The Relationship of Petruchio and Katherine by Maeve Allan on Prezi
45 quotes from The Taming of the Shrew: 'My tongue will tell the anger of my Petruchio: Who knows not where a wasp does wear his sting? Katherine: Yours, if you talk of tails: and so farewell. tags: love, marriage, poem, shakespeare. Free Essay: An analysis of the relationship between Petruchio and Katherina The Relationship Between Katherine and Bianca in The Taming of the Shrew. Free Essay: Relationship of Petruchio and Katherina in William discussing about Katherine & Petruchio's behaviour towards each other through words, body .
They constantly criticize and are disrespectful towards each other. If Baptista had an intimate acquaintanceship or friendship with Antonio, the Baptista would have known Petruchio either by sight or name.
Petruchio only knows Kate for one scene in Act 2 before the decision is made that the two shall marry. Their physical and verbal interactions in Act 2, Scene both reflects signs of physical abuse and illegal actions in the rules of courtly love.
This couple have been left to have a conversation unsupervised, without the presence of a male family relative.
It is typical of a performance of The Taming of the Shrew that Petruchio and Kate begin to wrestle and physically strike each other during their verbal battle of wits. Touching, even holding hands, was taboo in terms of courtship.
By Act 4, Petruchio finds ways to physically abuse her after she is made his wife without touching her. Petruchio frequently forbids Kate from eating and sleeping until she submits to him. He starves her until she grovels at his feet and becomes grateful that she is married to him. Besides Petruchio keeping Katherine sleep deprived and not through the method of excessive lovemaking on their honeymoon as newlyweds often do and starving his new wife, Petruchio has been emotionally manipulative as he controls her appearance.
After leaving immediately after the wedding and before the reception in Act 3, Petruchio forces Kate to leave without properly saying goodbye to her family and packing for the trip. In Act 4, Katherine remains in her old filthy wedding gown, having been ruined mostly on the journey. In Act 4, Scene 3, Petruchio has had a Tailor fashion her a new dress.
Petruchio has tempted Katherine with a new dress and he forces her to remain in rags. From the moment the two wed in Act 3, Petruchio segregates Katherine from her family. He continues to isolate her by taking her to his house in the country, a place she has never been before. In her alienation, Katherine gathers the desire to return to the family she argued with frequently and at times, despised.
Petruchio denies her requests. Petruchio makes her and company travel back on foot to Padua. Katherine, who has not had her proper sleep or intake of victuals over the past few days, becomes utterly exhausted and drained of energy.
Whenever Kate disobeys her lord husband or disagrees with his lawful wording, Petruchio makes them return back to his country home and restart the odyssey. Kathrine soon figures that her own behavior is to blame for her punishment; Katherine feels she is deserving of the abuse. After this psychological and bodily torture, Katherine finally concedes and they are able to continue.
Katherine readily agrees with her husband and apologizes for her stupidity, blaming it on the sun. To modern audiences, all elements of this relationship is undoubtedly abusive. To her family, Petruchio may seem attentive and affectionate to his new mate. Pope added most of the Sly framework to The Shrew, even though he acknowledged in his preface that he did not believe Shakespeare had written A Shrew. By comparing seven passages which are similar in both plays, he concluded "the original conception is invariably to be found" in The Shrew.
He reached this conclusion primarily because A Shrew features numerous lines almost identical to lines in Marlowe's Tamburlaine and Dr. Instead he labelled A Shrew a bad quarto. His main argument was that, primarily in the subplot of A Shrew, characters act without motivation, whereas such motivation is present in The Shrew. Alexander believed this represents an example of a "reporter" forgetting details and becoming confused, which also explains why lines from other plays are used from time to time; to cover gaps which the reporter knows have been left.
Chamberswho reasserted the source theory. Its textual relation to The Shrew does not bear any analogy to that of other 'bad Quartos' to the legitimate texts from which they were memorised. The nomenclaturewhich at least a memoriser can recall, is entirely different.
The verbal parallels are limited to stray phrases, most frequent in the main plot, for which I believe Shakespeare picked them up from A Shrew. InLeo Kirschbaum made a similar argument. In an article listing over twenty examples of bad quartos, Kirschbaum did not include A Shrew, which he felt was too different from The Shrew to come under the bad quarto banner; "despite protestations to the contrary, The Taming of a Shrew does not stand in relation to The Shrew as The True Tragedie, for example, stands in relation to 3 Henry VI.
Alexander's theory continued to be challenged as the years went on. Houk developed what came to be dubbed the Ur-Shrew theory; both A Shrew and The Shrew were based upon a third play, now lost. Duthie refined Houk's suggestion by arguing A Shrew was a memorial reconstruction of Ur-Shrew, a now lost early draft of The Shrew; "A Shrew is substantially a memorially constructed text and is dependent upon an early Shrew play, now lost.
