The Father and the Bride in Shakespeare Author(S): Lynda E
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Father and the Bride in Shakespeare Author(s): Lynda E. Boose Source: PMLA, Vol. 97, No. 3 (May, 1982), pp. 325-347 Published by: Modern Language Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/462226 Accessed: 23-08-2014 18:12 UTC 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]. Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 168.28.16.242 on Sat, 23 Aug 2014 18:12:43 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions LYNDA E. BOOSE The Fatherand the Bride in Shakespeare T HE ARISTOCRATIC family of Shake- in focusing on what would seem to have been speare's England was, according to social the least valued relationship of all: that between historian Lawrence Stone, "patrilinear, father and daughter. primogenitural, and patriarchal." Parent-child While father and son appear slightly more relations were in general remote and formal, often in the canon, figuring in twenty-three singularly lacking in affective bonds and gov- plays, father and daughter appear in twenty-one erned solely by a paternal authoritarianism dramas and in one narrative poem. As different through which the "husband and father lorded it as these father-daughter plays are, they have one over his wife and children with the quasi-author- thing in common: almost without exception the ity of a despot" (Crisis 271). Stone characterizes relationships they depict depend on significant the society of the sixteenth and early seventeenth underlying substructures of ritual. Shakespeare centuries as one in which "a majority of indi- apparently created his dramatic mirrors not viduals . found it very difficult to establish solely from the economic and social realities that close emotional ties to any other person" (Fam- historians infer as having dictated family be- ily 99)1 and views the nuclear family as a havior but from archetypal models, psychologi- burdensome social unit, valued only for its ability cal in import and ritual in expression. And the to provide the means of patrilineal descent. Sec- particular ritual model on which Shakespeare ond and third sons counted for little and daugh- most frequently drew for the father-daughter re- ters for even less. A younger son could, it is true, lationship was the marriage ceremony.5 be kept around as a "walking sperm bank in case In an influential study of the sequential order the elder son died childless," but daughters "were or "relative positions within ceremonial wholes," often unwanted and might be regarded as no Arnold van Gennep isolated three phases in rit- more than a tiresome drain on the economic re- ual enactment that always recur in the same sources of the family" (Stone, Family 88, 112).' underlying arrangement and that form, in con- Various Elizabethan documents, official and cert, "the pattern of the rites of passage": sep- unofficial, that comment on family relations sup- aration, transition, and reincorporation.6 The port Stone's hypothesis of the absence of affect.3 church marriage service-as familiar to a mod- Yet were we to turn from Stone's conclusions to ern audience as it was to Shakespeare's-con- those we might draw from Shakespeare's plays, tains all three phases. When considered by itself, the disparity of implication-especially if we as- it is basically a separation rite preceding the sume that the plays to some extent mirror the transitional phase of consummation and culmi- life around them-must strike us as significant. nating in the incorporation of a new family unit. Shakespeare's dramas consistently explore affec- In Hegelian terms, the ceremonial activities as- tive family dynamics with an intensity that justi- sociated with marriage move from thesis through fies the growing inference among Shakespearean antithesis to synthesis; the anarchic release of scholars that the plays may be primarily "about" fertility is positioned between two phases of rela- family relations and only secondarily about the tive stasis. The ritual enables society to allow for macrocosm of the body politic.4 Not the ab- a limited transgression of its otherwise universal sence of affect but the possessive overabundance taboo against human eroticism. Its middle move- of it is the force that both defines and threatens ment is the dangerous phase of transition and the family in Shakespeare. When we measure transgression; its conclusion, the controlled rein- Stone's assertions against the Shakespeare corporation into the stability of family. But be- canon, the plays must seem startlingly ahistorical fore the licensed transgression can take place- 325 This content downloaded from 168.28.16.242 on Sat, 23 Aug 2014 18:12:43 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 326 The Father and the Bride in Shakespeare the transgression that generates the stability and couple's willing consent was necessary for valid continuity of society itself-the ritual must sep- matrimony and however vociferously the official arate the sanctified celebrants from the sterile conduct books urged parents to consider the forces of social interdiction. The marriage ritual compatibility of the match, fathers like Cym- is thus a pattern of and for the community that beline, Egeus, and Baptista feel perfectly free to surrounds it, as well as a rite of passage of and disregard these requirements. Although lack of for the individuals who enact it. It serves as an parental consent did not affect the validity of a especially effective substructure for the father- marriage and, after 1604, affected the legality daughter relation because within its pattern lies only when a minor was involved,7 the family the paradigm of all the conflicts that define this control over the dowry was a powerful psycho- bond at its liminal moment of severance. The logical as well as economic weapon. Fathers like ceremony ritualizes two particularly significant Capulet, Lear, and Brabantio depend on threats events: a daughter and a son are being incorpo- of disinheritance to coerce their children. When rated into a new family unit, an act that explicitly their daughters nonetheless wed without the pa- breaks down the boundaries of two previously ternal blessing, the marriages are adversely af- existing families; yet, at the same time, the bonds fected not because any legal statutes have been being dissolved, particularly those between fa- breached but because the ritual base of marriage ther and daughter, are being memorialized and has been circumvented and the psychological thus, paradoxically, reasserted. In early come- separation of daughter from father thus rendered dies like The Taming of the Shrew, Shakespeare incomplete. For in Shakespeare's time-as in followed the Roman design of using the father of our own-the ceremony acknowledged the spe- the young male lover as the senex iratus, a cial bond between father and daughter and the blocking figure to be circumvented. The mature need for the power of ritual to release the daugh- comedies, tragedies, and romances reconstruct ter from its hold. the problems of family bonds, filial obedience, As specified in the 1559 Book of Common and paternal possessiveness around the father Prayer, the marriage ritual enjoins that the fa- and daughter, the relation put into focus by the ther (or, in his absence, the legal guardian)8 marriage ceremony. When marriage activities are deliver his daughter to the altar, stand by her in viewed from the perspective of their ritual impli- mute testimony that there are no impediments to cations, the bride and groom are not joined until her marriage, and then witness her pledge hence- the transitional phase of the wedding-night con- forth to forsake all others and "obey and serve, summation; before that, a marriage may be an- love honor and keep" the man who stands at her nulled. What the church service is actually all other side. To the priest's question, "Who giveth about is the separation of the daughter from the this woman to be married unto this man?"-a interdicting father. question that dates in English tradition back The wedding ceremony of Western tradition to the York manual (Book of Common Prayer has always recognized the preeminence of the 290-99; 408, n.)-the father must silently father-daughter bond. Until the thirteenth cen- respond by physically relinquishing his daughter, tury, when the church at last managed to gain only to watch the priest place her right hand control of marriage law, marriage was consid- into the possession of another man. Following ered primarily a private contract between two this expressly physical symbolic transfer, the families concerning property exchange. The father's role in his daughter's life is ended; validity and legality of matrimony rested on the custom dictates that he now leave the stage, re- consensus nuptialis and the property contract, a sign his active part in the rite, and become a situation that set up a potential for conflict by mere observer. After he has withdrawn, the cou- posing the mutual consent of the two children, ple plight their troths, and the groom receives who owed absolute obedience to their parents, the ring, again from the priest. Taking the against the desires of their families, who must bride's hand into his, the groom places the ring agree beforehand to the contract governing on her finger with the words, "With this ring I property exchange.