While some of William Shakespeare's plays have become so ingrained in popular culture that they are ubiquitous, others are rarely performed or read and are, in fact, largely ignored. Shakespeare's Othello, one of the former, and Titus Andronicus, one of the latter, are very different plays in their setting and style, but their subject matter is much more similar than it appears at first glance. The main character of Othello is a famous Moor and usually depicted as black, despite debate over what exactly Shakespeare meant by "Moor". Titus Andronicus also features a Moorish character, Aaron, but his characterization is more reminiscent of Iago's villainy than any trait of Othello's. The ten-year separation between the writing of the two plays seems to have caused an abrupt change in Shakespeare's characterization of the Moor, but the impact of this change on the different notions of race and otherness within the two works is extremely complex. Aaron's characterization in Titus Andronicus and Othello differ with respect to notions of masculinity, inherent barbarity, and animalism, but both plays highlight the "otherness" of their Moorish characters. Additionally, both plays have strangely distorted timelines and durations, which, while probably just a coincidence, also contributes to the alteration of Aaron and Othello. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Although Titus Andronicus' Aaron and Othello are both most certainly Moorish characters, it is not very clear what is meant by "Moorish". As Emily Bartels explains in the introduction to her book "Making More of the Moor," the term was used interchangeably during the Renaissance with a variety of other racially ambiguous words "to denote a figure of different parts or the whole of Africa (or beyond). ) who was either black or Muslim, neither, or both” (434). Much of the early criticism of Othello denied that the character could be black (448) and was instead intended to be Arab, but the racial epithets leveled at Othello focused on blackness; Iago calls him an “old black ram” (1.1.88). Aaron's skin color is also obsessed with Titus Andronicus. He himself declares that he "will have his soul black as his face", while "an unfortunate black fly" painfully reminds Marcus and Titus of "the Empress's Moor", Aaron (3.1.204, 3.2. 65-66). . Aaron and the other characters in the play constantly draw attention to skin color, but in Othello, Iago is the instigator of almost all racial language (Bartels 447-48). Shakespeare's Moorish characters are both black, and skin color plays an important role in the larger question of power and where it lies. Titus Andronicus, the first of the two plays, depicts a much more stereotypical "barbaric" black character in Aaron, who is unapologetically and undeniably evil, than Othello. Aaron “is the only character in this play whose malignancy is consistently recognized and easily categorized by everyone, including himself and his allies” (Bartels 442) and indeed his malignancy is virtually his only personality trait. Aaron, much like Othello's Iago, plays the brooding villain, often revealing his plans to the audience through monologues or asides. Joseph Porter notes Aaron's similarity to Iago in his linguistic examination of the texts, Belleforest's "Vn Escalue More" and Othello. He appears alone in 2.1 and summarizes the action of the first act,then revealing his sexual intention to "have fun with" and "go up in the air with [Tamora]", the new empress of Rome (2.1.1-25). The obscenity of his lines here is typical of his racially charged portrayal of a scheming villain, almost caricatured for modern audiences. This almost caricatured effect is, however, banished shortly after when Aaron orders Demetrius and Chiron to “serve [their] lust, out of sight.” , that is, to rape and mutilate Titus' daughter (2.1.131-132). Aaron sows destruction across Rome and through Titus Andronicus, but “that [he] has not done a thousand other [heinous acts] / Even now [he] curses the day” (5.1.124-125). Titus Andronicus is a play aimed at subverting sympathies and uprooting normality, but in its depiction of Aaron it firmly cements a racial stereotype (Bartels 442). Shakespeare's initial portrayal of a Moorish character is one of undeniable, stereotypical barbarity and differs sharply from Othello, whose Moorish character is depicted in a much more ambiguous manner. Barbarism is much less racially defined in Othello. Far from being a barbaric character, Othello is educated and worldly, and woos Desdemona with tales of his travels. However, much of the critical discourse surrounding the play concerns the ease with which Othello is persuaded to "think and act monstrously", as Emily Bartels puts it (448). “The valiant Othello,” as