‘Complaint’ About Shakespeare
Friday, June 13th by scott malia
When people get all fired up about Shakespearean authorship debates, they tend to center around a few basic questions: Which plays did he write? Did he write all of his plays? Did he co-write some of his plays with other authors and, if so, who were they. Implicit in some of these questions is a kind of hegemony. In other words, the “pure” Shakespeare plays (if such things exist) are more important, better or take precedence over the ones who have been sullied by other author’s hands (even if their work is good).
As with all Shakespearean criticism, debates about his poetry get far less ink than his plays. A recent article notes the exclusion of a poem entitled “A Lover’s Complaint” from a new and supposedly comprehensive edition of The Bard’s writings. The critic was further outraged at the inclusion of two other poems whose authorship he found questionable.
In the midst of many line-specific arguments about “A Lover’s Complaint,” the author raises the question of how to tell the difference between bad Shakespeare and other Elizabethan writing that is merely an ineffective imitation of his style. His defense of “Complaint” is that it is deliberately bad as a kind of parody (he cites a particularly odd use of the word “balls”—no, it’s not what you think—as an example of the piece’s comically deliberate misuse of imagery and metaphor). Regardless of who wrote “A Lover’s Complaint,” I walked away from this article wondering if we have to justify The Bard’s missteps in order to preserve his reputation. Maybe he did like to lampoon poor writing, but perhaps we’re just uncomfortable with the idea of someone we’ve heralded as a genius missing the mark.
