Comparison Of A Midsummer Night's Dream And Henry V

1671 Words4 Pages

Breaking the fourth wall, or, penetrating the audience’s suspension of disbelief, demonstrates the way that actors and playwrights throughout the ages have honed the power of literature. Speaking directly to the audience as a way to encourage a realistic interpretation, despite physical accuracy or on stage representation, creates a mindset that transforms the play into an objective work of art, and a lens through which the audience can view themselves and the world around them. The specific rhetorical strategies that Shakespeare uses in both Puck’s epilogue in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and the Chorus’ speeches in Henry V, act to place the imaginative labor of realistic interpretation onto the audience, while encouraging appreciation for both …show more content…

“If we shadows have offended, think but this an all is mended” (1-2) is a cleverly written line that, much like the prologue in Henry V, places the interpretive responsibility on the audience. Simply by thinking, they are able to alter their perception of the play’s message and adjust their feelings towards it, increasing their sense of power over their own theatrical experience. The specific use of the word “Slumbered,” and the depiction of the play as an actual dream (3), suggests that the entire play has taken place within the minds of the audience. To say that it is “No more yielding but a dream” (6) implies that the play itself has no agency without the participation of the audience; so while it functions as a dream, the interpretation and enjoyment is almost entirely up to the …show more content…

These plays are presented as slightly distorted mirrors of reality, so by having audiences invest themselves so deeply in the understanding of the literature, they are likely to gain a greater understanding of themselves and the worlds they live in. By pushing the imaginative burden onto the audience, Shakespeare is able to make commentary on human nature and human history without being held responsible for its implications. Because the audience is encouraged to fully embrace their role in the production, any commentary and critique is aimed towards themselves and their inability to effectively understand, resulting in an increased appreciation for Shakespeare himself, and the complexity of literature as an art

Open Document