The role of animal metaphor in The tempest : the feeble occlusion of the radical idea of social hierarchy

(1)

the feeble occlusion of the radical idea of social hierarchy

著者（英） Rika Shirai

journal or

publication title

Core

number 39‑40

page range 1‑23

year 2011‑03‑15

URL http://doi.org/10.14988/pa.2017.0000015153

(2)

core

Vo 39.l ・40 March 2011

The R o l e of Animal Metaphor i n The 1 き m p e s t : The F e e b l e O c c l u s i o n o f t h e R a d i c a l I d e a o f S o c i a l

H i e r a r c h y

R i

ka Shirai

I. lntroduction

The role of animal metaphor in Shakespeare' s The Tempest serves to draw attention to various forms of distinctionラespecially，it serves to draw attention to the confiict of the ideas of 80cial hierarchy coexisting in the play as well as in Shakespeare' s society. Some critics have seen the colonial practices in the New World behind the play and have shed light on th巴confiictof the attitude toward political and pow巴rrelations in the play. Paul Brown， Francis Baker and Peter Hulme， acknowledging the relationship betwe巴nthe play and the colonial effort in the New Worldラdeniesthat the play has a single， fixed meaning and rather points out that the play is the battlefield' in which the conflict of the ideas of political relations takes place. Paul Brown does not justif

シ

Prospero's power over Caliban， but argues that through the power r巴lationbetween Prospero and Caliban the play reveals Prosp巴rO'8s佐ugglewith Caliban Prospero r巴quiresa struggle with the forces of the other in order to show his power: struggle is therefor巴theprecondition for the announc巴m巴ntof his victory. . . . th巴colonialist narrative requires and produces the other" (290‑1). Francis Barker and Peter Hulme see the issue of legitimate authori勿notas the theme of the play but as figural traces ofthe t巴xt'sanxiety concerning the very matters of domination and resistance" (300).

(3)

Focusing on the conflict of Prospero' s and Caliban' s political claimsラBarkerand Hulme血ldin this the possibility of the ideological occlusion of Caliban's political claims， or Prospero' s struggle with Caliban: One way of distinguishing Prospero' s play from The Tempest might be to claim that Prospero' s carefully established relationship between main and sub‑plot is reversed in The Tempest， whose main plot concerns Prospero' s anxie句Tover his sub‑plot" (304). The critics' argument calls attention to th巴play'srole to foreground the id巴ologicalview of power relations in the light of colonialism.

It is no doubt that the play is directly influenced by the England's colonial enterpris巴

in the New World. At the same time， it can be also said that the play concerns with the historical transition of the ideas of social hierarchy in Shakespeare' s age. Famouslyラ

his age was the transitional period of history: the stable order of th巴traditionally feudal society of medieval England was gradually demystified by th巴skepticalanalysis ofthe orthodoxy ofpolitical and social relations. Jonathan Dollimore wisely sums up the period' s unstable claim of the orthodox establishment of social ord巴r:

The id巴ologyof the Elizabethan World Picture was bui1t紅oundthe cen凶l tenet of teleological design: the divine plan irトformedth巴universegenerally and society particularly， being manifested in both as Ord巴rand Degree; further， identity and purpose wer巴inextricablyrelate ，dwith both deriving from the person's (or any thing's) plac巴inthe design. . . . In fact， it [a medieval anachronism

J

survived in significant and complex ways‑that is，姐amalgam ofreligious belief， aesthetic idea

1 i

sm and ideological myth. (6)

In th巳historicaltransitionラtheplay concerns with the demystification of the social

(4)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in 刀leTempest: The Feeble Occlusiou of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 3

order as the divine plan: what is shown throughout the play is Prospero's effort to restore the id巴alsociety in which the feudal order firmly op巴ratesand its limitation. David Norbrookラsettingthe play in the peculiar cont巴xtof Shakesp巴are'stim巴，pomts out that Prospero' s endeavor to restore his feudal， harrnoniou8 society is thr巴atenedby the skeptical view ofhis vision of social hierarchy:. . . The Tempest i8 a hard寸leaded playラ . . . it is not 80 much that the play is a romanc巴asthat it stagesラandin the process distances itself fromラtheromance scenario of d戸lasticredemption that Prospero is staging" (26). In the play， he assumesラlanguageitself as the mirror of social and political contexts of characters enacts the hierarchical separation of the courtiers and the less powerful social groups. As he says， one ofthe roles ofthe play is to call into question the attempt to ground the stable social order in the divine plan.

