This essay argues that Othello is best understood not through personality analysis alone, but through the lens of the classical Fool archetype rooted in medieval morality plays and pre-Elizabethan theatrical tradition. Drawing on scholarship by Hornback, Kermode, Hadfield, and Grady, the paper traces how Shakespeare cast Othello into the role of the blackfaced natural fool — a scapegoat figure bearing communal pain — while simultaneously portraying him as a man who struggles consciously against that ordained role. Central to this struggle is Othello's use of language: his eloquent speech temporarily overcomes audience expectations of folly, but as Iago corrupts his vocabulary and syntax, Othello descends into the very archetype he has fought to escape, ultimately accepting the Fool's identity in his final moments.
The paper models contextual archetype analysis — situating a literary character within a historical performance tradition (medieval blackface and morality plays) to generate interpretive insight that purely text-based or psychological readings cannot reach. This approach shows how theatrical and cultural history can be applied as a critical lens rather than mere background information.
The essay opens by establishing the interpretive challenge Othello poses, then proposes the Fool archetype as the most illuminating framework. It historicizes the framework through Hornback's scholarship on blackface and morality plays, then applies that framework systematically: to stage emblems, to Iago's trickster role, and most extensively to the arc of Othello's language. The conclusion resolves the argument by showing Othello's final speech as the character's acceptance — rather than defeat — within the Fool role.
Every Shakespearean hero has his own unique qualities, whether those be virtue or savagery of soul, a tragic character turn, or a humorous nature. To some degree, these qualities may be altered and shaped by the actors who perform the role. Othello, as a character, is a prime example of this. He may be seen, in differing productions, as a villainous and barbarous fellow — a savage — or he may appear as the innocent and naturally gentle victim of the serpentine Iago. Either interpretation would be fair, for the play proposes so many different ways of looking at him through the eyes of other characters that one would be justified in drawing any number of conclusions about how he should be played.
In analyzing the play for character, it is important not to base one's interpretation of Othello solely on personal instinct or on an idealized notion of how an imaginary actor would perform the role. Rather, the interpreter should consider the nature of Othello as Shakespeare most likely imagined him in relationship to his original audience and time. Even more importantly, one must take into account the archetypal role Othello plays. The details of personality may rightfully take a back seat to the importance of the archetype being presented through the character. Understanding Othello's fulfillment of — and struggle with — this grand archetypal role may provide far more insight into character and motivation than a partisan description of personality alone.
According to historical sources and a close analysis of the play, Othello appears to be cast into the archetype of the classical Fool: one who is tricked and infected by evil, becoming a scapegoat for the community and bearing pain for their enjoyment and enlightenment. Yet he is defined not merely by his part in that role, but by his awareness of it and his struggle against it.
To understand the way in which Othello's nature is defined by the Fool archetype, one must first understand the history and nature of that archetype itself. This history, and its relationship to Othello, is clearly set forth in an excellent essay by Hornback. One of the more awkward aspects of performing Othello for modern audiences is the fact that the main character is obviously meant to be dark-skinned and is subject to any number of racial epithets and stereotypes — which he eventually proceeds to fulfill. It is well known that in Shakespeare's time the play was performed in blackface, with a white actor darkening his skin to an unnaturally dark shade. This tradition is generally abandoned today because it seems contrary to the promotion of racial harmony.
However, Hornback makes a credible and fascinating case that the blackface in Othello was not intended as a racial statement. Rather, it was designed to situate the story and character within a long tradition of blackface in morality plays dating back to ancient pagan religious rites. In those rites, figures such as the Harlequin, the traditional Fool, and certain devils were all played in blackface for symbolic rather than racial reasons.
Before exploring the relationship between Othello and the ancient theatrical Fool tradition in greater depth, it is important to stress that this is not merely a symbolic or literary point. If Othello was originally meant to be played as an archetypal Fool, then this says more about his nature and character than any other single insight into his existence. Many elements of his personality — such as the fine balance between innocence and cruelty visible in his open trust of Iago and his willingness to brutally kill his wife — make far more sense once they are brought into a medieval perspective in relation to the Fool tradition. In this light, his character merges with an ancient ideal and is freed, to some degree, from the difficulties of the script to become part of a tradition that gives vital personality to his role.
