How Does Shakespeare Use Clothing In The Tempest
Gabriela Toledo
2/9/15
Texts and Contexts
Essay 1:
The Tempest Clothing and Appearance:
Connotations in Shakespeare’s “The Tempest” Shakespeare’s
The Tempest was written between the years 1610 and 1611, and was known as one of only two plays that Shakespeare wrote as an entirely original piece. It was performed for the second time in 1612 to honor the wedding of the daughter of King James.
Given the fact that it was written as an original, there is possibility that Shakespeare may have written this with royalty in mind. While staging and props were not a particular focus of the play in a visual sense, it is known that extreme detail was dedicated to the garments and costumes worn by the actors. Just as the social gatherings of the Elizabethan era would …show more content…
suggest, the use of clothing in
The Tempest is an obvious representative of social hierarchy; characters with the most social importance wore the most intricate garments, while those with little importance were clothed unprepossessingly.
One thing to note about the typification of clothing in the play, however, is that the quality of the clothing worn by the characters does not directly correspond with the intellectual power of the characters wearing them.
Prospero, the protagonist of the piece, is a perfect representation of the correspondence between attire and social hierarchy in the play. When analyzing Prospero, however, one cannot simply consider his magic cloak—his outfit in entirety is the key to understanding why his clothing corresponds with power. Prospero is seen throughout the play with three items: a cloak, a staff, and his book of magic. There is no character throughout the play that possesses more items onstage than Prospero does. This abundance of notable personal items is the first hint that Prospero claims the most authority on the island. The most important attribute of the items, however, is the fact that all three correspond with magic.
Prospero’s magic is seen as the true foundation of his power and authority on the island. In
Act I, Scene 2, Prospero attempts to explain to his daughter why and how they came about living on the island. In doing so, Prospero removes his magic cloak and staff. He explains, …show more content…
“
’Tis time I should inform thee further… pluck my magic garment from me…Lie there, my art.
—Wipe thine eyes. Have comfort” (1.2, 2325). Shakespeare emphasizes this removal of clothing because as Prospero removes his magical items, he is adhering to the innocence, inferiority, and helplessness of the characters lacking these garments. It is safe to assume that even Miranda, Prospero’s daughter, is subject to the hierarchy of these magical items, as
Prospero needs to remove them in order to be completely honest with her about the topic at hand. The threat of the removal of Prospero’s magical clothing is constant throughout the play, as it acts as Caliban’s motivation throughout the final scenes of the play. While Prospero is the perfect representation of the association between clothing and power, Caliban is the perfect representation of a rebel against that claim. In various representations of the play,
Caliban is portrayed as a monster. Even in productions which portray Caliban to be more humanlike exhibit him in little to no clothing, and even direct him to be hunched over in a
grotesque, menacing manner. Daniel Wilson’s “The Monster Caliban” exemplifies an illfitting description of Caliban’s character as a whole. Wilson explains Caliban as a “natural brute”, one who displays a “doglike aptitude for attachment, a craving even for the mastership of some higher nature…” (Wilson, 155). But what “monster” could see past Prospero’s intimidating powers? Caliban—exceeding the expectations brought upon him by the barbarous attire he was given—sees past appearance. What “domesticated dog” could understand that “Without his [Prospero’s] books, he is but a sot, As I am!” (3.2, 88). In this,
Caliban understands that the root of Prospero’s power is found in the materials he dons. In order to strip Prospero of power, Caliban must first strip him of his magical constituents. And thus, we see that Caliban does not completely identify with the clothing he is dressed in. Yes, his appearance represents the native/lower class, but covertly, his mind does not.
Even when contrasted with Stephano and Trinculo, one look below the surface of the plot reveals that Caliban is more intellectual than the two slightly moreprivileged Italians who wear full garments. In the scenes leading up to the fourth act, Caliban behaves as nothing less than a slave to Stephano and Trinculo. He imitates their actions and seems to find solace in the idea that he is under their rule rather than that of Prospero. What really seems to be the case, however, is that Stephano and Trinculo are the key to freeing Caliban of his slavery under Prospero, and Caliban is fully aware of the fact. The audience soon comes to realize—ironically enough—that Caliban’s downfall is in Stephano and Trinculo’s infatuation with clothing. In the first scene of the fourth act, Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo, begin their attempt to murder Prospero.