N orbrook assumes that the mat巴rialityoflanguage sh巴dslight on the con佐adictions lying in the claim of th巴stablesocial order as the divine plan， whereas my assumption is that animal metaphors contribute to foreground th巴conflictof the ideas of social hierarchy in the play. Bruc巴Bo巴hr巴r，focusing on the treatment of Caliban as an animal， sees this as the repres巴ntationof the racism underlying the play: Shakespeare， "

he says，repeatedly compromises Caliban's humanity through patterns of animal reference; . . . [Caliban's] epithets inevitably participat巴inlong tradition of racist name‑calling. . ." (27). However， we can find other characters compared with animals in the play. Antonio and Sebastian， who seek to define themselves against the traditional order of their society through the conspiracy against Prospero or Alonsoラidentifies themselves with beasts. Moreover， in th巴clashbetwe巴nthe courtiers and the sailors in the little opening sceneラtheBoatswainラbreakingup the stable hierarchy of their

(5)

society， is compared with a roaring anima l.Terence Hawkes' s reading shows th巴

possibility that叩imalreferences in the play calls attention to the con:flict of ideas of social structure. Actually， Hawkes assumes that the play is profoundly related with the colonialist practices in the New World:It [the play] invites consid巴rationof what colonization of the New World might rea.l

か

belike" (200). It is remarkabl巴thathe points out that the play explores what basis a human society might properly and fruitfully b巴constructedthere [the New World]" (200). Prospero， Hawkes assumes， introduced his language to a new world an ，dat the same time， imposed his own culture and society on i .tAssuming that man is the Talking Animal' ，Hawkes sees the lack of a spoken language， which is tantamount to animal， as a sign that h巴orshe is outside the society which the language embodies: Languag巴andway of life'， • • • are 80 closely connected as to be virtually coterminou8. IfIspeak your language'， it follow8 that 1 am human in the same way that you are. It means that we share assumptions about the way the world is" (195). Even though he is not interested in the different ideas of the structure of society coexisting in the play， it is worth noticing th巴

relationship between th巴con:flictof the ideas of social hierarchy and animal metaphor. Therefore， th巴aimof this essay is to explore how the animal metaphors in the play contribute to foreground the tensions of the ideas of social hierarchy.

11. The Role of Animal Metaphor as the Occlusion of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy

Among the inhabitants of th巴islan，danimal metaphor plays a role to occlude the attitud巴towardthe order of society which upsets Prospero' s vision of social hi巴rarchy.

(6)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in The Temp回:tThe Feeble Occlusion of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 5

Prosp巴rorelates the animality with the outsidemess of the recognized social formation. In the long narrative ofhis past， Prospero id巴ntifi巴swith a roaring animal what he used to be when his growing outsidemess in Milan drove him into his exile from the state. Prospero's r巴countofhis twelve‑y'巴arpast reveals to us that it is the conflict of Antonio andProsp巴ro's idea of social order that drove Prospero into his exile from the stat巴.In his narrative， Prospero engages in exposing Antonio' sfoul play" (1.2.62). He recalls that his trust hadind巴edno limit， / A confidence sans bound" and thus that he assigned the manag巴m巴ntofhis state to Antonio (96‑7). This narrative sugg巴ststhat Prospero believed thatAntonio kept his place and responsibilities expected in proportion to his known social and political status. However， Antonio， who does not believe the hierarchical s仕uctureof society to be transcend巴ntal，de白ledhimself against his al10tted place in the order of the soci巴tyand new created / The creatures that were mine [Prospero's]， • • • or changed 'em， / Or else new formed 'em" (81‑3). Clinging to the feudal order， he recollects， Prospero to my [his] state grew stranger" and then h巴

was vanished in [a] ro抗encarcass，" which is associated with the dead body of animal，

"[u]nder my [his] burden groan巴d"(76， 146， 156). In this recollection， Prospero ironically presents as an animal the man who became unfit for Antonio' s view of social ord巴rand vanished企omthe society. Prospero's assumption about animal shows that， for him， the outsiderness in the recognized society is associated with the animality.

Vanished from his Milan and thrown out into a new， s佐angeislan ，dProspero tries to re‑巴stablishhis id巴alsociety: on the islan ，dProspero reasserts the feudal relations of service. When he recounts to Miranda about the series of the events of his twelve‑ year exile from MilanラProsperoass巴:veratesto her that he was guided to the island

(7)

[b]y providence divine" (1.2

. 1

59). He insists that he is， without qualification， the lord ofthe island. Asserting the social order as the gift ofprovidence， Prospero introduc巴d his vision ofthe essential1y hierarchical society to the island. However， Caliban's and Ariel' s bluntly or reservedly desire for liberty from their subordination calls into question the 1巴gitimacyof Prospero' s authority as the lord of the island. Prospero' s following animal references represent his effort to occlude the subversive 副iれlde toward the hierarchical relations of s巴rVlce.

In his quarrel with巴achof them， Prospero refers to Ariel and Caliban as animals. Assaulting Ariel' s reserv巴dly challenge against his hierarchical relationship to ProsperoラProsperodescribes Ariel as a howling animal. A武erAriel reports that he has completed Prospero' s biddings， Ariel' s desire for [m]y [his] liberty" bursts into fiam巴

(1.2.245). Prosp巴rotries to exclude Ariel' s subversiv巴attitudetoward his subordination from his vision of social hierarchy through animal refi巴rence: Ifthou more murmur' st， 1 will rend an oak / And p巴gthee in his knot匂Tentrails till / Thou hast howled away twelve winters" (294‑6). This animal reference shows Prospero's effort to occlude the visibl巴tokensof disord巴rfrom his ideal hierarchy of the society. Indee ，dbefore he had included Ariel into his own hierarchical society， Prospero uses animal metaphor to d巴scribeAriel:

PROSPERO .. thy groans Did make wolves howl and pene仕atethe breasts Of ever‑angry bears. . . .

• It was mine art，

When 1 arrived and heard thee， that made gape

(8)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in The Tempest: The Feeble Occlusion of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 7

The pine and let thee out. (2879，291^副3)

ActuallyラcomparingAriel's voice with th巴roaringof animals， Prospero may simply remind Ariel of th巴spirit's torment企omimprisonment within the pine tree and his debt to the master. However， scornfully emphasizing that it was only wild animals such as wolv巴s"and bears" that could understand Ariel， Prospero symbolically places Ariel within the animal world and foregrounds Ariel's animality (288ラ289) This animal m巴taphorsuggests thatラforProsperoぅth巴distinctionbetwe巴nmen and animals depends on whether Ariel is in Prospero' s vision of hierarchical society. In his encounter with Ariel， Prospero confers on Ariel the soci巴ty，in which Prospero believes Ariel's allotted plac巴ishis servant

Caliban openly refus巴shis obedienc巴operatingin th巴feudalrelations of service， being d巴scribedas an animal. When he enters inAct 1， Scene 2， Caliban firmly denies Prospero's legitimacy of authority: For 1 am all the subjects that you haveラIWhich first was mine own king" (1.2.342‑3). Prospero effaces Caliban' s claims with cramps， I Side‑stitches， that shall pen thy [his] breath up， urchins" to prick him， and pinching pains more stinging than the bees (326‑7). Caliban's claims which subvert Prospero's view of social ord巴rare erased as the "din"且nd roar"at whichbeasts shall tremble"

(371，372). Before Caliban was outside Prospero's vision ofsocial hierarchy， Prospero did not admit Caliban as a human. In his narrative of his encounter with Caliban， Prospero emphasizes condescendingly that he once charit油lybothered to treat Caliban，with humane care，" foregrounding Caliban's animality (347). Moreover， according to Miranda's recollection， Prospero， with Miranda， regarded Caliban as a savage who wouldst gabble like I A thing most brutish" (357‑8). Boehrer sees

(9)

Miranda's arrogant misinterpretation ofCaliban's speech as Miranda' s racism" which is "typical of relative anthropocentrism" (29). However， her tr巴atmentof Caliban sustains the other different reading， for language of any society can be seen as the reflection of the social structure as wel1 as the agent of domination. When Prospero and Miranda arrived on the islan ，dtheir own society did not exist there; thus， they provided for Caliban their own society in which th巴yassumed he could leam the order of that society as wel1 as th巳irlanguage. Hawk，巴salso sees language， which shows the way of speaking， as the reflection ofthe way ofliving in the society. He points out that civil conversation' is exactly what the unredeemed Caiban lacks，" for， he says， linguistic int巴Tchangehas a fundamental role to play in the structure of any society"

(205， 206). It is remarkable that th巴playshows that Prosp巴rointroduced the feudal society to the island. Caliban d巴m巴sto be subserviently contained in Prospero' s vision of social hier紅白y，engaging in breaking up th巴hierarchicalrelationship which Prospero has conferred on him. This is why Prospero refers to Caliban as an animal again. The identification of Caliban with animal represents his subversive attitude toward Prosp巴ro'svision ofhierarchical soci巴句T.

Moreover， animal metaphors are found in th巴conflictof the ideas of social hierarchy among the courti巴rsassembled from their socie勿tothe s佐ang巴island.What occurs throughout among the shipwrecked king Alonso and his fol1owers is the clash between th巴partyof Alonso and its counter‑force‑Antonio and Sebastian. In the conflict among th巴 courtiersラAntonio and Sebastian show his skeptical views of the mystification of social hierarchy as th巴divineplan even though th巴yend up being r巴ducedto roaring animals. When Antonio proposes that Sebastian join with him to

(10)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in The Temp田:TtheFe巴bl巴Occlusionof the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 9

k:ill Alonso， Sebastian pronounces that he is standing water" that [h]ereditary sloth instructs" how to

