So I know this is something we touched on at least in our section, but maybe not everyone has considered it yet. I’m wondering what our reactions are to Emilia’s role in Othello? I mean, she is undoubtedly Desdemona’s close (instant) friend, and doesn’t seem to be playing a part in Iago’s scandal, yet she still steals the scarf for him. Sure, she claims she has no idea why he wanted the scarf and that she was just following his request, but really, what was she thinking? Who just steals their friend’s scarf for their husband and doesn’t even bother questioning why the heck he would want it? Maybe this all has to do with obedience and the fact that it possible was inappropriate to question the intentions and actions of one’s husband at the time? All I know is I would be extremely mind boggled if my boyfriend randomly BEGGED me to steal a scarf from my friend. Perhaps she is one of those girls who loves drama and just wanted to steal it to see what would come out of it, or maybe she secretly had it in for Desdemona and wanted to see trouble arise. I can’t imagine she would have had any idea what her twisted, wacko husband was planning, but I suppose there’s a chance.. Thoughts?
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Emilia's Questionable Role in Othello...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I was a sign of the times, and nothing more. During that time, you were supposed to obey your husband, and she was simply being obedient. To even imply that she intended to play a part in causing Desdemona's death is ridiculous because there is an abundance of evidence that supports her innocence.
Her obedience is shown when she initially says "I nothing but to please his fancy (III:iii:303)," but even though she fulfills his demands she still questions his motives several times. She first asks "What will you do with't, that you have been so earnest to have me filch it(III:iii:318-319)?" After he brushes her off, she doesn't give up and persists with saying "If it be not for some purpose of import, give me't again. Poor lady, she'll run mad when she shall lack it (III:iii:320-322)." Again, he snaps at her, and since it would only fuel Iago's temper to persist, she wisely drops the subject.
If you look at this scene and continuing throughout the play, Emilia gets a better glimpse of Iago's true colors than anyone else. He is constantly insulting her, calling her names such as a "fool," "wench (which he calls her when she brings him the handkerchief!!)," "whore," and "strumpet(whore)." Do you really blame her for obeying him? During that time, women had no rights, so it would make sense for her to listen to Iago in order to evade his abuse.
Perhaps the strongest example of her innocence is shown at the end of the play in Act 5 scene II, when she finds out that her husband was behind the death of Desdemona. In this play Shakespeare uses a lot of word repetitions, where characters keep repeating the same word or phrase over and over. Everytime he did this was to show some insight into the thoughts of the character. In Othello's case, it was used to show his insanity and gradual departure from humanity. In Emilia's case, however, it is to emphasize her profound shock and horror at her husbands deeds and thereby show us her innocence.
Although she has been obedient to her husband and has tolerated his abuse throughout the play, she eventually disobeys him. "Tis proper I obey him, but now now. Perchance, Iago, I will ne'er go home (V:ii:199-200)." It is clear that her loyalty is to Desdemona and not her husband. Had she any notion of what her husband was plotting to do, why would she have disobeyed her husband and revealed all of his deeds to Othello, Cassio, and Gratiano, ultimately resulting in the end of her life and her husbands?
Touche. It wasn't necessarily an implication, but merely an exploration of ideas. It's hard to tell what's clear or certain in Shakespeare's writing. I didn't mean to imply that she necessarily intended to play a part in causing Desdemona's death, but that perhaps she could have suspected some sort of mischief and ignored it. Although, I think to call anyone's implications of a complicated and confusing piece of writing, i.e. any of Shakespeare's plays "ridiculous" is somewhat offensive. All your evidence has good points, and after reviewing the quotes, allowed me to view Emilia's role in a more specific light, which is all I was asking for. I do not question that Emilia would have wished death upon Desdemona but what I do think is ridiculous is the fact that out of pure obedience to her husband she would steal something precious from her dear friend without hardly questioning it. This is what I should have directed the original post at, I suppose. Even in the times when obedience to one's husband took priority over a friendship (this hasn't necessarily changed), I still can't wrap my head around the fact that she would steal something for him without truly interrogating her husband. Moving off track a bit, but staying on the topic of obedience, recall the part in the play (sorry, I don't have my book on me to directly quote) when Emilia and Desdemona are talking (I believe in Desdemona's bed) and Desdemona is swearing how she was innocent and wondering how anyone could ever cheat on their husband, and Emilia immediately declares that dozens of women cheat on their husbands every day, and that there are plenty of reasons to do so. It is natural at this point to question Emilia's faithfulness to her own husband, Iago, which would also question the notion of simple obedience, even in these times.
To me, and especially in the film adaptation, it seems that Emilia obeys Iago's request to steal the handkerchief not only because of her obligation to follow the orders of her husband, but also because she is craving any kind of affection or attention from him. While I agree that a fair share of evidence points to Emilia's unfaithfulness (her conversation with Desdemona that Stephanie mentioned and Shakespeare's comparison of Bianca and Emilia near the end of the play), I believe she still respects Iago. However, I think the possibility of her having an affair is important, because it means she might not be the completely obedient wife that she should be, which allows her to question Iago's motives for stealing the handkerchief and later, to completely disobey him by revealing his plan. I do not think she had any part in fooling Othello and bringing about Desdemona's death.
Emilia's role can be looked at as very interesting. She is the one to get the handkerchief, and that really caused the death of multiple people. Without her in the picture would things have ended differently? I have come to the conclusion that she can be looked at as a very interesting character and her morales can easily be questioned, but without her in the picture, the outcome would have been the same. Iago already had Othello where he wanted him, and who is to say that Iago wouldn't have found a way to get the handkerchief himself. Yes she is interesting but I don't think her actions changed the outcome in anyway. Othello was doomed from the moment he let himself get manipulated by Iago.
Post a Comment