by Jordana Jampel (Circle 5)
With her hair about her ears, as the stage directions put it, Queen Elizabeth comes into the room in which The Duchess of York and Clarence’s son and daughter are debating Clarence’s death. Elizabeth tells them that King Edward just died, presumably from heartbreak over accidentally murdering Clarence, to which The Duchess of York responds with, “Ah, so much interest I have in your sorrow/ As I had title in thy noble husband./ I have be wept a worthy husband’s death,/ And lived with looking on his images./ But now two mirrors of his princely semblance/ Are cracked in pieces by malignant death, And I for comfort have but one false glass,/ That grieve me when I see my shame in him” (2.2.47-54). The Duchess’ heartfelt response sparks a not-so-family conversation about the deaths of Edward and Clarence, but the way the conversation pans out is, in my opinion, extremely un-family like. There is a lack of empathy between one another even though each person in the room lost a family member, and nonetheless, they were Royal brothers. Instead of condoling their grandmother, Clarence’s two children turn to Elizabeth and tell her how they will not grieve with her because she hadn’t grieved with them when they found out their father died. The children’s lack of response to their grandmother greatly contrasts the way the Duchess responds to Elizabeth, “Ah, so much interest I have in your sorrow” (2.2.47).
As I continue to read this part of the play over again, (it might be one of my favorite pieces of literature I’ve read thus far) I wonder if this is an accurate depiction of the unemotional way the Royal family engaged with one another, or if Shakespeare, for the sake of drama, elaborates the animosity between the York family members. As Elizabeth and Clarence’s children continue to exclaim their individual woes about their lost loved ones without the care of the other brother’s mourners, The Duchess of York interrupts the three family members and in an eloquent, riddle like manner, expresses to them how she has lost not one loved ones, but two: “She for an Edward weep, and so do I;/ I for a Clarence weep, so doth not she./ These babes for Clarence weep, and so do I;/ I for Edward weep, so do not they./ Alas, you three on me, threefold distressed,/ Pour all your tears. I am your sorrow’s nurse,/ And I will pamper with lamentation” (2.2.79-88). Instead of trying to compete with Elizabeth and the children in who is the most upset, The Duchess urges bitter kin to confide in her, which serves as evidence of the strength that lies within her. The Duchess doesn’t reprimand or criticize Elizabeth and the children in the same manner they were speaking to each other, instead she soothes the high tension by acting as the only family-like family member of all the York family. With this in mind, maybe Shakespeare intended for a very specific familial subtext in this particular scene; Shakespeare seems to be emphasizing the importance of not necessarily familial relationships, but filial relationships. I am not too sure of the significance of filial relationships within the play, but I do know that The Duchess of York is the only York family member who actually seems to be a real, emotional person.
Jordana,
I really like the context of your blog post. I would have never thought about the familial relationships of either the present day Royal family or the Yorks in Shakespeare’s work. Now that I am thinking about it, I really do wonder how the present day Royal family is within their own interactions. Do they act like a normal family who is warm and sit down to dinner to talk about their days? Or are they rigid in their communications? This is true in the York family as well. The family does not seem to be warm and loving towards one another, especially not towards Richard. I guess the way in which people viewed disabilities was different in those times, but looking at it with the perspective of somebody who has worked with kids and adults with special needs for five years shows it in a different light. Even though we know that Richard is evil and should not be treated kindly, I hope that they would not view his deformity as a trait to look down upon. The Yorks seem emotionless in every aspect, especially when it comes to death, and I completely agree with you in that The Duchess of York seems to be the only truly kind and emotional person.
Jordanna,
You bring up something that while I knew was in the play, I never paid as much attention to, being the relationships between the family members of the royal family. After having read your post, and by extension remembering the scenes you mentioned, it makes me think that yes Shakespeare must have dramatized and exaggerated much of the interactions and grief among the women, I’m of the belief that in an environment that they live in, I doubt that too many tears would be shed. While I could be thinking too fictionally, especially with me about to use Game of Thrones as an example, I think it’s appropriate considering the Yorks and Lancasters were the inspirations for the overarching plot. With Game of Thrones, while there are many deaths, those that could potentially be in line for the Iron Throne are hardly mourned, and I think this mentality applies to any character vying for a position of power. There are going to be deaths, and at best some characters will see this as an acceptable loss so long as SOMEONE sit on the throne.
