Known as an excellent interpreter of human thought and action, William Shakespeare often relied on gender roles and stereotypes to create within the public an opinion on a character or an event. Given that Elizabethan society made such great distinctions between the actions and feelings of men and women, Shakespeare's gender imagery would most certainly have succeeded in capturing the audience's attention and understanding. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Twentieth-century feminist critics of Shakespeare view him as reinforcing patriarchal values ​​and perceptions of women during the Renaissance (Grady, 237). Madelon Gohlke defines traditional Elizabethan gender roles as masculinity representing “heroic violence” and femininity representing “submissive pacifism” (Grady, 238). Shakespeare uses both characters of both genders and gendered language to display the masculine and feminine attributes of the characters, events and situations in the history of Richard II, Henry IV and Henry V. Manly Attributes in Historical Plays of Shakespeare are strength and honor. , while feminine attributes are weakness and unreliability. Thus, Shakespeare continually shows feminine attributes in a negative light while extolling virtuous masculine qualities. STRENGTHJudging by his words and actions, Richard II appears to be a weak and feminine king. He earns nothing for himself and avoids fights and quarrels. Richard attempts to mediate the conflict between Mowbray and Bolingbroke. The men want to settle with a duel, but Richard stops them before they start fighting. Both Mowbray and Bolingbroke are willing to die to clear their murder, but Richard does not want to participate in any sort of physical conflict. Mowbray denounces the war of words as a “women’s war” (I, i, 48). Therefore, he mocks Richard's non-violent attitude as feminine. By refusing to submit to violence and finding a weaker solution (the banishment of both men), Richard assumes the feminine role, avoiding deadly conflict and settling for weaker consequences. Richard's handling of conflict is neither strong nor decisive; it is rather poetic and idealistic. He relies not on words of action, but on words of philosophy and artistic metaphors, while duelists desire manly strength and action. Juxtaposed with the strong and courageous Mowbray and Bolingbroke, Richard indeed appears weak and feminine. The weak leadership of Richard II contrasts with the strong leadership and valor of Bolingbroke. Shakespeare clearly sees Bolingbroke in the male role and Richard in the female role. Bolingbroke is strong, fearless and decisive while Richard seems weak, afraid and careless with his kingdom. Bolingbroke does everything he can to develop a good reputation among his subjects, and his policies show that he is a strong leader. "...Observed his courtship of the common people/How he seemed to sink into their hearts/With humble and familiar courtesy" (I, iii, 24-26). He is not afraid to defend his belief that he is the rightful king, and his powerful leadership and good relationship with the people allow him to capture the crown from a weak king. The English people need a strong man as their leader and not a weak and effeminate “boy” as their leader. Richard II's garden scene also associates women with weakness by pitting Isabel, the queen, against the gardener. Isabel, in mourning forthe well-being of her husband and her kingdom, brings her nothing but sorrow as the Gardener attempts to logically explain the situation to her. She will not accept his strategic analysis of the situation; rather, she simply dwells on the sadness of the deposition. "... O you think/To serve me last so that I can keep the longest/Your pain in my chest..." (III, iv, 94-95). Feminist critic Linda Bamber suggests that its reliance on emotion rather than logic puts it at a disadvantage in the face of the masculine realm of the gardener, politics, and war. Isabella is not the queen of a kingdom; rather, she is just the queen of a garden. His grief, which cannot be “released into action” due to the weakness of his sex, completely alienates him from the “masculine Self” (64-65). The Duke and Duchess of York represent a negotiation of gender roles. Even though York likes to believe he's in control, his wife seems to take the lead during their last exchange. In the first scene between the couple, the Duchess lets her husband take the strong role and weakens her own emotions. However, in fighting for her son's interests, the Duchess is controlling, strong and intelligent in comparison to her rather stupid husband. As the Duchess pleads for her son's life, her husband denounces her as stupid and undisciplined. He tries to give her back the feminine role. The Duchess, however, is determined to save Aumerle and calls upon the courage and authority normally attributed to a man to ask her son for forgiveness. The Duchess controls the entire scene with King Henry, using diplomacy and careful language to convey her plight. Her husband's outbursts seem stupid and rather petty in comparison to her strength and courage to petition. In fact, King Henry's gracious acceptance of his pleas gives him even more strength. He manages his concerns as he would those of a man; he doesn't shut her mouth just because she's a woman. During this scene, a woman takes on the role of a man while her husband is relegated to the background. Just as Richard II presents a manly trait as a strength, Henry V continues this representation in the Battle of Agincourt between English and French soldiers. Although the English soldiers appear weak and without enough strength to attract the attention of the well-equipped French, they have an inner, masculine strength, which proves to be the key to their success. In Kenneth Branagh's version of Henry V, English soldiers appear to the audience as powerful, courageous and ready to fight to the death. French soldiers appear in full regalia with the wacky Dauphin leading the way. The contrast in the appearance of the two groups is particularly evident when Montjoy, decked out in beautiful capes and banners, confronts Hal one last time to ask him to desist. Hal's more masculine attire and strong stance give him a masculine identity, which is in direct opposition to the French messenger's feminine attire. Masculine strength will once again defeat feminine weakness at Azincourt.DISHONOR VS. HONOR Besides strength, Shakespeare also extols honor as a masculine virtue and plays on the ancient stereotype of womanhood as deceptive, dishonorable, timid, and untrustworthy. Richard, unlike Bolingbroke, does nothing to procure the love of his subjects. His approach to acquiring property is questionable and shows that he is a weak man trying to appear strong. Just minutes after Gaunt's death, Richard orders the house looted and claims the property for his own. Even after Northumberland and York denounce his plan, Richard ignores their warnings and continues the actions that make himan unpopular leader. Perhaps Shakespeare is playing here on the stereotype that women are untrustworthy and will do whatever it takes to get what they want, while men are willing to fight honorably for their demands. To make matters worse, Richard fled to Ireland, evading his first duty. in his own country, England. So people feel like they can't count on him. Elizabethan society viewed women as unreliable and unpredictable creatures; they could not be easily trusted. Richard's feminine attributes at this time would most certainly make him an unpopular leader. Thus, they would have been more than welcoming to the honorable and masculine attributes of Bolingbroke, who is ready to rise up and take control of Richard's mismanaged and abandoned kingdom. Just as Shakespeare sets the feminine Richard II against the masculine Bolingbroke, he creates the same marked contrast of gender attributes in the first part of Henry IV. Hotspur is the quintessential Elizabethan male. He is a strong and honorable warrior, ready to fight at any time. His main goal is to protect and defend his country and king against traitors. Chivalrous and loyal, Hotspur embodies the characteristics upon which the foundations of Elizabethan masculinity rest. Quick to anger, he does not mince his words when criticizing those around him. He denounces a messenger as being a woman. It insults the man's masculinity and considers him to be without honor, weak and stupid. “...For it made me mad/To see it shine so brightly and smell so good,/And speak so like a nice woman in waiting” (I, iii, 53-55). Hotspur doesn't trust women either. He refuses to tell his wife about the battle because he thinks she will. As a typical man of that era, he would think that women couldn't keep a secret. He thinks it's better that she doesn't know his mission. He doesn't seem to appreciate her questioning his actions. She doesn't play the role of the simpering female very well until he threatens her that he doesn't love her and won't sleep with her unless she lets him go, no questions asked. After her declaration, she once again becomes the reluctant ideal of an Elizabethan woman. The character of Falstaff contrasts directly with Hotspur. Falstaff has no sense of honor. It seems he considers honor a waste of time. His addiction to gossip and deception presents him in a negative, feminine light. Linda Bamber suggests that because Falstaff shows a world outside the political realm: bawdy humor, drunkenness, and sexuality, he appears as a female character juxtaposed with decidedly political and honorable male characters (68). Falstaff navigated his way into the prince's life with a timid and undisciplined attitude rather than with frankness and honor. Falstaff now expects favors in return for his friendship with the prince. Shakespeare not only equates dishonor with womanhood within unique characters like Hotspur's wife and Falstaff, but he also equates womanhood and dishonor in battle scenes. King Henry V considers it “feminine” to destroy the entire town of Harfleur and show no mercy to its inhabitants. Instead, he fights in a manly and honorable manner by allowing citizens to wave the white flag. King Henry also considers the French women after killing the innocent baggage bearers to add them to the death total. Henry is completely disgusted and sees this atrocity as a woman's revenge. Shakespeare effectively equates dishonor and femininity in his historical plays. The Duke andDuchess of York in Richard II show a negotiation between the masculine role of honor and the feminine role of infidelity. York is honorable and loyal to the Crown; he is ready to deliver his traitorous son to King Henry. The Duchess is also loyal, but she is loyal to Aumerle. She will fight with all her strength so that he is not sentenced to death as a traitor. In the scenes of their argument and audience with the king, the Duke and Duchess of York both appear to possess masculine honor. Both characters are willing to fight for what they think is the right solution. Nothing stops the Duchess; she is honor-bound to save her son's life. However, the Duchess exemplifies the feminine trait of lack of confidence. Her husband had expected her to simply stay at home and endure the king's decision. Sacrificing her husband's trust for her son's life, the Duchess of York mounted her horse and rode in pursuit to remedy the situation. Henri, here too, appears very honorable, sparing Aumerle's life and forgiving him. Once the three characters are in the room, Henry listens to each in turn, allowing each to express themselves. As king, Henry could simply kill Aumerle on the spot or order a woman to leave his presence. Instead, he acts more than justly and honorably in forgiving Aumerle and sending the young man home with his mother. Prince Hal presents a negotiation between the masculine traits of strength and honor and the feminine traits of weakness and dishonor. For the most part, Hal is a strong leader and exemplifies masculine strength in his actions and words. He is truly the leader of his group of rogue friends which includes Bardolph and Falstaff. His father, however, finds the young Prince Hal incapable of ruling a kingdom and denounces his son's irresponsible actions as feminine weakness. "Can no one tell me about my unthrifty son?/. . .If a plague hovers over us, it is him./. . .Which he, a wanton and effeminate young boy,/Takes the point of honor to support/Then disband a crew” (Richard II, V, iii,1-11), Prince Hal quickly changes his policies and outlook on life “Yet here I am. I will imitate the sun/Who allows the contagious clouds to smother its beauty from the world,/. . .By piercing the filthy and ugly mists/. ..Redeeming the time when men least think of it, I will do it' (I Henry IV, I, ii, 197-217). Hal will let his father, his companions and his kingdom believe that he is good for nothing until the surprise moment when he lets his true strength shine through. Then everyone will see him as a stronger leader and will be impressed by his presence. Just as the sun appears brighter after being covered by clouds, Hal will appear a stronger ruler if he hides his strength now and only shows it later. Once Hal becomes King Henry V, he is a strong ruler who fears nothing. He knows that the French forces are much stronger than the small English army, but he refuses to let the French dauphin insult him and his kingdom. to summon the troops and make the Dauphin eat his words. As he rallied the troops in front of Harfleur, King Henry instilled courage and strength in his men simply through the words he used to build their morale. Here he transfers some of his own strength to the frightened men. In Branagh's version of the film, the audience first sees the desperate faces of the tired and worn army, but as their king speaks, their faces change from worry to mission. Thus Henry gave his army its masculine strength and valor. On the theme of honor, King Henry V only displays masculine honor when circumstances permit. It is also very, 1990.