Introduction
Law
is an integral part of most Shakespearean plays and this is especially
considering that many of these involve various aspects of the law. Most plays
by Shakespeare show that he was an individual that was significantly fascinated
by a diversity of legal aspects that are addressed in the way that the
characters act. In addition, Shakespeare is an individual that seeks to show
that law is an important part of the lives of individuals in society and that
it is essential to ensure that they take notice of it. This is especially the
case where in Shakespearean plays, law is an integral part of promoting both
good governance and oppression because of the numerous legal technicalities
that are involved in the process. In this paper, there will be an attempt to show
that while law is supposed to be an instrument of good governance, it can also
be used to bring about the oppression of certain individuals in society.
Law as an instrument of good governance
In
certain Shakespearean plays, law appears to be an instrument of good governance
because it enables them to defend themselves from false accusations. Law is an
essential aspect of promoting good governance in society and this is a case
that is advanced in Shakespearean plays, where individuals are required to be obedient
to laws in order to ensure that there is a level of social order (Cunningham, 2017).
Plays such as the Merchant of Venice
and Julius Caesar show that adherence
to the law is an important part of making sure that there is the advancement of
social order as well as the avoidance of unnecessary conflict. It also promotes
the advancement of means through which to ensure that there is the creation of
initiatives that promote solution to problems without resorting to violence.
The achievement of these goals through the use of law cannot be underestimated
because it shows that it is a means of advancing the interests of good
governance. Furthermore, law in Shakespeare can also be used in order to ensure
that the interests of the weak are protected against the strong while at the
same time helping those in positions of power to promote the advancement of
justice in their own societies. A consequence of such a situation is that
individuals come to the realization that it is only through the pursuit of law
that it becomes possible to not only promote good governance, but also justice
in the societies within which they live.
Law ensures that there is the advancement of
justice in society since the individuals involved are provided with an
opportunity to make sure that they are able to advance their individual
interests without hurting those of others. One of the most significant cases of
law as an instrument of good governance is seen in The Merchant of Venice, where despite Bassanio being maliciously
accused of owing Shylock a debt, he is eventually proven to be innocent of the
charges that have been brought against him and is acquitted (Hadfield, 2016).
Bassanio’s acquittal comes about because of the actions of his wife, who
disguises herself as a lawyer and successfully defends her husband against the
charges that have been brought against him. That Bassanio is found not to be
guilty following the trap that is set to ensnare him by Shylock shows that the
law actually works and that it can be a means of ensuring that justice is
achieved at all times. The capabilities displayed by Shakespeare in these play
show that despite the attempt by certain individuals to make use of the law as
an instrument of oppressing their fellows, the law can be made use of as a means
of promoting social justice. Bassanio’s acquittal also allows for the
development of a perspective concerning the motivations behind why certain
individuals are capable of making use of law as a means of advancing their own
interests to the detriment of that of others. In the end, as in the case of
Shylock, these individuals end up being considered to be the villains of the
plays and justice is served when they gain their just punishment.
The
pursuit of law is essential for good governance in Shakespeare plays because it
promotes the idea that individuals have to set aside their personal interests
for the sake of their societies. One of the most important instances is seen in
Julius Caesar, where the title
character repeatedly refuses to be crowned king of Rome because it is against
the laws of the state. Caesar is an individual that, despite his personal
ambitions, is still willing to ensure that he attains them through the workings
of the law rather than forcing them on the population (Jenkins, 2016). He is
shown not to want to shake up the republican order that has been instrumental
in governing Rome for centuries; resulting in a situation where despite his
popularity and the desire by the population to have him crowned king, he
refuses to be crowned in favor of retaining the status quo of the city. A
consequence of his actions shows that there is need to ensure the advancement
of law as a means of promoting good governance because it creates a situation
where Caesar is put in circumstances where he is tempted to assume a role that
could do away with the good governance of the city of Rome. However, his
refusal to undertake the tempting task of being a king shows that Caesar is an
individual that, despite being a dictator, seeks to ensure that there is the
promotion of good governance in his home city. Therefore, in this play,
Shakespeare promotes the idea that law can be used as a means of ensuring that
there is good governance even though the instances where the society is willing
to give up its interests because of the popularity of certain individuals.
Law as an instrument of oppression
Despite
law being an instrument of good governance, there are instances where it can
also be used as a means of promoting oppression. In Shakespeare plays, law is
an important aspect of showing that situations arise where law ends up being a
means of bringing about either the destruction or oppression of other
individuals. One of the most significant parts of law is that it leads
individuals towards taking advantage of it to ensure that their individual
interests are protected over those of the weak (Omrani, 2016). Using law as a
means of advancing individual interests at the expense of others often leads to
the oppression of the latter. The result is that many of these individuals end
up in situations where they are not able to undertake actions with as much
freedom as they would like because to do so could bring about the ire of their
oppressors. The role of oppressors in Shakespearean plays tends to be given to
villainous rulers, as seen in the case of Claudius in Hamlet. However, there are instances where this role is given to
individuals that are considered to be outsiders in their societies, as seen in
the case of Shylock, a Jew living in Italy at a time when there was wide
mistrust of Jews. Therefore, in Shakespeare plays, when law is addressed, it is
done in such a way as to show that despite its being considered a source of
good governance, it is also a means through which oppression can be brought
about in society; essentially being an instrument of injustice.
Hamlet is one of the most significant
Shakespearean plays that address the issue of law as an instrument of
oppression. This is especially the case considering that the title character,
Hamlet, is a victim of oppression despite not only being from the ruling class
of his country, but also the son of the previous king (Thomas, 2014). Despite
the privilege that he grows up with, Hamlet is shown to be a weak individual,
whose uncle takes advantage of in order to assume the throne. Claudius, his
uncle, is shown to be a conniving individual that makes use of every means
possible to ensure that he not only kills his brother, but also pushes aside
his nephew, who is the legitimate successor to his father, and instead assumes
the throne himself. In this situation, Hamlet is depicted as being an extremely
weak individual that is taken advantage of by his uncle in such a way that he
ends up being denied his rights as the heir to the Danish throne. When his
mother marries his uncle, it seems that Hamlet has essentially been pushed
aside and he is shown to be an individual that harbors a lot of resentment for
the injustice that he has suffered. The way that Claudius takes the throne is
not only suspicious, but also goes against the law because the succession was
supposed to go to the legitimate successor, Hamlet. Claudius’ succession to the
throne shows that he has no regard for the law and that he can twist it in such
a way that suits his own purposes to the detriment of his nephew.
The Merchant of Venice is another play
that shows that law is an instrument of oppression rather than good governance.
The case of Shylock’s false accusations against Bassanio shows that the law can
be used as an instrument of oppression. Shylock’s malicious nature is brought
forth through his desire to use the law as a means of destroying the life of
Bassanio, an individual towards whom he holds considerable hatred for
unexplained reasons. A consequence is that Shylock ends up seeking to ensure that
he makes use of the law as a means of attaining his malicious objectives. When
he requires that Bassanio pays him a debt by giving him a pound of flesh,
Bassanio’s hands are tied because the orginal agreement between these two
individuals stated that it was a requirement (Nam, 2015). Therefore, Bassanio’s
hands are legally tied and Shylock makes use of this advantage over an
individual that he considers his adversary to ensure that he seeks to end
Bassanio’s life legally because the extraction of a pound of flesh would only
mean death. The legal process that Bassanio is subjected to as a result shows
that law can be made use of as an instrument of oppression rather than of good
governance.
In
Hamlet and The Merchant of Venice, there is a sense that law is an instrument
of oppression rather than as a means of promoting good governance. Individuals
are shown to be extremely vulnerable to the law to such an extent that it leads
to a situation where they are placed in unjust situations. They essentially
become victims of the malicious machinations of others who feel that they can
take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. A result is that some
characters are not only able to advance their selfish interests using the law,
but there are instances where others are duped into undertaking actions that
are illegal, leading to the mental oppression of the individuals involved. The
case of the title character in Othello
is an essential theme because it involves Othello being duped by Iago into
killing his wife because of suspicion of infidelity and jealousy (Myers, 2013).
Othello can therefore be considered to have committed a crime because of a
moment of madness caused by Iago’s influencing him into breaking the law.
Conclusion
Law is an extremely important part of Shakespearean plays and in most cases, it dominates entire plays. A result of this situation is that it leads to the development of means through which to ensure that there is recognition of the various ways of how law can be both an instrument of good governance as well as that of oppression. The contrasts that are displayed in law show that it is essential for individuals to read Shakespeare with a mind open to the the way that legal matters end up affecting the lives of the characters within the plays. In this way, it becomes possible to make a connection of how Shakespeare is relevant to the lives of individuals in everyday life.