One Author, One Play, Many Opinions

In discussions of The Tempest, one controversial issue has been how to interpret Shakespeare's text "correctly." On the one hand, the author of "Cultural Studies: Postcolonialism, African-American Criticism, and Queer Theory" (I''l call him Author X), argues that post-colonialism is a valid belief and suggests that The Tempest might be included in what is considered postcolonial work. On the other hand, George Will contends that interprtations of any text cannot be considered the ultimate truth. Others, called New Critics, even maintain that potsolonialism in literature is not a valid interpretation, as it takes into account historical events of the authors' time periods. However, my own view is that Shakespeare wrote his play to please audiences, not necessarily to reflect his own beliefs, although some political undertones due to his environment may have seeped into his work .


In discussions of The Tempest, the traditional view is that Caliban is a conquered slave to Prospero, the colonial "dictator." This paints Shakespeare to be a political commentor, not just a businessman in the business of pleasing audiences. However, there may be other ways to think about this text. By stepping back from the novel as a whole, even, one can critique how to even approach reading the actual text, as opposed to merely analyzing the characters themselves.  For one thing, Will explains that, “By ‘deconstructing,’ or politically decoding, or otherwise attacking the meaning of literary works, critics strip literature of its authority. Criticism displaces literature. Critics displace authors of bestowing meaning.” With this view in mind, any absolute interpretation of Shakespeare's play might detract from the author'soriginal work of art . Author  X also contends that, "Postcolonial critics also guard against ascribing their own cultural ideas into postcolonial works, realizing that any attempt to understand comletely a subaltern group will be impossible and can lead to another form of repression." Meanwhile, New Critics might argue that Postcolonialism itself is a form of bias when reading; it does not let the author's theme stand alone. Will, then, might be inclined to agree. Therefore, taking these positions into account, we can see that many critics feel strongly about how The Tempest should be read. Whether they are concerned mainly about the author's perspective and how it relates to history and thus is interpreted, or how the reader should not consider any interpretations "right," they all feel that they offer valid suggestions to academia. These ideas helped me come to the conclusion that with an open mind, I think that Shakespeare was not particularly moved by events around him to create a politcal statement, nor do I think  that I offer the ultimate answer in this discussion. I think that, quite simply, Shakespeare jsut wanted to earn money, and wrote plays to please the audiences that could pay his rent. I might also be inclined to agree with Author X, however, and think that Shakespeare may have subconsciously written about a post colonial sruggle due to events around him. Just as Shakespeare seems to blend a variety of culture and possibly "answers" into his text, critics provide their own similiar literary blends for readers to carefully indulge in, tasting new ideas carefully.