Vanita, Ruth. “Men Beware Men: Shakespeare's Warnings for Unfair Husbands.” Comparative Drama, vol. 28, no. 2, 1994, pp. 201–220. JSTOR, 
www.jstor.org/stable/41153689. Accessed 21 July 2021.

Vanita situates her argument against Nancy Cotton Pearse’s definition of a “chastity play” and also the domestic tragedy plays of Othello’s time period, specifically A Woman Killed with Kindness by Thomas Heyward. Vanita argues that Othello goes against type in two regards:  the chastity play where the innocent woman survives and the domestic tragedy where the husband kills the guilty wife. A Woman Killed with Kindness was performed in 1603, and Vanita suggests the Othello was a direct reply to that performance. Whereas in A Woman Killed with Kindness focuses on the woman’s chastity (or lack thereof) and a husband’s cuckoldry, Othello focuses on the men’s reaction to a woman unchasteness. In both plays, the wives die, but in Othello the question is about the permanence of death rather than death as evidence of a woman’s chastity. In most chastity plays, a woman’s innocence was determined by her ability to evade death. If a woman survived an attempt on her life than she was considered innocent, but if she died then was considered guilty of adultery. Vanita suggests that Othello is really a warning to husbands because they hold all the power in the relationship rather than a play warning wives on the dangers of infidelity. 

- Tracie Yule

"Rethinking Iago's Jests in Othello II.i: Honestas, Imports and Laughable Deformity"

 

Derrin, Daniel. “Rethinking Iago’s Jests in Othello II.i: Honestas, Imports and Laughable

Deformity.” Renaissance Studies. Vol. 31, Issue 3, June 2017, pp. 365-382. 

Though it has often been discarded by directors who deem the scene as “filler provided for an anxious Desdemona” (365), Daniel Derrin asserts the importance of Othello’s Act II, Scene I as essential to understanding a complex exchange of power between the two witty characters through their negotiation of an ethos—honestas. Darrin argues the scene offers “a serious dramatic exploration of Iago’s persuasiveness and Desdemona’s cleverness” (365). He defines honestas as a reflection of the “moral goodness” expected of civil conversation and explains how Iago uses a false sense of it to bring down virtually all major characters in the play, though he claims this fictionalization of honesty does not necessarily imply Iago is ethically “vacuous.” Derrin asserts that jokes are funny because of certain shared value-laden beliefs between the deliverer and recipient and expounds on Desdemona’s possible interpretations of Iago’s misogynistic dialogue based on her responses to it. He also touches on the delicacy required of the interaction between the two characters of differing social standing.

--Leslie Leffers

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

“Analyzing Iago's Speech in Shakespeare's Othello”

    Nimer Abuzahra and Rami Salahat from Hebron University, Palestine, share an analysis of Iago’s speech: his words choices and metaphors throughout the play specifically. The authors employ several methods of analysis in their study. Through these methods, the authors break down Iago’s use of animal metaphors, how his words connect to gender, identity, and race, and his use of rhetorical questions and manipulative language. In short, the authors claim that the purpose of Iago’s dramatic use of animal metaphors throughout the play is to degrade and even dehumanize several characters in the play in order to accomplish his plans. He also uses his words as weapons to create dissent among the characters regarding Othello’s race and heritage, sowing discord and doubt wherever he goes. The authors also analyze Iago’s misogynistic views through looking at his words, metaphors, and assertions of the other sex which are backed up in his actions. One example is Iago’s assertion, “Come on, come on; you are pictures out of doors, bells in your parlours, wild-cats in your kitchens" (Shakespeare 2.1.108-109). The authors assert, “Sanders (2003) points out that Iago's statement is a proverb which means that women are in church saints, abroad angels, and at home devils. This suggests that Iago has a bad view of women in general, that they don’t seem what they really are” (Abuzahra & Salahat 191). Finally, the author’s discuss Iago’s uses of rhetorical questions and other speaking techniques to persuade and misguide many characters, showing how words have power to manipulate with negative impacts.

Abuzahra, Nimer, and Rami Salahat. “Analyzing Iago’s Speech in Shakespeare’s Othello.” Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, vol. 2, no. 2, April 2018. SemanticScholar, pdfs.semanticscholar.org/79ca/1d951902872db1ece17094a01a8bf70fc606.pdf. 

- Mathew Stephens 

"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

“Desdemona and the Role of Women in the Antebellum North”

Kahn, Edward. “Desdemona and the Role of Women in the Antebellum North.” Theatre Journal, vol. 60, no. 2, 2008, pp. 235–255. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25070199. Accessed 26 June 2021.

Kahn argues that the varied interpretations of Desdemona’s character during the post-civil war period was a reflection of Northern culture.  This time period reflected a shift in attitudes about race and sex, and Desdemona became a “cultural icon” for many men and women (235). The main discussion topics took on three main forms: Desdemona as the virtuous woman who is the expert on human emotions, as the sensible woman reflected the “cult of domesticity”, or as a reflection of the women’s abolitionist movement (251). Kahn examines performances during this time period to support his analysis, but spends much time examining the writings of two critics: John Quincy Adams and Norman Hudson. Adams maintains that Desdemona is a “wonton figure” who betrays “her father, her family, her sex, and her country” (245). In addition, Adams spends time critiquing interracial marriage. In contrast, Hudson focuses on the women’s movement and separates Desdemona from it while also arguing for female passivity (251).  The article examines arguments for and against the varying portrayals of Desdemona but maintains that she was a fluid figure that was used to justify a political point of view.

-Tracie Yule

“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