Why are there so many strong women in Shakespeare's works?

One thing that stands out immediately in Much Ado About Nothing is the presence of a strong, central, female figure.  I find this to be slightly ironic considering during Shakespeare’s time women were not very highly regarded, especially when they are married, as seen through the “Marriage and Money” article previously read.  Through the first two acts, primarily the first one, I see Shakespeare setting the stage to enhance Beatrice’s role as a strong woman.  Shakespeare clearly demonstrates this powerful aspect of women when he puts Benedick vs. Beatrice in a verbal showdown.  After the two provide insults back and forth, primarily Beatrice towards Benedick, Benedick has enough and backs down, “I have done” (I.I.116-117).  I found this moment to be extremely interesting while reading because what man during this time would let a woman win such a match of insults?

            To further demonstrate Beatrice’s strong-will and dominance, when she provides a reason to not get married she makes a valid, religious based point which undermines the male gender.  She basically tells her uncle, Leonato, that she refuses to be overmastered with a piece of valiant dust?” (II.I.51-52) .  Although Beatrice believes she will be overpowered by whomever she marries she still refers to the man as a miniscule piece of dirt.  This is a powerful insult not only to men but also God and Adam from Genesis.  But, what is more interesting than Beatrice’s control is the acknowledgement Shakespeare makes in the men, that women seem to be the person in the marriage who “wear the pants”.

            As shown in our study guide questions, we also see the quote from Don Pedro in Act I Scene I, line 213 “Well, as time shall try.  In time the savage bull doth bear the yoke” while discussing marriage.  Even Don Pedro recognizes that once a man enters marriage he will become tamed and part of the yoke.  This is the lifestyle that Benedick appears to want to avoid for the rest of his life so he can remain a bachelor but we all know this is not practical during Shakespeare’s time just as it seems impractical to have a woman “in-charge”.  It is funny to think that a woman would be the one to put the man in his place and tell him what to do and how to act, especially from all the commentary we have read about societal roles.

            One thing I also noticed while reading that almost contradicts the idea of women’s roles once they are married is when Benedick and Don Pedro are communicating.  In Act One, Benedick sees marriage as the end of his individuality.  He sees that the woman is going to take over his life and over power him and he will be a tool to her.  Benedick says, “In such great letters as they write ‘Here is good horse to hire’ let them signify under my sign ‘Here you may see Benedick, the married man’” (I.I.218-219).  This is extremely ironic to me considering all that has been embedded in the minds of readers of Shakespeare is that women are not supposed to be in power.  I think this quote directly addresses the oppression Benedick will feel from being married to any woman. 

            What does this say about Shakespeare as a writer?  We have already seen powerful women in A Midsummer Night’s Dream and even in Twelfth Night.  Are these women supposed to represent the few women who, during the time actually stood out or maybe this is Shakespeare’s way of calling out all the women and get those who are a bit more timid to stand up and take control of the life they lead and the men in society?  It is unfortunate that no one ever will know the answer to any of these questions but I think they are reasonable to be asking, otherwise why would the women in Shakespeare’s plays have so much strength?

Gender and Power

         There were many things I found perplexing in the first acts of A Midsummer Night's Dream.  I haven't seen the play performed in a while, but as I started reading I was expecting something very light.  So when Egeus starts begging for the "ancient privelege of Athens", I wasn't sure how seriously I should be taking it.  This situation, I suppose, is appropriate for the setting of the play, but at the same time I couldn't really factor it into what my understanding of the play as a whole.  Egeus says that Lysander has "bewitched" Hermia into loving him and thus disobeying Egeus' order that she marry Demetrius (I.i.21-38).  But what I don't understand is that if Egeus blames Lysander for brainwashing Hermia, why doesn't he beg that Lysander be punished?  Then, later, when Lysander accuses Demetrius of having made love to Helena and then leaving her, Theseus says he had heard about this but quickly forgot about it ("but being over-full of self affairs, my mind did lose it"- I.i.111-113).  Why is Demetrius not held accountable for his actions and why is Egeus so casual about something that could mean life or death for Hermia? This interaction seems to set up the gender hierarchy within the play, at least for the human characters.
           The relationship between Titania and Oberon suggests that division of power is not so clean cut in the faery kingdom.  Titania and Oberon's first interaction in the play displays a definite power struggle in which neither party seems to hold much power over the other.  That Titania denies Oberon the changeling boy "perforce" shows that she has power and can exert that power in spite of her husband (II.i.26).  Also, Titania's assertion that she must keep the boy to honor the relationship that she had with his mother shows that Titania values her friendship just as much or more than her relationship with her husband, displaying her autonomy.  Oberon's mischief with the love potion is a way to undermine the autonomy that Titania displays, and perhaps to assert a patriarchal power dynamic.

