Rice University
Honest Othello: The Handkerchief Once More
Author(s): Michael C. Andrews
Source: Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, Vol. 13, No. 2, Elizabethan and Jacobean
Drama (Spring, 1973), pp. 273-284
Published by: Rice University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/449739 .
Accessed: 22/03/2013 14:13
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Rice University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studies in English
Literature, 1500-1900.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
HonestOthello:
Once More
The Handkerchief
MICHAEL
C. ANDREWS
in Othello. In the first,Othellowarns
There are two accountsof the handkerchief
Desdemona that it is a love-charmwith "magic in the web," givento his motherby
an Egyptian;in the second, he tells Gratiano it was "an antique token/My father
gave mymother."Contraryto currentopinion,the firstversioncarriesconviction.As
with Othello's suicide speech, Shakespearegives his protagonistsuch hypnoticelomakingthe audiencerealizeOthello
quence that an actor would havegreatdifficulty
is not tellingthe truth.There is no indicationthat Othello is lying,nor is he elsewherecharacterizedas an able dissembler.Unwillingnessto believethatShakespeare
mayreflectthe same racial
could have conceivedof Othelloas genuinelysuperstitious
thathas on occasion led to a denialof the importanceof Othello's
self-consciousness
racial background.A close examinationof the text suggeststhatOthellodoes indeed
The firstversionis not discreditedby
imputemagicalpropertiesto thehandkerchief.
may be explainedon the basis of the dramaticcontext,or
the second; the differences
as a carelesserroron the partof Shakespeare.
verThe fact that Othellogivestwo different
has, predictably,
sions of the historyof the fatalhandkerchief
not passed unnoticed.1In his firstand moreelaborateaccount
is a
(III.iv.53ff.),OthellotellsDesdemonathatthehandkerchief
an
from
mother
received
Egyptian
his
talisman
love-controling
"charmer":
she toldher,whileshekeptit
'Twouldmakeheramiable,and subduemyfather
Entirelyto herlove: butifshelostit,
Or madea presentof it,myfather'seye
Shouldhold herloathly,and hisspiritsshouldhunt
Afternew fancies:she dying,gaveit me,
And bid me,whenmyfatewouldhaveme wive
offeredhere,and
1See VariorumOthello,2nd ed. (1886), p. 317. The interpretations
will be dealt withlaterin thispaper.
thoseof subsequentwriters,
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
274
HONEST
OTHELLO
To giveit her;I did so, and takeheed on't,
Make it a darling,likeyourpreciouseye,
To lose, or give'taway,weresuchperdition
As nothingelse could match.
(11.55-66)2
Desdemona, shocked and at least momentarily
incredulous,3
asks"Isn't possible?"Othellothencontinues:
'Tis true,there'smagicin theweb of it:
A sibyl,thathad number'din theworld
The sun to maketwohundredcompasses,
In herpropheticfurysew'd thework;
The wormswerehallow'dthatdid breedthesilk,
And it was dyedin mummy,whichtheskilful
Conserveof maiden'shearts.
(11.67-73)
At the end of the play,however,whenOthellois pathetically
to justifyDesdemona'smurder,he merelyrefersto
attempting
the proofof guiltaffordedby Cassio's possessionof "the recognizanceand pledgeof love,!WhichI firstgaveher;I saw it in his
an antiquetoken/My fathergave
hand,/It was a handkerchief;
mymother"(V.ii.215-218).4
Although critics have offered ingenious interpretations
wherebythe substitution
of Othello'sfatherforthe"Egyptian"
and the omissionof any mentionof the magicalpropertiesof
the handkerchief
it seemsto
become fraughtwithsignificance,
me thatall attemptsto explainOthello'swordsto Desdemona
as prevarication
are liableto thesamecriticism
NevillCoghillso
devastinglylevels at T. S. Eliot's readingof Othello's suicide
speech.To Eliot, of course,Othello'sfinalspeechis an "exposure of human weakness" ratherthan an expressionof "the
greatnessin defeatof a noble buterringnature."Afterquoting
All referencesare to the Arden Othello,ed. M. R. Ridley (1958, rpt.with minor
3corrections,1962).
