A comparison of “The Tempest” by Shakespeare and ”Of Cannibals” by Montaigne

The Extract from Michel de Montaigne’s “Of Cannibals” and William Shakespeare’s play ”The Tempest”

The extract from Michel de Montaigne’s ”Of Cannibals” and William Shakespeare’s play ”The Tempest” are complementary in many respects, as they have certain similarities in plots, motifs, and themes. These relationships are portrayed in a variety of ways; for example, The Tempest is Shakespeare’s response to Montaigne’s ”Of Cannibals.” Shakespeare’s reaction indicates harmony with Montaigne’s ideas in Of the Cannibals. The way they view cannibals demonstrates the collation of their philosophies. Therefore, despite the fact that these documents discuss different topics, there are also a lot of similarities in character traits and themes. The two texts portray the themes of artificial versus natural world. They also engage in dehumanizing cannibals. Shakespeare has his way of demonstrating and representing the themes in the story. He shows different aspects of justice and represents the outlooks of the society. The Tempest is one of Williams Shakespeare’s wonderful stories; the narrative has been based on different themes and symbols that carry a lot of information about the thought of the writer. This paper aims to provide an account of the similarities in characters, motifs, and themes between Shakespeare’s ”The Tempest” and Montaigne’s ”Of Cannibals.” Also, discuss the various ways in which the correlations are portrayed in the texts.

Themes

One of the significant similarities seen in both texts is that they all dehumanize cannibals. There are many instances in Montaigne’s passage where he presents cannibals as savages. The writer says that ”It is no lie to say that these men are indeed savages—by our standards; for either they must be, or we must be: there is a great gulf between their souls and ours” (Montaigne 239). According to him, it is impossible to pursue such a critical isolation from the European partialities. This point is demonstrated where the author concludes that he yet sees “an amazing gulf” between the personality of the cannibals and the humans. It is this gap that critically directs to his dehumanizing expression. The judgment and the presence of European values drive a permanent wedge between the savage soul, which the Europeans perceive as subhuman, and the European soul, which is entirely human. It is also worth noting that when the writer says that either of them is savage, he is stating his disbelief that the European soul could be a sub-human one, contrary to that of the beast. The fact that the souls of the cannibals and the Europeans have differences is a clear indication that from the time they came to be, the author circumscribes the cannibals into an exhaustively dehumanized nature. There is unarguably no way that they can bridge the gap between savagery and humanity.

Shakespeare follows the same trend of presenting cannibals as savages. In his text, Miranda had previously attempted civilizing Caliban by training him how to communicate in English so that he could do away with his ”brutish” language. The attempts to train Caliban to adopt the European standards ended in tragedy where he attempted to assault Miranda sexually. This scene is a clear indication that whatever trials made to educate Caliban to emulate the European culture will be in vain and that he will always be a savage. Through the rest of the text, Caliban fails to adopt the European values. For example, the failure is seen when he swears that he will serve Stephano because of alcohol. The matter worsens since Caliban becomes promptly addicted to the alcohol. Nonetheless, Stephano emerges as having a more serious case than Caliban (O’Toole 9). Since he is European, he is supposed to act with an eye to modesty-he, therefore, has further to fall regarding his humanity. Shakespeare treats him miserably because of drunkenness. Caliban is clutching a bottle when he first appears near Stephano, and later on, asserts that ”He shall taste of my bottle. If he never drunk wine before, it will never go near to remove his fit. If I can recover him, and keep him tame, I will not take too much for him” (Shakespeare 2.2.71-74). Stephano acts as an encouragement to Caliban to drink, with hopes that he can now be restrained, having bought his loyalty. This statement is an indication that even the least of the Europeans is enough not only to trick the savage into becoming an alcohol addict but also restricting him at the same time.

Justice according to the Tempest is a fairy tale that involves a partisan act by two siblings. Prospero’s loss of the throne to his brother was an unexpected upset; he had plans to reestablish justice by getting himself back to power. The idea of justice of Shakespeare in the context is subjective to the favor of a single party. The fate of a sole character influences the outcome of the rest of the participants in the story. Prospero presents himself as a victim of crises of injustice, but Shakespeare tries to explain the hypocrisy over the views. Despite being furious on his brother’s action for taking power, he does not have a good reason to enslave Ariel and Caliban, and it demonstrates a clear view of injustice by Prospero. The explanation of fairness has a different avenue to focus on, but Shakespeare decides to mimic and contradict the expectations of the reader.

