Much Ado About Nothing: A Catalyst for the Exploration of Gender Inequality
As a teacher, the notion of creating a link between my students and classroom texts is of utmost importance to me. This act, that of illuminating a path between two seemingly unlike entities can make way for an enlightening educational experience, and it is this occurrence that I wish to emulate in my classroom. When it pertains to Shakespeare, students often view his work as having little or no relevance to their present day lives, but this belief could not be farther from the truth. My inquiry project explores literary criticisms of Shakespeare’s Much Ado about Nothing, with a focus on the central (and contemporary) issue of gender inequality in the play, and hopes to shed light on the universal and present day relevance of a play that was written hundreds of years ago.
As mentioned above, much of the central plot in Much Ado About Nothing deals with issues of gender inequality. This sentiment is immediately visible in the very first scene when the character of Leonato answers the question about his daughter’s paternity with the sarcastic response that he must be the father because his wife has told him that he is. Leonato’s so-called humorous response is anything but innocent, and this incident sets the tone for how women are viewed by the male characters throughout the course of the play: as liars and manipulators, when in fact, the exact opposite is true. Carol Cook examines this notion in her essay ““The Sign and Semblance of Her Honor”: Reading Gender Difference in Much Ado about Nothing”, and explains that a lot can be learned “about the place of gender difference in the life and language of Much Ado’s Messina by looking at the most persistent theme in the witty discourse of the play’s male characters – that of cuckoldry” (187). Viewing women as cuckolds, or adulteresses, allow the men in the play to engage in the part of the naïve, unassuming, and above all, innocent victims that are wrongly deceived by the women in their lives. The men form an almost iron-clad bond (and make women the enemy in the process), and tend to listen to one another instead of questioning their significant others. This is observed on a large scale when Claudio publicly shames and disgraces Hero instead of dealing with their issues privately. This labeling of women as lacking virtue is a tragic theme in the play, as are “jokes about the unreliability of wives and lovers” (Maus 561) – but where does this ideology come from? Why does Much Ado About Nothing seem to suggest that “women are responsible for their sins but men are not” (Berger Jr 307)? In order to answer these questions, the prevailing ideologies about gender during the period of the English Renaissance must be examined.
Concerns of female sexual fidelity ran high in English Renaissance culture, leading “anxiety about sexual betrayal [to pervade] the drama of the English Renaissance” (Maus 561); Much Ado About Nothing is simply demonstrative of this fact. Katharine Eisaman Maus further elaborates that “the terms cuckold, whore and whore-master account for most of the defamation suits brought in sixteenth century church courts” (561), which further exemplifies the notion that a woman’s virtue was a central topic of conversation and of utmost importance during this time. The wrongful treatment of Hero parallels this prevalent philosophy, and additionally stresses that without virtue, a woman is easily disposable, a nothing. When Hero is first declared an unchaste woman, “her father’s first reaction to the denunciation is to wish death for himself… [and then] to wish for her death, to hide her shame” (Scheff 153). Instead of hearing what his daughter has to say, Leonato immediately wishes to erase her existence, and by wanting so, makes clear that his loyalty is with the men.
It is clear that “social and sexual roles are firmly established [in Messina], and the inhabitants are acutely conscious of them” (Cook 189), but the character of Beatrice challenges these conventions, and in doing so, is perhaps the only example of a strong-willed female in the entire play. Beatrice does not buy into the illusions of romantic love, and instead critiques love and deems it unnecessary. She also “refuses the subjugation of femininity…by placing herself among the men and wielding phallic wit as aggressively as they” (Cook 190), and makes it clear she possesses agency in the process by admonishing the conventions placed upon women. While I see Beatrice as an exemplary role model, one that women today would be proud to call a leader, not all critics agree.
Some agree that while the play illuminates and questions gender differences, there are far too many contradictions present in the play (Cook 186). Others have noticed that Beatrice, although full of female power, often paradoxically contributes to the perpetuation of a male hierarchy (Friedman 350-351). This thinking is due to the fact that Beatrice, the same women who denounced the institution of marriage at the start of the play, actually takes part in the institution by marrying Benedick. Michael Friedman argues that “Beatrice goes through a gradual process of muting…on her way to becoming a married woman…[and] ultimately sacrifices the verbal mastery which constitutes her power in exchange for a hushed existence as Benedick’s wife ” (351). Simply put, I disagree, and feel that this assertion only hinders the equality that we so wish to see in regard to gender. To insinuate that Beatrice’s choice to partake in the institution of marriage strips her of some sort of power, and makes her any less of a woman, does not encourage the empowerment of females; it in fact does the opposite. To say that Beatrice “yields willingly to male control” and that “this surrender indicates that masculine domination is “natural,” “correct,” and “necessary” after all” (Friedman 359), ironically oppresses women further, as it suggests that women must follow the conventions of a more contemporary gendered identity (that of the independent woman) in order to be the highly praised “modern and powerful” female. The characters of Beatrice and Hero make for great character foils when it pertains to highlighting this bias; their choices and attitudes are opposite (at least in the beginning), but to label one ‘more’ a woman than the other is not only wrong, but incredibly troublesome. Moreover, it is also assumed that young people today want to distance themselves from traditional gender roles, but this theory is not exactly true.
