Imperialism in the Tempest - a Question of Ethics and Morality

The Tempest is about an ousted Duke of Milan ,Prospero, who has been living in exile on a remote island for the past twelve years with his daughter Miranda. He is a powerful magician, who happens to be the master of Ariel and Caliban, and a guy who really likes his books. When Prospero's enemies wash up on shore, he uses his black magic to seek revenge and restore himself to power. The Tempest belongs to the genre of Elizabethan romance plays. It combines elements of tragedy with those of romantic comedy, and like one of Shakespeare's plays previously, it asks deeper questions that are not completely resolved at the end. The tone that seeps into the play is one of wonder, amazement, and admiration. Mystery is still present , but the magic performed is not black and scary. The version that seems to grasp my attention more, would have to be the Utah Valley University interpretation because it takes Shakespeare’s main purpose and tone but shows it in its own unique way. Furthermore, with its silly drunkards, the play has a certain lightness to it and even the so called killers of the King tell hilarious jokes and are lighthearted. But there is also the tone of revenge and reconciliation in the play. We feel a revenge burning in Prospero while, at the same time, a wish for forgiveness and reconciliation with those who have wronged him.

The Tempest was Shakespeare’s last play that was written shortly after England colonized Virginia in 1609. Throughout the play, there are many different references to imperialism and colonialism within the characters. The Tempest analyzes the imperialistic relationships between England and America but applies it to personal human interaction between the central characters. The island gives newcomers a sense of endless possibilities like claiming the land for themselves because of the belief in the Great Chain of Being and the seventeenth century being an age of exploration. The idea of ruling a colony lured many people into the idea that having that kind of power over a large group of people is attainable. Master-servant relationships are

In the play, The Tempest, by William Shakespeare, Caliban is an important character. Caliban is a character who plays as a victim to be pitied, as well as a villain to watch out for. In this essay, I will show clearly how Caliban is a victim and villain by exploring his relationship with Prospero, Miranda, and the island.

Shakespeare's "The Tempest" forms a world within itself. Within this world, many topics regarding government, power and colonization are addressed. Shakespeare tackles the discovery of new places and races, the relationship between the colonized and the colonist, old world ideologies on new soil, as well as theories on civilization and government. These aspects at the core reveal a very clear struggle for political power. Prospero's first major monologue creates the foundation of such a theme. In 1.2 lines 30-175 Prospero tell his story recounting the usurpation of the power he had as Duke of Milan, then quickly

Just like Prospero says to Caliban: “thy vile race, though thou didst learn, had that in’t which good natures could not abide to be with”(Shakespeare, 358-359). Caliban’s inborn sinful nature is rooted so deeply that even civilization and education cannot alter it. Even worse, civilization facilitates his viciousness. Although before learning the language Caliban is already of an evil state of mind, since he cannot express his feeling by words, he could only “gabble like a thing most brutish”(Shakespeare, 357-358). It is exactly the acquirement of language that enables Caliban to vent his venom. Moreover, trying to civilize the barbarian and treat him in a humane way, Prospero lets Caliban live together with him and Miranda, but it ends up that Caliban acts foully and Miranda’s safety is threatened. Without the thought of civilizing Caliban, Prospero would not have put Miranda in such dangerous situation. In these instances, it would be better if Caliban did not get the chance to be civilized and remained at the original barbaric status, by which those inherent wicked thoughts would have been restrained within Caliban himself and never get expressed or lead to worse

Caliban, immediately introduced as "poisonous slave," "savage," "hag-seed," is a character often likened to the African- American slave. The ease and matter-of-factness with which Prospero and Miranda dismiss him is painfully obvious even before he enters the scene (Act 1, Scene 3). Through no fault of his own, Caliban is dehumanized by the authority of his day and dismissed by the important members of his society. He looks much different from the others on the island, so he is not seen as a true human being; in fact, his only redemption lies in the fact that he is able to learn the language in order to serve the master.

In this motif tracing, I argue that the epithet “monster” is used as an agent of othering, a way to remove Caliban from the other characters and depict him as something other than human. In Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Caliban’s name is only said eight times, while he is addressed as “monster” the rest of the 34 times he is spoken to. This motif is used to belittle and dehumanize a unique character that plays an essential role in the plot. Shakespeare’s use of this epithet combined with Caliban’s servile role, restraint of his speech to simple diction, and portrayal as an insurgent, causes the uncultured native to be born. This plays into the 16th century view of the native: one who is there to serve the more sophisticated, knowledgeable masters.

The Tempest, by Shakespeare, offers the reader a variety of themes. The one theme that stands out the most is that of colonialism. During the time of Shakespeare, many European countries such as Spain, France, and England, were expanding their borders by taking over less developed countries, referred to as colonies. During this time of exploitation, there was skepticism concerning the possible success of the colonies. While some scholars believe that the play is about the Americas, I argue that the play reflects on colonialism in general and how it is destined for failure which is shown through the character’s relationships throughout the play.

