Harvard Shakespeare scholar Stephen Greenblatt explores a fascinating paradox: the playwright who gave us history's greatest love stories never depicted a single happy marriage. This revealing interview uncovers how Shakespeare's own troubled marriage shaped his bleak yet passionate view of romance, offering surprising insights for modern relationships.

Key Takeaways

• Shakespeare's own marriage to Anne Hathaway appears to have been unhappy, influencing his dramatic portrayals of love and relationships.
• The playwright consistently depicts passionate courtship but avoids showing the aftermath of marriage in his comedies.
• Shakespeare's tragedies reveal his belief that men, not women, are typically the source of marital dysfunction and violence.
• The sonnets to the Earl of Southampton suggest romantic relationships beyond his marriage, reflecting broader acceptance of same-sex intimacy in Elizabethan times.
• Shakespeare's message isn't to avoid passionate love, but rather to embrace it fully without overthinking the long-term consequences.
• The playwright viewed marriage as inevitably heading into "difficult waters," with only the extremely lucky avoiding relationship troubles.
• Romeo and Juliet stands as Shakespeare's rare example of genuine, non-fungible love, distinguished by extraordinary poetry that elevates it to mythic status.
• Macbeth and Lady Macbeth represent Shakespeare's most successful long-term marriage, built on intimate sharing of secrets and mutual conspiracy.

Timeline Overview

00:00 - 02:27 - Introduction - Exploring the paradox of Shakespeare as the great love playwright who never wrote happy marriages, setting up the central question about what this reveals.

02:27 - 09:04 - Shakespeare's Bad Marriage - Evidence from biographical details, wills, and domestic arrangements suggesting Shakespeare's unhappy marriage to Anne Hathaway shaped his artistic perspective.

09:04 - 25:40 - Why Shakespeare Didn't Write Good Marriages - Analysis of how Shakespeare depicts passionate courtship but avoids showing marital aftermath, with rare exceptions like Macbeth.

25:40 - 28:56 - Shakespeare and Southampton - Examination of the romantic sonnets to the Earl of Southampton and their implications for understanding Elizabethan attitudes toward same-sex relationships.

28:56 - End - Shakespeare Leaving his Family - Discussion of the ethical implications of Shakespeare's geographical separation from his family and whether artistic genius justifies personal choices.

Shakespeare's Bad Marriage

The evidence for Shakespeare's troubled marriage paints a compelling picture. When eighteen-year-old William married twenty-six-year-old Anne Hathaway, they had three children in quick succession, then no more. This pattern was highly unusual for Elizabethan families, who typically had as many children as possible given high mortality rates.

Shakespeare never brought his family to London when he moved there for his career. Documentary evidence from wills and other sources shows that theater people overwhelmingly relocated their families when they moved to London. Shakespeare didn't follow this pattern.

His famous sonnets, "among the most remarkable love poems ever written," were addressed to someone else entirely—not to Anne Hathaway. In his will, Shakespeare initially left nothing to his wife and used no terms of endearment, contrasting sharply with other wills of the period that address "dearest wife" or "beloved spouse."

The one gesture he made was practical rather than romantic: "to my wife Anne, the second best bed." While some scholars argue this was actually the marital bed they preferred, Greenblatt notes the striking absence of affectionate language from this "profoundly eloquent man."

Yet Shakespeare wasn't abandoning his family entirely. He continuously sent money back to Stratford, purchasing real estate and eventually buying "the second best house in Stratford" for his wife and parents.

Why Shakespeare Didn't Write Good Marriages

Shakespeare's comedies end in marriage, not because he believed in marital happiness, but because that's where the story must stop. As Greenblatt observes, "Shakespeare almost never represents the aftermath" of these unions, and for good reason.

Consider the mismatched couples: the witty Rosaline married to the dim Orlando, the complex Viola married to the neurotic Orsino, or the gifted Portia married to Bassanio. "What would it be like" to actually live these marriages? Shakespeare avoids answering.

When he does show established marriages, they're typically disasters. Brutus won't share intimate thoughts with Portia. Leontes wrongly accuses Hermione. Othello literally kills Desdemona. The pattern is unmistakable.

Western European literature before the 16th century lacked traditions of representing "long-term happy affectionate marriages." This changed later with Puritanism, which introduced the radical idea that "you should actually love your wife." But Shakespeare wrote before this shift.

The playwright's message isn't to avoid passionate love. Rather, it's "don't overthink it, enjoy." These overwhelming feelings come at you whether you want them or not. "You have no choice but to submit to it."

However, there's an important exception to Shakespeare's pattern of failed marriages. Macbeth and Lady Macbeth represent "probably the most interesting long-term marriage that Shakespeare is able to represent." They share intimate secrets, and Macbeth calls his wife "dearest chuck"—rare endearment in Shakespeare's married couples. Their marriage only disintegrates under the weight of their crimes.

Shakespeare and Southampton

The sonnets to the Earl of Southampton reveal another dimension of Shakespeare's understanding of love. Lines like "I love you so that I in your sweet thoughts would be forgot" go far beyond conventional male friendship.

Greenblatt argues there was "overwhelming something romantic going on." The claim that this was merely conventional correspondence is "absurd." The Elizabethan world allowed much more "ease about male physical contact" than post-Victorian society.

Men slept in the same beds at universities, teachers with students. While sodomy remained officially punishable by death, prosecutions were virtually nonexistent. "They would have had to have done away with a lot of people in the society."

This wasn't unique to Shakespeare. French essayist Montaigne's "most intimate and highly eroticized relationship" was with his male friend. Even King James wrote similarly romantic letters to his lover Buckingham.

Shakespeare Leaving his Family

Shakespeare's geographical separation from his family raises ethical questions about artistic duty versus family obligation. At nineteen, he essentially left Stratford for London, pursuing his theatrical career while his wife and children remained behind.

Greenblatt resists the "abandon narrative," noting that Shakespeare sent money and his family wasn't destitute. They eventually lived in Stratford's second-best house. Modern academics often live thousands of miles from family due to career demands.

The deeper question is whether artistic genius justifies personal choices. Greenblatt rejects the idea that great artists must be moral exemplars. "There is no direct coordination between being a great poet and being a role model for in every way."

Ben Jonson once claimed "the best poet is the best man," but Greenblatt calls this "absurd." If we required moral perfection from artists, "we'd be in terrible trouble actually in terms of most of our artists."

Shakespeare "lived the life he needed to live." Rather than becoming a glover in Stratford, "thank heavens he fulfilled this deep craving inside him."

What's Next?

Share your thoughts on Shakespeare's view of love—does passionate romance inevitably fade, or can it transform into lasting partnership? Download our complete analysis of Shakespeare's most complex relationships.

Shakespeare's bleak yet passionate view of love offers no easy answers for modern relationships, but perhaps that's precisely the point—great art illuminates experience rather than providing simple solutions. His legacy reminds us that even the most eloquent voices on love struggled with its contradictions in their own lives.