The Marriage Trilogy (Jude the Obscure, Middlemarch, and Anna Karenina)

Warning: this post contains SPOILERS on nineteenth-century novels!!!!!!

Don't mind me if I make a lonelymaxxing type of post. I just really wanted to talk about three nineteenth-century novels that I believe everyone who ponders about marriage should read. These three books constitute what I am going to call The Marriage Trilogy. They contain everything marriage-related you can possibly ponder about. These three books are:

1. Jude the Obscure (1895) by Thomas Hardy -- (Book #1 The Doompill)

2. Middlemarch (1872) by George Eliot -- (Book #2 The Hopepill)

3. Anna Karenina (1878) by Leo Tolstoy -- (Book #3 The Compromisepill) 

This is probably not the last time you're going to have to deal with me marriageposting or divorceposting (I recently read John Milton's pamphlet on divorce!!! So watch out!!!) By the way, Hardy actually quotes Milton in Jude the Obscure!!!!

Jude the Obscure -- The Doompill 

Jude the Obscure is actually my favourite novel of all time. It's also a book that made me cry, scream, and crash out because it's the saddest novel I've ever read. Without giving too much away, the novel is about two people who love each other who can not be with each other. This is because Jude marries a woman who manipulates his sense of honour/chivalry but who he does not actually love, and Sue (who he actually loves) marries someone else who can provide for her out of convenience. But Sue does not love the old schoolmaster she marries either. Jude and Sue have an intellectual connection. Sue basically changes Jude's entire worldview through their intellectual discussions. It's clear that Hardy thinks intellectual companionship is important. They both do Latinmaxxing and Greekmaxxing, but Jude does this to study Christianity while Sue has a deeper appreciation of the classical pagan authors. And this has a huge impact on their worldviews and leads to lively debate and long yaps between them. This book is extremely doompilling because it makes it sound like everyone ends up marrying someone they settle for rather than who they truly love. Even when Sue's husband sees Jude and Sue yapping together, he has to admit that they are lowkey perfect for each other. Jude and Sue technically never get married, but you can argue that they are more married than anyone else in the book is if you use love to define marriage rather than a piece of paper. By the way, what is the Milton quote that Hardy includes as an epigraph in this book? It's this one: 

“Whoso prefers either Matrimony or other Ordinance before the Good of Man and the plain Exigence of Charity, let him profess Papist, or Protestant, or what he will, he is no better than a Pharisee.” — John Milton, quoted by Thomas Hardy

This is a truly based quote. And I don't think anything more based about marriage has been said than this in the entire history of western thought, except for maybe that thing that Nietzche said about marriage being a long conversation. That was pretty based too. However, I have not actually read Nietzche's Human, All Too Human yet so I don't have much context for that. What I can tell you is that Milton and Hardy are based and 100% correct about marriage. If you don't think that whatever Jude and Sue have is a love that is higher than marriage, you are basically a Pharisee (by which Milton means someone who cares more about the law than what is actually right)!!!!!

 

Middlemarch -- The Hopepill 

Middlemarch is the novel that made me end a relationship. I know I said Jude is my favourite novel of all time, but Middlemarch is a close second. I love how this novel basically has two stories going on at once. Dorothea, the protagonist, is in an unhappy marriage with an old scholar named Casaubon. At first, Dorothea thinks Casaubon would be a good match because she wants to be with an intellectual guy who she admires. She thinks she can help him with his scholarly work. However, Dorothea comes to the nasty realization that Casaubon has no admiration for her even though she is an intelligent woman. He has no interest in her inner life, but she remains devoted to him out of a sense of duty. Dorothea has a literary foil, or a character who is in a very similar circumstance as her, named Lydgate. Lydgate is a doctor who is very passionate about his work, but his wife Rosamond doesn't respect his passion. She rejects Lydgate's interest in the medical field, making Lydgate himself feel rejected, unhappy, and resentful. Dorothea and Lydgate both want to be valued for their minds, but their partners do not offer this to them. My relationship reminded me too much of Dorothea and Casaubon's relationship, which is why I ended it. Eventually, Dorothea meets a man named Will Ladislaw who truly loves her soul!!! There's an unforgettable scene where Will Ladislaw and his friend are in an art museum where they see Dorothea. Ladislaw's friend, an artist, says he would paint Dorothea. And Ladislaw says what she really deserves is a poem about her, meaning that he deeply appreciates her non-physical attributes. He is captivated by her voice, soul, and mind. The most romantic scene ever is after Casaubon dies and Dorothea marries Will even though he's poor. 

