In delving into a literary exploration of Shakespeare's complete body of work, why begin with a lesser-known work like "Titus Andronicus"? It isn't as well known as the writer's more famous works, nor is it regarded as one of his better written plays (in fact quite the contrary). Well, there's a few reasons I went with this play: first of all chronologically this is one of Shakespeare's earliest efforts, and many scholars claim this was in fact his first play (though there's no sufficient evidence to solidify this theory). Also, it will provide a good contrast to later works, as it can show how Shakespeare's style became more refined over time.
But honestly, I chose this play because its fun to read. Why? Imagine Shakespeare wished to blend the over-the-top gore of Evil Dead with the cool, edgy style of Kill Bill, all in Elizabethan prose, and you begin to have an idea of what Titus is like. I always find it wildly humorous when people try to portray the Elizabethan era as a more refined, classy time in history; certainly the language has an articulation to it that seems far more intellectual to contemporary slang and style, but that era was just as enamored with edgy material, whether it be in the form of sex, drugs, intrigue, or violence, as this current generation. "Titus Andronicus" is one of the best examples of this truth.
So What is this Play About Anyway?
Titus Andronicus, to put it lightly, is a truly bizarre story of revenge. It begins with the death of a Roman Emperor, and in the wake of his demise his two surviving sons (Saturninus and Bassianus) are debating over who should step into the vacant seat. Marcus Andronicus then arrives to rain on their parade, and informs them neither of them will be the new head of royalty; instead his brother, Titus Andronicus, who had been fighting valiantly for ten years in the name of Rome against the Goths (though it isn't explained, we are to assume he was fighting the Goths at a Hot Topic right outside of Rome) and is shortly returning home. When he arrives he has with him as prisoners Tamora, Queen of the Goths (no, not Helena Bonham Carter, Tamora), her black lover Aaron, and her three sons. As a result of the losses he endured in battle, Titus takes revenge on Tamora by murdering her eldest son in front of her.
He then proceeds to reject the emperor seat and instead passes it on to Saturninus. Feeling pretty cocky, Saturninus tells Titus he wants a new wife, and that Titus' daughter Lavinia is quite the catch......but shes betrothed to Bassianus. Titus' son Mutius objects to this as well since under law Bassianus should be able to keep his arrangement with Bassianus. Titus responds by murdering his own son Mutius, simultaneously pissing off the new emperor Saturninus and proving himself to be a douchebag of a father. Saturninus retaliates by marrying Tamora instead on the spot, but Tamora calms Saturninus and pleads with him to not take action against Titus, mainly so she can screw him over royally later in the play.
From here the play progressively gets more insane. Aaron, the Moor who is Tamora's lover, organizes Bassianus' murder, and then has Lavinia raped in the forest and her tongue and hands cut off so she can't identify her attacker. The murder is framed on Titus' sons, who are scheduled to be executed. Titus pleads for his sons to be spared, and Aaron says if he allows one of his hands to be severed it will spare his sons. Well, the hand is chopped off and sent off to show as evidence.....but it is returned with his sons severed heads. Apparently Titus' actions cost him an arm and a leg.....or in this case a hand and two heads. Titus then vows violent revenge on the Goths for what has transpired.
This leads to a wealth of Jerry Springer-esque behavior. Aaron and Tamora give birth to an interracial baby (or more accurately, Tamora births it, but Aaron did help create it). In the course of the final moments of the play, Titus also kills his daughter Lavinia (his reasoning? He asks Tamora if a father should kill his daughter if she was raped, and she says yes. Wow, that's sound logic). Oh yes, and did I mention that this all happens at a dinner Titus is having with Tamora? And did I also mention that Titus cooked Tamora's sons in the pie Tamora is eating during the whole fiasco? And Titus even dressed as a freaking cook???? Actual text in the play : "Titus enters, dressed as a cook"; that Titus has a batty sense of humor. Clearly Tamora is horrified, and the play ends with a series of stabbings that is so riddled with murder after murder it looks like the closing minutes of Reservoir Dogs. Titus is dead, Tamora is dead, Saturninus the Emperor is dead, and Lucius, right hand man to much of Titus' actions and the only son who manages to survive both Titus' enemies and Titus himself, is the new Emperor. Titus is laid to rest, Tamora's body is fed to wild beasts, and Aaron is buried with his head and neck only above ground and left to starve to death, and in a very Camus moment proclaims he doesn't regret the actions that have led to his painful death, but instead only wishes he had been responsible for more sinister behavior.
My Thoughts
This play is clearly one of Shakespeare's weaker works. It is labeled as one of his tragedies, but reading it in modern times it is so filled with outlandish gore and absurd taboo-thumping plot revelations it is difficult to not be at least a little amused by it. With that said, I find the play to be highly enjoyable regardless of the weaknesses in its literary merit, and there is some intelligent concepts still to be gathered from it. The one that stands out the most to me is the concept that Shakespeare suggests if no one is fit to be ruler, natural events will diminish those unworthy for the throne until one that is worthy remains. It is clear from the poor behavior of just about every character at the start of the play none of the central characters should ever be allowed a position of authority. Saturninus and Bassianus seem inadequate for the job. Tamora and Aaron are relentlessly evil. And Titus, the supposed protagonist, may be a war hero but it is made apparent he is also too impulsive and is willing to murder own members of his family with little hesitation (which begs to ask the question as to why he would be SO bitter at the Goths for murdering his son, when he ultimately murders another son and his daughter with relative ease). At the end of the play, Lucius, the one character who seems to have some sense of honor who isn't dead, ascends to the now-vacant throne. I'm somewhat curious if this play was commentary on the royalty that was governing England at the time, as many of his plays set in the past often commented on happenings in the present in a very subtle way.
Much has been stated about the elements of racism in the play, with Aaron, the sole black character, being such an unrelentingly vile creation. While there's no doubt he is a highly unpleasant character, you need not look any further than Othello to see that Shakespeare did not seem to be making any harsh criticisms of the black community (and that isn't the case with all classic authors; love him though I do, its undeniable that H.P. Lovecraft's writings have some deplorable racial comments throughout). I happen to love Aaron as a character as well. His prose in the way of his lines in the play are among some of my favorites in the entire work, and his delight in his own menace is a blast to read.
I also love Tamora as a character. I think her willigness to do whatever it takes to ruin Titus makes her a fun character to watch, as villains tend to be more infectiously fun and exciting to perform than stock heroes. Lavinia on the other hand, seems like a stock "damsel in distress who is entirely submissive to the males in the work". I almost feel like Lavinia is supposed to be a strong contrast to the Tamora character, which in that aspect it works well.
Overall, I consider this one of the better entry-level plays for those interested in getting into Shakespeare. I think its a play that actually fits in with mainstream tastes more than most are aware of, and I think its healthy for readers to get a glimpse of a true artist before they had really reached their full potential. This play doesn't have the brilliance of something like "Hamlet" or "Macbeth", but the style and the character development that led to those stories is certainly evident in this play.
And finally, I will close out this post with a clip from the Royal Shakespeare Company's performance of "The Complete Works of Shakespeare Abridged". It is a hilarious variation on the Titus story that is very fitting and in line with a more modern form of entertainment:
No comments:
Post a Comment