、

^bb^，^"ⁿô^t^how tô^"^f^lô^w^"⁽²

^. ¹

^.²²¹^，²²²^，²²³⁾^.^He uⁿ^côⁿ^s^cⁱôû^s^l^y

r巴vealshis own smold巴ringdiscontent for his allotted position as a young巴rbrother which ke巴pshimself from the crown. Denying that Ferdinand or Claribel is the only heir of Naples" and claims that [t]here be that can rule Naples I As well as he [Alonso] that sleeps，" Antonio justifies Sebastian' s desire to 百ow'or aspiration for the crown(257ラ264‑5).To shap巴thesocie勿inthe light of Sebastian' S lL.'1cohscious desire， Antonio attempts to new created I The creatures that were [Alonso' s]ラ・・・orchanged

'巴m，I Or else new form巴d'em" again (1.2.81‑3). However， Antonio and Sebastian's conspiracy fizzles out. A mong the awaked other courtiersラAntonioand Sebastian define thems巴lvesas roaring beasts:

SEBASTIAN

羽市ileswe stood here securing your repose， Even now we heard a hollow burst ofbellowing， Like bulls， or rather lions. Did't not wake you?

1t struck mine ear most t巴rribly. ALONSO

ANTONIO

1 heard nothing.

0， 'twas a din to fright a monster's ear‑

To make an earthquak巴!Sure it was the roar Of a whole herd oflions.

ALONSO GONZALO

Heard you this， Gonzalo?

(11)

. . There was a noise， That's verily. (2

. 1

.311‑7， 321‑2)

Their skepticism about the social order as the gift of providence is reduced to the sound of animals such as a hoIlow burst ofbeIlowing，"a din to耐ghta monster's ear，" and the roar / Of a whole h巴rdoflions" (312， 315， 316‑η. Through the series of Antonio and Sebastian' s attempted assassination of Alonso， we can h巴arthe subversive voice about the social order， which may very well be silenced at court. In this conflict among the courtiers through which the issue of the view of social hierarchy is brought into th巴 fore，the play reduces Antonio and Sebastian to animals. Placing the conspirators in the animal world^ラth巴playtries to effac巴th巴skepticalattitude toward the胡emptto ground the stable social order in the divine plan. The animal metaphors found among the courtiers also suggest the play's effort to occlude the subversive attitude toward the traditional notion of social order.

In the above‑discussed conflict of the ideas of social order among the courtiers lies the possibility that the play shows that， in the society of the courtiers， the traditional notion of social order holds dominance in the pressure of the skepticism embodied by Antonio and S巴bastian.That society is not actually stag巴d，but we can see the figure of their ship itselfin the little opening scene as the epitome oftheir society， in which the e妊ortto occlude the subversive vision of stable social hierarchy in that society is presented through animal references. In the almost‑split shipラth巴membersof the court party startle to discover that the accustom巴dsocial responses to them have evaporated:

BOATSWAIN What cares these roarers for th巴nameofking?

(12)

To cabin! Silence! Trouble us not.

GONZALO Good， yet rem巴mberwhom thou hast aboard

BOATSWAIN Non巴that1 more love than myself. You are a councillor; if you can command these elements to silenc巴andwork the peace of the present， we will not hand a rope more. Use your authority! (1.1

. 1

6‑23)

Figuring Gonzalo as

、

^côûⁿ^cⁱ^l^lô^r^，^"^hⁱ^s^pô^sⁱ^tⁱôⁿⁱⁿ^t^hê^sô^cⁱê^t^y^，^t^hê^Bôâ^t^s^wâⁱⁿⁱ^dêⁿ^tⁱ^fⁱê^s

th巴shipwith his own society (21). The p巴rfectcondition of the ship can be seen as a symbol of order: thusラwecan identif

シ

thealmost^嗣splitship with the almost‑collapsed order of the passengers' society. The Boatswainヲpresentinghimself and the rioters who challenge against the traditional hierarchy of th巴socletyぉ the roarers，"

foregrounds th巴animalityofthe elements (16). In the Boatswain's image， the rioters in th巴societyar巴associatedwith animals whose roaring may be match巴dwith or encouraged by the roaring of the storm. The animal metaphor calls attention to the society's effort to occlude the idea which subverts the orthodoxy ofthe social order in sarcastlc way.

The courtiers' comparing the Boatswain to an animal also represents their effort to occlude the subversive atti旬detoward the stable social order. In his following clash between th巴courtiersand the Boatswain， we find in th巴frenzyof Sebastian' s rage th巴

emblematic equivalency of the Boatswain， who transgress巴sthe social ord巴巳anda brute animal:

BOATSWAIN Have you a mind to sink?

SEBASTIAN A pox o'your throat， you bawling， blasphemous， incharitable dog. (1.1.38‑40)

(13)

The Boatswain' s question can be tr巴atedas his challenge against his hierarchical relationship to the courtiers in the society. As suggested above， th巴Boatswainshows his almostsplit ship as the symbol of the disorder of his society. Thereforeラtheword sink" can be considered to mean that the courtiers go down below the surface ofwater an ，dat the same time， that they move down to the lower level or lose their dominant position in the society (38). Th巴Boatswainsarcastically qu巴stionswhetherthe arrogant courtiersぅwhointerrupt th巴sailors'work again and again， hop巴tosink. Simultaneouslラ:y

he implicitly凶esto let the courtiers know that the collapse of the social hierarchy easily undercuts the courtiers' known superior‑rank， namely， that the hierarchical relations of their society are not transcend巴ntal.Norbrook also points out that the ゆ reof the split

的

asthe symbol of order calls into question the抗temptto leave the social order as the gift of providence: "The figure of the ship of state had a greater app巴alfor sevente巴nth園田nturyradicals than the traditional figure of the body politic because it vi巴wedthe state as an artificial construct rath巴rthan part of the order of nature， • • ". (33). In the frenzy of rage， Antonio and Sebastian d巴scribethe Boatswain， whose attitude toward social hierarchy is subversive， as an incharitable dog"

( 1 . 1 . 4

0). In the clash between the courtiers and the sailors， animal reference serves to occlude the idea which threatens the ideal vision of the stable social hierarchy.

Prospero， even though he confirms the legitimacy ofhis lordship on the islandラalso has to con企ontthe subversive vision of social hierarchy， which takes shape through Caliban' s emblematic monstrousn巴ssor animality. We can see the conspiracy of Stephano' s parりras their chall巴ngeagainst Prospero's id巴alvision of social hierarchy itself. Among the triumvirate of Stephano， Trinculo， and Caliban， the term ・monster'

(14)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in The Temp四:tThe Feeble Occ1usiou of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 13

has established itself as a proper appellation for Caliban. In his fantasy of power， Stephano establishes the imaginary state [which] totters" with the monster Caliban (3.2.6). Stephano jollies Caliban to fulfill his ambition toinherit" the crown of Alonso on the island (2.2.172). Imagining himself as the lord of the isla n，dStephano gratifies Caliban with the name ofMonsieur Monster" (3.2.17). H巴contentsCaliban with the position [s]ervant monster，"[m]y man^司monster，"mylieutenant， monst民 ormy standard" (3ラ11，14^開5).He also bestows the position ofviceroy on Caliban:1 will be king and queen‑save our graces‑and Trinculo and thyself [Caliban] shall be viceroys" (1078). In Stephano's illusionistic state， the source ofsocial hierarchy does not rest in the divine providence. Caliban， wil1ingly conforming to the social and political status shifted by Stephano one after another in the seemingly comical design of the rebellion， breaks the stable social order into which Prospero佐iesto include him; Caliban， with Stephano， tries to shape his own socie勿inthe light of his desire and purposes. Caliban' s monstrousness or animality can be seen as the representation of the vision of social hierarchy which confiicts with Prospero' s one.

Actually， Caliban' s awareness that he se巴ksto define himself against Prospero's id巴alvision of social hierarchy is shown by his own id巴ntificationwith animal. Shuddering at his challeng己againstthe feudal relations of service， Caliban warns Stephano and Trinculo that Prospero will shape them as animals: 1 will have none on't. We shalllose our time， / And all be turned to barnacles， or to apes / With foreheads villainous low" (4.1.247開9). Caliban ru巴おllyacknowledges thatラbecause of his transgression against the order ofProspero' s society， he has to symbolically d巴:generate into th巴 apes/ With foreheads villainous low" (248θ). Caliban's animal reference

(15)

recalls that Prospero' s distinction between men and animals depends on the idea of social hierarchy. N orbrook， also pointing out that Caliban' s animal reference represents his acknowledgement ofhis challenge against his hierarchical relationship to Prospero， comments on Caliban' s above^桐quotedwords: So far is Caliban from accepting conventional stereotypes that he warns his allies against reducing themselves to the way their masters rnight want to construct them" (43‑4). Caiban's monstrousness， Norbrook says， is not his self‑d巴scription"but 自己r巴sultof imitating distortions in traditional linguistic and social forms" (44). Relating the materiality of Caliban's language with his animality or outsiderness of the ord巳rof th巴recognizedsocietyラ

Norbrook indicates that Caliban's language serves to foreground the material basis of the stable social order which is effac巴din that society. In my view， by making Caliban identifシhisown challenge against Prospero' s vision of social order with animality， the play reminds us ofthe relations between Prospero's assumption about animal and his idea of social order. Caliban' s animal refer巴nce，mirroring Prospero' s effort to occlude his own subversive idea of social hierarchy， ironically sheds light on the mat巳rialbasis of the social hierarchy which is effaced也 Prospero's society. At the end of their conspiracy， Prospero dispels the Stephano party as roaring animals. Prospero shows the exclusion ofthe Stephano party as follows:

PROSPERO

Go， charg巴mygoblins that th巴ygrind their joints With dry convulsions， shorten up their sinews With aged cramps， and more pinch‑spotted mak!巴them Than pard or cat o'mountain.

(16)

The Role of Animal Metaphor In.The Temp回:tThe Feeble Occlusion of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 15

ARIEL Hark， th巴yroar! (4

. 1

.258‑61)

Prospero， with Ariel， have spirits in the 伊iseof dogs chase the Stephano party offstag巴.The roaring of the Stephano' s party is now barely distinguishable from that of dogs. Prospero presents their subversive attitude toward the stable hierarchical society as animalistic; in the en

， d

he excludes the conspirators as roaring animals from his own hierarchical society.

III. The Feebleness ofth巴Occlusionof the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy In社lIsway， in the conflict of th巴ideasof social hierarchy， animal metaphors s巴rve to occlud巴th巴radicalidea of social hierarchy. Howeveζit is also remarkable that the use of animal metaphor in the play foregrounds the feebleness of the play' s effort to occlude the subversive idea of social hierarchy. lnd巴e

， d

the animals compared with characters are always associat巴dwith the roaring or howling beasts terri今ingthe surroundings. In the pattem of animal reference lies the possibility that the play implicitly shows that the traditional idea of social order as the gift of providence holds dominance in the press町eof the skeptical views about it. Moreover， in this chapter， 1 will focus on the scenes in which the roaring of the animals engulf the human socieザ or the ideal vision of the stable social hierarchy， assuming that th巴scenesrepresentthe feebleness of the occlusion of the radical idea of social order.

As suggested above， in the failure of their conspiracy， the play makes Antonio and Sebastian efface their skepticism about the attempt to ground a stable social order in the divine plan as the roaring ofwild animals: a hollow burst ofbellowing，"a din to fright a monster's ear，" and th巴roar/ Of a whole h巴rdoflions" (2.

1 .

312， 315， 316‑乃.

(17)

However， it is also remarkable that the仕aditionalidea of social order， which is embodied by Gonzalo in the conflict of the ideas of social hierarchy among the courtiers， ends up being巴rasedinto nothing at th巴endof the collision. Gonzalo， comparing the bereaved Alonso with the cloudy" weather and the king with the sun in his consolation to the king， shows his belief in the legitimacy of Alonso' s authority (143). He acknowledges the analogy betwe巴nthe earthly order and the h巴av巴nlyone as the idea l.Nevertheless， his claim confronts Antonio and Sebastian's skepticism: punning on the loyal Gonzalo's words， they dismiss Gonzalo's claim as [v]ery foul"

and call into question his beli巴fthatth巴socialorder is transcenden t.(143). Moreover， the king Alonso also dismisses Gonzalo' s speeches as 'nothing': Pritheeラnomore. / Thou dost tall王nothingto me" (171‑2). The bereaved Alonso may simply spurn Gonzalo's optimistic consolation to his deep suffering from Ferdinand's supposed death. However， displaying a feeling of repugnance to Gonzalo' s speeches as Antonio and Sebastian doラAlonsoseems to reject Gonzalo's view of social ord巴runderlying his formulaic modes of the courtier' s pr創se.Ev巴nGonzalo hims巴lfeffaces his claims as nothingness:[Antonio and Sebastian] are of such sensible and nimble lungs that they always use to laugh at nothing. . . . [1 ，]in this kind of m巴rryfooling， am nothing to you， so you may continue and laugh at nothing still" (174‑6ラ178‑9emphasis mine). Go回 alo'ss巴nseof nonentity represented by his obsessive r巴petitionof the word nothing' inevitably swe巴psaway not only his optimistic thoughts about Ferdinand' s supposed d巴athbut also his acceptance of the social order as the divine plan. On the symbolic level， among the courtiers Gonzalo is reduced to a silent cipher and his view of social hierarchy to nothingness. 1n the ear of the king， Antonio and Sebastian's

(18)

skepticism is nothing，" and to the loyal follower Gonzalo it is nothing more than a noise" (314， 321). However， in fact， Antonio and Sebastian' s animal‑like roaring which represents their skeptical view ofthe stable social order as the divine plan ominously reverb巴ratesaround the court party as if their roaring is about to engulf th巴:m.

Moreover， Prospero's vision ofsocial hierarchy as th巴giftof providence embodied in his betrothal pageant is a180 designed to end up being engulfi巴dby the strang巴noise‑ like sound which Prospero or the other men cannot recognize. Actually， the insubstantial pageant continues into the graceful dancing， through which Prospero' s ideal vision of social hierarchy tak巴sshape in th巴culminationof his pageant. The device of the goddess Juno， Ceres， and lris command th巴 sunbumedsicklemen" to join in country footing" (4

. 1

.134ラ138).In the hierarchical relations coming down from above as the epitome of concord and heavenly harmony， the sicklemen， with their prais巴forthe gods and goddesses， mingle with them. Norbrook also se巴sthe dancing as the embodiment ofProspero's hope for the naturalization of authority，" commenting on Prospero's vision of social hierarchy as follows (36):

. . .

in Prospero's golden age there is a hierarchical s仕uc旬rein which the labour of the r巴apersis ultimately motivated by the transcendent gods and godd巴S8巴swho are figures of the leisured aristocracy" (36). As Norbrook points out， the vision ofthe graceful dancing reflects Pr08pero' s ideal mystification of hietarchical society as the gift of providenc巴.

