Othello or Othe(r)llo: A vacillation Between the Familiar and the Alien
This essay challenges the popular view of Othello as a villain, and examines this in the context of Said's theory of Orientalism.
Mark Easton
E-mail: [email protected]
Canada
The literary tradition of portraying "black-faced" men as wicked has encompassed a time span from the Middle Ages, through and beyond the sixteenth century (Hunter 1967: 142). Hence, there is good reason to assume that a Shakespearean audience's attitude towards a "Negro" character concurs with this dominant literary representation. This character's "wickedness" is viewed as a self-fulfilling prophecy, pre-constructed by an audience that knew nothing more. To a contemporary audience however, the black character is much more ambiguous and multifaceted; this is largely a result of the more informed racial precepts nested in a modern readership. Consequently, the assistance of Said's theory of "Orientalism" allows the modern reader to look beyond this hegemonic sixteenth century representation of the Negro, to see a dynamic interchange of binary opposites.
Within Shakespeare's {Othello} one can see a constant vacillation between the familiar and the alien. There is a continuous conflict between Othello's characterization as a foreign "Other," and his association with the "familiar" European. This play should not be examined merely in terms of a "tyrannical Moor" who has degenerated into his pre-Europeanized state. It is the purpose of this paper to explore Othello as a product of European colonization and domestication. If Othello's character is examined from this perspective, then it also calls into question his characterisation as a "tragic figure," acting upon the impulses "prone to the nature of his race." At times it is through this perception of his otherness that he is paradoxically linked to the familiar, and his domestication into the familiar, which reestablishes his otherness. These ambiguities in {Othello} will become evident through various examples of language, plot, and characterization.
The first issue to be considered in {Othello}, is Shakespeare's possible reason for presenting a Moor in the play. One of the most feasible explanations to this question has an historical significance. It is stated within Emily Bartel's article "Renaissance Refashioning of Race" that Hakluyt's Principal Navigations, a popular text of the Shakespearean era, is filled (by current standards) with indiscriminate labelling of Africa's inhabitants.[1] Terms such as "Africans," "Negroes," and "Ethiopes" are all used interchangeably, however, it is generally accepted that Hakluyt's "Moors" appear more civilized than other inhabitants observed on the continent. (Bartels 1990: 437-38). The concept "more civilized" is likely to mean that Hakluyt observed the Moors to be complementary to European civilization in some way. Hakluyt has indirectly constructed the image of the Moor through his own Euro centric perceptions of the civilized. Hakluyt has created a hybrid, bringing this "Other" closer to the familiar in Europe by labelling it civilized, yet it is still distanced by the fact that the Moor is not native to Europe. Thus, through popular literature, Hakluyt has preeminently fashioned an outsider who is receptive to Europe.
The second issue to be considered in {Othello} is why Shakespeare used Venice as the initial location for the play. There is a facetious comment by G.K Hunter concerning the Italian civilization, "-excessive civilization perhaps in Venice, but civilization at least 'like us'" (Hunter 1967: 149). Hunter is alluding to the fact that Western society views Italy as similar to itself in many fundamental ways (i.e. white, Christian, empirical), but its Mediterranean location does define Italians as the calla rosa, and in this regard, the West still adheres to the mythical assumptions of Italy as an exotic land of passion.
If one assumes that the first and second points present reasonable explanations of character and setting choice, then Shakespeare must have assumed that the civilizations of both the Mores and Italy share enough of the same qualities to make them compatible. Likewise, he must have assumed that England shares enough commonalities with Italy to make the distant location conceivable to his audience. Therefore, Shakespeare presents a formulaic combination of Hakluyt's view of a savage/domesticable Moor with the distant/similar Italy to create a situation that his English audience could identify with to some extent. It is this immense paradox in perceiving another race that circumscribes one's ambiguous understanding of {Othello}.
Within the play itself, one can immediately see this vacillation in perception. It becomes a dilemma of understanding between the play's words, and one's own preconceptions concerning the "Other". For example, in Act I Scene III, the Venetian court has chosen Othello to command the Cyprus campaign against the Turks for the following reasons:
The fortitude of the place is best known to you, and though we have there a substitute
Of most allowed sufficiency, yet opinion, a more
Sovereign mistress of effects, throws a more safer voice on you.
(I.iii.ll.221-25)
There are two conflicting interpretations to this passage. The first, is that Othello is a competent military leader who is ordered to Cyprus because he has the confidence of the Venetian court. If this is the case, then Othello's race is not an issue. But an ambiguity arises of one considers the language used in the passage, and the nature of the enemy to be fought. The Duke indicates that there is already a commander of allowed sufficiency at Cyprus, yet opinion, which is an unsubstantiated perception, is the ultimate factor in the decision. This suggests that there is more to the decision than Othello's competence. In the context of Said's theory, there are actually three identifiable "Others" at work here: the Turk, the Moor Othello, and the Land of Cyprus. All three of these distinct elements become generalized by the Venetians into one, "similarly distant" category. Edward said explains this thought process in his essay Orientalizing the Oriental.[2] By choosing Othello, the Venetian court has intensified its own sense of self. Because these geographic and ethnic elements are distant from Italy, they have been generalized into one common category. Thus, one can infer that Othello is better suited to fight the Turk in the land of Cyprus because "he is dark skinned like the Turk and would know how the Turk thinks" He is better suited for the task because, like the Turk, he is indigenous to a more southern climate. When examined from this perspective, the Venetians see no difference between objects outside of the self. There is only a boundary between "us and them," in which any perceived differences are inherently constructed through the self.
