Does Tragedy Invariably Conform to a Conservative Perspective on Gender Relations - Essay Example

?Does Tragedy invariably conform to a conservative perspective on gender relations, or can it work to bring these into question? Introduction Literature is littered with tragic stories, more so in the writings of William Shakespeare than any other author. Such tragic stories mostly relate to romantic tragedies, flawed characters, and tragedy stemming from various unfortunate events. Based on Shakespeare’s stories, tragedy can also relate to both genders and their relationship with each other. Women are however often the subject of tragedy, being an instigator or sometimes the party meeting the unfortunate demise. This essay shall determine whether or not tragedy invariably conforms to a conservative perspective on gender relations, or whether it can work towards bringing these into question. It shall draw mostly on Shakespeare’s King Lear and Marlow’s Dr. Faustus in order to provide clear and more specific examples and insights into the issue being studied. Body Tragedy can trigger different reactions from different people regardless of gender. In some ways though, the differences are observed in terms of whether tragedy matches the conservative expectations relating to gender relations. Shakespeare’s female characters in his tragedies grow as characters as the stories and tragedies also unfold (Laura, 2002). In King Lear, Regan and Goneril work with each other, but more as anti-heroines. Goneril seems to be the more dominant personality, with her character based on the lack of sympathy towards other people, and in so many ways, such quality made her even more tragic. Although a historical viewpoint of the social interactions in 16th century England veers away from Shakespeare’s themes, including how his themes are still being evaluated centuries following their initial publication, this is not because of concerns about the 16th century (Callaghan, 1989). It is important to understand that Shakespeare wrote within the existing social conditions. At such time, women who had dominant places in society were perceived as individuals to be feared and to be viewed with much scepticism. During Shakespeare time, Queen Elizabeth was considered an exception to this perception. The presentation of Goneril cultivates such fear. Garner and Sprengnether (1996) discusses that in the play King Lear, the relinquishment of the father’s authority also caused the unveiling of the destructive dominance and impact of female power and chaos, as seen in the acts of the sisters Goneril and Regan. Both sisters were not provided treatment as good examples of tragic female heroes; still their characters as powerful women should be considered without focusing on the existing 16th century stereotypes (Callaghan, 1989). An assessment of Goneril indicates how she is viewed in relation to her sister with Shakespeare wanting to prepare the sisters to be one evil entity (Liu, 2010). This theory can easily be founded in Regan’s own words when she expresses that she is made up of the same qualities as her sister, with the same prize and weight attributed to them both. Regan was the second child and as such has a different role compared to Goneril; she also has to work towards protecting her position as a ‘loving’ daughter (Liu, 2010). There are differences in these two sisters as Goneril is more intelligent than her sister, and that she wants Regan to simply follow or fall behind her. Shakespeare often applies the style of creating double roles or dual identities for his characters, having them connected and also contrasting with each other. Their differences are also observed by Dusinberre (1989) with the initial interactions between the sisters supporting such difference. As Goneril is more inclined to act on something, Regan is still trying to think on something. In effect, Goneril is the more dominant character in King Lear. She is the one who plotted to relinquish their father of his power. Goneril is also telling her servant to inform their father that she does not desire to see him. Goneril also detests the fact the King Lear could still have the power to claim the authority he already relinquished to her two daughters. In other words, she is acting here as a queen (Dusinberre, 1989). Lear inflicts abuse on Goneril’s servant when the latter stated who he knew him to be – as his lady’s father. This did not sit well with the King who still believed that he was more than the lady’s father. This would encapsulate Goneril’s gripe with her father, with Lear still refusing to relinquish the power of the throne that is not anymore his. This increases Goneril’s desire to keep Lear out of power, putting him in his place instead as an old man (Dusinberre, 1989). Her refusal to support Lear’s extravagances led to Lear’s disownment of Goneril. Lear also launches a tirade against his daughter for her daughter’s failure