How Are Women Portrayed in the Dramas of Shakespeare - Coursework Example

How Are Women Portrayed in the Dramas of Shakespeare? The rise of feminism paves the way for women’s equal position to men in society to be acknowledged. Women have mostly been portrayed as the fairer but weaker sex in both history and literature. This may stem from their feminine nature of being the more emotional of the two genders. The view of women being highly emotional springs from historical perspectives of gender differences. Corrigan (2002) points out that during the mid-19th century, women’s emotion was seen as lacking the power and energy ascribed to masculine passion and hence, identified as inferior and ineffectual emotionality. Women were viewed as incapable of controlled emotion and are not well-equipped to regulate them. Men, on the other hand, had “better capacity to harness the power of emotion in the service of reason, and so drive evolution and civilization forward.” (Shields, 2007: 104). As feminists evolved in their realization that such beliefs were prejudiced against women, the slow and painful process of women proving it otherwise began. However, such beliefs were already deeply-ingrained in the psyche of most people. For feminist communication scholars, it is essential to critique some forms of literature as constructions of patriarchal oppression. Patriarchy is defined as the ideological systems, social structures, and practices created by men and reflecting male values that have both psychological and material components (Spender, 1981). Specifically, Hooks (2004, p. 18) argues patriarchy is a “political-social system that insists that males are inherently dominating, superior and [that they] maintain that dominance through various forms of psychological terrorism and violence,” including the “exchange [of] submission for protection” (Lerner 1986, p. 239). In a case of art imitating life, Shakespeare has been successful in producing renowned literary pieces worthy of meticulous study. In work contemporaneous to his, the dramatic presentation of women often renders them as weak and ineffectual, never strong and victorious. This paper will venture to analyze the dramatic presentation of the women characters in three of Shakespeare’s plays namely: “Othello”; “The Taming of the Shrew” and “Much Ado About Nothing” to explore if he truly was a patriarchal bard, as he was believed to be. Shakespeare lived in an age that stressed the maintenance of order through hierarchy, an age in which the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib was wholeheartedly believed in and lived by. Shakespeare, however, has never advocated order for order’s sake, nor does he does so based on hierarchy alone. If men must command and women submit so that harmony and decorum ensue, “the division of power and status according to sex alone is, he (Shakespeare) shows, irrational and illusory” (Steeves & Chartier as mentioned in Kahn: 84) Some critics claim that the Bard of Avon was a patriarchal bard. Consider Shakespeare’s drama, “Othello, The Moor of Venice”. The play has perhaps the simplest plot of any of Shakespeare’s plays. It is also the darkest and most passionate of his plays. It describes the nature of love, friendship and betrayal. The play narrates the story of Othello, the Moor and “Desdemona who dares to love him against the backdrop of war and the quest for power” (Studying Othello). It is significant to describe the nature of Desdemona’s love for her husband. From beginning to end, she was completely faithful and true to him. Reviving after his attempt to kill her, she does not let things be, without clearing things up in order to save her honor and what is left of the marriage. She proves to be the epitome of morality when she declares herself guiltless. To top it all, she maintains with her dying breath that Othello is innocent of her death. Desdemona held herself up to be a shining example of courage. Trailing after is Emilia, Iago’s wife, who defended Desdemona’s innocence, especially after discovering that her own husband was at the bottom of all the mess. One may conclude that although Emilia was the wife of Iago, a menial, a mere servant of the great Othello, she showed herself to be just as brave as the young mistress, Desdemona. From her example, the reader can claim that the wealthy and highborn do not have a sole monopoly of goodness and rightful behavior. How can he be branded as a “patriarchal bard” when he paints such a glowing and sublime picture of two opposite segments of women in his plays and during his lifetime as imbued with the spirit of righteousness? He could have portrayed Desdemona and Emilia as otherwise. He could have drawn the former as a stupid, young brat and spoiled daughter of a politician, instead, he describes her as loving, loyal and brave enough to defend herself and her husband from calumny. Emilia, too, could have been depicted as a wife leading Iago, her husband to commit evil misdeeds, but no! Shakespeare depicts her as a moral and virtuous woman, faithful to her friends, no matter that death and shame were staring right into her face. However, what is dominant in this play Othello’s hurt ego and his protection of his reputation by going overboard in killing his wife whom he suspects of infidelity seems a bit extreme. Although society may condone such an act as just, and is mitigated as a crime of passion, it also reveals Othello’s weakness – his being gullible to Iago’s manipulation. While this leaves a bad taste in the