In the light of this comment, discuss the [dramatic] ways in which Shakespeare presents the issue of control and authority in The Tempest.

The social hierarchy on the ship is disrupted by the storm, shown by the Boatswain’s blatant disregard for the King of Naples’ authority,

‘… You mar our labour – keep your cabins … What cares these roarers for the name of the King?’ (Boatswain)

‘Good, yet remember whom thou hast aboard.’ (Gonzalo)

‘None that I more love than myself.’ (Boatswain)

The disruption shown here reflects the elemental disorder of the storm itself.  However, more importantly, the Boatswains insolence introduces questions regarding power and authority for the first time in the play.

        Prospero’s motivation for generating the tempest has been questioned.  Previously, Prospero’s control has been seen as a necessity, and a positive necessity, needed in order to ensure a happy end.  However recent critics have suggested that his control, especially over Caliban, is harsh and perhaps malignant at times.  Essentially, the question being asked is, is Prospero a benign character?  Miranda’s own doubts about the morality of her father starting the storm, ‘If by your art, my dearest father, you have put the wild waters in this roar, allay them’ shows that perhaps there is an argument that her father is wrong.  Also, Prospero’s control and treatment of Caliban is very questionable.  Caliban himself believes he is a ‘tyrant’, he also tells Trinculo and Stephano, ‘I’ll fish for thee and fetch thee wood enough’ showing he will willingly help them, whereas he had to be forced to do the same tasks for Prospero.  The way Prospero speaks to Caliban is also very unpleasant; he says to him in Act I Scene II, ‘tonight thou shalt have cramps, side-stitches that shall pen thy breath up’.  The contrast in the way Prospero treats Ariel, also suggests that he is unfair to Caliban, while he calls Ariel a ‘Fine apparition!  My quaint Ariel,’ he refers to Caliban as ‘Thou poisonous slave, got by the devil himself upon thy wicked dam’.  Also, at the end of the play, Prospero grants Ariel his freedom while Caliban is seemingly condemned to be his perpetual slave.  However, there is obviously the counter – argument that Prospero is justified in his treatment of Caliban as he tried to rape his daughter and because he conspires to kill him with Trinculo and Stephano.  Whether this is valid, all depends on the idea of Prospero as a colonist.  As a master, Prospero is both kind and firm.  He gets angry with Ariel when he refuses to obey him and asks for his liberty, ‘Dost thou forget from what a torment I did free thee?’ and says ‘Thou liest, malignant thing’.  This suggests Ariel perhaps serves him through fear as much as through gratitude.

        The justification for Caliban’s rebelliousness can be attributed to the idea that Prospero is a colonist who came to the island, which was rightfully Caliban’s, or at least to which he was a native, and simply took over unjustly and imposed on Caliban his language and his authority, much like the British did to the South Americans around the seventeenth century.  In this respect, The Tempest has often been interpreted as a statement on colonialism, and would make Caliban’s conspiracy against Prospero just.  Caliban’s conspiracy then, is different to Antonio’s, whose only reason for it was political advancement; on the other hand Caliban is rebelling for liberation from his ‘tyrannical’ master.  There is a flaw to this theory, in that, Prospero did not choose to go to the island and does not exploit its resources for money making him a somewhat feeble colonist.  

        As a ruler, Prospero is, although loved in Milan, ‘So dear the love my people bore me’, perhaps not very strong.  In both the case of his brother’s usurpation and Caliban’s attempted rape of Miranda it was partly Prospero’s own fault, as through his own complete indifference he enabled both characters to set up the situations.  Prospero’s forgiveness of them both at the end of the play is perhaps due to his own rethinking and realisation of what he needs to do.

        Prospero’s control over Miranda as a father is more personal, and less complex.  Prospero is a good father, he clearly loves Miranda very much, shown when he talks of her as a baby in the tempest where they were cast on the island in the first place,

‘O, a cherubin, thou wast what did preserve me.  Thou didst smile, Infused with a fortitude from heaven’.

Their relationship is central to the play; Prospero has to give up his daughter to marriage to one of the only noble characters in the play, Ferdinand.  Prospero has to ‘relinquish’ his power over her.  However, Prospero does not do so lightly, he constantly challenges Ferdinand, making him carry logs, and insisting on their premarital chastity, ‘If thou dost break her virgin-knot before all sanctimonious ceremonies may with full and holy rite be ministered, no sweet aspersion shall the heavens let fall to make this contract grow’.  Interestingly, Prospero refers to their marriage as a contract which can be taken to mean, not just a marriage contract between the two lovers but also between Prospero and the King of Naples, as theirs is, albeit one of love, a political marriage also.  Prospero will have political gain from it, and in this sense he shows himself to be a typical renaissance parent.  The contrast to Ferdinand and Miranda’s marriage is Claribel’s marriage to the King of Tunis in Africa arranged by Alonso purely for his own advancement. This marriage was ruthless and very unpopular, as Sebastian states, ‘You were kneeled to and importuned otherwise by all of us; and the fair soul herself weighed between loathness and obedience’.  Claribel was clearly a victim here of patriarchal authority and values, the seventeenth century audience would have generally have empathised with Claribel’s situation as arranged marriages were seen often as wrong.  Prospero does not impose these on Miranda and wishes her happiness showing him as an authoritative but loving father.  

        Shakespeare presents the issue of authority and control in many different ways, which often challenge the socially accepted traditions, like that of colonialism.  Prospero is a benevolent father and ruler, but can be a cruel master.  The play’s elusiveness has enabled its addressing of these issues of control to be interpreted in many different ways.