Desdemona asks a second time if the storyis true; beingassuredthatit is "most
veritable"she declares: "Then would to God that I had neverseen it!" (III.iv.75).
AfterOthello departs in a jealous rage she appears perplexedbut unconvinced:
. ." (1.99).
"Sure there'ssome wonderin thishandkerchief.
There are otherbriefreferencesto the handkerchiefin the play, none mentioning
magic.Too much,I think,has been made of this.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MICHAEL
C. ANDREWS
275
analysis:
the speech (V.ii.339-357), Eliot offershis influential
WhatOthelloseemsto be doingin makingthisspeechis
to escape realcheeringhimselfup. He is endeavouring
ity, he has ceased to thinkabout Desdemona,and is
thinkingabout himself... Othello succeeds in turning
himselfinto a patheticfigure,by adoptingan aesthetic
rather than a moral attitude, dramatizinghimself
He takesin the spectator,but
againsthis enrivonment.
to takein himself.
thehumanmotiveis primarily
"I do not believe,"Eliot concludes,"that any writerhas ever
exposed this bovarysme,the human will to see thingsas they
are not, more clearlythan Shakespeare."5To thisProfessor
Coghillreplies,withI thinkunassailablelogic,thatEliot's interpretationis unworkablein the theater:"Whattonesof voice,
what move or gesture,can an actor use to suggesta Bovarist
cheeringhimselfup?" And how is the audience supposed to
determine"whetherOthellois cheeringhimselfup forbeingso
grossa fool and a failure,or whetherhe is cheeringhisaudience
up by showingonce again,and at the lastmoment,a trueflash
of thatnobilityforwhichtheyhad firsthonouredhim?"Moreover,as ProfessorCoghillpointsout,Eliot's Shakespearewould
clumsydramatist:
haveto be considereda remarkably
For if Shakespearehad wishedto conveythe "terrible
exposure of human weakness" that Eliot sees in
Othello's speech, he could veryeasily have made this
singlepurposeplain, unless he was a bungler,or quite
to theeffecthe was creating.For ifMr.Eliot
indifferent
is right,the betterthisspeechis spokenand acted,the
moreit mustdeceivetheaudience;and thisis,in effect,
5"Shakespeare and the Stoicism of Seneca" (1927), Selected Essays (New York,
1950), pp. 110-111. See also F. R. Leavis,"Diabolic Intellectand the Noble Hero,"
Scrutiny,IV (1937), reprintedin The CommonPursuit(New York, 1952); D. A.
Traversi,An Approach to Shakespeare2nd ed. (AnchorBooks, 1956), pp. 148-149;
Leo Kirschbaum,"The Modern Othello," ELH, II (1944), 287, 295; Robert B.
Heilman,Magic in the Web (Lexington,Ky., 1956), pp. 164-68; Paul A. Jorgensen,
"'Perplex'd in the Extreme': The Role of Thoughtin Othello," Shakespeare400,
ed. JamesG. McManaway(New York, 1964), p. 275.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
276
HONEST
OTHELLO
conceded by Mr. Eliot, who says Othello"takes in the
spectator."6
The handkerchief
speechseemsto me an analogousinstance.
How are we to know that Othello is fictionalizing?7For
whetherone says that Othello is speakingsymbolically
and is
really"askingDesdemona to restoreto him the sacrednessof
love,"8 or simplytrying"to cover up the real reason for his
disproportionate
passion over such a trifle,"9the lines are designed,in Eliot's phrase,to take us in. To adoptProfessor
Coghill's argument,
"the betterthisspeechis spokenand acted,the
moreit mustdeceivetheaudience";10themore,in short,we are
willingto acceptthehandkerchief
as an authenticelementfrom
Othello'sexoticand fabulouspast.
To say thatOthellois concoctinga horrific
primitive
legend
is symptomaticof modern skepticismwith regard to the
heroic,11and is perhapsmorerevealingof our age thanapposite.
6Shakespeare'sProfessionalSkills (London, 1964), pp. xiv-xv.Cf. Dover Wilson,
Introductionto the New CambridgeOthello (1957), pp. li-liii.
"O hardness to dissemble!" (Othello's aside at III.iv. 30) calls attentionto how
difficultit is for Othello to pretendnothingis the matter.Indeed, his early responses show that he dissemblesvery badly. Nor-for reasons to be mentioned
later-should Desdemona's apparentskepticismbe construedas Shakespeare'sway
of alertingus to the "truth."
WinifredM. T. Nowottny,"Justiceand Love in Othello," UTQ, XXI (1951-1952),
337. Cf. Heilman,Magic in the Web,pp. 208-218. I have no quarrelwithsymbolic
readingsof the handkerchief;I merelywish such readingswould begin with the
literalmeaning,and build outward,ratherthantreatingit as puremetaphor.
Eldred Jones,Othello's Countrymen(London, 1965), p. 102. Cf. Variorum,p. 317,
for the opinions of Cowden-Clarkand Steevens. Steevens' view-Othello is "purposely ostentatious,in orderto alarmhis wifethe more" (laterhe tellsthe truth)-is
endorsedby ChristopherRicks,EIC, X (1960), 117; cf. Moody E. Prior,MP, XLIV
(1946-47), 231-232; MarkVan Doren, Shakespeare(Anchor Books, 1953), p. 197.
Tucker Brooke and Laurence Mason declare that "Othello is inventingmarvels. . .
to tryhis wife's conscience" (Yale Othello [New Haven 1948], p. 163. See also
LaurenceLerner,"The Machiaveland the Moor," EIC, IX (1959), 358.
10Coghill,p. xv. ProfessorCoghill'sconclusionis also relevanthere: "It follows...
that what begins as an attack on Othello's characterturnsout as undermining
1Shakespeare'scraftsmmanship."
Noble Moor," BritishAcademy ShakespeareLecture
See Helen Gardner,"e
(1955), in ShakespeareCriticism1935-1960, ed. Anne Ridler(London, 1963), pp.
348-370. See also PeterAlexander,"'Under WhichKing,Bezonian?' " Elizabethan
and Jacobean Studies Presented to Frank Percy Wilson (Oxford, 1959), pp.
167-172. In Shakespeare Survey, 21 (Cambridge,1968), p. 7, Helen Gardner
shrewdlysuggeststhat Eliot is really attacking"Shakespeare's inadequate [to
Eliot] view of lifeand deathratherthanOthello's . . .".
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MICHAEL
C. ANDREWS
277
Once on this road, it is easy to push onward-to suggest,for
example,that Othello is also lyingwhenhe assuresthe senate
thatphysicaldesireplays no partin hiseagersupportof Desdemona's request that she be allowed to accompanyhim to
Cyprus(I.iii). And this,of course,has happened.Othello,we
are told, knows Moors are consideredlustful,and consciously
attemptsto "side-step"such an imputation:"But the fact is
to thephysicalaspects
thatOthellois not nearlyso indifferent
of love as he makes out. In Cyprus,wherethe strainsof his
naturaland
positionare morerelaxed,his behaviouris perfectly
is perhaps
warm."12 This seductivelyplausiblepsychologizing
inevitabletoday, since we tend to forgetthat Shakespeareis
From a less
neithera novelistnor,afterall, our contemporary.
