Podlesakova 1
Alena Podlesakova
Shakespeare on Stage
7 August 2002
Dr. Ronald Strickland
“The Nature of Romantic Love in The Misummer Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet, and The Merchant of Venice”
Romantic love is a very frequent theme in Shakespeare’s plays. In “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” in “Romeo and Juliet” as well as in the “Merchant of Venice,” young couples are ready to change their lives dramatically for the sake of their love. What is the notion of this passion, which can change the fate of people? Can it affect just anybody? Is it dangerous, silly or beautiful? These must have been the questions for which the late sixteenth century audiences were seeking the answers while watching Shakespeare’s plays.
To examine the conditions in which romantic love existed in the late 16th century and which naturally became reflected in Shakespeare’s plays, it is important to define the notion of romantic love.
Generally, the notion of romantic love is thought to be a well-known phenomenon to which human beings are more or less susceptible. Stone expresses the general notion of romantic love with several key elements: the infatuation usually happens suddenly at first sight, the beloved person is highly idealized, love becomes the most important value, and “giving of full rein to personal emotions is admirable, no matter how exaggerated and absurd the resulting conduct may appear to others” (Stone 282).
The sudden effect of falling in love at first sight is well illustrated in “Romeo and Juliet” when Romeo sees Juliet for the first time: “Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight,/ For I ne’er saw true beauty till this night” (1.5. 49-50). At this time, Juliet is a complete stranger, who impresses Romeo only by her appearance. The mystery coming from a lack of knowledge about the object of love is according to social scientists typical for infatuation. Fisher argues that people hardly ever become captivated by someone who they know well. She supports her argument with a research study suggesting that there is a critical period in childhood during which most individuals lose forever all sexual desire for those they see regularly. Naturally, too much knowledge of the beloved object tends to prevent its idealization. This mechanism probably worked the same way in the late-sixteenth century, and worked as well in the relationship between Juliet and “the valiant Paris” (1.3.76), “a flower of Verona’s summer” (1.3.80), who seemed to be well known and too easy to get for Juliet.
In Midsummer Night’s dream, the sudden infatuation, which changes the objects of Demitrious and Lysander’s love, is caused by the supernatural world, which can ignore all human conditions and rules. Lysander and Demetrius can thus both suddenly fall in love with Hellena, although Lysander has just decided to flee from Athens with Hermia, and Helena’s obsession with Demetrious made him previously detest her. This switch not only ridicules the notion of romantic love, although the conditions are far from being realistic, but it also challenges considerably the value of Lysander’s and Demetrious ability to love altogether.
Although the romantic love does not explicitly happen at the first sight in “The Merchant of Venice,” there is a lot of mystery surrounding Lorenzo and Jessica. The fact that they have to send each other messages through Shylock’s servant suggests that Jessica and Lorenzo have not had much chance to get to know each other very well. What is more, to Lorenzo, Jessica is a complete stranger in terms of her religion and culture, which probably makes her exotically attractive.
Another important feature of romantic love mentioned by Fisher is the timing. According to Fisher, people fall in love when they reach a certain period and stage in their lives. “When individuals are looking for adventure, craving to leave home, lonely, displaced in a foreign country, passing into a new stage of life, or financially and psychologically ready to share themselves or start a family they become susceptible” (Fisher 48). These conditions suggest that although such person can be in a stress, he or she does not fall in love unless he or she wants to. Fisher reports a study giving supporting evidence to the claim that infatuation occurs only after the subject becomes ready to pay attention to a love object (48).
The aspect of readiness to fall in love is well illustrated in Romeo and Juliet. Juliet falls in love with Romeo after the time her mother signifies that Juliet is to be married in the near future:
“Well, think of marriage now. Younger than you
Here in Verona, ladies of esteem,
Are made already mothers. By my count
I was your mother much upon these years
That you are now a maid. Thus in brief
The valiant Paris seeks your love.” (1.3. 71-6)
Although Juliet’s mother suggests that Juliet should fall in love with Paris, she does not sound quite determinate: “What say you, can you love the gentleman? (1.3. 81).
Romeo’s readiness to fall in love with Juliet is paradoxically signified by his futile love for Rosaline. His mind is already determined to be in love with a beautiful woman regardless of the possibility to gain the attention of the beloved object. He can admire Rosaline only from a distance - the same way he admires Juliet when he first sees her. Finding Juliet more beautiful than Rosaline, Romeo is quick to change the object of his infatuation. Romeo’s idealization of Juliet, who is at this moment still a stranger, verges on religious worship: “I’ll watch her place of stand, / And, touching hers, make blessed my rude hand (1.5.47-8). At this point, Romeo’s idolatry resembles romantic tradition of medieval troubadours, whose object of love is devoid of sexual desire. In fact the question whether sexual desire is a necessary element of romantic love has posed a large dilemma throughout centuries.
