Social and Feminist Influences of Austen and Shakespeare

Social and Feminist Influences of Austen and Shakespe beBy Khalil JethaIntroductionFeminist thought is a movement truly apocalyptical of a dynamic ball club. When gentlemanifested in literature, it signifies the breaking of old traditions, and the manner in which feminism is endowed reflects the attitude of the writer and society to the aforementi singled changes. In the racing shell of William Shakespeare (1564-1616), delivering charge young-bearing(prenominal)s was of marked significance as the Elizabethan era marked the strongest womanly monarchy England had ever seen. However, upon closer inspection it can be inferred that Shakespeare had an innate disregard for fe young-begetting(prenominal) authority, reflected by examining the causas Desdemona (from Othello), Kate (from The Taming of the Shrew), and Rosalind (from As You handle It). The prevailing approach in Shakespeares time was one of trepidation for the wild woman, or a fe masculine who did not conform to social expectations. The so-called womens liberationist regions merely served to lend form and dimension to virile characters and patriarchal themes. In contrast, later authors such as Jane Austen (1775-1817) use empowered characters such as Elizabeth Bennet (from Pride and Prejudice), Elinor Dashwood (from Sense and Sensibility), and Catherine Morland (from Northanger Abbey) to present feasible realities within the context of the society in which Austen lived. Working her characters into the cloth of her era, Austen used women not as a means but as her end. Unlike Shakespeares characters, whose wiles and individuality served as gimmicks to promote patriarchy, Austens characters showed women who pull rounded independently of male-dominated societies. with careful dissection and comparison of texts, Shakespeares Othello, The Taming of the Shrew (TOS), and As You Like It (AYLI), exemplify distaffs whose liberty and unorthodox qualities are eventually extinguished by overbearing male figures. Desdemona, Kate, and Rosalind are all radically different characters encompassing various prospects of the womanish psyche. Desdemona represents a rebellious daughter and cozyly insatiable wife whose wiles cannot be controlled by men, a characteristic which drives her husband insane. Kate, the shrew, is the empowered woman who grants to the power of society, forgoing her independence to operate a wife, in the process experiencing a wonderful metamorphosis instigated by her husbands subjugation. Rosalind is unique among the tierce, an omniscient whose altruist temper cedes dominance to her alter ego, Ganymede.A to a greater extent accurate description of the depot feminist applies to Austen, whose characters do not serve to alter or develop male characters. date successfully writing novels whose mends and characters fit in 18th cytosine England, Austen manages to show a different side of women, a side that is adversely affected by the character weaknesses of men. Her novels Northanger Abbey (NA), Pride and Prejudice (PP), and Sense and Sensibility (SS) present females whose pensive minds help them maneuver by the tumultuous and impractical societies in which they find themselves living. NAs Catherine Morland, PPs Elizabeth Bennet, and SS Elinor Dashwood are subtly different however, the triplet female characters share their firm morals and unwavering integrity in common. Catherine Morland finds herself growing up in a earth of first glances and vagaries, the sharp-witted Elizabeth Bennet spites the side of meat bourgeois for their pride, finding that she herself has prejudice to overcome. SS Elinor Dashwood finds that doneout her life she cannot rely solely on men though society leads her to do so all three women overcome tribulation to grow into worldly individuals, unlike Shakespeares who any compromise their personality or lives in the course of their respective texts.Shakespeares Characters and workShakespeares Othello is notabl e among Shakespeares tragedies because it presents a unique setting and character establishment. The namesake and protagonist, a Moor (a Muslim of African descent), transcends racial and religious boundaries to enter and communicate the elite of Venice. The relationships between Othello and separate Venetians communicates Shakespeares disdain for society, manifested in the villain Iago. From a feminist standpoint, however, the most prevalent victim of tragic circum military posture is not the Moor of Venice, but rather the woman he marries. Desdemona is the classic martyr for feminist ideals, encumbered both as a woman struggling to track a life with the one she loves of another race and as a woman living in a mans world, struggling to affirm her marital fidelity and personal integrity. As a feminist martyr, she is helplessly passive, can do nothing, unable to retaliate even in speech because her nature is infinitely sweet and her love absolute (Bloom 1987, p. 80). When Othello accuses her of compromising her fidelity, she is insulted and maintains her integrity by refusing to even answer such allegations. Viewed by the reader, this action is one of pride and combine. However, when she counters Othello, slightly mocking his insecurities by inquiring what he could ask her, that she should deny/Or stand so mammering on, he perceives it as her attempts at masking her experience desires to seek familiar satisfaction outside the bonds of matrimony (Act III, Scene iii, lines 69-71).Desdemona is constantly struggling with her environment. On the one hand, she fits into society as a married young woman. On the other, she presents a threat to the stability of patriarchal society. By marrying outside her race and religion, Desdemona defies custom by posing the scandal of miscegenated offspring. Confronted by her father, Desdemona vehemently rejects his concerns and contentions, favoring Othello despite the fact that she perceives a divided duty Desdemona ration ally argues in favor of Othello, professing that she should show Othello the same preference her mother showd/To Brabantio (Act I, Scene iii, lines 178-188). In her design that presupposes her assertiveness, Desdemona reveals social boundaries a woman faces first she is bound by allegiance to her father, then she grows to devote her life to her husband.From a gender issues standpoint, her identity as a sexually charged, erratic newlywed earns her little more than violent encounters with Othello and her eventual murder. Her charged sexual nature catalyze Othellos sexual anxieties through not fault of her own, as Iago manipulates Othellos marital instability to begin with (Bloom 1987, p. 81). Ultimately, it is Othellos indecision, his inability to voice his suspicions directly that further fuel his insanity and manipulation at Iagos hands Desdemona pays the ultimate price for her loyalties, both in marriage and to herself (Bloom 1987, p. 88). Throughout the play, Desdemona, like the other female characters of the play, never requires validation or reassurance of her pass judgment as a person. Othello represents the need for public respect, a reason why Iagos suggestions of Desdemonas infidelity drives him insane. Desdemona is further degraded as Othello gives Iago more assign than he does his own wife. In all his deceptions, Iagos feigned love gives him power which Desdemonas genuine love cannot counteract Shakespeare shows his audience that female character is surpassed in importance even by spurious male camaraderie (Bloom 1987, p. 91). A victim of male circumstance, Desdemona is tragically caught between the Iagos insecurities as a soldier surpassed by an outsider and Othellos insecurities as an outsider seeking social acceptance. Othellos marriage to Desdemona preyifies her Iago spites Othello for marrying Desdemona as it completes what Iago perceives as Fates ungodliness against his station in life. Othello, in turn, is never sated, as his marriage to Desdemona should establish consolidated his power as a man instead, he resents Desdemonas confidence and the power that even a suggestion of her infidelity asserts over him. The feminist criticism of the institution of love revolves around loves existence as a means of control when Othellos male autonomy is compromised and he begins to speculate on his nature as secondary to his wifes sexual power, he goes insane, ironically smothering her to death using the same sheets used during the night of their marriages consummation. Desdemonas erstwhile functional marriage serves as the proverbial straw that breaks the camels back, as Othello finds the scorn due the cuckold almost as difficult to bear as the loss of Desdemona (Bloom 1987, p. 90). Shakespeares introduction of Desdemona as a pawn in Iagos manipulation can be presented as his disdain with societys misogyny. However, Desdemonas portrayal as the helpless victim serves to further discredit female position.While the tragic death of Othello surpasses Desdemonas in literary importance, Desdemona becomes more tragic a character than her estranged husband. She has done nothing to earn the contempt of her husband, whose murderous intent and eventual suicide serve as the solely means of self-validation. She has become an object in Othellos self-sacrifice, nothing more than another factor in Shakespearean tragedy. In his portrayal of Desdemona, Shakespeare may get down been able to present a feminist case for the station of women in society and their abuses at the hands of men. But Othello is not made the villain Iago is the person portrayed as destroying a life, not in Desdemonas passing but in Othellos fall from grace. Desdemona, though a possible case for the argument of feminist characters in Elizabethan theatre, is ultimately too passive to be a feasible feminist. Had she asserted herself and called Othellos insecurity, her husbands pride may have been compromised, but it would serve as a means for him to i dentify the primary culprits at hand. That Desdemona confronted her father and not her own husband plays the feminist argument into discredit marriage, not self-sufficiency, was Desdemonas final goal. She sought neither to validate herself nor her sense of self-worth, but rather chose a life of devotion to the Moor she loved. In essence, she presented herself as a victim from the very beginning.Unlike other Shakespeare plays, TOS can be taken both in its historical context and simultaneously be use to the modern social constrictions women face. In its historical context, the play presents a comical obstacle standing between a man and the object of his affection. In a more contemporary setting, however, TOS is a story of one mans conquest over a womans social and emotional independence and the domestication of a free spirit. The aforementioned setting studys sport out of breaking Kates will and reveals a theoretical rebuttal of radical feminism.As TOS unfolds, the audience sees Kat e as a social pariah, unfit for society as she spurns the institution of marriage and the idea of love. An independent, sharp-tongued woman, she is demonized by the local male population who sees her as a barricade preventing courtship of the demure, younger, more favorable Bianca. It is not completely dismissible a notion that Shakespeare wrote TOS with the intent of exposing the farce of certain types of marriage. Shakespeare may have juxtaposed the stubborn, resilient, and often violent Kate with the desirable Bianca to show the duplicity of social marriages. In his article entitled The Taming of the Shrew Mocks the World Mercantile Marriage, Gareth Lloyd Evans describes the world of TOS as mercantile to the end, showing how even at the conclusion of its biggest transaction (the marriage of Bianca), the gambling element remains (Marvel 2000, p. 69). In the end, Kate becomes docile to the will of Petruchio, divergence Bianca flabbergasted at her sisters change of heart. Kates rad ical change from self-avowed hater of all things love and marriage hence becomes the locus of the question of her nature as a feminist character was Shakespeares portrayal of Kate as a virulent misanthrope a comic device or a social message? If Shakespeare intended to use Kate in the same manner with which he employed the character of Desdemona in Othello (that is, as a means to the plots end), then TOS takes on an entirely new committal. Using Kate as a comic device makes female independence the object of scorn and ridicule, and Shakespeares tone toward feminist issues would be dismissive and, condescension not withstanding, misogynist. As the object of a social statement, Kate would become a testament to the futilities of female cynicism and rejection of society.Examining Kates transition lends credibility to the said stance. If Shakespeare was a feminist writer, creating Kates character with the conclude of communicating a message to society at large, the shrew universe tamed would be Petruchio. Instead, Petruchios taming of Kate is an act of instilling humility in a spoiled, egotistical, well-fed, rich girl and forcing her to accept a will other than her own (Marvel 2000, p. 147). The feminist standpoint would rather be one of prevailing contempt for Petruchio, a self-avowed social climber whose desire to marry Kate stems from expansion of his familys wealth. Like Desdemona, Kates independence and strength as a female character are stifled by marriage unlike Desdemona, Kates marriage to the hooligan Petruchio is one with ulterior motive. Kates wedding is a travesty and a sacrilege, marred by Petruchios intoxication and unruly garb (Marvel 2000, p. 152). Almost suggestive of Petruchios goal of taming the shrew, he further suppresses Kate by kissing her at the will of I will not (Marvel 2000, p. 152). Ironically, the kiss represents more than the overbearing will of an intoxicated groom. The significance of pacifying Kates ill will with a kiss is utterl y symbolic of her contentions toward TOS opening. Standing at the altar, her final cry is one against a life of pacification and subjugation under the supremacy of a husband. The actual taming does not begin until after marriage, a further explanation of Kates disdain.What is more intriguing about Kates taming is the means in which she is subdued. Following her outrage at the spectacle of the wedding, Petruchio denies Kate food, insisting that it is for her own good. Later, he denies her access to the ornate clothing provided by the tailor. Before leaving for their return to Padua, Kate implores her husband that they make haste, as they are late. Petruchio sputters that he will not go, and that she is reading the time incorrectly Petruchio condescendingly states that whenever they get off it will be at what oclock he says it is (Act IV, Scene iii, line 189). The means denied Kate in her taming are food, clothing, and free will. Kate begins to rely on her husband for survival, warmt h, and freedom of motion. Essentially, Petruchio becomes not further her husband but also her guardian, leaving Kate with the independence of a small child. It is almost as if he is brainwashing her, torturing her by keeping her hungry, clothed in what way he sees fit, restricting her motion and even forcing her sense of time under the fetters of his will. Shakespeares only message here(predicate) is not simply the futility of female emancipation, but the repercussions of atypical female action. Kate is portrayed as earning her fate through her belligerence and the days she spent terrorizing society with her outbursts and isolated violence. The more a woman strays from the path society sets out for her, the harsher the punishment in an inescapable future marriage.The only negating aspect to the misogyny of Shakespearean self-assertion is Kates nature. though stubborn, Kate is intelligent, too in her apparent surrender to her husbands mad will, Kate realizes she can take the wind completely out of his sails, rifle his weapon of its power, even turn it against himtame him in his own humor (Marvel 2000, p. 52). By entertaining his strange whims, Kate can turn the tides against Petruchio, calling his bluff, so to speak. later on all, Petruchios madness is forced, as he is trying to irk his wife and break her composure. As the entertaining, submitting wife, Kate also tames Petruchio she conceivably leaves him no reason to be as erratic as the wife whose will he set out to break. In this sense, Kate is Petruchios equal, and in their social obscurity, they are made acceptable through the bonds of marriage.On the surface, Rosalind is socially acceptable, like most of Shakespeares characters. She is almost altruistic, exuding transcendent knowledge about life and love. She chastises Silvius for his devotion to Phoebe, yet swoons for Orlando and does not grow embittered at the prospect of love in the manner TOS Kate does. As one of the more engaging characters of the play, Rosalind, like Othellos Desdemona, goes against her uncles wishes in the pursuit of her love, in this case manifested by Orlando. Unlike Desdemona, however, Rosalind is more congenial, coaxing her uncle by imploring his forgiveness. Rosalind testifies to Duke Frederick that if she offended him in her affections for Orlando, it was never so much as in a thought unborn (Act I, Scene iii, lines 49-50). As a lady and a daughter, Rosalind is the ideal woman to show society. She is polite, reserved, and wise beyond her years. Her personality, however, shifts to a point unparalleled by other Shakespearean characters. Rosalinds power as a possible feminist character is best exemplified in her fundamental interactions while cross-dressed as Ganymede (Ganymed). After she assumes the identity of the male Ganymede, Rosalinds character unfolds as one who is both enticing and mysterious, alluring to the romantic, erotic, and homoerotic aspects of theatre. She begins to take a more aggre ssive stance in her interaction with Orlando, preventing him from kissing her despite her desire, insisting that he should speak first (Act IV, Scene i, lines 69-74).As mentioned previously, men were exclusive actors as women were not permitted entry into the world of Elizabethan theatre. Homoeroticism was naturally an unavoidable subtext to any Shakespearean play. The choice of the Greek mythological figure of Ganymede is indicative of Shakespearean homoeroticism. In Greek myth, Ganymede was a ward boy with whom Zeus (Jove) fell in love. Rosalind on an Elizabethan stage would therefore be a male actor cross-dressed as a woman, who in the play cross-dresses as a homosexual man beguiling and perhaps slightly manipulating the unsuspecting Orlando. When taken into this context, As You Like It reveals new depth and content. Michael Shapiro delves into cross-gender devices in his book Gender in Play on the Shakespearean Stage Boy Heroines Female Pages. Rosalind adopts three separate a nd distinct layers of identityRosalind, Ganymede, and Rosalind (Shapiro 1994, p. 119). The sole purpose behind her schizophrenic metamorphosis is her love for Orlando, a man she has barely met. The first Rosalind is the vibrant character attracted to Orlando. Ganymede serves as a mentor to Orlando, a bestower of advice in her assumption of Ganymedes identity, Rosalind alters her own nature as a woman living in a patriarchy as she takes the role of a mentor, giving man-to-man advice to Orlando on the behavior of wives (Shapiro 1994, p. 124). This ascension to egalitarian status with Orlando is reflective of the first feminist objective to attain total social equivalence with men.The third Rosalind is the one who acts according to the advice she gives Orlando as Ganymede, and incidentally is the most intriguing of the three identities. As Ganymede, Rosalind has a control over Orlandos emotions and thoughts. She can stoop him whichever way she so pleases by suggesting, as a man, how Orlando ought to behave or react to women as wives. As the third Rosalind, she can indirectly affect Orlando by either corroborating through her actions any advice she gave as Ganymede, or further discredit Ganymede by acting opposite. Rosalind ultimately has the choice of how she wants Orlando to accept her. Rosalind can covet Orlandos trust and affections as a man, and in doing so mold him to her liking so that she may later win him over as a woman. Ganymedes presence as a trusted friend of Orlando is significant as it is perhaps the only way Rosalind can enjoy equality. This aspect of her cross-dressing is wholly non-feminist in its nature. From a radical feminist standpoint, there should be no gender labels, in which case Rosalind has failed to identify herself as such as she is forced to become a man. From a liberal feminist standpoint, gender labels can exist and differences should be respected. In the liberal feminist mindset, Rosalind has failed to gain equality as she is o nly given credibility as a man the nature of the advice Orlando seeks regarding the nature of women as wives can only be trusted as coming from a man.Equally plausible is that Rosalind is forced to act the way she does to get what she wants. Rosalind may have taken the initiative to achieve her goals no matter the cost of identity. Furthermore, her male identity had the potential to liberate her female identities as Ganymede, Rosalind had the power to dictate to Orlando the manner in which women should be approached. Shakespeare had the