Ode to the Sodden Brothel
Before we begin I must say that Shakespeare (and whoever might have written Pericles) is a true master of describing female anatomy in the most hideous way possible. Why are there no criticisms written on this? I think it’s absolutely fabulous.
Moving on to Benjamin and Pericles—I don’t have much to say. Gower is the storyteller. I think it would be easy to make the case that everything seen (or read) is done so through him; even though he only appears at the beginning of the acts it is his story. It’s strange to view Pericles through Walter Benjamin’s essay “The Storyteller” because I don’t view Pericles as that great of an epic. I liked it, I think it might be the one I have most enjoyed reading thus far, but it doesn’t fit into Benjamin’s essay really. What wisdom does it impart? That incest is bad? Check. Don’t try to kill the kid you’re supposed to take care of? Check. You can always talk your way out of “working” by ministering in a brothel? Hm, not so sure about that one.
But perhaps Pericles could be looked at as an example of a story lacking all those qualities Benjamin is discussing. Let’s focus on the experiences related by Pericles and decide if they are justly rendered.
All aspects of the play are fairly clear; in fact, if it is truly written by Shakespeare it certainly is the least layered of all of his plays. Were it written at the beginning of his career I could understand this—the guy’s just starting out, he hasn’t hit is stride yet and the words just don’t quite flow so easily. But this is placed near the end. So how can Pericles be written by Shakespeare, at the end of his career, and be so amazingly different from the other plays? I would say perhaps he got tired of hiding his meanings, but The Tempest is nothing if not elusive. So where does that leave us? Perhaps it was written on a dare? Someone got tired of Shakespeare always hiding the incest and double dog dared him to write it clear out? Seems like as good of an idea as any. No matter the man’s talent he was human (and I would say egotistical) so the idea of Shakespeare writing Pericles on a dare doesn’t particularly surprise me.
So we will assume (because it’s late and I’m tired) that Shakespeare wrote Pericles. Smarter people than I have sat around and discussed this quite snottily and I’m happy to go with their decision. How does it rank as storytelling? I think for pure enjoyment value, it’s right near the top. No one in this play is overly melancholy, the gender roles are by far the easiest to digest (minus Marina being married at 14 to a man she met in a brothel, but concessions must be made) and I like most all of the characters. Seems like a good story to me. But what about the wisdom? What is it imparting to the reader? After arguing criticism should cover more of these topics last week why is Pericles the first play to talk about?
Honestly, it seems like Shakespeare’s attempt at a blockbuster. Not a whole lot of substance, but we’ve got action, romance, dirty sex, people dying, intrigue—the whole lot. It’s even got catchy music in between acts sung by Gower. But I think maybe, this play (and Gower in particular) does fit Benjamin’s definition of a good story or storyteller. On page 91 Benjamin says, “The storytelling that thrives for a long time in the milieu of work…is itself an artisan form of communication…It does not aim to convey the pure essence of the thing, like information or a report. It sinks the thing into the life of the storyteller, in order to bring it out of him again.” No one’s conveying particularly sought after wisdom with Pericles but it does sink into one’s life. It’s not a play you forget and it is one you want to talk about soon after reading it. Hamlet might be more dense and ripe for literary discussion, but it’s Pericles that makes you go “oh, that’s not right.” Then you have to go verify with everyone else, yes, incest is wrong, no, none of us have ever tossed our spouse overboard because we neglected to check for a pulse.
What greater purpose for a story than for it to stay in people’s minds? To be remembered and told again? A person loses a bit of her purity after reading Pericles, much like watching Deliverance, and you don’t ever get to be the same person after that you were before. Nothing’s hidden, meaning doesn’t have to be sought after, but like herpes it gets inside you and doesn’t go away (no, I don’t have herpes).
I suppose that could be argued to be the hidden genius of this play. I still maintain, though, that he wrote it on a dare.
