Historical literature is often considered to be an author’s reflection of their own society and its values, but Shakespeare’s marriage-centric plays from early modern England deserve a second look for how they portray women and their roles in male-female relationships. Scholars have addressed the topic of gender role portrayal in these two plays, but in this paper I will synthesize my own argument and analysis in relation to those of six scholars to freshly approach the discourse of gender-normativity in the combination of these two Shakespearean plays through a focal point of love as a concept, not limited to only romantic relationships but also parental relationships. I believe this set of ideas is important and significant as it allows for a more encompassing investigation and perspective on Shakespeare’s portrayals of female characters in two plays well known individually for their emphasis on the traditional social institution of marriage, rather than isolating either romance or family relations. What role does the concept of love play in the discourse about Shakespearean gender-normativity, then, within these marriage-centric plays? Although some might claim that Shakespeare’s portrayals of institutional possessive love in his plays establish a patriarchal gender-normative view of submissive women, I argue that synthesizing interpretive analyses of The Merchant of Venice and The Taming of the Shrew allows us to see how the concept of possessive love within these marriage-romance plays was used to construct character relationships that inform the rejection of gender-normative female objectification and subjugation, considering how the plays depict the power dynamic between daughters and fathers in parental love, dialogic displays of female sexual autonomy in romantic relationships, and controlled female submission in marriage.

            First, how Shakespeare depicts the power dynamics in father-daughter relationships in The Merchant of Venice and The Taming of the Shrew demonstrates one way in which the concept of possessive love was used to construct relationships rejecting gender-normative female submission. We can start by considering a scene from The Merchant of Venice, wherein the character Shylock is depicted as losing “his stones, his daughter, and his ducats” when his daughter Jessica elopes with her lover (Shakespeare, Merchant 2.8 lines 1070-1083). The loss of stones, being era slang for testicles, is significant here if we interpret it as representing Shylock’s masculinity and status as the head of the household since this line therefore suggests that Jessica, by eloping, has stolen away his masculinity (Moulton 1411-12). This perspective is important in how it redefines the power dynamic in the relationship between Jessica and Shylock. Considering how women in Shakespeare’s time were viewed in a gender-normative fashion as owned and controlled by their fathers (Moulton 1410), if Jessica’s abandonment of her father allows her to steal away Shylock’s authority not only as a father—since he loses her as a daughter—but also as a man, it accordingly suggests a departure from the traditional power dynamic between men and women and from the traditional gender-normative role for women as objects of possession because Shylock’s daughter thus has ultimate control over Shylock’s role as a father and as an authoritative male, rather than being the weaker one in the father-daughter relationship. In fact, I could additionally argue that Jessica is portrayed as possessing Shylock and his masculinity for herself, considering how the dialogue implies that she essentially steals the physical representation of masculinity away with her when she elopes, thereby reversing the power and gender order.

            The father-daughter relationship between the character Kate and her father Baptista in The Taming of the Shrew also reflects a departure from traditional gender-normative roles. Considering that this particular play is quite literally about a male character—Petruchio—and his attempt to shape a feisty woman—Kate—into the ideally submissive woman for him to marry (Shakespeare, Taming), this work of Shakespeare has often been read as condoning or accepting the patriarchal dominance of women normal for Shakespeare’s time (Smith 289). However, we can take a closer look, for now focusing on a scene wherein a discussion of betrothal occurs, with Baptista responding to Petruchio’s talk of confirming of a betrothal by saying, “Ay, when that special thing is well obtain’d/That is, her love, for that is all in all” (Shakespeare, Taming 2.1 lines 964-979). Thus, the existence of the betrothal depends on Kate’s personal desires (Smith 303) and on Petruchio being the receiver of her love. Like how Shylock’s daughter held a degree of control over her relationship with her father, Kate possesses a certain autonomy in her relationship with her father who cannot give Kate to Petruchio in marriage without her individual consent, which would come in the form of love for Petruchio. The idea that Kate’s consent is necessary for an exchange wherein daughters are usually considered possessions of their fathers is significant, then, because the simple fact that the daughter is acknowledged as having a degree of autonomy and authority marks a shift in the gender-normative role of objectification often applied to women within a father-daughter relationship.