Anyway, men shouldn't date Rosamonds and women shouldn't date Casaubons. 

While reading Middlemarch, I took pics of passages that had me howling and screaming and posted them on my one-person Discord server. I'll share some with you guys here. This is about how Rosamond was a terrible wife:

Also here is something I saved about some characters who had more minor roles in the story, Fred and Mary. Mary wanted to fix him so badly:

Anyway, Middlemarch is based. It is more hopepilled than Jude because of how Dorothea finds Ladislaw at the end who is basically a perfect man and marries him. 

Also, this is a meme I made. I posted this before. But here's a repost anyway.

Anna Karenina -- The Compromisepill 

Eventually when you're pondering about marriage, you arrive at the compromisepill. However, this is a hard pill to swallow and I lowkey didn't really swallow it yet ngl. 

My cat Mictlan is a Russian Blue, and so I thought it would be cool to take a picture of a Russian creature with a Russian book!! Lowkey Tolstoy should've added more creatures. There were horses though. 

Now, this is 800 pages about a woman cheating on her husband. Interestingly, I actually hated two other classic novels that were about women cheating on their husbands. One was Main Street by Sinclair Lewis and the other was Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert. I think the reason why I didn't like those books is because I thought the women were dumb and hard to sympathize with, even though their husbands were such mediocre men. The husbands in both Main Street and Madame Bovary were doctors who had no time for their wives. They were also lowkey kinda uncultured and didn't read enough poetry. However, their wives were also mediocre and I can't say I liked them much. But Anna is different. I loved Anna, idk. She was cool af and I understand why the young women in the novel like Kitty are captivated by her, and the men too of course. Her husband Karenin is very similar to the hubsands in Main Street and Madame Bovary. That is to say he is extremely mid. Anna wants a passionate love, and so she cheats on him with Count Vronsky, a handsome charming guy who I imagine had a great jawline. However, Vronsky never truly does value her. He sort of treats having her as a status symbol. You also see elements of the classic demand-withdrawal cycle in their relationship. 

Anna Karenina's plot structure is similar to Middlemarch because it sort of has two storylines in one. There's the Anna-Vronsky storyline and the Levin-Kitty storyline. This is kind of like how Middlemarch has Dorothea-Casaubon and Lydgate-Rosamond. I actually wonder if Tolstoy read Eliot. He probably did. I know he liked Dickens. 

Anyway, Vronsky doesn't truly love Anna's soul. There are times when he seems to, like after Anna recovers from a nearly fatal illness, but he mostly just seems like a hotter version of Karenin. Anna realizes that maybe it wasn't worth it. Meanwhile, Levin turns to God instead of turning to other women when he is unhappy in his own marriage.

The novel shows Levin as a noble character while Anna tries to fulfill her own desires instead of turning to spirituality. 

However, the genius of the novel is probably in that even though Levin is endorsed as morally superior, Anna is the more likeable character by far. Her intensity and passion makes her so much easier to sympathize with and relate to than Levin.

So if you fully swallow the Compromisepill, you could end up like Levin. And he is an admirable guy when it comes to morality. 

But Anna is more based, remember that! At what cost will you swallow the Compromisepill?

Here's a pic I took of a page from the book. Anna and Vronsky are quarrelling in this chapter. And I just thought Tolstoy did a 10000 times better job of describing "the demand-withdrawal cycle" than psychologists do. Take that, psychologists. Your field isn't a real science and it can be done better by writers of literary fiction. The demand-withdrawal cycle usually has a woman feeling unappreciated and demanding more from a man who then withdraws because he doesn't like the criticism. It had me howling and screaming when it happened to Anna and Vronsky.