modernpointof view it shouldbe obviousthatShakespeareis
(if not "realistically")emphasizingOthello'slack of
effectively
lateran essentialaspectof theplay.One thinks,
self-knowledge,
betweenOthello'sconceptionof
of
forexample, the difference
Desdemona's death as a "sacrifice"and his actual conductin
V.ii. SurelyOthello is not lyingto us when he speaksof the
abstractjustice of his "cause." As a generalprincipleof his
Shakespeareis at considerablepains to alertus to
dramaturgy,
of thosewho "lie like truth."
thedeceptiveness
The reductio ad absurdum of skepticismconcerningthe
of Othellois easyenoughto imagine,and is in factto
credibility
be found in that John the Baptist of the debunkingcritics,
BernardShaw, whoseHesione Hushabyeis not only confident
Othello fabricateda portionof his romanticpast, but suspects
thatsome
thathe killedDesdemonato preventher discovering
storieswerelies.13
of his fine-sounding
how fewcriticshaveattemptedto arguethat
It is interesting
shouldbe takenas
Othello's firstaccount of the handkerchief
14
is
some
There
piquancy in the fact that,
the literaltruth.
12Jones,p. 96. Cf. his assertionthat Othello,in the murderscene,"shows an enthusiasm forDesdemona'sbody whichhe had deliberatelyconcealed fromthe senate"
(p. 97).
House,Act. I.
'3Heartbreak
14Criticsgivingtheirreasonsfor acceptingthisspeechincludeG. R. Elliott,Flaming
Minister(Durham, N.C., 1953), pp. 145-148; JohnWain, The LivingWorldof
Shakespeare(Pelican Books, 1966), p. 147; and Fernand Baldensperger,"Was
XX
andLiterature,
Studiesand NotesinPhilogy
Othello an Ethiopian?,"Harvard
con(1938), 3-14. Baldenspergerwho providesan invaluablefundof information
"one of
cerningElizabethanattitudestowardsamulets,considersthehandkerchief
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
278
HONEST
OTHELLO
startingfromopposite directions,modem skepticsand idealin
izingtraditionalists
back intoeach other,and findthemselves
agreement.
The traditional
view,as expressedin the Variorum,
is presumablybased on theassumptionthatOthellosimplycannot harborsuch primitivenotions: he mustremaina civilized
European gentlemanif he is to be worthyof our regard.One
thinksof the artlessconfessionof the immortalMiss Preston:
"In studyingthe play of Othello,I have alwaysimaginedits
hero a whiteman. It is truethedramatist
paintshimblack,but
this shade does not suit the man. . . Othello was a white
man."15On a somewhathigherlevel,the Prestonianrefusalto
We see
accept what the play givesus is stillto be encountered.
Othello'svisagein our minds,and ifit is not whiteit is (despite
Roderigo's "thick lips" I.i.66) at least un-Negroid.Discussing
what he calls the "confusionof colour and contour,"M. R.
Ridley speaks of the kind of black man the role requires:
One of the finestheads I have everseen on anyhuman
being was that of a negroconductorof an American
Pullmancar. He had lips slightlythickerthanan ordinary European's,and he had somewhatcurlyhair;forthe
rest he had a long head, a magnificentforehead,a
keenlychisellednose, rathersunkencheeks,and hisexpressionwas grave,dignified,and a triflemelancholy.
He was coal-black,but he mighthave sat to a sculptor
for a statue of Caesar, or, so far as appearancewent,
haveplayeda superbOthello.(p. li)
Ridley is correctingMiss Preston,so the unconsciousironyof
this passage is particularly
delightful:one is especiallygrateful
for the "keenly chisellednose." Surelythe contrastbetween
Othello's appearance(by the standardsof the play, not only
and his inner
unlikelyto inspirelove but even frightening)
worthis one of Shakespeare'sbasic points.Appearancebelies
ranks
those powerfulEthiopiantalismans. . . which any specialistin superstitions
to-dayamong the most efficientof all the magichelpersof a creduloushumanity"
essay,but quotes froma
(p. 13). R. B. Heilmandoes not mentionBaldensperger's
is "an
personalletter:Othello is "an inbornfetichist,"forwhomthehandkerchief
amulet withoutequal" (Magic in the Web, p. 283, n. 83). See also JamesA. S.
