Explore how Shakespeare treats the theme of identity in Othello.
It can certainly be said that Shakespeare’s portrayal of each character in the play is complex,
seamlessly driving the action of the play. One could argue that Shakespeare intended to
address the theme of identity as one that is defined by social class, in Iago’s case, as well as
gender roles in Desdemona’s case. Shakespeare presents the reader with a myriad of ways
to interpret the character of Othello, but ultimately, one can come to the conclusion as a
reader that Othello’s identity is incredibly divided and lacks clarity throughout, hence why
he cannot simply be typified as a tragic victim or a tragic hero.
Shakespeare’s multi-faceted presentation of identity can be seen within the complexities of
the presentation of the protagonist, Othello, who can be said to possess a split and
fragmented personality. This is exemplified when Othello is seen at the beginning of the play
using biblically-driven language, when he states ‘vouch with me, heaven’ which immediately
alerts the audience that despite his race, he is like them, a Christian. The imperative
command used here reflects the idea that he is seeking union with God, to help him
convince Desdemona’s father of his humility and valour. Shakespeare is purposely creating a
contrasting image here of a man of African ancestry, who Elizabethans would have assumed
to be Moslem (Muslim), as a Christian, perhaps in an attempt to dispel discrimination.
Furthermore, Shakespeare exhibits his educated language again when he refers to the
senators and Brabantio as ‘most potent, grave and reverend signiors’, with his use of tripling
and excessive complimentary language here serving to portray him as extremely humble.
When analysing Othello from a Marxist perspective, the split in his personality comes about
once you realise that Othello being a well-respected general in Venice is not enough for him
to overcome his racial barriers. Plaatje asserts that ‘nobility and valour […] are not the
monopoly of any colour’ which is agreeable, as his race is a pivotal part of his identity and
ultimately stops him from being wholly able to assimilate. Evidently this ‘otherness’ is driven
by racial discrimination in Elizabethan England, with Biblical and mythological sources being
the driving force of these. Anything dark was classed as being unholy, as God proclaimed in
Genesis ‘let there be light.’ With the people in Elizabethan England having such a strong
religious conviction and truly believing that black is associated with evil, it is unsurprising
that Shakespeare presents Othello as being fragmented, as Othello can never truly be seen
as an equal.
It is shocking to see how Shakespeare presents the theme of identity for Iago to be defined
by his social class throughout the entirety of the play. It is clear to see that Iago’s
wickedness for Shakespeare was going to be at the forefront of the play, as almost
immediately we realise that the prized lieutenant role had been ‘off-capp’d to him’, him
being Cassio. ‘Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago’ shows a self-recognition of his own
duplicity, with this seemingly obvious phrase only serving to villanise Iago from the start.
The use of the person pronoun ‘I’ proves that Iago is ultimately self-serving and exercises his
moral relativism because he knows his malevolent actions will ultimately benefit him. Thus, I
would challenge Coleridge’s idea that Iago has a ‘motiveless malignity’, as he is the only one
in the play that is of working class background, so his machinations to climb to the top of
the social hierarchy are certainly not motiveless. If one takes a Marxist reading of Iago, it can
be seen that he is carrying out the actions he deems necessary to join the nobility.
Shakespeare uses Iago to coin the phrase ‘our bodies are gardens, to which our wills are
