Whether a reflection of William Shakespeare’s personal beliefs or an ironic social commentary, the image of masculine power in “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar,” “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark,” “The Tragedy of Macbeth,” and “The Tragedy of Coriolanus” is consistently associated with violence and physical supremacy; the image of feminine power is equated with manipulative tactics and indirect control through words.
There are countless examples of one’s maleness being dependent on an ability to discard passive problem solving techniques and utilize violence. Shakespeare presents a strong contrast to his brawny men with female characters who exert power by agitating their male counterparts with threats, utilizing reverse psychology, and using their sexual wiles to attain what they desire, reinforcing an ultimate dependence on men.
There is much tension in Shakespeare’s mentioned plays regarding the line of division between these two distinct roles. Each of these plays presents a moment when a male character’s gender is challenged by his own competing female tendencies, prompting him to respond with violence; or a female character attempts to assume the male gender in order to gain power, discarding her usual manipulative tendencies.
In order to understand the tensions that exist when a character dismisses (whether momentarily or not) his/her assumed gender traits in Shakespeare’s plays, one must recognize what traits are commonly believed to be true of both the male and female genders.
In her essay, “Sex Roles: The Argument from Nature,” Joyce Trebilcot reverts to basic biological principles to explicate behavioral differences between men and women:
“As the male fetus develops in the womb, the testes secrete a hormone which is held to influence the growth of the central nervous system. The female fetus does not produce this hormone, nor is there an analogous female hormone which is significant at this stage. Hence it is suggested that female and male brains differ in structure, that this difference is due to the prenatal influence of testicular hormone, and that the difference in brains is the basis of some later differences in behavior”(Trebilcot).
After establishing the likelihood of brain differences depending on gender, she goes on to address the common dispositions associated with both genders,“…the uterus is passive and receptive, and so are females; penises are active and penetrating, and so are males”—confirming the traditionally held belief (Trebilcot).
In his essay, “‘Pack Your Heat and Work the Streets’—Weapons and the Active Construction of Violent Masculinities,” Henri Myrttinen explores the connection between males and violence, saying of all factions of men:
“Their lowest common denominator is a view which, as described by Bryson, equates 'manliness' with the 'sanctioned use of aggression, force and violence.' This 'manliness' often needs to be renegotiated through the violent subjugation of others.”
He goes on to say, “Three characteristics linked to the notion of hypermasculinity of interest here are an emphasis on strength, aggressiveness and sexual potence.” While there are exceptions to this view of masculinity, one can easily agree that the generally held belief is that being male is synonymous with aggressiveness and physical power.
Having established what marks one as male or female in a most conventional sense, it is necessary to note that a character is marred for attempting to change their socially assigned gender role in Shakespeare’s plays. A man that displays female characteristics, or rather a lack of malecharacteristics (violence), is not just “unmanly,” but considered weak and pathetic. A woman who displays masculine characteristics is equally criticized and considered domineering or rough. As a result, representatives from both genders experience jeers from others, or are physically penalized.
This punishment is evident in “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Several characters display typical gender traits to assert power, and other’s experience fluctuating roles. Most obvious is Mark Antony’s feminization of Julius Caesar after his death. Antony speaks for Caesar—literally putting words in his mouth—which is typically associated with male dominance. However, Antony’s manipulative tactics used during his eulogy are easily classified under the category of feminine power devices. Rather than using direct violence by immediately attacking Caesar’s murderers, he plays the humble and hurt friend, using reverse psychology on the crowd to stir the reaction he desires. While this strategy is successful for Antony, it serves to feminize not only Caesar for his silence, but Antony for his manipulation and indirectness—commonly associated with female power tactics.
Marcus Brutus is yet another character who struggles with asserting his masculinity through violence.
Brutus’ wife, Portia, temporarily assumes the masculine gender to express herself, but eventually resorts back to female dependency.
However, does not address the temporary nature of this masculine switch. While Portia chooses to bleed, she submits to her dependence on Brutus by killing herself. Brutus explains the reason for her death to Cassius, saying, “Impatience of my absence/and grief that young Oc emphasizing her failure to cope as a women with a male gender-lect. This play also connects masculinity with intended violence: The women in the play assert their power by manipulation and words, the men assert power by physical force and violence. For instance, Calpurnia begs and eventually kneels to Caesar when she wants him to stay home on the Ides of March, saying, “Do not go forth today. Call it my fear/That keeps you in the house and not your own” (Shakespeare 1554). Caesar submits until he is ridiculed by others for showing fear.
