How has literary criticism changed over time in relation to Othello PDF

Preview

Summary

Download How has literary criticism changed over time in relation to Othello PDF

Description

“How has literary criticism changed over time in relation to the work of Shakespeare’s Othello” Written in 1604 at the dawn of the 17th century, Shakespeare’s Othello has received numerous critical reviews over the last 413 years. As different social and political events take place and new philosophies are created the attitudes critics have towards a piece of literature are subject to change over time. When comparing early criticism to contemporary criticism these influences and changes in perception or lack thereof become apparent. Focusing on attitudes towards Marxism, race and feminism this research essay will examine the ways in which the literary criticism of Shakespeare’s Othello has changed through time. Looking the character of Iago there seems to be an agreement among critics that his motivations and actions can be looked at through a Marxist lens. With Othello a General and Iago subordinate to both him and Cassio his resentment is clear when he claims his hatred of Othello for giving a promotion to “one Michael Cassio” (Shakespeare, 1.1.20) who he states has “never set a squadron in the field, / nor the division of battle knows” (Shakespeare, 1.1.22-23). In passing over Iago, Othello has made him a subordinate to someone he deems less qualified than himself thus making him resentful and bitter of those in positions of power and the upper classes. In 1817 critic William Hazlitt wrote on the characterisation of Iago and his motives. At the time, he believed that “some persons, more nice than wise, have thought [his] whole character unnatural, because his villainy is WITHOUT A SUFFIENT MOTIVE” (Hazlitt). He thought this to be untrue as he believed Shakespeare knew that man has a natural love of power with Iago being “an extreme instance” … “of diseased intellectual activity, with an almost perfect indifference to moral good or evil” … “with a decided preference to the latter, because it falls more readily in with his favourite propensity” (Hazlitt). This reasoning follows Marxism deeming the inequalities in society as a fault of capitalism and man’s want

of power, superiority and money. In 1903, almost 100 years later, A.C. Bradley commented on Iago’s joy in seeing his victims suffer at his own hands “not from any disinterested love of evil or pleasure in pain, but mainly because this pain is the unmistakable proof of his own power over his victim” (Bradley). This view again paints Iago as power hungry and dissatisfied with his position in society. Through manipulating Othello, he becomes in effect the master of his superiors who he believes have “undervalued him” (Bradley). He delights in seeing that: “these worthy people, who are so successful and popular and stupid, are mere puppets in his hands, but living puppets who at the motion of his finger must contort themselves in agony, while all the time they believe that he is their one true friend and comforter” (Bradley). Due to this view, Iago appears to be a moral relativist, allowing himself to act in any way he sees fit in order to change the social order simply because he believes that the ends justify the means. This area of criticism does not appear to have changed with critics seeming to be in agreement about origins of Iago’s motivations which are further emphasised when he shows the audience his envy of money and the status that comes with it when continually telling Roderigo to “put money in thy purse” (Shakespeare, 1.3.139). This behaviour contrasts to Othello who has adopted the Christian faith and the absolute moral standards of God making it all the more shocking when he believes Iago’s lies and is convinced to ignore his conscience and the words of his wife. Had Iago succeeded he would have elevated his social status to that of the upper class and been promoted to lieutenant making him financially secure. “The fact that he fails reinforces the importance of morality before materialism, on which basis the ruling class can survive, despite the tragic death of three of their number ("Marxist Interpretation » Othello Study Guide From Crossref-It.Info").

Considering the changing attitudes towards race and people of colour over time it seems only natural that the ways in which critics interpret the racial aspects of the play would also be subject to change. Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote in 1818 “Can we imagine [Shakespeare] so utterly ignorant as to make a barbarous negro plead royal birth, - at the same time, too, when negroes were not known except as slaves?” (Coleridge). This viewpoint highlights the changing times and attitudes of the public towards race since the 1600s. At the time of writing Othello, people of colour in England, as Coleridge says, would most likely be enslaved. Due to this, it can be assumed that the story may have appeared unusual to the audience as few outside of London would have ever encountered a person of colour so a play leaning towards sympathising with the protagonist despite his actions in killing his wife would garner a different response than in later years. In addition to this Coleridge also comments on the romance of the narrative claiming it “something monstrous to conceive this beautiful Venetian girl falling in love with a veritable negro.” (Coleridge) at the start of the seventeenth century. He also claims that it would “argue a disproportionateness, a want of balance in Desdemona, which in Shakespeare does not appear to have in the least contemplated.” (Coleridge). In saying this Coleridge points out that in the past audiences would have understood and even agreed with the various racist attitudes and comments made. This would even apply into the middle of the 20th century as interracial marriages were still considered unnatural. Due to this attitude, it is possible that many would have debated if the play was, in fact, a true tragedy, simply because Othello and Desdemona getting married would have been viewed as something that was expected to inevitably fall apart. A.C. Bradley wrote a response to Coleridge and other critics in 1902 arguing that what he had written argues against his own points stating, “Could any argument be more selfdestructive?” (Bradley). Bradley argues that Brabantio refused to believe his daughter was

really in love with Othello and was only able to understand by coming to the conclusion that Othello has “practised on her with foul charms, / Abused her delicate youth with drugs or minerals” (Shakespeare, 1.2.73-74). In addition to this he argues that Coleridge’s claim that such a love could argue “’disproportionateness’ is precisely the suggestion that Iago did make in Desdemona’s case” (Bradley) “Foul Disproportion, thoughts unnatural” (Shakespeare, 3.3.236) arguing that she clearly is not in her right mind leading Bradley to conclude that, looking from a more modern viewpoint, “the argument of Coleridge” … Points straight to the conclusion against which the argue” (Bradley). Bradley also claims that Othello’s race is of lesser importance in the play. Implying that Othello was not “jealous by temperament” (Bradley) but that he is a “noble barbarian” (Bradley) with the Christian morals and values of the society he lives in. He believes that there to be “some little plausibility” (Bradley) to the idea that Othello retains beneath the surface the “savage passions of his Moorish blood” (Bradley). He proposes that the view that Othello is “staged in a moral consciousness not yet reached by the people around him” (Bradley) is, to him, “hopelessly un-Shakespearean” (Bradley). In saying that Othello’s was not of great importance we see the changing attitudes of the times become apparent in the belief that while his race has an impact on the audience’s perceptions of his character and the “action and catastrophe” (Bradley), it is not important overall. Simply put he asks the audience to consider “if anyone had told Shakespeare that no Englishman would have acted like the Moor, and had congratulated him on the accuracy of his racial psychology” (Bradley), what reaction it would garner. Believing the idea ridiculous he was “sure he would have laughed” (Bradley). Throughout the play Othello and Desdemona “act as if a black man from Africa and an upper-class white woman from Venice have every right to fall in love, marry and be left to live happily together” (Ryan) action as though they belonged to an already free society

instead of being “prisoners of a time when racial prejudice and sexual inequality are so ingrained that even their heroic hearts are tainted by them” (Ryan). In 1937 F.R. Leavis also commented on past critics stating that “Coleridge” and “Bradley”, as outsiders to the world within the story would naturally find the part of Othello interesting “in the sense that they have preferred to see the play through Othello’s eyes rather than Shakespeare’s” (Leavis). In doing so they see Othello “(as we have all been) cruelly and tragically wronged – a victim of relentless intrigue, and, while remaining noble and heroic, is allowed to appreciate the pathos of his own fate” (Leavis). Othello may also be looked at from a feminist viewpoint due to the various inequalities the women experience along with accusations and demonization throughout the play. “From the play’s earliest performances, audiences responded sympathetically to Desdemona’s plight” (Mason Vaughn). In 1610 after a production in Oxford “Henry Jackson recalled that Desdemona ‘entreated the pity of the spectators by her very countenance’” (Neil, 9). However, 20th century feminist critics have “underscored Desdemona’s initial independence and Emilia’s eventual strength, and outlined the ways both women – as well as the courtesan Bianca – were constrained by the male characters’ patriarchal suppositions.” (Mason Vaughn). The preoccupation with cuckoldry in early modern England “demonstrates a basic male insecurity about women’s sexuality” (Mason Vaughn). By the third page, Desdemona has already been objectified, referred to as the property of Brabantio by Iago “Awake! What ho, Brabantio! Thieves, thieves! Look to your house, your daughter, and your bags! (Shakespeare, 1.1.79-80). Grouped into the same category as bags it’s clear that she women in the play are deemed property. Kiernan Ryan wrote:

“Othello’s dread of cuckoldry and the misogyny that feeds it are perfectly in tune with the patriarchal society of a city where his colour makes him feel like and alien, but where he’s entirely at home as a man” (Ryan) Due to this, Iago finds it easy to persuade Othello that Desdemona is betraying him as they live in a patriarchal society that holds a “warped view of women and female sexuality” (Ryan). Iago reminds Othello of Desdemona’s previous lie where she “did deceive her father, marrying [him]” (Shakespeare, 3.3.209) as “proof of her capacity to hoodwink her husband too” (Ryan). Once married Desdemona “honours the patriarchal dictum that, once married, the wife owes her husband the same respect and duty she had shown her father” (Ryan) with Emilia doing also doing the same. Even after Emilia realised the magnitude of Iago’s villainous actions she admits “Tis proper I obey him, but not now” (Shakespeare, 5.5.198). Looking at these critical analysis’s it appears clear that there have been obvious changes to some areas of literary criticism as time has gone on with Shakespeare’s Othello standing the test of time as a play “written from an imaginative standpoint far ahead of his time” (Ryan). Due to this, the changes in the attitudes of society towards Marxism, race and feminism are more apparent as Othello is still a relevant work today with critics still actively analysing it. In doing so we can see Othello in today’s light as offering a critique of racial and sexual injustice, far more impacting in the 21st century than in the early 1600s.

Works Cited Bradley, A.C. “Shakespearean Tragedy: Lectures on Hamlet, Othello, King Lear, Macbeth”. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. 2005. Web. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16966/16966h/16966-h.htm Coleridge, Samuel Taylor.“The Literary Remains of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Volume 2 by Coleridge”. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. 2003. Web. http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/8533/pg8533.html Hazlitt, William. “Characters of Shakespeare’s plays”. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. 2011. Web. http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/5085/pg5085.html Leavis, F.R. "”Diabolic Intellect And The Noble Hero" By F.R. Leavis, Scrutiny, December 1937". UNZ.org. N.p., 2017. Web. http://www.unz.org/Pub/Scrutiny-1937dec-00259 "Marxist Interpretation » Othello Study Guide From Crossref-It.Info". Crossref-it.info. N.p., 2017. Web. http://crossref-it.info/textguide/othello/41/0 Mason Vaughan, Virginia “Critical Approaches to Othello”. The British Library. N.p., 2017. Web. https://www.bl.uk/shakespeare/articles/critical-approaches-to-othello Neill, Michael, ‘Introduction’, Othello (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print. Ryan, Kiernan "Racism Misogyny And Motiveless Malignity". The British Library. N.p., 2017. Web. https://www.bl.uk/shakespeare/articles/racism-misogyny-and-motivelessmalignity-in-othello#sthash.Fe4k2wnz.dpuf Shakespeare, William. “Othello”. 1st ed. Ware: Wordsworth Classics, 2000. Print....