In an article illustrative of the “turn to
religion” in Shakespeare studies, Ken Jackson presents Timon of Athens (1605-6) as a meditation on religious passion.
Timon’s spiritual quest, Jackson argues, is figured forth in his hubristic
desire to achieve the impossibility of true beneficence—to give gifts that
miraculously escape the logic of exchange and reciprocity. Timon’s tragic
nobility consists largely in this pursuit of selfless beneficence that none but
Christ may truly achieve. Whereas Jackson reads Timon primarily through the lens of late Derridean philosophy, I
rethink (and build upon) his argument by attending more closely to material
experiences of the gift depicted in Timon,
and, further, how such experiences undermine philosophies of gift-giving set
out in Reformation theology.
As part of its overall attack on
works-righteousness, the Reformation placed special emphasis on the need to
forget oneself in the act of giving, to recognize oneself as merely a conduit
through which divine beneficence flows in a larger cosmic cycle. I argue that
Timon can never fully achieve this ethic of selfless giving because his
beneficence is underwritten by usury agreements that memorialize his name. The
second half of the play, however, juxtaposes such human dilemmas with a vision
of nature as a true gift that appears without a demand for reciprocation. Through
such contrasts, the play suggests that the rise of a credit economy alienates
would-be givers from participating in larger ecological, cosmic, and divine
cycles of beneficence.
Works Cited
Bailey, Amanda. “Timon of Athens, Forms of Payback, and
the Genre of Debt.” English Literary
Renaissance 41 (2011): 375-400.
Ben-Amos, Ilana
Krausman. The Culture of Giving: Informal
Support and Gift Exchange in Early Modern England. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,
2011.
Hawkes, David. Idols of the Marketplace: Idolatry and
Commodity Fetishism in English Literature, 1580-1680. New York: Palgrave,
2001.
Jackson, Ken.
“‘One Wish’ or the Possibility of the Impossible: Derrida, the Gift, and the
God of Timon of Athens.” Shakespeare Quarterly 52.1 (2001):
34-66.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.