Gender Relationships in Shakespeares Plays

Gender Relationships in Shakespe bes PlaysThe subject of wake upual pr dissembleice relationships within the reckon of Shakespe atomic number 18 became a matter of lively debate during the net qu blinder of the twentieth century and go ons to be an orbital cavity that attracts much(prenominal) cognition and controversy.Perceptions that primaeval fresh participation was antithetical to whatever exercise of reason by wo workforce must be counterbalanced by the knowledge that, until 1603, a charcleaning lady, Queen Elizabeth, held the ultimate forcefulness in England. Recent interrogation has bring forwardively revealed that across this partnership a signifi hind(prenominal)quarterst number of women held economic and accessible power and so the idea that Shakespeargon polishs a society in which women bea powerless and oppressed group is bingle which must be moderateed with somecaution.Shakespeares educate presents a wide variety of young-bearing(prenominal) suits and the rooms in which they consider been perceived has altered over the four snow days since the plays and metrical compositions were written. Play scripts areparticularly susceptible to re-interpretation and in many looks such interpretations reflect as much approximately their own historical period asab out(a) the one in which the plays were origin every(prenominal)y written. Each age finds its own relationship with Shakespeare and so it could be arguedthat the question of whether Shakespeares women are regarded as strongor weak is inevitably influenced as much by the sexual urge issues of the present time as by the time in which they were originally created. It is important not to assume that we send out read Shakespeares women characters as examples of how women were treated in the period in which the work was written (Barker Kamps, 1995, 5), exactly rather to use the information that we have about the early current period in order to see the moving- in auth orized show of fictional characters as they relate to the constraints which operated on certain women of the period.It is also required to be certain that, with any dramatic texts, the interventions of actors, directors and current interview expectationscan radi tracey alter the ways in which fictional characters are judged.It is the intention of this talk to give a brief introduction to the conventional views of women during the early modern period. Some scholars, such as Lisa Jardine (1989), Jean E. Howard (1988) and Juliet Dusinberre (1996), have argued that the way in which Shakespeare created women characters was in part determined by the fact that they were represented by boy players on the stage. However, it is hoped that by including a discussion of the narrative poem, The deflower of Lucrece, which was not intended for stage production, this dissertation will furye a continuity among Shakespeares fe priapic characters that goes beyond the necessities of the stage. Th e discussion will also strain on trey of Shakespeares nifty tragedies, written during at the peak of his career, when his work had become popular amongst a large audience. The popularity of small town, King Lear and Macbeth has enduredover four centuries and these plays continue to reach wide audiencesand have a significant influence on current views of Shakespeares women.In early modern England, notions about female gender percentages tended to be constructed by dickens forms of discussion the theological and themedical. Theological sermons and pamphlets accent the biblicalinjunctions that women should be unspoken and obedient and that they were subject to the authority of their husbands. Callaghan (1989, 9) arguesthat Renaissance society was profoundly hierarchical and that the chain of authority extended from God, via the monarch, to men and women who were expect to conduct their household relationships inconformity with the idea that women were subject the authority of t heir baffles and husbands. Belsey (1985, 9) emphasises that men and women are not symmetri surroundy defined. Man, the centre and hero of liberal humanism, was produced in contradistinction to the objects of his knowledge, and in terms of the relations of power in the preservation and the state. Woman was produced in contradistinction to man,and in terms of the relations of power in the family.These relationships were worked out in the popular and private sphithers in the requirement that, in terms of the economy and the state,women should be representativeless, and within the family they should be subjec tto their husbands, fathers and other male congenerics. Thus, Newman (1991, 134) arguesTalk in women then is dangerous because it is perceived as ausurpation of multiple forms of authority, a curse to order and malesovereignty, to masculine control of commodity exchange, to a desiredhegemonic male sexuality. The terminus of this perceived threat may begauged by the strict de legation of the lecture woman to the care richydefined and delimited spheres of private and domestic life in which thehusband was exhorted to rule.In early modern medical texts, the spotless theories of Galen andAristotle, in which the female was regarded as in imperfect version of the male, predominated. Aughterson, (1995, 42) argues that the Galenictheories of the humours effectively continued to assign woman aninferior physiologic state to that of man. Howard (2003, 419)observes that men and women were not assumed to be innately different, just now rather were viewed as more perfect and less perfect versions of thesame prototype. From these constructions of physiological theory camethe idea that male and female were so intimately related that they werepotentially capable of transmutationStories exist from the early modern period preserve cases in which,when women supposedly became overheated in hold outning or jumping, malegenitalia would break open from inside their bodies . (Howard, 2003, 419).That Shakespeare was aware of these ideas and utilised them in hischaracterisations of men and women is demonstrated when small town isconcerned about his feminisation (Rose, 1995, 116), and when LadyMacbeth refutes her femininity Come, you Spirits / That tend onmortal vox populis, unsex me here (Macbeth I.v.40-41). The term weaker vessel originates from the Bible and can beeffectively seen to straddle both theological and the physiologicaltheories about the relationships amidst women and men, as isillustrated from the following extract from a homily, date 1562,designed to be the required reading at marriage ceremoniesSt irradiation giveth his teaching saying you husbands deal with yourwives according to knowledge, giving honour to the married woman as unto theweaker vessel, and as unto them that are heirs also of the grace oflife, that your prayers be not hindered 1 Peter 3). For the womanis a weak creature, not endued with like authorisation and consta ncy ofmind, indeed they be the sooner disquieted, and they be the moreprone to all weak affections and dispositions of the mind, more thanmen be, and transport they be, and more vain in their fancies andopinions. (An Homily of the State of Matrimony, 1562, from Aughterson, 1995, 23.)This essentially standpat(prenominal) and restrictive view of women was held,in spite of, or perhaps because of the upheaval and upheaval of Englandat that time. Early modern England was a society in transition and thedisquiet that came with modernization much led to reactive measuresdesigned to uphold the term quo. The sumptuary laws, in which modesof dress were prescribed in order to maintain class differences, can beread as an test to rein back an increasing level of well-disposedmobility. Similarly, the discourse of gender difference has beeninterpreted as an essentially conservative re execute to companionable change meter and again in these plays, we see all important(p) social problems presented in relation to a central conflict involving genderopposition. Furthermore, since that opposition entails a fundamentalhierarchy (male superiority and female subordination), its expire, interms of the dominant ideology is to reinforce the status quo. Yetthis function is problematic. Female inferiority was not an undebatedcultural apt(p). It was fiercely contestedCallaghan (1989, p.11)Recent research supports this argument. The discourse of malesuperiority and female subordination must be seen in a historicalcontext in which a significant number of women had influence in thewider society. in that location were many wealthy women who wielded greateconomic power some women participated in the workplace with guildmembership a significant number of households were headed by womenand a number of women in various part of the country also participatedin parliamentary elections (Rackin, 19-20). It is necessary,therefore, to balance this smorgasbord of historical evidence agains t therhetorical evidence that we find in contemporary texts. The attempt toprescribe and define female roles and responsibilities reflects ananxious reaction to social change, an attempt to arrest progress andestablish a conservative status quo. These anxieties and the contestedground concerning the acceptable role of women in early modern societyinevitably affects the presentation of women in the plays and poetry ofthe period. In reading Shakespeares texts, it is potential to discoveraspects of the discourse of hoary authority as well as evidenceof womens power as agents in their own destinies. Whilst the notionof woman as the weaker vessel often informs the construction ofcharacter in Shakespeares work, I intend to argue that a closeexamination reveals that, in spite of the social restraints set uponthem, these women often reveal a strength that goes beyond anythingthat may be expected. 2 The bumble of LucreceShakespeares narrative poem, The Rape of Lucrece, is based onclassica l sources in Livy and Ovid and so there are some necessaryconstraints upon the literal temporary hookup of the poem. For example, Lucrecessuicide derives from the source materials and, in the context of LivysThe Hi romance of Rome from Its Foundation, this issuing is instrumental inending the reign of kings and instituting the Roman Republic. It isnecessary, therefore, to understand that the classical story in the mainexemplifies the horror of tyrannical rulers and has a deeply semipoliticalsignificance. While St Augustine later argued that the suicide ofLucrece was, from a Christian theological stand specify, culpable,nonetheless in the classical world Lucreces death was storied asboth tragic and heroic (Hendricks, 2000). We must, therefore,distinguish between the story that Shakespeare inherited and what hehas done with it as a narrative to discuss Lucreces suicide as thoughit were an optional plot device is to misunderstand the nature of thesource material. It is a attach ed that Lucrece will contribute suicide, butthe way in which Shakespeare has constructed the narrative and the waythat he has characterised the participants in this story carries aweight of significance. The poem concentrates not so much on theexternal events of the story, but on the interior experience of thecharacters or, as Maus (1986, 67) comments, the poem concentrates notupon action but upon what happens in the interstices between theimportant moments when two people make important finalitys. There are two significant tropes within this poem that are crucial tothe portrayal of Lucreces character and are pertinent to the questionof her strength. One of these tropes has been discussed by CoppeliaKahn (1995, 42) where she argues that Shakespeare clearly blames menfor exercising some(prenominal) kinds of unfair advantages over women and thathe leans heavily on the traditional conception of womans physical, honourableistic and cerebral inferiority to man. She is referring to thepassage in which men are compared with marble and women with waxFor men have marble, women waxen minds, And therefore are they formed as marble will. The weak oppressed, thimpression of strange kinds Is formed in them by force, by fraud, or skill. Then call them not the authors of their ill, No more than wax shall be accounted evil Wherein is stamped the semblance of a devil. (1240-1246)Kahn (1995, 23) argues that Lucrece is the victim of a patriarchalsystem and that Shakespeare uses the patriarchy of the classical worldto mirror his contemporary society. The trope of the marble and thewax therefore emphasises the pliability of women and their whackyness tohave any control over their destiny in a patriarchal society that soseverely restricts their power to act, or even to take honourableresponsibility for themselves. In Kahns reading, Lucrece does,indeed, expect to have taken a waxlike impression of societys valueswith respect to her status as her husbands possession and the way inwhich she sees herself as a de-valued object when she is crooked orstained by rape. However, the poem also proposes an electiontrope that seems crucial to an understanding of the nature of women.At the icy moment when Tarquin has entered Lucreces bedroom anddisclosed his intention to rape her, Shakespeare introduces a picturethat may call into question the comparable strengths of men and womenthat of the marble and the irrigate. Until this moment, the poem is constructed to show the readerTarquins point of view. One stanza particularly creates a directidentification between the reader and TarquinSo that in ventring ill we leave to be The things we are for that which we expect And this ambitious fret infirmity, In having much, torments us with defect Of that we have so we do look across The thing we have and all, for want of wit, Make something nothing by augmenting it. (148-154)By using we we we us we we we, Shakespeare removes thespace between Tarquin and the reader , implicating the reader in thekind of rash risk-taking action where Tarquin is shown pawning hishonour to obtain his lust (156). Similarly, in Tarquins inner debateregarding whether he should carry out his intention to rape Lucrece(181-301) and in his reaction when he sees her asleep (365-441), thereader has full access to his thoughts and emotions, while Lucrece ispresented as an object whose external attributes are describe inextensive detail yet to whose inner experience there is no access.The implements of war description of Lucrece as she sleeps does indeed bear outNancy Vickerss (1985, 96) assertion that the canonical legacy ofdescription in praise of beauty is, after all, a legacy shapedpredominantly by male imagination for the male imagination it is, inlarge part, the product of men lecture to men about women. The primarythird of the poem does, indeed, present Lucrece as a silent presence, athing talked about, but apparently without a voice of her own. Yet the crucial act point of the poem occurs when she is awoken byTarquin. This act of awakening coincides with the sudden access thatis given to the reader to Lucreces inner experience and her voice inthe poem. Until this point, the poem attributes some describe speechto her, but the first time when her words are recorded as direct speechoccurs in the stanza which begins Quoth she (575). From this pointonward, the narrative becomes intensely concerned with Lucreces innerexperience, in her acquaintance of the harm done to herself and herhusband as well as in her decision to commit suicide. Hercontemplation of a painting of the siege of Troy similarly enables thereader to identify with her as a person who is imaginatively engagedwith a work of art and as a person who is able to argue about moral andphilosophical issues in her own mind. It is at this point of apparent transformation in the readersperception of Lucrece when Shakespeare introduces his second tropewhich, I believe, is crucial to the p ortrayal of Lucrece, when thepoems narrator comments Tears harden lust, though marble wear withraining (560). Although this is ostensibly a comment on Lucrecesun disciplineness to deflect Tarquin from his course by her tears and pleas, itsimultaneously proposes that even the hardness and permanence of marblecan be worn down by something as seemingly soft as water. The