Is This Love?
in
Much Ado About Nothing
“Is
this love, is this love, is this love, is this love that I'm feelin'?
I wanna know, wanna know, wanna know now...”
Bob
Marley croons what four hundred years earlier Beatrice and Benedick
could well have crooned with him. Romantics have said, and still do,
“Well, yeah. Duh.” In other words, “Obviously it's love!”
But
let's not be hasty. This is a play full of deceptions. It really
ought to be called “Quite a Lot of Deceptions About a Lot of Rather
Big Things.” But Shakespeare is sneaky. The “nothing” in his
title is easy to discern – Hero's non-infidelity. Or? Could he
possibly mean that the “nothing” is actually the love between
Beatrice and Benedick because it doesn't really exist, they've only
been manipulated into believing it does?
In his
introduction Stephen Greenblatt expresses the very plausible view
that such is the case. He asks, “But what if we do not dismiss
their own words” (page 1412) of hostility and insult? He goes on,
“ Benedick and Beatrice have rational arguments, grounded in the
gender politics of their world, for remaining single” (ibid) but
they both consent to be persuaded by their friends, not for love but
because “it is better to live in illusion than in social isolation”
(page 1413).
But,
but...I mean, I've seen Ken and Emma! Of course
they're really in love!
Hmmm. I
have to confess. Even before reading Greenblatt's intro I had a
lurking doubt. Is this love? Or isn't it? I wanna know!
It
won't really help to use our magnifying glass on every insult they
exchange. They both make it clear from the start. Not only are they
not interested in each other, neither of them are interested in
marriage, period. Their active dislike for each other at the
beginning may, as Beatrice hints, be based on a previous failed
romance between the two but in the first act they are clearly not in
love, or even in like. They are witty, but hateful.
Enter
manipulative friends. They insult Benedick in his hearing after
claiming that Beatrice “loves him with an enraged affection, it is
past the infinite of thought...”, that “she falls, weeps, sobs,
beats her heart, tears her hair, curses 'O sweet Benedick, God give
me patience'”, that there is danger that “she will do a desperate
outrage to herself...” and that “she says she will die if he love
her not and she will die ere she make her love known and she will die
if he woo her, rather than she will bate one breath of her accustomed
crossness” (Act 2.3).
Sneaky
Don Pedro, Claudio and Leonato! Everything they say is blatantly and
outrageously out of character for the Beatrice we and Benedick have
seen so far – except the last line. That makes it just about
believable for Benedick. And for us? Well, not really but love is
strange, a fine madness and all that.
Benedick's
first reaction is of course, “Is it possible?” But he quickly
gives himself reason to believe: respectable Leonato wouldn't
lie! He shouldn't be proud. People can and do change. OK. “I
will be horribly in love with her... if I do not take pity of her I
am a villain. If I do not love her I am a Jew” (explained in the
Norton note as an anti-Semitic stereotype of the un-Christian, the
uncharitable) (Act 2.3).
How
romantic is this? Not very. “Horribly in love” is...well, a
horrible way to put it. “Pity”? Uncharitable? Yes, it is very
possible that he is explaining away his sudden surge of wild love for
Beatrice in this way. And it is possible to take his words at face
value.
Beatrice
then? Her friends treat her about the same, insults interspersed with
praise for Benedick's many virtues. Beatrice is called proud,
disdainful, wild, scornful, full of herself.
Disdain
and scorn ride sparkling in her eyes,
Misprising
what they look on, and her wit
Values
itself so highly that to her
All
matter else seems weak. She cannot love,
Nor take
no shape nor project of affection,
She is
so self-endearéd (Act 3.1).
Hearing
herself described in such nasty terms it's amazing poor Beatrice even
notices the two quick mentions that “Benedick loves
Beatrice...entirely” and that the friends think he should “fight
against his passions”.
And
sure enough her first reaction is to the insults:
What
fire is in mine ears? Can this be true?
Stand I
condemned for pride and scorn so much?
Not,
to be sure, that she is
as proud and scornful as they say, only that she is condemned by them
as such. A small detail perhaps because, in fact, she immediately
thereafter turns to thoughts of Benedick:
And,
Benedick, love on, I will requite thee,
Taming
my wild heart to thy loving hand.
If thou
dost love, my kindness shall incite thee
To bind
our loves up in a holy band.
For
others say thou dost deserve, and I
Believe
it better than reportingly (Act 3.1).
If
Benedick uses the word love sparingly to describe his own feelings,
Beatrice uses it not at all for hers. She speaks only of his
love for her, which
she will “requite”. They will turn their love into marriage
because he deserves it.
Based
on these two scenes then, are they suddenly madly in love? If we pick
out the words “love”, “in love”, “requite”, “loving
hand”, “our loves”, yes, it's possible to make just that
interpretation. As Branagh and Thompson do in the movie. Only a
robot with a heart of stone could resist falling for the magnificent
love scene in which Benedick splashes dizzyingly around the fountain
while Beatrice soars into the sky on her swing. Ken and Emma can be
forgiven – they were newlyweds themselves at the time. They make
the love interpretation seems exactly right.
But
back to the text. What happens after these two upsetting, essentially
hurtful and overwhelming scenes? Benedick claims to have a toothache
(explained in a Norton note as symbolizing being in love, page 1441)
and Beatrice has a bad cold, or something. They are, in other words,
flummoxed by the new situation and they do not even meet to try out
their new feelings of confused love on each other until after the
disastrous non-wedding of Claudio and Hero. They meet in the chapel
and here they do passionately declare their love for one another:
Benedick:
I do love nothing in the world so well as you...
