'king Of Shadows': Patriarchal Fairy Doubles In A Midsummer Night's Dream

The nature of the titular dream is a topic contested by scholars and it is only through close reading of the text that one appreciates Oberon and Titania's roles as fairy doubles of the engaged Theseus and Hippolyta. By focussing on the parallels that exist between the couples, one draws the conclusion that Shakespeare utilises the fairy scenes in the woods as a dreamlike device to explore the Duke's, and his fiancé's, subconscious tensions. In both the real and subconscious worlds patriarchy holds sway and, it is through their shared dream that Shakespeare explores the mechanics of their emphatically unequal relationship.

When Puck calls Oberon "King of Shadows" (Shakespeare 206) this holds significance on multiple levels. Besides simply addressing Oberon by his title as "King" of the fairy world, the use of "shadows" (bearing in mind the Greek setting) has Platonic connotations with "shadows" (Plato 705) as pale imitations, an idea that everything is a replica of its ideal form. The Platonic undertones can be reconciled with Calderwood's essay which notes "Shakespeare's device of doubling the roles of Theseus and Hippolyta with those of Oberon and Titania" (Calderwood 410). Therefore, when Puck labels Oberon "King of Shadows", he identifies him as Theseus' shadow counterpart - a double whose actions and feelings mirror Theseus'. Rather than being pale imitations however, the fairy scenes in the woods present the balance of power between Theseus and Hippolyta more clearly and it is in fact the doubles who better convey the oppressive relationship. Such tyranny is masked by the supposedly civilised Athens whose emphasis on laws desensitises us to its true inequality. Through the chaotic fairy world however, real conflict is revealed and civilisation revealed as preserving a patriarchal status quo. Plato's Republic allows understanding of the world by opening one's eyes to the transcendent World of the Forms. Equally, analysing the fairy world procures greater understanding of how reality operates. The opening scene immediately establishes tension in Theseus' relationship, (strains that will manifest themselves more obviously in the fairy world). Theseus proclaims to Hippolyta:

Hippolyta, I woo`d thee with my sword, And won thy love doing thee injuries. But I will wed thee in another key - (Shakespeare 133)

Shakespeare's use of antithesis alerts the audience that this is no ordinary courtship as language like "swords' and 'injuries" are hardly synonymous with concepts of wooing and "love". The verb "won" reveals Theseus' desire for dominion over the objectified Hippolyta, (she is a prize that emphasises his masculinity as a conquering warrior) however, he has not "won" her yet. With the marriage four days away and his relationship with, and more importantly dominance over, Hippolyta not yet secured, Theseus worries for his status. This reveals itself when Egeus implores Theseus to force Hermia to marry Demetrius. Significantly, Hippolyta remains silent throughout this passage, either out of acquiescence or disapproval. If, as I maintain, it is the latter, then this hints at unease in their relationship more perceptibly explored in the fairy world. At the end of this exchange, Theseus asks "what cheer, my love?", (Shakespeare 139) before immediately moving on and addressing Egeus. To warrant this question Hippolyta must have looked aggrieved at Theseus' violent masculinity (something which her witnessing clearly worries Theseus). Such worry will continue until he has definitively "won" and bound her in the institution of marriage.

Theseus' unease about securing his patriarchal power exhibits itself more noticeably within the fairy world and Krieger comments how the fairies are "spiritual manifestations of the sexual drives of Theseus and Hippolyta" (Krieger 56). Like Theseus, Oberon courts something from his partner to establish dominance. In this world however, rather than marriage, the possession of a changeling boy constitutes Oberon's demands. Calderwood (who engages with Krieger in his essay) notes how the boy is transformed "into a symbol of what Oberon really desires, the gift of Titania's love and obedience" (Calderwood 415), i.e. the boy is a plot device exploring male frustration when women refuse to give in. Conversely, this explanation is too simplistic and fails to adequately explain the changeling boy's role. Krieger is more precise in specifying "sexual drive" as the feature that binds the two couples, than Calderwood's claim that Oberon's objective is simply "love and obedience". This sits ill in a play so sexualised and scathing in its depiction of masculine power.

