HENRY v. DIXON

1876 ◽  
Vol 23 VLR ◽  
pp. 368-372
Keyword(s):  
1956 ◽  
Vol [1956] VLR ◽  
pp. 371-381
Keyword(s):  

1876 ◽  
Vol 29 VLR ◽  
pp. 667-671
Keyword(s):  

1902 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
E. P. Cheyney ◽  
Charles L. Kingsford
Keyword(s):  

2010 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 337-354
Author(s):  
Christopher Dowd
Keyword(s):  

PMLA ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 302-311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Levin

The method used by some recent critics to prove that certain Shakespearean characters are “figures” of Christ (or of other biblical or Renaissance personages) was parodied by Shakespeare himself in Fluellen's comparison of Henry v to Alexander the Great. Its success is guaranteed in advance, since it allows the critic to select only the similarities between the two persons being compared without considering whether these are unique or whether they are more significant than the differences between them. The evidence is thus subjected to a double screening: the critic determines which events in the character's career can be compared to the historical personage, and then which aspects of those events are relevant to the comparison. Even the differences between them can be converted into positive evidence. It is therefore possible by this method to prove that almost any character is a figure of Christ or of King James or of almost anyone else, which is the great strength of “Fluellenism” and also its great weakness, since a method that can prove anything proves nothing.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document