            Second, the way in which Shakespeare portrays conceptual female sexual autonomy through dialogue and conversation further demonstrates how the idea of possessive love was used to construct male-female relationships that reject gender-normative roles for women. Portia, a central character from The Merchant of Venice, is a strong example of this idea when she threatens her husband Bassanio with celibacy (Parten 152), saying, “By heaven, I will ne’er come in your bed until I see the ring!” (Shakespeare, Merchant 5.1 lines 2611-2612). Not only does Portia threaten her husband by withholding her body in regards to sex, she also threatens him with the chance of her own infidelity, saying, “I will become as liberal as you: I’ll not deny him anything I hate, No, not my body, nor my husband’s bed… I’ll have that doctor for [my] bedfellow” (Shakespeare, Merchant 5.1 lines 2649-2651, 2656). The fact that she can threaten Bassanio with the refusal to have sex with him or to do it with someone else implies the level of control she has in their relationship. If we consider how early modern England viewed wives as belonging to their husbands (Moulton 1414), these verbal threats are especially significant in context, since we see that through the guise of possession, Shakespeare portrays Portia as refusing a traditional, patriarchal view of obedience by women—she is not passive, but incredibly aggressive by holding her sexual autonomy over her husband’s head. She asserts her control over her own sexuality rather than being objectified as a woman in this time would have been otherwise, and therefore is an example of a woman completely rejecting the gender-normative role of a submissive wife. Portia turns the tables on the dynamic of dependence and assumes a position of power in her relationship with Bassanio such that he is now the one dependent on her and her control over himthrough her sexuality.

            There is a similar portrayal of dialogic female sexual autonomy in The Taming of the Shrew, wherein occurs a scene featuring Kate and Petruchio interacting (Shakespeare, Taming 2.1 lines 1033-1093) through what Amy L. Smith deems highly sexually-charged dialogue involving “rapid-fire puns and sexual invitations and rejections” (Smith 301). In a basic sense, Kate is asserting her sexuality by taking on an interactive role in the conversation and dialogue with Petruchio, offering her own sexual retorts (Smith 300) and the line “If I be waspish, best beware my sting” (Shakespeare, Taming 2.1 line 1066 ), which Smith considers “the most sexually explicit dialogue in the scene” (Smith 301). We can look to Ela İpek Gündüz for contextualization, as they assert that in Shakespeare’s society, women ought to act “totally obedient and submissive” (Gündüz 838).  Additionally, Karen Newman writes that the ideal woman of Renaissance society was to be “chaste, silent, and obedient” (Newman 29). If women in Shakespeare’s time were expected to be voiceless as well as submissive and demure in sexuality, then Kate is going far beyond the gender-normative role for a woman here through her actions here within her love relationship with Petruchio. Like Portia, Kate is asserting her sexuality by taking on an interactive role in the conversation rather than a passive or submissive role wherein she might have allowed Petruchio to goad her with his own sexual speech. She does not allow him to completely woo or tame her despite Petruchio’s attempt to possess her for himself (Smith 300). I would like to emphasize a point in addition that Kate here is acting as a willing female participant creating the sexual dialogue rather than allowing it to remain a monologue acting as an attempt of taming her, a woman, which is significant as the move represents her putting herself on equal footing with the man in the heterosexual relationship. As a result, we see that Shakespeare portrays Kate here as an individual with verbal sexual autonomy and ownership of her sexuality, thus informing the construction of a male-female love relationship that rejects gender-normative roles for women, alongside Shakespeare’s portrayal of Portia of The Merchant of Venice.