Now, we are almost at the end of this post. I just wanted to end with a poem about the Marriage Trilogy. I chose juvenile rhymes and simple words on purpose to make it sound more like the style of a person who wouldn't read the Marriage Trilogy for some irony. Anyway, here it is:

A Poem I wrote about the Marriage Trilogy 

Long conversations between Jude and Sue

on matters that changed their entire worldview,

Perhaps you'll never know what that's like,

Philosophy taking over the night

Casaubon made Dorothea feel like

he was the sea, and her mind was a pool

until Ladislaw showed her what it was like

to actually be loved for her soul,

But they'll never say you're like him

Maybe you're like Count Vronsky

so handsome he made Anna Karenina

cheat on her husband and ruin her life,

All she wanted was love, 

though Vronsky didn't know how to do that right,

But her husband was not much better 

so she never satisfied her desires

Jude loved Greek and Latin

a poor boy who became a stonemason

just so he could have books 

And Lydgate was a doctor

who truly had a passion

but I'm not sure you know what that's like

any better than his wife did

Maybe that's why you can't love

a person that well either,

Jude and Levin and Ladislaw

could do it better

I don't even think you see

your lover is ensouled,

Ladislaw thought Dorothea's

beauty 

was too much for a portrait,

just right for poetry,

It would capture more of

her mind, her voice,

They say their love is beautiful

and in this one short life

I can't see the point

of being with you if

it doesn't feel like what they have,

So it can't be right

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's all, folks! I'll probably try to post something less lonelypilled next time.

Erasmus's Folly is Jestermaxxing

This meme is original content made by yer girl ;)

What's up fam? We're going to get a little deep on this post lol. Sorry if it sounds a bit like traumadumping at first. But I promise it will get into some interesting analysis of old books later. I will talk a bit about Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, but the majority of this post will be about Erasmus's In Praise of Folly (1511). 

As someone in their twenties, I can not understand why society or the media tends to portray this as the most fun and desirable age. I do believe it is better than childhood or teenage years, simply because I feel more in control of my life now. Children's lives are entirely controlled by adults, which of course they kind of need to be for their safety. But it means they can not really pursue freewillmaxxing, for example by exploring interests, hobbies, beliefs, and friendships that their parents may not approve of. My favourite part of adulthood is getting to freewillmaxx and explore new ideas, sometimes reaching the conclusion that my parents were right about something and sometimes not. Getting to do stuff for myself without having to depend on others is also great, and of course the best part about being over 18 is that Discord mods leave you alone (if you know, you know). 

However, I simply can not accept the idea that this is supposed to be the BEST decade of your life. To me, that sounds crazy since you'll still have at least 40 years of your life left when you're 30 (and most likely more than that). The older you get, the safer you are from Discord mods too! Why do people act like their life ends at 30? I feel like a lot of historical figures I admire didn't even accomplish shit until they were older than 30, so I find this romanticization of youth completely bonkers. John Milton was in his 50s when he was writing Paradise Lost!!!! Why is everyone falling for the propaganda that 20s = best time in life???? I hated my childhood. And I hold the opinion that being in my 20s is better than being a child, and I also look forward to my 30s. And my 40s. Yes. I don't care if that sounds crazy. I AM EXCITED ABOUT GETTING OLDER.

People also romanticize the beauty of youth. But I think it takes a man or woman of culture and sophistication to appreciate mature beauty. It's literally like the difference between one of those AI generated anime-inspired images and like, the Sistine Chapel, but whatever. Just say you like flashiness and instant gratification. "Look how the images dance and flicker across the screen!!!!!"

Of course, every thought that I have ever had, that you have ever had, has already been philosophized about by some person from 100000 years ago. For example, I was thinking, "you know maybe if I lived in the 1600s I would have wanted to marry John Milton." Then I started reading Middlemarch (1871) by George Eliot today and guess what????? It says Dorothea "felt sure that she would have accepted the judicious Hooker, if she had been born in time to save him from that wretched mistake he made in matrimony; or John Milton when his blindness had come on; or any of the other great men whose odd habits it would have been glorious piety to endure..." so basically, she is just like me fr. 

