Final Hub: Wrapping up Shakespeare and the Family

Focus:
My research focus started out as a filial analysis on Shakespeare's works. Once I realized "filial" was specific to parent-child relationship I thought I'd broaden my research to a familial analysis of Shakespeare. But then it felt too broad and overwhelming so I broke the familial analysis into five parts and then shortened it to three:

• Love & Marriage
• Tragedy in the Family
• Filial: Parent-child Relationship 

Finally, when it boiled down to the wrapping up of the blog, I realized what my focused had turned into: Shakespeare and tragedy in the family. This focus encompasses some of his plays, biological information about Shakespeare's own life, and how responses to tragedy parallel between the modern family and the Elizabethan family. 


Thesis:
Familial relationships in Shakespeare's works parallel directly with his own life and the views of the time. I argue that the Elizabethan familial relationships are the same as today, and that we can use these relationships portrayed in Shakespeare's literature as tools to learn from the pitfalls and successes. 


Support/Evidence:
First, I began learning about the life of Shakespeare in Michael Wood's documentary "In Search of Shakespeare" and wrote about Shakespeare as a son, husband, and father in one, two, three and four parts.
Then I researched Elizabethan marriage in Bruce Young's Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare. I wrote about the three types of marriage in Elizabethan times that are illustrated in A Midsummer Night's Dream:  love, lust and companionate.
Next, I wrote about how families are central to most of Shakespeare's tragedies. Shakespeare used tragedy as a way to illustrate the values of family and how the bonds are strengthened through adversary. I referred to modern examples of tragedies that affect the family like the shooting in Brazil and the earthquake/tsunami in Japan. I also referred back to the biographical research I wrote about on Shakespeare and how when his son, Hamnet, died Shakespeare responded by mending the relationship he had with his father.
Shakespeare also illustrated through some of his plays that tragedies can tear families a part. Tragedy in Hamlet is a result of "family feelings" and Hamlet being forced to internalize those feelings. I mentioned a psychological study that concluded young people have a higher risk of suicide attempt when they've experience the death of a biological parent. Shakespeare also demonstrated how tragedy can further detriment a family had an affair after his son, Hamnet's, early death.
Finishing my research focus with King Lear, I discussed how King Lear actually portrays the ideal filial relationship. I used the example of Lear and his daughter, Cordelia's, reconciliation through repentance, forgiveness and unconditional love.


Conclusion:
Shakespeare's illustration of the family not only reflects Elizabethan society but modern society as well. Focusing on subjects such as tragedy, Shakespeare's characters become timeless and their issues hauntingly familiar. Because Shakespeare experienced tragedy in his family first-hand--a failure of father, a gun-shot possibly love-less marriage, and the death of a young child---his characters are genuine and their experiences are real. We can learn from much of what Shakespeare illustrates about families in his, plays, their successes and their failures. 

The Ideal Filial Relationship in King Lear

As I conclude my focus on the familial Shakespeare, I end with the play King Lear from which my research was inspired by. In King Lear, Shakespeare focuses on the filial relationships of Lear and Gloucester. "Lear and Gloucester are both flawed fathers who learn from what they suffer and are finally reconciled with a child they have mistreated" (Young 91)*.

"Though the play initially grounds the parent-child bond in nature, duty, and reciprocity, by the end, when Lear and Cordelia are reconciled, it becomes something of even greater value and significance." When Cordelia and Lear reconcile their relationship they use language of repentance, forgiveness and unconditional love. Cordelia asks for her father's blessing, and he kneels to ask for her forgiveness (Young 92).


King Lear, Act IV Scene VII 

Shortly after the father and daughter have been reunited, Cordelia is captured and hung. Because Shakespeare made their earthly relationship short-lived, perhaps he was alluding that the importance did not lie in physical manifestations. How tragic the ending may seem, Cordelia and Lear captured the essence of an ideal parent-child relationship, and maybe even any familial relationship. Cordelia asks her father, "Sir, do you know me?" and he admits that his foolishness, ignorance and skewed perspective had previously made that question difficult to answer. But now, he is aware of his flaws and humbly accepts his daughter, "I think this lady/To be my child Cordelia". Hand in hand, Lear asks for his daughters support and forgiveness "You must bear with me./Pray you now, forget and forgive. I am old and foolish." I believe this is the scene where Shakespeare speaks the most about family. We see that repentance, forgiveness and unconditional love are the vehicles through which we may truly know those we call family.

After a career of fame, wealth, and status Shakespeare returned home to live out the last days of his life. Having been an absent father, I assume that as Shakespeare wrote King Lear, 10 years before his death, that he longed for the day when he could ask his family for forgiveness and to accept him back into the home. This is probably more speculation than not, but if you watch, listen, read and truly see the familial relationships in Shakespeare's literature, there is no doubt of the feelings--whether they be longings, lofty ideals, or realities--for his family.

*Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare by Bruce Young

Hamlet: A Detrimental Familial Response to Tragedy

Familial relationships in Shakespeare's works parallel directly with his own life and the views of the time. I believe that Elizabethan familial relationships are the same as today, and that we can use these relationships portrayed in Shakespeare's literature as tools to learn from the pitfalls and successes. 