Indeed, Calderwood's example of the boy can be used to extend Krieger's argument that this subconscious world deals with sexual energy. Children suggest innocence and vulnerability, traits that are taken from women through marriage and the subsequent loss of virginity. Titania's desire to withhold these virtues from Oberon is a more visible reflection of Hippolyta's opposition to her own impending marriage and, as the fairy world better explores our world's simple Platonic shadows, the power struggle is easier to identify. Like Titania is reluctant to hand over a changeling boy that signifies her virtue, Hippolyta looks towards her constraint into marriage as a similar (albeit less obvious) loss. Theseus' objective is therefore not "love" and the child's inclusion lies closer to Krieger's explanation of the men's primary motive being sexual, (note how in opposition, Titania says how she has "forsworn his [Oberon's] bed and company" (Shakespeare 157), i.e. stopping his sexuality and thus power).

Unfortunately, in this patriarchal world, virtue is not something women can choose to give away. When unable to procure the boy from Titania willingly, Oberon uses force to secure his dominance through the physical act of placing magical "juice" on Titania's eyes (Shakespeare 171). On stage, taking advantage of a sleeping woman and forcing her to act in a way that makes her lose her virtue is extraordinarily threatening, as it demonstrates the impossibility of escape from masculinity. Should a woman be unwilling to give in, male society will punish her with even greater severity. For Titania, this takes the form of being tricked into having sex with Bottom, an horrendous image of bestiality that signals the consequences of defying the patriarchal world, whilst for Hippolyta, the consequences of her refusal are hinted at through Theseus' warning to Hermia: "to die the death" (Shakespeare 136). Both Hippolyta and Titania inevitably face patriarchal suppression and any hope Hippolyta has of escaping her marriage is vanquished in the subconscious dream world where the penalties for feministic independence are made clear: deny a man power and he will ruin you and take it anyway. The ending however may be cited as a discrepancy that undermines this whole argument. Inexplicably, in the penultimate Act, Theseus reverses his stance on Hermia telling Egeus that he will "overbear [his] will" (Shakespeare 225) and allow Hermia's love match. I offer two accounts for this. Firstly, as it is now his wedding day and ownership of Hippolyta is guaranteed, (the symbolic child has been handed over and his status reaffirmed), taking out his masculine frustrations on others is unnecessary. Secondly, the proposition that this contrived ending is exactly the point; the play ends too neatly. As a comedy, Shakespeare satisfies the conventions of the genre by tying up all the plots into three marriages and a reconciliation. This is the most horrifying aspect of the play as a tidy conclusion rests uneasily with an audience so freshly exposed to the reality of what lies beneath the surface of allegedly civilised relationships. The ending is disarmingly normal with the final act in particular engaging in mirth that overshadows the disturbing events of the play. Whilst Burke argues that the ending is "a happy ending that befits the tenor of the play" (Burke 308) I postulate that the ending instead hints at the play's most terrifying aspect: although there is merriment in this happy ever after, underneath the surface the threat of masculine power endures, only temporarily appeased by its victories over Titania and Hippolyta. The "happy ending" Burke speaks of is in fact significant because it does not fit "the tenor of the play" and again, Krieger's explanation accords the best explanation - the fairies represent the sexual drives of Theseus and Hippolyta and, as such drives are clearly taboo, they have to be buried upon returning to civilisation. The audience therefore, now returned to Athens, is left to try and decipher the once again masked hints of patriarchal power in a refined society.

A Midsummer Night's Dream is not the comedy it initially appears to be. Transporting its audience from civilisation into an almost Platonically transcendent counterpart shows gender relations for what they truly are. However, rather than Plato's idealistic World of the Forms we get a much bleaker view as, in this supernatural world, civilisation's mask slips and we see what is only hinted at in Acts 1 and 5: that masculinity is not only dangerous but omnipresent, infiltrating all aspects of life. As such, when the mask is donned again in the final scene in Athens, we know Krieger was correct and that lurking underneath is a world of sexualised male tyranny.