So this got me thinking, was there anyone else before me who hated being young? I like tea and cats and books. I was literally born to be an old lady. My idea of fun is just old lady activities. There has got to be someone who feels like I do about how romanticizing youth is silly. 

There are passages in Meditations about being able to appreciate natural beauty even for things that are aged, mature, and overripe, without disregarding the beauty of youth as well. These come from Book III of Meditations:

"figs, when they are quite ripe, gape open; and in the ripe olives the very circumstance of their being near to rottenness adds a peculiar beauty to the fruit."

"if a man should have a feeling and deeper insight with respect to the things which are produced in the universe, there is hardly one of those which follow by way of consequence which will not seem to him to be in a manner disposed so as to give pleasure. And so he will see even the real gaping jaws of wild beasts with no less pleasure than those which painters and sculptors show by imitation; and in an old woman and an old man he will be able to see a certain maturity and comeliness; and the attractive loveliness of young persons he will be able to look on with chaste eyes; and many such things will present themselves, not pleasing to every man, but to him only who has become truly familiar with nature and her works."

This is great, but the text that really made me feel less alone in my views was In Praise of Folly (1511) by Desiderius Erasmus. Folly is a female jester, but also a goddess, and is the allegorical personification of tomfoolery. The whole book is a speech she makes in praise of herself. She mocks the Stoic philosophers like Aurelius for not being silly. She makes fun of wisemen, philosophers, grammarians, theologians, lawyers, rhetoricians, etc. Her arguments are all exactly what you would expect anti-intellectuals to make, if anti-intellectuals were actually capable of sustaining and defending an argument over the course of a whole book and finding the coolest classical allusions to support themselves. And so Folly does romanticize youth, and she says that her followers get to be young forever. Erasmus was obviously what we would think of as a "wiseman," and the book appears to be a humorous roasting of himself in part. But knowing that the views expressed by Folly are often satire really helped me feel less alone in my views, because they are better defined against what Folly expresses if that makes sense. 

Folly was conceived out of wedlock by Plutus when he was in his youth with the beautiful nymph Neote, and she is really proud of this. She was nursed by Drunkenness and Stupidity. Her handmaidens are Flattery, Forgetfulness, Pleasure, Madness, Luxury, etc. 

^ I found this picture online, which has a quote from the book. But I really don't like that drawing. I want to draw an allegorical personification of Folly as a sexy female jester and make Erasmus proud. 

Folly on Aging 

Folly says if you follow her, you get to be young forever. If you become wise, you'll get wrinkles. Here is a quotation:

 "if mortals would refrain completely from any contact with wisdom and live their entire lives with me, there would not be any old age at all. Instead, they would enjoy perpetual youth and live happily ever after. You see, don’t you, how these grave and sober personages who devote themselves to philosophical studies or to serious and difficult tasks seem to enjoy hardly any youthful years at all; they grow old before their time because they are forever worrying and beating their brains out about knotty problems, so that their vital spirits gradually dry up, leaving them exhausted and juiceless, as it were."

Folly also talks about how gifted children are an absolute curse. The charm of children is supposed to be in their ignorance. 

"Aren’t we put off by the child who has the knowledge of a grown man? Don’t we avoid such precocious prodigies like the plague?" 

Folly claims that women are naturally sillier than men. They are less suited for intellectual pursuits. They like frivolous things. But Folly thinks this a good thing! She claims that this is also how women preserve their youthful soft skin, while men get rough skin from having to think too many thoughts. Women are meant to be the comic relief in men's lives.

 "by living with him she can season and sweeten the sourness of the masculine mind with her folly."

“Where do men get their rough features, coarse skin, bushy beards-all of them clearly signs of old age? Where but from the vice of prudence? Women, on the other hand, have soft cheeks, a high voice, a delicate and smooth complexion, so that they seem to preserve forever unchanged the marks of adolescence”

Now this raises the question, what does Folly think of women who don't like being silly and would rather be wise? Well just like with children who are wise beyond their age, she hates them. And she thinks Pallas, which is another name for Athena the goddess of wisdom, is a huge nerd. 