One must also note that Portia’s punishment for assuming masculine traits is her death.
Like Brutus in “Julius Caesar,” Shakespeare’s Hamlet in “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” struggles to assert his masculinity through violence. His hesitancy to do so is equated with femininity, with the resulting violence dismissing this tendency of his. By this rationale, one can assume that introspection is a feminine attribute in the world of Shakespeare, while action and directness are inherently masculine. Hamlet is subtly chastised (but chastised nonetheless) for his highly introspective nature. This tendency to over-think is apparent when Hamlet says, “blah blah I must be a manalkdj;.” Hamlet equates his final decision with masculinity, and his decision is that of violence over peace; therefore one can equate violence with masculinity and peace with feminism in Shakespeare’s text.
Macbeth is yet another example of tension between genders and a struggle to maintain one’s socially appointed role. It is quite evident that this tension exists between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth regarding gender and power. Several times throughout the play, Lady Macbeth challenges her husband by saying, “be a manblahblah,”—illustrating how one is marred for deviating from expected behavior. While she is perfectly capable of committing the murderous acts that she is requesting of Macbeth, she manipulates her husband into committing them by threatening his manhood. Because she does not assume male power tactics, she emerges successful—at least for the moment. For Macbeth, in order to prove his manhood, he must resorts to violence.
It is in the “Tragedy of Coriolanus” that one of Shakespeare’s female characters resorts to feminine wiles and not only emerges triumphantly, but does not attempt to assume masculine power traits and is therefore not killed by the author. The mother of Coriolanus, afdgadsf emerges as the powerful woman, who succeeds in maintaining her feminine qualities.
Citations
Greenblatt, Stephen, ed. The Norton Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford
Edition. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997.
Shakespeare, William. "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar." The Norton
Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford Edition. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, and Katharine E. Maus. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997.
Myrttinen, Henri. "'Pack Your Heat and Work the Streets'--Weapons and
the Active Construction of Violent Masculinites." Women and Language 27 (2004). 09 May 2005.
Trebilcot, Joyce. "Sex Roles: The Argument From Nature." Ethics 85
(1975). 09 May 2005.
There are countless examples of one’s maleness being dependent on an ability to discard passive problem solving techniques and utilize violence. Shakespeare presents a strong contrast to his brawny men with female characters who exert power by agitating their male counterparts with threats, utilizing reverse psychology, and using their sexual wiles to attain what they desire, reinforcing an ultimate dependence on men.
There is much tension in Shakespeare’s mentioned plays regarding the line of division between these two distinct roles. Each of these plays presents a moment when a male character’s gender is challenged by his own competing female tendencies, prompting him to respond with violence; or a female character attempts to assume the male gender in order to gain power, discarding her usual manipulative tendencies.
In order to understand the tensions that exist when a character dismisses (whether momentarily or not) his/her assumed gender traits in Shakespeare’s plays, one must recognize what traits are commonly believed to be true of both the male and female genders.
In her essay, “Sex Roles: The Argument from Nature,” Joyce Trebilcot reverts to basic biological principles to explicate behavioral differences between men and women:
“As the male fetus develops in the womb, the testes secrete a hormone which is held to influence the growth of the central nervous system. The female fetus does not produce this hormone, nor is there an analogous female hormone which is significant at this stage. Hence it is suggested that female and male brains differ in structure, that this difference is due to the prenatal influence of testicular hormone, and that the difference in brains is the basis of some later differences in behavior”(Trebilcot).
After establishing the likelihood of brain differences depending on gender, she goes on to address the common dispositions associated with both genders,“…the uterus is passive and receptive, and so are females; penises are active and penetrating, and so are males”—confirming the traditionally held belief (Trebilcot).
In his essay, “‘Pack Your Heat and Work the Streets’—Weapons and the Active Construction of Violent Masculinities,” Henri Myrttinen explores the connection between males and violence, saying of all factions of men:
“Their lowest common denominator is a view which, as described by Bryson, equates 'manliness' with the 'sanctioned use of aggression, force and violence.' This 'manliness' often needs to be renegotiated through the violent subjugation of others.”