Justice, as explained by the Misanthrope, is viewed as follows: ”Notice how tolerant people choose to be. Toward that bold rascal who’s law with me. His social polish can’t conceal his nature.” (Montaigne 241). The writer explains that justice is only served when the wrong is punished, and otherwise, there is no lawfulness if such actions go unpunished.

The explanation of punishment as a way to reform and rehabilitate the community is explained in the same way by both writers. Alceste blames the society for all his problems, Prospero takes his vengeance towards Ariel and Caliban. ”CELIMENE: You’re much mistaken to resent him so. Why I put up with him you surely know: My lawsuit’s very shortly to be tried, And I must have his influence on my side.” (Montaigne 2.1.43). The feeling of justice according to Molière about Celimene’s quote is that it has more towards power and has a significant influence on the society; and according to Tamper, Shakespeare also acknowledges the same.

Another thematic similarity between the two texts is the theme of power.

The Cannibals discusses the various cultural norms and the human behavior which are demonstrated between the Brazilian-Indians and the Europeans while also relating it to the association of power among people of diverse islands in Shakespeare’s play (O’Toole 9). It is natural for the humans to have the characteristic of hunger for power. Likewise, it is normal according to the values of the Brazilian-Indians, to eat and sacrifice flesh and meat of their rivals. Tempest introduces to the reader the idea of the natural instinct that the human has to possess. In the play, the author considers the concept of power hunger as a natural constituent of individuals and creatures. On the other hand, Montaigne expresses the same theme but in an unlikely perspective. Also, individuals hold command by cannibalism and human execution.

The culture of Brazilian-Indians as cannibals is an indication of the reign that the people exercise over their enemies. They present the aspect of reining the other by eating the dead flesh of their opponents. The Tempest explicitly defines the obsessive idea held by the cultural power, and it also related to Of the Cannibals by a big deal on the way powerful beings behave in problematic contexts. There is the original character to kill anything that begins a problem. The Europeans, as well as the Brazilian-Indians, do away with any threat by murdering like the characters in Shakespeare’s play, the characters in Of the Cannibals do initially think that they should kill to minimize risks. In this way, both of them are similar.

The theme of true love

The theme of true love is viewed similarly by the two writers; Prospero and Miranda are good examples of true love. Though fathers seemed to have little to share with their children Prospero loved and cared for Miranda as if she was her own. He describes her daughter as Cherubin which can be expressed as an Angel in other words. The theme of love can also be seen in Alonso who is willing to do anything to be with his son even if it means to lie mudded with him in the sea rather than stay without him.

No one can control Alcester love for Celimene. Regardless of her values and behaviors not being similar to his, he continues to love her. Alceste believes that life proceeds according to a strict and steady rational code of ethics which is contrary to the view of Celimene. Love is strong; it changes him to believe in something or rather someone. Both writers wanted to show the power of love and demonstrated how useful it is to human life both in decision making and lifestyle.

The relationship between Ariel and Prospero

The relationship between Ariel and Prospero is another instance where Shakespeare engages Montaigne’s words. Prospero uses Ariel for his convenience. Ariel is respectful to the master and also admires him, but craves to have freedom. When Ariel decides to present his grievance, Prospero shows his true colors and threatens Ariel and treats him like a malignant person and barbarously (White and Copp’d 123; O’Toole 9). Similarly, Prospero’s connection with Caliban reflects Montaigne’s even more, because Prospero has control over Caliban since his arrival at the island. He is unfamiliar with what goes on in the island since he is a visitor but decides to use Caliban as a tool for getting all he wants. The reason for teaching Caliban foreign language at this time is for him to gain full control so that he can get used to the new place and suit his needs adequately. Nevertheless, it is shown through the regrets that Caliban makes about trusting Prospero since he is no longer a master of his life, that Prospero is careless of Caliban’s feelings and thoughts once he settles. ”I am all the subjects that you have/Which first was my king; and here you sty me/In this hard rock, whiles you do keep from me/The rest o’th’ island” (Shakespeare 1.2.342-344). Shakespeare’s portrayal of the selfishness of Prospero to the people in the island is a reflection of what Montaigne writes about how individuals are abusive to nature so that they can suit their desires.

