Miller 1
Quentin Miller
Studies in Shakespeare
Dr. Gretchen Minton
May 2, 2012
Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra & Troilus and Cressida:
An Orientalist Perspective
In a broad and more imaginative scope, roots of Shakespeare’s satirical effects
stem from our grand perceptions of reality and lie within his concepts of orientalist
fundamentals. Therefore, Shakespeare’s works exist as satires of Orientalism; in that,
they depend upon and adhere to the inescapable imagination of the Occident, a
worldview rooted in assumptions of Self and Other that, when describing the Other,
paradoxically reflect the identity of the Self. In the case of Antony and Cleopatra, the
embodiment of “Other” is personified by the hyper-feminine Cleopatra, whereas the
patriarchal hyper-masculine “Self” exists in Antony. Similarly, and as much as satirical
effect hinges on hilarity, Shakespeare’s satirical effects exist as a criticism of social
constructs and appear sporadically in the play, Troilus and Cressida.
In the words of Edward Said, “Therefore as much as the West itself, the Orient is
an idea that has a history and a tradition of thought, imagery, and vocabulary that have
given it reality and presence in and for the West. The two geographical entities thus
support and to an extent reflect each other” (Said 5). Seen here, Orientalism exists as a
social criticism of the Other, or orient, and is reflected by what we perceive as the
Occident, or the Self. The two mirrored perceptions then dramatically romanticize one
another and create a paradoxical dichotomy. Typically, the Occident is representative of
Europe, or the east, whereas the Orient is represented by Asia, or the west. Accordingly,
the approaching European colonization of Asia links the two opposing entities as the
Miller 2
masculine and feminine or the colonizer and un-colonized. Therefore, the underlying
themes within Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra and Troilus and Cressida exist
satirically when viewed through the lens of Orientalism.
The imagery and conquerability of Egypt within Antony and Cleopatra implies a
fertile and emasculate Other, which then reflects the patriarchal influence and dominance
of the Roman Empire. Specifically, Cleopatra’s impending political emasculation alludes
to her metaphorical representation of the soon-to-be Roman-ruled Egypt. In an almost
comedic juxtaposition of the feminine and masculine roles, Shakespeare inserts his
satirical mastery in Cleopatra’s lines: “I drunk him to his bed—/Then put my tires and
mantles on him whilst/ I wore his sword Philippan” (2.5.21-23). Here, a role reversal
epitomizes the reflection and desire for their counterpart. Cleopatra’s dawning of Roman
battle attire and her immersion in the masculine role alludes to the defeat of the Egyptians
by the Romans, whereas Antony’s effeminate figure can then accordingly be inferred to a
foreshadowing of his suicidal love for Cleopatra. Within Dr. Haegap Jeoung’s
dissertation titled, “An Africanist-Orientalist Discourse: The Other in Shakespeare And
Helenistic Tragedy”, he addresses this role reversal; “It is remarkable that Egypt is a
feminized land, as is allegorized through Cleopatra, where Antony undergoes becoming
effeminate. Antony becomes a scapegoat corrupted in Oriental femininity, in contrast to
the manly Roman 'virtus'” (Jeoung 45). This newborn dichotomy reveals a fear of
patriarchal defeat, and a lustful desire for the feminine orient.
Furthermore, the imagery of the orient parallels the descriptions of the Egyptian
lands. Also In Haegap Jeoung’s dissertation, he analyzes the femininity of the land; “All
in Egypt is symbolically castrated, which gives rise to the colonial imagination toward
Miller 3
masculine dominance” (Jeoung 45). Both the fertility of the land, and the emasculated
other is apparent in the delivery of the lines of a Roman soldier Agrippa, “She made great
Caesar lay his sword to bed,/ He ploughed her, and she cropped” (2.2.235-36). This
implicit agricultural reference to an invasion or a ploughing of the fertile feminine land
directly reflects the hyper-masculine Roman Empire.
Antony’s rejection of his patriarch further resembles orientalist fundamentals and
evidence of this resistance can be found in 2.4.36-38, “I will to Egypt; / And though I
make this marriage for my peace, / I’th’East my pleasure lies.” Antony’s lack of logic
stems from his selfish and inescapable imagination of Cleopatra, here referred to as the
East, which has thusly been hyper-romanticized. The reflection of himself in Cleopatra is
evident in his chaotic criticisms of Cleopatra’s choices. Just as Antony was surprised by
Cleopatra’s desertion, the rest of the Roman army was baffled at Antony’s decision to
follow her, and was vocalized by the Roman soldier Scarrus, “Leaving the fight in height,
flies after her./ I never saw an action of such shame-/ Experience, manhood, honour,
ne’er before/ did violate so itself” (3.10.20-23). Later, Antony argues his point that
Cleopatra, or Egypt, was the reason for his betrayal to Rome,
“Egypt, thou knew’st too well
My heart was to thy rudder tied by th’strings,
And thou should’st tow me after. O’er my spirit
Thy full supremacy thou knew’st, and that
Thy beck might from the bidding of the gods
Command me” (3.11.55-60).
