A Comparative Study of Poetic Rhythms in the Literatures of Shakespeare and Srimanta Sankardeva

Abstract

Poetic rhythm is not merely a formal feature of verse but also a reflection of cultural consciousness, aesthetic intention, and social communication. This paper undertakes brief study of the poetic rhythms of William Shakespeare (1564–1616) and Srimanta Sankardeva (1449–1568), two seminal figures in world literature who, though separated by geography and context, both revolutionized literary traditions. Shakespeare, working in Elizabethan England, utilized iambic pentameter and blank verse to explore the complexity of human psychology and dramatic dialogue. Sankardeva, operating in medieval Assam, employed lyrical Borgeet and rhythmic narrative poetry to democratize spirituality and mobilize cultural identity under the Neo-Vaishnavite movement. By analyzing their rhythmic structures, performative functions, and socio-psychological implications, this study reveals how rhythm served not only as an artistic device but also as a vehicle of cultural transformation.

Introduction

Core Thesis

Rhythm in poetry is not merely aesthetic—it functions as a cultural, psychological, and performative force. This study compares how Shakespeare (Elizabethan England) and Sankardeva (Neo-Vaishnavite Assam) used rhythm to reflect their distinct worldviews, yet both harnessed it to engage audiences deeply and shape societal values.

Objectives

1. Analyze rhythmic techniques in Shakespeare and Sankardeva’s works.

2. Explore how rhythm influenced performance and audience reception.

3. Assess the social and psychological functions of rhythm in their cultural contexts.

4. Compare their rhythmic styles and innovations.

5. Understand rhythm’s role in their lasting cultural legacies.

Methodology

• Comparative literary analysis using formalist, cultural, and socio-psychological approaches.

• Primary texts: Shakespeare’s plays and sonnets; Sankardeva’s Borgeet, Kirtan-ghosha, Ankiya Naat.

• Analytical tools: Metrical analysis, performance theory, audience psychology.

Literature Review

• Shakespeare: Widely studied for his iambic pentameter and its psychological realism (Abrams, Greenblatt).

• Sankardeva: Studied mainly in Assamese scholarship; rhythm used for devotional accessibility and social reform (Neog, Sharma).

• Gap: Few cross-cultural rhythm studies—this research bridges that gap.

Cultural Contexts

• Shakespeare: Renaissance, humanism, individual psychology, theatrical drama.

• Sankardeva: Bhakti movement in Assam, anti-caste egalitarianism, oral worship traditions.

Rhythmic Techniques

???? Shakespeare

• Main rhythm: Iambic pentameter (10 syllables, unstressed-stressed).

• Forms:

  • Blank verse (unrhymed)

  • Rhymed couplets (sonnets, scene closings)

  • Variations: trochaic, spondaic, prose (for emotional effect or character contrast)

• Function:

  • Reflect psychological states (e.g., Hamlet’s indecision)

  • Control pacing and dramatic tension

  • Bridge social classes via speech variation

???? Sankardeva

• Rhythms: Based on taala (beats) and raga (melody); syllabic and musical rather than metrical.

• Forms:

  • Borgeet: devotional songs using folk and classical rhythm cycles (e.g., Ekat?l, Chout?l).

  • Ankiya Naat: rhythmic dialogue in simple chhandas for oral performance.

  • Influence from folk traditions like Ojapali and Kirtan.

• Function:

  • Facilitate communal worship (Nama-Prasanga)

  • Break caste boundaries through accessible rhythm

  • Create meditative, spiritual atmosphere

Comparative Analysis

Findings & Discussion

1. Common Ground: Rhythm as a tool for audience engagement, emotional resonance, and cultural cohesion.

2. Key Differences:

   • Shakespeare: rhythm dissects individual psyche.

   • Sankardeva: rhythm unites collective spirit.

3. Critical Insight: Rhythm reflects and reinforces the dominant cultural values—humanist individualism vs. devotional inclusivity.

4. Aesthetic Role: Rhythm shaped both psychological realism (Shakespeare) and spiritual transcendence (Sankardeva).

5. Performative Role: From Globe Theatre to Naamghar (prayer hall), rhythm was central to audience experience.

Contemporary Relevance

• Shakespeare’s rhythmic innovations continue to inform global drama and literature.

• Sankardeva’s rhythmic traditions remain central to Assamese devotional culture.

• Comparative rhythm studies offer insights into how local cultural expressions connect to universal human experiences.

Conclusion

Shakespeare and Sankardeva, despite geographical and cultural distance, demonstrate the transformative potential of poetic rhythm. For Shakespeare, rhythm dramatized human psychology; for Sankardeva, it sacralised collective devotion. A comparative lens underscores rhythm’s dual capacity: as a literary aesthetic and as a cultural force. Both legacies remind us that poetry’s power lies not only in words but in the rhythmic pulse that binds human beings to emotion, identity, and community.

References

[1] Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Harcourt Brace, 1999. [2] Barpujari, H.K. The Comprehensive History of Assam. Publication Board Assam, 1990. [3] Dimock, Edward C. The Place of the Hidden Moon. University of Chicago Press, 1966. [4] Greenblatt, Stephen. Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare. Norton, 2004. [5] Neog, Maheswar. Early History of the Vai??ava Faith and Movement in Assam. Motilal Banarsidass, 1980. [6] Sharma, Chandan Kumar. “Religion and Social Change: Neo-Vaishnavite Movement in Assam.” Indian Sociological Review, 2005. [7] Wells, Stanley, and Gary Taylor. William Shakespeare: A Textual Companion. Clarendon Press, 1987.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Santanu Bhargav. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.