Over all, wise people are boring and annoying and they ruin everything, as we can see in this passage:

Bring a wiseman to a party: he will disrupt it either by his gloomy silence or his tedious cavils. Invite him to a dance: you would think it was ‘a camel dancing.’ Drag him along to a public festival: his face alone will be enough to put a damper on people’s gaiety— wise Cato will be forced to leave the theater because he cannot put off his supercilious airs. If he joins a conversation, everyone suddenly ‘clams up.’ If something has to be bought, if some contract has to be negotiated, in short, if any of those things must be done without which everyday life cannot be carried on, you would say this wiseman is more of a blockhead than a man. 

The whole book is definitely worth a read if you get a chance. Folly claims to be blurting out anything that comes to her mind, but she clearly knows how to deploy rhetorical strategies, and so she secretly partakes in and benefits from the learning that she tells others not to pursue. 

Some of you may be interested in Folly's criticism of theologians and ascetics in particular, in which case you would really like the later sections of this book that I have not covered. 

I found this book humorous, comforting, skillfully written, and over all just amazing and would definitely recommend it to people who like pondering about things. 

Alright fam, that's all for today!!!   

Satan from Paradise Lost is kind of like a wolverine (hear me out)

 

 

Yer girl is back with another informal post on a serious topic, kinda like that post I made about Utopia by Thomas More or about All About Love by bell hooks and Braiding Sweetgrass by Robin Wall Kimmerer (yes I talked about bell hooks and Kimmerer in the same post even tho most people would tell you that they talk about very different things. I actually think the points they make about greed are quite similar). 

Anyway, today's topic is on "Wolverine thinking" (a term I coined) and Paradise Lost. 

Let me begin by explaining what "Wolverine thinking" is, since it is a term I coined after reading a retelling of an Ojibwe legend by Basil Johnston 

When I read Ojibway Heritage (1976) by Basil Johnston, I was fascinated by the story of the wolverine in the chapter called "The Nature of Animals." Johnston explains how the Great Spirit (or Great Mystery, as he translates it) named Kitche Manitou gave gifts to every creature. For example, the eagle received strong wings and keen sight. The deer received grace. The hummingbird was given the power of hovering, and so on. However, the wolverine was unsatisfied with these gifts. 

The wolverine was basically an incel who thinks the reason why he is an incel is because he's short. You see, an incel believes he has been somehow cursed to be genetically inferior and that there is nothing he can do about it even though he can just touch grass and work on his personality. He doesn't know how to be grateful for what he has and make the most of his natural gifts the way everyone else does. Here is a quote from page 52-53. I wanted to directly quote this. Because Johnston writes so beautifully, I didn't want to ruin y'alls's experience of this story by paraphrasing it:

Only the wolverine was discontented. When he saw the extent of the gifts of the other animals, he grew envious. Soon he wanted the strength and the size of a bear, the elegance of deer, and the swiftness of the fox. In his increasing disappointment, the wolverine began to despise himself and his gifts and feel bitter at Kitche Manitou. At length, he resolved to return to the mountain top and ask the Master of Life for greater and better gifts. When the wolverine attained the crest, he boldly called out, “Kitche Manitou! Hear me! You have not been just to me. You have not been just to all the animals. To some you have given greater scope and a greater measure of gifts. By this uneven distribution you have made some great and some less.” More audacious, the wolverine continued, “I demand that you redress this great wrong. For myself, I wish more strength, more comeliness, more speed.” But Kitche Manitou’s thunderous voice broke through the selfish list of wolverine. “To each animal being I have given sufficient power for the fulfilment of his being and form. The power I have conferred on each is a form of my power, and is a reflection of my gifts. “No injustice has been done. If you have not developed and fostered the gifts I have presented to you, it is you who have perpetrated an injustice upon yourself. You have betrayed yourself. “For your presumption, you shall wander alone and despised. And for your refusal to develop your attributes you will, henceforth, feed upon what has been left over by your fellow creatures who have nurtured their talents. Go!” Wolverine left the mountain top more bitter and envious than before. He had not been daunted by Kitche Manitou himself! As Kitche Manitou ordained, so the wolverine became solitary, vicious, and avoided. Hungry ever, he must feed upon the portions left by other animals.