As it is obvious from recent sociological research, today’s general notion of romantic love includes sexual desire as an important component. Regan reports a recent sociological study conducted by Berscheid in which the vast majority of the respondents regarded sexual attraction and desire to be components of romantic love (Regan 102). However, while the sexual attraction has become a natural component of romantic love in the modern world, in history, romantic love was not always associated with the erotic instinct. Singer’s exhaustive criticism in “The Nature of Love,” outlining the concepts of love from Ancient history to Modern Age in the Western civilization, offers two opposing views of romantic love.
The first view idealizes love as a means of spiritual transcendence, which should unite man with a spiritual order of things. The beloved person is not an object of sexual desire but a way to a higher level of being. In the Ancient world one of the major transcendental perspectives on love lies in Plato’s philosophy saying that “love is desire for the perpetual possession of the good” (Singer 53). According to Singer, Platonic love is “the soul’s dynamic effort to achieve oneness with the source of its being, a state of wholeness from which it was separated by descending into the material world” (65). In Catholic Medieval Europe, a transcendental perspective uniting the soul with the source of its being transforms into the Christian love for God. The Christian love, condemning pleasure associated with sexual desire, regarded sex as only a necessary means for reproduction. Under this influence, the tradition of French troubadours from the Southern Provence emphasized the benefits coming with the frustration of sexual desires. “The southern troubadours generally (though not invariably) treat the beloved as something static – like the Good in Plato [...]. The lady on her pedestal is alive, but she is a living statue” (Singer 125). The troubadour can love his lady only from a distance, and this distance allows him to “freeze her in the mold of perfection” (Singer 125). For these reasons, transcendental love is highly susceptible to the elements intensifying the infatuation, such as idealization, lack of reciprocity, difficult obstacles and mystery.
On the other hand, the non-transcendental humanistic perspective of romantic love emphasizes sexual desire and attraction. Following the idealized transcendental perspective of love dominating the philosophy of Ancient Greece, the humanistic approach to love, which was promoted by Ovid, dominated the Ancient Rome. Unlike Plato, idealizing the object of love as a means to achieve the Good, Ovid glorifies the sexual instinct itself (Singer 123). This perspective became later also a tradition in the Medieval Europe. Next to the tradition of courtly love originating in the Southern France, there aroused later another tradition in the Northern France, which “believed in sexual completion [...]” (Singer 124). Consequently, this tradition influenced the whole Europe and thus became prominent in Shakespeare’s plays.
Although Romeo’s initial futile infatuation allows him to experience only courtly love similar to Medieval troubadours from the southern France, he quickly progresses to love enriched with a sexual attraction. He is even lucky enough to consummate his marriage fully before he leaves Verona. In “A Midsummer Night’s Dream as well as in the “The Merchant of Venice” the couples strive for union certified by marriage, which allows them to satisfy their sexual desires.
The romantic infatuation for the beloved person is not necessarily always reciprocal. Tennov says that the infatuated individuals, who she calls the limerent objects, demonstrate an extraordinary ability to invent plausible explanations for why the apparent neutrality or rejection by the beloved person are in fact a sign of hidden passion. According to Tennov, small doses of attention from the beloved increase the intensity of the infatuation. “Reciprocation leads to euphoria, followed by a union that might be stable or unstable, and that might or might not endure” (Tennoy 78).
The absence of reciprocity in romantic love becomes the most significant asset amplifying the humor in the plays. In “The Merchant of Venice,” Portia’s rejections of her numerous wooers, who extol her beauty, make the wooers the objects of ridicule. In “A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Helena’s desperate love for Dimitrius, and Lysander’s rejection of Hermia after he is enchanted by Helena escalate the humor to a great volume.
The most salient feature, however, certifying the romantic aspect of love in Shakespeare’s plays, are the barriers the lovers have to overcome to achieve their union. According to Fisher, barriers, too, are necessary components of infatuation (48). In Shakespeare’s plays, these barriers are often in the form of higher authorities, which disapprove of the lovers’ intention to unite with their beloved objects. In “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” in “Romeo and Juliet” as well as in the “Merchant of Venice,” young infatuated couples defy authorities to strive for public recognition of their love by certifying their relationships with marriage. The fights of the infatuated couples against higher authorities create a tension which enriches their romantic love with supernatural power and heroic qualities. The more obstacles the couples have to overcome, the more heroic and thus more romantic impression their love articulates.
