Shakespeare and Society

DR. PETER WILLIAMS
Shakespeare and Society
The Influence of Elizabethan and Jacobean Society and History on
Shakespearean Plays and their Modern Adaptations in Films
Noha Chahal
6/5/2015
Senior Paper

1Shakespeare and Society
Abstract
William Shakespeare, one of the greatest literary writers of all time, was
brilliant in the way he captured significant traits of history and the real
world and aestheticized them, escalating them into a new dimension,
teaching his audience of the world while also greatly entertaining them,.
In this paper, I will concentrate on his plays, The Tragedy of Macbeth and
The Taming of the Shrew, and how the two plays clearly demonstrate
Shakespeare's knowledge in history, and the human psyche and its
demonstrations in society. I will also further elaborate on Shakespeare's
brilliance in his attributes to many modern day adaptations of his plays
into movies, such as the BBC movie, ShakespeaRe-Told: Macbeth and 10
Things I Hate About You. In this way, I will prove that Shakespeare was
not only successful in reaching the audience of his time and his society,
but also people of all time and of all cultures.

Shakespeare and Society
The Influence of Elizabethan and Jacobean Society and History on
Shakespearean Plays and their Modern Adaptations in Films
Noha Chahal
The soul of literature is a seamless blend of real life, meaningful words, and
transcending aesthetic. Together, they create an escalated realm with infinite
possibilities outside of the realm of life. The combination of letters to create words is
only made true with the existence of its meaning. Art, in all its forms, can only ignite
and inspire with the beauty it reflects and the movement it creates. Literature is life;
without life, literature would simply be an art with empty words and no meanings –
aesthetic with no beauty. It takes a true artist- a truly gifted writer- to capture the
beauty of the world and of life, and fill literary words with meaning. Who could be a
better artist of literary meaning than none other than William Shakespeare, the
"greatest playwright not of his age alone but of all time" (Greenblatt, 2004, p. 1).
One of Shakespeare's greatest specialties was arousing the spirit of his plays
by extracting important elements of the real world and situating them into his own
work, creating the perfect combination of the aesthetic and the real. His life, his
surroundings, and his knowledge were all the basis of the inspiration of his works. In
many of his plays, Shakespeare recreates real people from history, correlating them to
fit different themes of his different play. The characters and themes of his play,
whether historical figures or not, are based on characteristics of Elizabethan and
Jacobean society, bringing them to life and making them relatable to all, while also
aestheticizing and immortalizing them. Examples of these plays include Macbeth and

Taming of the Shrew, plays that both include characters with traits extracted from real
societies and real historic events and people, such as Queen Elizabeth I and King
James I. In these plays, the traits of different characters reflect personas of average
people from the Elizabethan and Jacobean era and the problems they faced revealed
much about the societal norms, lifestyle, and ambitions of people at the time.
Although they may be based on Elizabethan societies, Shakespeare has captured the
incessant human qualities and embedded them in these characters, thus
revolutionizing literature and marking his presence in the literary world.
The success of Shakespeare's plays made their way into the modern day with
numerous movie adaptations all over the world. Examples of these adaptations
include: Macbeth, adapted into a BBC movie called ShakespeaRe-Told: Macbeth; and
Taming of the Shrew, adapted into the 90's Hollywood hit 10 Things I Hate About
You. These adaptations capture the essential plot of the Shakespearean plays and place
them in the present world, giving them a modern twist, making them more relatable to
people of the modern time and Western cultures.
Shakespeare was a man of prodigious knowledge and an unfathomable
understanding of the human psyche. One of the human qualities Shakespeare was all
too familiar with himself was the aim of many ambitious people- to excel to the top.
Some choose to follow the path of nobility, morals, and patience, while others decide
to take matters into their own hands and take drastic measures to jump up the ladder.
The play, The Tragedy of Macbeth, is one of those stories of a man who does
whatever it takes to get into power, no matter the sacrifice and the price he has to pay
for it. The character Macbeth, however, has no sense of direction, which is clear in his
letter to his wife. Upon hearing the fate of his future in his prophecy, he turns to her