The three soon come across strategically placed garments, in which the drunkards take to them in a heartbeat. Caliban exclaims, “Let it alone, thou fool, it is but trash…” (4.1, 223). This line implies that even at the sight of the fineries, Caliban does not succumb to the materialistic outlook that the two men of supposed superiority carry with them.
Ironically enough, clothing acts as Prospero’s power and paradoxically as Caliban’s downfall.
Of course, throughout the scene, Stephano and Trinculo still consider themselves to be rulers of Caliban, shouting orders at him to “put some lime upon your fingers,” and “help to bear this
[garment]” (4.1, 244249). It is evident at this point in the play that their ignorance is a prodigious reason for the failed attempt at overthrowing Prospero. Ironically enough, clothing acts as Prospero’s power and paradoxically as Caliban’s downfall. It should also be recognized that Caliban never directly wishes to be more fully clothed, nor does he ever wish to be clothed in garments like that of the Italians. His intentions are focused solely on the destruction of Prospero, while these supposed “masters” are only focused on an obvious
trap.
Through this scene, the audience may come to an understanding that Caliban— while constantly a representative of the social hierarchy assumed by clothing—never capitulated to
Prospero’s selfproclaimed authority. Caliban, through intellectual superiority, was able to destabilize the significance of his appearance.
Thus, a census is concluded that on the surface, clothing is viewed as a mere representation of social hierarchy. From the Elizabethan era even through today, clothing has stood out as an extremely suggestive method of categorizing a person’s status in a social sphere. However, Caliban’s character and development of intellectuality throughout
The
Tempest suggests that through deep evaluation, clothing does not and will never allow one to estimate one’s true natural ability.
WORKS CITED Wilson, Daniel. Caliban: The Missing Link. Toronto: n.p., 1873. Print. The Monster Caliban. Graff, Gerald, and James Phelan. William Shakespeare 's The Tempest: A Case Study in
Critical Controversy. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999. Print.
2/9/15
Texts and Contexts
Essay 1:
The Tempest Clothing and Appearance:
Connotations in Shakespeare’s “The Tempest” Shakespeare’s
The Tempest was written between the years 1610 and 1611, and was known as one of only two plays that Shakespeare wrote as an entirely original piece. It was performed for the second time in 1612 to honor the wedding of the daughter of King James.
Given the fact that it was written as an original, there is possibility that Shakespeare may have written this with royalty in mind. While staging and props were not a particular focus of the play in a visual sense, it is known that extreme detail was dedicated to the garments and costumes worn by the actors. Just as the social gatherings of the Elizabethan era would …show more content…
suggest, the use of clothing in
The Tempest is an obvious representative of social hierarchy; characters with the most social importance wore the most intricate garments, while those with little importance were clothed unprepossessingly.
One thing to note about the typification of clothing in the play, however, is that the quality of the clothing worn by the characters does not directly correspond with the intellectual power of the characters wearing them.
Prospero, the protagonist of the piece, is a perfect representation of the correspondence between attire and social hierarchy in the play. When analyzing Prospero, however, one cannot simply consider his magic cloak—his outfit in entirety is the key to understanding why his clothing corresponds with power. Prospero is seen throughout the play with three items: a cloak, a staff, and his book of magic. There is no character throughout the play that possesses more items onstage than Prospero does. This abundance of notable personal items is the first hint that Prospero claims the most authority on the island. The most important attribute of the items, however, is the fact that all three correspond with magic.
Prospero’s magic is seen as the true foundation of his power and authority on the island. In
Act I, Scene 2, Prospero attempts to explain to his daughter why and how they came about living on the island. In doing so, Prospero removes his magic cloak and staff. He explains, …show more content…
“
’Tis time I should inform thee further… pluck my magic garment from me…Lie there, my art.