            Last, Shakespeare’s depictions of self-controlled female submission within marriage in The Merchant of Venice and The Taming of the Shrew represent another way the concept of possessive love is used in the construction of character relationships that reject a gender-normative role for women. The scene in The Merchant of Venice wherein Portia recites her wedding vow and love pledge to Bassanio and wherein she gives him a ring is an example of such a self-controlled submission (Shakespeare, Merchant 3.2 lines 1505-1530). We can read this act of gifting a wedding ring as symbolizing Portia handing over her wealth and her body to Bassanio (Park 4), and thus this ring represents Portia’s chosen submission to her husband. I would argue that the simple fact that Shakespeare portrays Portia as having the independent capability to choose to give Bassanio control over her life is giving Portia a position of authority in the relationship, because on a larger scheme, this portrayal suggests the innate power of submission—if one refuses to be a wife to her husband, then her husband cannot be a husband. We can read further into the analysis however, since through this exchange, Portia is also reversing the traditional role of the man being the one to give a woman the ring, thus putting the expectation of a faithful and submissive spouse on Bassanio instead (Park 5). Therefore, through Portia’s control in her decided submission, she actually gains a position of power in her relationship. Through the lens of possessive love as a concept, paradoxically, Bassanio becomes the one who must be obedient because Portia submits to him—he becomes the possession. This idea is significant because Shakespeare essentially allows Portia to reverse the gender roles in her love-relationship with Bassanio through an exchange that would traditionally make her the “object” being possessed, therefore rejecting the gender-normative view of a wife’s role by allowing her to transcend the normal boundaries of her position as a wife and giving her character far more power than would be expected in Shakespeare’s society.

            Female submission is a narrative device shared by The Taming of the Shrew and carries a similar significance within the play. At the end of the storyline, Kate enters the socially submissive role of a wife by marrying Petruchio and gives a speech to other wives about the importance of obeying their husbands (Shakespeare, Taming 5.2 lines 2677-2720). The speech itself is a performance for the other husbands and wives in the play and can be read as a performance on a larger scale, for society as a whole (Gündüz 842, Smith 313), demonstrating Petruchio’s apparent subjugation of Kate. A performance is controlled by the actor—here, the actress—and Kate’s speech performance she dictates. Therefore, I would argue that Kate’s performance of submission here actually acts to allow her to maintain her autonomy in the societally-constrained position of a wife rather than demonstrating Petruchio as having complete ownership over her. Amy L. Smith comments on this scene, claiming that Kate “emphasizes not the husband’s dominance but the wife’s submission, and thereby she gives the power of future performances to the wives… Kate is not determined by her script of obedience but rather reiterates it in a way that reminds the audience that all of the power in this relationship does not lie entirely with the husband” (Smith 314). I would add to Smith’s point and say that by implying the power of women to act and perform as wives, Kate’s performance emphasizes not only the interactive role Kate takes on in her relationship with Petruchio, wherein his authority as a husband cannot be fulfilled without her decision to comply as a wife, but also the interactivity of the very system of marriage. She allows him to portray himself as a powerful man and husband by performing a role as Kate the submissive wife, and in that sense, Kate holds a significant degree of power in the very existence of their relationship, since Petruchio does not possess her unless she allows him to do so by performatively submitting as the character Kate plays. She reshapes and reinterprets submission (Smith 314), making it into something that affords her a degree of control. As such, Shakespeare’s portrayal of Kate as an autonomous woman even in a state of what his society would deem wifely submission demonstrates how he, through depictions of possessive love, constructs a male-female relationship departing from patriarchal gender-normative objectification of women in their social roles.

