Critical Response to an Analysis of the Tempest by Shakespeare - Research Paper Example

Critical Response to an Analysis of the Tempest by Shakespeare Shakespeare’s the Tempest is popularly known to be his final act on stage. Many scholars discussed it as a play reflecting the colonial mindset of the British, of which, a person like Shakespeare would be familiar with. The play mainly revolves around a main character named Prospero who is a magician with the capacity of handling the state matters through magic. It is a play dealing with succession of royal tenets. Wylie in his paper, “New and Old Worlds: The Tempest and Early Colonial Discourse” which is going to be critically analyzed here, points out the initial relationship of Prospero and Caliban as harmonious. Wylie intends to associate it with the bond of early English settlers who were showed around the land by Native Americans (Wylie 47). For Wylie, the Tempest is a lesson in early colonial discourse artfully crafted by Shakespeare. Wylie explains how the play shows that the discourses of colonialism and geography were already complex in the early seventeenth century. He calls it the “foundational colonial allegory” which is narrated by the ruler of the island, Prospero. Prospero recalls how he was usurped by his brother Antonio and King of Naples, Alonso who were shipwrecked but Prospero and his daughter Miranda reach the current island from which he speaks. The island was completely deserted except for one person whom they found, named, Caliban. Although Caliban owns the land, Prospero compels Caliban to start serving Prospero and consider him his master through his magical powers. This is indicative of the fact that the colonial forces always created an environment for the native people to feel obliged towards the settlers from abroad. The island which Shakespeare sketches in the play is probably one of the islands from the late sixteenth century located in the Mediterranean or the West Atlantic which shows how colonialism was a matter of history. The imaginative geographies of the island are worth noting as they reflect the sixteenth century. That was the time, according to Wylie, which gave way to the voyages of “discovery” and the growth of trading and plantation which opened new avenues for the settlers (Wylie 49). For Wylie, the motifs of the play the Tempest are significant in stirring a complex perception of early colonial discourse. He draws the relationship of colonialism with geographical knowledge together in order to understand the issues at hand. The exotic imagery is aroused in the play through the motif of “storm”. Similarly, the island is the source of attraction for most of the characters who wish to govern it. The voyages are indicative of the fact that the travels were mostly between England and Italy or that between England and catholic Spain because the “King of Naples” and “Duke of Milan” according to Wylie are titles of Spanish king. The characters respectively represent the Italian stereotypical materialist longing for the island. Besides all these motifs, the one which plays the most significant role is that of Caliban. He is an epitome of mystery who resides on the island as the sole native who is treated by all the new arrivals on the island as the “other”. It should be the other way round in reality. He should be treating the arrivers as the “other”. But it is the power of Prospero which makes him bow to him in harmony. Theirs is a master and slave relationship where Caliban becomes Prospero’s natural slave (Wylie 57). What Wylie fails to elaborate in his paper is how the colonized island is also a means for Caliban to acquire his freedom because once Prospero manages to take charge of the island Caliban is no longer ready to obey Prospero the way he was in the start of the play. It is the power of imagination, in short, which Wylie considers significant in the making of the whole geographical and colonial discourse. The imagining of the “old world” and its geography onto the imagination of the new world and the conceptual effort it requires to imagine the whole scene is a thing of credibility in the play (Wylie 61). On a personal note, one thing which is most appreciable in Wylie’s paper is his focused views on colonialism and geographical discourse through which he assesses the whole play. His analysis mainly revolves around the motifs of the play which he thinks play an eminent role in redefining boundaries. He avoids speaking in terms of race and culture but lays more stress on travelling and the location of the island. One might ask what role Prospero plays in influencing Caliban and his island. Why does he ensure that he take charge of improving the island? This brings the discussion to the point where Shakespeare makes his audience realize the significance of land for the Elizabethan elite. The old world is seen as a thing of the past and the new world is embraced by the royalty with open arms. Prospero’s succession of the island indicates his confident and rightful perception of his race which gives him the liberty to make such moves against the native member of the island whom he readily makes a slave. Wylie concludes by stating that “the play perhaps neither fully endorses nor rejects the incipient colonial process, but rather highlights the conceptual difficulties the New World posed for Europeans.” What he means to say is that it is not easy for the Europeans to accept the New World for what it is without making amendments to the new environment according to the ways the Europeans are familiar with. He adds that “as an intervention in early English colonial discourse, what The Tempest demonstrates is that this discourse was at its inception already complex, under negotiation, even sometimes fragile” (Wylie 61). This means that he believes that colonialism was not a new term coined sometime later after Shakespeare wrote the play. It was something which was already under heavy discussion and debate during the Elizabethan time. Colonial discourse has been a historical term existing since before Shakespeare even started writing. It can be traced back to the time when probably the first Englishman went out to explore the world. Wylie is presumably right when he says that the Tempest is an allegorical tale narrating the issues of colonialism prevailing in the past. According to Wylie, Shakespeare highlights the cultural and political aspect of those times in such a manner that even centuries after his composition, his work is read for several vital connotations that reflect the attitude of the early colonials. Shakespeare claims on behalf of these early settlers who have been criticizing the “other” wherever they go in his famous lines of the play: “This thing of darkness I acknowledge mine” (Shakespeare V.i). This line sums up the whole representation of the colonial way of thinking. The colonizers admit that they may have gone off the track to acquire a land which does not belong to them but they are also helpless when it comes to their innate quality of ruling with the intention of setting up a business or for the purpose of plantation and trading for industrial and materialistic gains. To sum up, Wylie concludes his paper by arguing that the play already has an ambiguous conclusion with unresolved ending to Antonio’s and Caliban’s fate. He believes that critics are compelled to give a colonial reading of the play because of its complex themes. Also, he thinks that the attempt to map the nineteenth century colonialism on to the sixteenth century colonial era may also have caused a problem for the critics as each colonial phase has its distinctive features (Wylie 60). Hence, Wylie consciously chose to read the play through the colonial and geographical lens keeping the historical perspective in view, neither rejecting the colonial implications nor mapping the modern colonial interpretations on the play. Works Cited Shakespeare, William, William Shakespeare, and G B. Evans. The Tempest. Charlottesville, Va: University of Virginia Library, 1993. Wylie, John. "New and Old Worlds: the Tempest and Early Colonial Discourse." Social & Cultural Geography. 1.1 (2000): 45-63. Print Read More