Motifs

Motifs are recurring structures, contrasts, and literary devices that can help to develop and inform the text’s major themes. Shakespeare and Molière have used different motifs to explain their arguments through the use of various languages and structures. Shakespeare, for instance, describes power regarding masters and servants. Observing carefully, a reader can realize that every scene both explicitly or implicitly shows one party of the characters being subjected to force or submitting the power towards the victims. The play illustrates the master-servant self-motivation, which is mostly harsh in incidences where the relationship is threatened, for instance, where servants become defiant, or masters are too bitter. For example, in the opening scene, the ”servant” (the Boatswain) is dismissive and angry toward his ”masters” (the noblemen), whose ineptitude threatens to go to a shipwreck in the storm (White and Copp’d 123; O’Toole 9). The Misanthrope demonstrates power through the legal systems. Alceste is involved in two lawsuits; one concerns the marshals of French while the other is not well elaborated in the text. The same way servants struggle in the Shakespeare’s narrative, Alcester personal life is under strain by standing in front of a lawsuit. The motifs of both kinds of literature work play a significant role in demonstrating consequences that both legal offenders and slaves go through by breaking the ties with their masters. The law in the Misanthrope is viewed as a master in one way or another like that in The Tempest. The demonstration of the legal system and that of master-slave relationship is closely related and an excellent way to explain events and themes in both literary works. The use of characters such as Prospero who is the center of The Tempest narrative; Prospero generates the plot of the play and almost single-handedly comes up with the design to achieve the plays’ happy ending. Comparing this characterization to Misanthrope, Alceste is the foundation to realize and discern hypocrisy. Alceste demonstrates life as being flattery and fool of gossip. She, therefore, gets a chance to create a plot for the play as Prospero does in his role.

Symbols

How do the mysterious noises in the Tempest and the letters in The Misanthrope help in developing the themes and symbolic actions within these two plays? Celimene letters establish a way for more dramatic effects within the story. The discovery of the message by Alceste develops the theme of trusts and infidelity through Alceste’s confrontation. The nasty letter by Celimene towards suitors leaves her to the fate of being abandoned. The messages assist the reader in understanding the exact traits of Celimene about her social and private life. The letters also act as the comforting zone of Celimene as she can distance herself from thoughts which could be offensive.

The tales have two different approaches when focusing on the mysterious noises in Shakespeare’s The Temper. The play begins with mystical sounds of thunder and lightning; the splitting of the ship is explained as a confusing commotion. The noises are a wakeup call on the hostility of the environment for the weak. The writer demonstrates musical sounds within the context such as Ferdinand is tempted to Miranda by Ariel’s music, the same music awakens Gonzalo when Antonio and Sabastian are about to kill Alonso. The scene contributes to a sign of speaking up on the wrongs. Shakespeare utilizes noise to illustrate justice while Molière uses letters to expose the evils and hypocrisy of the society.

At the beginning of the play, the tempest puts all of Prospero enemies under his feet. The action demonstrates the suffering that Prospero endured and the revenge he is willing to inflict on others to make sure that they are even regarding pain. After the shipwrecked, the affected are put at the mercy of the sea. The very same action was depicted when Prospero and his infant daughter were pulled off from the sea being given a second chance. Prospero inflicts punishment on his enemies so that they may learn from their mistakes as he learned from his. On the other hand, Célimène’s house is seen full of freeness as men are allowed to come and leave freely. Despite Clemene’s hate to his suitors, he does not inflict punishment nor does he beat them up. The views of the two writers regarding symbolism in this instance are distant in thought and idea. One shows consequences as a method to learn while the other beliefs in free will. The use of symbols to demonstrate actions is a strong idea that both authors have portrayed in their writings. They understand their importance and have a transparent approach towards what the symbolic devices truly explain to the readers.

Conclusively, Shakespeare uses Montaigne’s Of the Cannibals as a direct source to write his play The Tempest. There are many similarities observed between the two texts where Shakespeare seems to reply to Montaigne’s essay. The two writings are similar in a number of their characters as well as thematically. The two writers dehumanize cannibals where they are represented as sub-humans. According to Montaigne, the cannibals are savages with a different soul from the average human. According to Shakespeare, he presents the cannibals as uncivilized. Miranda, for example, tries to teach Caliban English language but Caliban does not understand a single aspect. The theme of power is also evident in both texts although it is presented in different senses. The relationship between Ariel and his master, Prospero, is an instance where Shakespeare engages Montaigne’s writing in his work. The two authors share same ideas though; they distinguish between language and stylistic forms. Shakespeare’s approach to justice and love is partially the same as that of Molière who uses different strategies to explain it.

Works Cited

Montaigne, Michel. The Complete Essays of Montaigne. Brilliance Audio, 2011. Print.

O’Toole, Michael. “Shakespeare’s Natives: Ariel and Caliban in The Tempest.” Available at http://www.columbia.edu/itc/lithum/gallo/tempest.html. Accessed on 25th December 25, 2017.

Shakespeare, William. The Tempest. First Folio, 1623. Print.

White, Howard B. and Copp’d Hills Towards Heaven Shakespeare and the Classical Polity. Vol. 32. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. Print.