Women in Shakespeare

[atiguhya padma]

Are there any women characters in Shakespeare that paint a positive picture? Are there any you can identify with?

[amuse]

I can totally identify with Katherine in Taming of the Shrew. I was shrill and bossy in my twenties, and her reversal at end of the play meshes with me now.

Are there any feminists ready to kill me ;) :D?

[atiguhya padma]

Oh dear, amuse, really, how could you?:) A group of feminists netsurfers are probably on their way to your place this very moment, to drag you out of your home and force you to see a production of the Vagina Monologues.:)

[Isagel]

Yep. Oh, we are going to get you now. We now where you live.
And you to, AP.

[IWilKikU]

I thought that Hypolita was a strong woman character. In a time when women were supposed to be quiet and virtueous ect. she proved she could be just as degenerate as Oberon.

...
...
...
...
uh...

After thinking a bit more, I would like you to just disregard that. I guess in the big picture she DID fall in love with an *** (donkey incase thats cencered), and than she thought it was a good trick rather than being mad about it.
...
...
What about...


uh...

nevermind.

[crisaor]

Originally posted by atiguhya padma
Are there any women characters in Shakespeare that paint a positive picture? Are there any you can identify with?
There are. Desdemona, obviously, Cordelia, Portia, to name a few.

[Raven]

To identify with? definitely Helena, I am as love-lost as she! ;)

[Shea]

I just finished writing a paper on Juliet and how her isolation affected her thoughout the play. I was surprised to realize how strong she was! Despite the fact that she committed suicide, she is definately a role model!

[IWilKikU]

Originally posted by Helena_of_verona

Though I force myself to identify with Helena. She's the perfect character.

Uhh, I thought Helen was a terrible character to use as a role model. She unconditionally loves this guy who doesn't give two craps about her. He still wouldn't love her if it wern't for Oberon's juice. That's misplaced devotion. Why is she a perfect character? I thought she was pathetic and winey.

[simon]

Desdemona was and unknowing, ignorant lovesick sap and Juliet was an obsessed child, good characters but not women to model yourselfe after.

[Blade]

Potia is probably the female character the paints the most "positive image" in my opinion

[Shea]

Originally posted by Blade
Potia is probably the female character the paints the most "positive image" in my opinion

I hope your not talking about Brutus' Portia!:D Hot coals down the throat! That kind of reminds me of my grandma's coffee drinking habits!

I like Portia of the Merchant of Venice. A very strong woman!

Simon, Juliet was obsessed with Romeo, but still kept her ability to reason. She was much more level-headed than he was. Just before she meets him at the balcony scene, her rationale proves her to be the only smart Capulet, in that she's the only one who won't hate someone simply because of his name. If you ask me, it's the rest of her family that has a wild uncontrolled obsession.

[Sunny]

Oh, i haven't read any works of Shakespeare, coz' it's so difficult to me. but i have read a lot of translated copies of his works. I hope to read the original works asap.

[Shea]

Footnotes are a big key in understanding Shakespeare! Sometimes they can be annoying, because you think you understand a word or a line, and you look at the footnote to see if there's something you didn't know, but it's just what you thought. But other times, they can really help you understand what going on by giving insight into the text or even the time period of either the play or Shakepeare himself.

[Blade]

Originally posted by Shea
I hope your not talking about Brutus' Portia!:D Hot coals down the throat! That kind of reminds me of my grandma's coffee drinking habits!

I like Portia of the Merchant of Venice. A very strong woman!



yes, i'm sorry i didnt clarify, i did mean Portia from the merchant of venice

[crisaor]

Originally posted by simon
Desdemona was and unknowing, ignorant lovesick sap and Juliet was an obsessed child, good characters but not women to model yourselfe after.
What???
If all lovers (men and women) were like her, imagine how much better our life would be.

[IWilKikU]

Desdemona or Juliet?

[crisaor]

Sorry, I thought it was understood. I meant Desdemona, obviously.

[simon]

Better how? Because women would be pathetic creatures that fail to notice the obvious? And that's not to say that Othello was any better, he never even considered to ask Desedemona. By the way I'm not ragging on Will, it's becuase his characterization is so good that we can analyze and attack the nature of the characters. But I guess you could say that Desdemona was strong in her innosence and Juliet in her faith.

[Raven]

I think Emilia was the only decent female character in Othello - at least she stood up to men

[simon]

I forgot about Emilia, she is a decent female and look what she got for it: death.

[crisaor]

Emilia is decent and Desdemona is "a pathetic creature that fails to notice the obvious"??? :confused: I'm wondering if we read the same book...

[Avalive]

Shakespeare is not the only love creation writter. But, he is one of them. I wish I could visit his dreamland and grab some fireflies of romance .

[IWilKikU]

Actually you CAN visit Shakespeare's dreamland. Read some Plutarch and other historians that he had access to. The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. Sorry Ava, but He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.

[Avalive]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
Actually you CAN visit Shakespeare's dreamland. Read some Plutarch and other historians that he had access to. The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. Sorry Ava, but He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.