Miller 4
Antony’s irresponsibility on the battlefield can be attributed to Cleopatra’s emasculating
decision to flee the battle. Curiously, and ironically, after this explanation Antony
forgives her of her misdeeds in the act of giving her a kiss. Reluctantly, Cleopatra betrays
Antony a second time and the collision of the two becomes imminent. This collision
between Antony and Cleopatra kills both of them and results in an ambiguity and
senselessness that shatters the paradox. The respective demises of both Cleopatra and
Antony result from their attempts at latching on to abyssal and reflective qualities of each
other, or their hopeless intents to escape their dichotomous origins from the occident and
orient.
Although the scope of the Orientalist lens covers a breadth of literary symbolism,
feminist archetypes, dichotomies of good and evil, the known and unknown, an effort to
discover underlying themes of Orientalism in Troilus and Cressida would be largely
futile. However, the broadness of this critique need not end when attempting to analyze
the multi-faceted themes presented in Troilus and Cressida. For example, the highly
coveted and seemingly absent character Helen is shrouded with mystery and her
appearance in the play becomes romanticized by both the Greeks and Trojans. Similarly,
both Helen and her female parallel Cressida become objects of male desire. Both Helen
and Cressida employ a quality of mystery that, from the male perspective, suggests a
desire for the unknown and a need to be conquered. While Cressida can be read as either
wonton or as innocent, a similar dichotomy within the character Helen suggests she’s
either the immortal goddess she’s portrayed to be, or an aging and increasingly useless
motivator for the Trojan army. A discussion between Hector and Troilus concerning the
Miller 5
need to harbor Helen at the cost of losing the war leads to her appraisal and eventual
commoditization,
“HECTOR. Brother, she is not worth what she doth cost
The keeping.
TROILUS.
What’s aught but as ‘tis valued?
HECTOR. But value dwells not in particular will;
It holds his estimate and dignity
As well wherein ‘tis precious of itself
As in the prizer” (2.2.51-56).
Here, Troilus’ suggestion that an application of inherent value has objectified Helen.
Thus, Helen becomes a commodity of the Orient. Just as Helen has become objectified by
the Greeks, Cressida has also been used as a bargaining tool for the Greeks. Thus, the
equally coveted Cressida can have the same application of value. The fact that Cressida’s
view of herself is seen through a male’s perspective separates her from her sex and
conforms to the male ideal or fantasy of the wonton woman. In Grace Tiffany’s, “Not
Saying No: Female Self-Erasure in Troilus and Cressida”, she argues that Cressida
knowingly portrays this image, “Cressida initially hides her love for Troilus in order to
conform to his Petrachan image of her as indifferent love-goddess (1.1-2); ultimately, she
will affirm the equally limiting male-scripted role of frail, wonton woman” (Tiffany 45).
Here, Tiffany supports Cressida’s intentional provocation of the male fantasy of the ideal
woman. This deliberate self-erasure only embraces Orientalist femininity.
While the appearance of Orientalism is scantily present in Troilus and Cressida,
the depth of the Orientalist perspective looms beneath the commoditization of the female
Miller 6
characters Helen and Cressida, and their reflections of the male. As much as the Occident
is believed to be the conqueror within Antony and Cleopatra, quite the opposite is true.
The self-sacrifice of Antony because of his desire to become one with the Orient, or
Cleopatra, is comparable to the loss of Occident-ness when the Occident becomes one
with the Orient. Paradoxically, the death of Antony symbolizes the ritualistic death and
rebirth of the Roman Empire as the Occident, whereas the death of Cleopatra is symbolic
of the Orient’s susceptibility to colonization. As a result, the newly conquered Egypt, or
Orient, is swallowed by Rome, or Occident, and becomes part of the Occident. This
paradox-shattering unification of Orient and Occident is therefore a result of
Shakespeare’s desired satirical effects.
Miller 7
Works Cited
Jeoung, Haegap. "An Africanist-Orientalist Discourse: The Other in
Shakespeare and Helenistic Tragedy." Diss. Louisiana State University, 2003.
Print.
Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon, 1978. Print.
Shakespeare, William. Antony and Cleopatra. Ed. Stanley Wells. Oxford: Oxford
UP. 1994. Print
Shakespeare, William. Troilus and Cressida. Ed. Anthony B. Dawson. Cambridge:
Cambridge. UP. 2003. Print
Tiffany, Grace. "Not Saying No: Female Self-Erasure in Troilus and Cressida."
Texas Studies in Literature and Language 35.1 (1993): 44-56. [Subject Terms:
English literature, 1500-1599; Shakespeare, William (1564-1616); Troilus and
Cressida (1602); comedy; treatment of self- negation; of female characters.]