mouth, Desdemona is subtly hailed as the dedicated, understanding and martyr wife. In the play, “Taming of the Shrew”, the “shrew” is Katherine, a lady of such violent temper that it seems unlikely that any swain will court her. She has a lovable younger sister named Bianca who cannot marry any of her suitors without the consent of their father, Baptista. He will not grant his permission until Katherine is married ahead. Kahn (1977) contends that the real “shrew” is not Katherine but Petruchio, her suitor. The characters as well as the taming action participated in by the characters are offshoots of the prevailing social practice called ‘male dominance’. Katherine (Kate for short), on the other hand fills the role of the “shrew” as her male guardians conceive her to be. While the story represents the system in the form of exaggeration, Kate’s form of violence is a desperate response to the prevailing system of female subjugation (Kahn, 1977). In Act I, Baptista requests Bianca’s two suitors to scout around for possible suitors for Kate as well as tutors for both sisters. It seems that in Shakespeare’s time, marriage was the sole reason for a woman’s being, such that the father of the girls would do everything to ensure that none of his daughters would be left without a husband. Baptista in this case would also see to it that while waiting for them to get married, they should be engaged in some useful activity. Hence, he looked for tutors in the interim. This is one instance which clearly shows Baptista’s adherence to the social practice of male dominance. Tied up with this practice of male dominance was Baptista’s ulterior motives for matchmaking in behalf of his daughters. Money, not the happiness of his daughters, is proven when Petruchio makes his bid for Kate. When Petruchio asserts that Kate has fallen in love with him, Baptista ignores the insult since the claiming is far-fetched anyhow, and proceeds to cement the deal for several advantages that would benefit him. First, the match between Bianca and her chosen husband depended upon that between Kate and Petruchio. Both marriages would provide Baptista insurance against having to support the sisters in widowhood, promise grandsons to whom he may pass whatever they could inherit from Baptista. It would impart to his clan the reputation of “marrying well”. Besides, in Shakespeare’s day and age, a father’s wealth and reputation passed from father to son with woman as mere accessory to the passing (Blake, 2002). This is another example of male dominance that then existed. In Act III, Scene 1 of the play, the audience witness the wedding party anxiously awaiting the arrival of the groom. Baptista alludes to “this shame of ours” but Kate corrects him by saying, “No shame but mine.” Kate insists that the shame is hers, the woman conned into marrying a man she does not love who leaves her at the church door. Baptista’s ensuing words are shocking since they apply to a stereotype of the shrew whom people have been viewing as a particular woman wronged by the socio-economic system of marriage. Baptista’s lines might as well come from Shakespeare’s heart as from that of Kate’s father. “Go, girl, I cannot blame thee now to weep, For such an injury would vex a very saint, Much more a shrew of thy impatient humour.” (III, 2, 27-29) Do not the above lines reveal something about how Shakespeare acknowledged the inequality and lack of justice and fairness in which the women of the Elizabethan era were regarded? Still another injustice rendered to the women of Shakespeare’s day was that they were regarded as mere pieces of property. Shakespeare sketches Kate as a victim of the marriage market. At her entrance, she is already, for her father’s purpose, that piece of merchandise that Petruchio declares her to be after the wedding. Baptista is set to marry the sought-after Bianca until he gets an offer for the unpopular Kate not for the sake of conformity to the hierarchy of age but out of a merchant’s desire to sell all the goods in his warehouse. Even the dutiful and submissive Bianca courted in high-flown style by Lucentio, is still a piece of property. From feudal times on, the married woman has been deliberately sacrificed as private property (Blake, 2002). It is pathetic that Petruchio’s violence is accepted by society while that of Kate has branded her as abhorrent and unnatural. A loud voice and a scolding tongue are the characteristics of a shrew – an oral kind of violence, being weak in contrast to Petruchio. Because she is powerless to change her situation, she talks about it instead. His words are not offensive but defensive and necessary for her survival. If Petruchio were female, he would be despised for being a shrew. The force that Petruchio wields over Kate by marrying her against her wishes and denying her needs are a representation of the psychological realities of marriage in Shakespeare’s day. Petruchio’s will must dominate over Kate’s simply because he is male and she is not (Kahn, 1977). Why does Kate submit to Petruchio’s unreasonable treatment of her? Only in order to achieve her immediate and basic needs - a bed, a dinner some peace and quiet. She assures her husband that she will give him obedience if that is what he wants but that she in turn must retain her inner freedom. The reputation of women being the “weaker sex” is strongly being contested by feminists today. However, the reality is that most women embody this reputation by allowing men to subjugate them because of their dependency and need for attachment and approval. Their low self-esteem makes them settle for something below what they respectfully deserve because they believe they are not worthy of having more. “The fantasy of winning approval or love through long-suffering toleration of others’ single-minded self-centeredness doesn’t bring in the love of others. And it promotes the hate of self.” (Schlessinger, 1995:188). Much of this can be attributed to the nature of a patriarchal society propagated throughout history. In Shakespeare’s plays, it seems that women suffer men’s exploitation, however, he delivers a subliminal message that it is because men are flawed that is why women need to tolerate them. For instance, in Taming of the Shrew, in the end, Shakespeare wants to make his readers feel that Kate has not been bought or sold, but has given herself out of love. He makes her affirm Petruchio’s superiority through outward conformity (Hazlitt, 1944). Towards the end, shrewish Kate seems to have changed into an obedient wife, however, in a further reversal, she steals the scene from Petruchio revealing that he has failed to tame her in the sense he set out to. It is Kate’s submission to him that makes Petruchio a man, finally and indisputably. This is the action toward which the whole plot drives (Kahn, 1977). In The Taming of the Shrew, “Shakespeare reveals the dependency which underlies mastery, the strength behind submission”(Kahn: 100). The play exaggerates in a ludicrous manner the force and reach of masculine dominance and pushes the readers to view this wish for omnipotence which is childish and infantile at the most. Although many critics are convinced that Kate’s shrewishness is moral and psychological, other misogynist critics maintain that Petruchio’s cruel behavior is a briefly-assumed role for another purpose. They say he is Kate’s savior, the wise man who leads her to her better self. It seems they miss the point. The play satirizes not woman per se in the person of the shrew, but male attitudes toward women. In “Much Ado About Nothing”, Shakespeare highlights the strength of his women characters despite societal repercussions of alleged betrayal by infidelity. In Shakespeare’s day, for a woman to lose her honor by having sex before marriage meant that she would lose all social standing. For women in that era, the loss of honor was a form of annihilation, hence, the decision of Hero’s family to pretend she had died and remain so until she was “washed clean again”. Beatrice’s cry “Kill Claudio” is a call for a champion to challenge Claudio and fight for Hero’s honor and that of the family. In seeking a champion, Beatrice’s call may be interpreted as a guarantee of their betrothal. This trial by combat evokes the blood-feud that dates back to Anglo-Saxon times in which vengeance for a private wrong was exacted by the victim’s kin. Northern European women were sometimes allowed to fight on their own behalf. The destruction of her reputation compelled Hero to die in order to live. Hero, therefore, needs a kinsman to secure justice for her, since her father and uncle are slow in challenging Claudio. It was Shakespeare’s way of portraying Beatrice with a “take charge” attitude, sorely lacking in the men characters. If Beatrice believes in the religious rationale for trial by combat (that God defends the right), she need not be afraid of putting her lover’s life in danger, nor should she be blamed for doing so. “For men to lay siege to women’s honor, which consisted above all in their chastity, and for the weaker vessel to slip is to be expected, it is made explicit in “Much Ado About Nothing” (Kohler: 56). From Shakespeare’s plays, it is evident that during his lifetime, man had the upper hand and women were assigned submissive roles. However, he was able to show the inner strength of his women characters shine in his plays. In “Othello”, although the women characters lost their lives, they were able to protect their good names out of their own volition and needed no man to protect them. In “The Taming of the Shrew”, the heroine, Kate had a difficult time in the beginning since she was courted in what today would be branded as unorthodox (flattery before the wedding and force afterwards). It is easy to have an impression of Kate as fighting back. Like Desdemona in Othello, she is brave in a different way, when she finally marries Petruchio, she flatly refuses to obey his first command to her as a wife. She exists mutely with him until the end of Act III. Contrary to what the reader expects, Kate does not retaliate with the shrewishness she is reputed to have. She submits to her husband’s power without trying to challenge it and she does so in a sportsman-like spirit – without bitterness or resentment. When she finds herself on the losing side of the bargain, she softens up a bit and in return gets what she needs for survival. She is wise enough to gain from the adage “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em”. Little by little, she lets go of her shrewishness until her husband feels that he has subjugated her entirely. Petruchio seems to find in Kate the reflection of his own superiority while readers know that he is fooled by a role she has assumed. Then it can be said of her that she has allowed him to win the battle, but she has won the war. Katherine may be considered one of Shakespeare’s strong-willed characters since she was able to survive in her desperate situation by use of her wits (since she was physically weak). She also appeared completely subjugated in