The Comedy of Errors, written by William Shakespeare, is reflected to a large extent in Plautus' play The Brothers Manaechmus, both of which deal with the question of separated twins who find themselves in the same town and mix up. However, although Shakespeare draws his work from the basic plot structure of the ancient Roman text of Plautus, it is evident that he takes liberties to further develop the main characters and deviate from the specific storylines of the original comedy . Upon careful reading, a major disparity between the two obviously lies in the difference in representation of the wives of the lost twins: Adriana in The Comedy of Errors and the wife in The Brothers Manaechmus. Through the analysis of the confused confrontation between "husband" and wife, third parties in the form of the Abbess and the Old Man, and the verbal violence to which they are subjected during their husband's moments of madness, it is evident that Shakespeare shapes Adriana's three-dimensional, sympathetic character from that of the Wife, portraying her as sympathetic rather than malignant. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get an original essay In Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors and Plautus's The Brothers Menaechmus, an alien twin (Antipholus of Syracuse/Menaechmus II) is interrogated confusedly by her brother's wife, during which she accuses him of not having recognized her and castigates his unfaithful behavior. However, it can be said that the two interactions deviate from each other, as shown by the diction between the man and the woman presented in both texts. While Adriana accuses her husband of negligence, just like the wife of Menaechmus I, she offers herself and reminds him of their vows as husband and wife. In this context, she addresses her suspicion of adultery when she meets him in the market place; ADRIANA I am possessed with an adulterous stain; My blood is mixed with the crime of lust: For if we also are one and you play false, I digest the poison of your flesh, being struck by your contagion. So keep alliance and truce far away with your true bed; I live without stain, you without dishonor. (2.2.139-145) Adriana asserts that her marriage to Antipholus did not make them two separate entities, but rather united them in unity as an inseparable whole, evident when she asserts that "we are one ". In saying this, she suggests that their marital bond fused their two bodies into one, using this analogy to demonstrate to Antipholus that if he became adulterous, his blood would also "mix with the crime of lust", "an adulterous stain" . on his purity, the result of his reprehensible actions. More literally, she implies that by sleeping with other women, notably the courtesan, he will bring sexually transmitted diseases into their bedroom, proof of his "adulterous stain" settling on his skin and making him ashamed in the Company. She thus begs him to remain faithful to her in order to protect his reputation by “keeping… a distant alliance and truce with your true bed”. She claims this will allow her to “live without stain” and will also preserve her own honor. Thus, in his appeal, Shakespeare leads the audience to sympathize with Adriana, who is forced to bear the weight of her husband's adultery, which results in both emotional and societal shame, as well as physical illness . Shakespeare here alludes to the fact that the wives of adulterous men also became victims of diseases spread by their husbands' affairs, an additional burden they were forced to bear. This is important because Adriana recognizes this while pleading with Antipholus,and nevertheless promises to remain faithful to him. However, unlike Adriana, the wife uses much less kind and noble language to speak to her confused “husband.” Although she initially believes that he has come to return the robe stolen from and given to Erotium, she calls him a "shameless, impudent and wicked man" (1.713), and, angrily, asks him how "You dare to mutter , do you dare to say a word to me? (1.711) when he asks her for her identity. However, the main disparity between her behavior and that of her Shakespearean counterpart is highlighted when she responds to Menaechmus calling her a "female dog" (1.718) after she approaches him: WOMAN I just can't stand all this shame - I would like I would even prefer to live my life….a divorce? Than bear the weight of your shame. (1.719-721) Saying that she would “rather live… life… divorce? by ending her marriage to Menaechmus, her response is fundamental here in that it creates a striking contrast with that of Adriana. Unlike the wife, who creates an easy escape by resorting to divorce, Adriana reminds her husband of their marital vows and the resulting incorruptible bodily separation. Unlike the first, she does not verbally insult him or threaten to leave her husband