you are missing the point. There are none-- but then again, the absurdist cannot make THAT his message. The very idea of rules, rules for generating rules, communication as such is called into question.

Does Shakespeare do this? I don't believe so.

Answer 3

Well first off, spell his name correctly please. It's Shakespeare.

Absurdism does have it's roots in Existentialism but they differ in several respects. Absurdism states that humanity's quest to find meaning in existence will fail because no meaning exists. In Absurdism there are two paths humanity follows: concluding life is meaningless or finding purpose in a higher power.
However Calmus, one of the most important philosophers on Absurdism, states the beauty that people encounter in life makes it worth living.

Answer 4

to to days audience some of his plays might seem absurd but you have to remember That when They were written in the 16th century people totally believed in the existence of fairies ghosts,goblins and all sorts of supernatural beings, to them Shakespeare's plays were far from absurd but quiet believable Shakespeare did not write his plays with one eye on what posterity might think of him but to please an audience and to make money. Surely the most insightful writer in the English language on the human condition would be just a little amused at hearing his plays being described as absurdist or existentialist they were intended to amuse and entertain and surely they have done that for the last 400years

Answer 5

yes its true.

Most of his works are full of "absurdities" to a smaller or a larger extent.