Showing One's Manhood: the Social Performance of Masculinity
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2018 Showing One’S Manhood: The oS cial Performance Of Masculinity Fayaz Kabani University of South Carolina - Columbia Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Kabani, F.(2018). Showing One’S Manhood: The Social Performance Of Masculinity. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/5080 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SHOWING ONE’S MANHOOD: THE SOCIAL PERFORMANCE OF MASCULINITY by Fayaz Kabani Bachelor of Arts University of South Carolina, 2003 Master of Fine Arts University of South Carolina, 2006 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2018 Accepted by: Nina Levine, Major Professor David Miller, Committee Member Ed Gieskes, Committee Member Rob Kilgore, Committee Member Cheryl L. Addy, Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School © Copyright by Fayaz Kabani, 2018 All Rights Reserved. ii ABSTRACT Contrary to much criticism of the past thirty years that regards Shakespeare’s Prince Hal as the epitome of unfettered Machiavellian subjectivity, Hal should be regarded as a teenaged male navigating the contradictory discourses of early modern masculinity in order to perform an integrated, consistent masculinity for his audience. His acceptance of hegemonic masculinity is complicated by his father Henry IV’s usurpation of the throne. The resulting ambivalence in Hal results in his participation in the counter- masculine world of Eastcheap. However, once Hal “chooses” his role as Prince of Wales, he finds it difficult to sacrifice his personal self, or body natural, for the sake of his public persona as king, or body politic. While Hal successfully transforms his youthful riot into kingly masculine self-control, becoming the legendary King Henry V, he still longs for the fraternity he experienced before his accession, desires that others recognize his inherent superiority, and approve him for “who he is” rather than his social position. However, toward the end of Henry V, he seems to have doubts about the masculinity he has so successfully presented to others, and, when denied relationship with others, asserts his dominance over them in a show of “breaking bad.” Not receiving free approval of his masculinity from them, he coerces their acceptance to prove his manhood to himself. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iii Introduction: Good Men Vs. Good Men, Kingship, Hegemony, and Hal .................................................................................................1 Chapter 1: “of all humours”: Hal and Limitless Masculine Potentiality in 1 Henry IV .....................................................................37 Chapter 2: “so troublesome a bedfellow”: 2 Henry IV and the Burdens of Kingship................................................................................108 Chapter 3: “Harry the Fifth’s the man!”: Kingly Masculinity and the Persistence of the Body Natural ..........................................169 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................260 iv INTRODUCTION GOOD MEN VS. GOOD MEN, KINGSHIP, HEGEMONY, AND HAL King O worthiest cousin! The sin of my ingratitude even now Was heavy on me. Thou art so far before That swiftest wing of recompense is slow To overtake thee. Would thou hadst less deserved, That the proportion both of thanks and payment Might have been mine. Only I have left to say, More is thy due than more than all can pay. Macbeth The service and the loyalty I owe In doing it pays itself. Your highness’ part Is to receive our duties, and our duties Are to your throne and state, children and servants, Which do but what they should by doing everything Safe toward your love and honor. (Macbeth 1.4.14-27)1 King Duncan’s courtly deference towards a thane, followed by Macbeth’s strained committal of loyalty, seems strange, given their respective social positions. Why do Duncan and Macbeth talk to each other in registers, that, taken out of context, seem counter-intuitive to their class statuses? Rather than merely illustrating Duncan’s praise of Macbeth and Macbeth’s expression of humility and service, these lines of dialogue demonstrate concisely both the social and performative nature of masculinity. 1 William Shakespeare, Macbeth, ed. Sandra Clark and Pamela Mason (New York: Bloomsbury Arden Shakespeare, 2016). 1 Towards a General Model of Masculinity: Good Men At this point in Act 1, Duncan has already lavished upon Macbeth the title and lands of the Thane of Cawdor privately by sending word with Ross and Angus. However, Duncan’s generosity must also be seen by the other thanes to show that Duncan is worthy of their loyalty. He must publicize his gift. Anonymous donation will gain Duncan nothing. Thus, Duncan deems Macbeth “worthiest” due to his accomplishments on the battlefield. The rest of his speech illustrates his consciousness of Macbeth’s good behavior as loyal subject and acknowledges that he cannot possibly repay Macbeth. In part, Duncan uses the inexpressibility topos to accurately describe Macbeth’s worthiness, but he also resorts to it to properly perform in public as king, in keeping with the late medieval and early modern assumption that honor “demanded public recognition of individual worth.” Because Macbeth deserves “a high reputation in the peer-group world of gentlemen as a person deserving respect and ‘worship,’” Duncan must show the other thanes that he acknowledges Macbeth’s feats of “vigorous…combative, self- assertion…and military glory in the field”;2 Duncan, as feudal king, must keep not only Macbeth, but also his other vassal lords happy to ensure their loyalty to him, for they might rebel otherwise. Thus, while he has already granted Macbeth the accolades attending upon the Thaneship of Cawdor, he issues forth this self-deprecation because he must publicly perform his generosity and wisdom in recognizing Macbeth’s worth to make himself look worthy to be served. Macbeth, for his part, plays the loyal, humble warrior. Being a good subject and kinsman, he attempts to deflect Duncan’s self-denigrating comments about his gifts. 2 Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex, and Marriage in England 1500-1800 (New York: Harper Colophon, 1979), 73-74. 2 Macbeth echoes the standard sentiment, “The service and the loyalty I owe / In doing it pays itself” (1.4.22-23). As one loyal to the king, his job is to render his military services. Macbeth takes up Duncan’s language of debt and describes himself as the one who owes. Duncan’s duty as king, according to Macbeth, “is to receive our duties, and our duties / Are to your throne and state, children and servants, / Which do but what they should by doing everything / Safe toward your love and throne” (24-28). Macbeth echoes King James’ own sentiment—“Kings are compared to fathers in families: for a King is truly parens patriae, the politic father of his people”3—casting Duncan as father of Scotland and himself and everyone else as dutiful children. He uses Duncan’s metaphor of debt/payment to cast himself as a faithful subject and a humble warrior, while Duncan deploys the same metaphor to depict himself as beneficent king. Macbeth, playing the loyal noble, deflates the embarrassment of wordy riches Duncan bestows upon him, in part to show the other nobles that he is indeed worthy of the lands and title newly bestowed upon him. He also plays the laconic warrior, uncomfortable with praise, who merely performs the duty owed his sovereign. While Macbeth and Duncan engage each other appropriately, they also present themselves as behaving appropriately to the other thanes and attendants present in this scene because although notions of martial masculinity depend on virtuous deeds, “masculinity is a matter of appearances,” as Bruce Smith argues, and “masculine identity of whatever kind is something men give to each other.” 4 As masculinity is a matter of appearances, other men must approve of the way one shows masculinity. Masculinity, dependent upon the approval of other men, cannot exist in a vacuum. Duncan’s bestowal 3 Stone, The Family, Sex, and Marriage, 110. 4 Bruce Smith, Shakespeare and Masculinity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), 4. 3 of a title and Macbeth’s deflection of his deserts to resituate the power in their relationship on Duncan’s side both serve to establish the other’s manhood. Duncan and Macbeth, in their engagement with each other, publicly affirm the other’s masculinity while also presenting their own for the approval of all the participants in the scene (Duncan, Macbeth, and the other thanes). Recognizing each other’s manhood stabilizes their own. This interchange illustrates the three operative assumptions of my investigation: 1) Masculinity is social. 2) As such, masculinity must be performed. 3) Performed masculinity must be accepted by the audience (present or internalized). It is performed in relation to men and women for the sake of other men. Showing one’s manhood