to grant his request for a large retinue. Goneril’s emphasis on a more modest retinue for the King was not considered an insult. Her affection for her father here is one based on power, not of a real fondness of her father Albany and Goneril’s relationship is more or less within the same realm of the latter’s relationship with her father, especially as she also wants to dominate her husband (Callaghan, 1989). While Albany expresses love for his wife, such feelings are rebuffed by Goneril. It is very likely the Goneril considers tenderness a weakness. There is a gender reversal observed here between Goneril and her husband Albany with Goneril taking the hard-edged and cold-hearted plot to gain more power and getting rid of any womanly thoughts or tendencies she had to her husband. Goneril is taking on the dominant character and role in the story (Rubio, 2000). She also takes on a lover in Edmund, mostly because she perceives it to be part of her command. This is a major affront to Albany, but Goneril is still playing the dominant woman dismissing Albany’s scorn, mocking him for what she would perceive as cowardly and sometimes womanly qualities. Goneril’s passion for power leads her to war. Albany continues to scorn Goneril, in some ways condemning her for not acting more like a woman and being more kind and respectful of him and of her father. As Edmund and Goneril lose the war they waged, she commits suicide. This highlights the tragedy of her fate; the audience also feels little sympathy for her at the end (Liu, 2010). Tragedy in this play seems to conform to the conservative gender perspective as women are viewed and are portrayed to have womanly qualities. This is very much apparent in Albany’s expectations about his wife (Das, 2012). He believed that his wife should take on more womanly qualities, and not the qualities of authority and dominance over him and her father. Albany’s scorn of his wife is very much founded on her failure to live up to his expectations of how a woman should act, including her failure to reciprocate her love. On the other hand, Goneril’s scorn and mockery of her husband Albany is based on his actions which she perceives are weak and akin to that of a woman’s typical actions, emotions, and reactions (Clark, 2004). Goneril even goes as far as highlighting her husband’s milky gentleness, the milk here of course referring to a woman’s nurturing of her child with milk from her bosom. She alludes to her husband being too womanly, too nurturing in his actions and decisions. She actively pursues power and does it with the ruthlessness and heartlessness which is often admired and expected in men, but shunned in women. Power and authority is not an expected quality among women and for the Goneril, her authority and power had to be drawn from the power and authority of her father and her husband. As she took on such authority and power, she was also seen to have relinquished her claims to femininity (Lott, n.d). Goneril, as a woman of power also has prejudices against feminine qualities as she understands that these qualities would not match the qualities she would need to gain and maintain power and authority. Goneril condemned feminine qualities like indecisiveness which she observed in her husband (Callaghan, 1989). Goneril is a considered a female character who wants to gain and maintain power. She seeks is on her own terms and in some context with another individual which in this case is Edmund. She scorns her husband, and aligns herself with the person who can gain and maintain her power. The character of Goneril represents gender crossing in terms of language and behaviour, which is very much related to the power she is also seeking. The tragic nature of their story takes issue with whether or not these women who want power can also be as tragic as the men. There can be issues in labelling Goneril as tragic because King Lear is the tragic hero and the man she wants to dominate (Laura, 2002). Cordelia does not have many scenes in the play, however, she still presents strong qualities like intelligence and her rebellion against her father and sisters. Lear displays unfavourable qualities among domineering men as he humiliates his daughters and still wants to retain some of his power and privileges as King (Laura, 2002). These selfish demands have triggered the unfortunate and dishonest actions from his daughters as they seek power over the others. Although Lear assents to the replies of Regan and Goneril, Cordelia is very much perceptive about her sisters’ lies. Following Goneril’s speech, Cordelia did not take a similar path of declaring flowery lies to their father. She recognized the misogynistic ideal related to males with females supposedly being unintelligent, also manifesting strength even while existing in a male-centric universe (Callaghan, 1989). Cordelia’s less verbal thoughts are in opposition to the grand verbosity of her sisters, which