       The Tempest is a classic example of Shakespeare’s dichotomized notions of right and wrong within the context of racial inherencies, a social commentary of the colonialism of the New World. An important theme in the play is the racial differentiation between Caliban and the other antagonists, primarily, Prospero, who comes to the island and enslaves Caliban to enforce his own rule. This relationship, as portrayed through the play, is a reflection of the historical social and racial tensions that existed between the colonizers of New Europe and the Native Americans and is illustrated through the language employed by Shakespeare and the interactions that take place between the characters. The Tempest

Prospero's relationship with Caliban differs from that of Prospero and Ariel's. Prospero does not view Caliban as a being who could be his equal. He is blinded by his prejudice against Caliban's appearance and manners. Caliban is portrayed in a negative light. He can be seen as the depiction of the victims of colonial expansion. Although Prospero seeks this righteousness, he both mistreats and insults Caliban, who ultimately attempts to kill Prospero.  In comparison to Ariel who acts only when commanded by Prospero, Caliban is wild. He refuses to be colonized and tamed. This can be taken as a reference by Shakespeare towards those who were

If Shakespeare's play does comment upon European exploration and colonization in the Western Hemisphere, however, The Tempest does not contain a critique of exploitation, but, instead, an apology for it. Caliban was initially treated as an ignorant child and only put under wraps after he attempted to force himself upon the completely innocent Miranda. The charge of "rape" is made more credible in having Miranda pass judgment upon Caliban whom she calls an "Abhorr'd slave" (I, ii., l.352). Unlike our current understanding of European colonialism, Prospero puts Caliban in chains because he has earned the status of

The previously mentioned literary piece was created right before Shakespeare`s death in 1616. The most controversial character in Shakespeare`s play the Tempest remains Caliban. Literary scholars have shared different ideas regarding the embodiment of this character and it has had different representations throughout the years. Caliban embodies social and political events which took place in Shakespeare`s lifetime. His name could not be far distinguished as anagram for “cannibal” or “Carib”, words which according to Vaughn, entered European languages after 1492, after Columbus discovered that some of the tribes encountered were cannibals, and they were reffered to as Caribs as potential reference to Caribbean languages. (Vaughan and Vaughan). Caliban`s lines in the Tempest in some way could be considered as a clear indication of Native American, as a character whose territory was occupied by a European and who was bound into

To accurately assess if Prospero acts as a colonizer, one must inspect his associations with different characters where he correspondingly applies his “ritual”: the activity of force, the testing, and afterward the prize. These illustrations can all be seen as the legislative issues of force and power as opposed to the progress of empire-building. It is conceivable that Shakespeare is putting forth the character of Caliban as not simply the wild man, or the respectable savage, two ideas nearly connected to the motion of imperialism, however something more basic: ‘natural man, instinctively poetic and instinctively brutal, longing for freedom’ (Edwards, 1986). Shakespeare may be communicating the duality of great and abhorrence that is in everybody. The play additionally inspects numerous samples of characters expecting to seize power and activity power, however these are behavioral models that have a tendency to loan themselves to frontierism, as opposed to be restrictive to it. Not at all like Caliban, Prospero appears

In the early 1600s, Shakespeare completed The Tempest, a comedy set in the New World centering around the former Duke of Milan, Prospero, and his quest for vengeance after being castaway to a remote island. Superficially, the comedy is straightforward; it is merely the story of a man who regains his dukedom and rights the injustices he has suffered. While the plot of the play may be simple, the larger narrative of the play prompts the audience to consider the more complicated dynamics of indigenous and European relationships. These dynamics are presented through the character Caliban and his interactions with the rest of the European cast. Through Caliban’s contact with these characters, he is presented as crude, foolish, and odious. Surely a character such as this is villainous, as he is often called throughout the play. Yet, while Caliban’s relationship with the European characters may expose his own unbecoming features, I argue that it also discloses the abusive and foul tendencies of the very Europeans who scorn him. Indeed, I will prove that Caliban is not the simple villain that he is superficially presented to be, but rather a victim of European intervention and hegemony. Through the analysis of Caliban’s character and his relationships with the European characters in The Tempest, I will then explore Shakespeare stance on colonialism and European interference with the indigenous people of the Americas.

Shakespeare’s The Tempest has been viewed through many different lenses, and each translation brings with it a new and differing understanding of Shakespeare’s complex original work. Two specific translations, Coetzee’s novel Disgrace and Cesaire’s play A Tempest, do an exemplary job at translating The Tempest, because both translations looked at a different aspect of the colonizer-colonized relationship. Cesaire 's A Tempest translates the story with a greater emphasis on Caliban’s point of view and Caliban’s feelings. The author did so to provide a more relevant, relatable play for his time period. A Tempest Contrarily, in Coetzee’s novel Disgrace, the author tells the story placing a stronger weight on Literature, much like life itself, is based on perceptions. These translations assist in pointing that out. The way one person perceives a text could be vastly different from another’s. Does that mean one is right and one is wrong? Or are they both wrong? Neither of them are wrong, each translation is just another person’s perception of the story. These two translations ultimately prove that the colonial relationship is constantly evolving, never settling.