“The Turn of the Shrew: Gendering the Power of Loquacity in Othello.”

Ganguly, Swati. “The Turn of the Shrew: Gendering the Power of Loquacity in Othello.” Multicultural Shakespeare: Translation, Appropriation, and Performance, vol.9, no. 24, 2012, pp.1-13. 

 

SUMMARY 

Ganguly’s claim is informed by many other scholars’ work, but focuses primarily on the enigma of Iago and Emilia.  Although each section has its own claim, of sorts, throughout she argues that Iago and Emilia defy gender conventions. Ganguly pulls from our critical authors from week two: Neely and Woodbridge.  She also references other authors and their claims about Iago, Emilia, and Desdemona.  In doing so, Ganguly focuses on where their readings “fell short” or missed something that she interprets to support her points.  The essay is divided into bolded sections that develop Ganguly’s thesis.  After defining Bakhtin’s notion of the “grotesque” (female) body, she moves into historical context around punishments for shrews (which was an illegal offense in Shakespeare’s England).  She then moves into her analysis of play, focusing on Iago as a shrew or “gossip” character.  From here she focuses primarily on Emilia exploring how she goes from silent shrew, to strong challenger of patriarchal norms. There were two ideas of note in her section on Iago.  First, is the idea that Iago is a “malcontent” archetype in the vein of Malvolio or Caliban.  However, these are roles of powerlessness – like women.  After explaining that a gossip is gendered as female, she makes the claim that Iago is a powerless, feminized, character (gossip) that uses the shrew’s power (the tongue) in order to gain a sense of control.  Additionally, Ganguly makes an underdeveloped, yet interesting, symbolic connection between the penis and the tongue.  In this way the woman’s “unruly” tongue is her source of power, like a man’s “unruly” penis.

*Ben Mathews

“The Other Interracial Marriage in Othello”

Boyer, Arlynda. “The Other Interracial Marriage in Othello.” Shakespeare, vol. 11, no. 2, 2015, pp. 178-200, doi: 10.1080/17450918.2013.833977

In “The Other Interracial Marriage in Othello,” Arlynda Boyer argues that Emilia should be cast as a black woman, saying, “Emilia could be racially different from Iago, and ... understanding her as such serves to illuminate the play for audiences in the here and now” (179). She begins by considering whether original productions of the play cast Emilia as a black or white woman—or both, depending on the context of the audience—reminding readers that the concept of “race” as we know it today came years after Othello’s origin, and those later perceptions shouldn’t cause us to “whitewash” Shakespeare’s characters or how they were depicted on stage during Shakespeare’s time. Boyer argues that Emilia could be black because the script doesn’t define her ethnicity, and there also may have been an audience for a black Emilia: “I am arguing an Emilia who can be either African or Venetian, precisely because she is undefined, whose potential Africanness may have been a staging experiment or an alteration specifically for court performance, and whose flexibility offers us options as it may have offered the King’s Men options” (184). At the same time, Boyer argues that contemporary productions of Othello should cast Emilia as a black woman, as doing so would “[force] audiences to notice complicated racial and gender hierarchies that normally go unquestioned” (181), especially considering the fact that there would be two interracial couples in the play: a black man/white woman and a white man/black woman. In contemporary productions, being purposeful about casting Emilia as a black woman could then give audiences the opportunity to “critique and interrogate [their] shared past [of colonialism]” (181). Thus, a black Emilia would serve as a powerful tool for cultural criticism.

Jenny Jadin

---------------------------------------------------------------------

In “The Other Interracial Marriage in Othello” Boyer argues and describe the character of Emilia, and how she can be both read and cast as a black woman. Boyer asks his audiences to  consider the interpretive and performative possibilities in such a move and states that “however, for these first racial uses of “white” to be intelligible to their hearers, the word must already have undergone a slippage in meaning from its earlier status as a gender, moral, and class marker – that is, it must have been made available for newer alternate meanings,” (190). The essay then goes into a thought experiment and in that performance, Emilia gives us possibly the first depictions of an African woman on the English stage. And this offers an exploration of the racial and gender dynamics in not one, but two interracial marriages. With two different interracial, the article focuses on the dynamics of both marriages and how gender and race can have a large effect on the way people are portrayed.

