You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Dr. Edgar is a practicing psychiatrist with literary interests and has lectured on the history of medicine. The essence of this book formed his master's thesis in English literature at Wayne State University in the 1930's, when portions of it also appeared in the periodical literature. There is much new material in this published version, in particular sections dealing with the psychoanalytic approach to Hamlet and Lear.
It is not his intention to add 'to the ever-increasing deluge of Shakespearean criticism'. He visualizes 'the spirit of Shakespeare' laughing 'hilariously up his sleeve' at 'the mountainous literature' his plays have already produced. On the contrary, he hopes to stem the tide by saving his hero from false adulation. In his own words, 'by demolishing the foundations of bardolatry in the fields of medicine and psychiatry, we fervently hope to diminish the possible future flow of commentary in this area of Shakespearean criticism'. This he has attempted to do by setting Shakespeare's medical lore in the background of his time. From Dr. Edgar's treatment Shakespeare emerges not 'an all-pervading, all-comprehensive, all-knowing God-man' (sic), but a superbly gifted Elizabethan playwright who merely used the knowledge available to the intelligent layman of his day.
There is no doubt much shoddy Shakespearean scholarship, and doctors who knew too little about Elizabethan drama and civilization as well as literary critics who were insufficiently informed in medical history, have contributed largely to the lore. The fault has been chiefly in the direction of idolatry, crediting Shakespeare with insights and foresights he did not and probably could not possess. Did