Tailer's Family - journeying!
Project - Warwickshire, Stratford-upon-Avon
No. 5 - 5: Exploring Stratford-upon-Avon.
The Garrick Inn, 25 High Street, Stratford-Upon-Avon.
ONE OF STRATFORDS OLDEST PUBS
The present building dates back to 1595
An Inn since the early 1700s it was renamed
after the Shakesperian actor. David Garrick
after he organised the famous Shakespeare
Jubilee here in Stratford in 1760
SHAKESPEARE AND THE FORMATION OF ENGLISH IDENTITY
by Ari Yampolsky
By the end of the eighteenth century, English national identity could be said to consist of two seemingly trivial preoccupations: the jealous appropriation of Shakespeare and, as T.S. Eliot wrote, "the taking of toast and tea." Citing these as constitutive of national identity may seem to miss the mark; but their significance is tied to the larger economic and social trends of this period. In the 1760's, England's status as a world power had shifted dramatically. With the acquisition of colonies abroad came an immense expansion of trade. At the same time, there was a tremendous upsurge of nationalism at home. Is it only a coincidence that (the English) Shakespeare was construed as the father of world literature par excellence at the same time that Britain fashioned herself as the mother of a global empire? The Stratford Jubilee of 1769 sought to celebrate the immortal Bard; instead, it reflected the manner in which Shakespeare had been appropriated and internalized by the English. Ironically, the result had little to do with Shakespeare and much more to do with forging a distinct English identity.
If nothing else, the Jubilee established one thing: while Shakespeare's reputation rested on his ubiquitous cultural presence and not the achievements of his works, his name was synonymous with what it was to be British. Whether one knew his plays or not did not matter. Nor did it matter that not a single Shakespeare play was performed (or even quoted) at the Jubilee. The congregants were gathered to celebrate their Englishness. No single person represented the scope of this national identity better than the best of their kind. There was a need for a national god and Shakespeare was installed to fill the vacancy. Garrick's Ode to Shakespeare spelled out the Bard's qualifications for national embodiment: his moral sensibility was unmatched, his spirit transcended bounds of time and space, his "truths" were universal and England's were the same.
The central problem of Shakespeare deification becomes evident here. We have, on the one hand, claims to universality, and on the other hand, a nationalist appropriation. How can Shakespeare be both timelessly universal and uniquely English? The details of the Jubilee highlight the fact that the national norm being worked out operated on exclusionary principles. In Garrick's immensely popular play The Jubilee (based on the actual event), Frenchman, Italians, Irishmen, and aristocrats are all excluded from and ridiculed at the festivities because they can not understand Shakespeare. They are all, as Michael Dobson writes, "beyond the pale" (Dobson, 220). English identity as figured by Garrick's appropriation of the Bard rejects even the people of Shakespeare's own rural province. Garrick's play is intended for metropolitan audiences, who constitute the socially eligible, and not the country yokels who are too stupid to understand the native words of their own kind. The jubilee claimed that Shakespeare transcended the limitations of the country lot he was born into; accordingly, the national Shakespeare can not be too closely associated with the specificity and indistinction of his birthplace, but must be made England's own, the god of our idolatry.
The success of the Jubilee's canonization relies on a gross cultural amnesia. Shakespeare had to be denied the connection to his texts, and England had to deny the existence of any area except London. Shakespeare had to be idealized (and literally forgotten) in order to fit the national past and the commercial middle-class present. The stage directions that conclude Garrick's play reflect the confusion that riddled Shakespeare's stage:
EVERY CHARACTER, TRAGIC AND COMIC, JOIN[S] IN THE CHORUS AND GO[ES] BACK, DURING WHICH THE GUNS FIRE, THE BELLS RING, ETC. ETC. AND THE AUDIENCE APPLAUD[S]. BRAVO JUBILEE! SHAKESPEARE FOREVER! THE END.
www.gouk.about.com/od/stratforduponavo…
To see Large: farm3.static.flickr.com/2777/4309715929_8a30eff601_b.jpg
Taken on
September 18, 2007 at 15:39 BST
Project - Warwickshire, Stratford-upon-Avon
No. 5 - 5: Exploring Stratford-upon-Avon.
The Garrick Inn, 25 High Street, Stratford-Upon-Avon.
ONE OF STRATFORDS OLDEST PUBS
The present building dates back to 1595
An Inn since the early 1700s it was renamed
after the Shakesperian actor. David Garrick
after he organised the famous Shakespeare
Jubilee here in Stratford in 1760
SHAKESPEARE AND THE FORMATION OF ENGLISH IDENTITY
by Ari Yampolsky
By the end of the eighteenth century, English national identity could be said to consist of two seemingly trivial preoccupations: the jealous appropriation of Shakespeare and, as T.S. Eliot wrote, "the taking of toast and tea." Citing these as constitutive of national identity may seem to miss the mark; but their significance is tied to the larger economic and social trends of this period. In the 1760's, England's status as a world power had shifted dramatically. With the acquisition of colonies abroad came an immense expansion of trade. At the same time, there was a tremendous upsurge of nationalism at home. Is it only a coincidence that (the English) Shakespeare was construed as the father of world literature par excellence at the same time that Britain fashioned herself as the mother of a global empire? The Stratford Jubilee of 1769 sought to celebrate the immortal Bard; instead, it reflected the manner in which Shakespeare had been appropriated and internalized by the English. Ironically, the result had little to do with Shakespeare and much more to do with forging a distinct English identity.
If nothing else, the Jubilee established one thing: while Shakespeare's reputation rested on his ubiquitous cultural presence and not the achievements of his works, his name was synonymous with what it was to be British. Whether one knew his plays or not did not matter. Nor did it matter that not a single Shakespeare play was performed (or even quoted) at the Jubilee. The congregants were gathered to celebrate their Englishness. No single person represented the scope of this national identity better than the best of their kind. There was a need for a national god and Shakespeare was installed to fill the vacancy. Garrick's Ode to Shakespeare spelled out the Bard's qualifications for national embodiment: his moral sensibility was unmatched, his spirit transcended bounds of time and space, his "truths" were universal and England's were the same.
The central problem of Shakespeare deification becomes evident here. We have, on the one hand, claims to universality, and on the other hand, a nationalist appropriation. How can Shakespeare be both timelessly universal and uniquely English? The details of the Jubilee highlight the fact that the national norm being worked out operated on exclusionary principles. In Garrick's immensely popular play The Jubilee (based on the actual event), Frenchman, Italians, Irishmen, and aristocrats are all excluded from and ridiculed at the festivities because they can not understand Shakespeare. They are all, as Michael Dobson writes, "beyond the pale" (Dobson, 220). English identity as figured by Garrick's appropriation of the Bard rejects even the people of Shakespeare's own rural province. Garrick's play is intended for metropolitan audiences, who constitute the socially eligible, and not the country yokels who are too stupid to understand the native words of their own kind. The jubilee claimed that Shakespeare transcended the limitations of the country lot he was born into; accordingly, the national Shakespeare can not be too closely associated with the specificity and indistinction of his birthplace, but must be made England's own, the god of our idolatry.
The success of the Jubilee's canonization relies on a gross cultural amnesia. Shakespeare had to be denied the connection to his texts, and England had to deny the existence of any area except London. Shakespeare had to be idealized (and literally forgotten) in order to fit the national past and the commercial middle-class present. The stage directions that conclude Garrick's play reflect the confusion that riddled Shakespeare's stage:
EVERY CHARACTER, TRAGIC AND COMIC, JOIN[S] IN THE CHORUS AND GO[ES] BACK, DURING WHICH THE GUNS FIRE, THE BELLS RING, ETC. ETC. AND THE AUDIENCE APPLAUD[S]. BRAVO JUBILEE! SHAKESPEARE FOREVER! THE END.
www.gouk.about.com/od/stratforduponavo…
To see Large: farm3.static.flickr.com/2777/4309715929_8a30eff601_b.jpg
Taken on
September 18, 2007 at 15:39 BST