Juxtaposition of Gender-Based Identities in Hamlet: A Feminist Perspective - Essay Example

 (Essay) Hamlet is one of the greatest plays in the history of English literature and the character of Hamlet is one of the greatest roles in the history of international theatre. It is hence not at all surprising that both men and women across the world pine for playing the role of prince Hamlet. What is even more surprising is the fact that ever since the Shakespearean times the role of Hamlet has been most often played by women. The casting of a woman as Hamlet has added whole new dimensions to the interpretation of the play by readers, critics and audience. Shakespeare was a playwright who was immensely at ease with cross-gender casting as all his female characters were enacted by men. And in some of his plays like Twelfth Night and As You Like It, he introduced, to an extent, the concept of the opposite, that is a woman in man’s role. Rosalind and Olivia, the heroines in both the plays, spend most of their time in the play under the disguise of boys. Thus, in most of his plays, especially in the comedies, Shakespeare somewhat encourages the idea of juggling with gender and distorting the gender- based identities of his characters. By going beyond the boundaries of gender and setting up a cross-gender cast of characters, the enactment of a play can serve multiple purposes. Male actors usually find delight in identifying with women characters and highlighting their feminine sensuality and nervousness, as was done by Adrian Lester in Rosalind’s and Mark Rylance in Cleopatra’s role. Women actors, on the other hand, attempt to present a universalized version of the male characters, rather than simply impersonating their male attributes. The same applies to the role of Prospero played by Vanessa Redgrave and Hamlet played by Angela Winkler. The female actors playing the role of Hamlet suggest that the pain of thwarted love created a frantic craving to communicate in Hamlet. This led Hamlet to deliver a series of soliloquies through which he could get rid of his remorse and guilt and share with the audience his innermost feelings and desires. All the female actors who have played the role of Hamlet- Angela Wetmore, Sarah Bernhardt, Diana Venora- have fully justified the concept of a female Hamlet. They have established the fact that the feelings that frequently haunted Hamlet throughout the course of the play- those of despair, loneliness, ethical dilemma, love, betrayal and revenge- are feelings that rise above the classifications of gender and cannot be pigeonholed as being specific to either men or women. The tragedies of Shakespeare unlike his comedies, however, are not marked by this kind of a distorted vision of gender. His plays like Othello and Macbeth, the tragedy of the protagonist originates and grows out of his incapability to escape his manhood. The heroes face tragedies in their lives owing to the tragic flaws like ambition, jealousy, poor judgment and distrust, all of which are qualities associated generally with the masculine gender. If we consider these common generalizations, then it would not be wrong to state that Hamlet is an exception when compared to the other tragedies of Shakespeare. It has been observed by literary critics and scholars across generations that the character of Hamlet supersedes the demarcating boundaries of male and female; brave and coward; primitive and modern. Some critics have gone to the extent of arguing that Shakespeare had probably intended Hamlet to be a woman since the appeal and charisma that we associate with the character is essentially feminine in nature. Whenever a female actor is casted for the role of Hamlet, the actor is left with two choices. She can either play Hamlet from the perspective of a male, a prince; or she can reconstruct the role as a female Hamlet or a princess. The former stance would highlight the universal nature of Hamlet’s character and conform to the play’s inherent handing of the elements of love, revenge, despair and dilemma, while maintaining the status quo of the relationships within the original play. The latter, on the other hand, would drastically change the nature of relationships between the different characters in the play, especially Ophelia and Hamlet, thereby revealing a more blatant and feminist evaluation of gender roles with respect to love, violence and politics. Both the choices can thus bring about a host of new experiences for both the actors and the audiences, and add a whole new perspective of interpreting and appraising the play. Hamlet has always been a favorite subject for interpretation by feminists and psychologists. The reasons for this are many: the protagonist of the play is driven by psychological complexities and internal impetuses, most of which have been left unexplained by Shakespeare and owe their meaning to the imagination of the readers. Moreover, the hero also holds some remarkable and unconventionally strong views about the fairer sex. Another element that has singularly claimed the attention of critics is the portrayal of female insanity though the character of Ophelia. For instance, in the essay "Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness, and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism" Elaine Showalter discovers the problems and the discomfitures encountered by the feminist critics in their attempt to approach the character of Ophelia. The feminist critics felt that the real problem lies in the fact that throughout the course of the play, Ophelia has been somewhat dominated by Hamlet, in terms of the rendition of the characters. But even when Ophelia is liberated from this aura of obscurity and insignificance, the problem persists in the form of the multiple disturbing links between the elements of femininity, female sexuality and insanity suggested by the character of Ophelia in the play. The champions of feminism have conventionally approached Ophelia in three ways: either as the typical mad woman, or as the subject which can never possibly be interpreted wholly, or as the icon of rejected womanhood. Showalter, for instance, tries to examine the extent to which Ophelia's madness can be attributed to her femininity. Showalter poses a question whether Ophelia represents a "document of madness (as Laertes claims) or does she represent the textual archetype of woman as madness or madness as woman" (Showalter, 1994, p. 1) She hints at the possibility that the supposed link between womanhood and insanity has been rooted in our culture, which probably breeds the idea that being a woman is a way of being insane. Given that, the image of Ophelia as a mad woman is so powerful that it has set forth an example for all succeeding female characters in literature and “reinforced the belief of the age that female madness was a part of female nature”. (Showalter, 1994, p. 3) The same idea has been taken a bit further by the French theorists of feminism, who believe that Ophelia’s madness can be attributed to the incapacity of language and words to render an authentic picture of femininity. The female characters are inevitably portrayed as wrecked, wretched, insane and insignificant, owing to the fact that the male writers find themselves at a loss and incapable when it comes to representing the innermost thoughts and feelings of a woman. This gives rise to the incomplete and incompetent rendition of female characters in most of the Shakespearean plays including that of Ophelia in Hamlet. This however does not, by any means, indicate that Shakespeare could not depict Ophelia properly. But it is a well-accepted claim of most of the critics that no amount of existing language is literally enough to capture the essence of a whole female character, because a woman’s mind is one of the most difficult subjects in literature. As a result, Ophelia can at best be depicted only as an epitome of silence, insanity, dilemma and oblivion, so much so that in the play Ophelia herself says: "I think nothing, my Lord." (Ham. III. ii) Another perspective presented by yet another school of feminist critics treats Ophelia as the embodiment of all the womanly qualities that are abhorred by men as symbols of weakness and incapacity. She is sometimes even considered to be the female counterpart of Hamlet, a theory that accounts for Ophelia’s insanity, seclusion and subsequent death. In the play, Hamlet too rebukes himself for his inability to act when he is needed to, a tendency that he himself labels as womanly, by saying that: “Why, what an ass am I! This is most brave, That I, the son of a dear father murder'd, Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words” (Ham. II. ii) Showalter substantiates this theory when she says that: "Hamlet's disgust at the feminine passivity in himself is translated into violent revulsion against women and into his brutal behaviour towards Ophelia." (Showalter, 1994, p. 2) Traditionally Hamlet has often been seen as possessing certain feminine traits, a belief that is further corroborated by the fact that most often the role of Hamlet is played by female actors. This, in a way, offers a better and deeper exploration of the feminine aspects of Hamlet’s character. The feminist approach, just like any other theoretical approach, can help in revealing certain unknown facets of the play. But just like any other approach, the scope of feminist approach has its own limitations too. The main problem with the feminist interpretations of Ophelia in Hamlet is that these are backed by very limited textual evidence. This can be credited to the fact that Ophelia appears on stage in only five of the total twenty scenes of the play. Some feminist critics, in fact, feel that it is this very brief appearance which necessitates the in-depth examination of the character of Ophelia. The problem becomes more overwhelming when we attempt to comprehend the entire play with respect to this single theoretical aspect. Another issue that troubles feminist interpreters is to judge the extent to which their findings are relevant in today’s context. Feminism was originally started as a political movement to champion the cause of liberation of women. But how far that is applicable to the arena of literature is a question to ponder upon. Going by the essence of feminism, if one tries to liberate Ophelia, he will have to engage in a biased and predisposed interpretation of the Shakespearean play. Now it is up to the reader to decide whether such a stance will be culturally worthwhile or ultimately fruitful, if we consider the fact that the play in question is a literary masterpiece by one of the most cherished and esteemed playwrights of all times. References Showalter, Elaine. “Representing Ophelia: Women, Madness and the Responsibilities of Feminist Criticism”. Hamlet. Ed. Susanne Wofford. Bedford ; St Martens, 1994. pp.220-240, Web. ecmd.nju.edu.cn/UploadFile/17/8062/ophelia.doc‎ Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. John Bosak ed. 1999. Read More