the Duke of Venice calls him, tells such fascinating tales of his life and travels that Desdemona “with eager ear / devours [his] speech” and “loved him for the dangers that he was running.” past” (1.3.48, 148-49, 166). This is not the image of a barbarian man, but Iago, in his jealousy, associates him with the devil (2.1.221), and therefore with barbarism. In private, Iago turns Brabantio and Roderigo against Othello using racial associations with devils and "black rams", but at court, where "at least [Othello's] martial prowess takes precedence over race...Iago knows better than demonizing the Moor” ( Bartels 448-449). Barbarism, here, is much less strongly associated with the Moorish character of the play than in Titus Andronicus. Furthermore, the idea that Othello possesses some inherent barbarity that makes Iago's persuasion easier is refuted by Iago himself, who admits that Othello "is of a free and open nature / who thinks that men are honest but seem to be” (2.1.381-82). Although he claims to Roderigo that "these Moors are fickle in their will", implying Iago's belief in Othello's racial inferiority, Iago attacks Othello's seemingly trusting nature, weakening the already weak association between the Moors and barbarism (1.3.339). The contrast between the courageous general Othello and the man who so easily falls prey to Iago's deception draws attention to Othello's otherness (Bartels 448), but he is less overtly othered by simple barbarity, as is Aaron in Titus Andronicus. Although similar to or perhaps simply a subcategory of barbarism, animalism is a distinct trait associated with Moorish characters in both Othello and Titus Andronicus, and the language of animal traits merits separate examination. The animal language used in both plays is more similar to that of barbarism, but nevertheless remains distinct. Joseph Porter attacks the language of bestial traits in his article concerning the phrase "I took the circumcised dog by the throat", present in Othello but not in Titus Andronicus, despite the fact that both works have Moorish characters, to whom the epithet is attributed. applied, and that the epithet comes from the source text of Titus (Porter 194). Despite this omission, the language ofanimality is present elsewhere. As previously mentioned, Aaron is associated with "a nasty black fly" which Marcus squashes, and Titus is furious at this loss of life until Marcus brings up the Moor, at which point Titus asks for a knife, intending to "d 'insult'. on him, / Flattering himself as if he were the Moor” (3.2.66-72). Furthermore, although the “circumcised dog” is absent from Titus Andronicus, Lucius compares Aaron to an “inhuman dog,” as well as a “ravenous tiger” (5.3.14, 5). Aaron's method of execution is also reminiscent of the animal kingdom; he is buried “up to his chest in the earth,” his head emerging from the ground like a worm, until he dies of dehydration, hunger, or cold (5.3.178-182). In both animalism and barbarism, Aaron's association with these traits is somewhat simpler than those of Othello, and he constitutes a more obvious racial stereotype of a Moor. The language of bestial traits, like that of barbarism in Othello, is found largely in Iago's mouth, and usually in private or asides. As Joseph Porter notes in his short work on the source text of Titus Andronicus, words and phrases from this source seep into Shakespeare's Othello ten years later, particularly the epithet "circumcised dog" ( Porter 195). Besides this particular phrase that Porter focuses on, Othello is compared to "an old black ram" and is accused of being as willing to "be tenderly led by the nose / as donkeys" (1.1.88, 2.1.383 ). -384). Iago, of course, utters both of these epithets. However, in the third act, Iago's words could be said to begin to extend to Othello himself, who "would rather be a toad / And live in the fumes of a dungeon / Than guard a corner in what I like / For others.” “uses,” that is, Desdemona’s love (3.3.274-277). Whether or not caused by an association with Iago, Othello's comparison here to a toad is representative of his continued descent into jealous fever. Iago's use of bestial and racial slurs in private, while generally disapproved in court, helps turn other characters, such as Brabantio and Roderigo, against Othello (Bartels 449). Compared to the animal language of Titus Andronicus, it is significant that such speech is limited to Iago's private moments alone or with other specific characters, and its effect is to less overtly associate Othello with the animal while using this association to contribute to its downfall. The obsession with candaulism and masculinity is present in Shakespeare's plays, as well as in Renaissance literature in general, which of course