Download Women in Shakespeare

An excerpt from “Women in Shakespeare” by Donna Ford
‘In these plays the female characters function to oppose the values of a world that is constructed as
masculine.’ Discuss with reference to two plays.
The female characters of Shakespeare’s Roman plays, in particular Julius, exist in order to provide a
contrast with his male characters, which represent Rome’s values. Rome is constructed within the plays as
a masculine society, ruled by all the traditional male values. In contrast, the women must submit to the
patriarchal rules that confine them to the private or domestic sphere, denying them access to the public or
political domain.
In Roman society, women ‘held no public offices’ (1) and were rarely permitted to speak in public,
therefore they were only valued in the domestic sphere. Women’s main function was as ‘objects of
exchange in marriage’, which was crucial to the forming of political alliances and the continuity of families
that ‘formed the basis of the Roman power elite.’ (2) Joplin described Roman women as having ‘a double
status as outsider within’ because they were necessary for the continuity of public life despite their
exclusion. (3) In Julius Caesar, there is no reference to the exchange of women, rather it is the men who
‘engage each other’s passions – as friends, as rivals, as Romans on the stage of history.’ (4)
In Julius Caesar, the female characters of Calphurnia and Portia are vital to the play for their personal
relationships with their husbands, Julius Caesar and Brutus. Despite their concern about their respective
husbands’ political careers, their opinions are ignored or rebelled against because they represent feminine
values and are grounded in the domestic sphere. However, as well as their role in emphasising the gender
differences, the women are also needed in order to provide further insight into the characters of Caesar and
Brutus. Their interactions serve to emphasise the “feminine” traits of the men, and the ability of women to
display “masculine” traits.
Brutus’ interaction with Portia, in Act 2, Scene 1, illustrates that women are isolated from politics.
Although Portia proves that she is perceptive and intelligent, Brutus is reluctant to confide in her about his
deep-rooted fears. This is based on the widespread belief that women were ‘untrained in reason’ and had no
control over their affections. (5) Portia is portrayed as the traditional nagging wife who worries about her
husband, asking ‘Is Brutus sick?’ (6) Initially Brutus insists that he is ‘not well in health, and that is all.’ (7)
However, Portia uses a convincing argument to persuade Brutus that she is worthy of his confidence. Portia
uses emotional blackmail, begging Brutus to ‘unfold to [her]’ his secret because of his ‘vows of love’, (8)
saying that if he refuses then ‘Portia is Brutus’ harlot, not his wife.’ (9) Once Portia begins to sway Brutus,
she uses a rational argument, pointing to her father, Cato, and her husband as proof of her strength and
reputation. Portia challenges Brutus, asking him ‘Think you I am no stronger than my sex, / Being so
fathered, and so husbanded?’ (10) However, she is merely defined in each instance by her relationship to a
man. Finally, Portia provides ‘strong proof’ of her ‘constancy’, a typical masculine trait, in the ‘voluntary
wound’ (11) in her thigh. The self-inflicted wound ‘destabilizes the gendered concept of virtue’ (12) – that
Portia can perform such an act proves that it is learned behaviour, not a particular masculine trait. In
response, Brutus promises that ‘by and by thy bosom shall partake / The secrets of my heart.’ (13)
In comparison, Brutus’ meeting with Cassius, in Act 1, Scene 2, takes place in the public domain, ‘within
earshot of a huge crowd, preceded and followed by a public procession.’ (14) Since it is a secretive
conversation, this meeting lies on the ‘border between public and private.’ (15) Whereas Cassius
encourages Brutus to act upon male values in order to achieve political action, or a ‘show / Of fire’ (16),
Portia represents Brutus’ doubts or ‘the “feminine” Other within him.’ (17) In particular, it is Brutus’
reluctance to murder Caesar that is evidence of his feminine side. In these two separate scenes, Shakespeare
overtly contrasts male and female values. He deems female values as unreliability, ‘associated with
weakness, the non-rational and disorder.’ (18) From this one can deduce that male values are reliability,
strength (of mind and body), rationality and order.
If Act two, Scene one, provides evidence of Portia’s constancy, this is reversed in Act two, Scene four:
O constancy, be strong upon my side, Set a huge mountain ‘tween my heart and tongue! I have a man’s
mind, but a woman’s might. How hard it is for women to keep counsel! (Julius Caesar, II, iv, ll.6-9)
The male world of Rome, defined by Brutus and Caesar, is not as clear-cut as it appears. Brutus is defined
by ‘the contradictions embedded in his culture [which] are set at war.’ (21) Brutus is divided in terms of
political alliances and gender definitions. Politically, he acts for the ‘common good’ as well as out of
emulation or rivalry. Similarly, Brutus’ gender contradictions are highlighted - although his motives for
murdering Caesar are ‘masculinized’, his doubts and fears are ‘feminized’. (22)
Julius Caesar’s interaction with Calphurnia follows Brutus’ scene of interaction with Portia. Again, a wife’s
role is as worrier about the safety of her husband, as Calphurnia exclaims, ‘You shall not stir out of your
house today.’ (23) Calphurnia’s belief in her dreams about Caesar’s death portrays women as being
superstitious, despite her claim that she ‘never stood on ceremonies / Yet now they fright [her].’ (24) Her
dream images recall the theme of wife as worrier or mourner, as she imagines herself to be ‘A lioness [that]
hath whelped in the streets’. (25) In comparison, Caesar has boldly asserted that he does not fear ‘death, a
necessary end.’ (26) However, Calphurnia’s fears about ‘blood upon the Capitol’ (27) exist to emphasise
the doubts that men hide under their assertions about constancy. Although Caesar agrees to remain at home
to please Calphurnia, as he states ‘for thy humour I will stay at home’, (28) he would not have agreed
unless he shared Calphurnia’s fears. Caesar uses his wife as a convenient excuse when he tells Decius:
Calphurnia here, my wife, stays me at home. She dreamt tonight she saw my statue, Which, like a fountain
with a hundred spouts, Did run pure blood; and many lusty Romans Came smiling, and did bathe their
hands in it. (Julius Caesar, II, ii, ll.75-79)
When Decius mocks Caesar’s obedience to his wife’s whims, saying ‘Break up the Senate till another time,
/ When Caesar’s wife shall meet with better dreams’, (29) Caesar changes his mind. When his reputation is
at stake Caesar exclaims ‘How foolish do your fears seem now, Calphurnia!’ (30) However, the fulfilment
of Calphurnia’s prediction suggests that men should put more faith in the intuitive powers of women.
