359 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth:
A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy
By Wilbur Dwight Dunkel

IN his four principal tragedies, Shakespeare closes the violent action in each with the emergence of a more or less meek character to restore harmony and order. After the majestic heroes and cunning villains have contended with one another in their individual ways throughout the different problems of these tragedies, an unspectacular person appears to fill the vacated place of power. And although these mild and patient characters may be of no interest to the reader, or theatre-goer, there well may be in this coincidence, or pattern, an insight useful to Christian thinkers. In our time of war and tension, the meek are seldom considered by men of action, but the terrible meek may yet inherit this earth.

I appreciate that Christian thinkers have too often been willing to dismiss Shakespeare's insights of the relation of God to man because they have questioned the implications of Shakespeare's theology as deduced from his plays. Moreover it takes a man half a lifetime to penetrate the accretions of scholarship which stand between the reader and the texts of Shakespearean tragedy; indeed the many more than 100 books and articles each year dealing with some aspect of Shakespeare's plays provide an obstacle to understanding, as fashions in criticism change radically even within one man's lifetime, The increasing number of neo-humanists, though admitting that Shakespeare's art matured within the Christian framework, quickly point out that Shakespeare departed therefrom; indeed they smile upon such relative terms as good and evil, and for that matter, morality, as relics of traditional scholarship, So we begin this essay with disdainful eyes upon us, looming over the squat tower of doubt.

For this reason, then, I have willfully striven for several years to disabuse my mind of this topic. I have said to myself that Shakespeare probably was not concerned with the person left to rule. On the other hand, this obvious rejection misses the point that the terrify-

360 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Earth: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

ing struggles are resolved; the evil doers fall and lose the advantages they have gained. Whereupon I have argued with myself that the conventions of this particular art form, tragedy, require that the tangled strands of human conflict be tied neatly at the end. So I have turned to Sophoclean tragedy, for example, and have found that a dictator named Creon succeeded to the throne of the high-minded Oedipus. Certainly here was no pattern to suggest to Shakespeare that a mild-mannered person should enter the place of power. Furthermore, the tragedies written by Seneca to illustrate the varying aspects of his version of Stoic philosophy provide little light on why Shakespeare selected a meek man as the inheritor of power. Nor do Shakespeare's predecessors, Kyd, Marlowe, and Green, who established the conventions for the new national drama in' England, indicate any reason for this condition.

Perhaps I have thought too long about "the meek shall inherit the earth," or too much of Gandhi's passive resistance. Are the characters that I designate as meek truly so, or are they by comparison with the interesting persons in the play merely unimportant stereotypes introduced by Shakespeare to end the play? Possibly Shakespeare's interest waned after depicting the convulsive struggles of men appearing larger than life on the world's stage. Yet after arguing with myself against writing this essay, the fact remains that the inheritors of power are, with some variation of the term, "meek," precisely that: they have avoided excesses of passion, however less admirable in daring they must by contrast appear to the heroes.

Intellectual and/or powerfully physical though Shakespeare's heroes appear to us, each in his own way succumbs to one of the seven ecclesiastical sins; in particular, pride, anger, envy, covetousness, ambition, within the extension of which we may place Othello's sexual jealousy. These fatal flaws in the otherwise admirable natures of the heroes cause them to soar to the zenith of man's aspirations and plummet down to the nadir. With all passion spent, these figures who command our respect and awe arouse finally our pity. If it could happen to them with all their talents and resources, what can the common man hope to gain? And that's the point; Shakespeare's inheritors of power do not seek it.

There remains at least one more obstacle to this brief thesis, namely the question whether the idea of tragedy with its emphasis upon death can exist within the Christian framework, since believers have

361 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Eeart: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

faith that Jesus Christ conquered death. For there is no doubt that the death of the hero does seem important as he struggles violently with the villain, or becomes himself the villain opposing harmony and order. As these evil doers destroy the good, the harmony and order of the God-centered universe seems to be contradicted, even though the evil doers either destroy themselves or are destroyed. But I would suggest that the bare bones of dramatic structure should not come between us and the idea. Surely Shakespearean tragedy transcends this level of the human situation when it exalts man's perception of how he, created in the image of his Maker, aspires to harmony and order. And so to arrange the troubled affairs of men, the mild-tempered, the terribly meek person appears. Well, there are the negative positions, let us now examine the evidence for the assertion that Shakespeare's inheritors of power in the four major tragedies are meek.