McPeek, "The Arts Inhibited' and the Meaningof Othello," BUSE, I. (1955),
129-147; and W. H. Auden,n. 22 below.
SVariorum,p. 395; quoted by Ridley,ArdenOthello,p. li.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MICHAEL
C. ANDREWS
279
reality:lago, afterall, is the sort of man who inspiresconfidence. I do not go so faras LaurenceLerner,who infersthat
"Shakespearesufferedfromcolourprejudice,"and sumsup the
play as "the story of a barbarianwho (the pity of it) relapses." 16But I am certainthat Othello's personaland racial
backgroundare vital to the play. Paul Robeson insiststhat
Othello's "color is essentiallysecondary-exceptas it emphain culture."17Butthisis onlypartiallytrue.
sizes the difference
lago's temptationof Othellodependsupon the kind of naivete
Robeson has in mind;buthisimpassionedbehaviorwhenlago's
"medicine" works (e.g., his speech at IV.i.31ff.and passioninduced trance)reflectsShakespeare'sacceptanceof the popular notion that blacks are more passionately
emotionalthan
whites.This does not seem to me to be the same thingas
prejudice,providedthatthe view is not dramatizedwithprejudicial intent.In Othello it is not; and the protagonist'smore
than European capacityforviolentemotiononce his defenses
are down is an exampleof the same attentionto decorum-to
citean oppositeextreme-which
led Shakespeareto characterize
Brutusas a Stoic. Othello is a type; he is also an individual,
whose terriblesuffering
Shakespearepresentswithimaginative
and absolutelyno condescension.
sympathy
I see, then,no reason to doubt that Shakespeareintended
Othello to have some beliefsin keepingwithhis background.
But I also see no reason why beliefin the efficacyof magic
should,in itself,renderOthelloany the less noble or imposing
as a tragichero. But we still do not fancy a supersitious
Othello-superstition
beingforus (thoughnot forShakespeare's
thetendaudience)farless acceptablethanuntruthfulness-and
encyis to givecredenceto thespeechwithouttakingaccountof
18 or to rejectit and availourselvesof whatever
its implications,
16'The Machiaveland the Moor," pp. 359, 360. Lerneris effectively
answeredby
Eldred Jones,EIC, X (1960), 238: "Othello is a complex storyof how a noble
and uprightman is subjected to temptationin the area of his being wherehe is
most vulnerable-hisdifferencein race." See also G. K. Hunter,"Othello and
Colour Prejudice,"PBA, LIII (1967), 139-63; K. W. Evans,"The Racial Factor in
17Othello,"ShaKs., V(1969), 124-140.
Quoted in MarvinRosenberg,TheMasksof Othello (Universityof CaliforniaPress,
181961), p. 195.
Heilman,Magic in the Web,p. 213; HarryLevin,CentennialReview VIII (1964),
13. OtherexamplesincludeTheodore Spencer,Shakespeareand theNatureof Man
(Collier Books, 1966), p. 128; G. Wilson Knight,The Wheel of Fire, 5th ed.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
280
HONEST
OTHELLO
thatOthellois really"one of
evidencethisdebunkingfurnishes
us." 19
The speechcannotmean whatit appearsto mean; therefore
it must mean somethingelse. But must it? Settingaside the
and dramaticconvention,
mattersof dramaticrepresentation
one may attemptto answerthe skepticalcriticson theirown
grounds.Whatevidencedoes a close readingof thetextprovide
as a potentlovethat Othello reallyregardsthe handkerchief
charm?
