“‘Say Die and I Will Die’: Betraying the Other, Controlling Female Desire, and Legally Destroying Women in 'Wide Sargasso Sea' and Othello'”

Gruesser, John. “‘Say Die and I Will Die’: Betraying the Other, Controlling Female Desire, and Legally Destroying Women in Wide Sargasso Sea and Othello.” Journal of Caribbean Literatures, vol. 3, no. 3, 2003, pp. 99–109. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40986147. Accessed 21 July 2021.

In this essay, Gruesser asserts that Wide Sargasso Sea is not only Othello’s feminist counterpart, but also a postcolonial revision of Shakespeare’s infamous tragedy. The structure of the piece compares and contrasts both male protagonists, Othello and Rhys’s Rochester, and female protagonists, Desdemona and Antoinette. Although Gruesser suggests additional connections between other characters, the analysis fixates strongly on the primary couples of which each story details. First, Gruesser claims that Othello and Antoinette are framed as the colonial Other, but are further divided by other factors, such as nationality, gender, and status. They are united in character by the perspective of the Other, and subsequent treatment of both Antoinette and Othello, lead them to unravel spiritually, emotionally, and physically. The author explains that jealousy, insanity, shame, and obsessive desire are the result of the continuous pressure that Antoinette and Othello experience as foreign people under the metaphorical thumb of colonizers. 

The remaining half of the analysis then explores the similarities between Antoinette’s character and Desdemona. Both women are limited in their power, mostly due to their sex, but also in personality and the handling of their partner’s false accusations and later abuse. Given the historical and cultural context of the role of the female in English society, both Othello and Rochester are able and encouraged to pursue any thoughts of doubt with their wives, and are considered justified in their punishments of Desdemona and Antoinette. Within this lens, the men are unified in their villainy, while the women experience a similar destruction due to a gaslighting husband. 

--Emily Tushar

One and One is Two, Three Is Potency

Karremann, Isabel.  “One and One is Two, Three Is Potency: The Dynamics of the Erotic Triangle in Othello.”  Journal of the Spanish Society for English Renaissance Studies, vol. 13, 2003, pp.111-121.

        In her essay, Karremann takes notions of the erotic triangle from Sedgwick in order to show it can be used for manipulation (as opposed to social-emotional exploration), and how norm transgression ruins its stability.  However, the main focus of her literary interpretation is to show how the erotic triangle Iago forms, fails because he (and Othello) fail to see each other’s desires. The academic conversation that this falls into is broadly gender at first, and then more specifically erotic or love triangles in literature as well as society. Karremann is E.K. Sedgwick work as her foundation; Sedgwick focused on recovering male homosocial bonds in literature and history.  Women were used as property to legitimize male homosocial relationships and prevent homosexuality. Sedgwick believed that most homosocial bonds were a mask for homosexual desires; however, homosexuality threatened the patriarchy by subverting power structures.  Using Sedgwick’s ideas, Karremann looks at how the erotic triangle becomes unstable, by transgressing social norms, and how it is used by Iago as tool for manipulation. Instead of using his triangle to develop a web of patriarchal bonds, Iago “exclusively” desires Othello, and their opposing desires destroy the stability of this triangle.

-Ben Mathews

"Slander, Renaissance Discourses of Sodomy, and Othello"

Matz, Robert. “Slander, Renaissance Discourses of Sodomy, and Othello.” ELH, vol. 66, no. 2, 1999, pp. 261–276. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30032073. Accessed 12 July 2021.

Matz’s essay explores the long ignored presence of desire between male characters in Othello, and asserts that the topic is largely overshadowed due to the social norms surrounding homosexuality and the (presumed) dominance of heterosexuality in English culture. The first portion of the interpretation argues that male same-sex desire in Othello is interconnected and influenced by the characters’ political relationships with one another. Matz argues that boundaries between social and sexual situations are vague, predominantly due to the cultural confusion and cross-over that exists in professional relationships as well as intimate ones. In fact, many of the interactions between the male characters (although seemingly grounded in service) has debatable, homosexual undertones. The author highlights several love triangles in Othello in order to confirm his assertion, including the relationship between Othello, Iago, and Cassio. Even though Iago and Cassio are looking for political reinstatement, they also deeply seek out Othello’s love and appear to care more about how he views them intimately. According to Matz, this “unnatural” desire for Othello’s love is sodomitic, as it violates the cultural assumption that institutions (martial, marital, etc.) are not to blend with one another. The second segment of Matz’s essay expands on additional sodomitic relationships. This includes the “unnatural” act or social violation of Othello and Desdemona’s marriage, Desdemona’s power over Othello (as it pertains to Cassio’s political status), and the supposed adultery among most characters in the play. Unfortunately, Matz notes that Shakespeare was seemingly aware of this, because all of these unnatural relationships are eliminated by the death of Othello and Desdemona in the final act.

--Emily Tushar

“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

Olson, Rebecca. “‘Too Gentle’: Jealousy and Class in Othello.” Journal for Early Modern Cultural 
Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, 2015, pp. 3–25. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/jearlmodcultstud.15.1.3. Accessed 7 July 2021.

Olson argues that many critics and scholars spend too much time and attention to Othello’s jealousy and race, but not enough attention is paid as to why Desdemona would evoke such a passionate response from him. Jealousy was a common theme in 17^th century texts, and Olson begins by defining two types of jealousy: jealousy of losing property or possession and jealousy of cuckoldry. She also explains the difference between envy and jealousy; envy is to “want something you did not have” versus jealousy is about losing something that you have (Olson 8). Iago is envious while Othello is jealous; this is an important distinction because one would evoke a more passionate response than the other. Her main argument is that Othello’s passionate jealousy has more to do with Desdemona’s social status rather than his race. The issue is that Desdemona has a higher social status than Othello.  She furthers her argument by correlating Desdemona’s social status to Othello’s social mobility. Othello can only retain his social status through Desdemona; therefore, when her social status declines with the accusation of adultery, his social status is lowered as well. In summary, Othello’s motivation for the murder of Desdemona is to maintain his honor and to protect other men from cuckoldry rather than just a manifestation of his insecurity as outsider.  

- Tracie Yule

Decolonizing Othello in Search of Black Feminist North American Identities

Cucarella-Ramon, Vicent. “Decolonizing Othello in Search of Black Feminist

    North American Identities: Djanet Sears’ Harlem Duet and Toni Morrison’s

    Desdemona.” International Journal of English Studies (IJES), vol. 17, no. 1,

    2017, pp. 83–97

In “Decolonizing Othello in Search of Black Feminist North American Identities: Djanet Sears' Harlem Duet and Toni Morrison's Desdemona,” Cucarella-Ramon compares Harlem Duet by African Canadian playwright Djanet Sears and Desdemona by Toni Morrison to Shakespeare's Othello and uses them to to carve out a new definition of what it means to be black in North America and Canada. Cucarella-Ramon claims that these texts can be used when looking at the study of (black) identity construction within US and in relation - Canada. Through rethinking and rewriting Othello in the modern era, they create a social and racial reality “unrelentingly disrupted by difference and hybridity,” (Cucarella-Ramon 83). Or in other words, Cucarella-Ramon puts Harlem Duet and Desdemona in conversation with Othello to offer a modern look at race in Othello, and more importantly offer a way for African Americans and African Canadians a way to read Othello and be able to place themselves in the story. They also bring the role of women to the forefront to render a feminist and democratic definition of the black female self. Cucarella-Ramon thinks that these readings can offer a look into the black identity in North America. 

• Priscilla Adams 

"Stitching and Unstitching: Fabrications of Othello"

Brendon, Devika. "Stitching and Unstitching: Fabrications of Othello." The Hopkins Review, vol. 14, no. 1, 2021, pp. 74-86. doi.org/10.1353/thr.2021.0017.

In Brendon's article, "Stitching and Unstitching: Fabrications of Othello," she offers an examination "in the contexts of Postcolonial and Feminist criticism..." (74) of race in Othello, by drawing modern-day parallels and differences with a modern reenactment of the movie, Internal Affairs. Brendon argues that both "Othello's" are "strong-willed and strong-minded" (Ibid) men lending to their aggressive responses to the"Desdemona's" perceived conduct. In the movie, Andy Garcia's "Othello" violently slaps Desdemona (Nancy Travis) whereas Othello killed Desdemona in Shakespeare's Othello.

But unlike the seventeenth century Desdemona, our modern version lives in a world where women have a more equal footing and can rationally communicate to Othello. Travis's character is more equipped to deal with the conflict than the original Desdemona. The modern Desdemona is "able to break down the manufactured distrust with communication: because she has standing in the relationship; because they are partners; because there is respect, and honesty, at the base of the connection" (75).

Brendon argues that part of the dysfunction between Desdemona and Othello in Shakespeare's original origin arises from their racial differences; Othello subconsciously/unconsciously is motivated to act and react because of his race. The continual subtext of him constantly having to prove himself makes him this hyper-sensitive and reactive character. As Brendon asserts " Being an honored dinner guest of a Senator and being his son-in-law and the father of his grandchildren are two different matters" (82).

-David Kase

“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

Insurgent Flesh: Epistemology and Violence in Othello and Mariam.

Gruber, Elizabeth. "Insurgent Flesh: Epistemology and Violence in Othello and Mariam."  Women's Studies, vol. 32, no. 4, 2003, pp. 393-410.

