Upon reading the entire play, I have to say I'm left with a bit of uneasiness again just like a lot of the other plays. I don't really know how I feel about Claudio or the marriage between Hero and Claudio.
Claudio is a character doesn't seem to think before he speaks or acts; he acts purely on emotions which can be very dangerous. This is behavior we as readers witnessed from the very beginning. He sees Hero and it's love at first sight. I'm a cynic. I don't believe in love at first sight, so I think it's highly irrational behavior, especially from a soldier who one would expect to have a good head on his shoulders (sorry to anyone who believes they have fallen in love at first sight). Then he believes Don John, who is notorious for lying and causing trouble, when he tells him that Don Pedro is wooing Hero for himself. Maybe he only believed Don John because he is insecure in his lack of a relationship with Hero seeing as he has never even spoken to her. Then Claudio is once again fooled by Don John. After you are lied to once by someone, would you really listen to them again? Did he just do it because he was actually scared of getting married and he was just looking for a way out of marrying Hero? If that's the case, why would he have gotten so angry? Which brings me once again to Claudio being an emotional fool. He completely destroys Hero's life by saying she's not virginal. He slanders her in front of her father and everyone who is attending for the wedding. He didn't bother to ask what in the world was going on he simply took a liar at his word and hot headedly ruined an innocent girl's life.
It leaves me wondering who the real villain is in the play. Is it really Don John or would you have to consider Claudio a villain, too? The fact that I can't decide if I consider Claudio is a villain or not leaves me a bit nervous about the wedding between Claudio and Hero. I can't imagine marrying someone who ruined my life forcing me to pretend I'm someone else for all eternity. That would be such punishment. Then again, I suppose depending on how the marriage scene is intererpreted, maybe Hero is going to make Claudio pay for the rest of his life. What's that saying...hell hath no fury like a woman scorned? Maybe Hero is stronger than I give her credit for. Maybe she realizes this is a way to take her life back from the person who destroyed her. Or maybe she realizes that she will never have another chance because of the damage Claudio has done. I'm not sure, and for that reason this ending leaves me with that sense of uneasiness that I'm not sure if it's really a happy ending.
5 comments:
I like how you are bringing about the idea that there just may be two villains in the play: Don John AND Claudio. However, I would just consider that Don John's actions are purely malicious, while Claudio may be a love-drunk sick fool. Was the way he slandered Hero entirely his fault? I think it's hard to tell because although it was a harsh verbal lashing with big accusations (which may lead to greater psychological implications, perhaps from war), I don't think he would have done it if it were not for Don John's influence. I guess we can say that Claudio is somewhat gullible, and for a soldier (and a future husband)that may not be a good characteristic.
I don't know if Claudio is a villain, although he certainly is villainous. His re-actions to Don John's actions are the main reasons for the play's flirtation with tragedy. If he were less obtuse and more critical, he would have been able to discern that something was amiss. Why didn't he question Hero about what he had seen instead of accusing her publicly? How do his actions align with his previous perception of Hero as virtuous? They don't. He's fickle and inconstant, more so than Benedick, whose ideas of marriage change completely. He is not in love with Hero, but with her dowry.
Another villainous character is Don Pedro: he manipulates the people in his environment just as his brother does, and his machinations lead Beatrice and Benedick to marry -arguably against their will.
Amy, your post brings up a valid idea- what will happen after the wedding?! There was so much drama and confusion in the play it almost seems silly to think that these quick-to-assume characters could actually start living a calm and trusting life.
Especially how quickly Leonato distrusts his own daughter and Claudio's rude words! I could not imagine this hilarious characters (and sometimes silly fools) to be able to function in a real life situation! It makes me question the "happy" future that is presented at the end of the play.
Amy, your post brings up a valid idea- what will happen after the wedding?! There was so much drama and confusion in the play it almost seems silly to think that these quick-to-assume characters could actually start living a calm and trusting life.
Especially how quickly Leonato distrusts his own daughter and Claudio's rude words! I could not imagine this hilarious characters (and sometimes silly fools) to be able to function in a real life situation! It makes me question the "happy" future that is presented at the end of the play.
If anything, I believe the end result of the play plants the seed for a cycle of suffering of sorts. Benedick and Beatrice were courted in the unusual way of not really courting each other at all, while Claudio's marriage to Hero is riddled with circumstances that display fragility, manipulation, and headstrong emotions. If Victorian England was a sucker for sequels as our society is, I'm sure Much Ado About Nothing Again (great title, right?) would be focused on the unraveling of the relationships as the flaws that make the audience uneasy at the conclusion of the play make themselves known. That, or their could be a bunch of pyro (I'm talking to you, Michael Bay)
Post a Comment