The firstphase of the temptationscene (III.iii) ends when
counteractsthe poison
Desdemona's appearancemomentarily
then
heavenmocksitself,/
words:
"If
she
be
false,
of lago's
0,
afterthis
I'll not believeit" (11.282-283).Almostimmediately
Desdemona drops the handkerchief;Emilia, remarkingthat
Othello"conjur'd [Desdemona] she shouldeverkeep it," gives
it to lago. (At thispointOthello'sgreatconcernthathis wife
first
withher strikesone as surprising:
keep the handkerchief
value,butOthelloseemsto be overgiftshave theirsentimental
doing it.) The nextphase-whichis decisive-follows.Othello's
occupation'sgone-but he still demands"the occular proof'
(1.366). lago promisesto lead him to "the door of truth";
are his two means of
Cassio's dream,and the handkerchief,
clinchinghis case. To thedream(in whichCassio is said to have
embracedlago, bemoaning"Cursedfate,thatgave thee to the
ferocity:"I'll tear
Moor!") Othello reacts withuntrammeled
her all to pieces" (1.438). But it is thegiftof thehandkerchief
thatis directlyassociated,in Othello'smind,withtheperdition
of love:
(MeridianBooks, 1957), p. 109n. See also GeorgeLymanKittredge,SixteenPlays
19(1946), p. 1298.
E.g., Jones, Othello's Countrymen,pp. 101-103. Jones retains the belief that
Othello is essentiallynoble; one imagineswhat someone less charitable-sayDr.
Leavis-would have done with this readingof the speech. A thirdpossibilityremains: to take the passage,as Elliottdoes, as "an indirectconfessionthatfromthe
very beginningOthello was predisposedto mistrusthis wife and, far more fatefully,to hide that mistrust"(FlamingMinister,p. 145). McPeekarguesfora more
sinistervariationof thisposition,findingOthelloguiltyof necromancy,"the original sin of his mother"-thoughhe raisesthe possibilitythatOthello is dissembling
("The 'Arts Inhibited'and the Meaningof Othello," pp. 143-144). Both Elliott
is supposedto keep
and McPeek proceed on the assumptionthatthehandkerchief
Desdemonafaithful;see n. 21 below.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MICHAEL
Iago.
0th.
Iago.
Oth.
C. ANDREWS
281
Nay,but be wise,yetwe see nothingdone,
She maybe honestyet;tellme butthis,
Have you not sometimesseena handkerchief,
20 in your wife'shand?
Spotted with strawberries,
I gavehersucha one, 'twasmyfirstgift.
I knownot that,but sucha handkerchiefI am sureit was yourwife's-didI to-day
See Cassio wipehisbeardwith.
If t be that,Now do I see 'tistrue;look here,lago,
All myfondlove thusdo I blow to heaven,. . .
'Tis gone.
Arise,blackvengeance,fromthyhollowcell,
Yield up, 0 love, thycrown,and heartedthrone,
hate....
To tyrannous
(11.339-346;451-456)
The sacredvow ofvengeancefollows.
It is in thiscontext,then,thatOthello speaks,revealingfor
of thehandkerthe firsttime(and too late) thefullsignificance
the
loss
of
love.21He is
loss
whose
directly
symbolizes
chief,
addressingDesdemona,by whomthe amuletmustbe guarded.
For him to have givenher such a charmdoes not mean that
thatOthellowon hisdaughter
Brabantiowas rightin suspecting
it is plain enoughthatOthelloregardsthe
throughwitchcraft;
as ensuringthe continuanceofhis love forDesdehandkerchief
in Shakespeare,"
SRen,VII
of Strawberries
20See LaurenceJ.Ross,"The Meaning
notes
forthisreference,
(1960), 225-240.DavidKaula,to whomI am indebted
andhypocof thestrawberry-righteousness
meanings
thatthetwo iconographic
to Desdemonaas
is appropriate
meaning
risy-aredeftlyexploited:"The former
herappear.. .". "Othello
shereallyis,thelatterto Desdemonaas lago is making
ShaKs. II
Use of Magicand Superstitution."
