In this column, you cite a line from Richard III of Shakespeare, as an example of Shakespeare’s somewhat unclear writing. The quote is:
The evil Richard (R3) says in earshot of the too-smart-for-his-own-good prince (P): So wise so young, they say do never live long. P: What say you, uncle? R3: I say, without characters, fame lives long. [Aside.] Thus, like the formal Vice, Iniquity, I moralize two meanings in one word.
Richard is punning on characters, but good luck trying to figure out the joke. I’ve seen the two meanings of the word glossed as (1) letters/writing/history (i.e., fame endures without written records) and (2) people/the soon-to-die prince and his brother (i.e., with the boys dispatched, Richard’s fame will endure). It’s hard to believe anyone in the audience understood this labored wordplay on first hearing it. What’s more, the line doesn’t make sense in the context of the play. Richard is trying to cover an ominous remark with one that, being mystifying, is even more ominous and thus likely to alarm the prince.
Not that I’m a big fan of the bard, but this line at least seems understandable with a slightly different spin. The “character” meant here is personality, and the meaning (as far as I can see it) is that without affectation, a person can earn well-deserved and therefore long-lasting fame. It’s a pithy and moralistic statement, which is exactly the type of thing that a person might pretend to have muttered to cover up something that was darkly apropos.
Repairing broken URL: What’s so great about Shakespeare?