because of his infidelity, but begs him to come back to her. This difference is important here in that, by changing her response, she is characterized as loving and co-dependent, rather than mean and angry, as Plautus depicts his female antagonist here. This is highlighted when the wife suggests that she would rather bear the societal shame of divorce "rather than bear the weight of that shame", in reference to Menaechmus' adulterous behavior. As a result, it can be said that Shakespeare's reflection and modification of the Brothers Menaechmus forges an alternative depth of Plautus' wife and paints her in a more dependent and three-dimensional manner. Perhaps this is why readers do not support the wife, who lacks even a name other than a sign of ownership from her husband, and who is static in her continued scolding and scheming. On the other hand, it may be incorrect to judge her actions so crudely given that her qualms towards her husband are very significant; she knows that he stole her dress and gave it to her lover Erotium, which her husband outwardly lied about. On the other hand, Adriana only suspects that Antipholus missed dinner in the company of another woman, when in reality he was delayed by the goldsmith, from whom he had ordered a necklace for her. Although it is suggested that Antipholus had previous illicit relations with the courtesan, his faults are not as deep as those of Menaechmus, who openly steals the bride. Accordingly, the wife can be said to differ in her relationship with her husband to the extent that, in response to the confusion, she threatens to leave him, while Adriana warns her husband of the societal shame of his adultery and reaffirms the bodily meaning. of their marriage. Furthermore, when there are problems between "husband" and wife in The Comedy of Errors and in The Menechme Brothers, a third party intervener seems to look down on the woman, either in the form of the abbess or a town nun. of Ephesus, or the Old Man, the father of the Woman. These meetings are paralleled in the two texts to the extent that external characters accuse the respective wives of bad actions towards their husbands, thus reducing them to silence. In The Comedy of Errors, the Abbess attributes Antipholus' madness as a consequence of Adriana's nagging of her obvious adultery. She claims that: ABBESS The venomous clamors of a jealous woman Poisons more deadly than a toothmad dog. It seems that his sleep has been disturbed by your taunts, and that is why his head is light. (5.1.69-72) By accusing Adriana of making Antipholus "light-headed" by speaking of wrongdoing, the Abbess suggests that her madness comes from the "venom" of Adriana's jealousy. She believes that this jealous "poison" penetrated him like a bite from a "mad dog's tooth" and prevented him from sleeping, thus explaining his strange behavior. In response to this, Adriana encroaches on the abbess to free her husband, softened by promises to take care of him during his illness: ADRIANA I will look after my husband, be his nurse, cure his illness, for that is my office , and I will have no other advocate than myself; And so let me take him home with me. (5.1.98-101) She claims that as her "nurse", Adriana will make it her duty to see that Antipholus is cured of his madness. She comes to the abbess not to complain but to have him back under her own care, illustrating her desire to stay with Antipholus despite all his misbehavior, highlighting the loyal and forgiving nature of her character. However, even though the abbess incorrectly diagnoses Antipholus, who is hiding in the monastery as a place of refuge from the charlatan Doctor Pinch, her attitude towards Adriana is nonetheless a reflection of the society that has shaped her view of rights and wrongs in the relationships between men and women. This scene is also reflected in the text of the Menaechmus Brothers, in which the Old Man, even before arriving at the scene of the conflict, prophesies the cause of the trouble by saying that: THE OLD MAN Well, it's always like that with women with large dowries. They are fierce towards their husbands, they order their lives. But sometimes, man is... let's say... not so pure. There are limits to what a good wife can endure. (1.766-769) With this song, he implies that his daughter's harassing behavior towards her husband is typical of rich women ("...it's always like that with women with large dowries"), indicating that the woman believes that her large dowry gives her the right to be demanding of her husband (“They are fierce towards their husbands, they command their lives”). As with the abbess, there is a note of reproach here, but it is assuaged by her recognition that there are "limits to what a good wife can endure." This thus illustrates the different ways in which the respective societies of Shakespeare and Plautus