I dunno. I never realli read about Shakespeare's works. He's not my stlye. I'm the person who hardly read. I'm not talented in literature. But, once an author's mind sparkles with mine, I read the book for what it tells me. Never for the literature.

[amuse]

Originally posted by Avalive
I read the book for what it tells me. Never for the literature.
Avalive, I'm confused as to how you can separate the book from the lit?

[Avalive]

I don't know. I know it sounds unreasonable and ribiculous. The feeling is kinda abstract. Honestly,I don't love literature myself. The real book is not created for Nobel Prize, the entity is not for literature. There must be link between lit and books. Obviously. However, it's not all. I remember somebody says something which
sparkles with my mind:

"True poets don't write
Their thoughts with a pen...
They release the ink that flows
From within their heart. "
~ by Anonymous ~

We are not in any debates. We are just sharing the feelings. Cuz my point won't stand. I'm always ridiculous. I guess u are right, Amuse,I basically nod for those normal attitudes, but they are powerless in my world.

[Raven]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
Actually you CAN visit Shakespeare's dreamland. Read some Plutarch and other historians that he had access to. The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. Sorry Ava, but He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.

well, it depends on what you mean by creativty. some authors are gifted with plots, some with character development, some with other worlds. I doubt there are many writers who are great at all of them. I myself can create whole worlds easily, but ask me to think of a plot and I draw a blank! ;)

[amuse]

Originally posted by Avalive
I don't know. I know it sounds unreasonable and ribiculous. The feeling is kinda abstract.
that's what i thought. i just wanted to see the bones within. :)

"True poets don't write
Their thoughts with a pen...
They release the ink that flows
From within their heart. "
~ by Anonymous ~
well put.

We are not in any debates.
if?? you felt i was looking for one, no. i simply prefer the normal blended with the mystical. one without the other confuses this little tree called me.
peace. :)

[crisaor]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.
WHAT???????????????????????????????????? :confused: :mad:
Who are you and what have you done to IWilKikU?

[simon]

Perhaps kik has been napped by gnomes of some kind, they seem to have been lurking about lately, it might be time for another uprising.

[IWilKikU]

Well, its true! I still think Shakespeare was the best! But come on, So many of his plays were based on pre-existing stories. And I havn't been kidnapped, the kidnapping gnomes work for ME! They go out and night and steal underpants from unsuspecting underpants victims.

[simon]

Oh no, you don't have any that say "wicked" do you?

[IWilKikU]

I will not say anything that may incriminate my underpants gnomes. They're a hard working bunch and deserve their privacy. Its the least I can do to repay them for the mass quantities of underpants that they provide me with.

[amuse]

*flashback to episode of "friends" where julia roberts/susie makes chandler wear her panties :D

[simon]

Well at least now I know where all my underwear has been ending up.

[emily655321]

Originally posted by IWilKikU
Well, its true! I still think Shakespeare was the best! But come on, So many of his plays were based on pre-existing stories. And I havn't been kidnapped, the kidnapping gnomes work for ME! They go out and night and steal underpants from unsuspecting underpants victims.

*Zips lips for fear of transmogrifying into some kind of Kik Groupie* All I'm gonna say is, my Shakespeare teacher must have hated me. I am not a Stratfordian.

And....Why is no one mentioning VIOLA??? She has to be one of the biggest feminist role models in the history of literature. I know, she dressed like a boy to get the respect, but everything she said and did Shakey clearly intended to be all Viola. Especially when compared to the other women we have to choose from -- shrews and nunnish things and airheaded nymphomaniacs. Just look at how Feste spoke to her; he was fooled (no pun intended) by the disguise, but the one scene outside Orsino's when they're alone he treated her with a kind of admiration and curiosity that no one else ever got from him.


*Quietly slips padlock onto her underwear drawer*

[byquist]

As an hombre, I note no one has mentioned Imogen in Cymbeline, who is a lovely character. Also the gal who cuts a deal with the Duke in "All's Well" is rare.

[mono]

I had a great admiration for Lavinia of Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus, due to her strength throughout everyone violently victimizing her. The thought of her persona seems almost haunting in the play, and I cannot but give the greatest sympathy.
Another character I loved seems a common one: Titania from A Midsummer Night's Dream. I looked highly upon her strong will, and for just merely being the Queen Fairy.

[Miss Darcy]

And....Why is no one mentioning VIOLA??? She has to be one of the biggest feminist role models in the history of literature.
Yeah, Viola is actually one of my favourite Shakespeare characters...and after her, comes Rosalind. I like the name Rosalind. More if you pronounce the "-lind" part as rhyming with "pinned" instead of "rind" or "mind" or "kind". Though there are rhymes for both in the play itself, I guess they were all pronounc'd the same during the Bard's time.

Fare thee well,

Miss Darcy
Forgetting this isn't Shakespeare High

[Perdito]

[/FONT]I hope that in claiming Viola for a feminist role model Miss Darcy does not mean the Viola who falls hopelessly in love with Orsino. This is a man so in love with an idea of love that exists nowhere but in his own foetid imagination that he stands as the epitome of narcissicism in a play that is Shakespeare's most intense exporation of the self-obsession and self-delusion of the subject in the grip of conventional love.
It has for long seemed to me that Shakespeare's sympathies in his later comedies are with the lower (in every respect) characters; that is to say the ones who retain some grasp of the physical necessities of love (as opposed to the Orsinos, Violas, Olivias, and Sebastians of the world for whom everything is "fancy"). If this is true, then the real heroin of the piece is Maria who is the only woman in the play who marries a man she knows.

