The World of the Villain: Shakespeare’s Tragi-Moral Paradigm
Keywords:
Aaron,, Tragic Villains, Shakespearean Villain, Titus Andronicus, Philosphy of TragedyAbstract
This research re-evaluates the tragic paradigms in Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus by highlighting his dramatic techniques for crafting the villain Aaron as a tragic character. Through close reading of the play, this research proves that Shakespeare used the same dramatic techniques for crafting Aaron as he used for tragedizing his heroes, especially Macbeth and Richard III. He humanized Aaron by permitting him to plead his case in self-revelation. He also effected a contrast of Aaron as the villain with the morally ambiguous world he inhabits. This prompts audience to embrace the moral complexities regarding him as a tragic figure whose change of fortune evokes pity. This new light on Shakespeare's techniques of crafting his villains has pedagogical implications for the teaching of characters with obstruse morality. Its theoretical implications necessitate reconsideration of the philosophical paradigms of tragedy in discussions of villain figures like the Joker in popular media.
References
Bartels, Emily C. (1990). Making More of the Moor: Aaron, Othello, and Renaissance Refashionings of Race. Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 4, (Winter, 1990), pp. 433-454 Published by: Folger Shakespeare Library Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2870775 Accessed: 24/07/2008 05:45
Bell, M. (2002). Shakespeare’s Tragic Skepticism. Yale University Press.
Clarence Valentine Boyer. (1914). The Villain as Hero in Elizabethan Tragedy. London, G. Routledge and Sons, limited; New York, E.P. Dutton & Co.
Brenton, Howard. (2002). “Freedom in Chaos” review of Terry Eagleton's Sweet Violence in The Guardian, Saturday 21 September 2002. Stable URL: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2002/sep/21/highereducation.news?CMP=share_btn_url
Chernaik, Warren. (2011). The Myth of Rome in Shakespeare and his contemporaries. Cambridge University Press.
Hulse, S. C. (1979). Wresting the Alphabet: Oratory and Action in “Titus Andronicus.” Criticism, 21(2), 106–118. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23102751
Jones, Eldred D. (1963). Aaron and Melancholy in Titus Andronicu. Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 2. (Spring, 1963), pp. 178-179.
Kerr, Heather. David Lemmings, Robert Phiddian (eds.) (2016). Passions, Sympathy and Print Culture: Public Opinion and Emotional Authenticity in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kewes, P. (2016). I Ask Your Voices and Your Suffrages: The Bogus Rome of Peele and Shakespeare’s Titus Andronicus. The Review of Politics, 78(4), 551–570. doi:10.1017/S0034670516000589
Lawlor, J. J. (1950). The Tragic Conflict in Hamlet. The Review of English Studies, 1(2), 97–113. http://www.jstor.org/stable/510608
Lawlor, John. (1960). The Tragic Sense in Shakespeare. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Company.
Mulvey-Roberts, Marie. (eds.) (2009). The Handbook of the Gothic. Palgrave Macmillan.
Norden, Martin F. (2007). Changing Face of Evil in Film and Television. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Poore, Benjamin. (Ed) (2017). Neo-Victorian Villains: Adaptations and Transformations in Popular Culture. Leiden/Boston: Brill Rodopi
Rhodes, N. (2003). Shakespeare the Barbarian. In J. Richards (Ed.), Early Modern Civil Discourses (pp. 99-114). Palgrave Macmillan.
Wilders, John. (1978). The Lost Garden. London: Macmillan.
