This paper examines William Shakespeare's "Othello" and refutes the claim that Iago is less a villain due to his artistry. It argues that the artistry of Iago is merely a dramatic device, and that it is not meant that we admire him for it. We are made privy to his dark inner thoughts, but this does not meat that we sympathize with villainy. The paper also argues that the villainous soliloquies are only meant to carry the plot forward. In this way it is a mistake to judge him an artist only because he appears to be so coherent.
From the Paper:
" Coleridge describes Iago's villainy as ''motiveless malignity'' (Hadfield 39). His one motive seems to be to glory in the success of his machinations, and thus to make it an art. Rubinstein comments that there can be no evil involved if is a task is undertaken with a purely artistic motivation (191). If evil is considered to be a manifestation of unbridled passion, then Iago should not be termed evil. But I believe it is a mistake to consider Iago without motivation. He hates Othello due to his color and his creed. Critics tend to overlook this basic fact, seeing that it is only Iago who hates, whereas everyone else in the play overlooks the 'blackness' of the Moor, and indeed respects him for his nobility of character. But there is no reason for us to assume that sixteenth century Venice has freed itself from racism. Iago must be seen as a personification of this form of hatred, which cannot have been absent in the Venice of renaissance times."
Sample of Sources Used:
Blumenfeld, Laura. Revenge: A Story of Hope. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003
Hadfield, Andrew. A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on William Shakespeare's Othello: A Sourcebook. New York: Routledge, 2003.
Rubinstein, Ernest. Religion and the Muse: The Vexed Relation Between Religion and Western Literature. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2007.
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice. Contributor John Henry Walter. London: Heinemann, 1976.
Visitors who viewed this Book Review also liked these: