Toward the end of our discussion of Twelfth Night we began to consider whether Malvolio might represent some larger human social principle or pattern (rather than the more topical Puritan). This question returns to some issues indirectly raised in the previous class - does the fact that the term "puritan" now refers to so much beyond its original historical context suggest that puritanism itself is a recurring cultural identity?
If so, this identity may have something to do with a way of internalizing authority. Shakespeare's comedies typically leave behind or bracket a world of patriarchal social authority - the main action takes place in a youthful fantasy world in which existing social relationships are challenged and rearranged. Only at the end are the old world and the old form of authority restored, usually with some kind of transformation. You can see this pattern clearly in A Midsummer Night's Dream and As You Like It. Twelfth Night has the same structure: Olivia's father and brother, as well as Sebastian and Viola's father, are dead, and the "children" are taken to a confusing, foreign world where they have to figure out their own social relationships. (Similarly with the American colonists?) Orsino should be the reigning patriarchal authority in this world, but in the first scene he abdicates his power fairly explicitly, effectively becoming just another child at play, and does not resume it until the very end of the play.
Malvolio, then, might represent an attempt at self-discipline through repression of pleasure, in the absence of an authority to enforce the social order from the top down. Olivia seems to have turned over the ordering of her house to Malvolio after the loss of her father and brother. In a way, Malvolio is trying to internalize the lost patriarchal authority - that is how he can imagine himself as an appropriate husband for Olivia.
As we continue our reading this semester, consider how these Puritan writers relate to external or worldly authority and how they create authority internally.
I've thought about this more and I'm fascinated by the idea of the imagination that happens in the play. One reason Malvolio becomes a complex position within the play may be because of his space as not the patriarch of the house, yet the acting authority of the house. I think it could be helpful to really examine the scene in which Malvolio imagines marrying Olivia and legitimizing his power as an authority. In this scene Sir Andrew and Sir Toby hide out and their own "fantasies" play out as they imagine (and want to) impose physical violence (to the point of death) on Malvolio. Their collective imagination focuses on the destruction of the patriarchal authority they are subjected to. Examining these contrasting view of the possibility, I'm wondering how much of this is wrapped up in understanding the Puritan's place within a political context. As my handy-dandy timeline shows, this play comes before the Puritans take control of the Parliament. Is this imagined view meant to be a political commentary that "imagines" what will happen if the Puritans do have a bigger political influence in Britain and the need to stop them? And how might the patriarchal authority of Malvolio be concerned with with a changing political climate in Britian (as Twelfth night comes near the death of Elizabeth I)?
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting suggestion. I think the answer depends on how political we take TN to be overall. It seems likely that Shakespeare would have been aware of general concerns about Elizabeth's possible successors, though would have had to be awfully prescient to glimpse the degree of power that the Puritans would come to have (albeit briefly) in the middle of the century.
ReplyDelete