Thesis abstract:

The differences in the early quarto and folio texts of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, Othello, and King Lear allow for both minor and substantial variations in structure, storyline, characterisation, line distribution, and stage directions, all of which inevitably affect the ethical implications of each play. What does the moral philosophy of Romeo and Juliet look like if there is no prologue (as in the Folio edition) to tell us that it is predestined to end tragically? What of the differences in Hamlet’s famous soliloquy if his agonising over ‘to be or not to be’ is noticeably Christianised, more morally lucid and with much less fear of the afterlife in Q1? How does it affect Othello and Desdemona’s relationship when the Folio copy of Othello censors religious language, expunging mentions of the Christian deities and faith? And how are we to view King Lear, morally, if an early Q1 version of the play was titled a more feminised and family-focused King Lear and his Three Daughters, emphasising not a narrow tragedy consisting of only one man but also his failed duty to his family?

This thesis explores how even minor variations can change the way we characterise the moral vision of Shakespeare’s plays, developing an account of literature’s relation to morality by focusing on the tragic genre’s in-built ethical quotient. A close analysis of specific variances seen across the early Q/F texts will advance philosophical-literary readings of familiar texts