The Pillar of the World

In tracing the development of Shakespeare's growing concern with the conflict between public and private values Mr. Markels finds that the traditional doctrine of order by which the history plays idealize political stability as an end in itself is transcended in <i>Antony and Cleopatra.</i> The problematic relation of the individual ruler to the society he rules as seen particularly in <i>Julius Caesar</i> and <i>King Lear</i> where the effects of self-dramatization magnify the disparity between the public and the private realm is resolved in <i>Antony and Cleopatra</i> where the claims of both realms are reconciled and the ideal of stability is transformed from the <i>raison d'être</i> of human action into its mere <i>donnée.</i> Mr. Markels points out that the often noted discontinuities in the action of Antony and Cleopatra-and indeed even in the syntax of the dialogue itself-far from needing to be resolved and explained away are intrinsic to the conflict portrayed. Mr. Markels suggests that Cleopatra's decision to join her lover in death indicates her ultimate ability to share Antony's vision. It is on the basis of this treatment of death as apotheosis-as opposed to mere catastrophe or as in <i>King Lear</i> final release from the demands of existence-that <i>Antony and Cleopatra</i> can be said to exemplify in a particularly impressive way that transition from a political to an ethical concern that distinguishes Shakespeare's most mature creations.<b>Julian Markels</b> is professor of English at the Ohio State University.