Throughout the play, Caesar’s power has been ambiguous. Cassius feminises Caesar in his description
about the swimming contest, telling Brutus that Caesar cried ‘“Help me, Cassius, or I sink!”’ (31) Cassius
also describes Caesar’s fever in Spain, calling him ‘a sick girl.’ (32) However, Cassius demonstrates that he
fears the power Caesar would claim if crowned, comparing Caesar, a ‘Colossus’ with everyone else, ‘petty
men’. (33) Likewise, Calphurnia’s dream of Caesar’s wounded statue emphasises the ‘contradictory images
of Caesar as both Colossus and sick girl, mighty in his triumph over Pompey, yet childless and deaf.’ (34)
Caesar is ultimately feminised in his assassination – he is rendered powerless and silent, just like the
women in Roman society.
In Julius Caesar, the female characters exist to oppose the values of a male-dominated Rome. Although the
women would like to gain access to this public sphere, they are denied it on the grounds of the values they
represent.
FOOTNOTES
1. Kahn, Coppelia, Roman Shakespeare (Routledge, London, 1997), p. 98
2. Roman Shakespeare, p.98
3. Joplin in Roman Shakespeare, ed. Kahn, p.98
4. Roman Shakespeare, p.99
5. Roman Shakespeare, p.97
6. Shakespeare, William, Julius Caesar (Penguin, London, 1967) II, i, l.261
7. Julius Caesar, II, i, l.257
8. Julius Caesar, II, i, ll. 272-274
9. Julius Caesar, II, i, l.287
10.
Julius Caesar, II, i, ll.296-297
11.
Julius Caesar, II, i, ll.299-300
12.
Roman Shakespeare, p.101
13.
Julius Caesar, II, i, ll.305-306
14.
Roman Shakespeare, p.80
15.
Roman Shakespeare, p.80
16.
Julius Caesar, I, ii, ll.175-176
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
Roman Shakespeare, p.80
Roman Shakespeare, p.81
Roman Shakespeare, p.101
Julius Caesar, IV, iii, ll.153-154
Roman Shakespeare, p.105
Roman Shakespeare, p.105
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.9
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.13-14
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.17
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.36
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.21
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.56
Julius Caesar, II, ii, ll.98-99
Julius Caesar, II, ii, l.105
Julius Caesar, I, ii, l.111
Julius Caesar, I, ii, l.128
Julius Caesar, I, ii, l.136
Roman Shakespeare, p.103
Shakespeare, William, Antony and Cleopatra (Penguin, London, 1997)
Adelman, Janet, "Making Defect Perfection" in Shakespeare: The Roman Plays, eds. Holderness, Loughrey,
and Murphy (Longman, London and New York, 1996), p.72
"Making Perfect Defection",p.74
Antony and Cleopatra, II, vii, ll.100-101
Antony and Cleopatra, I, iv, ll.4-5
"Making Perfect Defection", p.71
Antony and Cleopatra, II, vi, ll.120-121
Roman Shakespeare, p.115
Roman Shakespeare, p.111
Antony and Cleopatra, II, ii, l.205
Antony and Cleopatra, III, xi, l.55-56
Roman Shakespeare, p.118
Antony and Cleopatra, III, xiii, l.3
Roman Shakespeare, p.120
Roman Shakespeare, p.116
Dollimore, Jonathan, "Antony and Cleopatra (c.1607); Virtus under Erasure" in Shakespeare: The Roman
Plays, p.105
Antony and Cleopatra, II, v, l.22
Antony and Cleopatra, II, v, l.23
"Making Defect Perfection", p.73
Antony and Cleopatra, V, ii, l.345
Roman Shakespeare, p.138
Roman Shakespeare, p.138
"Making Defect Perfection", p.86
"Making Defect Perfection", p.85
Roman Shakespeare, p.137 Bibliography
Primary sources: Shakespeare, William, Antony and Cleopatra (Penguin, London, 1997) Shakespeare, William, Julius Caesar (Penguin, London, first published, 1967) Secondary sources: Holderness, Loughrey and Murphy, Shakespeare: The Roman Plays (Longman, London and New York, 1996) Kahn, Coppelia, Roman Shakespeare (Routledge, London and New York, 1997)