I do protest I love thee.
Beatrice:
I was about to protest that I loved you...I love you with so much of
my heart that there is none
left to protest (Act 4.1)
That
seem pretty unambiguous. Or? Beatrice is confused. “Believe me not,
and yet I lie not. I confess nothing nor deny nothing.” And most
importantly they, especially Beatrice, are in shock over Claudio's
cruel and outrageous treatment of Hero. All of their emotions are in
a turmoil and the situation is far from conducive to happily
exploring their mutual love. In fact, Beatrice's emotions are in
violent turbulence and when Benedick at first protests that he
cannot, will not, “kill Claudio” Beatrice accuses, “there is no
love in you.” She is terribly upset over not being able to avenge
Hero because she is not a man, and Benedick, after insisting that he
loves her and being told firmly that words are not enough - “use it
for my love some other way than swearing by it” - realizes that his
friend Claudio is in the wrong and agrees to confront him.
He
does. Later he is shown frustrated in his attempts to write a love
sonnet to Beatrice. She enters and once they establish that Claudio
has duly been challenged and justice will somehow be attained the two
allow themselves a few moments of bantering love talk in which they
still do not or cannot accept a smooth and sweet romance, peppered as
their exchange is with words like “foul wind”, “bad
parts”, “against my will” and “hates”. Beatrice concludes
by admitting that she at the moment does “very ill” and Benedick
scarcely has time to imply that loving him will help her feel better
before they are informed of the announcement of the falseness of
Claudio's accusations against Hero.
Off they go to the odd
reconciliation between Claudio and Hero and to their own public
announcement of their...well, whatever it is. Benedick tries to get
Beatrice to admit to loving him but she only answers, “No more than
reason.” Reason? What's that supposed to mean? What do reason and
love have to do with each other? That's the whole point. Nothing.
Even when Claudio and Hero produce B and B's respective scribbles
declaring their love for each other, they both claim to love the
other out of pity. But they kiss and dance and supposedly get
married.
Is this love?
Greenblatt, as we have
seen, is skeptical. Harold Bloom dismisses their so-called love as
“benign nihilism” (page 200) and, like Greenblatt, a “defense
against meaninglessness” (page 193). Frank Kermode describes their
moments of expressing love as that of “persons who have momentarily
forgotten their reputations” (page 77) as hostile non-lovers. Jean
E. Howard (quoted by Alison Findlay) points out that “far from
discovering Benedick's and Beatrice's pre-existant love, Don Pedro
works hard to create it” because the anti-love and
anti-marriage attitudes and fierce independence of both of them
threaten the very structure of their society and therefore they must
be insulted, lied to and manipulated into... (page 396)
Yes, into...
...love?
Yes. I dare conclude that
yes, Beatrice and Benedick love each other. Have I been brainwashed
by the romantic image of Ken and Emma? No. If Beatrice and Benedick
don't love each other they do in fact think they do. And both most
decidedly believe themselves to be loved by the other, which is
enough to convince them of their own reason to love. Are they going
to live happily ever after? I'd say they have as good a chance as any
couple, if not more. They are, after all, entering into the marriage
on equal terms of love seasoned with skepticism and humor. They are
equally willing to end their social isolation, to find or pretend to
find meaning together.
Is that love?
It works for me.
July –
August, 2012
Works cited:
- The Norton Shakespeare, based on the
Oxford Edition. Ed. Greenblatt,
Stephen et al. Second edition. 2008.
- Bloom,
Harold. Shakespeare the Invention of the Human.
Riverhead Books, 1998.
- Greenblatt,
Stephen. Introduction to Norton edition, see above.
- Howard, Jean E. Quoted
from The Stage and Social Struggle in Early Modern England
in Alison Findlay's essay “Much Ado About Nothing” in A
Companion to Shakespeare's Works – the Comedies.
Edited by Richard Dutton and Jean E. Howard. Blackwell Publishing.
2006.
- Kermode,
Frank. Shakespeare's Language. Penguin Books, 2000.
Films seen:
- BBC, 1984.
Director: Stuart Burge. Cast:
Benedick – Robert Lindsay; Beatrice – Cherie Lunghi; Claudio –
Robert Reynolds; Hero – Katharine Levy; Leonato – Lee Montague;
Don Pedro – Jon Finch; Don John – Vernon Dobtcheff; Dogberry –
Michael Elphick. A very enjoyable production in which the two leads
provide a strong performance. Less enjoyable is Jon Finch's campy Don
Pedro; it doesn't strike the right note. A pity, after his well done
Henry IV.
- 1993.
Director: Kenneth Branagh. Cast: Benedick – Kenneth Branagh;
Beatrice – Emma Thompson; Claudio – Robert Sean Leonard; Hero –
Kate Beckinsale; Leonato – Richard Briers; Don Pedro – Denzil
Washington; Don John – Keanu Reeves; Dogberry – Michael Keaton;
Margaret – Imelda Staunton. What can I say? I
love this movie. Oh Sir Ken, please make more Shakespeare movies!
With Emma. You're still friends, aren't you?
- Shakespeare
Retold,
2005. Director: Brian Percival. Cast: Benedick – Damian Lewis;
Beatrice – Sarah Parish; Claudio – Tom Ellis; Hero – Billie
Piper; Leonato – Marvin Jarvis; Don John – Derek Riddell. Fun and
believably adapted. Especially Damian Lewis and Billie Piper do a
good job.
Seen
on stage: No.