—Wipe thine eyes. Have comfort” (1.2, 2325). Shakespeare emphasizes this removal of clothing because as Prospero removes his magical items, he is adhering to the innocence, inferiority, and helplessness of the characters lacking these garments. It is safe to assume that even Miranda, Prospero’s daughter, is subject to the hierarchy of these magical items, as
Prospero needs to remove them in order to be completely honest with her about the topic at hand. The threat of the removal of Prospero’s magical clothing is constant throughout the play, as it acts as Caliban’s motivation throughout the final scenes of the play. While Prospero is the perfect representation of the association between clothing and power, Caliban is the perfect representation of a rebel against that claim. In various representations of the play,
Caliban is portrayed as a monster. Even in productions which portray Caliban to be more humanlike exhibit him in little to no clothing, and even direct him to be hunched over in a
grotesque, menacing manner. Daniel Wilson’s “The Monster Caliban” exemplifies an illfitting description of Caliban’s character as a whole. Wilson explains Caliban as a “natural brute”, one who displays a “doglike aptitude for attachment, a craving even for the mastership of some higher nature…” (Wilson, 155). But what “monster” could see past Prospero’s intimidating powers? Caliban—exceeding the expectations brought upon him by the barbarous attire he was given—sees past appearance. What “domesticated dog” could understand that “Without his [Prospero’s] books, he is but a sot, As I am!” (3.2, 88). In this,
Caliban understands that the root of Prospero’s power is found in the materials he dons. In order to strip Prospero of power, Caliban must first strip him of his magical constituents. And thus, we see that Caliban does not completely identify with the clothing he is dressed in. Yes, his appearance represents the native/lower class, but covertly, his mind does not.
Even when contrasted with Stephano and Trinculo, one look below the surface of the plot reveals that Caliban is more intellectual than the two slightly moreprivileged Italians who wear full garments. In the scenes leading up to the fourth act, Caliban behaves as nothing less than a slave to Stephano and Trinculo. He imitates their actions and seems to find solace in the idea that he is under their rule rather than that of Prospero. What really seems to be the case, however, is that Stephano and Trinculo are the key to freeing Caliban of his slavery under Prospero, and Caliban is fully aware of the fact. The audience soon comes to realize—ironically enough—that Caliban’s downfall is in Stephano and Trinculo’s infatuation with clothing. In the first scene of the fourth act, Caliban, Stephano, and Trinculo, begin their attempt to murder Prospero.
The three soon come across strategically placed garments, in which the drunkards take to them in a heartbeat. Caliban exclaims, “Let it alone, thou fool, it is but trash…” (4.1, 223). This line implies that even at the sight of the fineries, Caliban does not succumb to the materialistic outlook that the two men of supposed superiority carry with them.
Ironically enough, clothing acts as Prospero’s power and paradoxically as Caliban’s downfall.
Of course, throughout the scene, Stephano and Trinculo still consider themselves to be rulers of Caliban, shouting orders at him to “put some lime upon your fingers,” and “help to bear this
[garment]” (4.1, 244249). It is evident at this point in the play that their ignorance is a prodigious reason for the failed attempt at overthrowing Prospero. Ironically enough, clothing acts as Prospero’s power and paradoxically as Caliban’s downfall. It should also be recognized that Caliban never directly wishes to be more fully clothed, nor does he ever wish to be clothed in garments like that of the Italians. His intentions are focused solely on the destruction of Prospero, while these supposed “masters” are only focused on an obvious
trap.
Through this scene, the audience may come to an understanding that Caliban— while constantly a representative of the social hierarchy assumed by clothing—never capitulated to
Prospero’s selfproclaimed authority. Caliban, through intellectual superiority, was able to destabilize the significance of his appearance.
Thus, a census is concluded that on the surface, clothing is viewed as a mere representation of social hierarchy. From the Elizabethan era even through today, clothing has stood out as an extremely suggestive method of categorizing a person’s status in a social sphere. However, Caliban’s character and development of intellectuality throughout
The
Tempest suggests that through deep evaluation, clothing does not and will never allow one to estimate one’s true natural ability.
WORKS CITED Wilson, Daniel. Caliban: The Missing Link. Toronto: n.p., 1873. Print. The Monster Caliban. Graff, Gerald, and James Phelan. William Shakespeare 's The Tempest: A Case Study in
Critical Controversy. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1999. Print.