are more pleasing to Lear. Lear liked hearing those words, he felt flattered by them, and it assured him that he would still have control over his daughters and in some ways also retain power for himself. Cordelia’s silence is her way of expressing her defiance against her father’s power and his demands for a more measurable accounting of her affection. When Lear did not approve of Cordelia’s less vocal showing of her love and affection, she was disowned. Cordelia did not speak falsehoods as her sisters have. Lear does not approve of Cordelia’s silence and as a result, she is disowned (Lott, n.d). As discussed by Clark (2004), gender issues can be detected with King Lear having three daughters fighting with each other over who will hold the power. Another issue here also refers to the two brothers Edmund and Edgar who are vying for the regard and affection of their father. Gender issues help in noting the existence of sibling rivalry, also showing how siblings from the same gender are often likely to not get along with each other. The association between father and daughter based on male-female perspectives can also be evaluated. King Lear does not have good relations with any of his children. The roles which his daughters have can also be evaluated based on gender problems. The central issue in this case is based on family relations. This point is however very much debatable. Family is however unquestionably the source of one’s life and well-being within the family also supports harmony within the home life; the opposite is also true as the lack of family can cause a significant amount of discord in a person’s life (Clark, 2004). How the story unfolds in this case is very much founded also on gender relations and how they provide more traditional perspectives of men and women, with dire consequences on women who step out of the usual expected bounds of femininity, as well as men manifesting what are considered feminine qualities (Callaghan, 1989). Christopher Marlowe set forth his work Dr. Faustus for the first time in 1604 and another version in 1916 when Elizabeth I already passed on. During this time, James I was already the ruling monarch. This marked the start of the Stewart rule in England (Congalton, 2005). Although Elizabeth I displayed prominently how educated women can also be strong and effective leaders, James I compromised slightly the queen’s legacy. For which reason, a revision of Dr. Faustus was made by Marlowe. Marlowe was considered a very educated man serving under Elizabeth I. He was actually even more popular than Shakespeare and still, at present, Shakespeare is considered the more prominent writer. An edit of Dr. Faustus pictured the post-Elizabethan era in terms of morality, something that most people would gradually have to embrace as such (Congalton, 2005). The main character of Dr. Faustus sells his soul to the devil in order to gain power. Initially, Faustus may be considered a spirit. Secondly, he wanted Mephastophilis as his servant and to be under his command. Third, he also wanted Mephastophilis to bring to him everything he wanted his servant to bring (Congalton, 2005). He also wanted to be invisible in his chamber. Finally, he wanted to appear in any form he wanted to appear. The second version of the play, the concept of an individual selling his soul to Satan seemed to provide a satirical perspective on the rule of James I (Congalton, 2005). James became Elizabeth’s successor and took over a country which long gained stability under Elizabeth’s reign. He was then able to live a life of luxury, almost free of worry. Dr Faustus mentions three women in his play. First is the Hostess of a tavern who yells at Faustus. Faustus later woes her and the Hostess soon forgets why she got mad at Faustus. In a way, Faustus treated the clown Robin in the same way, implying that Marlowe’s way of presenting women is also as important as the effort made for a clown (Congalton, 2005). The first text however does not present the Hostess in such a weakly manner. The first text written after the death of Elizabeth I has a more favourable view of women, and in the second text, a less favourable perspective of the woman was presented. Another woman mentioned in the play is Duchess of Vanhold. She plays a larger role when compared to the hostess. The Duchess is also seated with Faustus and the Duke when Faustus later asks what the Duchess would like (Wolin, 1995). The Duchess asks for grapes and Faustus sends his servant to look for the fruit. She is surprised when the fruit is brought to her as they were out of season. Faustus continues to explain that in other parts of the world, grapes are grown twice in a year. He had to take the time to explain how the season works. This is in contrast to Elizabeth who would have been knowledgeable about the seasons and the world. Helen of Troy was the last woman to appear. She is considered a major downfall for different