This might sound strange, but many of the characters in Acts
I and II remind me of children. Before you
assume that I am simply an education major whose mind is constantly focused on
the behavior of kids, give me a chance to illustrate this idea.
Egeus acts like a “tattle-tale” when he runs to Theseus to complain about his daughter, Hermia. He is not happy that she refuses to marry Demetrius, and runs to the higher authority instead of taking matters into his own hands. I think he resembles a sibling running to his or her parent after he or she has been in a quarrel. Additionally, Hermia and Lysander both exhibit the behavior of adolescents. Hermia rebels against her Egeus’s order. She proclaims that she is madly in love with Lysander, and refuses to give in to her father’s demand. Hermia’s feelings are mutual, for Lysander adores her, too. He mocks Demetrius by stating, “You have her father’s love, Demetrius; Let me have Hermia’s. Do you marry him” (1.1.93-94). These lines are certainly witty and sarcastic. Besides increasing the comical tone, they sound like something a juvenile would say.
On another note, Titania and Oberon’s argument makes them comparable to younger children. They are fighting over the possession of a boy. In a way, it resembles youngsters arguing over a toy. Oberon becomes jealous, and angrily argues with Titania. He even develops a mischievous plan to drop magical juice into her eyes while she is sleeping, for he knows it will make her fall in love with something once she awakes. He exclaims, "Be it on lion, bear, or wolf, or bull, On meddling monkey, or on busy ape - She shall pursue it with the soul of love" (2.1.180-82). He thinks he is so clever coming up with a naughty plan in order to get what he wants - the boy. Her attention will be focused on chasing her new foolish love that he will be able to snatch his "charm." Does this sound like a child creating a sneaky plan to get to the cookie jar?
Nick Bottom is especially infantile. First of all, he misspells and incorrectly pronounces words. Furthermore, he wants everybody else’s part in the play that the artisans are preparing for the wedding. When Quince assigns roles, Bottom immaturely interferes. He is asked to play Pyramus, but attempts to snatch the parts of Thisbe and the Lion as well. Bottom’s actions mirror what many children would do in that situation. They always want what others have.
Could this all have been part of Shakespeare’s strategy as a playwright? In other words, perhaps developing and emphasizing the child-like nature of his characters was one way that he intensified the comedic nature of the play. His goal was to appeal to the audience, and I am guessing that many people watching his plays were parents. Parents probably find the conduct of his characters especially comical – and even relatable – since they witness such actions on a daily basis. On the other hand, maybe Shakespeare did not do it in order to appeal to the parents of his audience. His writing might simply be making a statement regarding our human nature: we can never completely grow out of childish behavior. Every one of us will act silly or foolish at certain times, whether it is intentional or not.
3 comments:
Krystal, I couldn’t agree with you more. As I was reading, I picked up on a lot of the immaturity between all the characters and they do all seem like children. I do believe this could have been Shakespeare’s intention, while trying to make a comedy. As one looks at little children, we see their immature, childish nature and find humor in it whether it is what the child does or says. Your direct examples of the characters truly show how they are mirror images of kids. The only issue I can see in this is the fact that the characters should know better. Although I do not know the ages of these characters, I would assume they are young adults and adults. Because of this, I would assume Hermia, Lysander, Egeus etc. should know better than to act this way. But, this may be just another aspect in the play that just heightens the humor altogether? Also, going off of your idea of immaturity, the misconstrued ideas of love are also very childish, and do not appear to be heartfelt, besides Lysander and Hermia, but I think that would be a whole different blog post to explore.
I found this argument to be very interesting. We are always searching for the "fatal flaw" of characters in Shakespeare's plays, looking for foreshadowing signs into their impending doom, and finally we continue to read on as the tragedy unfolds. In this play, the major flaw of most the characters are very similar-- they are immature, unreasonable, and even irrational at times. Through the characterization of the highly love driven and naive Helena and Hermia, the stubborn and non-understanding Egeus and Theseus, etc. the comedic nature of this play is heightened, and we can see how such childish characteristics are only a recipe for conflict. In writing this play, Shakespeare seemed to be very aware of what he was doing. He created mischevious characters, controlling characters, foolish ones, etc. each for a certain purpose. Shakespeare mixes all these flawed, childish characters into one mix allowing him to create a world of conflict and comedy that is both relatable and shocking all in one.
Post a Comment