    Gruber’s central claim is that violent, female death is a necessary component of gaining knowledge on the male quest.  Essentially, without Desdemona’s death, knowledge could not be discovered for both the characters and audience. Since Gruber is using a compare and contrast of two plays with disgraced women, she is not situating her argument among others about Othello.  Instead, she is situating her argument among a broader conversation about epistemology – mainly its evolution over the centuries.  In the introductory pages she references Francis Bacon, Andreas Vesalius, and makes footnotes to other epistemological studies of the Medieval era.  Since we are not reading Cary’s Tradgedie of Mariam, I will focus on what she says about Othello.  She uses the plot of Othello to define the “calumniated woman” plot/frame/genre.  In this frame, “the slander directed at female characters prompts their jealous husbands to seek knowledge of them” (Gruber 394).  This is the main plot/conflict of Othello obviously.  Gruber’s argument is not about the typical quest / pursuit of “truth” or “Self-Knowledge,” but instead finding out whether a wife was unfaithful.  Gruber uses misogynistic quotes from Iago to point out how seeking knowledge was a male activity, and since they are the subject seeking knowledge of an object (the female), that minimizes their presence in the story (making them objects, and removing their agency). Gruber’s interpretations add some unique understandings to Othello.  The first being Othello’s talk of not wanting to share his “corner” of Desdemona with other men (Shakespeare 3.3.267).  Gruber insinuates this corner his her vagina, and that her body is his “territorial space” that is being violated – and thus violating his “territorial rights” (Gruber 402).  Additionally, Gruber shows how Desdemona’s death makes her body (and mind) finally “compliant” to Othello.  He can now “read her like a book,” and find the evidence of her infidelity (which does not find).

-Ben Mathews

“Desdemona, Woman Warrior: ‘O, These Men, These Men!"

Holmer, Joan Ozark. “Desdemona, Woman Warrior: ‘O, These Men, These Men!" (4.3.59).” Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England, vol. 17, 2005, pp. 132–164. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/24322724. Accessed 28 June 2021.

Summary of the article:

In the article by Joan Ozark Holmer for Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England, Holmer argues that Desdemona is perhaps the bravest warrior ever presented on stage. She is “literally a warrior in the Christian sense, with faith as her shield” and figuratively a warrior in a secular sense, with her tongue as her sword (133). What follows is a critical analysis proving that Desdemona is a perfect Christian warrior as per Erasmus’s The Handbook of the Christian Soldier, with several arguments as to Desdemona’s heroics. One such argument is how she is a warrior in front of Othello, by testifying on his behalf before her father and the Senate, and by imploring the Duke to let her stand by his side in Cypress. Further testimony from Holmer is that Desdemona learns through adversity when she discovers that Othello is not as pure of mind as she had thought, and she fights for Cassio. She does this not for herself, but for Othello’s own good, knowing that Cassio loves Othello. The most substantial argument from Holmer that Desdemona is a woman warrior is that she ultimately does not rebuke Othello for her own murder, but continues to love him and tries to save both his reputation and his soul. In her final lines, she cries out that she has been falsely murdered. She cries this out to Othello, so that he might know his misdeed and repent for it, but when asked by Emilia to confirm who has killed her, she lies as though she has committed suicide, thus saving her husband’s reputation and tarnishing her own. That she would focus so much effort on redeeming her husband’s soul and continuing to love him to the last, argues Holmer, shows that Desdemona is indeed a woman warrior.

-- Wes Wingert

“The Nature of Gender: Are Juliet, Desdemona and Cordelia to Their Fathers as Nature Is to Culture?”

Kakkonen, Gordana Galić, and Ana Penjak. “The Nature of Gender: Are Juliet, Desdemona and Cordelia to Their Fathers as Nature Is to Culture?” Critical Survey, vol. 27, no. 1, 2015, pp. 18–35., www.jstor.org/stable/24712420. Accessed 26 June 2021. 

Using Sherry B. Ortner’s tenets of ecofeminism and Edgar C. Knowlton’s analyses of Shakespeare’s various understandings of “nature,” the Kakkonen and Penjak argue the understanding of nature is socially constructed, creating a hierarchical order in both political and cultural spheres within the patriarchal systems that Shakespeare’s plays, and thus his characters, exist within. Connecting the patriarchal roles of women within the context of family (ie. being a daughter, a wife, and a mother) to the construction of nature being closer to women than men, the authors apply Ortner’s understanding of the procreative functions of the female body: “1) a woman's body creates new life; while a man's doesn't, thus enabling him to get involved in cultural issues; 2) because of their reproductive ability, women are placed on a lower social scale than men; 3) being defined by the body functions and traditionally imposed social roles, women are seen as being closer to nature” (Kakkonen & Penjak 28). This process of othering, justifying the placement of women in lower levels of social and cultural contexts, domination of daughters, and in turn wives and mothers, occur throughout the plays, but each of the daughters broke the societal expectations of their fathers. In defining themselves by breaking away from their fathers’ repressive wills, the women are destroyed, as if the tragedy is their free will, indicating a patriarchal system that must be broken by the men who constructed it (Kakkonen & Penjak 31). 

--Hannah Nagy

"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