Monday, October 18, 2010

Language & Violence

With the character of Iago we find that language becomes an instrument of violence. He does this by prompting the de-signification of language. He tells us “I am not what I am,” and explains that the day his actions (and therefore his speech) reflect his true intentions is the day he’ll be dead, signaling to us that anything he says cannot be trusted, as it will be a lie. He is not only lying to the other characters in the play, he is lying to us, the readers, which further complicates the contradictions and paradoxes found in the play. 

Language can be described as the ultimate marker of humanity: we think in it, we understand ourselves and the world  through it, and it enables/constrains knowledge. Iago, then, disrupts the  fundamental organizing tool of reality. He turns language from a tool that facilitates communication and understanding, from a tool of designation and  denotation with which human beings can identify and construct their realities, to a tool of obfuscation. His language brings ambivalence and uneasiness to the world of the play. For example, the speech Othello gives to the Duke in act 1  illustrates his mastery of the medium: he uses pathos, false modesty, and elements of performance and storytelling to lure his audience to his side. His language is concrete, and it is fecund in that it promotes empathy, which is how he gets Desdemona to fall in love with him. When he speaks to Iago at 4.1.34-41, however, his ability to speak has completely disintegrated because he has been so thoroughly led astray by him. He speaks in short, furtive sentences. At times he doesn’t even use full sentences and just spits out nouns: “Handkerchief--confessions--handkerchief,” and “Pish! Nose, ears, and lips!” which is interesting because it reminded me of cubism and how post WWI artists used it to depict the violence that occurs when the world becomes fragmented--which is essentially what happens to Othello. His emotional world was constructed on the basis that Desdemona was virtuous and faithful to him (“Honey,” “O my sweet,” “It gives me wonder great as my content to see you here before me,” “My dear love,” “I do love thee”) so when he believes that this is untrue, then everything around him unravels. Othello mimics the unravelling of his world with what wishes to do to his wife, which is to “chop her to messes” (4.1.190.) He wants to cut her up into pieces the way language and his identity have been. Not only does this show how Iago has fractured language, it also shows that his language is not fecund: it is the exact opposite of Othello’s and leads to death. If language is an indicator of humanity, then Othello’s inability to speak signals that he is being dehumanized--he is turning into the beast that Iago compared him to at the opening of the play and his killing Desdemona serves as a justification for the xenophobia and racism Iago advances. Ironically, Iago tells Othello to “keep time in all,” or to maintain control. He is referring to Othello’s passion, which he claims is “most unsuiting to a man,” but because his passion is one of the things that differentiates Othello from the other ‘civilized’ Venetians, Iago actually wants him to lose control of it--another instance of the bastardization of language.

Through the de-signification of language, Iago creates a world in which there is a total eradication of truth, but only he is aware of that. What does this mean for the characters of Othello? It means that Iago is  a tyrant, of sorts, who manipulates people and impels them to do as he wishes. His tyranny is of the worst kind, however, because it is insidious; he forces people to do as he dictates while allowing them to believe that they are acting of their own volition. By giving people wrong information he forces them to make decisions according to a script that he has laid out. A cruel joke is being played on the other characters: they no longer recognize the rules of the game. Each character believes that he or she is making a decision for a reason: Othello kills Desdemona because she has committed adultery; Roderigo tries to kill Cassio because that will help him “get” Desdemona--but the truth of the situation is that all of their decisions are based on nothing. Desdemona’s adultery is a complete fabrication (much like this play: ironically Othello says that “It is not words that shakes me thus” but it is. It is the power of words that “shakes” him, just as they “shake” the audience--it’s as if Iago is putting on a play, but instead of being in the audience Othello is in the middle of it.) All the destruction and devastation their actions inflict, then, is for nothing. The tragedy of the play is overwhelming in its thoroughness because there is no point to it; it is totally devoid of meaning. This is emphasized by the fact that Iago never gives us a real reason for his actions. He tells us first that it is because he has been passed over for a promotion, then that it is because he suspects Othello has slept with his wife. But we cannot trust his “reasons” and even if we do, there still remains an imbalance: surely the obliteration of Venetian military power  (which is what Othello’s death means) cannot be tantamount to adultery or workplace advancement? Even at the end of Lear there is a bit of hope in the form of Edgar: I’m not sure where the hope is going to come from at the end of this play. 

2 comments:

Sandra Hamlett said...

I enjoyed reading your post. I agree that language is key to the tragedy of Othello. I find Iago even more compelling a character because of the way he is able to manipulate those around him through the use of language. It's chilling to have a character map out exactly who he is by stating "I am not what I am." What is Shakespeare saying here? In Twelfth Night we can not believe our eyes, in Much Ado About Nothing, we can not believe what we hear, in A Midsummers Night's dream, we can not believe what is felt. In Othello, I think Shakespeare is also playing around with reality by testing our understanding of language. If Iago is not what his is, then does that mean he doesn't exist at all?

ladida said...

So I'm re-visiting Othello, and the text is covered in my old notes, which inevitably lead me to re-visit this site (and all the great new posts)and this post. Here I posit the idea that language and humanity are intricately intertwined, and that language is even a marker for humanity, and then I use that idea to examine Othello and his demise. What I didn't do, I now realize, is adequately apply it to Iago. At the beginning of the play his mastery over language is as impressive as Othello's. If the disintegration of Othello's speech signals his dehumanization, then the whole-ness of his speech should represent his humanity, right? So, if Iago's speech and Othello's speech are both "whole" at the beginning of the play, what does that say about Iago's humanity? If language and the use of it is a marker for humanity, then is Iago the “most human” in this play, (since he uses language the best)? Or is it that his designification of language signals to us that he is in fact the exact opposite of human? I’m not sure what the answer is right now, but I think I’m heading towards the conclusion that the monstrous and the human aren’t that far apart.

(Just now I wrote that he uses language the best in the play, but is the ability to manipulate language the same as using language “the best”?; if his use of language serves to disintegrate it, then does he really have mastery over it, or is he just destroying it? )