“Can the world buy such a jewel?”
“In mine eye, she is the sweetest Lady that I ever look’d on.”
(Act 1, Scene 1, page 28)
Hero has all the qualities desired in a trophy wife. She is articulate, refined and holds a high social status, being the daughter of Leonato. However, we must not assume that Hero is unhappy with this arrangement. Where Claudio gains a trophy wife, Hero would be marrying a well-respected soldier, indeed one who is friends with the Prince. Note that when this arrangement is suggested to Hero, she has very little to say about it.
Taking into account this view, we can interpret Claudio’s reaction as one of frustration at being humiliated by his trophy wife. However we could also consider another view – one which goes along with the assumption that Claudio genuinely loves her:
“That I love her, I feel.”
(Act 1, Scene 1, page 29)
It is said that there is a thin line between love and hate, and if we assume that Claudio does love Hero his actions could be interpreted as a subconscious gesture of love. The strength of Claudio’s love is such that this ‘betrayal’ by Hero warrants a rash reaction as his. Similarly to his sudden declaration of love for Hero in Act 1, Scene 1, Claudio reaction to Hero’s supposed actions is just as sudden and spontaneous, if not brutal:
”Sweet Prince, you learn me noble thankfulness:
There Leonato, take her back again,
Give not this rotten orange to your friend.”
(Act 4, Scene 1, page 76)
The denunciation of Hero is not only by Claudio but also her father, Leonato:
“O Fate! take away not thy weary hand,
death is the fairest cover for her shame
that maybe wished for.”
(Act 4, Scene 1, page 79)
Leonato’s hasty declaration is a source of shock for many audiences though it is hard to say whether this is due to cultural and chronological differences. 21st century audiences find this more 17th century approach insensitive and one with which they are not accustomed to. In an age where it is generally thought that parents should love with children unconditionally, the rather antiquated idea of family pride seems wrong.
Alongside this plot is Beatrice’s command to her suitor, Benedick. Beatrice and Benedick’s relationship encapsulates the way the play is written. Alongside the slapstick comedy of Dogberry and Verges, Benedick and Beatrice provide the witty, verbal play comedy. Both the plot of the play and Beatrice and Benedick’s relationship end happily as well as the other plot trajectories. Sandwiched between their “merry war” and “skirmish of wit” lies Beatrice’s daunting challenge to Benedick:
“Benedick: Come bid me do anything for thee
Beatrice: Kill Claudio.”
(Act 4, Scene 1, page 84)
Just as the comedy bookends the tragedy and shock with Beatrice’s and Benedick’s relationship, this is reflected in the plot of the play itself. Note how Dogberry and Verges’ scenes bookend the scenes of Hero’s denunciation. Dogberry and Verges provide a very different type of comedy to the witty word play of Benedick and Beatrice. The malapropisms of Dogberry make the scenes with him much more slapstick type comedy:
“yea, or else it were pity but they should suffer salvation body and soul.”
(Act 3, Scene 3, page 65)
The way Shakespeare uses comedy in this play helps to create a contrast for the high drama which occurs later. The contrast between the comedy and drama makes the dramatic events all the more shocking. Gildon is correct in suggesting that the discourses and events are too shocking for comedy – but not for tragedy. Much more complex, dark and morbid plots have been told in Shakespeare’s tragedies, Macbeth being a prime example.
In some aspects, “Much Ado About Nothing” is a story that is fundamentally about good vs. bad and love vs. hate. The good is represented by the couples and the bad by Don John and his cohorts. We are first introduced to the villainy of Don John in Act 1, Scene 3. It is a short scene in which we are not only introduced to Don John himself but his later plan to “misuse the Prince, to vex Claudio, to undo Hero and to kill Leonato.” (Act 2, Scene 1) Shakespeare does not intend Don John to be anything more than a “plain-dealing villain” (Act 1, Scene 3).
Although we can question Don John’s reasoning behind his motives, Shakespeare has made it clear that Don John is a two-dimensional figure. There is not attempt by Shakespeare to garner sympathy for Don John the Bastard from the audience – he is there simply as a figure of hate and mockery for the audience and also as a device to mislead the Prince and Claudio.
Another contrast is found in the differing deceptions of the characters in the play. Predictably the malicious deceptions are all of Don John’s doing. However, the Friar and Don Pedro also carry out deceptions – this time with far more good intentions. The deception of Claudio by Don John, Borachio and Conrade is strikingly similar to that of Beatrice and Benedick in style. Both parties act out scenes intended to be heard by the respective characters but construed as not to be heard by them.
Again all those contrasts add up and help to create the ‘rollercoaster’ effect within the audience. By taking the audience from one extreme emotion to another (laughter to shock), Shakespeare is creating a ‘rollercoaster of emotions.’ Through this technique the emotions and responses felt by the audience are, to an extent, heightened.
Certainly, Gildon could be correct in his observation that these events are too shocking for comedy but that shock was intended by Shakespeare. These shocking events were written purposely into the play by Shakespeare; it Shakespeare’s way of manipulating the audience’s reactions and feelings. No doubt, any controversy created by the play would only make the play all the more successful. However, Gildon’s critique of the play’s events and discourses being too shocking for tragedy are somewhat unfounded. Surely the events in the play aren’t too far from reality in the 18th century. Although no-one is suggesting that Shakespeare sacrificed his creative integrity, he wrote plays that his audiences could relate to, not necessarily with their situations perhaps but most certainly the emotions stemming from those events and discourses.