treated the concept of marriage, to the extent that for Adriana, her marital bond with Antipholus is all-consuming and eternal. On the other hand, for the Woman, her bond with her husband is forged by monetary ties and can be easily broken, an idea reinforced by the Old Man in his speech. Approaching the couple, his daughter, the wife, tells them about her husband's spending and her attempts to control his affairs and drinking, claiming that she wants to abandon her husband and return home to her family : WOMAN, I have done nothing wrong, dear Father, you can be assured of that. But I just can't continue to live with him somehow. Therefore, take me home. (1.779-782) In saying this, her behavior once again marks a deep disparity between her and Adriana; rather than tend to her sick and obviously insane "husband", she chooses to abandon him ("Therefore, take me home") and return to live in her father's house, claiming that she is not guilty in this situation because she “did nothing”. false". While Adriana selflessly comes to the abbess to take her husband home and care for him, his wife wants to be taken home herself, reflecting a disgruntled child, rather than a wife with faced with a difficult husband For the wife, marriage is not.the unbreakable bond that Adriana sees, but rather a temporary arrangement that can be broken if inconvenienced. For her, she and Menaechmus I do not share a unified body and soul; it is obvious that she feels that her wrongdoings are exemplary of her bad character, and that alone, without further reflection or blame in herself. By refusing to take responsibility for her husband's actions, the wife can also be interpreted in a more feminist light; unlike the codependent Adriana, she is unwilling to tolerate Menaechmus' abusive behavior. This disparity once again drives a wedge between the two women, who differ in their solutions to their fragmented relationships. After hearing the wife's complaints, the old man reprimands her, defending Menaechmus I by saying that her displeasure with her husband's behavior will not make him change despite her reluctance: "Thanks to all your diligence, I I promise, he'll love her more. » (1.791). He goes on to say: OLD MAN…Look, you are rather well dressed, well adorned with jewels and well stocked with food and maids. Being a well-off woman, well, be good, leave her alone. (1.801-802) These words of warning strike a chord in the Abbess's speech, since the Old Man here also advises the Wife to wean herself from her jealous behavior and let things go ("Being well-off, woman, well, be good, leave him alone). Accusing her of "blaming innocent men" (1.805), like the abbess, he does not sympathize with the plight of the wronged woman, instead attributing Menaechmus' erratic behavior to her jealousy. Thus, the old man and the abbess ignore the women's pleas, demonstrating their mutual lack of compassion towards the men's adultery and abusive behavior. Following these feuds across the two texts of The Comedy of Errors and The Brothers Menaechmus, another match between the two occurs during the bouts of supposed madness seen with both Antipholus of Ephesus and Menaechmus II. When detained by Doctor Pinch, Antipholus' speech aligns very closely with that of Menaechmus II, for whom the Old Man sends the Doctor following his crazy threats to kill those around him. Throughout these scenes, both men attack and blame their wives, as seen when Antipholus of Ephesus condemns Adriana for claiming that Dromio had not come to her to secure Antipholus' bail: ANTIPHOLUS Concealer as a prostitute, you are false in everything; And art joins with a damned pack To make me an abject and loathsome contempt: But with these nails I will tear out these false eyes Who would see in me this shameful sport. (4.4.102-6) In his rage, he threatens to “rip out those false eyes,” which he believes so unjustly accuse him of a wrongdoing he did not commit. Calling Adriana a lying “prostitute”, he blames her for her promiscuity and her arrest. Likewise, this is directly paralleled with the case of Menaechmus, who, when confronted by the old man, begins to insult the father and daughter, calling the woman a "very rabid female dog" and her father a "goat that stinks of blood." garlic ". : MANAECHME II …On the left I am guarded by a very rabid dog. Right behind her is a goat that stinks of garlic, and this goat has countless times accused an innocent citizen of perjury. (1.838-840) As in The Comedy of Errors, Menaechmus II threatens to “Take burning torches, [and] set fire to this woman’s eyes.” (1.841), using the promise of violence to get rid of the wife. Thus, it is clear that both he and Antipholus resort to verbal violence in the treatment of their respective wives. Overall, it is evident that compared to the Menaechmus brothers, Shakespeare deviates to a large extent..