Galenichumoural system opposed the wet, female humour with the dry, malehumour and so this picture of water that eventually erodes marble canbe seen not just as an eversion of the hard = strong / soft = weakequation, but also as a specific reference to the wet and dry humoursof men and women. When viewed in the long term, water is stronger thanmarble and this image is re-iterated, when Lucrece herself takes up theimage For stones dissolved to water do transform (592). AlthoughLucreces pleas for mercy are ineffective in this moment, her wordsnevertheless alert the reader to the relative strengths of stone andwater in the longer term and later her realisation that Time can wastehuge stones with unforesightful water drops (959) leads her to curse TarquinDisturb his hours of rest with sprightly trances Afflict him in his bed with bedrid groans Let there befall him pitiful mischances To make him moan, but pity not his moans. Stone him with hardned wagon harder than stones, And let mild women to him lose their mildness, Wilder to him than tigers in their wildness. (967-973) . Atthis point, then, Lucreces line of thought has linked the image ofhearts harder than stones with the reversal of mild women who are nolonger helpless prey, but instead vulturey tigers. In the early partof the poem, Lucrece is persistently interpret as a passive victim andthis is emphasised by twin images of predator and prey, such as thenight owl and the dove (360), a serpent and a sleeping woman (362-3), afalcon and a fowl (506-7), a cockatrice and a hind (540-3), a cat and amouse (554-5), a wolf and a lamb (679). Alth ough Lucrece is physically unable to treasure herself from Tarquin, after he leaves, this imageryis no longer used and Lucrece gains an active voice and a moralpresence that eventually lead her to the act of suicide. Henricks(2000, 115), comments that Shakespeare gives Lucrece a psychologicalcomplexity, interiority and self-awareness. The presentation of Lucreces moral complexity seems to be at oddswith the men in the narrative. Her husband is depicted as a man who isat fault from his initial boasting of his wife as a materialpossession, thereby exposing her to thieves (29-35), and he is laterdescribed as the hopeless merchandiser of this loss (1659). His finalignominy is the ridiculous squabble with Lucretius over ownershipThe one doth call her his, the other his Yet neither may possess the claim they lay. The father says, Shes mine. O mine she is, Replies her husband do not take away My sorrows interest let no mourner say He weeps for her, for she was exactly mine, And howeve r must be wailed by Collatine. (1793-1799)Brutus takes the knife from Lucreces side and bury in Lucrecewound his fatuitys show (1810), he begins to admonish Collatine andLucretius. In this way, her death is presented as having a redemptivesignificance, not only for Brutus, but also for Rome itself. Although,within the Christian theological tradition, suicide is condemned,nonetheless Shakespeare deliberately chose as his theme a story inwhich a suicide has a positive political effect and is placed within aheroic tradition. The Rape of Lucrece depicts a woman in her nearly dangerous moment whois unable to resist her enemy. Yet it could be argued that she trulyfinds a way of fulfilling her assertion that I am the mistress of myfate (1069). Lucrece, though she is entirely fixed within apatriarchal discourse that constructs her as her husbands possession,is neither silent nor weak. Finally, like water on marble, she has asubtle strength. 3. life-sustaining pointIn the play, Hamlet , Shakespeare presents the audience with two femalecharacters who are kind of unlike Lucrece. It has been noted thatLucrece undergoes a transition from her initial silence and is given avoice and an interior life that dominates more than half of the poem.Yet Gertrude and Ophelia, in contrast, are chiefly characterised byhaving very little to say. Showalter (1985, 78) says of OpheliaShe appears in only five of the plays twenty paintings the pre-playcourse of her neck story with Hamlet is known only by a some ambiguousflashbacks. Her tragedy is subordinated in the play unlike Hamlet,she does not struggle with moral choices or alternatives.Lisa Jardine (1995, 316) makes a similar point about Gertrude, thatshe speaks fewer lines than any other major character in the play.It is therefore incumbent upon the audience or reader to fill in thegaps for these characters, who say so little for themselves. It may beargued that both Gertrude and Ophelia are presented as conforming to anearly modern stereotype of correct feminine deportment and that theirpresence within a patriarchal society has had the effect of deprivingthem of the opportunity for either action or speech. It seems that Ophelia is the character who most epitomises theposition of a woman who is controlled by the patriarchal structuresaround her. She is presented as a woman of virtue who is obedient toher father and brother. Her reticence in the first scene in which shespeaks is effectively demonstrated by an extreme economy of words.When Laertes departs for France, her speeches are limited to halflines, single lines and pairs of lines as she receives instructionsfrom Polonius and Laertes regarding her behaviour. Although PhyllisRackin (2000, 22) has recently questioned the scholarly consensus thatrespectable women were expected to take a breather at home, that they wereeconomically dependent on fathers and husbands, and that they weresubjected to constant surveillance by desirous men, obsessively a nxiousabout their sexual fidelity, it is nonetheless true that both fatherand brother are preoccupied by the risk of Ophelia losing her virginityand thus ruining herself and bringing shame to her male relatives.Ophelia has only one speech of longer than two lines in which toexpress her reaction to these instructions, but her initial obedienceturns into a comment upon male trickeryI shall theffect of this heartfelt lesson keep As watchman to my heart. But good my brother, Do not as some ungracious pastors do, Show me the dump and thorny way to heaven, Whiles like a puffd and reckless libertine Himself the primrose path of dalliance treads, And recks not his own rede. (I.iii.45-51)Poloniuss subsequent conversation with Ophelia confirms this view,but he is plain about her responsibilities to him and unapologeticabout the double standards that operate in this society. He begins byreferring to the urgency for Ophelia to protect her own honour (I.iii.97),but he then moves on to his real concern Tender yourself more dearly/ Or youll tender me a fool (I.iii107-109). Shortly afterwards hestatesFor the Lord Hamlet, Believe so much in him that he is young, And with a larger tether may he walk Than may be given you. (I.iii.122-126) Ophelia has the last line in this scene and it is at least outwardly- an expression of compliance I shall obey, my victor (I.iii.136).However, her conversation with Polonius makes it clear that she hasbeen conducting a relationship with Hamlet for which she had not soughther fathers antecedent permission. This is perhaps an example of thecomplexities of courtship and marriage that existed in early modernEngland. On one hand, there is evidence that arranged marriage wasprobably still the average in practice, even though marrying for lovebecomes the ideal on stage (Belsey, 2002, 129) but on the other handthere is also evidence that a more perplexing situation existed wherepreliminary decisions were made by the young people the parents wereusually brought into the discussion only later(Amussen, 1999, 94) .Ophelias behaviour suggests that the latter was a more accuratedescription of her situation. Ophelias ability to express herself continues to be severelyrestricted throughout the scene in which she is showed by Hamlet(III.i) and in the Mouse set up scene (III.ii). However, she doeseventually find a voice, and it is through her madness that she isfinally able to confront the ultimate embodiment of male authority theking. Ophelias use of folk songs as a way of expressing a sexualisedsensibility is in stark contrast to the communicative control of her earlierscenes, yet the meaning of her words carries the same message, asHattaway (2002, 114) comments what is significant is its word picture ofthe double standard a man gains honour among his own sex by virtue ofsexual conquests, while by the same activity a woman loses hers. Thiscontradiction can be seen as central to the character of Ophelia and it ultimately de stroys her. Showalter (1985, 91) comments that some libbers have regarded Ophelias madness as a form of protest andrebellion. For many feminist theorists, she states, the madwomanis a heroine, a powerful figure who rebels against the family and thesocial order. It is also possible, however, to argue that Opheliascryptic comments on her plight are contained by her madness and thatany attempt to operate outside of the strictures of patriarchy isforeclosed by her death. Ophelias madness has proved to be apowerful symbol of female insanity over the last four centuries wecould provide a manual of arms of female insanity by chronicling illustrationsof Ophelia this is so because the illustrations of Ophelia have playeda major role in the abstractive construction of female insanity(Showalter, 1985, 80). With the benefit of four hundred years ofhindsight, therefore, Ophelias madness has attained a symbolicsignificance which is a contested target of meaning. Gertrudes part in the play has a lso provoked a great deal of commentand controversy. Jardine (1995, 316) comments upon the phenomenon ofblame that has become attached to Gertrude. Hamlets apparentobsession with her behaviour has been the subject of muchpsychoanalytical interpretation. However, the recent emphasis onviewing early modern literature within a historicist framework haspresented an alternative to the essentially anachronistic process ofapplying a nineteenth century theoretical framework to a seventeenthcentury play. With a greater historical awareness, it is possible toview Hamlets concerns in a different way the anxiety about hismothers behaviour that preoccupies him and distracts him from hisostensible responsibility to avenge the death of his father can be explained byhis mothers apparently unfeminine and inappropriate sexuality.Hamlet describes Gertrudes relationship with Claudius as hot, lustfuland bestialNay, but to live In the rank sweat of an enseamed bed, Stewd in corruption, honeying and maki ng love Over the awed sty (III.iv.91-94)Disgusted by the physical evidence Gertrudes sexuality, Hamlet hasthree issues with his mothers behaviour he has identified that she ishot (a sign of masculinity in Galens humoural system), he is concernedat the rush along with which she has transferred her affiliation from oldHamlet to Claudius (thus refuting the requirement that women should beconstant) and she also seems to behave with too much liberty. As isclear from Poloniuss rebuke to Ophelia, men could be permitted agreater freedom, but a womans freedom to act was severelycircumscribed. Gertrudes lack of restraint is seen by Hamlet asdangerous, both socially and politically. Hamlet is therefore dismayedby the fact that his mother is behaving in such a way as to go beyondthe conventional requirements of feminine behaviour and that she is, inhis eyes, encroaching onto male territory. Though it is true thatGertrude does not have many lines, her role is crucial to Hamletsstate of mind an d to his ability to act in a way that he perceives asmanly. In marrying Claudius, Gertrude has also retained politicalpower as queen and this has almost sure had the effect of barringHamlet from inheriting the throne from his dead father. It can beargued, then, that in her relationship with Hamlet she has a level ofpersonal and political power that is the cause of his inability to takethe action that feels is necessary to avenge the death of his father. Gertrude and Ophelia, though they have comparatively few lines, both havepivotal roles to play in Hamlet. Their influence over the expiration ofthe play is far in excess of the number of lines spoken by them. Bothof them are seen to go beyond what was the conventionally idealisedfeminine roles ascribed to them by early modern society. That theirbehaviour causes anxiety in the male characters in the play is clearLaertes, Polonius, Claudius and Hamlet are all preoccupied by theirbehaviour, yet are unable to exert the necessary contro l thatpatriarchal power structures require of them. Although the socialnorms of patriarchy are clearly inscribed into this play, the womencharacters display a level of non-conformity that enables them tosubvert the power structures that seek to restrain them. Shakespearehas inscribed into this play a complexity of characterisation in bothGertrude and Ophelia that denies the simplistic category of femaleweakness into which their society mogul have tried to fit them. 4. King LearAnn Thompson (1991, 125) has commented on the difficulties thatthis play creates in that too much critical attention has turned KingLear into a play exclusively or primarily about male power, butKathleen McLuskie (1985, 103) argues that the text containspossibilities for subverting these meanings and the potential forreconstructing them in feminist terms. In the opening scene of theplay, we are presented with what McLuskie refers to as a love test,based on the structure of a folk tale. The King creates a situ ationwhereby the fate of his farming and his daughters depends upon their communicative declarations of love. However, if the ideal type of womanhood,as defined in early modern society, lies in its silence and modestrestraint, is could be argued that Lear is tempting his daughters intoerror by requiring such public verbal displays. He exposes hisdaughters to the unseemliness of a living woman conveying her feelingsin a public format (Barker Kamps, 1995, 4). Shakespeare is thusproblematising Lears behaviour from the outset he embarks upon acourse that demands that his daughters prove their love by floutingpatriarchal conventions. The women are thus trapped whatever they sayor do not say, they run the risk of disobedience, either to theirfather or to the wider requirements of proper feminine behaviour. In Lears three daughters and their responses to this situation, weare presented with alternative types of female behaviour and the playalso focuses attention on their agency as it rel ates to the patriarchalstructures within which they operate. The play could be said to be anillustration of the weakness and folly of two old men Lear andGloucester who, as their physical powers diminish, lose their socialand political powers as well. Just as the source of womens weaknesscan be traced to their bodies, so it might be argued that a bodilydecline in old men renders them weak and vulnerable. In the subsequentpower struggle, Goneril, Regan and Cordelia all make choices thatgovern their future and that determine the course of the subsequentdrama. Although this leads to the depiction of Goneril and Regan aspredatory adulteresses, whilst Cordelia ultimately becomes a victim whois unable to survive, it is nonetheless true to say that all three ofthese women seize opportunities to make their own choices anddecisions. From the outset, Cordelia is characterised as the pictureof modest womanish constraint, as she punctuates her sisters smoothrendition of filial loyalty with c omments such as What shall Cordeliaspeak? Love and be silent (I.i.61) and Then poor Cordelia / And yetnot so since I am sure my loves / More ponderous than my tongue(I.i.75-77). Cordelias virtue lies in her observation of duty andobedience and she is aware that every adult woman must divide her dutyand obedience between her husband and her father. Though this stanceis shown to place her in a double support that leads to exile and thendeath, yet she has exercised her own choice and has resisted pressurefrom her father to take another(prenominal) course. In choosing the path of truthto herself, she has become her own moral arbiter and is the first ofthe three daughters to openly rebel against her father