However， Prosp巴rocannot finish displaying his ideal vision of social order: he suddenly erases the grace向1dance， or his ideal vision of the hierarchicalラbutharmonious society. Their voice diお凶s幻int除忠gra幻te郎sinto

、

âs^仕^'âⁿ^g^巴^hollowandc^∞ôⁿ^f^白ⁱ^l^S^民^巴^dno^仇^l^sê^久"whichis no more recognized as human voice (4.

1 .

138 sd). Pr08pero' s pageant dissolves into th巴

(19)

world of animal‑like chaotic soun ，dwithin which his ideal vision of social hierarchy has evaporated

Seemingly， atth巴endofthe play Prosp巴rosucceeds to occlud巴theabove‑discussed roaring animals企omboth his own island and the如何reof the state to which he will return. Caliban seems to cut his mons佐ousnessoff from himself: begging for [Prospero's] pardon，" he acknowledges his hierarchical relationship to Prospero (5.1.294). Also^ラProspero，calling Caliban mine，" acknowledges his responsible for Caliban as hisfellow' (276). This bond between Prospero and Caliban represents the bond betwe巴nmaster and servant knitting together th巴巴lementsof the feudal， harmonious society in which ev巴ryonehonors the hierarchy. Moreoveラ.rasto the members of his real state， Prospero pr巴，sentsth巴restorationof the sailors， who come to honor the hierarchical but harmonious society， as the liberation from the roaring animality:

BOATSWAIN

Wewered巴adofsleep

And‑how we know not‑all clapp巴dunder hatches， Where but even now with s凶ngeand sev巴ralnois巴S

Of roaring， shrieking， howling， jingling chains And more diversity of sounds， all horrible， We were awaked; straightway at liberty， • • • (230‑5)

Th巴diversityofsounds" which is all horrible" such as the strange and sev巴Talnoises / Of roaring， shrieking， howling" reminds us of the chaotic sound of the li抗leopening scene， in which the roaring ofthe metaphysical animals‑the subversive voices ofth巴

(20)

The Role of Animal Metaphor in The Tempest: The FeぬleOcclusion ofthe Radical Idea ofSocial Hierarchy 19

sailors and the eIements of their position‑mingled with the roaring of the tempest and出reatenedthe stable hierarchical structure ofthe socieザ(234，232‑3). Therefore， Prospero' s last animal reference seems to show the sailors'liberation from the supposed animality or subversive attitude toward social hierarchy as well as企omthe physical con血lementto the shipboard. Inde e，dwe can no longer白ldwhat由巳sailorsused ω be when they were as much concerned to save their own life as those of the king and courtiers. When he sees the Alonso party again， the Boatswain articulates his subservienc巴tothem: The best news is that we hav巴safelyfound / Our King and company" (221‑2). The Boatswain's wonder at th巴endof the play shows the king' s ship is in perfect condition:. • . our ship， / Which but t注目glassessince we gave out spIit， / Is tight and yare and bravely rigged as when / We first put out to sea" (222‑5). This perfect restoration of the ship or the symbol of order s巴emsto show us that Prospero reasserts the stable social order of his state.

However， we have to catch a gIimpse ofthe possibility that Antonio's animal‑Iike roaring， or his radical idea of social. order， remains reverberate in the fu旬reof Prospero's state as it did twelve years ago. At the end ofth巴play，Prospero displays the figure ofth巴白tureofhis state through Ferdinand and Miranda's playing chess. They tease each other lovingly， but their reappearance has to beぬreaten巴dby Miranda' s accusation ofFerdinand's falseness:

MlRANDA

Sweet lor ，dyou play me false.

FERDINAND Noラmydearest love， 1 would not for the world.

(21)

おHRANDA

Yes， for a score ofkingdoms you sho

u 1

d wrangle， And 1 wo

u 1

d call it fair play. (5.1.172‑5)

For Prospero， this game of chess， which Alonso int巴rpretsas [a] vision ofthe island，"

represents his own vision of Ferdinand and Miranda' s state or the stat巴towhich he will return to (176). In the symbolic figure of stateヲProsperoshows Miranda is unconsciously prepared to countenance Ferdinand carrying out foul pla

y ' .