instantly, and Lady Macbeth molds him a backbone and constructs the plans for him-
to kill the king and his leader, King Duncan. The three characters carry significant
roles in the play and their formation in a story is one of common practice of
scheming.
History shows itself through a number of Shakespeare's plays, such as in The
Tragedy of King Richard, The Life of Henry the Fifth, King Lear, The Tragedy of
Hamlet King of Denmark, and of course The Tragedy of Macbeth. Each play tells the
significant story of different monarchs or legendary figures significant to the history
and culture of Shakespeare's time. The story of Macbeth follows the same
characteristics as it is based and inspired by the 11th
century Scottish King Mac
Bethad mac Findláich (Williams, 1982).
King James I of Scotland, the king of Scotland and England in the late 16th
early 17th
century, was an impressive man that admired and was admired by
Shakespeare. Shakespeare's acting company, The Kings Men, was honored and
supported by King James and this play was assumedly dedicated to him. Although
this may be true, the essence of the plot of the play follows the story of the 11th
century king of the Scots, King Mac Bethad mac Findlaich- in English, MackBeth.
Shakespeare's knowledge of King MackBeth's life was derived from Raphael
Holinshed's 1587 edition of the Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland
(Williams, 1982). As the story goes, the Scottish thane MackBeth killed King
Duncane in battle, his mother's cousin, in order to succeed the throne. However,
MackBeth did not enjoy the throne long enough before he was killed by King
Duncane's son, Malcolme's, army.

Henry Paul (as cited in Williams, 1982) claimed that the play Macbeth, which
was first performed in 1611, was written as a tribute to King James I. While others,
such as Marvin Rosenberg (as cited in Williams, 1982), have argued otherwise and
that there are in fact many aspects of the play that would have been unacceptable to
King James. Nonetheless, it has been concluded that the play was inspired by the
events in King James's life; and the characters Macbeth, Lady Macbeth, and Duncan,
all have traces of real traits of people of the time. Although these characters
specifically reflect personas of people directly in King James's societies, they also
portray natural human characteristics and personality traits of people in all kinds of
societies and cultures, all the way from the 11th
century BC until present day.
Not only was Shakespeare able to ignite powerful themes and perfectly
recreate important inimitable historic narratives, he also created impeccable fictional
personas based on the historic figures he found in the Chronicle. Very little could be
known about the actual MackBeth or Duncane; thus, based on their actions and
schemes, Shakespeare was able to put a person into the action- implant an identity for
the real person. Additionally, he fictionalized a wife for MackBeth, whom portrays
the dark scheming wife, Lady Macbeth, a mistake of a woman - a creature with the
body of a woman, but the heart and ambitions of a knight and the gut of a man.
The themes of murder, power, and greed were familiar in Shakespeare's plays
such as Julius Caesar, Hamlet, and Richard III, parallel the stories in history and in
Shakespeare's time. Although Shakespeare appropriated the characters and themes of
a historical event, he created the characters and enlarged the themes to suit his
audience and the events that were taking place at the time; such as witchcraft. The
addition of witchcraft not only tackled an important issue taking place at the time, it

also aestheticized the story, completely escalating it from a story out of a history
book, into an artistic and dramatic literary piece. The witches also give a true meaning
to the plot- the drive to kill Duncan. These witches act as "the devil" in religious
context – he who plays with a person's head to commit a sin. The ugly sisters add
dramatic effect to the play and give it an interesting twist, complicating the plot even
more.
King James himself was quite knowledgeable in witchcraft and published a
book in 1597 on witchery and demon spirits known as his " Daemonologie, In Forme
of a Dialogie, Divided into three Bookes", which eventually became the guide to
witch hunting and demon extinguishing. King James's interest in demonology and his
personal participation in numerous witch trials were the stimulus behind "the ugly
sisters" in Shakespeare's play, Macbeath, and the reason why so many claim that this
play was written for the satisfaction of King James (Williams, 1982). In the actual
story of MackBeth, as mentioned in the Chronicles, the "three women in strange and
wild apparel" were never identified as "witches" but rather "certeine wizards" of some
sort (Williams, 1982, p. 14). The abundance of witches and witchcraft along with
King James's cognizance of the matter were in Shakespeare's favor and his skillful
ingenuity channeled them perfectly in his story for both dramatic effect and a twist to
the plot.
Another event used as a muse for Shakespeare was the attempt of King
James's murder. On November 5th
1605, a group of Catholics under the reign of King
James I, who were discontented with his treatment of the Catholics, plotted to kill the
King and any parliament members with him at the time, in order to put his daughter,
the Catholic Queen Elizabeth, into power. The plan was unsuccessful after Guy