As I mentioned in my previous post, tragedy not only directly affects families but illustrates the value of families at the same time. Revenge for a father's death is, of course, a central issue in Hamlet--not just for Hamlet himself but also Laertes and Fortinbras. In Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare, Bruce Young explains the connection between family and tragedy in Shakespeare's Hamlet:

"The tragedy results in large part from the intensity of family feelings...Hamlet's anguish...comes from his sense that his mother is deficient in family feeling, failing to grieve adequately for his father and marrying a close relative, with the result that the marriage is incestuous, as it would have been according to English standards. Even apart from that issue, Hamlet is troubled by the confusion of family roles: Claudius and Gertrude are now his "uncle-father and aunt-mother". Of course, Hamlet wants no one to substitute for his dead father. Hamlet...remains one of the world literature's richest and most fascinating treatments of family life." (91, emphasis added)

"Family feelings" is an essential issue in Hamlet because it is what ultimately drives such a tragic ending. Hamlet seems to internalize all of the family feelings about his father's death. He is the only one who expresses depression and anger and who struggles with issues of life and death. Not that his mother doesn't feel sorrow, but she does not express it and her quick re-marriage does not represent it. Hamlet, therefore, must be the one to mope around, question his beliefs, and avenge his father's death because he represents the grieving process. Sadly enough, this is a universal issue within families experiencing tragedy. Many times one child takes the brunt of the family, acts out those intense emotions and more often than not, it results in a more tragic experience than the first. As was such the case with Hamlet--suicide and murder.

I found a study from the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry that studied the young people's risk of suicide attempts in relation to the death of a parent. Interestingly enough, the study was based on a group of Danish children (if this doesn't ring a bell, Hamlet was the Prince of Denmark). The study concluded that "Experiencing the death of one or both biological parents increased the risk of suicide attempts in young people" (181). Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" speech toys with the idea of suicide and, guessing by his demeanor throughout the play, a reader knows his fate does not end well. While Hamlet does not actually commit suicide, Ophelia does after the death of her father.

While some tragedies strengthen the bonds of family, Shakespeare also illustrates in Hamlet how the results of tragedy can tear a family a part. After the death of Shakespeare's son, Hamnet, Shakespeare reacted in a couple of ways, one of which was repairing the relationship between him and his own father. Another way Shakespeare responded is a real life representation on how tragedy, if responded to inappropriately, can cause continued detriment to the family. Michael Wood speculates, in In Search of Shakespeare, that Shakespeare also reacted by taking on a mistress. He had an affair with a married woman, who was musical, and had "dark skin". This woman, Emilia Bassano, drove Shakespeare "mad with desire and guilt."

Thus, Shakespeare gives us two choices following tragedy, it can either strengthen the bond or tear the family a part. There is no in-between in the eyes of Shakespeare.

Familial Involvement and Reponse to Tragedy

Familial relationships in Shakespeare's works parallel directly with his own life and the views of the time. I believe that Elizabethan familial relationships are the same as today, and that we can use these relationships portrayed in Shakespeare's literature as tools to learn from the pitfalls and successes. 

One section of my focus, familial Shakespeare, is about tragedy in the family. I believe this is an important connection to make between the contemporary family and Elizabethan family because tragedy is universal and, quite frankly, has occurred and will occur every day. 

When I think of tragedy in the modern world involving families, I think of the latest incident in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, when a man opened gunfire in an elementary school. He killed 12 children, and injured another 12. 

Disclaimer: This video contains disturbing images.

Tragedy, like this, is sickening and depressing. It brings with it fear, anger, sadness, feelings of hopelessness and lack of control. Anything can happen, anywhere, and to anyone. You can't help but be weighed down by the disastrous reality of it. We feel and see the same thing happening in regards to the earthquake/tsunami in Japan.

 

So many helpless people were killed, homes were destroyed, and resources diminished. It's easy to become overwhelmed by darkness, yet there is always a light that emerges. Somehow familial bonds are strengthened through death and tragedy.


In Shakespeare's plays families are central to most of the tragedies. This means that families are "subject to horrific strains including betrayal, deception, egotism, jealousy, hatred, violence, and the accidents and assaults of fortune, nature and human family. Although the families succumb, in many cases, to these strains, the plays nevertheless demonstrate the value of families--otherwise we would not be moved by the tragic outcomes--as well as the powerful emotions, both positive and negative, associated with family life. The tragedies also deal with the ethical and philosophical issues, including the nature of familial love, the relation of family and personal identity, and the role of family in social and political life and in the cosmos." (Young 90)

Shakespeare's son, Hamnet, died at the age of 11 from a terrible sickness. Michael Wood believes, in In Search of Shakespeare: The Duty of a Poet, that one way Shakespeare reacted to Hamnet's death demonstrates the strengthening and/or mending of familial bonds in the midst of tragedy. Immediately after his son's death, Shakespeare applied for a coat of arms for his father, John, as a way to recompense his reputation. He was granted the coat of arms, gaining the title of a gentleman and restoring his father's name. After losing his son, it seems as though Shakespeare wanted to mend the relationship with his father as a way to cope with his son's death.

