While reading the Tempest I cannot stop comparing this story to that of The Tragety of Othello, The Moore of Venice. Within that play there was a point in which that Othello was accused of witchcraft to win the love of the sweet Desdemona; more importantly, the accusation of such meant the fall of Othello from power. Within “The Tempest” I am inclined to notice the lack of concern and repercussions for those who do practice some type of magic within this play
Propspero admits within the first scene that he is the cause of the storm in which had just occurred. At no point from that point on is he threatened or judged because of such. Also, there is the magical character Ariel who is not hunted down at any point (however Ariel tends to remind me of the magical characters within “Mid-Summer Night’s Dream” and how they were also accepted). Prospero in Act III again is part of a magical alliance with Ariel and again there is no hint towards a problem for Prospero for this alliance.
The inclusion of magic within Comedy’s like “Mid-Summer” is somewhat easily accepted due to the light humor of the entire play itself. However, the inclusion of magic within a Tragedy is somewhat less clear when trying to understand the relationship between what is acceptable or real for that matter. Within “The Tempest” the inclusion of magic continually adds to the plot in ways that were merely touched upon within “Othello”. It is my wonder as to whether or not magic should be within this play and if it should be included then what are the reasons that it was not accepted within “Othello”? I have come to a few short conclusions.
The inclusion of magic within this play adds a slight mystery to the tragedy that is not apparent in any of the other plays that Shakespeare has written. As such this is increasing the intrigue for those who are reading or watching this play. Magic can always be an author’s aid when he/she wants to add something different into the story, because of such “The Tempest” has another layer of intrigue within it. Another reason could have been that due to the abnormality of the first scene, Shakespeare wanted to continue the idea of abnormality into the story itself. Thus, magic was inserted into the story line.
I do not believe that there is no specific reason for Shakespeare to add magic into this specific play. My only question is why.
3 comments:
I felt the same way you did after reading the first act of this play and realized that no one seems to care that Prospero used magic to create this big storm and cause a ship wreck. I think he justified it to his daughter is telling her that no harm was done, but still in Othello it was such a big deal and here is seems like it’s happening everywhere and it’s not being questioned. I like the conclusions that you came to about the inclusion is certain plays, I agree and think that magic was more easily accepted in A Midsummer Night’s Dream due to the fact that it is a comedy, and in a tragedy I think it adds more mystery like you said but also does that make it more easily accepted? Because like you said it wasn’t accepted in Othello, and I definitely agree that the inclusion of magic within a tragedy is somewhat less clear when trying to understand the relationship between what is acceptable or real.
It seems to me that the inclusion of magic is strongly associated with power and control in this play. The way i see it, the magic is equivalent to knowledge in a way and we all know that saying "Knowledge is power."
In todays readings as we see Caliban scheming with Stefano and Trinculo, Caliban made it a point to mention that in order for their plan to succeed they need to get Prosperos books first and destroy them, thus implying that without his magic/knowledge he is nothing and becomes as weak as the average person. This was a nice entry :)
This is a great connection between plays, and I hadn't considered the sinister magic that Brabanzio accuses Othello of in light of _The Tempest_ before. I think it calls our attention to the darker aspects of Prospero. Although he has often been represented as an old, sympathetic figure, he is also ruthless. His magic, too, is used for the causes of pain and suffering. The difference with Othello is that Prospero is not "othered" by his magic--there is nothing racialized about him. Perhaps this allows his magic to go by less noted.
Post a Comment