Taming Of The Shrew Is Too Misogynistic English Literature Essay

At the time The Taming of the Shrew was written, the traditions and customs were of a radical nature; ranging from women to working conditions. The main notion of marriage was perceived in a completely different way since some men married for wealth and some simply got married since it was almost compulsory. You could say men were actually much more dominant, since they were the anchor of control when it came to deciding who to marry, in contrast to the women who had no say in the situation whatsoever. In this essay I will be discussing my opinions and whether or not I think that the representation of women in the play is somewhat the epitome of misogyny.

To many people who read and analyse The Taming of the Shrew, they may observe it as may be as being thoroughly misogynistic, an excruciating illustration of female representation in the 16TH century England . However I think that this is far off from real and extremely superficial. The Taming of the Shrew offers many interpretations of its true meaning and does actually express some sort of relevant to a modern society, to an extent I think that The Taming of the Shrew is too misogynistic for a modern audience to appreciate it as comedy and I have many factors to support my opinion.

In the play Shrewish Kate is tamed by Petrucio who is described as;  conscienceless, corrupt and deceitful. Petruchio moves on to using Kate’s fathers wealth as his only reason to entrain on his marriage, even though Kate tries her hardest to resist and avoid she is left with no choice. He abuses her by humiliating her and degrading her, all the way up to the final scene where Kate openly . He embarrasses and degrades her, culminating in the final scene where Kate abandons her independence with ease by placing her hand under petruchio’s foot and carries on to lecture all the other women about what they should be doing and informing them of the traditional role of being a servant within the barriers of marriage.

“Forward, I pray, since we have come so far And it be moon, or sun, or what you please” (ACT IV SCENE V 12-13). Here we can see that Kate and Petruchio become closer whenever Petruchio enables Kate to redirect the aggression he directs at her at another victim. In this case, Kate blamed her mistake on ‘the blessed sun’. But there is a definite suggestion of a gap emerging between how she views herself and how she reacts in relation to Petruchio when she refers to herself in the third person ‘… whatever you have it named… it shall be so for Katherine’. The language of Kate and Petruchio reinforces the notion of partnership. In 16TH Century England, female speech was associated with female independence which, was forbidden. However Kate is an assertive and articulate individual as is clear in Act II Scene I when she labels Petruchio a ‘moveable’ an ‘ass’ and a ‘jade’. Her wordplay with Petruchio in this scene clearly indicates they are suited: PETRUCHIO: I swear I’ll cuff you, if you strike again KATE: So may you loose your arms. If you strike me, you are no gentleman, And if no gentleman, then why no arms.

In the eyes of the feminist critic throughout the play Kate is not silenced, instead she propounds her views and articulates male language in a refusal to be controlled and categorised by the power structures by which men subordinate women. Kate describes Petruchio as ‘no cock of mine, you (Petruchio) crow too like a craven’. Her willing engagement in conversations containing sexual puns or innuendo emphasises her colloquial parity with Petruchio. Thus it is Kate who is educating Petruchio rather than the latter educating the former about the role of women in marriage. By engaging in loquacious argument, Kate’s refusal to conform to the conventions of 16TH Century England acts as a sharp warning to Petruchio that he cannot simply bamboozle her into marriage.

There are many other reasons why this play is not offensive. The play after all is a comedy, not a tragedy or drama. While it would be fair to accept that a suppression of Kate would have been appreciated by a 16TH Century audience, it can be doubted as to whether this is what Shakespeare intended. Surely he wouldn’t want to offend the country’s first female monarch so profusely? The audience is not supposed to derive entertainment from the ‘taming’ of Kate, but from the comic and farcical way in which their courtship and eventual marriage is delineated – as almost a battle of equals. The fact that the play has a happy ending and that both are triumphant emphasises this comic genre.

The plot’s structure underlines the notion that this play is a fantasy and not reality. The surreal induction scenes containing Sly, in which it is made clear that the pending performance is meant purely for his entertainment, introduces the theme of a play within a play and so is designed to detach the audience from the matters of the plot. It also represents a trail of conscious deceit, which links to the deception of Kate and Petruchio over the wager. The constant swapping of identities among the other characters again furthers the theory that all we are viewing is merely role-play. In addition, although characters such as Tranio and Lucentio are Italian by name, but they are certainly not by nature, which again serves as a comic device that this play is not to be taken seriously.

The plot’s worthiness as a comedy for contemporary enjoyment as well as criticism reflects the fact that the themes considered within the play are still important in modern society. Indeed the play raises a number of pertinent questions about subjects such as the role of women, the role of and meaning of marriage, and the reasons for marriage, making it a worthy piece of educational literature. One can only find the play offensive if one finds modern society offensive because the themes of deception, gender differences, greed and want are prevalent in society today (both to the advantage and disadvantage of women). The fact that we still live in a patriarchal society demonstrates that its structure has not fundamentally changed and therefore the play cannot be considered an anachronism. The Taming of the Shrew only configures with the thoughts of other authors or poets such as Chaucer who in his Merchants Tale depicted an almost farcical marriage where the bride deceives and outwits her male counterpart in order to gain the marital domination. It is the play’s strength that it can be interpreted in many different ways. In addition to the conclusion that it depicts the suppression of women or the outwitting of men by women, a Marxist analysis may conclude the play as the gaining of status by the lower class mortal or as the force of love triumphing over want. The fact that popular musicals such as Kiss Me Kate have been successful as well as many other similar productions highlights its worthiness as a play and reason to continue with its production.

One reason why the play should be continued in production is that it educates its audience about the historical contexts of 16TH Century Britain. Between 1550 and 1660 Britain was concerned with an intense preoccupation with women who are a visible threat to the patriarchal system. Shakespeare was not alone in writing about this subject, instead he actively engaged in the controversies of the day. The Taming of the Shrew challenges the assumption that the wife will simply submit to her master’s wishes as well as question whether this hierarchal structure can continue if it is threatened by rebellious behaviour.

Based on numerous reoccurring references, with some being aforementioned, throughout the play The Taming of the Shrew, it is plain to see how a woman’s opinion is easily disregarded, her status is automatically put a notch under men, and she is valued as one would value a temporary possession. For a woman in the 16th century, life is a struggle. Not only are women unable to speak their minds, they are shunned if they do. Being considered lower-class is something each of them must live with each and every day – the fact that they will never be considered “good enough” in the eyes of men. However, one must be seen as a human being before being put into an equal class with men. Unfortunately, this is a long way off for women as they are seen as mere possessions. The impact the male society has on the treatment of women is so immense that even someone classified as shrewd can be “tamed” into following the expectations of their society.