Monday, April 20, 2009
The End of the Leaky Ladies?
In a quite refreshing change from The Revenger’s Tragedy and many other plays we have read, the principal role of The Duchess of Malfi goes to its namesake female character. The Duchess does not seem to fit into the passive and frivolous stereotype of females, instead possessing a strong will and a sharp intellect. She questions the social obligations and underestimations of her position, asking why “should only I, of all the other princes of the world, be cased up, like a holy relic?” (3.2.140-142). But is she truly free of the “leaky female” curse? How strong is the defiance in her representation?
As the Duchess’s attendant, Cariola serves as her foil. While the noose and the idea of death troubles the poised Duchess “not a whit” (4.2.212), when it is Cariola’s turn to die, a desperate Cariola pleads for a way to escape her fate. The immediate contrast between the composed and dignified exit of the Duchess and the more expected, hysterical outcry of Cariola demonstrates the exceptionalness of the former in not succumbing to weaknesses like the latter did.
While I am inclined to say that the Duchess is an exceptional female character throughout most of the play, a few moments make me hesitate to deem her completely unaffected by uncontrolled or leaky female tendencies. A considerable “leak” occurs when she gets overly excited and reveals her secret marriage to Bosola, who is generally known to work for her brother, Ferdinand. This impulsive move puts her and Antonio in danger, more directly setting off the series of events that will culminate in her demise. Here, she seems to confirm the presumption that females cannot keep secrets, which is later echoed by Julia’s inability to guard the Cardinal’s secret.
Furthermore, (though this might just be a manner of speech) the Duchess frequently refers to things that “princes” should do, as opposed to using an equivalent female-oriented word. For example, she says, “I am making my will, as ‘tis fit princes should” (1.1.377). Combined with the presence of stereotypical females like Cariola and Julia, how does the way that the Duchess regards herself - as well as how we regard her - alter attitudes towards females within this play? Does this characterize her as more of an exception to the rule? Or can she still speak to more general perceptions of her gender? How might her unusual position of power and marital status complicate matters?
Other points to think about:
- The strong equalizing force present in many of the play’s interactions:
In the more obvious example, the romance of the royal Duchess with the lowly servant Antonio cuts across social rank, relying on goodness of heart and actions instead. Additionally, a sense of constancy is layered on top of equality, such as when Ferdinand effectively says at least all children are equal due to “compassionate nature”, regardless of legal standing (4.1.35-38). And while she is imprisoned and emotionally tortured, the Duchess retains her poise and defies the patronizing Bosola with her exclamation, “I am Duchess of Malfi still” (4.2.138).
- The visuality of death:
The play becomes very graphic at points, requiring the staging of a dead man’s hand or of the image of strangled children. The Duchess appears relatively unaffected during many of these scenes. How would this go over with a live audience? What is achieved by the visual articulation of the murders?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree that in many ways, the Duchess is an exceptional character. What struck me most was her eloquent speech. In act 3 scene 2, Ferdinand confronts his siter with "Or is it true that thou art but a bare name and no essential thing?" (75-76), to which the Duchess wittily responds "I will plant my soul in mine ears to hear you" (79). The Duchess goes on and creates a beautiful image when she tells Ferdinand that, "Alas, your shears do come untimely now to clip the bird's wings that's already flown" (86-87).
ReplyDeleteHowever, I also understood many of the Duchess' actions to be foolish and almost overly eloquent and grand. Perhaps Webster was poking fun at a "strong and powerful" woman, as she sets herself up for doom by marrying Antonio and telling Bosola of her marriage. I think it is very significant that, while the Duchess is executed with grace and does not beg for mercy like Cariola, the Duchess is still executed. Does anyone else think that maybe Webster is claiming that this kind of woman could never be successful?
The way in which dismembered body parts and “decoy bodies” are used in the play seems to almost take away from its serious nature. They belong more appropriately in the play’s moments of madness. It is incredibly disturbing that the duchess is presented with a dead man’s hand and the fake corpses of her children. When she reacts to these stimuli in a calm manner, however, I cannot see how these gruesome props on stage could highlight anything but the situation’s artificiality. The duchess maintains her properness and claims that she will do so in death to “revive the rare and almost dead example of a loving wife” (4.1.73). How can these props be realistic if the women is not squealing in discomfort and misery? This led me to wonder if the props (which could not have been more than a set of dummy-parts) are meant to be unrealistic? Does she know that they are not real? The doctor describes Ferdinand’s “melancholy humor” after his sister is killed as a disease that brings people to sneak into graveyards and “dig dead bodies up” (5.2.12). He is allegedly seen with the leg of a man on his shoulder. Seeing this dismembered limb might make more sense to an audience because it is a commentary on a character’s insanity, not a distraction in a poignantly serious situation.
ReplyDeleteI think that it might be worthwhile to compare the Duchess in this play to the woman understood to be Antonio’s wife in The Revenger’s Tragedy.
ReplyDeleteIn The Revenger’s Tragedy, Antonio’s wife yields to the pressures placed upon women by the patriarchic society of her day. She commits suicide after having been raped because she does not want to dishonor her husband’s name. Antonio’s wife does not seem to have cared for herself as a human being in her own right. Rather, she appears to have affirmed the prevailing notion of the society in which she resided that women ought to be subservient to their husbands in all respects of life. Antonio actually comes across as being proud of his wife for her act of suicide: “Precedent for wives” (Middleton I.iv.6)! He does not seem to mourn his loss at all.
In The Duchess of Malfi, the protagonist does indeed resist the stranglehold that the men of her society have placed upon women. She tries to assert her authority as a woman by transcending the rules of the patriarchic society of her day. Ferdinand and the Cardinal, however, are displeased with the Duchess’s behavior. They cannot seem to come to terms with the fact that their sister actually had the nerve to defy them and essentially the patriarchic society that they may be said to represent. Resultantly, they have her, her lover and her children murdered.
What do these comparisons between The Revenger’s Tragedy and The Duchess of Malfi tell us about how women were perceived by men during the period in which these plays were produced?
-Rishabh
In regard to the Duchess' death, I don't really see it as an expression of her 'exceptional' character, as much as it is a statement about religion by Webster. In fact, I think her initial reaction to death conveys her true character. She says, "Let heaven, a little while, cease crowning martyrs, to punish them! Go, howl them this, and say I long to bleed. It is some mercy, when men kill with speed" (4.1.109). It seems here that the Duchess does not display any 'exceptional' qualities, understandably, upon hearing about Antonio's death. Alternatively, this could also just be a minor 'leak' in her otherwise exceptional character.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I see the Duchess' later acceptance of death as a more of a religious statement, rather than a statement of her strength. It seems that she longs for the afterlife in order that she may be reunited with Antonio and her children. She even entertains thoughts of suicide until Bosola says, "Remember you are a Christian." The only thing that seems to prevent the Duchess from killing herself is the fact that she is, indeed, Christian. Additionally, the way that Webster presents all these characters, especially the Cardinal, makes me suspect some religous undertones.
One thing that did puzzle me was the fact that the Duchess returns to life a little later in the play. What was the purpose of having her speak her, as she dies shortly after?
I would consider the Duchess to be one of the strongest female characters we've come across this semester. When compared to some of the other female characters, the Duchess defies many of the stereotypes that the others promote. The Duchess does not marry to her family's expectations which is considered a serious faux-pas of this time. Whereas Portia, a seemingly strong female character allow's her father's stringent rules control her love life. I understand why she may be considered "leaky" at times when she reveals her secrets. However it would be unreasonable to assume that she was this perfect speciman of the strong-female form. Her calmess during her death scene in act 4 scene 2 really demonstrates a strength that most men in our plays did not attain. She is satisfied with death because there, in heaven, she will not have to endure the injustices she has faced on earth.
ReplyDelete-Hayley
Throughout this blog post, there have been several comparisons between the Duchess and female characters in the other plays we have read. Based on these comparisons, the Duchess certainly does seem to stand out as a notably strong female. However, if we put aside her gender for a moment and compare her to the male characters in positions of power from other plays, we may notice that, though the Duchess has her weaknesses, so do virtually all of these male characters. In fact, relative to many of the powerful male characters we have seen, the weaknesses of the Duchess seem somewhat minor.
ReplyDeleteSure, the Duchess shows the stereotypical “leakiness” of women when she tells Bosola about her secret marriage to Antonio, putting both her and Antonio in danger. But, then again, Vindice’s confession to Antonio in “The Revenger’s Tragedy” results in the execution of both Vindice and his brother Hippolito.
We can also critique the Duchess’ inability to resist the, perhaps, politically unwise marriage to Antonio as a sign of her womanly weakness. However, it could be argued that, in “Hamlet,” Claudius’ decision to marry Gertrude, keeping him very close to the immediate family of the late King, was much more inadvisable than the Duchess’ marriage to Antonio, as Claudius was behind the late King’s murder.
Even some of our noblest male characters have their weaknesses. For example, Antonio from “The Merchant of Venice,” unwisely makes a deal with Shylock using money he has not yet secured and is eventually saved by Portia, a female character.
To sum up, the fact that the Duchess is a woman may lead us to focus more on her weaknesses and, in so doing, forget that many of the powerful male characters that we have seen in other plays have similar weaknesses.
-Liz