[Miss Darcy]

[/FONT]I hope that in claiming Viola for a feminist role model Miss Darcy does not mean the Viola who falls hopelessly in love with Orsino.

I sure do. If you fall in love with someone, it's not your fault! And feminism does not necessarily mean anti-male. Well I guess some are, but I think the essence of feminism is that we are just as good as men are. Not always better, though :D often that IS the case! - But throughout history the situation of women has been often very hopeless and degraded. Think "obedient Ophelia", suppressed women unable to do anything except cook and clean, tiny feet in China....of course there have been times where women ruled. Venus figurines. Women as authors in Japan (the men were obliged to use female pseudonyms, though in the Western world it was often the other way round). Women scientists (though they obviously had a very hard time of it, and were also repressed)....Listen to some of Viola's speeches to Orsino about women. She argues (as Cesario, of course) that she knows


Too well what love women to men may owe:
In faith, they are as true of heart as we.

And that...


We men may say more, swear more: but indeed
Our shows are more than will; for still we prove
Much in our vows, but little in our love.

She is a strong woman, and is respected by all the men in Orsino's house. And surely it is love indeed, which she feels to Orsino, that she is so infatuated in? She loves him, sure, passionately, and fully, and it is equal to any more bodily and normal love of the servants. It is romantic, and sexual at once. The servants simply lack the romance. They are too down-to-earth for that, I think. And don't you love somebody the more, if you don't know them, if you have only just met them?...Then you can idealise, then you can sigh, then you can be attracted to them. If you know somebody all your life, or at least for a long time, there is no mystery in passion, and usually no idealism which is the very essence of love.

It is true that Orsino was "in love with the idea of love", and more passionate about his anguish, than with his love herself. It is not real love, mere infatuation. To Cesario he feels something completely different. He doesn't want to admit to himself...that he has fallen in love with a "boy".

Those are some of my thoughts...sorry if I have bored anyone...

Miss Darcy

[lilladybug]

Positive women characters are endless in Shakespeare, it all depends on how you look at their roles in the drama. Take Rosalind in As you like it, she's a positive guide for Celia, Orlando, Phoebe, and Silvius. She teaches them all what love is and how to respect it, even though she does it in her male counterpart. Despite the fact that she is pretending to be a man, her feminity guides her in producing the role that so many of this play's characters look up to! Not only do you have Rosalind that is a positive female figure, but what Hotspur's wife in Titus? Lady Percy promotes the softer side of Hotspur, sure she may be a pistol with him at times, but she does tone down the warrior and turn up the romantic. So, what if she's not the good guy's wife?!? Her role is still a positive one!

[brshfr]

Desdemona was and unknowing, ignorant lovesick sap and Juliet was an obsessed child, good characters but not women to model yourselfe after.

Desdemona is one I could relate with because her undoing has nothing really to do with her, she is the hapless victim of a man's jealousy.

[Chubby]

Hi, everybody :)



Actually you CAN visit Shakespeare's dreamland. Read some Plutarch and other historians that he had access to. The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. Sorry Ava, but He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.


I couldn't agree with you more that his plays are based on other people's historical writings, and that Sh shows no creativity in that field, but his creativity lies in the way he presented them. One can see from his plays that Sh had an understanding of human nature, motives, of cause and effect of human actions. The actual story isn't as important as the way you tell it. :)
At least that's my impression/opinion :)

[Cristina]

Actually you CAN visit Shakespeare's dreamland. Read some Plutarch and other historians that he had access to. The majority of his plays are based on others' historical writings. Some are what we would consider strait up plagerism today. I think the only plot that he really dreamed (interesting use of languege) is A Midsummer Night's Dream. Sorry Ava, but He hardly had an ounce of creativity in his bones.

I think you can apreciate creativity in shakespeare without necessarily looking for an original plot. His creativity is so palpable in his characters. Characters like Malvolio and Falstaff are somuch more complex than the role requires. He was pretty good at creating real people instead of characatures or clear villans/heros. Plus if your a huge dork and study the rhyming skemes (kinda a waste of time) he's crazy creative with his use of rhyme/verse/song to convey levels of emotion, and deviances from the rhythm to make thoughts stand out... so he's basically the man

[Cristina]

So I'm writting my final paper for shakes class on the evolution of the female character throughout his works (googling the subject brought me here) but I think shakespeare had a hard time writting woman roles that accually seemed like real woman-- I mean he's a genius but woman are kinda hard to get.

He started out with a lot of woman like Joan of Arc who were cool but come on they were basically just men in dresses. Then he had women who where total geniouses but kind of unnaturally perfict, like Portia who waltzes into a court of law and is all of a sudden a sick aturney even though she never went to school. I'm thinking that the most relatable/real women come at the end of his career like Paulina and Hermione in a Winter's Tale.