Soliloquies in Shakespeare: Revealing True Character
This paper examines how soliloquies and monologues in Shakespeare's plays serve as the primary vehicle for revealing characters' true motives, desires, and inner lives—often contradicting their public personas and popular interpretations. Through close readings of Romeo's balcony monologue, Juliet's brief aside, Friar Laurence's self-serving soliloquy, Richard III's opening confession, and Katherine's concluding speech in The Taming of the Shrew, the paper argues that what these characters say when addressing only themselves or the audience is far more revealing than what they say to one another. The analysis challenges conventional readings of these plays, suggesting that lust rather than love drives Romeo and Juliet, that Richard seeks attention more than power, and that Katherine's final monologue contains deliberate subtext.
- Introduction: Soliloquies as windows into true character
- Romeo and Juliet: Lust Mistaken for Love: Balcony monologues reveal physical desire, not love
- Friar Laurence: The Self-Serving Schemer: Friar's soliloquy exposes pride and self-interest
- Richard III: The Need to Be the Center of Attention: Richard seeks attention above power or revenge
- Katherine and the Subtext of Submission: Katherine's final speech contains deliberate ironic subtext
- Conclusion: Soliloquies are key to understanding Shakespeare's characters
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper grounds every interpretive claim in specific textual evidence, quoting directly from the plays and providing act, scene, and line citations throughout.
- It consistently challenges received wisdom about well-known characters, offering counterintuitive but carefully argued readings—for example, that Romeo's famous balcony monologue reveals lust rather than love through its symbolic incoherence.
- The paper draws on secondary scholarship (Clemen, Rose) to support interpretive moves without over-relying on outside sources, keeping the analysis text-centered.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates sustained close reading across multiple texts, tracking not just what characters say but how they say it—attending to linguistic patterns (shifting pronouns in Richard III), the coherence or incoherence of extended metaphors (Romeo's sun/moon/star imagery), and the rhetorical context of a speech (Katherine's awareness of a wager). This technique of reading form as content is a hallmark of literary analysis at the undergraduate level.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a theoretical frame about the function of soliloquies, then moves through three plays in sequence: Romeo and Juliet (two characters plus Friar Laurence), Richard III (one extended character study), and The Taming of the Shrew (Katherine's closing monologue). A brief conclusion synthesizes the argument. Each play section follows a consistent pattern: introduce the conventional interpretation, present textual evidence that complicates it, and draw a revised conclusion about the character's true motivation.
Introduction
William Shakespeare's works are among the most well-known texts in the English language, and indeed in any language around the world. There are many reasons for the enduring popularity of Shakespeare's plays, not the least of which is the pure skill he displays with language. The themes his plays deal with are quite profound and almost always universal to all of humanity, and his poetic talent provides insight into these themes to a degree that few authors before or since have been able to approximate—at least not across the wide range of topics and perspectives that Shakespeare brought to bear. But his poetic talent and the universality of his themes are not the only reasons his works have proved so enduring.
Most of the world's most well-known stories can have their importance traced to one specific aspect: character. Very few people know the origins of Santa Claus, why he is also known as Saint Nick, or what the modern figure's connection to Christianity is. Yet Santa—and similar figures in other cultures—is one of the most recognizable characters in our world today. The same is true for many of Shakespeare's characters, who present strong figures in our collective consciousness even when their stories may only be partially known. Romeo and Juliet are two of the world's best-known lovers, Richard III is one of Western civilization's most reviled (and enjoyed) villains, and Katherine from The Taming of the Shrew remains—whether for better or for worse—the embodiment of the feisty and demanding woman.
Yet none of these characters, nor the many others that can be counted among Shakespeare's most fully rendered and enduring creations, is as simple as their image in the collective consciousness suggests. Not only do they change as their respective plays progress, as any character in a great piece of literature necessarily must, but many of these characters also purposefully present different sides of themselves to various other characters at certain points in the play. Even more, many of Shakespeare's characters have motives and perspectives that are not entirely clear throughout the play, and even seem to behave and think in ways that contradict each other. These characters can be trusted to reveal their true motives and intentions in only one situation—their soliloquies, or monologues addressed not to any other character onstage but rather to the audience (or the open air, depending on the interpretation).
This paper will attempt to paint a more accurate picture of some of Shakespeare's more complex, enigmatic, and misunderstood characters by examining their monologues—and especially their soliloquies—in the various plays in which they appear. Though these characters are assumed to be fairly well understood by many people familiar with Shakespeare's works, there is often a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty surrounding their image in the collective consciousness. Even the plots of the plays and the eventual outcomes of the various characters discussed herein do not necessarily accurately reveal the interior lives and motivations of these characters. It is only through a careful, close reading of their monologues and soliloquies that these characters are truly revealed.
Works Cited
Clemen, Wolfgang. A Commentary on Shakespeare's Richard III. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Evans, G. Blakemore and M. Tobin, eds. The Riverside Shakespeare. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2003.
Rose, Herbert. A Handbook of Greek Mythology. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Shakespeare, William. Richard the Third. In The Riverside Shakespeare.
Shakespeare, William. Romeo and Juliet. In The Riverside Shakespeare.
Shakespeare, William. The Taming of the Shrew. In The Riverside Shakespeare.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.