‘Miranda offers hope for the future.’ – Part B practice
‘The Tempest’ written in 1611 by William Shakespeare is an androcentric play driven by
patriarchal dominance, the women within the play are sparsely recognised and their
influence is diminished. Miranda, the only spoken female, offers hope for the future. She is
dominated by her father, acts as a plot accelerator and is a trigger for her father’s own
reconciliation, her influence, on deeper analysis, is crucial to the development of the play in
its entirety. Over time, the differing interpretations of Miranda have changed, this is largely
due to the changing mindsets of generations past and future as well as the rise of feminism
and its influence over differential interpretation.
Within ‘The Tempest’ women are presented as, for the most part, voiceless. Mirandas
influence within the play is significant in the conceptual analysis of her character as hope for
the future. ‘The Tempest’ was triggered by the female characters within the play. Claribel’s
marriage to the King of Tunis in Africa, was the reason for the ships voyage. Both women,
Claribel and Miranda, act as significant plot triggers whereby without their influence ‘The
Tempest’ would not have occurred. Miranda was subject to patriarchal dominance. Her
father, Prospero (the play’s protagonist) ‘the plays controller and manipulator’ (literary critic
Robert Wilson) governed her every move and referred to her with belittling and patronising
terminology such as ‘wench’, ‘worm’ and ‘child’. The Jacobean audience would not have
been surprised at her treatment, within their respective era, women were subject to the
control and dominance of men, where they had little to no social or economic autonomy
over themselves. However, over time, this has significantly altered, whereby a modern
audience would see this as suppressive and ultimately androcentric. Director Julie Taymor,
in her 2010 interpretation of the tempest, started with Miranda running down the beach of
the island during the storm. To start with Miranda, ultimately gave her an agency that was
not previously explored whereby through starting with her character, Taymor suggests that
without women and their significant influence ‘The Tempest’ would not have been possible,
using Miranda to offer hope for the future of women in cinema and literature. On
assessment, Miranda offers hope for the future through her depiction over time and her
influence as the sole speaking woman in the androcentric play.
Miranda also offers hope for the future through her union with the King’s son, Ferdinand.
This orchestrated love match offers hope for the future generations as Miranda asserts her
own agency over the dominant men within the play. The union within ‘The Tempest’ acts as
a source of hope for future generations whereby Miranda asks Ferdinand to be his wife ‘if
you [he] will take me’. Through this assertion of femininity, she offers hope for women
globally, even a modern audience would have found this pleasing and significantly
transgressive for a woman to ask a man for their hand in marriage. Although their match
was orchestrated by her dominant father, Prospero, they found love on their own whereby
Miranda was referred to as ‘non-pareil’, she compared to no other woman the men on the
island had ever seen before. Over time, directors have presented this union in a variety of
ways. In a more modernised interpretation where women are given more exploratory
freedom, Julie Taymor presented the pair as significantly affectionate. Within her 2010 film,
the two showed physical affection. A feminist critic would have been pleased by this
significant use of physical touch, through this Miranda is presented with an agency that in
the Jacobean era would have been unthinkable, projecting her as a source of hope for the
‘The Tempest’ written in 1611 by William Shakespeare is an androcentric play driven by
patriarchal dominance, the women within the play are sparsely recognised and their
influence is diminished. Miranda, the only spoken female, offers hope for the future. She is
dominated by her father, acts as a plot accelerator and is a trigger for her father’s own
reconciliation, her influence, on deeper analysis, is crucial to the development of the play in
its entirety. Over time, the differing interpretations of Miranda have changed, this is largely
due to the changing mindsets of generations past and future as well as the rise of feminism
and its influence over differential interpretation.
Within ‘The Tempest’ women are presented as, for the most part, voiceless. Mirandas
influence within the play is significant in the conceptual analysis of her character as hope for
the future. ‘The Tempest’ was triggered by the female characters within the play. Claribel’s
marriage to the King of Tunis in Africa, was the reason for the ships voyage. Both women,
Claribel and Miranda, act as significant plot triggers whereby without their influence ‘The
Tempest’ would not have occurred. Miranda was subject to patriarchal dominance. Her
father, Prospero (the play’s protagonist) ‘the plays controller and manipulator’ (literary critic
Robert Wilson) governed her every move and referred to her with belittling and patronising
terminology such as ‘wench’, ‘worm’ and ‘child’. The Jacobean audience would not have
been surprised at her treatment, within their respective era, women were subject to the
control and dominance of men, where they had little to no social or economic autonomy
over themselves. However, over time, this has significantly altered, whereby a modern
audience would see this as suppressive and ultimately androcentric. Director Julie Taymor,
in her 2010 interpretation of the tempest, started with Miranda running down the beach of
the island during the storm. To start with Miranda, ultimately gave her an agency that was
not previously explored whereby through starting with her character, Taymor suggests that
without women and their significant influence ‘The Tempest’ would not have been possible,
using Miranda to offer hope for the future of women in cinema and literature. On
assessment, Miranda offers hope for the future through her depiction over time and her
influence as the sole speaking woman in the androcentric play.
Miranda also offers hope for the future through her union with the King’s son, Ferdinand.
This orchestrated love match offers hope for the future generations as Miranda asserts her
own agency over the dominant men within the play. The union within ‘The Tempest’ acts as
a source of hope for future generations whereby Miranda asks Ferdinand to be his wife ‘if
you [he] will take me’. Through this assertion of femininity, she offers hope for women
globally, even a modern audience would have found this pleasing and significantly
transgressive for a woman to ask a man for their hand in marriage. Although their match
was orchestrated by her dominant father, Prospero, they found love on their own whereby
Miranda was referred to as ‘non-pareil’, she compared to no other woman the men on the
island had ever seen before. Over time, directors have presented this union in a variety of
ways. In a more modernised interpretation where women are given more exploratory
freedom, Julie Taymor presented the pair as significantly affectionate. Within her 2010 film,
the two showed physical affection. A feminist critic would have been pleased by this
significant use of physical touch, through this Miranda is presented with an agency that in
the Jacobean era would have been unthinkable, projecting her as a source of hope for the
