I’m a Don John Sympathizer
My wife performed in Much Ado About Nothing last year at the Ancient Kourion Theatre in Cyprus. We were reminiscing about the evil Don John and his plan to ruin the marriage between Claudio and Hero.
I found myself arguing that Claudio s the real villain in the play: his love for Hero is shallow, fickle at best, and he’s happy to publicly humiliate her with only scant evidence of her infidelity.
Claudio’s shallowness turns my stomach! At least I can understand Don John’s motivations.
Although he’s undoubtedly a “plain-dealing villain”, I can’t help but sympathize with Don John. He’s a social outcast (for being a bastard) and has been defeated in battle by his own brother. This is a man who will never find peace – and we shouldn’t expect him to. As one of the few “real” characters in Much Ado About Nothing, he sees right through Claudio’s shallowness and understands the fickleness of his love for Hero.
I share Don John’s contempt for Claudio – which I guess makes me a Don John sympathizer. Perhaps not what Shakespeare intended?
Comments
Or perhaps just so. His lays have endless nuances, and therefore endless interpretation-options.
wow i hate this web site no just kidin please write more i love reading these storys and stuff thanks a bunch it keeps my life going and interesting well ttyl BYE (:
I’ve always found Claudio quite superficial and shallow, too. He is extremely cruel to Hero; of course, her father doesn’t treat her very well either! I guess it is indicative of the time period, when it comes to women’s rights.
Yes, I agree, Hero gets shabby treatment by those who are supposed to love her the most, Claudio and her father, Leonato. The only one in Messina with a lick of sense about this matter seems to be Beatrice. She not only defends Hero’s honor, but wishes to avenge the wrong herself. (O, that I were a man! I would eat his heart in the marketplace!) Benedick nearly joins in the “boy’s club” but his love for Beatrice uncloud his vision long enough realize Claudio is a moron for believing such a weak rumor and for publically humiliating Hero. I understand why Don John is such a villian but I don’t condone it. But at least he has reasons to act the way he does; what’s Claudio’s excuse for his poor treatment of his fiance?
You may be interested in the outcome of some of my research as published about Much Ado:
Recently it has been recognized that the sub-text of Much Ado is the discrepancy between the honor-fixation of the dominant Spanish in Sicily and the indigenous Italians. Don Pedro, Don John, and their protégé Claudio, are all three over-serious and obsessive about their status and dignity, insensitive to other’s feelings – whether deceiving their friends Benedick and Beatrice, or deceiving themselves over Hero’s supposed misconduct. This stereotypical behavior is again not Shakespeare’s invention. Don John was not only a general against whom the English fought in the Low Countries, he was also the initiator of the idea of an Armada to return England to the Catholic faith, with himself as king after a forced marriage with the fimprisoned Mary Queen of Scots (Elizabeth I having been executed first). The English state papers are full of Don John’s insane escapades, all designed to offset his humiliation at court as merely the illegitimate son of Emperor Charles V – and hence half-brother to King Philip II. Philip feared his aggressiveness and gave him little honor even when he returned to Messina after leading the Christian fleets to victory against the Turks at Lepanto in 1572. Indeed, Don John stands there still: his statue remains in place in the square next to the cathedral, in a characteristic aggressive posture. This assertive memorial catches the mood of the Messina situation in Much Ado, with a general uneasiness about the role and schemes of this bastard brother to “Don Pedro” (another name, like that of “Ferdinand” of Navarre, which avoids provocation by concealing allusion to a living monarch).
The play makes a first exploration of this dangerous inter-cultural contrast, which is to develop in Othello’s morbid schemings of the Spanish-named Iago (Spanish for James, as in Sant’ Iago Matamoros: “St. James the Moor-Killer”). The contrast between the intense, indeed neurotic, honor-fixation of the Spaniards and the wry, even cynical and laid-back manners of the Italians is striking. The Italians appear humorous and affable, not only mocking others but themselves, as most brilliantly illustrated by Beatrice and Benedick. This couple conceal their powers of commitment under an affectation of mocking indifference – but we can see in the preoccupation with each-others’ defects that their earlier, failed love affair has not destroyed their mutual interest, or their capacity to rise to the defense of the maligned Hero. Shakespeare’s doubts about the compatibility of the two cultures as ruler and ruled is validated by the ultimate expulsion of the Spanish from Italy. At the end of Much Ado Claudio has been reclaimed by Italian social dexterity while the two Spanish brothers still remain unassimilated to the Messina community: Don John as a criminal, Don Pedro left outside the matrimonial cycle. Shakespeare is deeply committed to marriage as a solvent of both emotional and international crises, as seen in the recurrent pattern of exogamy in his political plays, above all in Henry V in which the climactic marriage of the two monarchies overbids audience interest in the Battle of Agincourt, just as the marriage of the Lancastrian Earl of Richmond and Elizabeth of York ends the Wars of the Roses in Richard III. In his political plays Shakespeare is committed to a view of multicultural marriage as a route to international harmony – as in our modern aphorism: “Make love not war.”
In writing my verse translation of the play, I drew on the scholarly work that accompanies 13 different editions of the play. The general consensus is that Claudio, though certainly a good catch for Hero, is shallow and behaves foolishly. I have yet to find a defender of Don John. He comes across as vindictive and ungrateful. Right after he is let off the hook for participating in a minor rebellion, he tries to ruin the reputation of a nice, young woman.
The plotting of the deception is probably the weakest part of the play, but it serves Shakespeare’s themes well. I wrote this in my introduction:
“Hero seems quite content, despite Beatrice’s haranguing, to accept whatever husband her father chooses. No doubt Leonato will approve of Claudio, so what can go wrong? Don John, the Prince’s half-brother, out of hatred for Claudio, plots to scuttle the marriage by tricking Don Pedro, Leonato, and Claudio into thinking that Hero has been unfaithful on the eve of her wedding. The plotting here is a bit clumsy and manipulative—the conflict is resolved if Hero defends herself instead of fainting—but it effectively advances the play’s examination of spousal infidelity and the terror it strikes in men. We also learn more about Beatrice and Benedick. Beatrice’s sharp mind and close friendship with Hero make her the first person to come to her cousin’s defense. Benedick, rarely serious up to this point, reveals a hidden respect for Beatrice’s judgment and shows that he values truth and honor above friendship when he decides to confront Claudio for humiliating and abandoning Hero.”
I think it is clear that Claudio, Don Pedro, and Leonato are supposed to be ashamed of themselves. By the way, Hero comes across as clever and perceptive in scenes where she does not have to compete with Beatrice for the stage.
Kent Richmond
http://www.fullmeasurepress.com