I

Scholars are not in agreement on the interpretation of Hamlet, particularly since Freud's disciple, Ernest Jones, wrote Hamlet and Oedipus. Yet for our present purpose it matters not at all whether Hamlet's delay in avenging his father's murder comes from his abhorence of bloodshed, his "melancholia," his frustrated ambition, or his Oedipus complex. For there is no gainsaying that Hamlet learned from his bitter experiences: "There's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow"; "There's a destiny that shapes our ends,/ Rough-hew them how we will." That Hamlet has gained an insight of the human situation appears in his admonishing Horatio, the scholar," to tell the world "Things standing thus unknown." Finally he says, "But I do prophesy the election lights / On Fortinbras; he has my dying voice."

Who is Fortinbras? And of what significance is Hamlet's thinking of him? But you recall how in the beginning Horatio informs the guardsmen that the elder Fortinbras of Norway had dared the elder Hamlet of Denmark to combat. Whereupon Hamlet's father slew Fortinbras's father. Thus the old rivalry for power between the kings of Denmark and Norway underlies the play and gives meaning to Fortinbras's apparent coming to the throne of Denmark, from which the Royal Prince (Hamlet) has been kept by the machinations of his uncle.

What is Hamlet's opinion of Fortinbras? Hamlet has seen Fortin-

362 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Eeart: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

bras waiting at the head of his troop for permission to cross Denmark in order to win a plot of ground. Hamlet observes that it is scarcely large enough to bury the soldiers in, if a conflict should arise. Fortinbras appears to be a busy young king setting his kingdom in order; whereas by contrast Hamlet chides himself for his own inactivity, for he has not yet avenged his father's murder.

Now Hamlet is on his way to England, exiled because lie has slain Polonius, whom he took to be Claudius behind the arras. And Claudius has arranged for Hamlet's death. But Hamlet extricates himself and returns to Denmark to meet Laertes, Polonius's son, eager to avenge his father's murder. So Laertes readily succumbs to Claudius's plot to destroy Hamlet in a duel.

Hamlet must pay for his violence, even though one can understand and forgive him as the victim of his uncle's guile. But it is not his death, but rather his recognition of the pity of all this strife he sought to avoid that wrings our sympathy. Indeed Hamlet's agony must reach the pinnacle of human acceptance as he foresees Fortinbras in his place on the throne of Denmark.

Within the context of Hamlet, Fortinbras was not diverted from the duties of his kingship by any struggle to right the wrong, real or, imagined, of his father's dying by the hand of Hamlet's father. On the contrary, Fortinbras may have had no cause to do so, since his father issued the challenge. Probably no one would wish, furthermore, to attribute restraint to Fortinbras as a characteristic, but at least he did not lead his army against Denmark, even if he may appear to be waiting for this opportunity. Indeed there was no cause for him to be friendly. In contrast to both Hamlet and Laertes, Fortinbras accepted the situation and did not allow passion to overwhelm his judgment.

Hamlet's gigantic struggle, both intellectual and physical, ranging from the rejection of his mother and his sweetheart to the contests with Polonius, Claudius, and Laertes, induced him to morbid introspections, which have become so much a part of present thinking in America. And while he struggled to right a wrong, augmented by the mores of his time, he revealed the scope of his nature and became, thus larger than life, a majestic figure of agony.

So by contrast to Hamlet, Fortinbras appears mild of temper and for a Royal Prince perhaps restrained, even to have a drop or two of meekness in his nature. Yet of all the inheritors of power, Fortinbras appears meek by default.

363 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Eeart: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

II

The ending of Othello, however, provides the emergence of a truly meek man. For of all the persons to replace the magnificent Othello, Cassio has always seemed to me to be the least likely to inherit power, in this instance to govern Cyprus for the Venetian senators. In contrast to Othello's range from patience, "Put up your bright swords or the dew will rust them" to his violence in smothering his beloved Desdemona, Cassio seems weak, possibly the "arithmetician" and "theoric" that Iago describes him as being. Indeed his inability to drink with his men, his affair with Bianca, the loss of his lieutenancy, and his pleading with Desdemona for intercession with Othello are scarcely incidents designed to win our admiration.

Iago's crafty use of Othello, by arousing his unwarranted suspicion of Desdemona, leads to destruction and the apparent triumph of evil over good. But the perfidy of the "honest Iago" will out, and he must in the end pay in full for the havoc he has caused.

So, again, as the contenders for power fall, a person not involved in the direful struggle appears to inherit the power. And Othello must face the agony of discovering that his violence was to no purpose; lithe man whom he suspected appears blameless in his relations with Desdemona and now succeeds to power. Certainly this revelation must be more painful than the physical death Othello inflects upon himself, as he gives a death for a death.

III

So in King Lear are the contenders for power destroyed. Goneril and Regan, Lear's evil daughters, and Edmund, Gloucester's evil son, scheme and fight for the power given up by King Lear. But their conflict endswith their destruction, and the distinctly meek Duke of Albany, husband of Goneril, and the distinctly meek Edgar, mistreated son of Gloucester, remain with Kent to inherit the power no one of them wants. Despite Shakespeare's explicit representation of pagan mores, this may provides many Christ insights. For example, in the depth of despair King Lear learns in humility how to pray for his poor subjects whom he has neglected, and he finds a few moments of peace and happiness with his loving daughter Cordelia. So his death is no tragedy, for who "would upon the rack of this tough world / Stretch him out longer."

Shakespeare thus clearly indicates that inheritance of worldly power

364 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Eeart: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

matters not to King Lear, who has passed through remorse, repentance, and regeneration of spirit, and even less, perhaps, to the meek men who remain to rule.

IV

In Macbeth no man is more meek than Malcolm, the son of King, Duncan, upon whom the succession to the throne is fixed. But when Macbeth murders Duncan and casts the blame on Malcolm, this Royal Prince does not remain in Scotland either to contest the false accusation or to avenge his father's murder. Malcolm flees to England, where, to be sure, faithful followers cluster around him. But it is Macduff, motivated in part by the wanton murder of his defenceless wife and children, who slays Macbeth. Then Macduff stands aside in order that Malcolm may ascend his father's throne. As Professor Tillyard has pointed out, Macbeth belongs to the chronicle history plays in its political theory. Here the inheritor of power is meek, as well as the lawful person to restore harmony and peace to the Kingdom of Scotland.

V

In our time the characteristic, "meek," has for practical usage be come a term of contempt, but in Shakespeare's day this word meant: mild, courteous, kindly, slow to anger. Hence Shakespeare himself may have thought of the persons who closed these tumultuous struggles as meek men. Fortinbras displays courtesy in asking for permission to cross Denmark as well as in his ordering four captains to bear Hamlet's body with full military honors befitting a Royal Prince. Cassio, though wronged by Othello, gave the final opinion of him: "For he was great of heart." And in King Lear, Edgar speaks for Kent and the Duke of Albany as well as for himself when he says: "The oldest have borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long." And finally Macduff speaks of "the grace of Grace/We will perform in measure, time, and place." Such are the patient and kindly men who restore order, and they are easily overlooked and forgotten by the reader and theatre goer.

The mores of the time dictated to the unwilling Hamlet what he was born to do in the existing conditions of evil. The exotic Othello was an "Outsider" in the "silken wars" of Venice. Both King Lear and Gloucester failed to distinguish between appearances and reality,

365 - The Meek Shall Inherit the Eeart: A Study In Shakespearean Tragedy

flattery and loyalty, in their children. Only Macbeth recognized in the beginning that "even-handed justice" would prevail against him; that he would be punished for his evil deeds; yet he became the "Butcher," as Malcolm described him, egged on by his "fiend-like queen."

In the contests of men with one another, our attention is fixed upon the spectacular figures; we identify ourselves with them; indeed we may even feel empathy with them; they are our heroes, right or wrong, as we observe their efforts to expand the nature of man. On the contrary, the unspectacular persons arouse our interest not at all. They may inherit power, but only as a duty and responsibility. Shakespeare, the artist with understanding of the nature of man, surely recognized the irony in the situation. The mighty contend and leave the world to the meek who do not want it, for it is they after all who shall inherit the Kingdom of God.

For the Christian man of today, has meekness ceased to be a virtue? It certainly has, if we think of meekness in the unfavorable sense of submissive, spiritless, and easily cowed. But in the positive meaning of meek," as I have suggested in this essay, being gentle, courteous, kind, merciful, free from self-will, and humble are attributes of Christ Jesus. And before us stands the archetypal figure presented in Philippians 2: 6-8: "Have this mind among yourselves, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count quality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant [slave], being born in the likeness of men."

Although our present-day heroes no longer appear in literature, or life, much larger than our neighbors, we still admire the persons who struggle against the competition, albeit too often simply for power or wealth. As Shakespeare's tragic heroes contended for their integrities, so do our heroes appear to be men with their attentions fixed upon their standards of achievement in our work-a-day world. Yet the Christian man is like the artist, at his best when he rises from the horizontal plane of common interests and reaches upward to grasp for a moment identification with the eternal continuum time. Here, at this intensity of the vertical achievement, the Christian man, like the artist, should sense humility, the gentle ecstasy of surrendering his individual will to the Divine, and care not it all about earthly power.