Shakespeare deliberately names this play The Winter’s Tale for a specific reason. These lines spoken by Mamillius directly outline the reasoning for the titling of this play:

MAMILLIUS: A sad tale’s best for winter: I have one

Of Sprites and goblins. (Act II, scene I, lines 33-34)

Here we see the use of the phrase “winter’s tale” and Mamillius says its a way to pass the time. The term “winter’s tale” is a fairy tale used as a way to transition out of the cold month of winter and is usually an improbable story in which the natural laws that govern this world do not apply. In many ways, the entire play is a fairy tale where things happen that really don’t seem to make any sense. Take for instance the scene in which Antigonus is consumed by a bear and the ship of that brought Antigonus to shore sinks by some sort of unseen force to punish Antigonus:

CLOWN: end of the ship, to see how the sea flap-dragoned
it: but, first, how the poor souls roared, and the
sea mocked them; and how the poor gentleman roared
and the bear mocked him, both roaring louder than
the sea or weather. (Act III, Scene, III lines 104-108)

Here, an improbable cosmic justice is being enacted upon Antigonus and the rest of the followers of Leontes’ madness. When Antigonus is consumed by a bear, the reason it is almost comical is exactly because this is a winter’s tale, rooted in fiction, a fairy tale to pass the time. Interestingly enough though when I googled the bear in the bible I discovered that the bear is not only a maternal figure, but also that it would come down from the mountains in the winter and terrorize villages. In 2 Kings 2:24 two she bears came out of the wood and tore forty-two children apart for mocking the prophet Elisha, fitting that Shakespeare would include a bear in this fairy tale, which takes place during the winter. So the bear in the bible is synonymous with child sacrifice, but interestingly enough, we see the bear attack Antigonus instead of the child. This act of the bear eating Antigonus is exactly the opposite of the events of the bible, where the bear eats the children for mocking the prophet Elisha, instead, the bear ignores the child and eats Antigonus. The bear could also be the antithesis of the pastoral genre, because the bear puts an end to the life of the sheep, a symbolic end to the relationship of Leontes and Polixenes, the end of their lives as: “twinn’d lambs that did frisk i’ the sun,” symbolically represented by the bear, a symbol of the winter in the Bible, when bears would come down from the mountains during winter to terrorize villages, so too did a bear end the relationship of Leontes and Polixenes, due to the egregious accusation made by Leontes against Polixenes of adultery, a foul sin in the Christian tradition. This sort of cosmic justice against Antigonus is like the hand of God, but considering this is supposed to be a fable or fairy tale to pass the time and transition out of the cold month season of winter, is Shakespeare considering the existence of God?

Historically, it was Julius Caesar who by the might of his resolve and determination, took over the Republic of Rome against the order of the senators, as he thought he would make a better ruler than the senators and Rome’s own people and he was right. Under Casear Rome expanded to dominate most of Europe in the 1st century. It was his ambition to conquer even more of the world that made him a target of the assassins who called themselves “Liberators.” In my opinion, the death of Julius Caesar was undoubtedly a tragedy as Caesar, judging by the evidence of his reign at the time, was a man of people of Rome and sought to only make Rome bigger, and where is the fault in that. Sure Caesar had ambition, but if ambition is a crime then we should all be thrown in prison! The event of the assassination of Julius Caesar was one that prompted our good friend Shakespeare to write a play about the death of a great leader, who went against the power of the senate to a conquest of his rivals that proved that Rome was not a power to be defiant to. Shakespeare presents us with the question of whether of not monarchy is a correct form of government or a republic in which the people are represented and the people in power need consent from the governed. I think that through the entire play, Shakespeare is not making a case for either, but he is simply displaying the ramafications of taking the law into one’s own hand and being a traitor. Shakespeare seems to say, through the murder of Julius Caesar that Brutus and his gang of conspirators, didn’t have the right to take another life and when should they. Under Caesars rule, the people of Rome were safe, protected and were genuinely happy under Caesar. Historically, the senators feared Caesar precisely because he was a man of the people, especially popular among the poor. I think this is portrayed somewhat well in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar  in Antony’s speech in act III when Antony tries to insight the people to rebel against the traitorous dogs Brutus and his Liberators:

In Shakespeare’s Richard III, the character of Richard is one who has been wronged by nature, undoubtedly left unfinished, born prematurely to a mother that never loved him. Richard was also cheated out of the throne from the very beginning, which accounts for his lashing out at the world. Richards first speech highlights his anger with the world that he never belonged to:

The character of Iago in Shakespeare’s Othello is certainly an evil character, but to label him as simply a symbol of evil or a vice archetype is doing an injustice to Iago, who is a human being, with as much wills and desires as the rest of the characters in Othello. In Fred West’s article Iago The Psychopath West discusses the fact that Shakespeare actually has been critically renowned by many contemporary psychologists for his studies into the more bizarre workings of the human personality. In fact, during the English Renaissance, the public became very interested in the study that contemporary science has dubbed: “psychology.” Therefore, to simply blanket Iago as a pure evil would be too easy and would discredit Shakespeare as the genius he truly was. Iago has been likened by West to be strikingly similar to the character of Aaron in Titus Andronicus as the: “stock character of evil,” as West calls Aaron. West believes that the qualities and characteristics of Aaron in Shakespeare’s: Titus Andronicus predicts the character of Iago in Othello, but Iago instead is not that of a “true evil” stand in, and just like Aaron has many human desires and wishes just like Iago. The two characters also seem to have no religious affiliation and could be a stand in for the Devil, in these lines we see Aaron’s anti religious sentiments:

LUCIUS. What shall I swear by? Thou believest no good:                                                             That granted, how canst thou believe an oath?

AARON. What if I do not? As indeed I do not;                                                                                   Yet, for I know thou art religious,                                                                                       And hast a thing within thee called a conscience.                                                                                                                       (V.i.71-75)

Compare Aaron’s anti religious feelings with that of Iago’s in the final act of Othello:

IAGO. Demand me nothing. What you know, you know.                                                   From this time forth I never will speak a word.

LODOVICO. What, not even to pray?

From these examples we can clearly see both of these characters’ aversion to religion, Aaron even favoring the conscience over morality. This would suggest a Machiavellian type character who favors practicality over morality visible in both Aaron and Iago. What then becomes interesting is the lack of remorse that Iago feels, he doesn’t even see his actions as being evil or wrong, whereas Aaron in fact does understand that the evil he has committed is wrong when he says, “If there be devils, would I were a devil” (V.i.147). Here Aaron is wishing that he could be a devil and cause even more torment to the characters of the play. A literary critic by the name of A.C Bradley, West writes, also came close to diagnosing Iago as a psychopath in the turn of the twentieth century, before the term psychopath was even discovered, and made a definitive mental disorder by Harvey Cleckley in his study of the psychopath called: The Mask of Sanity published in 1941. It seems that unlike Aaron recognizing his own conscience, Iago has a guiltless nature unable to recognize the evil he has committed to Desdemona and Othello. This guiltless nature is one of the prime symptoms of psychopathy.

West, Fred. “Iago the Psychopath.” South Atlantic Bulletin, vol. 43, no. 2, 1978, pp. 27–35. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3198785.

In William Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night, there is a running theme of disorder all based around the celebration of the twelfth day of Christmas, where in Shakespeare’s time, everyone was free to do what they wished. These celebrations often consisted of men crossing dressing and vice versa, women dressing as men. In the play, we have this same characteristic of the twelfth night celebration represented in the character of Viola, who, to get closer to the Duke Orsino, disguises herself as a male eunuch, in order to account for her high pitched voice characteristic of the female sex. All the while, the overarching plot being that the duke loves the lady Olivia who’s brother has just perished at sea (or so she thinks). There are many sub plots ocurring in this play and one of them in particular, having to do with a steward of Olivia named Malvolio. Malvolio, whose dour spirit is ruining everyone’s fun, especially Sir Toby’s whose goal is to see his friend Sir Andrew, married off to his niece Olivia. Maria, the maid of Olivia’s house devises a plan to get rid of Malvolio’s negativity, which is representative of a kind of order among all the chaos in this play.

The characters of Malvolio and Feste the clown are exact opposites of each other and work to create a dichotomy of madness and sanity that is very intriguing to look into. What Shakespeare implies about madness in these two characters speaks volumes not just about madness but about the art that is poetry and fiction. Eventually, through the plotting of the characters Maria, Fabian, and Sir Toby, they efectively paint Malvolio as possessed by the devil after he confesses his love to Olivia based on a false letter that she never wrote. They lock Malvolio in a dark room and dress Feste the clown in the garb of a fictional clergyman named Sir Topas. The two have a very lengthy conversation where Feste tries to prove to Malvolio that he is mad or possessed. Malvolio begins to actually believe this lie that has been put in place by Maria and Sir Toby. The entierty of this scene deals with the concept of the imagination and one’s own ability to create something out of nothing, much like the question posed by Theseus of the lunatic, the lover and the poet in A Midsummer Night’s Dream: 

Midsummer Nights Dream acts I and II were full of surprises both somewhat saddening and at the same time humourous. All of the characters are thrown into the fray in these acts and it doesn’t seem like what is currently happening in the play is reperable, which is what builds the suspense in regards to the relationship between Hermia, Helena, Lysander and Demetrius. The fairy king Oberon, wants Titania’s adopted son from a preistess of Hippolyta with whom she developed a strong homosocial bond with. This priestess birthed a child that was a changeling, or a child that was replaced with a fairy child. The priestess then unfortunately died in child birth, and Titania sees the changeling child as a symbol of their friendship and wants to raise it for herself. Oberon however wants to keep the child for himself and raise it as one of his “henchmen.” (act 2.1 line 121) Throughout these acts, the theme of smashing patriarchal authority is strong and there is a constant struggle between the sexes. It seems as though this was Shakespeare’s original intention as he paints Hippolyta to be the queen of the mythological tribe known as the Amazonians who were a society of women who didn’t need any men to thrive. However, although Hippolyta is an Amazonian woman, she seems somewhat content in her marriage with Theseus and he constantly reminds her that: “I wooed thee with my sword And won thy love doing thee injuries.” (act 1.1 Lines 15-16) These words from Hippolyta suggest that she is an Amazonian queen who has been stripped of her identity and is now under the conquest of her husband Theseus. To turn back to the supernatural world of Oberon and Titania’s marriage it seems as though Titania’s defiance of Oberon could have a great payoff if she is able to keep complete posession of the changeling child. Perhaps he could be a merciful king of the fairies and put an end to the vicious cycle of tradition in the human world, where Kings force their daughters to marry off to men they don’t love, in the case of Egeus and his daughter Hermia, who truly loves Lysander, but Egeus would rather see his daughter with Demetrius, even threatening to kill his own daughter citing the law of Athens: “I beg the ancient privilege of Athens: As she is mine, I may dispose of her, Which shall either to theis gentlemen of to her death, accoridng to the law.” (act 1.1 Lines 41-44) With the power the fairies seem to have over the human world visible in act II when Robin or Puck uses the love potion to try and make Demetius fall in love with Helena. If Titania could raise the child on her own and have the changeling become king and change the mortal world to mold it into the perfect world for humans, where daughters could marry whomever they truly love, and fathers couldn’t threaten death upon their daughters. The issue would then be the ethical question of whether controlling the lives of humans would be a moral decision, if it would end the opression of the male sex on the female sex, but at the same time have the supernatural world completely control the mortal one. However, Shakespeare doesn’t seem to hint at this revolution of equality, but instead simply presents these injustices for us to gawk at and creates the character of Hippolyta as one who has been stripped of her strong feminine role as an Amazonian queen and instead a victim of this patriarchal authority, same for the rest of the female cast in A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The fact that Shakespeare frames this whole story in a comedy lens and how all the relationships go back to the way they were, seems to suggest that Shakespeare believes that although these problems are exposed, they can never truly be fixed. It reminds me now that I have read The Winter’s Tale of the way Shakespeare writes in the pastoral genre into his romance, he acknowledges the class struggle, but he never suggests that it can be fixed. The pastoral genre in The Winter’s Tale is the perfect example, where we have class struggle leading to the imprisonment of Hermione and the abandonment of Perdita. The sheep shearing festival, recalling the times before urban development, where no one class had dominance over the rest is all a facade, just like how the characters are all dressed up at the sheep shearing festival in costume. This same attitude of Shakespeare translates to A Midsummer Night’s Dream when Shakespeare suggests that love can only be true through magic and fantasy, and the gender gaps can only be solved through a fairy world, like how The Winter’s Tale is simply a fairy tale to pass the time.