Will in the World

Stephen Greenblatt’s 2004 work Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare is another Shakespeare biography, but this one is different. In the realm of New Historicism, Greenblatt (who is also Harvard University’s John Cogan University Professor of Humanities) delves beyond just the bare bones facts that are known of Shakespeare’s life. He presents no new information, no recent discoveries about the famous playwright’s mysterious life, but rather builds off of the agreed-upon basic facts regarding his upbringing and career. Greenblatt’s mission in this novel is not solely to educate the audience about Shakespeare’s biological background, but also to explore why and how his background affected his legendary writing.

Shakespeare, born in April of 1564, always had an interest in the arts. The first chapter begins with an imagining of Shakespeare’s days as a secondary school student. It is relatively known that Shakespeare read and sometimes acted in Latin comedies or plays; Greenblatt considers if this influenced the writing of Comedy of Errors. This first chapter explores how Shakespeare’s early youth, especially in relation to theatre, affected his literature. Greenblatt proposes that the actor troupes that traveled through town subconsciously influenced the wide audience that Shakespeare would eventually write for, as they often put on morality plays that related to authentic people and everyday life, and he even suggests that a visit to town made by Queen Elizabeth further influenced his vision for entertainment. Although the beginning of the biography focuses on Shakespeare’s childhood, it doesn’t begin to center on his personal, familial relationships until the following chapter. Shakespeare’s father John was a glove maker who traded wool as a side gig, both of which made him prosperous.

This wealth did not last for long past Shakespeare’s youth, though, as his father lost much of his fortune and status very fast, although it is unknown why. Because of the heavy presence of alcohol in his plays, Greenblatt theorizes that this loss was a result of alcoholism. Here, Greenblatt proposes a concept: Shakespeare was fixated on the “dream of restoration” in his work because he wished his father’s lifestyle could be restored in the same way his characters’ lives often are.



Greenblatt focuses on Shakespeare’s relationship with his mother next, as he feels that was the source of major conflict and tension in their household. He uses historical context regarding the religious atmosphere at the time (Catholic vs. Protestant) to deduce that faith was the source of turmoil between Shakespeare’s parents. He believes that Shakespeare’s mother was Catholic and not afraid to practice it publicly, but his father disagreed.

The author continues to build off of the notion that religion was a major influence in Shakespeare’s life. He believes that Shakespeare got more of a professional beginning in acting when he was a schoolmaster for Catholic families, an experience that may have even led him to encountering Edmund Campion, an infamous missionary, before his execution. He also may have gotten his start with the Queen’s Men in Stratford in 1587.

Greenblatt repeatedly addresses what he already knows most readers will criticize, and that is the unconfirmed nature of what he is proposing and the deep speculation he gets into. He does not claim that any of this is fact, but rather views it as an opportunity to explore the “what ifs” and “maybes” that we may never truly know. Although many historians agree that Shakespeare did in fact marry a pregnant Anne Hathaway in 1582 (he was 18, and she was 26), some of Greenblatt’s deductions are skeptical. He feels that Shakespeare did not have a happy marriage with his wife for several reasons: for one, she gave birth to an older daughter, Susanna, and two twins, Hamnet and Judith, but Hamnet tragically passed away at the age of 11. Secondly, after Shakespeare’s own death in 1616, it was discovered that he only left his “second best bed” to his wife in his will. Greenblatt interprets this as a rocky situation, likely as a result of the marriage Shakespeare witnessed growing up; therefore, he concludes, Shakespeare often wrote about unhappy couples in his plays because he felt marriage tarnished love.



Shakespeare’s venture to London ultimately became the inspiration for the majority of his plays because of its dangerous and city-like feel. He encountered a lot of violent and gruesome events and experiences in his time in London, like the execution of criminals and the presence of whorehouses. Greenblatt speculates that this very dangerous nature is what led Shakespeare to be so mysterious and private, in turn causing the lack of information we have about him today.

At the same time, the theatre was considered to be against moral code. Religious leaders attempted to close down all of the theatres, but the arts fought back. In order to keep up demand and to keep customers, theatres needed a large volume of plays constantly showing. Therefore, the market was blossoming, and an opening may have appeared for a playwright, jumpstarting Shakespeare’s quickly successful career. Meanwhile, Shakespeare continued to draw inspiration from the wildly popular Christopher Marlowe (which, Greenblatt claims, is most evident in his play Henry VI). Despite this admiration, Shakespeare - for some unknown reason - began to have a rivalry with the University Wits, a group of poets that Marlowe was part of. This rivalry sparked even more of Shakespeare’s success, however, as he made parodies based off of their work and based one of his most popular characters, Falstaff, after member Robert Greene.

Greenblatt takes the latter half of the biography to analyze Shakespeare’s sonnets rather than his plays. He speculates that the sonnets were written for a very small audience, such as the Earl of Southhampton. Greenblatt also considers the fact that he wrote for such a wealthy person because the theatres were being disputed. Religion also once again comes to the forefront at the end of the book, as Greenblatt analyzes the relationship between Marlowe’s Jewish play The Jew of Malta with Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. Shakespeare undoubtedly features a much-hated Jewish character in his play, but he tries to make him slightly more human than Marlowe’s Jewish character by basing him off of Rodrigo Lopez. Lopez, a physician to the Queen, maintained his “innocence” from Judaism up until his death, and Shakespeare’s character Shylock received similar sympathy from his audience.



Greenblatt then delves into the basis for the psychological trauma Shakespeare’s characters endure in his more popular tragedies. The 1600 play Hamlet, he says, had to have been derived from the pain that Shakespeare felt after the loss of his son Hamnet in 1596. He explores how each of his plays mirrored some aspect that we know is true regarding Shakespeare’s life. For example, the 1604 play King Lear conveyed a lot of stress and anxiety about moving down the totem pole and losing one’s status, which parallels with his grappling about retirement. Here, the “dream of restoration” comes into play yet again.