Possessed:Noteson Shakespeare's
"Othelloand the'Tragedyof Situation,'"
(1966). 123. See also P. G. Mudford,
whosestudyappearedaftermyownessayhad
XX (1971), 4-5.Mudford,
English,
he notes
as Othello's"sacred"love-charm;
viewsthehandkerchief
beencompleted,
shallwithlust'sbloodbe spotted"(V.i.36)echoesthe
that"Thybed,lust-stain'd,
ofthehandkerchief.
description
to acceptor rejectOthello's
whether
21Cf.Evans,pp. 134-136.Evansis uncertain
.. . to a
but arguesthatOthello's"mindreverts
accountof the handkerchief,
Chrisdespitehisprofessed
believed,
magicalworldin whichhe has alwaysfaintly
marriage
tianity.He comesto acceptthatonlymagicmadehis extraordinary
possible. . ." (p. 134).
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
282
HONEST
OTHELLO
mona, not hers forhim.22 His firstgiftto Desdemona,it was
givenafterthe inceptionof love in orderto renderit perpetual.
Till thisinstant,perhaps,neitherDesdemonanortheaudienceis
aware how remoteOthello is fromthe worldin whichhe is a
sojourner.23 He comes fromthe ancientplaces of the earth;
propheticsibylsand magicin the web need not be aliento one
Desdemona,who
who has traveledamongthe Anthropophagi.
seems convincedfor one horrifiedmoment("Then would to
God that I had neverseen it!"), soon pushes this knowledge
fromher. Her unwillingness
to accept the storyindicatesher
rejectionof an aspectof Othello'scharacterthatis realenough
to us, and is no lessnaivethanherfailureto detectjealousy;for
the handkerchiefis in harmony with what we know of
Othello.It was given,he tellsDesdemona,whenhis fatewould
have himwive;even at the end of theplayhe retainsthissense
of fated action: "O vain boast,/Who can controlhis fate?"
(V.ii.265-266).24Humanresolvematterslittle.Like Oedipus,he
sees his terribleerroras forcedupon himfromtheoutside,not
and hejustlypunisheshimselffor
simplyhis own responsibility;
the act he committedin ignorance.It would not be in accord
with Othello's characterto emphasize his own role. He is
"wrought"by lago; thistoo is partof his fate.
At the end of the play,Othellois speakingin a publicrather
thanan intimatecontext,and is on thedefensive("I knowthis
act shows horribleand grim" [V.ii.203]). He speaks of the
handkerchiefto Gratiano, Desdemona's uncle. We should
scarcelyexhibitanythingbut a naturalreluctanceto allude to
thehandkerchiefs
magicalpowersbeforean audienceforwhom
evidenceof his
his beliefin such a talismanwould be further
barbarism.25And if it is not simplya carelesserroron Shake22Cf. Elliott,pp. 145-146; Lerner,"The Machiaveland the Moor," p. 358. In addition to what Othellosaysin III.iv, see II.iii.91-93: "Excellent wretch,perdition
catch my soul,/But I do love thee, and when I love thee not,j Chaos is come
which I so lov'd, and
again." It is hard to see that Othello's "That handkerchief
gave thee,! Thou gavestto Cassio" (V.ii.48-49) is designedto contradictthe meaningestablishedhere.
23Cf. W. H. Auden on Desdemona's refusalto admit she has lost the handkerchief:
because she is suddenlyconfrontedwitha man whose sensibility
"she is frightened
are
alien to her" (Encounter,August,1961, p. 13).
superstitions
24and
25Cf. "this forkedplagueis fatedto us/Whenwe do quicken" (III.iii.280-281).
p. 14.
