![]() ![]() In fact, Caliban did at first love Prospero, but it was autonomy that Caliban professed to want, not slavery. Prospero, having drawn Caliban away from his savagery and towards modernity, believes that Caliban owes him a debt of gratitude. His lack of gratitude towards his master. Ariel is portrayed as a submissive servant, while Caliban is characterized as rebellious and spiteful.Ĭaliban's first speech emphasizes the conflict that arises In these initial encounters, the contrasting aspects of Ariel and Caliban’s separate relationships with Prospero are emphasized. With raven’s feather from unwholesome fenĭrop on you both! A south-west blow on yeĪnd blister you all o’er!-(I, ii, 321-24)Ĭaliban’s apparent hatred for Prospero is evident in much of his speech, which consists predominantly of curses similar to this one. Whereas Ariel greets Prospero with an affirmation of his greatness, Caliban greets him with a curse: To thy strong bidding taskĪriel and all his quality."-(I, ii, 189-93)Īriel’s self-effacing willingness to serve Prospero contrasts strongly withĬaliban’s attitude of sardonic rebelliousness exhibited in the same scene. "All hail, great master! Grave sir, hail! I come His language is that of a slave who binds himself to his master without question: The first appearance of Ariel immediately establishes his character as that of a submissive, deferential subject. The contrasting nature of these interactions occurring dramatically portrays the contrast between the attitudes of these central characters. Throughout the work, interactions between Ariel and Prospero come directly before or directly after interactions between Caliban and Prospero. The scenes of The Tempest are structured so as to emphasize the differing characterizations of Ariel and Caliban in their relationship to Prospero. Both Ariel and Caliban are individuals undoubtedly oppressed by Prospero, yet each develops a different relationship to their master based on their natural character as well as their prior circumstances. ![]() Lying at the root of Shakespeare’s response to Montaigne is a differing conception of human nature and the extent to which modern civilization suppresses it.Īriel and Caliban can both be viewed as the "colonized subjects" of Prospero, and the differing attitudes of these subjects towards their master is indicative of the differing ways in which human nature responds to modern civilization. By analyzing the characterization of these two characters in relation to Prospero, one comes closer to determining how The Tempest as a work of art responds to and challenges Montaigne’s essay. Both Caliban and Ariel are natives of the island, and hence can be thought of in terms of Montaigne’s cannibals. This ambiguity stems from the juxtaposition of the brutish and pathetic character of Caliban with the sprightly and sympathetic character of Ariel. Yet the complexity of The Tempest lies in its essential ambiguity. This seems to imply that Shakespeare’s portrayal of Caliban is a direct attack against the form of wistful idealizing of Nature that Montaigne is so fond of. Whereas Montaigne’s cannibals are praised as "wild fruits," produced by nature in her ordinary way and without any artificiality, Shakespeare’s cannibal appears to be as pathetic, crass, and vulgar as any individual can possibly be portrayed. Montaigne’s idealization of the cannibals contrasts sharply with Shakespeare’s unsympathetic portrayal of the brutish Caliban, whose name thinly veils the influence of Montaigne’s essay. In "On Cannibals" and in The Tempest, both Montaigne and Shakespeare explore the relationship between human nature and modern civilization. The characterization of Ariel and Caliban in The Tempest is significant in relation to Montaigne’s essay, which was one of Shakespeare's main inspirations for the work. He boldly asserts that in the character of these people, all of "the true, most useful, and natural virtues and properties are alive and vigorous." Montaigne goes so far as to claim to have found in these cannibals the "golden age," spoken of so often by philosophers and poets as merely an unattainable dream. He perceives these "cannibals," as he calls them, to be men who live in the way Nature intends them to live, unadorned and unfettered by modern civilization. ![]() It is not surprising, then, that he presents a highly idealized characterization of the natives of the New World. In his essay "On Cannibals," Montaigne continually asserts that what is natural is synonymous with what is good, and that Nature herself ought to be the light by which human action is guided. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |