Jesting in Earnest in Love’s Labour’s Lost
Berowne’s feeble defense, when challenged by the King, that his vow to fast and remain celibate for three years at the court of Navarre was made “in jest” (I.i.54) ushers in a pattern of authorial obfuscation concerning whether characters’ statements are to be taken at face value or as jokes. Though...
Guardado en:
| Publicado en: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare, |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Lenguaje: | Anglais |
| Publicado: |
Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare
2015
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Sumario: | Berowne’s feeble defense, when challenged by the King, that his vow to fast and remain celibate for three years at the court of Navarre was made “in jest” (I.i.54) ushers in a pattern of authorial obfuscation concerning whether characters’ statements are to be taken at face value or as jokes. Though Shakespeare withholds conclusive textual evidence, such indeterminacies cannot easily be shrugged off as “hors-texte”, as they are given prominence in the play by providing backbone to the plot, which can broadly be read as the women’s attempt to gauge the young men’s seriousness and reliability, and also through alignment with contemporary legal debates around the issues of criminal intention and equity. With its invocation of courtroom hermeneutics, the play suggests that performative reconstruction is the key to establishing a fictional speaker’s intention. Such reconstruction, in the playhouse as in the courtroom, implies a projection of new standards onto an old text. Ultimately, then, Love’s Labour’s Lost’s dubious jests highlight the contigency of moral values, and their fragility. |
|---|