In all three plays, the young couples have to overcome the authority of fathers, whose power over children was, according to Lawrence Stone, often despotic in the late 16th century. The despotic authority of fathers, put in the play in the contrast with other authorities, illustrates not only the significance of the paternal authority in the family, but it also illustrates a more general balance of powers in the society of the late 16th century, when the feudal system was starting to give way to the new political and economic order of capitalism. As the family was a key unit on the scale of the economic and social hierarchy (Stone), the different social conditions of the fathers in the plays naturally affect the progress of the relationships between the couples. Consequently, the different balance of powers in each play results in different impacts on the lives of the love-stricken individuals.
In “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” the highest authority is possessed by the Duke of Athens, Theseus. His power allows him to soften the Ancient law condemning disobedient children to death and so he offers Hermia nunnery in order to prevent her from execution:
“Upon that day either prepare to die
For disobedience to your father’s will,
Or else to wed Demetrius, as he would,
Or on Diana altar to protest
For eye austerity and single life (1.1. 86-90).
Theseus, representing the supreme power of aristocracy in the feudal system, has the last word over the fate of his subjects. Powerful enough to get around the laws of Athens, he not only initially softens the punishment for Hermia’s disobedience, but eventually ignores the law and Eugeus’s discontent altogether when he gives Hermia and Lysander permission to become married without restricting any of Hermia’s privileges. Theseus does not wait until Eugeus reconciles with Hermia’s intention to marry Lysander. Without waiting for Eugeus’s reaction to the fact that Eugeus’s preferred wooer of Hermia has lost all interest in marrying her, Theseus gives full recognition to both love-stricken couples:
“Fair lovers, you are fortunately met.
Of this discourse we more will hear anon. –
Egeus, I will overbear your will,
For in the temple by and by with us /
These couples shall eternally be knit” (4.1.174-8).
The superiority of a Theseus’s decision overbearing the Athens’ law demonstrates the distribution of power in the feudal system, where aristocracy wielded the supreme authority. Although Eugeus threatens Hermia with the law sentencing her to death if she does not obey his will, Eugeus is eventually fully subjected to Theseus’s unchallengeable decision. During Shakespeare’s life, however, the law was getting more significance. According to Archer, the increasing recourse to the law courts was a key development in this period. This developments originated in “both the increase in commercial transactions and the success of Tudors in persuading their subjects to wage law rather than war” (45).
The tendency in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” to describe the life of people in the former feudal system rather than the life of people affected by the beginning capitalism is also apparent in the fact that Eugeus’s paternal power is still affected by the “Open-Lineage-Family” system, which, according to Stone (1977) was dominant before the Protestantism and Reformation. Lysander persuades Hermia to get around Hermia’s father’s will by seeking refuge in Lysander’s widowed aunt, “a dowager of great revenue” (1.1.157). Lysander’s intention to look for help from a wealthy kin, who, being wealthy and without a husband, is a considerably independent woman, illustrates the surviving importance of the family outside the nuclear unit at the time when nuclear family was just beginning to gain more significance.
Although the young couples in “The Midsumer Night’s Dream” have to overcome a paternal authority, the intensity and authenticity of the romantic love is disturbed by the fact that the lovers do not have to overcome the paternal power by themselves. Apart from the influence of Theseus, the young couples’ fates are manipulated by supernatural authorities, who direct the fates of the young couples to a happy wedding day. These happy weddings, obtained with seeming easiness, devaluate the romantic power of the couple’s love. The doubts about the value of romantic love become even more urgent with the intervention of the fairies manipulating with Lysander’s and Demitrius’s affections for Hermia and Helena. The Demitrius and Lysander’s readiness to change the objects of their infatuation makes the romantic love in the play difficult to take seriously.
The seriousness of romantic love becomes far more articulated in “Romeo and Juliet.” Here, too, a young couple has to defy authorities to strive for legalization of their infatuation.
The paternal authority, to which Romeo and Juliet are subjected, is intensified by the mutual hatred of Capulets and Montagues, whose houses represent the Open Lineage Families. The hatred does not affect only both the male and female members of the family lineage, but also the servants working for these families:
Gregory: “The quarrel is between our masters and us their man.”
Samson: Tis all one. I will show myself a tyrant: when I have
fought with the men I will be civil with the maids – I will cut
off their heads.” (1.1. 17-20)
Hatred as a common agenda of both masters and their servants supports Stone’s concept of Open Lineage Families, which apart from all kinship included also the servants working for their masters.
Unlike the couples in the Midsummer’s Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet fail to find a help which would overpower their fathers’ hate-driven wills, and thus they fail to find a sufficient protection for their romantic love. They fall back on a friar, a representative of the Catholic Church. Paradoxically, the hatred between the Capulets and the Montagues provides a sufficient reason for the friar to agree to marry Romeo and Juliet, despite the friar’s little faith in the value of Romeo’s love: