Just How Serious was Shakespeare?

     In Mr. Vode's Junior English class, class discussions on Othello were intensely, perhaps even unnecessarily, spiritual.  I enjoyed learning of connections between "the light entering the darkness" in Luke's Gospel and Othello's tendency toward that same spiritual light, as well as analyzing Desdemona's "Christ impulses." Reading Shakespeare as literary genius whose works overflowed with deep meaning and symbolism made his works blend well with others in the junior year curriculum, and thus, more palatable and approachable.
       However, when watching Trinculo and Stephano in the 2010 film version of the play, I came to see Shakespeare's definite attempts to appeal to the illiterate and uneducated. Seeing Trinculo as played by Russel Brand, a famous comedian I had known prior to seeing the film, invalidated my view of Shakespeare as only a brooding and somber scholar. The sheer idiocy of the characters' actions, their garish clothing, and their general lack of composure and intelligence, along with absurd situation in which Stephano discovers Trinculo (hiding under a small sheet alongside Caliban, who believes he is a spirit, while Trinculo believes Caliban is dead) had no place in my current conception of Shakespeare, yet they were undoubtedly supported by the text.

     Trinculo's stupidity and Stephano's drunkenness showed me Shakespeare sought to entertain both the literary critic and the common playgoer of his time. In fact, I have found that many scenes that I previously regarded as solemn and contemplative, such as Hamlet's encounter with Yorick's skull, Iago's successful attempts to alarm Brabantio that "an old black ram is tupping your white ewe," and even Romeo and Juliet's grandiose expressions of love, also have comedic aspects to them. I even consider that possibility that Shakespeare intended them to be entirely comedic, and we twenty-first century readers merely impose an interloping seriousness to his words.