Spoiler alert: Everyone dies. Except when they don't. But the title character does. Except when they don't.

The is the second part of my two part series on how genre applies to Shakespearean drama. (If you haven't listened to the previous episode on comedy and tragicomedy, you might want to check that out first.)

When it comes to tragedies, is it fair to say that those are the plays where everyone dies and leaves it at that? Did Aristotle really have all the answers when it comes to what playwrights were doing centuries later? Is it fair to say that nobody understands what Troilus and Cressida is doing?

We're going to get into it!

Stick around for a critical look at the history plays including why they used to have cooler titles, why Richard III is a cool character, and why we should maybe give these plays a tad more credit.

Further Reading

The First Folio (see more about the First Folio and the infamous catalogue page)

Aristotle's Poetics

Joyce Carol Oates, "The Tragedy of Existence: Shakespeare's 'Troilus and Cressida'"

The New Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare, particularly the chapters:

“Shakespeare’s tragedies” by Michael Neill

“Shakespeare’s English history plays” by Ton Hoenselaars

The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare by Russ McDonald, particularly the chapter:

“Theater à la Mode: Shakespeare and the Kinds of Drama” and accompanying primary documents

Some Shakespearean tragedies:

Hamlet

Romeo and Juliet

Troilus and Cressida

And some Shakespearean histories:

Richard III

Henry IV, part 1 and Henry IV, part 2

Richard II

Credit where credit is due

Art by ⁠Halie Branson⁠

Music recording by ⁠josdvg⁠