He goes on to say, “Three characteristics linked to the notion of hypermasculinity of interest here are an emphasis on strength, aggressiveness and sexual potence.” While there are exceptions to this view of masculinity, one can easily agree that the generally held belief is that being male is synonymous with aggressiveness and physical power.
Having established what marks one as male or female in a most conventional sense, it is necessary to note that a character is marred for attempting to change their socially assigned gender role in Shakespeare’s plays. A man that displays female characteristics, or rather a lack of malecharacteristics (violence), is not just “unmanly,” but considered weak and pathetic. A woman who displays masculine characteristics is equally criticized and considered domineering or rough. As a result, representatives from both genders experience jeers from others, or are physically penalized.
This punishment is evident in “The Tragedy of Julius Caesar.” Several characters display typical gender traits to assert power, and other’s experience fluctuating roles. Most obvious is Mark Antony’s feminization of Julius Caesar after his death. Antony speaks for Caesar—literally putting words in his mouth—which is typically associated with male dominance. However, Antony’s manipulative tactics used during his eulogy are easily classified under the category of feminine power devices. Rather than using direct violence by immediately attacking Caesar’s murderers, he plays the humble and hurt friend, using reverse psychology on the crowd to stir the reaction he desires. While this strategy is successful for Antony, it serves to feminize not only Caesar for his silence, but Antony for his manipulation and indirectness—commonly associated with female power tactics.
Marcus Brutus is yet another character who struggles with asserting his masculinity through violence.
Brutus’ wife, Portia, temporarily assumes the masculine gender to express herself, but eventually resorts back to female dependency.
However, does not address the temporary nature of this masculine switch. While Portia chooses to bleed, she submits to her dependence on Brutus by killing herself. Brutus explains the reason for her death to Cassius, saying, “Impatience of my absence/and grief that young Oc emphasizing her failure to cope as a women with a male gender-lect. This play also connects masculinity with intended violence: The women in the play assert their power by manipulation and words, the men assert power by physical force and violence. For instance, Calpurnia begs and eventually kneels to Caesar when she wants him to stay home on the Ides of March, saying, “Do not go forth today. Call it my fear/That keeps you in the house and not your own” (Shakespeare 1554). Caesar submits until he is ridiculed by others for showing fear.
One must also note that Portia’s punishment for assuming masculine traits is her death.
Like Brutus in “Julius Caesar,” Shakespeare’s Hamlet in “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” struggles to assert his masculinity through violence. His hesitancy to do so is equated with femininity, with the resulting violence dismissing this tendency of his. By this rationale, one can assume that introspection is a feminine attribute in the world of Shakespeare, while action and directness are inherently masculine. Hamlet is subtly chastised (but chastised nonetheless) for his highly introspective nature. This tendency to over-think is apparent when Hamlet says, “blah blah I must be a manalkdj;.” Hamlet equates his final decision with masculinity, and his decision is that of violence over peace; therefore one can equate violence with masculinity and peace with feminism in Shakespeare’s text.
Macbeth is yet another example of tension between genders and a struggle to maintain one’s socially appointed role. It is quite evident that this tension exists between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth regarding gender and power. Several times throughout the play, Lady Macbeth challenges her husband by saying, “be a manblahblah,”—illustrating how one is marred for deviating from expected behavior. While she is perfectly capable of committing the murderous acts that she is requesting of Macbeth, she manipulates her husband into committing them by threatening his manhood. Because she does not assume male power tactics, she emerges successful—at least for the moment. For Macbeth, in order to prove his manhood, he must resorts to violence.
It is in the “Tragedy of Coriolanus” that one of Shakespeare’s female characters resorts to feminine wiles and not only emerges triumphantly, but does not attempt to assume masculine power traits and is therefore not killed by the author. The mother of Coriolanus, afdgadsf emerges as the powerful woman, who succeeds in maintaining her feminine qualities.
Citations
Greenblatt, Stephen, ed. The Norton Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford
Edition. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997.
Shakespeare, William. "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar." The Norton
Shakespeare: Based on the Oxford Edition. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean E. Howard, and Katharine E. Maus. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1997.
Myrttinen, Henri. "'Pack Your Heat and Work the Streets'--Weapons and
the Active Construction of Violent Masculinites." Women and Language 27 (2004). 09 May 2005
Trebilcot, Joyce. "Sex Roles: The Argument From Nature." Ethics 85
(1975). 09 May 2005
0 comments:
Post a Comment