opportunity to relay a message through his cross-dressing female hero, but failed to endeavor to such communication. though working within the limits of his society, Shakespeare did not address issues through Rosalinds characters in the manner Austen does with her female protagonists. While heavy-handed techniques are not necessary, Shakespeare only flirted with the notion of empowered females as it augmented the situational comedy in AYLI.Shakespear es characters cannot be accurately described as feminists, even with respect to the social norms they challenge in his works. The Webster Dictionary defines feminism as the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.Though her marriage to Othello was one of controversy, it was one that tested the boundaries of race and religion-relations. Miscegenation, not misogyny, was addressed in their relationship. Desdemona was perpetually a victim whose life rested solely in the hands of her insane husband. For Desdemona to be a feminist or even have feminist characteristics, she would have picked up a sword and joined Othello in the military. The Venice in which she lived only economically endowed her with a dowry, which would then be paid upon marriage. From a social standpoint, Desdemona may have been able to petition her fellow Venetians for help when she suspected Othellos violent tendencies. However, she chose to leave her destiny in the hands of her husband, no matter the outcome.Kate, though constantly haranguing the general public for the institution of love, does not take her stance for feminist reasons. The traditional feminist attack on the institution of marriage focuses on marriage as forcing certain roles on women (motherhood and subjugation under a husband in particular). thither is no indication that Kate took any of these stances more plausible is that she is embittered by the fact that society forces marriage and not why it is forced.Rosalind is perhaps the strongest character of the three in question. That she is assertive has little to do with her identity as a feminist character. While there is little doubt that she is a hero and one of the foci of AYLI, and still less speculation on the strength of her character, she still does not actively seek political or economic equality. There is no mention of her stance on women in society. The most feminist aspect of Rosalind is her ability to transcend gender. In cross-dressing, s he reflects new treatment by Orlando. Though not more positive or negative than her treatment when Orlando acknowledged Rosalind as a woman, as Ganymede, Rosalind shows that Orlando approaches her with similar respect. Rosalinds sexual empowerment does idealise her to a certain degree it is as if she has the power to evoke feelings in men that would erstwhile not exist.With the exception of TOS Kate, Shakespearean females are usually undisturbed individuals who contribute to the development of a plot or male character. However, all three Shakespearean characters can be described as heroes to a degree. warble Pearson defines a hero in her book The Female Hero in American and British Literature as one who departs from convention and thereby either implicitly or explicitly challenges the myths that define the status quo (Pearson 1981, p. 16).Desdemona, though sexually more forward than other Shakespearean women, is at home in her surroundings. She is a born Venetian of high stature, and though she keeps her relationship with Othello secret, she has no conflicting interests in Venice. Her marriage to an outsider challenges the myth of requisite same-race marriage. Othello, on the other hand, is a man of different race and religion, struggling to make a name for himself in a new land. He is not nearly as self-assured as Desdemona, his physical differences weighing on his conscience and costing him peace of mind. Where Desdemona has made peace to accept her own death (she requests the wedding sheets be primed(p) on the bed), Othello is never composed to the measure Desdemona exudes. In short, Desdemona acts as foil to Othello in every way their union is one that naturally causes friction, without which Iago would never be able to manipulate the situation.Kate and Petruchio are very unique among Shakespearean couples though Petruchio is hardly a hero by the Shakespearean norm of gallantry, he is the man who tames the shrew. However unorthodox a hero, Petruchio is the perfect match for Kate in his gruffness, his unkempt demeanor, and his social shortcomings. The two have only their resilient personalities in common Kate is more polished and presentable than her wily husband, but the two both have a natural contempt for life that can only be squelch by their marriage. Their relationship is one of servant and master, the power balance shifting constantly. Though Kate detested the pandering of her past suitors, her attraction for Petruchio budded because he was precisely the opposite of what society (and her father) wanted for her. To keep her interest piqued, Petruchio naturally appealed to Kate and had to maintain a certain air about himself. Following their marriage, Kate became subservient, accepting Petruchios odd tendencies and orders to pacify him (he never would have expected a docile Kate, and receiving one shifted manipulation back into Kates hands). Though their personalities are