There’s something interesting about framing the plot of a play as an argument. It implies certain amount of inherent conflict in the work. What is the argument? Thinking Man against the obligation of Revenge?
But of course it is not that simple if it’s even that at all.
Does this notion of argument come from rhetorical training and history?
In that Q2 talk from the Free Library
Lesser posits that the To Be or Not to Be speech is actually classic abstract rhetoric structure and content. What is the Central Question? To Be or Not to Be.
Point 1: Suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Counterpoint 1: Or take arms against a sea of trouble.
It is essentially an argument. Not really a soliloquy. It does not feature I at any point. It does not feature any of his actual circumstances. It does not ask the audience to solve it.
It is a very good argument, of course but an argument. Is a plot an argument?
Sometimes it is, yes.