Some might, by focusing solely on the overall results of the narratives, argue that the concept of possessive love in these Shakespearean plays serves only to further establish patriarchal gender-normative roles for the women in the plays, considering how the plays are centered around the traditionally gendered concept of marriage. They might say The Taming of the Shrew is inherently patriarchal and only puts women into the gender-normative role of submission and subjugation, considering the narrative of “taming a woman as if she is an animal” (Gündüz 840) and how in the end Kate is technically tamed into marriage and into giving a speech that “implies a straightforward acceptance of submission” (Smith 289). In regard to The Merchant of Venice, they might say as Anne Parten does about the topic of Portia’s ring, that “a context is created in which this can be laughter at the mere thought that such an action as cuckoldry should be performed… laughter at the thought that order could be broken is a sure sign that order has been restored” (Parten 154). They might argue, then, that the character of Portia is still in a position of wifely submission, because her threat of cuckoldry is simply an unrealistic threat which thus “tell[s] the audience explicitly that…she will not dominate [her husband]” (Parten 150). However, I remain firm in my argument, because it is important to remember that these plays were meant to be public performances that could entertain wide audiences. As Amy L. Smith says, “to claim that a reiteration of marital hierarchies is merely reinstating the status quo is to ignore the power of performativity” (Smith 315). There would be few people in the audience if Shakespeare had written the female characters as complete heroines in such a patriarchal society. I argue, then, that what we see in his plays is a form of compromise, because language and rhetoric are just as important as narrative when it comes to theatre and literature, and never should a performance be taken at face value. By utilizing the concept of possessive love to construct different types of male-female relationships, Shakespeare portrays strong female characters who manage to assert a degree of authority over men either explicitly or subtly but who still demonstrate how women can attain some level of control over their own lives in the society in which Shakespeare lived. Simply offering a new perspective on women’s social roles within relationships is a way of challenging tradition.

It is likely that there will always be debate about how Shakespeare depicts gender roles within his plays. My synthesized analysis on how Shakespeare uses the concept of love to depict male-female relationships with non-gender-normative roles for women is a way for me to expand on existing scholarly arguments. Still, I am confident that my contribution is significant, as I consider this paper to be written through a uniquely comprehensive lens that addresses the subject of gender normativity by combining the idea of possessive love with the investigation through different forms of love-based relationships—parental and romantic—rather than through just one or the other. It is a discussion useful in the discourse about gender normativity in Shakespeare’s many plays, and future investigation of the subject through lenses beyond my choice of love as a concept could continue to reveal novel perspectives and understandings of what Shakespeare tells us through his stories.

Works Cited

İpek Gündüz, Ela. “Gendered Identities: Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew”. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 17, no. 3, pp 834-844.

Moulton, Ian Frederick. “His stones, his daughter, and his ducats’: the rhetoric of love and possession in early modern Europe”. Textual Practice, vol. 33, no. 8, pp 1409-1425.

Newman, Karen, “Portia’s Ring: Unruly Women and Structures of Exchange in The Merchant of Venice”. Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 1, pp 19-33.

Park, Jae Young. “Symbolic Meanings in the Wedding Ring in the Merchant of Venice: Religious Conflicts and Matriarchal Challenge”. ANQ: A Quarterly Journal of Short Articles, Notes and Reviews, pp. 1-8.

Parten, Anne. “Re-establishing sexual order: The ring episode in The Merchant of Venice”. Women’s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9:2, pp 145-155.

Shakespeare, William. The Merchant of Venice from The Folger Shakespeare. Ed. Barbara Mowat, Paul Werstine, Michael Poston, and Rebecca Niles. Folger Shakespeare Library, May 8, 2020. https://shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/the-merchant-of-venice/

Shakespeare, William. The Taming of the Shrew from The Folger Shakespeare. Ed. Barbara Mowat, Paul Werstine, Michael Poston, and Rebecca Niles. Folger Shakespeare Library, May 8, 2020.  https://shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/the-taming-of-the-shrew/

Smith, Amy L. “Performing Marriage with a Difference: Wooing, Wedding, and Bedding in The Taming of the Shrew”. Comparative Drama, vol. 36, no. 3/4, pp 289-320.

[Previously submitted by myself for a college writing assignment.]