Violence against women in Shakespeare's Othello and critical tradition

¶ … Pechter's

"Too Much Violence: Murdering Wives in Othello"

The Author's Argument

Othello according to the author is the renaissance play where the most heinous act of violence against women occurs. He says "of all the acts of violence against women represented on the English Renaissance stage…Othello's murder of Desdemona, followed quickly by Iago's murder of Emilia, is the most appalling" (366). Throughout the piece the author gives accounts of writers, critics and reviewers who do not seem to believe this, instead stating in one case that it is a shame that "the exigencies of the stage require the omission of the exquisite scene. Pechter sees the violence as a product of the times, but cannot excuse the fact that people not only want to see the scene, and believe that the scene is essential to the workings of the play. He is making the argument for the reader, but he may have some problems convincing people who want to see the Shakespearean works as they were written. The main argument is that the original scene is too violent mainly because it seems to relegate women to a secondary status, but also that it is wrong for reviewers to lament the fact that such an appalling scene is tampered with.

Agree or Disagree with Author

Thinking in terms of a person who was born after Civil Rights and Women's Rights marches have tried to even the field and show that women, in and of themselves, have value, it is difficult to disagree with Pechter. However, he is taking scenes from a play that was written centuries ago during a completely different time. It is hard to see Blanche in "Streetcar Named Desire" as anything but a prop for Stanley. The argument against what he is saying is that this is simple entertainment. People in this day realize that violence against women is wrong and that it should not be perpetuated, but there are now much worse scenes on television and movies. Why is he worried about an ancient play? The main disagreement is that this has no value as tradition. The play shows the tenor of the times in which it was written which does have value. So, saying all of this, I disagree with his premise.