order to protect her peaceful relationship with her husband as well as her reputation by adhering to the customs of the people during the Elizabethan era. The three plays explored in this paper have their time setting in Shakespeare’s time – an age in which male dominance was the order of the day. Shakespeare, though, is not an advocate of order for the sake of order alone. It is evident in his dramas that he endorses the principle, but at the same time, questions its moral grounds. Kate is maltreated by almost every male character in the play – her father, who forces her to marry ahead of her younger sister, Bianca so as to ensure that he will not have any daughter to support in his old age, even if she does not love the man she marries. He also treats and regards her as a piece of private property. Even the meek, submissive Bianca is not spared. Both women are victims of Baptista’s marriage market. The women’s roles in this play parallel the roles of the women in the play, Othello, who are likewise controlled by their men and regarded as property to own instead of people to be respected. Even if Kate is shown on one occasion as beating up her sister to find out which of her suitors she favored, she was determined to marry so that Bianca would have the chance to marry herself. In other words, she had her sister’s best interests in mind. Again, this bond is like that of Desdemona’s and Emilia’s, true friends who stuck it out together for each other. Shakespeare usually stressed strong female bonding in his plays. Kahn argues that “focusing on Petruchio, his violence has been legitimized by society unlike kate which has marked her as unnatural and abhorrent. Petruchio’s violence is described as a hubbub of loud speech, beatings and quarrelsomeness, whereas Kate’s is marked by a scolding tongue and loud, raucous voice – a verbal violence befitting a woman since her limbs are traditionally weak” Similar to Othello, Shakespeare’s writings reflect the gender inequality prevalent at that time. Men were acceptable even if they were obnoxious and incorrigible, however, it is horrendous for women to be so. Such portrayals in Shakespeare’s plays may seem to adhere to a patriarchal belief, however, Shakespeare may have meant it to be satirical. “Much Ado About Nothing” heroines, Hero and Beatrice play comparable roles and temperaments with the other Shakespeare women characters. Some readers sympathize with Beatrice, admiring her concern for her cousin, Hero in much the same way as they give credit to Kate for insuring that her sister, Bianca would not be left unmarried even at the expense of Kate marrying a man she did not love. Shakespeare makes it apparent that although oppressed, his women characters actually emerge to be made of stronger material than the men, who are usually portrayed as heroes, but are actually flawed. Desdemona, Emilia, Kate, Bianca, Hero and Beatrice, are all involved with men who make their lives more complicated. Knowing that they rule in a patriarchal society, these men feel free to do anything they please, expecting the women to just submit. Although physically weaker, the women accepting their subjugated roles in a patriarchal society manage to keep their chin up and vindicate themselves from the ruckus men around them create. Shakespeare may be seen a ‘patriarchal bard’ because of the themes he selected for his plays. However, he was just being true to the realities that prevailed in his time. From the investigation of the three plays, it is evident that he used various strategies to show how the oppressed women characters were able to deal with the challenges women were bound to face during those patriarchal times. As his stories unfolded, each of his women characters eventually proved themselves as worthy to be equals of men. Works Cited Blake, A., TheTaming of the Shrew: Making Fun of Katherine, The Cambridge Quarterly Vol. 31, No.3 2002 Bloom, H., Blooms Major Dramatists: Shakespeares Comedies, 2000, p16-19 Corrigan, J., Business of the heart: Religion and emotion in the 19th century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002. Forster, E.M. Aspects of the Novel. New York: Harcourt, Brace,Jovanovich, 1955 Groliers’, Inc., Grolier’s Encyclopedia, Vol. XV, 1962 Hazlitt, W. Characters of Shakespear’s Plays , London1944 Heilman, R. The Authority of Experience.Essays in Feminist Criticism, Univ. of Mass. Press, 1977. Kahn, C., “The Taming of the Shrew: Shakespeare’s Mirror of Marriage”, The Authority of Experience. Essays in Feminist Criticism. Kohler, D., Much Ado About Nothing: The Medieval Connection, English Language Notes, Vol. 41 Issue 4, 2004. Lerner, G., The Creation of Patriarchy, Oxford University Press, New York. 1986 SparkNotes Editors. “SparkNote on Much Ado About Nothing.” SparkNotes.com. SparkNotes LLC. 2002. Web. 15 Nov. 2010. Schlessinger, L., Ten Stupid Things Women Do To Mess Up Their Lives, Harper Perennial (A Division of HarperCollins Publishers) 1995 Shields, S.A.,“Passionate Men, Emotional Women: Psychology Constructs Gender Difference in the Late 19th Century”, History of Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 92–110, 2007 Steeves, E. & Chartier, A.B. (eds) Modern Language Studies, Vol. V, No. 1, Spring, 1975 Studying Othello, the Moor of Venice. Retrieved 10, November, 2010 from:http://www.eriding.net/amoore/gcse/othello1.htm Turner, R.Y., Shakespeare’s Apprenticeship (Chicago 1974) in Maurice Charney (ed.), ‘Bad’ Shakespeare: Revaluations of the Shakespeare Canon (Cranbury, NJ1988) Read More