As noted above, the blackface of pre-Elizabethan theatre was not designed as racial commentary. Inasmuch as Othello becomes a racially charged story, that is a reinterpretation of the tradition. In its original form, blackface was used to indicate specific metaphorical roles: the demon and the fool. Medieval drama was rooted in pagan celebrations dealing with the story of the God and the Goddess and their antagonist. Over time, the black horned god figure was Christianized and identified with the devil, reappearing only on certain contrary church holidays such as the Feast of Fools and within dramatic contexts.
As Hornback explains: "For your horned and blackened devil is the same personage, with the same vague tradition of the ancient heathen festival about him... the blackfaced devil was quite often blurred with the fool, and their origins in pagan festivity are virtually indistinguishable in medieval and early Renaissance tradition." (Hornback, 26) Blackface, in its association with the sooty faces of horned demons, was linked both to diabolical evil and, far more innocently, to the natural fool and scapegoat. The horned god played an important role as a sacrificial figure and bringer of enlightenment in original cultures; in the morality plays, the fool served as an object lesson in morality and intelligence, functioning as a scapegoat for the pressures of the community. Othello, who is blackfaced in the play by virtue of his race, is simultaneously cast after the tradition of the abject natural fool of the old morality plays. This creates a necessary link within the text between its obsession with blackness and darkness and its repeated invocations of fools and foolishness — terms referred to dozens of times throughout the play. (Hornback)
Other elements of the Fool tradition are also visible in Othello. Throughout the play, those duped by Iago are called fools, though this label is most particularly applied to Othello himself. Iago becomes important here because he plays opposite the Othello-Fool as a perfect updated version of the "villainous trickster/wit-intriguer Brighella," who in the post-Renaissance theatrical era was generally "scarcely more than [a] lackey" (Hornback, 26), just as Iago is scarcely more than Othello's ancient.
Additionally, Othello's obsession with his handkerchief is a classical sign of the Fool. Othello speaks of it, saying: "That handkerchief / Did an Egyptian to my mother give; / She was a charmer, and could almost read / The thoughts of people" (Othello, 3.4). This is reminiscent of the traditional medieval fools who carried "ever-present handkerchiefs of the Morris dance and the natural fool's 'muckender'" (Hornback, 26), which served as a necessary part of their identity and symbolism.
Hornback summarizes the cumulative case: "Given the wealth of evidence of associations between blackface, natural fools, and Moors, I am suggesting that Burbage in blackface as Othello, especially in light of Shakespeare's deployment of other emblems of natural folly, would have been quite as likely to call to mind the now-lost natural fool tradition of comic abuse on the Renaissance stage as the now more familiar association with evil. In addition, other obvious emblems of natural folly, such as the Moor's standard stage apparel, would have reinforced associations between Othello and the abject, a scapegoat natural fool." (Hornback, 26)
If one accepts that Othello was designed to be viewed as the traditional fool, then much of his motivation and his tragedy comes into sharp relief. The play can be seen as his battle against fate and nature as he struggles to divest himself of the role of the Fool. He attempts this first through fine language and storytelling, but his language is perverted and destroyed by Iago. Unwilling to surrender to the role of the Fool, and determined above all not to be cuckolded (as traditional theatrical fools so often were in the most humorous fashions), Othello holds on until the end. Only after finding himself tricked into killing his own faithful wife does he accept his foreordained role, crying out: "O fool! fool! fool!"
There is a sense throughout Shakespeare's plays that characters are aware they are on stage and living their lives within a playhouse. Consistently, through monologues and puns, characters show awareness of the limits of their world. As one scholar notes, "Characters address the audience and introduce themselves in Shakespeare, as do Trinculo in The Tempest or the porter in Macbeth." (Moore) One may assume, then, that if Othello is being cast as a devil and a fool, he is to some degree aware of this and may experience the need to overcome this theatrical stereotype in addition to the racist stereotypes that exist in Venice or Cyprus. Othello's nature may therefore be understood as one torn by the struggle to overcome the expectations and prejudices of his station and costuming.