The Shrew is a reworking of this lost play. Duthie argues this other version was a Shakespearean early draft of The Shrew; A Shrew constitutes a reported text of a now lost early draft. In particular, he concentrated on the various complications and inconsistencies in the subplot of A Shrew, which had been used by Houk and Duthie as evidence for an Ur-Shrew, to argue that the reporter of A Shrew attempted to recreate the complex subplot from The Shrew but got confused; "the compiler of A Shrew while trying to follow the subplot of The Shrew gave it up as too complicated to reproduce, and fell back on love scenes in which he substituted for the maneuvers of the disguised Lucentio and Hortensio extracts from Tamburlaine and Faustus, with which the lovers woo their ladies.
Morris summarised the scholarly position in as one in which no clear-cut answers could be found; "unless new, external evidence comes to light, the relationship between The Shrew and A Shrew can never be decided beyond a peradventure.
It will always be a balance of probabilities, shifting as new arguments and opinions are added to the scales. Nevertheless, in the present century, the movement has unquestionably been towards an acceptance of the Bad Quarto theory, and this can now be accepted as at least the current orthodoxy. The Early Quartos series. Miller agrees with most modern scholars that A Shrew is derived from The Shrew, but he does not believe it to be a bad quarto. Instead, he argues it is an adaptation by someone other than Shakespeare.
In The Shrew, after the wedding, Gremio expresses doubts as to whether or not Petruchio will be able to tame Katherina. As Gremio does have a counterpart in I Suppositi, Miller concludes that "to argue the priority of A Shrew in this case would mean arguing that Shakespeare took the negative hints from the speeches of Polidor and Phylema and gave them to a character he resurrected from Supposes. This is a less economical argument than to suggest that the compiler of A Shrew, dismissing Gremio, simply shared his doubts among the characters available.
For him, adaptation includes exact quotation, imitation and incorporation of his own additions. This seems to define his personal style, and his aim seems to be to produce his own version, presumably intended that it should be tuned more towards the popular era than The Shrew.
He points out that the subplot in The Shrew is based on "the classical style of Latin comedy with an intricate plot involving deception, often kept in motion by a comic servant. He points to the fact that in The Shrew, there is only eleven lines of romance between Lucentio and Bianca, but in A Shrew, there is an entire scene between Kate's two sisters and their lovers. This, he argues, is evidence of an adaptation rather than a faulty report; while it is difficult to know the motivation of the adapter, we can reckon that from his point of view an early staging of The Shrew might have revealed an overly wrought play from a writer trying to establish himself but challenging too far the current ideas of popular comedy.
The Shrew is long and complicated. It has three plots, the subplots being in the swift Latin or Italianate style with several disguises. Its language is at first stuffed with difficult Italian quotations, but its dialogue must often sound plain when compared to Marlowe's thunder or Greene's romance, the mouth-filling lines and images that on other afternoons were drawing crowds.
An adapter might well have seen his role as that of a 'play doctor' improving The Shrew — while cutting it — by stuffing it with the sort of material currently in demand in popular romantic comedies.
Oliver argues the version of the play in the First Folio was likely copied not from a prompt book or transcript, but from the author's own foul paperswhich he believes showed signs of revision by Shakespeare. When Shakespeare rewrote the play so that Hortensio became a suitor in disguise Litiomany of his lines were either omitted or given to Tranio disguised as Lucentio.
For example, in Act 2, Scene 1, Tranio as Lucentio and Gremio bid for Bianca, but Hortensio, who everyone is aware is also a suitor, is never mentioned. In Act 3, Scene 2, Tranio suddenly becomes an old friend of Petruchio, knowing his mannerisms and explaining his tardiness prior to the wedding. However, up to this point, Petruchio's only acquaintance in Padua has been Hortensio. However, as far as Hortensio should be concerned, Lucentio has denounced Bianca, because in Act 4, Scene 2, Tranio disguised as Lucentio agreed with Hortensio that neither of them would pursue Bianca, and as such, his knowledge of the marriage of who he supposes to be Lucentio and Bianca makes no sense.
From this, Oliver concludes that an original version of the play existed in which Hortensio was simply a friend of Petruchio's, and had no involvement in the Bianca subplot, but wishing to complicate things, Shakespeare rewrote the play, introducing the Litio disguise, and giving some of Hortensio's discarded lines to Tranio, but not fully correcting everything to fit the presence of a new suitor.
Upon returning to London, they published A Shrew insome time after which Shakespeare rewrote his original play into the form seen in the First Folio. Controversy[ edit ] Kevin Black in his "wedding outfit" in the Carmel Shakespeare Festival production. The Taming of the Shrew has been the subject of critical controversy.
