Hermia and the Dark Lady: From Perceived Others to Potential Erotic Objects

Open access

Abstract

The present paper is focused on the figures of the Dark Lady of the sonnets and Hermia from A Midsummer Night‟s Dream as modes of writing against the Petrarchian ideal. The former is the most explicit of Shakespeare‘s suite of “dark ladies” (which includes Anne, Kate, Hero, Phoebe, Cleopatra, and Rosaline), while the latter is arguably his least individualised character, yet one that has benefitted from more public attention than most thanks to the generous circulation, continuous adaptation and re-contextualisation of the text. Two useful concepts for the discussion I propose are what Mikhail Bakhtin terms “re-accentuation” and “heteroglossia” as these texts allow different voices to dispute the place and worth of a dark-skinned woman, yet it is precisely by creating a space to voice them all that it creates a possibility to shake up the aesthetic, as well as the literary canon. The ontological status of the Dark Lady and Hermia is also of interest, so that a linguistic and stylistic analysis is carried out in order to highlight how conflicting ideologies attempt to appropriate their image, namely the hegemonic versus the inclusive understandings of what James Hughes calls the “personhood-based theory”. The revolutionary aspect brought to the table by Shakespeare is his choice for a transition from the hegemonic perspective to one which judges the two “dark ladies” on their own terms.

References

  • Alexander, Catherine and Stanley Wells (ed.). Shakespeare and Race. Cambridge University Press, 2000. Print.

  • Back, Les and Solomos John (ed.). Theories of Race and Racism. London: Routledge, 2001. Print.

  • Belsey, Catherine. “Disrupting sexual difference: meaning and gender in the comedies” in Alternative Shakespeares. Edited by John Drakakis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge, 2002. 169-194. Print.

  • Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human, New York: Riverhead Trade,1999. Print.

  • Buber, Martin. I and Thou, Hong Kong: Hesperides Press, 2008. Print.

  • Callaghan, Dympna. “Introduction” in A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. by Dympna Callaghan, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016, 1-19. Print.

  • Cook, Judith. Women in Shakespeare. 2nd edition, Virgin, 1990. Print.

  • de Grazia, Margareta (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Print.

  • Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger. An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo, London: Routledge, 2001. Print.

  • Eco, Umberto. Inventing the Enemy and other occasional writings. Translated from Italian by Richard Dixon, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012. Print.

  • Elsom, John (ed.). Is Shakespeare Still Our Contempoary?. 2nd reprinting, London: Routledge, 1992. Print.

  • Evans, Malcom. “Deconstructing Shakespeare‘s comedies” in Alternative Shakespeares. Edited by John Drakakis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge, 2002, 69-97. Print.

  • Fleming, Juliet. “The Ladies‘ Shakespeare” in A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. by Dympna Callaghan, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016, 21-39. Print.

  • Graham, Elaine. Representations of the Post/human: Monsters, Aliens and Others in Popular Culture, Manchester University Press, 2002. Print.

  • Howard, Jean and Marion O‘Connor (ed.). Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology. London: Methuen, 1987. Print.

  • Hubler, Edward. The Sense of Shakespeare‟s Sonnets, Santa Barbara:Greenwood Press, 1976. Print.

  • Hughes, James. Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future, Boulder: Westview Press, 2004. Print.

  • Hughes, Ted. Shakespeare and the Goddess of Complete Being. London: Faber and Faber, 1993. Print.

  • Kavanagh, James. “Shakespeare in ideology” in Alternative Shakespeares. Edited by John Drakakis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge, 2002, 146-169. Print.

  • Legatt, Alexander (ed.). The Cambridge Companion to Shakespearean Comedy. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Print.

  • Lewis, C. S. The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1937. Print.

  • Loomba, Anita and Martin Orkin (ed.). Post-colonial Shakespeares. London: Routledge, 1998. Print.

  • Loomba, Ania. “The Great Indian Vanishing Trick - Colonialism, Property, and the Family in A Midsummer Night‟s Dream” in A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. by Dympna Callaghan, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016, 181-206. Print.

  • Newman, Karen. “ ‗And wash the Ethiop white‘: femininity and the monstrous in Othello” in Shakespeare Reproduced: The Text in History and Ideology. Ed. by Jean Howard and Marion O‘Connor, London: Methuen, 1987, 143-163. Print.

  • Rackin, Phyllis.”Misogyny is everywhere” in A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. by Dympna Callaghan, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016, 60-75. Print.

  • Rose, Jacqueline. “Sexuality in the reading of Shakespeare: Hamlet and Measure for Measure” in Alternative Shakespeares. Edited by John Drakakis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge, 2002, 97-121. Print.

  • Said, Edward. Orientalism, New York: Pantheon Books, 1978. Print.

  • Serpieri, Alessandro. “Reading the signs: towards a semiotics of Shakespearean drama”, translated byKeir Elam, in Alternative Shakespeares. ed. by John Drakakis, 2nd edition, London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

  • Shakespeare, William. A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Edited by Harold F. Brooks, 2nd revised edition, “The Arden Shakespeare”, London: Methuen&Co. Ltd, 1979. Print.

  • Shakespeare, William. The Sonnets. Edited by G. Blakemore Evans with an introduction by Anthony Hecht, Cambridge University Press, 1996. Print.

  • Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. In Other Worlds: Essays in Cultural Politics, London: Routledge, 2006. Print.

  • Stanton, Kay. “Made to write ‘whore‘ upon? Male and Female Use of the Word ‘Whore‘ in Shakespeare‘s Canon”, in A Feminist Companion to Shakespeare. Ed. by Dympna Callaghan, 2nd edition, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016, 98- 121. Print.

  • Vickers, Brian (ed.). Shakespeare. The Critical Heritage. Volume 5 (1765-1794), London: Routledge&Kegan Paul, 1979. Print.

Linguaculture

The Journal of Linguaculture Centre for (Inter)cultural and (Inter)lingual Research, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi

Journal Information

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 11 11 11
PDF Downloads 3 3 3