Johnston, Basil. Ojibway Heritage, UNP - Bison Books, 1990. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/oxford/detail.action?docID=1682898.

Created from oxford on 2025-09-10 20:33:36.

So for his ingratitude, the wolverine is cast into isolation by Kitche Manitou. And honestly, the wolverine deserved this. 

What is "wolverine thinking"? I would say it is constant emptiness like the insatiable hunger of a wolverine that one tries to fill with a greed for material wealth or possessions (Milton certainly condemns greed in Paradise Lost), and constant ingratitude or grumbling at one's circumstances in life, believing that one got the short end of the stick. I think it causes one to suffer when it comes to interpersonal relationships, and also causes one not to take advantage of certain opportunities when they come their way. 

In Book 4 lines 46-48 of Paradise Lost, Satan admits he did not show gratitude to the one who had created him:

What could be less then to afford him praise,

The easiest recompence, and pay him thanks,

How due! yet all his good prov'd ill in me,

The wolverine is bitter, envious, and feels painfully lonely. Note Satan's similar feelings when he is jealous of the closeness of Adam and Eve. This is from Book 4, lines 505-511:

Sight hateful, sight tormenting! thus these two 

Imparadis't in one anothers arms

The happier Eden, shall enjoy thir fill

Of bliss on bliss, while I to Hell am thrust,

Where neither joy nor love, but fierce desire,

Among our other torments not the least, 

Still unfulfill'd with pain of longing pines;

At other times, Satan feels so empty that he is described almost as the anthropomorphized form of Hell. Line 20 in Book 4 is "the Hell within him, for within him Hell."

Anyway, I thought this was bonkers. So I wanted to share this stuff with you. Let me know if you have a different take either on the wolverine story or on Paradise Lost. 

If you would like to read another post I wrote on wolverines, here it is: https://freyathefrypan.blogspot.com/2024/12/wolverines-are-most-relatable-animal.html 

These creatures are one of my autistic hyperfixations. 

Bye, frens!

My Top 5 Favourite Lines from Shakespeare

I saw a question on Quora asking readers to list their favourite lines from Shakespeare. Here's what I came up with!

Picking just five favourite lines from the Bard of Avon is no easy feat. Shakespeare was definitely a genius. There are two qualities of his writing that have made him immortal and cause his works to resonate with us today. He draws extensively from the literary canon of Western Culture. His works are rich in allusions to Greek mythology and the Bible, which means he mastered his understanding of what impacts our collective cultural consciousness. The more significant factor that caused his works to endure for so long is that he had a profound understanding of human nature that made him way ahead of his time. He was a psychologist before psychology was even considered a legitimate field of study. The emotions that his characters go through are very easy for readers to relate with. I feel like I’ve encountered a lot of wisdom in his writing that reminds me of my own relationships and experiences and I’m sure I’m not the only one who thinks this.

After a lot of thinking, I’ve managed to narrow down my list of favourite Shakespeare quotes. I’ll explain why I chose each one in particular.

EDGAR:

Yet better thus, and known to be contemn’d,

Than, still contemn’d and flatter’d, to be worst.

King Lear (4.1.1–2).

In this part in the play, Edgar is a wanted man because his half-brother has convinced everyone that he is plotting against his father’s life. Edgar disguises himself as a beggar and sets out on his own to avoid getting caught. He’s basically saying that it’s better to be openly hated in this wretched state than it is to be falsely flattered and secretly hated. This really resonated with me and reinforces one of the major themes in the play, that of deceit and trickery with smooth words. Goneril and Regan used the same kind of flattery on Lear. We’ve all had ‘fake friends’, people who insist that they love us but then ‘snake’ us when we least expect it. This is why the characters in King Lear evoke so much pity within the audience. Gloucester, Edgar’s father, also looses his eyes before he can see through lies!

HAMLET:

The time is out of joint. O cursed spite,

That ever I was born to set it right!

Hamlet (1.5.190–191).