Miranda's countenance ofFerdinand's falsen巴ssas his fair play" recalls Antonio' sfoul play，" in whichherej巴ctedhis allotted place in the soci巴tyandnewcreat，己d/ The creatures that were mine [Prospero's]， • • • or chang巴d'em， / Or else new formed 'em" tWI巴lveyears ago (5.1.175， 1.2.60，81‑3). In other words^ヲatthe end of the play w巴confrontProspero' s vision ofhis state， in whichAntonio's radical id回 ofsocial hierarchy or his roaring‑

"a hollow burst of bellowing，"a din to仕ighta monster' s ear，" and the roar / Of a whole herd of lions"‑remains resound as if it prep紅白toshatter Prospero' s ideal vision of social hierarchy (2.1.312， 315， 316‑7). The speed with which Prospero promises the royal members will catch up with the rest of the royal fleet seems to suggest that he dismisses his巴xp巴rienceson the island as an ephemeral， dream‑like interlude. Prosp巴ro'sid巴alvision ofhierarchical society， which he achieves to enact at th巴endof the play on th巴islandラisnothing more than his ephemeral dream.

r y .

Conclusion

In the play， the traditional id巴aof social hierarchy as the divine plan and the skeptical view of it coexist: the feudal order in the hi巴rarchical，but harmonious

(22)

society holds dominance in the pressure of the skeptical view of the idea of social ord巴r.In the conflict of the ideas of social order throughout the play， animal metaphors represent the effort to occlud巴thesubversive or radical idea of social hierarchy・Indee，d Prospero presents Caliban and Ariel as animals when they refuse the feudal relations of service. Moreover， in his punishment for the conspiracy of the Stephano party， Prospero metaphorically shapes them as animals to effac巴theirsubv巴rsivevision of social hierarchy. Animal metaphors can also be found in the scene of the courtiers: in the conflict of the attitude toward social order， Antonio and Sebastian's skepticism about the view of social order as the gift of providence ends up being reduced to the bellowing ofb巴asts.

However， we have to doubt that th巴play'socclusion of the radical idea of social order may be :fi巴eblewhen the metaphysical animals repeatedly engulf th巴human society， or th巴idealvision of social hierarchy as the gi食ofprovidence.The roaring of animals， namely， Antonio and Sebastian' s skepticism about the mystification of social hi巴rarchy，is de喧ignedto achieve dominance over Gonzalo' s belief in the social order as the divine providence. Prospero' s ideal vision of social hierarchy巴mbodiedin his pageant also ends up dissolving into the sound which the man Prospero can no longer mingle with. The roaring animals， which are always associated with terrif抑19beasts， threaten the vision of stable social hi巴rarchyas if even th巴playwrightShakespeare himself cannot control the force ofthe animals.

Animal metaphors in the play， occluding the radical idea of social hi巴rarchy，seems to serve to assert the回ditionalidea of social order as the divine plan in the historical transition in which it was gradually demystified. However， simultaneously， the almost

(23)

uncontrollable force of the animals also shown in the play implicitly confronts the audience with the limitation of th巴occlusion.W hen we find the role of animal metaphor in the play as th巴feebleocclusion of th巴radicalidea of social hierarchy， the play can be s巴enas Shakespeare' S ode to th巴dying‑out佐aditionalidea of stabl巴social hierarchy.

Works Cited

Barker， Francis and Peter Hulme. Nymphs and Reapers Heavily Vanish: The Discursive Con‑texts of The Tempest." The Tempest: A Case Study in Critical Controversy. 2nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Ph巴lan.Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's， 2009. Print.

Boehrer， Bruce. Shaた'speareαmongthe Animαls: Nature and Socie砂inthe Drama of Early Modern England. New York: Palgrave， 2002. Print.

Brown， Paul."This Thing of Darkness 1 Acknowledge Mine': The Tempest and the Discourse of Colonialism." Theたmpest:A Case Study in Criticα1 Controversy. 2nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff and James Phelan. Boston: Bedford/S t.Martin'民2009. Print.

Dollimore， Jonathan. Radical Trage砂:Religion， Ideology and Power in the Drama of Shakespeare and His Contemporaries. Brighton: Harvester Press， 1984. Print. Hawkes， Terence. Sh

ι α

espeareきTalkingAnimals: Language and Drama in Society.

London， EdwardArnol ，d1973. Print.

NorbrookラDavid. WhatCares Th巴seRoarers for the Name ofKing?': Language and Utopia in The 長mpest."The Politics ofTragicomedy: Shakespeare andAfte. rEd.

(24)

The Role of Ani百lalMetaphor in The Tempest: Th巴FeebleOcclusion of the Radical Idea of Social Hierarchy 23

Gordon McMullan and Jonathan Hope. London: Routledge， 1992. 21‑54. Print. Vaughan，Alden T.， and Virginia Mason Vaughan， eds. The Tempest. London: Thompson

Learning， 1997. Print.