Fawkes, their leader, was caught moments before setting off the barrels of gunpowder
(Nicholls, 2007). This event made its way into the making of Macbeth, first as a way
to personally link the story to King James, and also to reflect the coldblooded
methods in killing monarchs to gain political and religious power.
The lust for power is a human quality that people will never get rid of. Wars
and powerful figures have stumbled into our world and unleashed the influence of
violence on the gluttony of power, especially during the 16th
and 17th
century. During
this time, a powerful monarch meant a powerful army, and a powerful army meant
ruthless killers (Cohen, 2011). A monarch increased his/her power by developing
artillery and running them by engineers and mathematicians skilled in the art of
gunnery, and eventually handing them to the armed knights, ensuring the greatest and
most powerful weaponry and number of kills fall into the hands of the ruler (Draper,
1936). Thus it was the monarch's job to ensure his armed knights were merciless at
the core, and allowed for nothing to stand in their way of getting him his power- he
created murderers.
With this idea in mind, one cannot judge Macbeth as a wicked power-hungry
killing machine, but rather, the result of a man who had the natural human drive for
power and was trained to act on this drive by his ruler, and he allowed himself to act
on it to the fullest potential. For Macbeth, it was impossible to be good and bad at the
same time (Cervel, 2010); trying to empower his king by killing but also wanting to
be in power without killing- the combination did not fit. Monarchs of the time,
unintentionally, drove their troops to becoming mass murderers, and some like King
James I, are betrayed by their people. In addition to the rage in wars and knight
training, people of the time were greatly influenced by the writings of Niccolò

Machiavelli, a 15th
century Italian philosopher, who wrote a book called The Prince,
where he describes his idea of a divine and ultimate ruler, and how to become an
irreplaceable politician, which became known as the infamous doctrine
Machiavellianism (Ferrero, 1939). Followers of these ideas believed that in order to
reach the ultimate state of power and politics, one must strive without sympathy or
remorse, to achieve supremacy. King Richard III would be another perfect example of
a true Machiavellian; despite the honesty of his betraying acts, he shows no sign of
remorse towards anyone- not even his own brother. Although Macbeth and his wife
attempt to become Machiavellians, by the end of the play, they fail to fulfill their
Machiavellian roles.
The character Macbeth is a very controversial character that has been
perceived either as a victim or as an evil murderer. Those who argue that he is a
victim in his tragic destruction claim that his actions were driven by the alluring
prophecy played out to him by the "ugly sisters", and by the threats and demeaning
intimidations from his wife, Lady Macbeth (Cervel, 2010). Others who argue that he
is a malevolent murderer assert that his evil spirit was innate in him, even if his wife
argues otherwise, and that his drive for the throne and power was extant long before
he learned of his prophecy. Lady Macbeth doubts Macbeth's "nature" which is "too
full o'th' milk of human kindness to catch the nearest way" (1.5, 14-16). Whether
Macbeth was in fact evil or if he was truly a victim, it was through this threat to his
manhood and honor that Macbeth is driven to the plot.
As a man who has been trained to kill, the threat of his incapability to murder
stands strong with him. "Courage is the distinguishing virtue of a soldier, and the
reproach of cowardice cannot be borne of any man from a woman without great

impatience" (Johnson, as cited in Miola, 2004, p. 209). In a number of Shakespeare's
plays, the threat of manhood and the diminished masculine persona is an initiative to
murder and power, such as Richard III, whom is so demolished by his deformed,
physically impotent state; he too sets out to kill as a way to regain his honor, although
in the end, he endures the same fate as Macbeth and is killed after taking the throne
(Draper, 1936). Both these tragic, yet very real stories were the common practice of
the time, a term known as regicide. Shakespeare's plays also include stories of
fratricide, such as in Hamlet, and Richard III, and Macbeth's killing of his brother-like
best friend, Banquo.
In the play of Macbeth, two incidents of regicide occur- the killing of King
Duncan, and the killing of King Macbeth; which is truly the case in the real 11th
century tragedy. The execution of King James's mother, Mary Queen of Scots, is also
considered by many to be an act of regicide on Queen Elizabeth I's part. At the time, it
was believed that a monarch was associated with God and it was his (in this case her)
divine order that entitled a monarch to the throne, which is why Queen Elizabeth
argued that "one sovereign in England was enough" (Draper, 1936, p. 82), and that
sovereign was herself.
Macbeth displays the same power hungry desire as his historic counter-part.
However, what differentiates him from the real MackBeth and the other regicidal
murderers is, his wife. The roles of Macbeth and Duncan have become clear- one was
the teacher and one was the student; their story ends with the student destroying the
teacher and the never ending Ping-Pong process. On the other hand, Lady Macbeth's
role is not quite as straightforward. She has a lot of pain bottled up inside her driving
her to let it out on others. "Come to my woman's breasts, and take my milk for gall,

you murd'ring ministers" (1.5.45). Lady Macbeth feels betrayed by the higher power
after having lost a child and thus wants to be freed of the burden on her chest and
seeks revenge- she wants power in return for her suffering (Chamberlain, 2005).
However, how much she has influenced Macbeth or how much Macbeth is aware of
the pain of his wife is never made clear in the play. Thus, her power is nevertheless
evident, and the twist to her character is, her gender.
The reign of a powerful monarch with an admirable army is envious enough,
but an attribute that makes this state even more envious is the fact that it was led by a
female- Queen Elizabeth I. It was rare at this time to see a woman in power or
influence, but with Queen Elizabeth in control, women were bringing out their guns
without holding back. Many of the women in Shakespeare's plays, such as Queen
Gertrude in Hamlet, Viola in Twelfth Night, and Katherine in Taming of the Shrew, all
reflect the revolutionized feminist qualities that were unfolding under the influence of
the Queen.
In her famous 1588 speech to the Troops at Tilbury, Queen Elizabeth strongly
states, "I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart
and stomach of a king" (Jokinen, 1996). This brilliant reference to herself is a perfect
description of Shakespeare's intentions for Lady Macbeth's personality in her famous
lines "unsex me here, and fill me from the crown to the toe top-full of direst cruelty"
(1.5, 39-41). Lady Macbeth does not allow her inborn state as a woman and the
societal expectations set upon her to be a gentle and caring woman restrain her from
fulfilling her desires to be in power alongside her husband.
The creation of Lady Macbeth was necessary to complete the character of the
real MackBeth and the drive to take action against Duncane. Being married to a

Thane and of the Upper Class, after the influence of the Renaissance, a unique woman
like Lady Macbeth was much more knowledgeable and aware of the world and not
"chaste dutiful, shamefast and silent" (Norton, 2000, p. 11), as was expected in her
society. She "verbally manipulates gender values and expectations to suit her
purposes" (Thomas, 2012), and endeavors to become her husband's equal. Lady
Macbeth is one of the many social stereotypes and cultural norms Shakespeare
attacks; others being the use of witchcraft, strength in royalty, nobility, etc. It can be
argued that Lady Macbeth's power and wit were a result of characteristics and
powerful attributes Shakespeare extracted from Queen Elizabeth and embedded in her
persona. Queen Elizabeth herself was one to eradicate societal and cultural norms and
disrupt the natural order of their time; despite her success, she did in fact imbalance
the normal order, being the end of the Tudor reign and being a woman. Although
Lady Macbeth believes she is strong enough to follow through with her plan until the
end, just like her husband's fate, Lady Macbeth falls short of her disposition and
commits suicide; unable to symbolically wash away the guilt of human blood off her
fingertips. Thus, Shakespeare makes a point that despite those who appear powerful
and capable of liquefying societal holds, the evil never wins.
Evil, power, greed, murder, guilt and betrayal are all timeless and cultureless
human attributes present in our world, and the basis of Shakespeare's unique strength,
as clearly presented in Macbeth. In the BBC adaptation of Macbeth in the movie,
ShakespeaRe-Told: Macbeth, the film counterparts of the characters in the play
exemplify most of the strong traits clearly portrayed in them. The movie is placed in
21st
century Scotland in a five star celebrity-chef restaurant. Joe Macbeth (Macbeth's
counterpart) is the head chef in Duncan Docherty's (King Duncan's counterpart)
restaurant and Ella Macbeth (Lady Macbeth's counterpart) is the hostess of the

restaurant. With Duncan in the spotlight and of extraordinary presence in high-class
society after the success of his restaurant (thanks to Joe), Joe and Ella begin to feel
undermined and cheated by their boss and plot to kill Duncan to gain ownership of the
restaurant and its fame- what they believe is rightfully theirs.
Joe, like Macbeth, is hesitant in committing the deed and requires the extra
push from his wife to follow through. He was generally satisfied with his position but
he was aware of the lack of appreciation from his boss. Duncan seemed to be blunt
about his treatment towards the Macbeth's, especially with his interesting relationship
with Ella. She seems to give him a lot more attention than a hostess should give to her
boss, and he seems to have a buried crush on her, which is obvious when he tells her
"in another life, I'd make a pass at you", where she responds, "in another life, I'd let
you". Their flirtatious relationship is only another reason for Joe to carry revulsion
towards Duncan and another reason for him to want Duncan dead.
When it came time for Joe to actually kill Duncan, he hesitates and cannot
fulfill the deed, demanding Ella to go and finish the job. Just like Lady Macbeth, Ella
must guide her husband step by step and clean up after him, a will of power on the
female figures. Although both these women seem to be the strong front of their
husband and the schemes, the both collapse in the end, unable to sustain the guilt and
contain their out-of-control husbands. Like Macbeth, Joe ends up killing Duncan,
Billy (Banquo) and Peter's (MacDuff) wife and children. The power-hungry
uncontainable drive to ensure his power to the end drives Joe mad and he loses sight
of what his goal truly was- to take what he believed was his. Instead, he lost himself
in the pursuit of power and ended up getting killed by Peter.