Thus, tragedy not only directly affects families but illustrates the value of families at the same time. Toru Kikawada realized the importance of families through loss. Others are reunited through tragedy, both physically and emotionally. Either way, those of us affected and those of us on-lookers, gain a renewed perspective of family when tragedy strikes.

Elizabethan Marriage

I've spent a lot of time learning about Shakespeare and establishing a basic understanding of his life as a play write and more specifically a son, husband, father, lover and active participant in a family-based society. This week I am focusing on the marriage & love aspect of familial Shakespeare. I turned to the book Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare by Bruce Young to research historical information about marriage in the Elizabethan era. I was surprised to find that what I previously thought about marriage in Shakespeare's time--female inferiority, arranged & teenage marriages--was, generally, incorrect.

Bruce Young introduces the topic of Elizabethan marriage with the finding that "Most historians conclude that love and friendship were essential elements of English marriages throughout the entire early modern period [Renaissance]" (44).

Men and women mingled with relative freedom and there wasn't usually a wide age gap between husbands and wives. Most brides & grooms were in their twenties, although the age of consent was 14 for boys and 12 for girls. The average age of marriage in aristocracy was 19-21 women, 24-26 for men, but for most classes is was higher. The average age of marriage in England through the 1500-1600s was 25-26 for women and 27-28 for men (41).



There were formal courting standards of getting the approval of a woman's parents before trying to "woo" her, but dating was also much like it is today--meeting through friends, getting acquainted over dinner, going out to social gatherings. Falling in love was a "common precursor to marriage". Women weren't always passive about it either. Dr. Young states that both men and women were active in choosing a spouse. Wealth was a factor but "virtue, shared belief and a capacity for harmony and love were supposed to be given greater weight" (38)

The engagement or "betrothal" was taken almost as seriously as marriage. There were ceremonies of betrothal much like the marriage ceremonies of our days: taking each other by the hand, making promises and even sometimes exchanging rings. Marriage was religiously based--as most aspects in life were during this time--so divorce was non-existent. Even broken engagements were looked down upon and sometimes they would even prevent future marriage (40).

Arranged marriages were rare and legally invalid if either the bride or groom did not give consent (35).

Besides this law, most parents were very involved with "helping" to choose the spouse of their child because their view of "kinship" at the time actively involved both sides of the family. In Elizabethan era "marrying the family" really was the case (36). Although there was no marrying within the family, or at least no close relatives. 

Elizabethan wedding dress

A typical marriage ceremony included the exchange of wedding bands, as today. During the ceremony the priest would state 3 reasons for marriage: "the procreation of children to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord", "to avoid fornication", "for the mutual society, help and comfort" of the couple (40). We can see in these three reasons that marriage wasn't just a love affair, nor was it just a business affair. Marriage was a duty, a religious commitment, a comfort & joy and also held high importance to society. Family was central to the Elizabethan society as their identity rested upon community not individuality (29). I wonder if growing up in such a close knit community was the reason Shakespeare was so adept to the universal nature of humans?

Marriage was monogamous and romantically seen as a way to connect an individual to the past and future. Also, around this time surnames were fully established, which is an important addition to marriage. I wonder if we would feel as united, and committed as couples without having the same last name? Maybe that is just my romantic side coming through, but I think there is weight to surnames being established during this point in time. It must've had some effect on marriage.

What I enjoyed reading most about marriage was that while the idea of man as the domineering head of the house was prominent, there were many also many beliefs of men and women as "complementary", "partners", and essentially equal (42). I believe this is something that gave root to romance and love-based-marriages during the time. Of course, there is also evidence of what is called "companionate marriage"--a marriage that is more "calculated" than driven by love (44). I think there is evidence in Shakespeare's plays of all the different types of marriage in his time--companionate, lustful, and a sincere loving marriage. My next post will be on A Midsummer Night's Dream and how Shakespeare illustrates these three types of marriage, their benefits & their follies.

Family Life in the Age of Shakespeare

While searching for scholarly articles on "filial theories" in Shakespeare (I'm feeling out this focus to see where is takes me) I found this book by one of our fellow Cougs, Bruce Young. Dr. Burton actually referred this book to me as well. 

The volume begins with a look at the classical and medieval background of family life in the Early Modern era. This is followed by a sustained discussion of family life in Shakespeare's world. The book then examines issues related to family life across a broad range of Shakespeare's works. Later chapters then examine how productions of the plays have treated scenes concerning family life, and how scholars and critics have commented on family life in Shakespeare's writings. The volume closes with a bibliography of print and electronic resources for student research. 

 Synopsis on Google Books

Bibliography--definitely woot worthy! Woot woot! I'm really interested the content, but the bibliography at the end will be an excellent resource for further research.  Some of the chapters included in this book are: Family Life in Shakespeares World (so a bit of history), Family Life in Shakespeares Works (textual analysis), and Family Life in Performance (I'm interested in the visual as well so this is the best of both worlds).