From the very first act, the whole audience knows that Hamlet is a dead man. When Hamlet is called upon by the ghost of his father to avenge him by killing his uncle Claudius, he doesn’t like it one bit. He knows that this fate has been thrust upon him but he hates the idea of having to kill, even if it’s for his father. This reminds me of a lot of moral and ethical dilemmas I’ve faced in my life. Hamlet reacts to them the same way I do, by procrastinating and postponing a decision for as long as possible. Instead of immediately acting upon the ghost’s wishes, he first puts on a play, the Murder of Gonzago, and watches his uncle’s reaction to decide if he’s really guilty. He also has the chance to kill Claudius at prayer but then cowers away from the act, making up some excuse about how this would cause Claudius to go to heaven since he would be slain after confessing his sins. Hamlet’s thoughtfulness, compassion, procrastination and indecisiveness are what ultimately lead to his downfall and I fear that I have many of the same traits as him.

OTHELLO:

Then must you speak

Of one that loved not wisely, but too well

Othello (5.2.359–360).

In the end of the tragedy Othello, Iago’s scheme is revealed. The Satanic and Machiavellian character Iago convinced Othello that his wife Desdemona was cheating on him. This eventually caused Othello to smother her with a pillow. In the end, Othello loses his land and status in Cyprus and has to be taken to Venice for his murder trial. The audience is usually shocked by how stupid and easily manipulated he is, but what they fail to realize is what an innocent and pure character he was in the beginning. In Shakespeare’s tragedies, bad things always happen to good people and the stage gets littered with corpses! Othello’s biggest flaw was how trusting and loving he is of others. Unfortunately, I’m sure a lot of us can relate to this, at least as how we were when we were children until we grew up and realized how evil people can be. Othello loved too much and his love blinded him, for nothing makes us angrier than when we feel like someone we love has betrayed us.

CALIBAN:

You taught me language and my profit on’t

Is, I know how to curse. The red plague rid you

For learning me your language!

The Tempest (1.2.437–439).

Caliban from the Tempest is one of my favourite Shakespeare characters. The inspiration for creating him is obvious. The Elizabethan Era was a time of exploration and change in English society, and stories of the inhabitants of the New World were always popular. Many Native Americans and Africans were captured and put on display in “human zoos” in London, a barbaric and cruel practice that history tries to make us forget. Shakespeare might have glimpsed a Patagonian native, and the dehumanizing spectacle must have left an impression on him. In the play, Caliban worships Setebos, a Patagonian god. Caliban is supposed to be a savage and demonic figure and his name is supposed to sound like ‘cannibal’, but throughout the whole play I can only feel pity for how he is abused and hated by Miranda and Prospero even though he is the native inhabitant of their island. Miranda and Prospero then have the audacity to declare that Caliban should be grateful to them for “civilizing” him. That sounds a lot like what European colonizers would say. Caliban boldly claps back and reminds them he was much better off before they came. He says the only good thing that came from learning their language was knowing how to curse. Being really interested in postcolonial analysis of literature, this quote really stood out to me. Shakespeare was ahead of his time in challenging many Eurocentric ideals for sure, as can be seen by the pity evoked for Caliban. In Sonnet 130, Shakespeare also challenged European standards of beauty by talking about a woman he loved who had curly black hair, a feature that wasn’t really considered ideal in Elizabethan society.

ROMEO:

Did my heart love till now?

Forswear it sight! For I ne’er saw true beauty till this night.

Romeo and Juliet (1.5.55)

I’ve said it many times before and I’ll say it again, there is nothing romantic about Romeo and Juliet. It’s a tragedy and a cautionary tale for teenagers rushing into love. There’s no wonder that in psychology there’s the “Romeo and Juliet Syndrome”, which has been very appropriately named. I feel like this line is a great example of what infatuation and lust is. Even though it’s not a good idea to objectify someone and obsess over them like this, I’m sure we can all relate to these kinds of intrusive thoughts. Shakespeare captures the universal feeling of infatuation really well here and I feel like this soliloquy alone would have been enough to secure his place in the literature hall of fame. At the same time, he mocks and ridicules the shallowness of Romeo's love. A great number of his sonnets also focus on a similar idea. The message is to love people in a spiritual way for who they are on the inside rather than just focusing on their appearance.

So there they are, my favourite lines from Shakespeare! It was really fun to give my views on each one.