- Priscilla Nicole Adams

-------------------------------------------------------------

    In this essay, Boyer argues that in Shakespeare’s Othello, Emilia is a character written with no defined race and because of this, when read or played as a person of color, the dynamics of the play shift considerably. Boyer argues that when Emilia is read or played as a woman of color it may “mask Iago’s villainy from the other characters” (181). Included in this mask would also be Othello’s blind trust of Iago, especially in areas of marriage. Boyer relies on omission of the text to prove her point: Emilia is the only female in the play not referred to as “fair.” Additionally, Boyer believes that Emilia and Iago’s relationship is meant to reflect Desdemona and Othello’s and to do this fully, one partner must not be Venetian. Boyer argues that Iago compares the sin Desdemona has committed to the same one he has committed (2.1.92); this means to imply that they have both married outside of their race. Finally, Boyer cites the use of the word “filth” as a racial slur. She notes that many critics take the use of “filth” (when Emilia says it to Othello, 5.2.164) to be racially motivated. A few lines later, Iago refers to Emilia in the same way. Boyer acknowledges that her argument is circumstantial; she relies heavily on omission of a defined race for Emilia. She does provide some information in response to possible rebuttals from critics. To those who would say that Iago does not approve of Desdemona’s relationship with Othello, he would never be married to a woman of color Boyer points out that there have been well-known racists (i.e. Thomas Jefferson and Strom Thurmond) who have had relationships with women of color.  

-Lauren Olson

"Proper" Men and "Fallen" Women: The Unprotectedness of Wives in Othello

Vanita, Ruth. “‘Proper’ Men and ‘Fallen’ Women: The Unprotectedness of Wives in Othello.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, vol. 34, no. 2, 1994, pp. 341–356. JSTOR, doi:10.2307/450905. Accessed 29 June 2021.   

    In “‘Proper’ Men and ‘Fallen’ Women: The Unprotectedness of Wives in Othello,” Ruth Vanita argues that both Desdemona’s and Emilia’s deaths, though actually carried out by one person each - Othello and Iago, respectively - are instead caused by others’ inability and unwillingness to intervene in marital affairs. Vanita outlines both characters’ deaths and the events that led up to them, in addition to the ways in which they could have been prevented. In first discussing Desdemona’s slow demise, Vanita spends a good deal of time blaming Lodovico, Desdemona’s “kinsman” and someone who “should represent some form of support for her” (345). Instead, he not only ignores her public beating by Othello’s hand, but then quickly formalizes their relationship and proves to Desdemona that his “polite speeches...mask his fatal failure to act the proper role of a man” (347). Additionally, Vanita supports her claim of Emilia’s death by explaining in great detail all that could have - and should have - happened. Vanita reminds readers that in that final scene, Iago attempts to stab Emilia to silence her, which in turn causes Othello to try to stab Iago, which consequently causes Montano to step in and disarm Othello. “The man who intervenes does so to save the murderer, not his victim” (Vanita 350). Through her discussion of both wives’ deaths, Ruth Vanita proves to readers that though both marital disputes were made public in many instances, the lack of aid provided to these “defenseless” wives cause them to be “felled by” the male-driven world that might as well promote the murder of women (352). 

  

--Michelle Vucsko

---------------------------------------------------------------

The relationship between husband and wife is considered private, even when part of their relationship plays out in public. Because of this private-ness, Vanita argues that, in Othello, people, particularly men, are unlikely to intervene on behalf of a physically abused wife. She notes that this exemplifies the ways in which the marital union is viewed because the men have no problem interrupting a man-on-man altercation. Vanita concludes that the deaths of both Desdemona and Emilia are not only to blamed on their husbands, but all people who witnessed the abuse and did not interfere. As evidence, Vanita points out that the women are “powerless” (345) against their husbands, noting that their husbands are always armed. She also uses the example of Lodovico as one who saw physical abuse firsthand, “expresses shock” (346), and still does not intervene in their “private” relationship. 

-- Lauren Olson