I completely agree with your post Jordana. There does not seem to be a lot of family value anywhere in this play. Clearly Richard doesn’t care about his family at all, but even the others do not seem to have a strong sense of family. They are more concerned with the throne and revenge on their own family. For instance when the grandsons don’t grieve with Margaret because she didn’t grieve with them is simply spiteful. This is not how a normal family should function. Margaret does seem to be the character with the most respect and emotion for her family. It is good that at least one family member does in this crazy, twisted group.
Jordana,
I am glad that you addressed this part of the play. I was a bit befuddled by this interaction between the children, Elizabeth and the Dutchess of York. It seems as though each character, even the children (as one) only really feel sorry for themselves for their losses. Your ponderings as well as those from a few of the comments above do leave us to wonder what the current royal family interactions are like when reading this uncomfortable interaction. I must agree that the Dutchess of York does take on quite a responsible and somewhat caring role in comforting Elizabeth and the children. Although, even her words seem righteous when she speaks to Elizabeth and the children. I think family ties and relationships in this play are something worth observing because they are so unlike the family relationships that we may all be used to, even in our own different ways. These relationships seem forced, uncomfortable, and in Richard’s case — lethal. A royal family is not something I would ever want to be a part of.
Jordana,
Awesome post! Although I did find the part about Clarence’s two children not grieving because of Elizabeth extremely odd, I did not think much more about the lack of emotion the York family portrays. This actually reminds me of Janet’s post from this week. She talked about the language used towards Richard throughout the play and how it could be a probable reason to why Richard is as mean as he is. Specifically how his mother treated him. Yeah, one could argue he deserved it, but she, and the rest of his family, could be the reason he is the way he is.
Jordana,
I’m glad you decided to explore this scene because I also found it quite odd, however, not really surprising. In general, if a family had faced so much loss, I would like to think there would be empathy and support among one another. However, the Yorks, and perhaps a lot of royal families, seem to be filled with a sense of distrust and unease for one another. Let’s not forget that Edward was willing to have his brother executed due to rumors that he could be treasonous. Elizabeth was well aware of Richard’s disdain for her family. Lastly, the Duchess of York does not exactly cross me as the sweet grandmother/comforting mother-in-law type. She openly dismisses her son, Richard, refusing to take any blame for what he has become. To put it simply, that family has some issues and their coldness to one another in their grief was to be expected.
Jordana,
I think that most royal families are depicted as having issues with each other simply because of lineage and parentage. Before the modern era, marriages for power or monetary reasons were usually the norm and because of this, familial discontent—that is to say being upset over a long period of time at another family member for causing such a situation to occur was not uncommon. Political power, being such a finite resource, often caused relatives to feud and war with each other with complete disregard for the actual connections tying families together. In this way, many families were torn asunder because of their aspirations regarding complete control.
In regards to your view on personal relationships within the royal family, I do agree with you wholeheartedly that (for their own kinsmen in particular) they show a shocking lack of empathy. That said, one would think that family that close-knit–spending that much time together–would feel (at the very least) some sort of sorrow at the passing of an uncle or grandson or the like. Sure it’s possible for some characters to be a little heartless–though Richard seems to be taking care of that–but there is something very inhuman about the way these characters are portrayed. My theory is that in writing for common lower to middle class citizens, Shakespeare wanted to reflect how they would feel about the monarchy. In fact, this is how we in the modern era also view those in power: celebrities, politicians, artists. All of a sudden, with fame comes a loss of humanness perceived by the public. So if someone in the family were to die, there would be less talk about mourning the tragedy by those commoners who did not even know the deceased and more talk about the new power balance–who is next in line for the throne, was foul play involved, etc.