Religion in the Age of Shakespeare [Hardcover]

Very highly recommended reading for both academics and non-specialist general readers, "Religion In The Age Of Shakespeare" by academician and historian Christopher Baker (Professor of English at Armstrong Atlantic State University) provides the reader with an informed and informative historical overview and analysis of the major religious contexts and themes as they are found in the mid-17th to early 18th century and reflected in the works of William Shakespeare. Profusely footnoted, the five chapters comprising this deftly written compendium include 'Background'; 'Religion in Shakespeare's World'; 'Religion in Shakespeare's Works'; 'Religion in Performance'; Scholarship & Criticism'. Enhanced with extensive pages of primary documents, an extended glossary, a four page bibliography, and a comprehensive index, "Religion In The Age Of Shakespeare" is a much appreciated contribution to the growing library of analytical research and history regarding 17th century in general, and the works of William Shakespeare in particular.

This is an unfortunate book because of its lack of definition about what is meant by "religion," its obvious bias, odd methodology, and incomplete bibliography. Even though its aim appears to be to provide an introduction and helpful bibliography for students (it has no original scholarship of its own), its one-sidedness is only harmful. The title indicates that it is about "Religion in the Age of Shakespeare" but it is not a history-- one chapter provides only an incomplete overview of "religion," by which the author means Protestantism, which he praises, and he inaccurately presents the historical situation (e.g., he speaks glowingly about Elizabeth's "Anglican compromise," which did not exist at the time, but says nothing about state enforced Protestant church attendance, oaths of loyalty, imprisonment, or executions, not to mention the systematic destruction of religious tradition in England.) Catholics get 2 1/2 pages, none of which are about England. Duffy's fine Stripping of the Altars is briefly mentioned in the context of Edward VI but the author doesn't seem to comprehend the book or the historical situation. Three of Robert Southwell's poems are included in the Primary Source section with no explanation as to how they relate to Shakespeare. Southwell is said to have been "executed." Why? One chapter is devoted to scholarship on Shakespeare and religion; the author goes out of his way to mention (one sentence) Milward only to condemn his Catholic approach to Shakespeare (and omits Milward's very fine Shakespeare's Religious Background from his bibliography, along with his Shakespeare the Papest and his many other books (two articles are in the bibliography)). Most other authors who have taken a Catholic approach are excluded, even though there have been one hundred years of scholarship in this area (Bowden, for example, is mention but omitted from the bibliography). Although the author explains that interpretation based on doctrine involves examination of both Catholic and Protestant religous rituals, theology, and religious texts in Shakepeare, he doesn't mention Catholic ritual (Mutschmann and Wentersdorf's Shakespeare and Catholicism (1952) which discusses explicit mention of Catholic ritual in Shakespeare is ignored) or Catholic texts, or Catholic theology. While the author acknowledges that some have investigated patristic authors in Shakespeare, he omits those who have noted parallels between Shakespeare and Aquinas both from his discussion and the bibliography (there have been decades of such investigation, Beauregard is the most recent). Recent work on Shakespeare's biography and Catholic family is also omitted (the Lancastrian Shakespeare does make it into the bibliography but not the text). Sometimes it isn't clear whether distortions are mistakes or deliberate: the author (p.59) says that Shakespeare's father's "will" was "worded as a devotional book" and hidden in the eaves of his house. The document was actually the spirtual testiment of Saint Carlo Borromeo, distributed by Edmund Campion, signed to indicate adherence to Catholicism, and hidden because it was illegal and dangerous in the wake of Campion's 1581 execution (all bibilograpy on this is of course excluded). Since the author dismisses both elements of the supernatural (angels, devils, ghosts, witches etc.) and classicism as "non Christian," he manages (in one sentence!) to condemn all of medieval and Baroque art, medieval drama, and 250 years of Jesuit drama in one sentence. But the author, by concentrating on a Protestant approach to Shakespeare, obviously has a problem. If Protestant "ritual" and theology consists of reading scripture and singing hymns, how can religion in Shakespeare be investigated beyond looking for Biblical quotations (and again, the bibliography is incomplete) or searching for references to morality? And in fact, apparently in order to make his text book-length, a substantial portion of one chapter is devoted to Marxism, Feminism, Freud, and other "ideological" approaches to literary interpretation. What this has to do with religion in the age of Shakespeare is not clear, but if Marxism is included as a religion, why can't Catholics be included, too?

I will keep this review brief for your convenience and offer some key criticisms. This is a good introduction to the religious context of Shakespeare's time (the author defines what is meant by "religion" on page 58), but not without its weaknesses. The later chapters especially suffer from brevity and lack of in-depth analysis. The author gives only a very brief overview of Shakespeare's works in chapter 3 and again an extremely condensed overview of scholarly approaches to Shakespeare's works in chapter 5; the final paragraph of chapter five seemed an abrupt ending to the book, a random "let's finish the book" type of summary that left me scratching my head. By the time you get to the end of the book you will get the (and I assume correct) impression that the author knows more about the history of Christianity than he does about Shakespeare. In the end, the book is a great read for beginners, but it is not recommended for the specialist of either Christianity or Shakespeare.

Chapters 1 and 2 are the most solid sections of the book since they provide an excellent summary of the history of Christianity from its beginnings and through the Middle Ages right into Shakespeare's day (covering the Lollards, the early reformers, Henry's reformation, the Puritans, and Elizabethan reform among other key topics). Chapter 3 looks at "religion" in Shakespeare's works, covering the histories, comedies, tragedies, and romances, usually providing only one or two concise paragraphs per play.

Chapter 4 is a much appreciated overview of a few Shakespearean films discussing how various screenwriters have tried to adapt Shakespearean plays (Macbeth, Hamlet, King Lear, and Romeo and Juliet) onto the big screen. I enjoyed the uniqueness and freshness provided by this chapter (Shakespeare in text vs. Shakespeare on film), but judging by scholarly standards it reads more like a sophisticated book report than something written by a Shakespearean scholar. Then we come to the weakest chapter in the book, chapter 5, which briefly glances over nearly 400 years of scholarly approaches to Shakespeare. While we cannot really know Shakespeare's personal views on religion, we do know the massive impact religion (Catholicism, Protestantism, etc) had on his works. The book ends with a brief overview of 20th century approaches to religion in the plays as doctrine, spirituality, or simple ideology, but the author does not really go in-depth in his analysis of the secondary sources; the author usually only takes few quotes from the books of other critics every now and then, followed by quick summaries of their significance (the brevity might explain why the actual body of the text is only 150 pages long). The rest of the book offers a selection of a few good primary sources from Shakespeare's day (e.g. the poems of Robert Southwell and John Donne), but the author should have also added works by Shakespeare to this list.

Finally, there are some problems with factual accuracy. The final paragraph takes the often misquoted passage from the poet and playwright Ben Jonson and assumes that he was actually serious when attributing the phrase "he was not for an age but for all time" to Shakespeare. Anyone who knows anything about Jonson will know that he was actually talking about himself as the poet "for all time," not really about Shakespeare. The average reader will take Jonson's 1623 preface to Shakespeare's works at face value, but if you read Jonson's many other poems you'll see he did these kind of subtle things all the time--praising other poets when he was really praising himself. Not that Jonson's praise of Shakespeare is insincere, but that the poem is really an account of an ideal poet more resembling Jonson than Shakespeare. In sum, besides these few criticisms the book is a must read for those with little knowledge about Christianity and Shakespeare. The book is a clear and well-written introduction to the central religious controversies in Shakespeare's day and the impact of religion on Shakespeare's works. However, I give it 4 out of 5 since "Religion in the Age of Shakespeare" doesn't really offer anything new.