Much Ado About Nothing Essay

such(prenominal) sting close Nothingthe title sounds, to a modern ear, offhand and self-effacing we might expect the swindle that follows such a beginning to be a marvelous piece of fluff and not such(prenominal) more(prenominal)(prenominal). However, the sportsman and the title itself are weightier than they initially depictm. Shakespeare used 2 early(a) such titlesTwelfth Night, or What You Will and As You Like Itboth of which send unexpected reverberations of meaning by means ofout their respective plays, the creator with its reference to the Epiphany and the topsy-turvy origination of a saturnalian celebration, and the latter with its implications about how the characters (and the audience itself) get the world in general and the Forest of Arden in particular. Much Ado About Nothing is no different, but we do not pick up the deeper resonances as quickly as an Elizabethan would, simply because of a campaign in pronunciation. We get our first real glimpse of the pu n in the title when adopt Pedro says, pedigree notes, forsooth, and nothing (The Complete Signet Classic Shakespeare, ed. Sylvan Barnet, New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1972, 2.3.57). As A. R. Humphreys explains, That nothing, colloquially spoken, was finale to or identical with noting is the basis of Shakespearean puns, especially in a context of musical noting. A similar pun, though non-musical, is conceivable here (Introduction, The Arden Shakespeare Much Ado About Nothing, London and New York Methuen, 1981, 4).The play is, in fact, driven by the noting of scenes or colloquys and the characters reactions to these observations noting seems to be the thematic glue that binds the various plot elements together. When he wrote the play in 1598, Shakespeare assembled the hotshot-Claudio plot line from bits and pieces of Ariostos Orlando Furioso (Canto V) and Spensers The Faerie Queene (Book II), and added details about Claudio and cod Pedro from Bandellos La Prima Parte de la Novelle (Novella 22). For the characters of Beatrice and Benedick, Shakespeare drew not so overmuch on a specific story or plot as on the tradition of wit combat and characters from his witness earlier comedies these two characters substructure be seen, in fact, as wittier and more mature versions of Kate and Petruchio from The Taming of the Shrew. Dogberry and Verges also oblige no clear literary source, but seem instead to be taken from Shakespeares England. (For a detailed discussion of Much Ados sources, see A. R. Humphreys introduction to The Arden Shakespeare Much Ado About Nothing, London and New York Methuen, 1981, 5-25.)Thesecharacters, different though they may be, mesh together (and frequently clash) through their observations, observe overhearings, and deliberate eavesdroppings. The first sign of this comes early in Act I. When Claudio asks Benedick what he thinks of Hero, Benedick responds, I noted her not, but I looked on her (1.1.158). It becomes increasin gly clear that they see in Hero two entirely different people. To Claudio she is a modest young lady, a jewel, and the sweetest lady that ever I looked on (1.1.159, 175, 181-2). solely to Benedick, shes too low for a high praise, too brown for a mean(a) praise, and too little for a great praise (1.1.165-70). This is, as John Wilders notes, a play much concerned with the ship canal in which people perceive one an other, with our tendency to see in other people whatever by character and experience we are predisposed to see (New Prefaces to Shakespeare, Oxford Basil Blackwell, 1988, 147). So we must consider that Claudio is describing what he sees through the hazy mists of romantic attraction, and that Benedick (whatever he may say) is analyzing her through the mask of a professed tyrant to their sex (1.1.162-3) neither of them may be seeing Hero as she really is.Claudio, however, has an unfortunate tendency to desire exactly what he sees, and his eyesight proves more powerful than his combine in wear out Pedro and his love for Hero. When Don John, in his first bit of mischief, suggests to Claudio that Don Pedro is courting Hero for himself, Claudio (despite his knowledge of the wooing plan and his friendship with the prince) takes what he sees for truth. And he is not convinced otherwise until the Don Pedro actually hands Hero over to him. Benedick also believes what his eyes show him The Prince hath got your Hero. But did you think the Prince would have served you thus? (2.1.189-90, 193-4). But Benedick, at least, may be excused by his ignorance of Pedros intent to woo in Claudios name. This excuse cannot be made for Claudio he seems more instinctive to trust what he sees rather than what he believes in his heart or knows in his mind to be true. It is this quality that enables Don John to convince Claudio that Hero is unchaste so when Claudio sees Margaret, impersonating Hero, in intimate conversation with Borachio, he disregards what faith (if any) he ha d in her, abandons his earlier observation that she is a modest young lady (1.1.159), and determines to shame her at the marriage ceremony. In his relationships with Don Pedro and Hero, visual proof (in both cases provided by a thorough-goingvillain) takes precedence over previous experience.Eyesight, however, is not the only deceiving sense hearing is also included in the plays treatment of noting. At the beginning of 2.1, we learn that one of Antonios servants happened to overhear Claudio and Don Pedro making plans for the winning of Hero, but the servant must not have heard the conversation in its entirety because he runs to Antonio with the story that Don Pedro means to court Hero in earnest. Auditory observations can apparently be just as unreliable as visual ones. Borachio, perhaps a more adept spy, also overhears Claudios and Don Pedros conversation, but he comes away with a more accurate version of the plan (2.3.56-61). The next eavesdropping scene, carefully engineered by t he love-gods (2.2.382) for the gulling of Beatrice and Benedick, is yet another demonstration that what we see and hear is not necessarily what is. Just as Don John and Borachio create an event to betray Claudio, Don Pedro and his confederates act out a scene for Benedick, and Hero and Ursula do the same for Beatrice.The quarrelsome couple up believe what the love-gods say because on some level its true and because Beatrice and Benedick want to believe that each is in love with the other. In the same way that we see what we are predisposed to see (Wilders 147), we also hear (and believe) what we are predisposed to hear. The final (and perhaps most important) overhearing connects the comic subplot of the constabulary with the world of Don John and Don Pedro. Despite their lack of sophistication and their abuse of the English language, Dogberry, Verges and the rest of the make discover Don Johns plotting and manage to sort out the confusion created by the aristocrats. Much Ado is, a s John Wilders says, a play about noting, about the various and conflicting ways in which we respond to and judge other people (147). It is about the flexibility of realityour ability to hedge what other people observe and our occasional tendency to let biases influence our perceptions. And finally, it is about the inadequacy of noting the world with eyes and ears only, and the importance of relying on ones experience with and consequent faith in other human beings. Much Ado is all this, and marvelous comedy too.