Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica

Jonas Saldanha Professor John Milton Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica (FLM0580) April 2013 #6469060 FFLCH USP DLM Department of English

Saldanha 1

Nearly one hundred years; the gap between the publication of Andrew Cecil Bradleys

Shakespearean Tragedy (1904) and Marjorie Garbers Shakespeare After All (2004) is approximately
of an entire century. From Bradleys days to Garbers, there have been nume rous critics who have dwelt on William Shakespeares life and work throughout the twentieth century, and they have tried to understand and elucidate many of the issues presented more than five hundred ago by the author. Bradleys approach to Shakespeares Othello seems to be quite general and descriptive of characters, in the sense that in reading the two lectures on the play, one has the impression that Bradley is describing real people, living folks into whom one may run on the street in an ordinary Monday morning. In a rather different fashion from Bradleys, Garbers writing sounds, obviously, more contemporary to the todays reader and dwells more on issues such as race, gender and class so as to explicate the characters motives and nature. In attempt to analyse and contrast both critics essays and lectures, I hold that, from Garbers viewpoint, the storyline of Othello depends much on and is shaped by the fact that Shakespeare intentionally opts for bringing up social elements present in the Venetian society back in the period in which the story takes place. On the other end of the scale, there is Bradleys remarkably well-known lectures that somewhat dismiss those social elements brought up by Garber by arguing that Othellos race his blackness does not play a very important part in the moulding of the play. However, there is also a crucial element in the play on which Bradley and Garber do agree and place as essential for the understanding of the it: Shakespeares portraying of the character of Desdemona as a strong, independent, resourceful, modern and, one might risk to say, feminist. Although Garber concedes that Othello is much more than a play intended to depict the social and political circumstances of the Venetian society in the sixteenth century, the author asserts that the play does reflects a world in crisis (Garber, pp. 589), a world where race, gender and class implicitly intertwine with individuals relationships and with the manner they interact and respond to the world. According to Garber, Othellos dark skin is undeniably a determining factor for the development of the play. Such argument is difficult to reject, as Othellos race and African features is a rather frequent subject in the play being mentioned by Iago, Brabantio, Roderigo and even by Othello himself, as in the following verse

Roderigo:

That a full fortune does the thicklips owe If he can carryt thus!

Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica

Saldanha 2

For Garber, much of what happens in the play is due to the racial element represented through Othello. Indeed, despite his race, Othello is entitled for an important position within the Venetian military forces as a general, which, as it seems to be implied, does not please everyone in Othellos social circle. Brabantios opposition to his daughters marriage with Othello is primarily based on his aversion for the otherness existent in Othello, that is to say, on his repugnance against Othellos colour. In a similar fashion, the hatred that Iago harbours against Othello has its grounds partly on Othellos skin colour. Therefore, it is in the light of these features of the play that one can say that race is a vital issue for Shakespeare here. If one digs even more deeply into the symbols of Othello, as Garber claims, race and racism come to surface and to an even more evident position. The focus that Garber espouses in order that she can elucidate motives and events of the story differs from what Bradley decides to deal with, in the sense that the former puts more weight on the social and external elements in the characters than the latter does. For the American critic, Venice, Cypris (later revealed to be related to Kypris), Bianca, reason, chaos, light and darkness are all connected somehow: those that are white and honest or seem to be so, in fact may behave as in fact, actually be black and immoral. As an urbane, sophisticated and enlightened city, Venice, a place of reason, is first placed by Garber in opposition to what Cypris, the island that must be protected, although it is far away from the center. Cypris is depicted in the play as the wild region out there, where turmoil and untamed nature prevail. For that reason, the relationship between what Venice and Cypris represent is not straightforward. Yet Garber connects the two opposites making them seem a coherent whole by reminding the reader of the origins of the name of the Venice: Venus. The goddess Venus also known as Aphrodite among the Greek, in her turn is commonly referred to also as Kypris, which is a variation of the name Cypris. To put it in a different way, Venice, Garber maintains, is Cypris and Cypris, Venice. There is then no separation between them, leading the reader to conclude that Cypris is Venice masked not so much its opposite as its hidden self (pp. 590).

Venice (Venus) Aphrodite (Greek variation)

= Kypris = Cypris

The

play, will

by

displaying thus be

this

complex

dialectical to

relationship dichotomy

between of

the

two

environments,

structured

according

this

reason/light,

disorder/darkness, black/white. Another contradiction that strengthens Garbers argument is that one of the most immoral person among the characters, Bianca (at least as it is viewed general society), has a name that in fact does not describe what her nature really is: Bianca in Italian means white, a word that alludes to honesty, uprightness, morality. In Biancas life, however, there is no such

Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica

Saldanha 3

feature as purity and morality. The case is quite the opposite; the character of Bianca is a courtesan a prostitute who lies in bed with any person, exchanging money for sexual pleasure. Garber points out that her name is, in a sense, undeserved, as Othellos reputation as a violent brute black person is unjustifiable as well. The association here between these conflicting elements seems quite complex, for the idea proposed by Garber is that one element contains the other and vice-versa, in a multifaceted fashion. Othello looks black, which is a colour viewed by the Christian western culture as

representative of immorality, sin and evil; however, Othello is not any of these, but a brave warrior, eloquent speaker, courteous citizen, honest general and loving husband. Meanwhile Iago, who has white skin, is truly black, morally speaking. The same paradoxical relationship is perceived when examining the character of Desdemona: she is an upright, morally correct woman who is mistaken by a dishonest, insincere person. On the other hand, the reader has Bianca, the true whore (Garber pp. 591), whose name ironically labels her as a pure woman. Hidden features of the characters are thus exposed as opposite to what they truly seem to be: along these lines, Venice is not so much more civilized and lighter than Cypris is; Iago is not so honest as his reputation makes him seem he is and Othello think he is; Othello, in spite of his Moorish/African features, is not the beast some characters claim he is; and, finally, Desdemona is not the unfaithful wife Iago accused her of being. Turning now to Bradleys lectures the reader will notice a quite different approach to race if compared to Garbers text as to how they deal with those issues. (However, they seem to agree on specific points concerning gender issues, as I shall briefly discuss below) By

emphasizing less in the element of Othellos race as an important factor to explicate the play, Bradley channelled his arguments towards difficulties regarding more the characters and their nature rather than external issues to the people as Garber does. According to Bradley, it seems hopelessly un-Shakespearean (Bradley pp. 159) to think that Shakespeare intended Othello to be acted as a typical black African individual. Although he admits that Othellos race play a part in the story and has its relevance for the idea that the reader has of him and for the catastrophe, the British professor believes that race is not a determining factor for the nature of Othellos character. Bradleys lectures dwell more on the description of the nature and motive of the

characters in Othello, whereas Garber focus more on issues that are not necessarily addressed explicitly in the play. By no means did Bradley in his lectures insist on the possibility of such a dichotomy as the one pointed out by Garber in her chapter. Bradley is not able to determine whether or not Shakespeare intended to create a Sub-Saharan (lighter brown) or a dark black man when imagining Othello. Yet, he adds, there is very little relevance as to whether or not he wanted the character to be acted as more or less dark. He allows for the fact though that it would be unlikely that Brabantio would refer to Othello as someone who has a sooty bosom (sooty meaning here dirty, blackish) if Othello were not dark black (Bradley pp. 170); and also there is the fact of how Othello speaks about himself as a black, undeserving person, as follows (Act III, Scene III)

Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica

Othello: []Her name, that was as fresh As Dians visage, is now begrimed and black As mine own face []

Saldanha 4

For Bradley, those are instances that might leave no doubt regarding Othellos colour. The verse that I have transcribed above, it is relevant to mention, reveals important information about Othello, namely that he sounds quite prejudiced (taking into account the anachronism of this term) against himself (a point that Garber also discusses in her chapter). All this discussion, never the less, is set aside by Bradley owing to the fact that, according to him, readers have little clue about how Shakespeare would call a North African or Southern African person back in his age and Othellos physical features (skin colour) have minimal influence on the development of the character himself. Having discussed an issue with which the authors deal in a quite dissimilar fashion race, now I turn to the topic of gender in Othello, only to concisely present the views of the authors on it. It seems that Garber and Bradley have similar interpretation of Desdemonas attitude towards the masculine and violent world surrounding her. It is noteworthy that the character of Desdemona displays such a strength, independence and confidence throughout the play, which is revealed by her way of speaking and arguing either with her father when she bravely confronts his opinion about her choice of husband in front of the Senate or with Othello when she eloquently defends Cassio. Desdemona is decisive when it comes to making decisions with regard to her own life. This feature presents unusually steadfastness and control for a feminine character created in Shakespeares time. In this sense, Othello can be considered a play that opens for debate very controversial issues that were not even subject of discussion in the sixteenth century. Rarely did a work of art bring up such debate as the one Shakespeare seems to propose. Garber describes the character thus: Desdemona is from the first open, generous, sure of herself unlike Othello. [] Desdemona will present herself as a social actor in the context of an otherwise man-to-man negotiation (pp. 598). And goes on to add: [][S]he paused her

housework to overhear and ultimately to participate in the conversation between Othello and her father, which seems to have surprised those present to the gathering, as it would be not common for a woman to take part in such discussions, even when they were about themselves. Bradley as well concurs with the notion that Desdemona had [been] made [] such a man (Act I, Scene III). The author points out that Desdemona was extremely brave for choosing Othello as husband. Her choice was an utter surprise to her father because the idea Brabantio had of her used to be quite different, as Bradley transcribes

Brabantio:

A maiden never bold

Of spirit so still and quiet, that her motion

Blushd at herself, and she, in spite of nature, Of years, of country, credit, every thing, To fall in love with what she fear'd to look on!

Shakespeare: Obra e Crtica

Saldanha 5

Her love for Othello seems to have given her strength to rise and take positions that she never before had fought so fiercely to defend. Her innocence and sweetness were replaced by

determination and independence. According to Bradley, she passed from girlhood to womanhood, of an individuality and strength which, if she had lived, would have been gradually fused with her more obvious qualities and have issued in a thousand actions, sweet and good. Desdemona represents thus the feminist character (taking into consideration the

limitation of this term) in Othello. This fact, for me, presents feminist element that cannot be witnessed in the literature of writers contemporary to Shakespeare or in the works of many writers that came after him.

References:

BRADLEY,

C.

Shakespearen

Tragedy.

Lectures

on

Hamlet,

Othello,

King

Lear

and

Macbeth.

MacMillan.

GARBER, M. Shakespeare After All. Anchor Books, New York