Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T14:28:06.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

“The Sign and Semblance of Her Honor”: Reading Gender Difference in Much Ado about Nothing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Abstract

The comic conclusion of Much Ado about Nothing, which ends with the conventional closure provided by multiple marriages, leaves unresolved crucial conflicts that the play has generated. The language of the play sets up a complex association of the word, the sword, and the phallus and represents the “merry war” between the sexes as a masculine struggle to maintain control of representation. To read others in this play is an act of aggression; to be read is to be emasculated. Masculine privilege is contingent on the legibility of women, whose ambiguous “seeming” gravely threatens the men of Messina and provokes them to use various defensive strategies against it, from the exchange of tendentious jokes to the symbolic sacrifice of Hero. The play itself is implicated in these strategies insofar as the characters' plot to recuperate Claudio through the fiction of Hero's death is also the plot of the play.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 101 , Issue 2 , March 1986 , pp. 186 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Craik, T. W. “Much Ado about Nothing.” Scrutiny 19 (1953): 297316.Google Scholar
Crick, John. “Much Ado about Nothing.” The Use of English 17 (1965): 223–27. Rpt. in Davis 33-38.Google Scholar
Davis, Walter R., ed. Twentieth Century Interpretations of Much Ado about Nothing. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1969.Google Scholar
Everett, Barbara. “Much Ado about Nothing.” Critical Quarterly 3 (1969): 319–35.Google Scholar
French, Marilyn. Shakespeare's Division of Experience. New York: Simon, 1981.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. “Fetishism.” Trans. Riviere, Joan. Sexuality and the Psychology of Love 214–19.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. The Interpretation of Dreams. Trans. Strachey, James. New York: Avon, 1965.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious. Trans. and ed. James Strachey. New York: Norton, 1960.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. “The Medusa's Head.” Trans. Strachey, James. Sexuality and the Psychology of Love 212–13.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. The Sexual Enlightenment of Children. Ed. Rieff, Philip. New York: Macmillan, 1963.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. Sexuality and the Psychology of Love. Ed. Rieff, Philip. New York: Macmillan, 1963.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. “The Taboo of Virginity.” Trans. Riviere, Joan. Sexuality and the Psychology of Love 7086.Google Scholar
Freud, Sigmund. “The Uncanny.” Trans. Strachey, Alix. Studies in Parapsychology. Ed. Rieff, Philip. New York: Macmillan, 1963. 1960.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Allan H.Two Margarets: The Composition of Much Ado about Nothing.” Philological Quarterly 41 (1962): 6171.Google Scholar
Hayes, Janice. “Those ‘soft and delicate desires’: Much Ado and the Distrust of Women.” The Woman's Part: Feminist Criticism of Shakespeare. Ed. Ruth Swift Lenz, Carolyn, Greene, Gayle, and Neely, Carol Thomas. Chicago: U of Illinois P, 1980. 7999.Google Scholar
Kahn, Coppélia. Man's Estate: Masculine Identity in Shakespeare. Berkeley: U of California P, 1981.Google Scholar
Neill, Kerby. “More Ado about Claudio: An Acquittal for the Slandered Groom.” Shakespeare Quarterly 3 (1952): 91107.10.2307/2866497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettet, E. C. Shakespeare and the Romance Tradition. London: Staples, 1949.Google Scholar
Shakespeare, William. Much Ado about Nothing. The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. Evans, G. Blakemore. 2 vols. Boston: Houghton, 1974. 1: 322–62.Google Scholar
Storey, Graham. “The Success of Much Ado about Nothing.” More Talking about Shakespeare. Ed. Garrett, John. London: Longmans; New York: Theatre Art, 1959. 128–43. Rpt. in Davis 18-32.Google Scholar
West, E. J.Much Ado about an Unpleasant Play.” Shakespeare Association Bulletin 22 (1947): 3034.Google Scholar