25Cf. Baldensperger,
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MICHAEL
C. ANDREWS
283
speare'spart,the same thingmay be said of the substitution
Othello's fatherfor the Egyptian"charmer"of the firstversion.26Certainlyit is hardto believethatShakespeareintended
this one half-line("My fathergave my mother" [V.ii.218]),
virtuallyalways overlookedby readersand spectatorsalike,to
serveas a dramaticrevelationof the truth.And it would have
errorto have atbeen a serious(and most un-Shakespearean)
temptedanythingof the sort: the less Shakespearehe. More is
involvedherethanthequestionof Othello'searlierhonesty:our
mindsshouldnot be deflectedfromthe mainbusinessat hand,
Othello'stragicrealizationof themeaningof whathe has done.
of thehandkerFor the truthis thatthe talismanicsignificance
chiefis no longerrelevant.The idea does not requirerepetition
now. Desdemonais dead.
then,is a crucialelementin interpreting
The handkerchief,
Othello.My readingseemsto me in accordwiththeimpression
conveyedby theplayas a whole,beforeit has been subjectedto
the sortof too-curiousscrutinythatreversesa powerfulinitial
response-onethatin thiscase, as Helen Gardnerargues,"confirstimpressionto
tradictsthat immediateand overwhelming
which it is a prime rule of literarycriticismthat all further
in assiduously
27Muchrecentcriticism,
analysismustconform."
strivingto save us frombeing duped by Othello's grandiose
image of himself,exhibits,from this point of view, what
over
Edward Hublerhas called "the triumphof sophistication
sense." We do not, in fact, see Othello preciselyas he sees
himself;but this does not mean that lago's angle of visionis
proclaimthat
closerto the truth,or thatwe shouldconfidently
reationalizesthe discrepancyby arguingthat "the en26Kittredgeunconvincingly
chantressgave [the handkerchief]at the requestof Othello'sfather,so thatit was
in effecta gift from him" (Sixteen Plays, p. 1309). McPeek, who quotes this
explanation,is uncertainwhetherOthello is now tellingthe truth;but "if Othello
wished to stressto Gratianothe importanceof the gifthe would representit as a
giftfromthe fatherto the mother" ("The 'Arts Inhibited' and the Meaningof
Othello,p. 146).
See also David Kaula, "Othello Possessed,p. 127, who findsthat "the magical
associationsof the handkerchief. . . are symptomsof the delusionwhichgripsthe
hero in the middlephase of the tragicaction." At the end of theplay Othello "is
beginningto see [love and marriagel no longeras the provinceof exotic and
barbaric female superstition but as civilizedactivitiesin which both sexes are
engaged."
27equallyand voluntarily
Gardner,"The Noble Moor," p. 349.
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
284
HONEST
OTHELLO
is such thatthe mostrigorousstudyis
the play's deceptiveness
28
necessaryto counteractour initialsenseof Othello'snobility.
The dangersof criticismdivorcedfromboth the practical
are
and historicalperspective
realitiesof theatricalpresentation
evidentenough,but nowheremore than with Othello. In the
historicalscholarshipmay providea vital
case of handkerchief,
serviceby placingtheplayin thecontextof Shakespeare'stime.
At theend ofhislearnedbut strangely
neglectedessay,Fernand
Baldenspergerconcludes that "Rymer was right:Desdemona
but a token of superhad to die because of a handkerchief;
as Shakespeareseemsto have
naturalpowersis not a meretrifle,
understoodit-in spite of the trendof post-Baconiantimes,
moreand moreadverseto beliefswhichhave now to be reconstructedin theirproperconnotations"(p. 14). I do not have
any notionwhat Shakespearehimselfbelieved.But therelevant
and the auquestion is Othello's view of the handkerchief,
mustbe
of thatview.The handkerchief
dience'sunderstanding
reckonedwith;it earnsa place in thestory.
UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER
28Cf.Heilman,
Magicin theWeb,p. 137: "I beganmystudyholdingtheorthodox
viewof Othello's'nobility'but foundtheimpression
gradually
modified
byrepeatedreadings
ofthelines"(emphasis
added).
This content downloaded from 140.233.2.215 on Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:13:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions