![Cover of the audiobook “Shakspeare and His Times [Vol. 2 of 2]”](/media/books/shakspeare-and-his-times-vol-2-of-2/cover.jpg)
Leo Tolstoy opens his critical essay by expressing a long-standing disagreement with the universal praise heaped upon the works of William Shakespeare. Having reread dramas like King Lear, Hamlet, Macbeth, and Othello across many years and in multiple languages, Tolstoy states that he experienced only repulsion, weariness, and a firm conviction that Shakespeare is neither a great genius nor even an average author. He asserts that Shakespeare's enduring fame is an evil untruth sustained by hypnotic social suggestion rather than genuine artistic excellence.
To illustrate his critique, Tolstoy examines King Lear in detail, dissecting its plot and character motivations. He argues that the central premise of Lear dividing his kingdom based on hollow flattery and banishing his truthful daughter Cordelia is entirely arbitrary and unnatural. The parallel storyline involving Gloucester and his sons suffers from the same artificiality, as characters instantly believe absurd falsehoods without a shred of investigation. Tolstoy points out that the language spoken by kings, fools, and peasants alike is pompous, pretentious, and completely detached from the realities of human speech.
Moving beyond King Lear, Tolstoy attacks the broader claim that Shakespeare excels in the delineation of human character. He contends that Shakespeare lacked the fundamental ability to give his personages individuality of language, causing all characters to speak in the same inflated authorial voice. Furthermore, the principal figures in Shakespeare's plays—including Othello, Hamlet, and Falstaff—were not created by him at all, but were borrowed from earlier historical sources, chronicles, and romances. According to Tolstoy, Shakespeare invariably weakened these borrowed characters by forcing them into unnatural actions and inappropriate speeches.
Tolstoy addresses the philosophical and ethical dimensions of Shakespeare's work, rejecting the notion that the playwright serves as a profound teacher of life. Analyzing the defenses offered by critics like Gervinus and Brandes, Tolstoy concludes that Shakespeare's underlying view of life is thoroughly vulgar and immoral. His plays champion active ambition over passive wisdom, endorse the principle that the end justifies the means, and uphold rigid aristocratic hierarchies while despising the working masses.
Finally, Tolstoy explores the historical origins of the Shakespeare cult, tracing it back to German aesthetic critics of the late eighteenth century who sought to replace the cold French classical drama with a freer form. By declaring Shakespeare a supreme genius and inventing theories of objective art divorced from any religious foundation, these critics established a lasting epidemic of suggestion. Tolstoy concludes that society must eventually free itself from this false glorification in order for genuine dramatic art, rooted in the highest religious consciousness of humanity, to finally emerge.