Dana Aspinall writes "Since its first appearance, some time between andShrew has elicited a panoply of heartily supportive, ethically uneasy, or altogether disgusted responses to its rough-and-tumble treatment of the 'taming' of the 'curst shrew' Katherina, and obviously, of all potentially unruly wives.
Do we simply add our voices to those of critical disapproval, seeing Shrew as at best an 'early Shakespeare', the socially provocative effort of a dramatist who was learning to flex his muscles?
Or as an item of social archaeology that we have long ago abandoned? Or do we 'rescue' it from offensive male smugness? Or make an appeal to the slippery category of ' irony '? Hibbard argues that during the period in which the play was written, arranged marriages were beginning to give way to newer, more romantically informed unions, and thus people's views on women's position in society, and their relationships with men, were in a state of flux.
As such, audiences may not have been as predisposed to tolerate the harsh treatment of Katherina as is often thought. In a mirror of the original, his new wife attempts successfully to tame him — thus the tamer becomes the tamed.
Although Fletcher's sequel is often downplayed as merely a farce, some critics acknowledge the more serious implications of such a reaction.
Lynda Boose, for example, writes, "Fletcher's response may in itself reflect the kind of discomfort that Shrew has characteristically provoked in men and why its many revisions since have repeatedly contrived ways of softening the edges.
The Taming of the Shrew - Wikipedia
For some critics, "Kate's taming was no longer as funny as it had been [ Marcus very much believes the play to be what it seems. She argues A Shrew is an earlier version of The Shrew, but acknowledges that most scholars reject the idea that A Shrew was written by Shakespeare. She believes one of the reasons for this is because A Shrew "hedges the play's patriarchal message with numerous qualifiers that do not exist in" The Shrew.
For example, director Conall Morrisonwrote in I find it gobsmacking that some people see the play as misogynistic. I believe that it is a moral tale. I believe that it is saying — "do not be like this" and "do not do this. It's amazing how you lobotomised her.
And they're betting on the women as though they are dogs in a race or horses. It's reduced to that. And it's all about money and the level of power. Have you managed to crush Katharina or for Hortensio and Lucentio, will you be able to control Bianca and the widow? Will you similarly be able to control your proto-shrews? It is so self-evidently repellent that I don't believe for a second that Shakespeare is espousing this.
And I don't believe for a second that the man who would be interested in Benedict and Cleopatra and Romeo and Juliet and all these strong lovers would have some misogynist aberration. It's very obviously a satire on this male behaviour and a cautionary tale [ This is him investigating misogyny, exploring it and animating it and obviously damning it because none of the men come out smelling of roses. When the chips are down they all default to power positions and self-protection and status and the one woman who was a challenge to them, with all with her wit and intellect, they are all gleeful and relieved to see crushed.
Petruchio's 'taming' of Kate, harsh though it may be, is a far cry from the fiercely repressive measures going on outside the theatre, and presumably endorsed by much of its audience. Some critics argue that in mitigating the violence both of folktales and of actual practices, Shakespeare sets up Petruchio as a ruffian and a bully, but only as a disguise — and a disguise that implicitly criticises the brutal arrogance of conventional male attitudes.
Whatever the " gender studies " folks may think, Shakespeare isn't trying to "domesticate women"; he's not making any kind of case for how they ought to be treated or what sort of rights they ought to have. He's just noticing what men and women are really like, and creating fascinating and delightful drama out of it.
Shakespeare's celebration of the limits that define us — of our natures as men and women — upsets only those folks who find human nature itself upsetting. I think it's an irresponsible and silly thing to make that play into a feminist tract: There's another, more complex way of reading it than that: Now, we don't happen to think that we are inheritors of the sin of Adam and that orderliness can only be preserved by deputing power to magistrates and sovereigns, fathers and husbands.
But the fact that they did think like that is absolutely undeniable, so productions which really do try to deny that, and try to hijack the work to make it address current problems about women's place in society, become boring, thin and tractarian. Oliver, "it has become orthodoxy to claim to find in the Induction the same 'theme' as is to be found in both the Bianca and the Katherine-Petruchio plots of the main play, and to take it for granted that identity of theme is a merit and 'justifies' the introduction of Sly.
This is important in terms of determining the seriousness of Katherina's final speech. Marjorie Garber writes of the Induction, "the frame performs the important task of distancing the later action, and of insuring a lightness of tone — significant in light of the real abuse to which Kate is subjected by Petruchio. Are we to let that play preach morality to us or look in it for social or intellectual substance?
The drunken tinker may be believed in as one believes in any realistically presented character; but we cannot 'believe' in something that is not even mildly interesting to him. The play within the play has been presented only after all the preliminaries have encouraged us to take it as a farce.