English Imperialism and Representations Essay

In William Shakespeare’s The Tempest Prospero, an exiled Naples duke, and his daughter, Miranda, are marooned on a remote island with the lone indigenous[1] inhabitant, a beast man named Caliban. Through his sorcery Prospero is able to enslave Caliban, the indigene, who toils for the benefit of Prospero and Miranda, the usurping colonial powers. While it is unclear if Shakespeare intended The Tempest to mirror English imperialism during the late 16th and 17th century, there are many congruencies between events in the play and events around the time of the play’s first performance in 1611. To begin with, in order to analyze these congruencies a brief overview of England’s New World[2] exploration and colonization is necessary. Next, Gonzalo’s interest in the island and his â€Å"plantation† scheme illustrate the English imperial yearning for the New World. In addition, the first exchange between Caliban and Prospero encapsulate the conflicts of indigenous people and the colonizers in an imperial relationship. Finally, the question remains if Caliban represents specifically Native Americans or broadly represents subjugated indigenous people by English colonization. Shakespeare’s The Tempest metaphorically represents English imperialism and encapsulates English sentiments towards the New World during the time of its cultural production. During the life of Shakespeare, especially around the time of the first performance of The Tempest, Europe engaged in imperialistic activities throughout the New World. In addition, during Shakespeare’s lifetime, England’s imperialistic activities would play a larger role in the country’s interests and developments. In Alden T. Vaughan article â€Å"People of Wonder: England Encounters the New World’s Native,† Vaughan describes how English perceptions of the Native Americans developed over the course of the 16th century. The English, while interested in the New World, did not play an active role in its initial exploration: â€Å"English people in the Tudor era lagged noticeably behind other Europeans in learning about the Americas. For nearly a century, English interest in the New World was surprisingly tangential, more a matter of curiosity than of conquest and based primarily on foreign rather than on English observation† (Vaughan, â€Å"People,† 13). For a majority of the 16th century the English received second hand accounts (writings and illustrations) of the New World. However, the English did make limited forays into developing first hand knowledge of the New World. Vaughan states, â€Å"The first document contact between the English and the Indians occurred in about 1502, when Sebastian Cabot†¦brought back [three men taken from Newfoundland]† (â€Å"People,† 14), but he continues, â€Å"Not until 1530, apparently, were other Indians brought to England, and not until 1553 did an English publisher issue a book with appreciable attention to America’s inhabitants† (â€Å"People,† 14). While slow to capitalize on exploring and colonizing the New World, the English â€Å"[became] actively involved in the exploration and conquest of the [Americas] and its peoples. Thereafter, England’s image of American natives reflected uniquely English experiences and expectations† (Vaughan, â€Å"People,† 13). One of the significant imperialist ventures around the time Shakespeare wrote The Tempest was the Jamestown colony. The English founded Jamestown in 1607, four years prior to the first performance of The Tempest. While a contemporary critic can only speculate the extent which the New World tantalized and influenced the English during this time, it must have had some sway on the popular imagination of English society, including Shakespeare’s. In The Tempest, the character Gonzalo demonstrates an interest with the pristine island setting that represents English imperial yearnings. After being shipwrecked on the island, Gonzalo first notices the natural beauty of the island. He exclaims, â€Å"How lush and lusty the grass looks! How green! † (2. 1. 53). From his initial observation of the health of the island, Gonzalo’s interest in the island soon becomes opportunistic: â€Å"Had I plantation of this isle, my lord –† (2. 1. 140). When Gonzalo says â€Å"plantation,† he means colonization. Gonzalo initial admiration for the island transforms into a scheme to start a colony; he envisions his colony as the antithesis of industry, a utopic society of idleness. Gonzalo describes his â€Å"plantation† in the following manner: â€Å"I’ the common wealth I would by contraries Execute all things; for no kind of traffic, Would I admit; no name of magistrate, Letter should not be known; riches, poverty, And use of service, none; contract, succession, Bourn, bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none; No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil; No occupations; all men idle, all, And women too, but innocent and pure; No sovereignty—† (2. 1. 144-52) In Gonzalo’s colony people just lie around with no one telling them what to do; in addition, the women all stay virgins. Gonzalo’s companions quickly point out the impossibility of his Eden-like scenario. Sebastian indicates, â€Å"Yet [Gonzalo] would be king on [the island]† (2. 1. 153) to which Antonio adds, â€Å"The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the beginning† (2. 1. 154). From the comments by Sebastian and Antonio, it is clear Gonzalo’s scheme is not practical, but certainly Gonzalo’s sentiment must have appealed idealistically to English and Europeans tired of the social turmoil in the Old World. Benjamin Bertram notes in The Time is out of Joint: Skepticism in Shakespeare’s England contemporaneous to Shakespeare’s life, London’s mercantile interests, unemployment, overpopulation, and â€Å"[i]mmigrants from the province† all made colonial ventures appealing (58). Gonzalo’s fantasizing might tap into the socioeconomic conditions contemporary to the time of cultural production of The Tempest. For some Europeans the social turmoil of the Old World was a sore spot, yearning like Gonzalo for a fresh start and for a better society in the New World. French courtier Michel De Montaigne in his essay â€Å"Of the Cannibals† (1580) argues the New World inhabitants are no more barbarous or savage than the Old World denizens, suggesting things might be better in the case of the former. De Montaigne establishes, â€Å"I find (as far as I have been informed) there is nothing in that nation [the American Indians], that is either barbarous or savage, unless men call that barbarism which is not common to them† (119). De Montaigne alludes to the social problems of 16th century Europe in pointing out the hypocrisy of the Old World labeling the New World as â€Å"barbarous† or â€Å"savage. † Moreover, De Montaigne sees the New World inhabitants as closer to a natural state and less tainted by â€Å"human wit† when he observes, â€Å"It is a nation†¦that hath no kind of traffic, no knowledge of letters, no intelligence of numbers, no name of magistrates, nor of politic superiority; no use of service, of riches, or of poverty; no contracts, no successions, but common, no apparel but natural, no manuring of lands, no use of wine, corn, or metal† (120). Curiously, both Gonzalo and De Montaigne evoke the idea of unfettered idleness and non-use of wine, corn, and metal as a more natural society. Also, in painting an idyllic picture of the social items supposedly absent from the New World, De Montaigne overlooks that corn is a New World vegetable and that American Indians were familiar with the practice of fertilization, although maybe not â€Å"mannuring. † While a lot of De Montaigne’s generalizations of the New World inhabitants are arguable, he calls the readers attention to a litany of social items as evidence of the Old World tainted by â€Å"human wit. † However, De Montaigne sarcastically concludes that what the American Indians, supposedly, do with their dead is no more barbaric than what the Europeans do with the living by torturing people, stating â€Å"there is more barbarism in eating men alive than to feed upon them being dead; to mangle by tortures and torments a body full of lively sense, to roast him in pieces, to make dogs and swine to gnaw and tear him in mammocks†¦than to roast and eat him after he is dead† (120). De Montaigne’s relativistic view of transatlantic cultural practices demonstrates culture in the Old World was not necessarily better than culture in the New World. Some Europeans might have yearned for a reprieve from the rigid trapping of the Old World; the New World to them might have represented an opportunity for a fresh start, a chance to create a utopic society. The only problem was what to do about the indigenous people already there. The English public had a growing interest in the New World during Shakespeare’s lifetime, and The Tempest almost predicts the course of English imperialism would take. The exchange between Caliban and Prospero in Act 1 Scene 2 metaphorically represents the underlying conflicts plaguing indigenous people and English colonizers. Caliban represents prototypical native Other[3] as he argues against Prospero, the colonial master. Caliban’s articulation that he is the rightful owner of the island sounds like the universal grievance of many colonized people: â€Å"This island’s mine, by Sycorax my mother, / Which thou tak’st from me† (1. 2. 335-6). Caliban’s ownership stems from his mother, a witch, who bore him on the island, and this claim is reminiscent of many indigenous people who trace their social beginnings through a creation myth fixing them to the land. As Caliban goes on, his description of the initial friendly relationship he had with Prospero, parallels the prototypical dealings between indigenous people and colonizers. Often this friendly period includes an exchange of items and information between the two parties. Caliban describes the following: When thou cam’st first, Thou strok’st me and made much of me, wouldst give me Water and berries in’t, and teach me how To name the bigger light, and how the less, That burn by day and night. And then I loved thee And showed thee all the qualities o’ th’ isle, The fresh springs, brine pits, barren place and fertile. (1. 2. 337-43) Caliban attests he â€Å"showed† Prospero â€Å"the qualities† of the island, and in essence, Caliban taught Prospero how to survive on the island. This detail interestingly parallels the situation in Jamestown. B. J. Sokol in A Brave New World of Knowledge points out that â€Å"sojourning Europeans almost entirely depended upon the services of native inhabitants for material survival, and especially for food† (83). This grace period between indigenous people and colonizers, however, does not last forever. Sokol continues, â€Å"In both [The Tempest] and Virginia these services had at first been voluntarily offered [by Native Americans], then they were purchased or extorted, and finally there was refusal, resistance, and rebellion† (83). Soon the colonizer presses for more resources, more control over the land, and more control over the indigenous people: soon the indigenous people become the colonized. Caliban describes himself from the position of the colonized, â€Å"For I am all the subjects that you have, / Which first was mine own kin; and here you sty me / In this hard rock, whiles you do keep from me /The rest o’ th’ island† (1. 2. 345-7). Caliban’s central grievance is how Prospero has stripped Caliban of his autonomy and his control over the island. The central grievance for many colonized people is how the colonizer strips self-direction and control over ancestral lands from the colonized. Richard Hakluyt in his essay â€Å"Reasons for Colonization,† written in 1584 about the Virginia colonial project (125), succinctly describes the intentions of the English imperialism: â€Å"The end of this voyage [to North America] are these: 1. ) To plant Christian religion. 2) To traffic. 3. ) To Conquer. Or, to do all three† (129). As demonstrated earlier, Caliban is unhappy with his conquered status, a status Prospero confirms when he rebuts Caliban’s grievances, â€Å"Thou most lying slave† (my emphasis, 1. 2. 347). Prospero interestingly goes on to indicate his own inherent superiority and Caliban’s inherent inferiority, a privileging central to any colonial situation. Prospero states, â€Å"I have used thee, / Filth as thou are, with humane care† (1. 2. 348-9). Prospero ascribes the quality of â€Å"filth† to Caliban and â€Å"humane†-ness to his own actions. As the Hakluyt states, the first objective of the colonizer is â€Å"to plant Christian religion† or bring morality to the heathen indigenous people. Prospero’s ultimate argument for supplanting Caliban evokes the moral order the colonizer supposedly brings, for Prospero states the reason he has enslaved Caliban is because Caliban sought â€Å"to violate/ The honor of [Prospero’s] child† (1. 2. 350-1). From the perspective of the colonizer Caliban attempted to rape Miranda; however, from the perspective of the lone indigenous person Caliban attempted to propagate his culture: â€Å"O ho! O ho! Would’t had been done! / Thou didst prevent me; I had peopled else / This isle with Calibans† (1. 2. 352-4). While this relativism does not absolve Caliban of attempting to forcefully procreate with Miranda, it does not absolve Prospero of enslaving Caliban either. Unfortunately, Prospero uses one crime to justify another crime: Caliban’s attempted rape leads to his enslavement at the hands of Prospero. Furthermore, when Miranda tries to instill Caliban with a sense of guilt over his attempted rape, she states she â€Å"endowed [Caliban’s] purposes / With words that made them known† (1. 2. 360-1). However, by endowing Caliban with the language of the colonizer, Miranda has merely indoctrinated Caliban in the ideology of the colonizer in which Caliban, the colonized, occupies the margin. The colonizer’s language is a burden upon the colonized, for in order for the two groups to communicate the onus is on the colonized to learn the colonizer’s language. Caliban concurs with this onus when he says, â€Å"You taught me language, and my profit on’t / Is I know how to curse. The red plague rid you / For learning me your language! † (1. 2. 366-8). Another privileging in the imperial situation is the language and culture of the colonizer over the language and culture of colonized. For instance, Thomas Harriot spent time in the Virginia colony and wrote about the Algonquian people in Brief and True Report of the New Found Land of Virginia; his English contemporaries criticized him for learning the language of the Algonquians (Bertram 59). Bertram notes, â€Å"the English feared much more than foreign languages, as contact with foreign cultures inspired probing questions about cultural identity†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (59). Miranda’s effacement of Caliban’s language demonstrates her fear of foreign language and culture. Just as Caliban threatens Miranda’s physical sanctity, he also threatens her cultural sanctity by not communicating in the controlled discourse. Clearly, the conflict between Caliban and Prospero in The Tempest metaphorically represents the imperialistic conflicts between the colonized and the colonizer. Lastly, although Caliban can metaphorically represent the colonized Other, did Shakespeare intend Caliban to represent Native Americans specifically? Alden T. Vaughan in his article â€Å"Shakespeare’s Indian: The Americanization of Caliban† examines the history of The Tempest analysis which attempted to see Caliban as representative of Native Americans. Vaughan concludes, â€Å"If an intentionalist reading is insisted upon, and if early interpretations of Caliban are taken into account, his principal prototype was probably the European wild man of Renaissance literature and iconography† (â€Å"Shakespeare’s,† 153). In addition, Ronald Takaki offers in â€Å"The ‘Tempest’ in the Wilderness† the context surrounding the first performance of the play; also, he explains how Shakespeare’s audience might have perceived the character of Caliban. Takaki explains the following: [T]he timing of The Tempest was crucial: it was first performed after the English invasion of Ireland but before the colonization of New England, after John Smith’s arrival in Virginia but before the beginning of the tobacco economy, and after the first contacts with Indians but before full-scale warfare against them. This was an era when the English were encountering â€Å"other† peoples and delineating the boundary between â€Å"civilization† and â€Å"savagery. † The social constructions of both these terms were dynamically developing in three sites—Ireland, Virginia, and New England. (143) If Shakespeare’s audience saw Caliban as more man than monster, they likely conflated all known savage Others in their perception of Caliban. When Prospero says, â€Å"This thing of darkness [Caliban] I / Acknowledge mine† (5. 1. 275-6), Caliban could seem more monster than man, â€Å"darkness† meaning evil, or Caliban could seem more man than monster, â€Å"darkness† referring to skin color. It is unclear what Shakespeare intended; however, how people interpret Shakespeare is entirely another matter. Although Vaughan dismisses the notion Shakespeare intended Caliban to be Native American, he supports the notion that Caliban can metaphorically be seen as Native American, stating, â€Å"metaphoric readings of The Tempest have had equal legitimacy with the older literal approach† (â€Å"Shakespeare’s,† 153). There are scholars who have a stake in seeing Caliban as solely meant to be Native Americans. An immediate thread of their inquiry is Caliban’s name, which might be an anagram from a variant spelling of the word canibal. John F. Moffitt and Santiago Sebastian in their text O Brave New People: The European Invention of The American Indian describe how the lurid European popular perception quickly associated cannibalism with the inhabitants of the New World. Moffit and Sebastian describe the following: Cannibalism was also the specific subcultural attribute of the aborigines of the Other World that, as might be expected, some European illustrators found most noteworthy. In a crude woodcut†¦, a German print of 1505†¦representing the earliest European depiction of American Indians†¦cannibalism becomes the foremost collective characteristic of the newly described peoples†¦. (264-5) While Europeans, according to Vaughan, were familiar with the concept of anthropophagi, or eaters of human flesh, such people were considered mythical (â€Å"People,† 15). Vaughan goes on to note, â€Å"So prominent did some accounts make the eating of human flesh that the word cannibal, from the Carib Indians who presumably practiced the vile custom, gradually replaced the older, more awkward, term for eaters of human flesh† (â€Å"People,† 15). Curiously, if Shakespeare meant to evoke the sensational trait of cannibalism ascribed to Native Americans by Europeans in his character Caliban, he does not develop the trait in the play. Conversely, if Caliban does not represent Native Americans, certainly the European characters within the play perceive his usefulness like Native Americans during the early 17th century. The play mentions dead or alive a Native American is profitable for displaying in England. Additionally, Trinculo notes, â€Å"[the English] will / lay out ten to see a dead Indian. (2. 2. 31-32). Later, Stephano schemes to capture Caliban, or as Vaughan euphemistically refers to Native Americans kidnapped by Europeans, â€Å"coerced American envoys† (â€Å"People,† 12). Stephano states, â€Å"If I can recover him [Caliban] and keep him tame and get / to Naples with him, he’s a present for any emperor that / ever trod on neat’s leather† (2. 2. 65-7). Although Caliban might have the same display value as a Native American in England, this fact does not necessarily make Caliban Native American. Within The Tempest, there is not enough strong evidence to support the reading that Shakespeare meant Caliban to be Native American. If Shakespeare intended Caliban to represent Native American then Leslie Fieldler notes, â€Å"Caliban’s attempt on Miranda’s virtue makes him ‘the first nonwhite rapist in white man’s literature’; his freedom song is ‘the first American poem’; and when he guzzles too much of Stephano’s wine, Caliban is ‘the first drunken Indian in Western literature’ (Vaughan, â€Å"Shakespeare’s,† 148). Native Americans struggle enough with poor representation in American society; there is not a pressing need to demonstrate Shakespeare intended Caliban to be solely Native American if it results in additional derision. In contrast, Jeffrey L. Hantman in â€Å"Caliban’s Own Voice: American Indian Views of the Other in Colonial Virginia† summarizes the 20th century importance of Caliban as a universal indigenous voice, â€Å"He is African, and he is Caribbean. He has been a native of Madagascar, Quebec, Cuba, Nigeria, Kenya, and Zambia. Today, he is sometime enslaved, and psychologically dependent, but he is also a guerilla, a revolutionary, and a hero† (71). Who Shakespeare intended Caliban to be is a non-issue for those who identify with Caliban. If people find an entryway into identifying with Caliban, then certainly Caliban becomes them as much as they become Caliban. Although it would be erroneous to claim Shakespeare meant The Tempest as an allegory for English Imperialism in the New World and Caliban solely represents Native Americans, the play does metaphorically represent English imperialism and encapsulates English sentiments towards the New World during the time of the play’s cultural production. A brief overview of England’s New World exploration and colonization demonstrates how the English perception of the New World and Native Americans transformed during the development of English imperialism. Within the play, Gonzalo’s interests in the island and his â€Å"plantation† scheme illustrate the English imperial yearning for the New World and an opportunity to develop a society closer to a natural state. Furthermore, the first exchange between Caliban and Prospero encapsulate the conflicts that mar imperial relationship between indigenous people and the colonizer. Moreover, although Caliban does not represent specifically Native Americans, he can broadly represent all subjugated indigenous people. There are many congruencies between events in The Tempest and events during the late 16th and 17th century English imperialism. The Tempest is an example where Shakespeare was not necessarily predicting a future outcome but more likely articulating the trajectory of a present English course. Works Cited Bertram, Benjamin. The Time is out of Joint: Skepticism in Shakespeare’s England. Newark, NJ: University of Delaware Press, 2004. De Montaigne, Michel. â€Å"From Of the Cannibals. † William Shakespeare The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 119-20. Hakluyt, Richard. â€Å"Reasons for Colonization. † William Shakespeare The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 125-34. Hantman, Jeffrey L. â€Å"Caliban’s Own Voice: American Indian Views of the Other in Colonial Virginia. † New Literary History 23. 1 (1992): 69-81. JSTOR. Winona State University, Darrell W. Krueger Lib., Winona, MN. 3 Mar. 2007 . Moffitt, John F. , and Santiago Sebastian. O Brave New People: The European Invention of the American Indian. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press, 1996. Shakespeare, William. The Tempest. William Shakespeare The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 10-88. Sokol, B. J. A Brave New World of Knowledge: Shakespeare’s the Tempest and Early Modern Epistemology. Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 2003. Takaki, Ronald. â€Å"The ‘Tempest’ in the Wilderness. † William Shakespeare The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 140-172. Vaughan, Alden T. â€Å"People of Wonder: England Encounters the New World’s Natives. † New World of Wonders: European Images of the Americas, 1492-1700. Ed. Rachel Doggett, et al. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1992. – – -. â€Å"Shakespeare’s Indian: The Americanization of Caliban. † Shakespeare Quarterly 39. 2 (1988): 137-153. JSTOR. Winona State University, Darrell W. Krueger Lib. , Winona, MN. 3 Mar. 2007 . ———————– [1] Throughout the paper instead of simply using the term â€Å"natives,† I use indigenous people because the term â€Å"natives† carries negative imperialistic connotations. [2] I use the term New World provisionally in order to describe the dichotomy between Europe, the supposed Old World, and their realization of the Americas, which they dubbed the New World. [3] While some scholars have argued that Shakespeare intended Caliban to be representative of Native American, this intentionality is problematic. I will examine this later in the paper.