The themes of delusion, greed, guilt, power, blood, suicide, and the numerous
other themes relating to the play and the movie, exemplify the ideas of human
qualities and ambitions that will never free the human race. Just like Macbeth, who
wanted power as power was presented in his time, Joe wanted power as power was
presented in his time. Their wives just as wives throughout time, ambition for their
husbands and join them in their motivation for power. While some succeed and others
lose, the never ending battle for endowment and jumping the ladder will never end,
neither now nor centuries from now. What does change is the goal or strife, but the
human drive will live on, just like Shakespeare's plays.
Another ladder that has seemed to stand strong in society is the roles of
women and men. Men always seem to be standing strong on the top of the ladder
while women seem to be lost somewhere on the bottom. Very rarely can a woman
climb to the top and find herself equal or not intimidated by men. Women like Queen
Elizabeth and Countess of Shrewsbury, Bess of Hardwick (Royster, 2012), were two
of the most influential and powerful women of Shakespeare's time. Their passivity to
their intended role in societies compared to the roles they actually fulfill is of great
stimulus to Shakespeare in the making of his play, Taming of the Shrew. In the play,
Shakespeare tackles the issues regarding gender roles and female stereotypes, along
with matters relating to marriage, dowry, and family roles that unfortunately, still
exist today.
Sir Thomas Smith once said, "We do reject women, as those whom nature
hath made to keep home and to nourish their family and children, and not to meddle
with matters abroad, nor to bear office in a city or commonwealth" (Norton, 2000, p.
12). Unfortunately, most of the men at the time, and even today, had the same

mentality as Sir Thomas. However, Shakespeare proudly and successfully rejected the
cliché stereotype of women in Taming of the Shrew, as well as in many of his other
plays with strong female personas such as Katherine in Taming of the Shrew, Lady
Macbeth in Macbeth, Olivia in Twelfth Night, Gertrude in Hamlet, and Desdemona in
Othello (Royster, 2012). All of these female icons, although very aware of their
forsaken roles in society, create scheming and witty ways to manipulate those around
them and stand out amongst the others. Other female characters, such as Bianca, in
Taming of the Shrew, Juliet in Romeo and Juliet, Ophelia in Hamlet, and Lady Anne
in King Richard fall victims to the pressures bestowed on them by society and in
many cases, results in their destruction.
Katherine and Bianca, in Taming of the Shrew, are two perfect examples of the
contradictory personalities displayed in Shakespeare's plays, parallel those found in
society of Shakespeare's England. The play tells the story of two sisters, Katherine,
the headstrong and rude older sister, and Bianca, the quiet beautiful and admired
younger sister, both awaiting in their father's, Baptista's, house to be wed. As Sir
Thomas has clearly stated, the roles of women at the time were simply second degree
to the man, refrained to the house and obedience of the man in control of her- whether
it be her father or her husband. At the time, women had minimal legal rights and
"were denied any rightful claim to institutional authority or personal autonomy"
(Norton, 2000, p. 12). For this reason, she was legally, as well as socially, restrained
by her male hierarchal figure and fully under his mercy. Katherine, who had no say
whatsoever in her betrothal, was fully unaware of her dowry when Petruchio who
"brusquely makes his bid for Kate" (Kahn, 1975, p. 90) and her father satisfied with
the price he sold his daughter, accepts. The only way Kate would actually inherit any
of her dowry was if she were to not bare a son, or if her husband was to die before her

son was of a legal age (Greenblatt, 2000, p. 13). Thus, not only was Kate forcefully
betrothed to Petruchio, she would not gain any power from it- the power all going to
her father.
Seeing as Katherine was not up to the normal ladylike standards of the time,
her father asserts that Bianca, the desired lady of a typical marriage, would not be wed
until he was to marry off Katherine. This, although seeming so, is not a respect to
Katherine and the hierarchal system of a household (marrying off the eldest prior to
the youngest), but rather as a way to guarantee Katherine's marriage and ascertaining
more power in society as having wed both his daughters to good money (Kahn, 1975),
at the time resulting in an award of high prestige and societal rank. Shakespeare
brilliantly plays on these rituals and the completely conflicting female personas in
Baptista's family, and the transformation both females undergo throughout the play-
Katherine being 'tamed' and Bianca falling in love, a very common practice in
Shakespeare's society.
Katherine's character, being the odd girl out in society, can be considered a
mirror image of the numerous female icons in Shakespeare's plays, but also, an
impeccable reflection of the new female power- Queen Elizabeth. Being the first
female monarch to actually rule England (some say a previous Queen Matilda was
supposed to take the throne but was never actually crowned), Queen Elizabeth created
a new path for English females to follow- Katherine was of the first of her kind.
Although in her final speech, Katherine confesses to the importance of being a loyal
wife, she never belittles herself or apologizes for her shrewdness, but rather, in a way
is thanking Petruchio for releasing her from the hate she carried. Because Katherine
was not like the typical woman of the time, she suffered in such a demanding

patriarchal society and household, creating a rigid hate within her. Although Petruchio
believes he has succeeded in taming a shrew, or that he has won power over his wife,
another Machiavellian practice, on the contrary, he seems to have been tamed himself
and is actually under her control.
According to his doctrine, "Machiavelli praises the man of virtù, that rare man
who is able to change his nature with the times" (Shuqair, 2014, p.2), in other words, a
real man is one that can tame his wife. "An analysis of the portrait of marriage in Shrew
suggests that the play promotes a model of husband, reflecting standards of conduct
that are Machiavellian" (Shuqair, 2014, p. 2), thus making Petruchio the perfect
example of a Machiavellian husband. He sets out to prove his manhood by
challenging Kate's sharp tongue and rock solid attitude and accepting the challenge of
mellowing his boiling wife and wrapping her around his finger. However, some critics
have argued that although this may be true, Petruchio himself releases much of his
Machiavellian character by the end of the play, a result of falling in love and
admiration with his wife (Shuqair, 2014). The mutual respect and compromised
understanding that presents itself by the end of the play is significant proof that a man,
Machiavellian or not, can never be in full power and needs to gain his respect rather
than enforce it.
One of the interesting aspects of Elizabethan culture is the stress on marriage
and the obedience of the wife to her husband. On the surface, it seemed like a woman
without a man had more power, and marriage downgraded a woman (Greenblatt,
2000). Although this is legally true, in practice that is not always the case. Legally, a
married woman was not allowed to buy or sell property, sign a contract, and was not
allowed be dismissed from her household unless approved by the husband; and the list

continues. However, as Greenblatt clearly points out, "even within marriage, women
typically had more control over certain spheres than moralizing writers on the family
cared to admit" (2000, p. 12). In Taming of the Shrew, Shakespeare played well on
this note. In his taming methods, Petruchio deprives Kate of this power to aggravate
her and leave her wanting more. He deprives her of food, he bans her from getting
involved with the servants, and does not even allow her to sleep- "thus to curb her
mad and headstrong humor"(4.1.190) and take away the few things she has the most
power with. In this way, he obliges her to earn her power by using her magical female
charm (in some cases this means her power in bed), and riding herself of her shrew
attitude to win her place in her new household. While Hortensio and Lucentio believe
they do have full obedience from their wives with absolutely no effort, they were
clearly proven wrong in the last scene of the play; proof that within the private sphere,
women had the control.
Bianca and the widow, reflecting the typical wives, prove that women in
Shakespeare's times were artificial machinery whom their men believed they drove,
but in fact, had a mind of their own. The result of this silent appearance discriminated
women from participating in society or aligning themselves alongside men- keeping
patriarchal dominance evident in society. It took a woman like Queen Elizabeth to
prove to misogynistic men that a woman can be as powerful, headstrong, and sharp
tongued like a man; characteristics clearly transparent in Katherine. However, just
like the Queen, Kate learned to control her tongue, present herself as a lady, and
charm her husband "thy lord, thy king, thy governor"(5.2.142), as a way to respect
herself as well as her husband. Going back to Queen Elizabeth's speech to the Troops
of Tilbury, she states, "I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have
placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good-will of my

subjects", respecting her knights and her loyal subjects, just as Kate has come to
respect her loyal husband.
The stereotypes of women, marriage, and family have lived on until this very
day and are evident in many different cultured societies. Evidence of this is present in
the adaptation of Taming of the Shrew in the 1999 movie, 10 Things I Hate About
You. The characters, Kat, Bianca, Patrick, Cameron, Walter, and all the other
characters, all follow the same personas as their drama counterparts. However, they
have transformed into modern 21st
century personalities with similar problems but on
very different scales.
Kat (Katherine's counterpart) and Bianca (Bianca's counterpart) are sisters
together in high school, struggling in their adolescent lives with their father Walter
(Baptista's counterpart) after the death of their mother. Kat, a spiteful rebellious senior
in high school refuses to follow cliché norms of high school to "fit in", while her
sophomore sister Bianca goes to extreme measures to ensure her popularity and being
adored by all. However, Bianca is held back from the typical teenage lifestyle- dating
and partying- by her father who formulates a rule that she is not allowed to date until
Kat does (quite relevant to the play). Bianca's problems are abolished when Patrick
(Petruchio's counterpart), the senior bad-ass juvenile delinquent, is hired by the self-
centered snobby Joey (one of Bianca's suitor's counterpart; Bianca's crush in the
movie) to date Kat so that he can date Bianca. On the other hand, Cameron
(Lucentio's counterpart), who has fallen in love at first sight with Bianca and is in
cahoots with Patrick behind Joey's back, pretends to be a French tutor to win her over
with his charm and sweet heart.

Patrick, just like Petruchio, manipulatively forces Kat into dating him, for the
money of course. However, the result of the fake relationship is real feelings. The two
end up falling in love, and their loves releases them of the negative energy and anger
they both carried around for so long (or in other words, they were both tamed). As it
turns out, Patrick was not the dangerous juvenile he was rumored to be, and Kat was
an hurt teenager who had previous embarrassment and regret from previous peer
pressure that drove her to block out all traces of adolescent immaturity. The two were
able to enjoy a meaningful and enlightening relationship, despite a couple of bumps
on the road, notwithstanding the mockery of people in their high school. Bianca, with
the help of Cameron and her awareness of Joey's cocky attitude, was able to realize
her selfishness and the pain it was causing others and by the end of the movie,
developed a lot of self-awareness and realization of the truth in high school
stereotypes. Throughout the movie, the sisters have a few bonding moments that
slowly erased the animosity the two had for one another, until they finally come to
understand the other very different type of woman.
Gil Junger, like Shakespeare, tackles many of the issues that woman were
dealing with in their societies, like peer pressure for sex, wanting to be beautiful and
adored, and also the uprising feminist attitude. Kat, who was greatly hatted in her high
school, being called names like a "bitter, self-righteous hag" and "heinous bitch" is an
example of a revolutionizing feminist trying to make a point in her society (in this
case her high school) about the dangers of peer pressure and the distress of wanting to
fit in and is attacked by misogynist intimidated men. Just like Kate, Kat feels that she
must put on a high guard to protect herself from the wicked tongue of followers of the
cliché norms and empower herself by boosting her own self-ego. Bianca, who seems
to be a self-confident beautiful woman, is actually a lost girl desperate to fit in and be

more popular than her peers. In the play, the audience does not know much about
Bianca except from what her suitors say about her, and that she is an obedient 'daddy's
little girl'. In the movie however, Bianca undergoes a transformation just as important
as Kat's, with the consciousness of the truth in the high school stereotypes and the
importance of being a confident strong woman. She learns to stand up for herself, to
Joey and her friend Chastity, and develops an entirely new respect and understanding
of her sister.
Junger's movie, just like the play, creates an awareness for people on the
dangers of following cliché stereotypes in order to be accepted and the reality behind
them. They both tackle very true and real problems people in their societies are
dealing with and shed light on some of the truths behind the appearances, and the
importance of not being judgmental or hasty. Although the play is not a tragedy like
most of Shakespeare's plays, and Junger's movie is a typical chick-flick teenage
movie, both stories tell the truth about reality and a large problem women have been
facing for quite a while. The morals and lessons of the stories are both strong and
important to be understood.
The power of Shakespeare does not only lie in the beautifully written lines of
his plays, or in the magnificent portrayal of stories and characters, but also in the
aesthetic light that surrounds them. Every word in Shakespeare's lines is aestheticized
and the meaning behind every passage and theme is escalated to a world of limitless
imagination, cultures, and time. Shakespeare was a brilliant man, not only in his
words, but in his knowledge of the world. His awareness of the people in his society,
the suffering and ambitions of the different personas, and the stereotypes not typically
tackled by others, reflect his deep understanding of the human psyche and the social

difficulties. The passion he had for history and religion were evident in the
information he used in his plays and the way he wrought the unknown into something
so relatable and so real clarifies his abilities of imagination and placing anything in a
world beyond our own. Shakespeare's plays Macbeth and Taming of the Shrew are
only two of his 38 plays, 154 sonnets, two narrative poems, and numerous versus that
tell stories of the real in a unique immortal manner. Through his work, people learn
about history, philosophy, religion, society, psychology, feminism, literature, and
most importantly, life. Every one, no matter when or where, will always find
something or someone to relate to in Shakespeare's works, and the beauty of
Shakespeare will continue to adorn our movies, music, plays, stories, and even our
lives.

Reference List
Brozel, M. (Director). (2005). ShakespeaRe-Told: Macbeth [Series]. United
Kingdom: British Broadcasting Company
Bertucci, C. (2014). Rethinking Binaries by Recovering Bianca in 10 Things I Hate
About You and Zeffirelli's The Taming of the Shrew. Literature Film
Quarterly, 42(2), 414-426.
Blake, A. (2002). The Taming of the Shrew: Making fun of Katherine. The
Cambridge Quarterly, 31(3), 237-252.
Breuer, H. (1998). Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew. The Explicator, 56(4),
173-175.
Cervel, S. P. (2010). Macbeth Revisited: A Cognitive Analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(1),
1-22, DOI: 10.1080/10926488.2011.535412.
Cohen, D. (2011). Macbeth's Rites of Violence. Shakespeare in Southern Africa, 23,
55-89.
Chamberlain, S. (2005). Fantasizing Infanticide: Lady Macbeth and the Murdering
Mother in Early Modern England. College Literature, 32(3), 72-91.
Crocker, H. A. (2003). Affective Resistance: Performing Passivity and Playing a-Part
in "The Taming of the Shrew". Shakespeare Quarterly, 54(2), 142-159.
Culpepper, J. (2000). A Cognitive Approach to Characterization: Kiatherina in
Shakespeare's The Taming of the Shrew. Language and Literature, 291-316.

Draper, J. W. (1936). Political Themes in Shakespeare's Later Plays. The Journal of
English and Germanic Philology, 35(1), 61-93.
Greenblatt, S. (1980). Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Greenblatt, S. (2000). The Norton Shakespeare General Introduction. (Greenblatt, S.
et al, Ed.). New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Greenblatt, S. (2004). Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare.
New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Kahn, C. (1975). "The Taming of the Shrew": Shakespeare's Mirror of Marriage.
Modern Language Studies, 5(1), 88-102.
Lazar, A. (Producer), & Junger, G. (Director). (1999). 10 Things I Hate About You
[Motion Picture]. United States: Touchstone Pictures.
Miola, R. S. (Ed.). (2004). William Shakespeare MACBETH Authoritative Text
Sources and Contexts Criticism. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Nicholls, M. (2007). Strategy and Motivation in the Gunpowder Plot. The Historical
Journal, 50(4), 787-807.
Pittman, M. L. (2004). Taming 10 Things I Hate About You: Shakespeare and the
Teenage Film Audience. Literature Film Quarterly, 32(2). 144-152.
Rickard, J. (2012). The Writings of King James VI and I and Early Modern Literary
Culture. Literature Compass. 654-664.

Royster, F. T. (2012). Introduction to "Shakespeare's Female Icons": Sorcerers,
Celebrities, Aliens, and Upstarts. The Upstart Crow, 31, 6-13.
Shuqair, K. M. (2014). Matrimonial Relations in Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew:
The Machiavellian Husband/Ruler. Canadian Center of Science and
Education, 4(3), 18-27.
Thomas, C. E. (2012). (UN)Sexing Lady Macbeth: Gender, Power, and Visual
Rhetoric In Her Graphing Afterlives. The Upstart Crow, 31, 81-102.
Williams, G. W. (1982). "Macbeth" King James's Play. South Atlantic Review, 47(2),
12-21.
Withington, P. (2001). Two Renaissance: Urban Political Culture in Post-Reformation
England Reconsidered. The Historical Journal, 44(1), 239-267.
.

Shakespeare and Society

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Shakespeare and Society

Similar to Shakespeare and Society (14)

Shakespeare and Society