territories in Greece. She is considered a beautiful woman. Faustus summoned her to impress the people he was entertaining. Their responses showed how they were suitably impressed of Faustus ability and work (Druxes, 1993). The scene is a strong representation of powerful women who apply their assets to secure what they really want. Marlowe may be indicating that Helen was very powerful because of the beauty she possessed. She made even the educated men concede to the wishes of Faustus. Marlowe is celebrating the power which women possess, a quality which he saw exhibited in the queen he served. He believed in Queen Elizabeth’s intelligence more than her beauty and also her strength of mind, qualities which surely contributed to her greatness (Druxes, 1993). Marlowe also believed that the qualities and strengths of women are not important, for as long as she utilizes these to overcome the barriers to leadership which she is often faced with. Under these conditions, she can gain respect and be of great service to other women. Conclusion Shakespeare and Marlowe provide tragic plays which seem to portray differing perspectives on gender relations. In King Lear, Shakespeare presents strong women who take on masculine qualities in order to appear powerful. The perspective of Goneril is however very much unfavourable. She is presented in a very unfavourable, greedy, and evil light. It is interesting to note however that if she were a man showing such qualities on his way to power, he would actually be viewed with much respect. Based on Marlowe’s depiction of women and gender differences, women are considered in a more favourable perspective in terms of leadership and of being intelligent women, able to bring men to their knees. In relation to King Lear, tragedy seems to support a conservative perspective on gender relations, as the play shows how women seeking power are evil and are to be viewed in a negative light. Goneril was scorned and in the end, she conformed to the picture of women not being as effective leaders as men. In the Faustus play, the tragedy to some extent conforms to a conservative perspective on gender relations as it presents the Hostess and the Duchess, including Helen of Troy as dull-witted and unintelligent women. The ‘power’ which Helen displayed was more based on her beauty, not her intelligence. However, Marlowe does attempt to present women in the light of how he perceived his queen Elizabeth I. Although the two tragic plays portray very classic and traditional expectations on women, they also portray how women can occupy less traditional roles, ones which show their strength and authority as leaders. However, in taking on these qualities, they are also taking on their doom. This would perhaps represent the biggest tragedy of all for these women. References Callaghan, D., 1989. Woman and Gender in Renaissance Tragedy: A Study of King Lear, Othello, The Duchess of Malfi and The White Devil. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Clark, M., 2004. Concept vocabulary for King Lear. Available at: http://novelinks.org/uploads/Novels/KingLear/Concept%20Vocabulary.pdf [Accessed 07 December 2013]. Congalton, J., 2005. A Monarchial Influence on the Modern Woman. Seminar for Women’s Studies. Available at: http://www.rowan.edu/colleges/chss/concentrations/womensstudies/papers/congalton.pdf [Accessed 08 December 2013]. Das, P. 1995. Shakespeare's Representation of Women in his Tragedies. Prime University Journal, 6(2), pp. 37-56. Druxes, H., 1993. The feminization of Dr. Faustus: female identity quests from Stendhal to Morgner. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press. Dusinberre, J., 1998. Boys Becoming Women in Shakespeare’s Plays. Shakespeare Studies, 36, 1-28. Garner, S. & Sprengnether, M., 1996. Shakespearean Tragedy and Gender. Bloomington: Indiana UP. Laura, M., 2002. Unsex Me Here”: Goneril, Lady Macbeth and issues of gender and power in King Lear and Macbeth. Available at: http://trippy41.wordpress.com/essays/unsex-me-here-gonoril-lady-macbeth-and-issues-of-gender-and-power-in-king-lear-and-macbeth/ [Accessed 05 December 2013]. Liu, Z. 2010. The Phallic Women: The Power and Desires of Goneril and Regan in King Lear. Available at: http://web.ntpu.edu.tw/~shueng/The%20Phallic%20Women%20%28The%20Power%20and%20Desire%20of%20Goneril%20and%20Regan%20in%20King%20Lear%29%20.pdf [Accessed 07 December 2013]. Lott, K., n.d. Intelligence of Women in Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies. Available at: http://www.stjohns-chs.org/english/lott/lott.html [Accessed 05 December 2013]. Rubio, B., 2000. Are the female characters stereotyped in King Lear as demonised or sanctified women? Jornades de Foment de la Investigacio. Available at: http://www.uji.es/bin/publ/edicions/jfi5/female.pdf [Accessed 07 December 2013]. Wolin, S. S., 1993. Democracy, difference, and re-cognition. Political theory, 21(3), pp. 464-483. Read More