By the turn of the seventeenth century, European powers had begun to form colonies abroad, forcing the subjugated peoples into a lesser societal role. With the contrasting characters of Ariel and Caliban, Shakespeare intended to show a viewpoint contrary to that held the English upper class at the time -- that the enslaved, or the colonized, were not inherently inferior to their masters or colonizers. Indeed, Caliban serves as a symbol of England’s colonized peoples; Ariel suits the purpose of highlighting Caliban’s mistreatment at the hands of their master.
Although there is no recorded account of his stance on slavery or colonization, Shakespeare’s works have a history of contesting the moral corruption of the ruling class. Both Macbeth and …show more content…
Both Prospero’s relationships with the two and their own physical appearances affect the audience’s perception of them. When Ariel first speaks with Prospero onstage, spectators see that he is willingly subservient, because Prospero saved him from arboreal imprisonment and, by extension, from Caliban’s mother Sycorax. In this exchange and in the subsequent one between Prospero and Miranda, the audience hear what the others think of Caliban before they have the opportunity to see the character themselves; he is immediately characterized as an insolent beast. It is only later that we hear Caliban’s own perspective. Even then, when Caliban contests Prospero’s vision of him, he admits to having attempted to rape Miranda; this, of course, does not conduce viewers to sympathize with Caliban. The conversation in question, however, also reveals a crucial facet of the relationship between Prospero and Caliban: that Prospero may have treated Caliban unfairly. We find out that Caliban hates his slavehood because he resents the fact that he must be subservient in his own home, and because he feels that it is Prospero and Miranda’s mistreatment that have made him truly beastly. Such a narrative hints that Caliban might, in fact, be unfairly
Although there is no recorded account of his stance on slavery or colonization, Shakespeare’s works have a history of contesting the moral corruption of the ruling class. Both Macbeth and …show more content…
Both Prospero’s relationships with the two and their own physical appearances affect the audience’s perception of them. When Ariel first speaks with Prospero onstage, spectators see that he is willingly subservient, because Prospero saved him from arboreal imprisonment and, by extension, from Caliban’s mother Sycorax. In this exchange and in the subsequent one between Prospero and Miranda, the audience hear what the others think of Caliban before they have the opportunity to see the character themselves; he is immediately characterized as an insolent beast. It is only later that we hear Caliban’s own perspective. Even then, when Caliban contests Prospero’s vision of him, he admits to having attempted to rape Miranda; this, of course, does not conduce viewers to sympathize with Caliban. The conversation in question, however, also reveals a crucial facet of the relationship between Prospero and Caliban: that Prospero may have treated Caliban unfairly. We find out that Caliban hates his slavehood because he resents the fact that he must be subservient in his own home, and because he feels that it is Prospero and Miranda’s mistreatment that have made him truly beastly. Such a narrative hints that Caliban might, in fact, be unfairly