intersects with representations of race in Titus Andronicus. Although Othello is perhaps more concerned with issues of sexuality and masculinity, as suspicions of adultery drive the plot, these issues are also present in Titus Andronicus. Unlike Othello, who is convinced that he is a cuckold, Aaron plays the cuckold in Titus. Tamora, with whom Aaron is having an adulterous affair, compares their illicit romance to that of Dido and Aeneas. She begs Aaron to lie with her amid the "yellowing noise" of the ongoing hunt in Act 2, scene 3, as "the wandering prince and Dido once enjoyed / When, with a merry storm, they were surprised / And covered with advice. -guard the cave” (2.3.20-24). Further evidence of Tamora's affair with Aaron comes with the birth of her child, whom the nurse delivers to Aaron and describes as "a joyless, dreary, black and painful problem /... as loathsome as a toad" (4.2. 66-67). . The child, obviously, does not belong to Tamora's husband Saturninus, but to Aaron. Although Aaron now has little respect for human life, he murdersthe nurse and probably the midwife to protect the life of her illegitimate child (4.2.140-167). In a twist somewhat incongruous with his previous characterization, Aaron spends the final act of the play carrying his infant son. This image of parent and child is commonly associated with femininity, somewhat upsetting the hyper-masculine and adulterous image of Aaron. In Titus Andronicus, the one who cuckolds the emperor is in turn feminized by the result of his own adultery, his child. Masculinity is, like many of these traits, much more complex in Othello. Iago preys on Othello's fear of being cuckolded, which is the essential driving force of the plot. Sexuality, and by extension masculinity, in Othello is a question of power, just as race is also a question of power (Bartels 447). Iago convinces Othello that he is a cuckold, but at the same time, Iago's private speech about Othello is hyper-sexualized, part of the Moorish stereotype that Iago attributes to Othello. Iago is convinced that "between [his] sheets / [Othello] did [Iago's] work", that is, he had extramarital sex with Iago's wife Emilia (2.1. 169-170). This, coupled with Othello's choosing Cassio as his lieutenant, confronting Iago's masculinity, caused him to "hate the Moor" (2.1.168). Iago's precarious masculinity leads him to grapple with Othello's equally precarious masculinity, of which Iago is well aware. Othello woos Desdemona with his worldliness and his travel stories, and not with "beauty in favor, sympathy for age, manners and beauty, all which the Moor lacks", according to Iago (2.1.223- 225). Iago is not the only character obsessed with Othello's sexuality and masculinity; Brabanzio, Desdemona's father, is also deeply concerned about Othello's sexual behavior. He claims that Othello must have Desdemona "in magic chains...bound" for her to marry him (1.2.66) and he is outraged at the idea that she lost her virginity to Othello, even if he is her lawful husband. It seems like masculinity is a toxic cycle. Iago perceives a threat to his masculinity and his power and in turn convinces Brabanzio and Othello of the threats against their power, Brabanzio of the threat against his daughter and Othello of the threat against his wife. Finally, and more tangentially, the representation of the passage of time. in Shakespeare's Othello and in Titus Andronicus, although perhaps simply a coincidence, contributes to the otherness of the Moor. Othello's “double-time patterns” are well known (Cohen 2096). Literally speaking, the events of the play take place over a few days and Othello murders his wife less than a week after their marriage, but he also accuses her of a long-standing affair with Cassio, which is impossible (2096) . Likewise, the chronology of Titus Andronicus is ambiguous. It is assumed that Titus returned from the Gothic war with Tamora and Aaron in his train and that on the same day Tamora married Saturninus, becoming empress. Titus then asks Saturninus to join him on a hunt if “tomorrow… it pleases [Saturninus] / To hunt the panther and the deer with [him]” (1.1.488-490). The next day's action includes the murders of Bassianus, Quintus, and Martius, and the rape and mutilation of Lavinia. This day is also presumably the day of the conception of Aaron's illegitimate child with Tamora, as the audience sees their sexual banter throughout the hunt (2.1-3). There is no indication that Tamora was pregnant before this scene, and yet the child appears to be born a few days later (4.2). The simplest explanation would be that there is a big jump in time between Act 3, Scene 1, and Act 3, Scene 2, but that would make little sense as the action of this scene and subsequent scenes takes place.