0% found this document useful (0 votes)
51 views3 pages

Module A Tempseed

The document analyzes the interplay of theatricality in Shakespeare's 'The Tempest' and Atwood's 'Hag-Seed,' highlighting how both works explore the empowerment and limitations of individuals within social structures. It discusses Shakespeare's metatheatrical reflections on artistic power and morality, which Atwood reinterprets through a postmodern lens to address contemporary issues of oppression and colonialism. Ultimately, both texts engage in a dialogue about the evolving role of the artist and the impact of theatricality across different cultural contexts.

Uploaded by

nainaram01
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
51 views3 pages

Module A Tempseed

The document analyzes the interplay of theatricality in Shakespeare's 'The Tempest' and Atwood's 'Hag-Seed,' highlighting how both works explore the empowerment and limitations of individuals within social structures. It discusses Shakespeare's metatheatrical reflections on artistic power and morality, which Atwood reinterprets through a postmodern lens to address contemporary issues of oppression and colonialism. Ultimately, both texts engage in a dialogue about the evolving role of the artist and the impact of theatricality across different cultural contexts.

Uploaded by

nainaram01
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

The textual conversation between The Tempest and Hag-Seed generates insight into

theatricality’s multifaceted ability to empower and restrict individuals across temporal and
cultural boundaries. Shakespeare’s ‘The Tempest’ (1611) establishes a pivotal use of metatheatre
to exemplify the power over reality afforded to individuals who create art through theatricality,
which Atwood escalates in Hag-Seed (2016) through the construction of a metanarrative with
postmodern influences. The Tempest also initiates a complex conversation surrounding the
morality of oppression within accepted social structures in a Jacobean context, entirely reframed
for contemporary audiences and sensibilities in Hag-Seed to uplift those suppressed by
comparable structures.

Shakespeare’s reflective approach to his theatrical craft in his final work The Tempest,
manifests in the incorporation of metatheatre, informing Atwood’s post-modern consideration
of the power and limitations of theatrical recreation. In his final play, by drawing attention to
the theatricality inherent in the act of creation, Shakespeare establishes its dual natured power
over reality. Prospero’s magical prowess is euphemistically prescribed a theatrical quality as his
“art”, as Shakespeare implies the artist is all powerful over their work, as Prospero ensures “no
soul” is lost in the eponymous tempest. Shakespeare’s purposeful connection of The Tempest’s
world and his performance space through the double entendre of the “great globe itself” evokes
the audience's understanding of his power as a playwright to temporarily transform their
experience of reality. The implied great power of this theatre begins to be limited in scope by
Shakespeare however, as Prospero’s metaphorical musing that “we are such stuff as dreams are
made on” implies Shakespeare’s understanding of his theatrical power to be ultimately limited
in its ephemeral nature. The artist's ultimate need for a more meaningful yet simpler existence
is evident in Shakespeare's final metatheatrical message through Prospero, the religious
symbolic value of his need to "be relieved by prayer" expressing both figure's desire to distance
from previous explorations of unorthodox, humanist ideologies in their theatricality, and align
with dominant Christian values. Shakespeare’s reflection on his own power and career forms the
basis of Atwood’s work.

Atwood mirrors Shakespeare’s introspective tone, marrying this with her postmodern
understanding of artistic creation, representing the potentials and pitfalls of theatrical power
for individuals. Felix’s awareness of theatricality’s capacity to regain power over his own destiny,
hyperbolically exclaiming “It conjures up demons in order to exorcise them!” is Atwood’s first
integration of metatheatricality to affirm the power of the form. His further assertion of this
power in the cynical religious reference that the “text is not a sacred cow” exemplifies the
influence of Atwood’s postmodern context. This influences her belief in the kaleidoscopic
nature of narratives across temporal contexts, demonstrating the self-awareness of artifice and
unoriginality in both author and character. Despite the heightened degree of control this
theatricality affords, Atwood purposefully selects the culmination of the motif of prisons to be
Felix’s metatextual assertion “the ninth prison is the play itself”, suggesting theatricality is
inherently binding. Resonating with the values Shakespeare grasps in his final reflection, Felix’s
moment of catharsis to let Miranda “to the elements be free” reinforces his understanding of the
ultimately limited capacity of theatricality to restore balance to his own reality, through
Atwood’s metatextual reuse of the hypotext’s dialogue. Atwood dialogues with Shakespeare on
the strengths and limitations of theatre from her distinct cultural context, but ultimately mirrors
his approach.

Shakespeare’s prescription of character’s abilities to engage with theatricality reveals insights


into their interactions with the power structures in which they are held, where Atwood’s
postcolonial insight collides with Shakespeare’s ambivalent commentary on Jacobean colonial
zeal. The imbalance of theatricality associated with characters in The Tempest, chiefly Caliban
as contrasted with Ariel, demonstrates Shakespeare’s disparate commentary on his colonial
context. Shakespeare initiates a conversation surrounding colonialist expansion, evoking ideas
of the “Noble Gentleman” culturally relevant after Montaigne’s essay Of the Canibales.
Shakespeare’s choice to afford Caliban, the supposed “savage”, a partial capacity for
theatricality when describing his own island, as expressed in the vivid imagery of the “fresh
springs, brine pits, barren place and fertile”, aligns with the notion of value in primitive people’s
closeness to nature. Nonetheless, Caliban’s inherent inferiority is reinforced as he is humorously
belittled to be “as disproportioned in his manners as in his shape”, the final limitation of his
theatricality to comedic value disempowering him, reinforcing colonialist ideals. In contrast,
though also Ariel’s consistent capacity for theatricality allows him to transcend his
imprisonment, his character being presented as appearing “like a harpy” these allusions to
Classical mythology affording him a degree of reverence withheld from Caliban. The
complexities of Shakespeare’s commentary on the morality of colonial oppression
Atwood’s reimagining of Caliban’s character within Hag-seed, as the collective entity of
prisoners, creates a dissonance with The Tempest, where their engagement with theatricality
empowers them, challenging contemporary social hierarchies. Atwood first connects the power
of theatre with the prisoners in Felix's observation of their joyous "faces" watching themselves
act, symbolising how the incarcerated are typically valued based on superficial perceptions, and
the role of theatre in transcending this social limitation. Atwood's reimagining of Caliban's
colonial bindings into ostracisation of the incarcerated facilitates Felix's growing capacity to
understand the prisoners as "misinterpreted" and "dehumanised" as their involvement in the
theatrical process progresses, expressed plainly and purposefully through 3rd person limited
narration. The connection between Caliban and the prisoners is deepened by their desire for
further critical and theatrical connection with his character, “like a shadow detaching itself
from its body”, imploring postcolonial audiences to consider the enduring importance of
Caliban’s character, and a subsequent reconsideration of their role in perpetuating harmful
social hierarchies. Further escalation into metatheatricality results in a linguistic allusion to the
hypotext surrounding Caliban’s association with “the darkness”, connecting this to a “musical”
ability, where the layering of a contemporary interpretation directs the audience to consider the
potentials of investment in rehabilitation. While Shakespeare ultimately upholds the colonial
ideals of his Jacobean context, Atwood’s response collides due to its resoundingly sympathetic
approach to the subjugated.

Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Atwood’s Hag-seed approach, from their distinct contextual
paradigms, similar notions of the layered power afforded by theatricality, initiating a
conversation across time. The ever evolving role of the artist, explored through a common
feature of metatheatricality, and the restrictions placed upon disadvantaged groups by social
structures, are both considered through the dialoguing of these texts.

You might also like