His overcoming is powerful indeed. Though Othello enters the play looking every bit the Fool in costume, and preceded by lines that prepare the audience for the coming of such a figure (as when Iago speaks of him as a black ram or a horse, and others call him lascivious or savage), he manages by virtue of his speech to momentarily defeat these expectations. "Given their expectations of folly and Othello's own claims to be 'Rude... In [his] speech' (Othello, 1.3), I hardly need mention that the audience was no doubt struck by his eloquence." (Hornback, 26) Othello uses fair words and storytelling to win the love of a woman, the respect of the city elders, and even the acquiescence of her father. Othello's power lies in fair words — just as Iago's lies in foul ones — and it is not until he abandons his commitment to fair speech that he falls into the trap of becoming the Fool he fears to be.
Many critics point to the overwhelming power of the spoken word in Othello. It is most common to associate verbal power with Iago — after all, it is he who, through his mastery of language, pulls the hidden puppet strings of the entire play. However, it is equally important to recognize the way Othello himself uses language. It is vital to understanding his character and nature to see him as something of a rough poet: a warrior, certainly, and somewhat unpolished around the edges, but one whose speech possesses a grace great enough to win him friends. Othello is, in short, a storyteller. He refuses to be defined by his archetypal role as a fool and continually redefines himself throughout the play with stories. He speaks of great sorrows, great heroism, his magical past (as in the story of the handkerchief), and his loyalties to the state. He consistently emphasizes qualities he wishes to be recognized as truly his own, and his dialogue helps maintain them.
However, as he gives up defining himself as gentle and fair-spoken — and turns increasingly toward defining himself as an honorable warrior above all — he begins to fall into a trap. Critics such as Kermode point out that under Iago's influence Othello slowly changes his vocabulary and is infected with the same vocal disgust that characterizes Iago's speech. "For the tactician Iago has correctly guessed Othello's reaction even to the possibility of his wife's unfaithfulness, and at first with all the hesitations proper to an honest man (and an inferior) communicating such a suspicion, he infects Othello with his own disgust." (Kermode, 176) Othello moves from speaking well to using terrible profanities and crudities; if one reads but a small portion of his speech in the latter parts of the play, this change is so obvious it cannot be escaped.
At the beginning of the play, Othello uses no profanity and no crudities. His speech is refined and beautiful, quite the opposite of Iago's. Iago consistently uses profanity and speaks of sex in disgusting and animalistic ways, likening it to flies and maggots, goats, and the like. As Kermode and others observe, Othello slowly absorbs this corrupted register until his own language becomes nearly unrecognizable.
At last Othello tells his audience not to judge him as a devil, nor on racial terms as a Turk, but instead instructs them that all has come about because he is, after all, the Fool: "One that loved not wisely... perplex'd in the extreme..." (Othello, 5.2). In this final speech he acknowledges that he might have been seen as a villain or a devil, and that he might have been understood as a savage black man — a Turk or a Moor. The language of his fellow characters has treated these options equally with the third, which is that he is indeed a Fool. Throughout the play he has struggled against all three stereotypes, but here he addresses them and embraces the last one: that he is indeed the mythical and natural fool.
Hornback speaks of this resolution, yet he is not alone in recognizing the way Othello comes to terms at the end with certain elements of the accusations leveled against him. As Grady also observes, "Othello seems to take into himself the alien Other... In a final attempt to completely exorcise it... we see the production of knowledge categories in the larger society reproduced by Iago and then 'taken in' by Othello to reformulate his identity in a process of subjection — from which he never escapes. [Yet it]... finally resurfaces as the internalized consciousness of the transformed Othello." (Grady, 537)
This exploration of the Fool nature of Othello, and the way in which he seeks to overcome it through language, is vital to understanding his true character. An actor might do almost anything with his personality — and yet if one does not understand the degree to which he is struggling not just with Iago but with his own ordained fate and archetypal role, then Othello may simply come across as cruel or stupid. Seeing that his nature is that of an archetype, and that he is struggling as an individual against the recognized danger of falling into that mythological pattern, one discovers a whole new depth to the play.
Grady, Hugh. "Iago and the dialectic of enlightenment: reason, will and desire in Othello." Criticism 37.4. (Fall, 1995): 537–559.
Hadfield, Andrew. A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on William Shakespeare's Othello. New York: Routledge, 2002.
Hornback, Robert. "Emblems of folly in the first Othello: renaissance blackface, moor's coat, and 'muckender'." Comparative Drama 53.69. (Spring 2001): 69–100.
Moore, Andrew. "Studying Bertolt Brecht." 2001.
Shakespeare, William. Othello. Project Gutenberg, 1998.
Vickers, Brian. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. 74–91.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.