Ophelia: The Untold Story - Essay Example

?Ophelia: The Untold Story Introduction Since ancient times, women are portrayed as weaker sex through different forms of art like painting, literature, poems etc. As art is the mirror of the social thinking and construction, the misrepresentation of women in art has provoked many feminists world over to raise their voice against it and bring out the true image of women in the society. Laura Mulvey, a British feminist film theorist, has said that women are used as nothing but commodities in movies (Mulvey 8). According to Mulvey, women are used in art or entertainment only to fulfill the sexual imagination and fantasy of the audience, and hence, her character usually lacks ‘meaning’ or depth (Mulvey 5). There are many popular female characters in literature, painting and poems which prove that Mulvey’s statement is true. One such female character, which is misrepresented in the story and misunderstood by people, is the character of ‘Ophelia,’ which appears in William Shakespeare’s world famous tragedy ‘Hamlet’. Elaine Showalter, an American feminist, has tried to defend Ophelia in her article “Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness, and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism.” Showalter, through her article, has argued that the existence of Ophelia’s character is so dependent on Hamlet that she does not have identity independent of him. Hence, she has tried to tell the readers that Ophelia has her own identity and story. However, Showalter has also failed to tell the true story of Ophelia as instead of defending Ophelia and her character, she has ended up telling the story that others have told about her. Hence, Showalter has given nothing new to the readers and has brought Ophelia’s story back to square one. Summary In her article, “Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness, and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism,” Elaine Showalter has raised a question regarding the identity and image of Shakespeare’s heroine Ophelia in his text ‘Hamlet’. According to Showalter, Ophelia is represented as weak and inferior sex. In Hamlet, Ophelia is shown going mad as a result of betrayal from her lover. Sadly, Ophelia’s madness is represented as inherent quality of women. The text has as if tarnished the image of women by showing Ophelia losing control over herself, behaving incoherently and ultimately committing suicide. Hence, it becomes a job of feminist to defend Ophelia and justify her behavior which is a result of oppression from men in her life and society as a whole. However, feminists have found that it is not possible to defend Ophelia as Ophelia does not have any story independent of Hamlet. Showalter has cited examples of feminist critics Carol Neely and Lee Dewards who found it impossible to defend Ophelia due to lack of enough space and justice given to her character by Shakespeare. Sadly, even French feminists have reached the same conclusion. French feminists have gone a step further and have said that Ophelia is represented as nothing but a symbol of negativity, absence and lack of everything that men possesses. The word ‘nothing’ that Hamlet uses while conversing with Ophelia symbolizes the female genitalia, which is considered by men as empty and “having nothing to see.” French feminists found that Ophelia’s story is a story of a deprived woman who is considered lacking in intellect, knowledge of language and sexuality. Moreover, Ophelia is shown displaying emotions strongly, which was considered as a ‘womanly’ and ‘unmanly’ thing by Elizabethans and Freudians and hence, she was portrayed as unreasonable and weak in character. Showalter has proposed that through English and French paintings, photography, psychiatry and literature, female sexuality and female insanity are bonded, and Ophelia is illustrated as the symbol of female insanity. However, it was through the stage presence and make up of the actresses who played Ophelia that the symbolism grew stronger. Showalter has stated that the make up and body movements of the actresses, who played the role Ophelia on the Elizabethan stage, had represented insanity. Ophelia’s insanity was considered as result of her sexuality and femininity. The colors of the dresses worn by Ophelia on stage are different and contrast to those worn by Hamlet. This sows that Ophelia is considered everything opposite to what Hamlet is. Even the method of her death, i.e. drowning, symbolizes femininity. Water is considered a symbol of fluidity and flexibility. These qualities are associated with females and hence, Ophelia’s death also sends a message of weakness and madness. As if this was not enough to tarnish the image of women, the fact that females who played Ophelia’s roles somehow experienced disappointments in their personal love lives and went mad, reinforced the wrong belief of Elizabethan time that madness is related to female emotions and female anatomy. However, Ophelia’s image was changed through French stage when a young Irish girl named Harriet Smithson played the role of Ophelia. Instead of using dresses and language as her medium of emotions, she used her command on mime to express the confusion and pain that Ophelia went through. This changed people’s perception of Ophelia. Harriet Smithson’s portrayal of Ophelia drove the art world into frenzy. Different artists through different forms of art like poetry, paintings and sculpture, started representing Ophelia and the romanticism that was attached to her character. However, Showalter laments that instead of expressing the pain and story of Ophelia, the artists expressed themselves in their art. In the shadow of artist’s power, the death and the true story of Ophelia has always remained untold. Hence, Ophelia was never understood correctly by world. Evaluation Elaine Showalter’s article is informative and is written with an intention of defending Ophelia’s character and telling her ‘true’ story. The strength of the