The Wykehamist
Shakespeare’ s Women and Ovid
The Reception of Ovid’ s Metamorphoses and Heroides in Shakespeare’ s Female Characters
To those well-versed in the Classics, it is clear when reading any one of Shakespeare’ s plays that“ the sweet wittie soule of Ovid lives in mellifluous and hony-tongued Shakespeare”( Meres, 1598). In general, the Classics influenced Early Modern Dramatists in style, narrative arc and character archetypes; especially the works of Seneca, Virgil and Ovid. In particular, Ovid’ s poetry is notable for his vivid portrayal of women in greater depth than his contemporaries,“ provid [ ing ] Shakespeare with examples of female characters who are witty as well as amorous, not merely moody but also full of vitality, linguistically adept and good at arguing”( Bate, 2001). While not always flatteringly depicted, the female mythological personae Ovid brings to life in his Heroides and Metamorphoses are varied and interesting enough to be able to stand on their own two feet within the narrative, rather than being simply defined by their relation and value to men. Shakespeare is able to use these women as templates for his own plays, building on centuries of poetic tradition, to the extent that it is often possible to find direct lines of evolution between certain Ovidian and Shakespearean characters; Shakespeare’ s recognition of Ovid’ s skill is arguably a factor in the brilliance of his plays, refusing to settle for under-developed portrayals of women so often found in the plays of his contemporaries. In this essay I will explore the parallels between female characterisation in both the Heroides and the Metamorphoses, against Shakespeare’ s most prominent female characters across his plays. More specifically, I aim to highlight the differences between the two authors’ depictions of women in passive and active roles: of victims and possessions; of antagonists and villains; and of strong leaders and queens.
Victims
One of the clearest examples of Shakespeare’ s drawing upon Ovid is in the character of Lavinia in The Tragedy of Titus Andronicus, who suffers an almost identical fate to that of Philomel in Book VI of the Metamorphoses. Shakespeare utilises the inevitable horror evoked by the graphic rape of Philomel at the hands of her brother-in-law and copies it across into his own play so clearly that Lavinia’ s uncle Marcus at once identifies the root of her plight, recognising its Classical similarities, crying:
‘ But sure some Tereus hath defloured thee, And least thou should’ st detect them, cut thy tongue. Ah, now thou turn’ st away thy face for shame’( II. iv. 27-29)
Shakespeare even adds to Tereus’ attempt at silencing Philomel, since, as Marcus notes,
‘ A craftier Tereus hast thou met withall’( II. iv. 42)
in Chiron and Demetrius, who cut off Lavinia’ s hands as well as her tongue, so that they may not be exposed by Philomel’ s same crafty exposure of her rapist. As a result, since“ it is not just that Shakespeare is imitating, and trying to outdo, Ovid by‘ improving’ on the Philomela story … but that his characters sometimes use their knowledge of the story to plan their next actions”( Martindale 1990), the Classical reader is left with the distinct impression that Shakespeare doesn’ t allow himself to merely repeat what is proved to be a flawed silencing with obvious consequences, but builds upon the myth in order to keep
16