strong, societys favor puts the advantage in to Petru chios hands as in addition to a wife he also gained financial means. Kate is merely a means to an end for Petruchio, whereas Petruchio is the only means for Kate to attain what society expects of her.Rosalind and Orlando are another anomaly, though in the end, Rosalind exists more for Orlando than vice versa. Cross-dressing aside, Rosalinds sweet temperament and witty rapport make her the ideal mate. Orlando, with the exception of his privileged birth and notable wrestling skills, is rather normal in every respect. Rosalind exists only to marry Orlando, and while her transsexual tendencies are a force with which to be reckoned, her antics merely delay what an inevitable relationship and existence. Her previously mentioned teasing was a perfect metaphor for a life whose direction she could not control.Shakespeare as a FeministWhether in tragedies or comedies, Shakespeares female characters vary greatly in their nature and the social mold they fit. presumption the Elizabethan era in which Shakespeare lived, most of his more wily and energetic female characters went against the grain of society. However, most all of Shakespeares more powerful female characters occurred in comedies, begging the question of whether or not they could be taken seriously as characters that could exist outside the realms of stage narrative. That these strong female characters exist only in comedies does not question any aspect of society. In keeping with his comedies humorous undertones, Shakespeare may very well have made his female characters strong because their existence would be laughable. After all, Elizabethan stage actors were all male women were never allowed in theatre. Furthermore, the tendencies of comedic so-called feminist characters are to either succumb to societys restraints, or to be smothered by overpowering male dominance. The women of Shakespeares plays are usually the ones who change, often when they become married. Katherina, for example, succumbs to marriage, s ettling for Petruchio, a drunkard whose ostentatious personality and strong sense of deviance outweighs her own rejections of conformity and domestication. Her resilience goes unrewarded, and she once again becomes a subservient figure in the archetypal patriarchy of the time. A large reason behind female suppression in Shakespearean plays was also public acceptance. No patron, male or female, would return to Shakespeares productions if the prevailing themes were the emancipation of women. Female assertion was a taboo, a reason why it was so popular in comedies. The greatest aspect of comedies is the aversion of tragedy negative happenstances that reach fruition are tragedies, and the same happenstances that are avoided are comedies. As the defining characteristic of a comedy, the resolution of a problem is mirrored in the pacification of said comedys female rogues. The strength of women in Shakespeares plays, therefore, is a literary tool used to build up the glory and triumph of m en and the patriarchies in which they exist.What cannot be dismissed, however, is the context in which Shakespeare wrote the plays. Speculation of his historical surroundings denote Shakespeares inclination to pander to leadership, in this case, Englands greatest female monarch, Elizabeth I. Though society was largely patriarchal, the monarchy led by queen who did not marry. It is not completely flimsy that Shakespeare pandered to the female monarch, emulating her reluctance to wed in his The Taming of the Shrew. Queen Elizabeth, after all, did not marry, nor would she fit into societys mold of the typical woman. Shakespeares characters were daring for the time, as they also broke the mold of Elizabethan women. Unlike Queen Elizabeth, however, the strong female characters of Shakespeares plays were exemplified by their ability to manipulate, control, and overpower men. In many ways, the strength of women served as a means to make women antagonists. For example, Desdemonas power ex isted to drive Othello mad with her unchecked sexuality. She exhibited a power over men, one that would not be contained or controlled by men. Though Iago manipulated the characters of Othello, it was extreme jealousy that drove the plays namesake mad, causing him to kill himself and the woman he could not control. The message conveyed in Othello could be construed to be a foreboding one to women in society and the men that dominated them losing control of women and compromising male dominance leads to tragic consequences.Shakespeares Rosalind was unique, different from Desdemona and Katherina in her omniscience and enlightened state. Though the complexity of her emotions and thoughts is unrivaled in As You Like It, she takes on a darker side, one of manipulation and social subversion. Though laudable, her social deviance still leaves the play wanting for a male counterpart to complement her. She cannot criticize the respective stations of men and women for too dour without succumb ing to loves fetters herself. It is as though Shakespeare is communicating the futility of female nonconformity. Shakespeares penultimate message in comedic female characters is one of concession. Though women are invite to mock and society and live outside its bounds, they all must eventually grow into wives and docile domesticates