article is the foundation on which the author has based her argument. Showalter has tried to prove her point with the help of different means like symbolism, history of Ophelia’s representation on stage and Ophelia’s depiction in different forms of art. Showalter has started the article by giving a background about Ophelia’s impact on the world of art and how Ophelia’s character has somehow become an epitome of female sexuality. Sadly, Ophelia’s character has been shown as weak and frail. Showalter has argued that Ophelia’s pain on being betrayed by her lover and other family members, and madness resulting from it, is misinterpreted as the sign of female sexuality and female emotions and not as a sign of someone who has lost control over herself due to the suppression, betrayal and inferior treatment from people in the society. To support her argument, Showalter has used the medium of symbolism. Strength Symbolism is one of the strongest point of Showalter’s arguments. Showalter has demonstrated through a Mousetrap scene in Hamlet how the words used by Hamlet symbolize frailty and weakness of females. To Ophelia’s question, “what is, my lord?” Hamlet replies “nothing.” Showalter has described that ‘nothing’ is an Elizabethan term to describe female genitalia. Psychoanalysis explains that female genitalia are called ‘nothing’ as it “represents the horror of having nothing to see.” Even the character of Gertrude is shown using the word ‘nothing’ when she says “her speech is nothing,” but mere “unshaped use.” In this way, Showalter has argued that by using the word ‘nothing’ in reference to Ophelia, her character has been reduced to ‘nothing’, i.e. with no independent identity and existence of her own. Ophelia’s character has been sketched as if to show that her presence has no importance, and without Hamlet she is ‘nothing.’ Showalter has further argued that Ophelia’s character has not remained ‘fictional’ but due to the adaptation of text for stage, it has seeped in the minds of people and has created a wrong image of women as inherently mad and insane. Other strength of Showalter’s argument is her focus on Ophelia’s representation on stage which strengthened the audiences’ wrong belief that insanity is generated from female body. Showalter has supported her argument by showing the readers how the directors of play had used the bold accessories like white dress, “fantastical garlands,” “wild flowers,” long disheveled hair etc., which symbolized femininity, to dress Ophelia. Showalter has also drawn attention of the readers to the fact that the appearance, behavior, language, costume, gestures and props used by actresses playing the role of Ophelia were not only sign of feminine nature, but also hinted towards insanity. This kind of portrayal created a subconscious association of feminine things with insanity. The combination of female body and feminine accessories with insane behavior was responsible in reinforcing the wrong belief that insanity is the product of female body. In this way, Showalter has used symbolism in brilliant way to support her argument. However, the weakness of the article is lack of depth in understanding Ophelia. Weakness The weakness of the article is its inability to give the reader what it promises to give. That is, in the first two paragraphs, Showalter has described how Ophelia is misrepresented in different forms of art and how feminists have tried to defend her behavior. After reading the first two paragraphs, the reader expects Showalter to tell the true story of Ophelia and defend her behavior. However, throughout the article, instead of delving deep into Ophelia’s behavior and character, Showalter has given information about how the world of stage, paintings and poetry, through portrayal of Ophelia, has led the common people into believing that insanity is associated with femininity and that female body and emotions are the root of insanity. Showalter should have tried to show the audience that Ophelia was intelligent and mature woman by referring to the scenes in Hamlet. For example, in Act iii, scene 2 of the play, Ophelia is shown defending Hamlet’s mother when he accuses her of forgetting his father (Shakespeare 87). Ophelia tells Hamlet that it is not two hours but two months since his father has died. Moreover, when Hamlet says “nothing,” she responds by saying that he is in joyous mood, indicating that he is being funny (Shakespeare 87). This shows that Ophelia was not a timid or weak woman but was a strong woman with independent thinking and guts enough to tell Hamlet that he was wrong in his thinking. Ophelia’s defense of Hamlet’s mother shows that she has her own opinions and has guts to tell him that his accusation is wrong. Showalter should have focused more on the character of Ophelia rather than just telling the reader how she was misrepresented in the world of art. Ultimately, even Showalter was not able to tell the true story of Ophelia as she completely forgot to delve into Ophelia’s strong character traits which are evident from the text. Hence, the intention of the article, which was tell the true story of Ophelia, is not achieved as Showalter also has failed to tell Ophelia’s story and to let the readers know how strong and mature she was. Conclusion The discussion above shows that Showalter, due to her lack of focus on character, has failed to tell the readers the true story of Ophelia. Hence, as Showalter has failed to achieve the real aim of the article, the real story of Ophelia has remained untold. Works Cited Mulvey Laura, Fetishism and Curiosity. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1996. Print. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Charleston: Forgotten Books, 2008. Print. Showalter, Elaine. “Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness, and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism.” Shakespeare and the Question of Theory. Ed. Patricia Parker and Geoffrey Hartman. London: Methuen Co. Ltd. 1985. 77-94. Print. Read More