Introduction: Shakespeare and the Study of Response

Abstract

Although there are signs of a new ‘movement’ in literary and dramatic criticism, it has not so far made much progress. More and more books¹ now touch on the reader’s or theatre-goer’s response, yet even those who believe that we should pursue this new critical interest draw back, all too often, when they consider the dangers. If they wish to examine the response to Shakespeare, whose response should it be? An Elizabethan one (impossible) — or a modern one? If a modern one, ought it to be that of the most experienced Man of the Theatre, or of the most learned scholar — or their very own? We could only speak authoritatively about our own; and yet it’s not easy to report accurately

With shabby equipment always deteriorating

In the general mess of imprecision of feeling.

And other dangers abound. The enthusiast who undertakes to record how he reacts to a play must know when his response is ripe, and ready for collecting. During a performance, immediately after it, a little later, or much later? Indeed, can he respond and observe his own response both at once?