In an article by Arthur Little titles "The Primal Scene of Racism in {Othello}," he concludes that, "[t]he members of the audience are captivated and caught by the play's public knowledge that, long before Othello was ever conceived, they have already privately conjured up or dreamt about the seductive Other" (1993:324). Othello's murder of Desdemona merely operationalises the audience's preconceived notions of guilt. This is based upon two illogical premises: 1) Blackness denotes wickedness; 2) Othello is preeminently guilty because he is black. If one logically examines Iago's stratagem to instigate Othello's jealousy, Othello's actions are not indicative of a savage foreigner who is "ultimately more Moor than European."
Iago's feigning of Desdemona's infidelity provokes a desired response in Othello (Othello becomes enraged and kills out of passion). When Othello responds in this way, he is reaffirming what "we have already known," that his literal blackness is indicative of his metaphorical blackness. However, if the audience had preeminently ascribed Othello's actions to be "typical of that race" then the audience is erroneously formulating his actions as distant from their own - an action more unlike the self than similar to the self. If such actions were capable only of a black man, then how would Iago know how to provoke Othello's rage? Hence, Iago's knowledge of the appropriate actions required to provoke a desired response from this "Other," links this Moor and the Venetian as more alike than Shakespeare's audience would probably care to admit. The audience's need to colonise Othello's actions as the product of a different race obscures this kinship. There is an important point about Othello put forth by the critic M.R Ridley. Ridley suggested that the play is "Reason versus Instinct" and that "Whenever Othello trusts his instinct he is almost invariably right. But Othello's instinct tells him that Iago is honest and perceptive." (Hirsch 1991:143). This argument is flawed. Othello does not use his instinct in determining Iago's honesty but relies upon reason.
As Hirsch states, Othello's trust in Iago is derived from his perceptions of Iago as a good soldier. Iago is viewed as honest because a good soldier is traditionally portrayed as one that is honest (1991:140). When Iago explains his suspicions to Othello, Othello does not merely accusations based on his belief in Iago's honesty, but desires something more empirical: "Villain, be sure thou prove my love a whore/Be sure of it. Give me the ocular proof," (III.iii.364-5). Iago's involvement with the handkerchief and his conversation with Cassio are materials staged to accommodate Othello's need for empirical evidence. It is only after receiving this evidence that Othello becomes convinced of Desdemona's infidelity. Othello has not passionately resorted to murder; the spurious empirical evidence constructed his rage. If anything, Othello's violent action is not the result of a Moor submitting to the "inherent" passions of his southern origins, but a figure acting upon, and ultimately colonised by Europe's emphasis on empiricism and reason. How could a character acting upon carefully constructed empirical evidence be viewed as having a tragic flaw? And after adopting and using these tools of empiricism and reason to take action, he is then reduced from being a part of this society. It is interesting to note that after Desdemona's murder, Othello is transformed from the "brave", "noble", or "valiant" Moor to a "cruel Moor" or "devil."
In Act V Scene II, Othello's colonisation is complete. There is nobody who can speak in defence of his actions. The newly arrived nobles, who had such high regards for him in Venice, have arrived after the fact and therefore possess a biased opinion. They clearly make it known that they will relay the events back to Venice, "You shall close prisoner rest/ Till that the nature of your fault be known/ To the Venetian state" (V.ii. 345-6). Thus, as Iago had censored the information that was relayed to Othello, the Venetians will censor the information relayed to the state. Thus, Othello's suicide could be seen as the ultimate act of colonisation. His acceptance into the Venetian court has established his identity more like the European than the "Moorish." However, his murder of the familiar (Desdemona) has realigned Othello's, and the court's association with the alien. His suicide could represent a traumatic vacillation from the lost Venetian identity to that of the Moor. Even when acting upon the "familiar" way to verify information about Desdemona's infidelity (staged empirical evidence), he is relegated to the savage Moor.
In the end, one can see that Othello is an unfortunate figure caught between two perceived worlds. When it becomes convenient, colonial attitudes work in subtle ways to reaffirm boundaries of difference, even for someone like Othello who had achieved a certain level of acceptance within European society. One can only speculate whether Shakespeare was being didactic about Othello's hapless vacillation between these two worlds, or whether he was merely popularising the implicit assumption of his time about non European races.
References
Bartels, Emily, C. "Making More of the Moor: Aaron, Othello, and Renaissance Refashionings
of Race, Shakespeare Quarterly 1990 Winter, 41:4: 433-454.
Hirsh, James. "Othello and Perception" Othello: New Perspectives. Ed. Patricia Vaughan and
Kent Cartwright, massachusetts: Associated UP, 1991. 135-159.
Hunter, G.K. "Othello and Colour Prejudice" Annual Shakespeare lecture of the British
Academy London: Oxford UP, 1967.
Little, Arthur, L. "An essence That's Not Seen: The Primal Scene of Racism in Othello,
Shakespeare Quarterly 1993 Fall, 44:3, 304-324.
Said, Edward, Orientalizing the Oriental: Contemporary critical Theory. Ed. Dan Latimer,
Toronto: Harcourt Brace, 1989, 253-277.
Wells and Taylor William Shakespeare: The Complete Works, New York: Oxford UP, 1994.
End notes
[!1] In fact, Hakluyt's Principal Navigations directly contributed to the formation of the African subject for English readers.
[!2] "For there is no doubt that imaginative geography and history help the mind to intensify its own sense of self by dramatizing the distance and difference between what is close to it and what is far away" (Said 1989: 260).
