The Play's the Thing, Part 2

Othello

Hamlet
 
 

The first exposure I had to this play was a song on "Fame" called Desdemona. Gene Anthony Ray played Othello and Carlo Imperato played Iago. I still have it on tape somewhere--a three-minute mini-opera.

This play has a great emotional impact on people. Norrie Epstein writes that during Paul Robeson's earth-shattering portrayal of Othello, a young girl in the audience was heard to whisper just before Desdemona's murder: "Oh God, don't let him kill her...don't let him kill her, oh God..."

And it's not hard to imagine why. Desdemona is a wonderful heroine, willing to flout convention and disobey her father to follow her heart. Othello is a noble and good man, strong enough to be a respected general, yet tender enough to adore Desdemona and win her with his poetry, wit and intelligence. And then we see this good man led astray by the craftily laid trap of a master villain, driving him to destroy the woman he loves so. (A thought...Othello is led to believe his wife unfaithful because a villian skillfully manipulates the truth to make it seem so, and audiences call Othello noble and wronged. But they brand Much Ado's Claudio a jerk...and the exact same thing happens to him!)

Much has been made of Iago's "motiveless malignity". I, however, don't see it so much as motiveless as sort of laid in between the lines. In the original short story by Gerardo Cinthio, Iago's counterpart had an unrequited passion for Desdemona; this could be a possibility. Iago does say he loves her, but is quick to explain that he only loves her as an instrument of his plans. Could he be protesting too much? He also says that it's suspected that Othello once had an affair with Iago's wife Emilia. (Is that true? I think not. Othello'd have to be a total moron to not only keep Emilia in his employ after the affair is over, but make her Desdemona's maid. And Emilia has too much affection for Desdemona to be a "rival".) But Iago then goes on to say that even if it's not true, suspicion is enough for him. He's looking for some kind of rationalization. So what's his true motive?

I think thus. Imagine how Iago must be feeling. He's a cynical man with a dark view of the world, and he knows that he doesn't have anywhere near the respect or the love that Othello has. He is a mere ensign, not looked up to, or admired, or beloved of many people, as Othello is. He is stuck in a marriage with a wife he no longer seems to love. And here is someone else who is getting praise, admiration and love. This man has a wonderful wife whom he loves dearly. Iago knows he will never be as good, or as loved, as this man. And the kicker...the man with all this is a Moor, an outsider, an "inferior" in Iago's mind. (Note Iago's many disparaging comments about Othello's race.) Iago must be thinking, "Fine, Mr. Paragon...I'll show you you're no better than the rest of us!" His rage at his own shortcomings leads him to take Othello down to his level. Desdemona must be destroyed, too, for she is the symbol of the love he does not have in his own life.

The scenes in which Iago manipulates Othello are harrowing, yet skillfully crafted and psychologically believable. Even before this, when he gets Cassio fired, he shows this tendency. He shows great reluctance to tell what has happened, because hey, he's a nice guy, he doesn't want to get Cassio into trouble. This only makes Cassio look all the blacker. And an especially nice touch is that Iago mentions the amity among them is like "bride and groom devesting them for bed"...reminding Othello of what's been interrupted!(A side note here...I always imagined Othello's line to Desdemona, "The purchase made, the fruits are to ensue, That profit's yet to come 'tween me and you," spoken solemnly. But in a production I saw in Lancaster, Pa, he spoke this line playfully, sweeping Desdemona up and carrying her offstage, while his men hooted and laughed. Wonderful touch.)

Iago shows the same reluctance to tell Othello of Desdemona's "infidelity", whetting Othello's curiosity. Then, later, when Othello accuses him of making it all up, Iago couldn't be more hurt and offended. That Othello should treat his friend like this, who only has his best interests at heart! He then plants images of Desdemona and Cassio in the Moor's mind. When he says "lie with her, on her," he causes Othello to go into a fit of rage and despair. He uses the handkerchief and his conversation with Cassio (in which Othello believes they are talking about Desdemona when they are talking about Bianca) as the "ocular proof" that Othello demands. It's easy to understand how Othello could have fallen for it.

And on the other side is poor Desdemona, totally unaware of why her husband's attitude should have changed so. Shortly before her murder, she seems resigned to whatever may come. She orders Emilia to make up the bed with her wedding sheets...and to shroud her in these sheets if she should die. Whether she knows that Othello might kill her, or she feels she will die of a broken heart, is unclear. If Iago represents pure hate, Desdemona represents pure love. So which one wins in the end?

In a way, love wins. When Emilia asks the dying Desdemona who has done this, Desdemona does not accuse Othello, She merely says, "Nobody...I myself...Commend me to my lord," and dies. Her love for Othello has persisted even in the face of all he has done for her. And Iago is, after all, defeated, even if he has destroyed Othello and Desdemona, for what remains for him but torture and death? (The Laurence Fishburne film of Othello has a nice touch at the end...as Cassio helps Othello up, you can see him slip Othello a dagger. He is doing his friend this service, knowing that Othello would rather die by his own hand than be ignominiously put to death by the Senate.) I also like to think (as I saw in one production) that Iago, confronted by what he has done (especially if it is true that he might have feelings for Desdemona) breaks down. If my theory is true, and Iago has destroyed them both out of jealousy for the beauty, respect and love he does not have in his life, he might be remorseful at finally seeing that he has destroyed the only beautiful things he knew of.

Notice how Othello's speech itself breaks down. In the beginning, he speaks calmly and articulately. But as Iago's poison begins to work, he speaks more in broken half-sentences. This shows how his mind and sanity are breaking down under all of this.

Back to top

"This is a story about a man who could not make up his mind," Laurence Olivier's film begins. But is that all there is to it?

Some have called Hamlet's indecision the cause of the tragedy. But I think it's a little more than that. Certainly, he is indecisive, but for good reason. He has been called to commit a murder, an act that may damn his soul. He wants to be sure that Claudius is guilty before doing this, for killing an innocent man would be a mortal sin. When he has the chance to kill Claudius, when the king is praying, he thinks it through, for he does not want to send Claudius to heaven. (That was the prevailing feeling...if you had prayed before you died, you'd go to heaven, no matter what dastardly deeds you'd done.)

No, I think that a good part of the tragedy was caused by Hamlet's inability to trust...for that's what caused the death of Ophelia. Most productions I've seen show that Hamlet knows Ophelia's been "loosed" as a spy. But she has only done so in the hope of helping him. However, one may also argue that he is justified in not trusting, for two of his so-called friends are actually trying to work against him, his mother has betrayed his father (in his mind), his uncle has betrayed his father. But his cruelty to Ophelia goes far beyond that, and this is what helps to drive her mad and gets Laertes hot for revenge.

Dr. Martin, my former English professor, also holds fast to the view that the ghost was actually a demon sent to damn Hamlet's soul. Even if Claudius did, indeed, kill the King, what right has Hamlet to take his life? Isn't vengeance the Lord's? Dr. Martin cites the fact that the ghost speaks not one word of love for the prince, not one intimation of joy that suggests that this is a father happy to see his son again. He also points out the part of the Player King's speech about Pyrrhus, and the wars, bloodshed, and misery caused by the fact that he wanted revenge. He believes that this is meant to show the futility of any kind of revenge. And what does Hamlet's revenge get him? Polonius, Ophelia, Laertes, Gertrude, Claudius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Hamlet himself...all dead.

(A little about the two film versions of the Ghost that I have seen. It's interesting that in the Kenneth Branagh version, the Ghost is threatening and frightening. But in Mel Gibson's version, the ghost is pitiful, suffering. He weeps spectral tears on "O, horrible!" while Hamlet wipes away his own tears at his poor father's plight. Completely different from Branagh's. Maybe Branagh subscribed to Dr. Martin's view?)

Another thing which helped cause the tragedy is lack of honesty. Just look at the pattern in Elsinore...deception over the death of the first King, deception over Ophelia's part in trying to help Hamlet, deception in the actions of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, even deception in Hamlet's feigned madness. The only truly honest character is Horatio, and he is the one who survives all this.

And I even think that a case could be made that indecision is not the real trouble here. Shakespeare could have been championing the idea of thinking things through. The only time Hamlet truly did anything without thinking about it was the moment when he killed Polonius, thinking he was Claudius. If he'd taken a moment to think about it, he would have realized that this couldn't be Claudius, since he had only left Claudius praying a few moments ago! But he kills Polonius, which sets the final part of the tragedy in motion.

What are we to make of Claudius? His repentance during the prayer scene sure seems real enough. But he also admits, during that same scene, that he does not want to give up his crown or Gertrude. And, during the final duel, he could have stopped Gertrude from accidentally drinking the poison by admitting it all. But he, careful of his own hide, stays quiet. (This could have also been the reason for Laertes' change of heart...he sees the rat that Claudius is.) To paraphrase Rhett Butler, Claudius is like a thief who isn't sorry he stole but is terribly, terribly sorry he's going to jail.

 A few thoughts about Laertes, Ophelia and Polonius. In the scenes where they are warning Ophelia about Hamlet's intentions, Laertes is the more sensitive and thoughtful one. He obviously has no dislike for Hamlet, but he knows how things work in the world of royalty. He tells Ophelia, in effect: "Look, I have no doubt Hamlet loves you, but it isn't his choice to make who he marries. He's a prince...he might have to marry some princess for political reasons. If you go too far with him, and he can't marry you...you'll be left with nothing." Polonius, however, immediately assumes that Hamlet's out to seduce and dump Ophelia...judging everyone's mind by his own corrupt one. (Although, in the Branagh version, he partially redeems himself in my eyes by the genuinely apologetic tone he takes when he tells Ophelia later that he really believed Hamlet was toying with her. And by actually holding Ophelia when she's so upset over Hamlet's treatment of her.)

Back to top
 

MORE PLAYS TO COME!
Back to the Will Power! homepage