Comaprisn between the two Tempests - Essay Example

Comaprisn between the two Tempests Aime Ceasire’s Tempest is considered to be a renewed and modern version of Shakespeare’s Tempest, and having more undertones of ethnicity. The Tempest was one of Shakespeare’s last plays which was written in 1610 and it was to symbolize the ending of his career. Its plot is built around a ruler, Prospero who is deposed, and the play Tempest is set on a far away island in the aftermath that the ship that had the King of Naples faced a storm that was extremely powerful and deathly and the people aboard were to leave the ship in order to survive. This was due to the spirit of Prospero’s servant, Ariel. This is the beginning of the play which unfolds the other acts of manipulation that were carried out by Prospero towards other memebers of the play as well, and that eventually lead to his own demise. Prospero has a daughter Miranda, whom he assures that no soul was hurt on the ship that was faced with the storm and he tells her to story of how he landed on that island. He was on that island because because his brother Antonio had betrayed him and taken his title. He was to be Duke of Milan. Caliban, who is the slave of Prospero is also one of the characters and the owner of an island due to the demise of his Mother Sycorax, who had lef the island to her son (Arnold 55). Prospero also manipulates the true love of his daughter, Miranda, who is Ferdinand, and the King’s son, even though he had wanted this incident to happen all along, he feigned that he was secretly mad and suspicious and he even captures and enslaves Ferdinand. Alonso, who is the King of Naples and also aboard the ship and his party are also characters of the script and his brother, Sebastian, has been a schemer all along. His brothers keep plotting against him and even though they themesleves are in a tight situation, they continue to scheme on their brother with a vengeance. Prospero also manipulates his enemies, by confronting them and giving them the illusion that he would present them with a royal banquet and then not having it. In the end Prospero himself appeals to be let off the island. Many people undermine Cesair’es Tempest and they don’t understand the Shakepearan model in its writing. Cesaire aimed to write the play about the ethnic situation in United States at that time. The master slave relationship in Shakespeare’s play are more than outstanding in Cesaire’s play and his island isnt just an island that the characters are trapped on, but a representation of the Caribbean community at that time where two themes are predominant; not just the master slave relationship but also the theme of sadism is prevalent throughout the play. He also adds an African God to counter the theme and introduce the ethnic issues of the time that arent evident in Shakespeare’s play. Cesaire also has limited use of the poetry and suggestiveness that Shakespeare’s play is filled with. This still leaves the text extremely rich and is also due to the influence of the French to rationalize everything. He also significantly reduces the dramaticism that Shakespeare’s Act one has by not showing the relatiosnhip of Ariel and Prospero and also other nautical instances of the act are eliminated. Cesaire also introduces other themese which Shakespeare hasn’t talked about; these are the fanatics of religion at that time as well as colonials, noth weaving their way in every scene of the play and reign supreme. In Shakespeare’s play, Prospero was given a trial in which he was later then thrown to the island, however, in Cesaire’s play, he wasn’t given that oppurtunity and it was the will of the Church to throw him and his daughter onto the island. Cesaire also focuses on the expansion of Europe and the Reneissance man in his play. Who is this Reneissance man? He is the man who is interested in conquering territories by colonizing, and is a humanist who is suspicious of the Church and is interested in expansion which is where the expansion of Europe is interttwined. Prospero is also portrayed as a character of domination who seems to have this desease to control everything. However, all the castles and the feuds etc. are not galmorized as they are in Shakespeare’s play, but rather are on a smaller and more rational scale. Everyone infact seems so interested in land and capital gains, that they are after Prospero so that they may use the lands he owns further after his death. Due to this change in between the two texts; Shakespeare and Cesaire’s Tempest, the themes of the former are in many cases subsided and do not even show face in the play at times because the other themes are so dominant. Prospero is primarily a magician in Shakepeare’s play; he is manipualtive and magical, however in Cesaire’s play he is not purely magical, in fact his charms, books and robes take a backseat to other rational functions in the play. Cesaire also makes some dramatic mistakes and assumes that his audience will be able to match the conclusions having been an audience to Shakespeare’s play and knowing the story behind it. Even the comical bits are submerged due to the failed attempot of adaptation as well as the Utopian undertones which are overthrown by colonial ones. Africanization is also a theme that is inherent in the play and in the dialogue between Ariel and Caliba. Ceasaire also has three scenes in his second act of the play. Also the scene of the banquet is different in his play, as he does have the banquet and forces the people which are his enemies to eat against their will where as in Shakespeare’s play, the banquet table was removed, and people were fooled into thinking they would get a feast. Therefore, Cesaire’s take on Tempest seemes to be a political version of Shakespeare’s play which was initiated during the sixties when there was a great deal that was changing in the world according to social standards. It may be a post-colonial version or a response to Shakespeare’s play with the same model and rather than just focusing on Prospero, it focuses a great deal also on the views of Ariel and Caliban who were the slaves and it has the ethnic undertone in it because Ariel is mulatto and Caliban is black. The same aspect and plot are transversed in Cesaire’s play however more differences are higlighted throughout the play. Caliban seems to be more forceful and dominating and he appears with a greater frequency in the play than in Shakespeare’s play. He shows greater hate towards Prospero where as only Ariel’s hate is more prominent in Shakespeare’s play espeically with his words “I'll impale you! And on a stake that you've sharpened yourself! You'll have impaled yourself!” Race is also more prominent throughout the play and in between the different characters as well and even the character that was more or less neutral in Shakespeare’s play that is Gonzalo is demeaning towards Caliban’s views and he believes that he needs some religion such as Christianity instilled in him. Therefore, Caliban seems to be all alone and is also treated differently and even Ariel is treated as such, both also because of the racial aspect and also because of the relationship between a master and a servant. He is still better treated as compared to Caliban but he is still taken captive. In the two plays, both by Shakespeare and Cesaire, there are some characters who come out to be prominently villainous and the main character seems to Prospero, both in good and bad, and he comes in many scenes and has a different part to play in many of them. All actions and events that occur in the play happen due to him and his means to get off the island and get to Milan. One of his negative qualities is that he doesn’t pay much attention to his kingdom as the Duke and he keeps putting off the responsibility to his brother. It is much easier however, to figure out that Prospero is a villain figure in Cesaire’s work as compared to Shakespeare’s work. He comes out as a dominant colonial man which seems to be his primary aim. Power seems to be a relevant theme in both the plays as well. Since Prospero seems to dominate the play and he has power as well magic, which is more dominant in Shakespeare’s play, and he also has a spirit of great power on his side, he controls the entire play and all the people in it and he aims to get his revenge from his enemies. He uses everyone in the play; even his own daughter Miranda, whom he uses as a tool to make peace with King Alonso, by arranging the situation in such a way that she ends up marrying his son. He even shows power over his enemies by the banquet scene which is again different in both the plays. He gets news of the fact that King Alonso’s party is roaming the island, and using his magical powers he makes up a feast, which he takes away from the enemies when they come, whereas in Cesaire’s play he actually forces them to consume the food he conjures up. In either case, the parties are petrified of him and flee in the other direction at his mention. While hiding, Stephano creeps upon Caliban which also exemplifies the power theme in the play and how everyone in the play uses it for their own benefit and purpose, which particularly seems to be colonialism in the play. Caliban continues to trust people he doesn’t know which seems to be a hurdle in his way, and he has the lack of power to dominate and can only express his hate towards the Duke but he even trusts Stephano who is just trying to use him and further gets exploited. Miranda is also the only female in the two plays essentially who is also on the island. She seems to be a powerless character in the play who is helpless to her father’s desires and is also unable to get rid of the attention that Caliban is showering. She seems to be an innocent character though and is a weak woman who needs protection. The interpretation of the two plays seems to be the same as well. Prospero comes out as a colonial character who is biased against ethnic identities. Caliban is the representation of his attitude and he both plays portray that it wasn’t Prospero’s favor on Caliban that he taught him English (Arnold 236). Bibliography Arnold, A. James. "Césaire and Shakespeare: Two Tempests." Comparative Literature (1978): 236. Read More