When it pertains to feminist ideologies, while young adults (both men and women) agree with and have positive responses about feminism and the women’s movement (Fitzpatrick-Bettencourt et al. 871), it should also be noted that more young people than we may think support traditional gender roles. When it concerns young people supporting the maintenance of the traditional gender roles, men and women use similar types of reasoning. Justifications regarding women’s roles are primarily based on stereotypes and issues of well-being. More specifically, young people argue that a child’s well-being benefits if women stay at home, and that women are more capable of taking on responsibility for the home and children than men are (Gere & Helwig 310). Keeping with this sentiment, I believe it is important to realize that when it pertains to gender roles in the home, or in any relationship, what should matter is what works for you; choosing to live your life a certain way should not determine the salience of your gender identity, and this is truly what I wish for my students to get out of this topic. When deciding to examine gender roles in Much Ado About Nothing, I was worried about how the boys in my class would relate to this topic because it deals primarily with women, but I think that tackling this issue form the broad sense of what gender means to them, whether they are a boy or a girl in the case of my students, and having them voice their thoughts on this topic, will make way for incredibly enlightening conversation. In the case of my male students, I think it would also be an excellent idea for them to examine and challenge a lot of what Beatrice says, as she is very critical of men. Simply put, I truly believe that students need to look at this play and any work piece of work for that matter, and question and challenge the portrayals put in front of them.
While Much Ado About Nothing is essentially a historical work of writing that examines gender roles, it should also be noted that having to negotiate one’s identity is still a very contemporary issue. In a letter written to the editor of The Vancouver Sun, Bonny Norton, a professor of Language and Literacy Education at the University of British Columbia, highlights the debate and controversy surrounding Jodie Foster’s acceptance speech at the Golden Globes. Critics have argued that Foster, in not outright disclosing her sexual orientation, did a great disservice towards the lesbian and gay community. Norton states that “Foster was delivering a complex and important message to the wider community, a message that sexual orientation is only one aspect of a person’s identity” (A14), a sentiment, that in my opinion at least, is important to recognize. After all, Foster is also a mother, a humanitarian, and an amazing actress – the latter of which was the occasion for her speech. Her sexual orientation should be the last thing that defines her, for it is only one facet of who she is. This same sentiment can be applied to the character of Beatrice, as not only is she a strong feminist, but she is also a wife, and one aspect of her identity should not be given more weight or importance than the other. The occurrence of complex negotiations of identity is important to teach our students, and Norton puts it best when she concludes that “the challenge of educators is to consider how the recognition of multiple identities might translate to educational programs and practices that will promote greater equity and hope for all” (A14). I could not agree more.
In conclusion, whether it pertains to the reading of Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing, or their lives in general, I want my students to make their own ideas about what gender is. I want them to look at historically constructed ideals of gender and examine their own lives and ideologies, and see, for example, that their gender cannot be threatened simply because they choose to believe in certain ideals. In that same regard, I want my students to take the relevant ideas in this piece of work and relate it to their own lives, and shape their own views, and ultimately make their own decisions about what constitutes gender. I want them to pave the way for the creation of new ideals, or, maybe no ideals at all – and all this starts with is the simple reading of a text. After all, we have the right to have different identities – we should not feel that we must be one or the other, this or that, when in reality, there should be room for all that we decide to be.
Works Cited
Berger Jr, Harry. “Against the Sink-a-Pace: Sexual and Family Politics in Much Ado about Nothing.” Shakespeare Quarterly (1982): 302-313.
Cook, Carol. ““The Sign and Semblance of Her Honor”: Reading Gender Difference in Much Ado about Nothing.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America (1986): 186-202.
Fitzpatrick Bettencourt, Kathryn E., Tammi Vacha-Haase, and Zinta S. Byrne. “Older and younger adults’ attitudes toward feminism: The influence of religiosity, political orientation, gender, education, and family.” Sex roles 64.11 (2011): 863-874.
Friedman, Michael D. “Hush’d on Purpose to Grace Harmony”: Wives and Silence in “Much Ado about Nothing.” Theatre Journal (1990): 350-363.
Gere, Judith, and Charles C. Helwig. “Young Adults’ Attitudes and Reasoning About Gender Roles in the Family Context.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 36.3 (2012): 301-313.
Maus, Katharine Eisaman. “Horns of Dilemma: Jealousy, Gender, and Spectatorship in English Renaissance Drama.” ELH 54.3 (1987): 561-583.
Norton, Bonny. The VancouverSun. 17 July 2013: A14.
Scheff, Thomas J. “Gender Wars: Emotions in “Much Ado about Nothing”.” Sociological Perspectives (1993): 149-166.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Berger Jr, Harry. “Against the Sink-a-Pace: Sexual and Family Politics in Much Ado about Nothing.” Shakespeare Quarterly (1982): 302-313.
Brown, John Russell. “Representing Sexuality in Shakespeare’s Plays.” New Theatre Quarterly 13.51 (1997): 205-213.
Cook, Carol. “The Sign and Semblance of Her Honor”: Reading Gender Difference in Much Ado about Nothing.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America (1986): 186-202.
Friedman, Michael D. “Hush’d on Purpose to Grace Harmony”: Wives and Silence in “Much Ado about Nothing.” Theatre Journal (1990): 350-363.
Gough, Melinda J. “Her filthy feature open showne” in Ariosto, Spenser, and Much Ado about Nothing.” SEL Studies in English Literature 1500-1900 39.1 (1999): 41-67.
Lewalski, Barbara K. “Love, Appearance and Reality: Much Ado about Something.” Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 (1968): 235-251.
Marsden, Jean I. “Shakespeare for Girls: Mary Lamb and Tales from Shakespeare.” Children’s Literature 17.1 (1989): 47-63.
Maus, Katharine Eisaman. “Horns of Dilemma: Jealousy, Gender, and Spectatorship in English Renaissance Drama.” ELH 54.3 (1987): 561-583.
Showalter, Elaine, William Shakespeare, and Susanne Lindgren Wofford. Representing Ophelia: women, madness, and the responsibilities of feminist criticism. Macmillan, 1994.
Scheff, Thomas J. “Gender Wars: Emotions in “Much Ado about Nothing”.” Sociological Perspectives (1993): 149-166.