Female Relationships in Hamlet

I've had some difficulty trying to expand the flurry of fragments that intrigued me in Hamlet into a full blog. To finally take a stab at it, I was considering the way Shakespeare portrays relationships between women, starting from the relationship between Gertrude and Ophelia. Gertrude is the one to break the news that Opehlia has died, "There is a willow grows aslant a brook...therewith fantastic garlands did she make...till that her garments, heavy with their drink, pulled the poor wretch from her melodious lay to muddy death" (4.7, 139). Gertrude mourns Ophelia, yet it seems to me that Gertrude is another character who failed Ophelia by not reaching out to her before it was too late.

Both Gertrude and Ophelia had received harsh treatment from the males of the play, namely Hamlet, who viciously ridiculed Ophelia to "join a nunnery" (ie, "You're a skank.") and equivalently insulted Gertrude, "As bad as kill a king and marry his brother" (3.4, 25). Gertrude and Ophelia have been name-called and overpowered by their male counterparts comparably. However, there are fewer scenes of the two women commiserating with one another or sharing their woes, as Desdemona and her attendant, Emilia, would discuss their theories of vexing husbands and men in Desdemona's bed chamber.
Gertrude may have been honestly oblivious to Ophelia's plight and grieving, for Gertrude admitted that she was expecting to lay flowers at Ophelia's bridal bed but surely not at her funeral. Even so, I am disappointed in the lack of camaraderie between the two women- they could have formed an alliance that would have strengthened them both.

Picking up on Shakespearean References
In my English Literature II class we are onto the modernist period of writing and just finished reading T.S. Eliot's "The Waste Land". In one of the poem's, "A Game of Chess", the barroom scene of a labor-class woman insensitively revealing the private life of her friend, Lil. The narrator divulges extremely personal details of Lil's disjointed marraige,
but get to my Shakespearean point, the poem concludes with the narrator and girlfriends departing with "good byes" which echo Ophelia's farewell prior to her suicide, "good night, ladies, good night sweet ladies, good night, good night."
In the context of the poem, Eliot was drawing from the emotionally-charged scene of "Hamlet" in order to convey his own female characters in a bleak and dire world.

What stood out to me was the opportunity to see Shakespeare through the eyes of another writer. The in-depth analysis of Shakespeare's works that comes from our class I consider invaluable, but within a Shakespeare-concentrated class I sometimes forget how far reaching Shakespeare's characters and themes touched others besides myself and how often he is echoed in subsequent great works literature for centuries after.

Women Rule

It’s a strange kind of contradiction that in Shakespeare’s time women were not allowed to act on the stage and yet they tend dominate and/or hold pivotal roles in many of his plays, especially Merchant of Venice.

Although Portia has no control over which partner she ends up with due to her father’s challenge, she holds a vast amount of knowledge and cunning. When Bassanio must leave to go to Antonio’s aid, he relies on Portia’s wealth to offer up to Shylock. And, unknowing to anyone else present in the room, the Judge and attendant are actually Portia and Nerissa dressed as men. It is true that in order to get their voices heard, they have to assume the identities of men, an understandable predicament for this time period, but the fact that Shakespeare makes the women of the play the heroes shows a great deal of support and trust toward the gender, perhaps he is even making a not-so-subtle statement that women are capable of such tasks.

W While the play shows that women are a capable gender on the outside, Shakespeare also shows the power they hold behind closed doors. The phrase “a man is king of his castle until the queen arrives” has been a frequent joke on the lips of many in reference to a woman’s power over a man. I do not mean in the public’s eye, because women were mostly powerless until the recent past, but within the realm of the household. I believed that this phrase was an American invention created in the women’s rights era, however it seems like it or varieties of it was present in Shakespeare’s time as well. A prime example of this power can be found in Act 4, Scene 1 beginning with Bassanio statement, “Antonio, I am married to a wife /Which is as dear to me as life itself./ But life itself, my wife, and all the world /Are not with me esteemed above thy life./ I would lose all, ay, sacrifice them all/ Here to this devil, to deliver you” (lines 277-82). Basically, Bassanio is stating that he would give up his wife for that of his friend’s wife, a grand and pretty statement, but when the judge – his wife! – and Nerissa hear the remarks made by Bassanio and Graziano, they both chafe and Nerissa returns with, “’Tis well you offer it behind her back;/The wish would make else an unquiet house” (lines 288-89). Here, she is warning him that he better be careful unless he wishes to have a fight with his wife. The only unfortunate part is that these words came out of the mouth of what they think is a man, so they have no idea that their wives/women just threatened them. However, the statements alone show that the common principle of a woman ruling her roost is even a part of this time period. Because these women come off as the strong, get-it-done sort of women, it makes me picture them running their households and husbands quite efficiently.

Even their gifts to their husbands portray this control over them. When Portia and Nerissa each gifted their husbands with rings that represented their love, basically “promise” rings, the idea was to ensnare them and have proof of doing so. When the ring comes off, the wife is to understand that their love no longer exists. Later, when Portia tests this love she believes that Bassanio won’t give it up, until the last moment when Graziano chases her down to give it to her. You can almost sense that her plan is to have the ring waiting for him when he returns, possibly sparking a large argument.