Essay on William Shakespeare's The Tempest

Good and evil characters are abundant in many forms of media, always contrasting one another due to their moral dispositions and their individual characteristics. These differences are shown sometimes through harnessing the responsibility of servitude. Characters whose natures conflict with one another can be drawn out due to their opinions on familial authority. The choice of mercy and mercilessness can also play a role in revealing distinctive moral beacons and villains. In William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, Ferdinand deviates from Caliban by possessing the trait of honor, Miranda and Sebastian hold opposing opinions of their relative’s authorities, and finally, Gonzalo and Antonio both commit actions regardless of the ethics surrounding them.

The prince of Naples, Ferdinand, displays his honourable character through preserving his moral commitments, while Prospero’s former slave, Caliban, strays from this principle. When Miranda offers to help Ferdinand while he is fetching wood, Ferdinand states that he prefers the possibility of “[cracking his] sinews, [breaking his] back / Than you [Miranda] should such dishonor undergo” the tasks that Prospero has ordered him to do (Shakespeare III.i.31-32). To be given a responsibility by an individual that one does not like can unveil a person’s true character. Through the act giving this menial task to Ferdinand, Prospero is able to witness the moral honor that Ferdinand protects. On the other hand, Caliban only followed his master’s orders in The Tempest due to Prospero’s “art [magic] [being] of such power [that] / It would control [Caliban’s] dam’s god, Setebos,” revealing that he would not honor any commitments for his master if he were not enslaved by Prospero’s substantial power (I.ii.448-449). Agreeing with the moral obligation of preserving commitments will leave a person that shares this view more likely to follow an order given by their master, even without the threat of punishment. Ferdinand and Caliban both serve Prospero and Miranda, but Caliban has a different purpose as to why he obeys accordingly. In conclusion, how characters approach an inescapable labor can convey their contradictions to the reader.

Another method to expose contradictions in characters is through Miranda and Sebastian facing the concept of holding respect towards familial authority. For instance, Miranda reveals her name to Ferdinand, but clearly displays regret after realizing that she has “broke [broken] [Prospero’s}hest to say so [her name]!” (III.i.46). Unintended actions occur often in reality, since humans are capable of making mistakes. Particularly in this scene, Miranda’s fault can be inferred to be of a genuine nature as she has been shown to possess pure qualities due to her living her childhood under the care of her father, Prospero. On the other hand, King Antonio’s persuasion of Sebastian has him “One stroke” away from “free [freeing] thee [Antonio] from the [consensual] tribute which thou [he] payest [pays to Alonso]”, essentially allowing Antonio to retract Alonso and his previous agreement (II.i.334-336). If one does not want to honor the deal that they have agreed to, they should not resort to unfair measures; others should not participate in this sort of nature as well. In this case, Sebastian has his own sword drawn just above Alonso, about to take his life in a cowardly way, exhibiting that he lacks respect for his own relative’s royal authority, opposite to Miranda’s more pure viewpoint concerning her father. All things considered, challenging characters with the power of familial authority creates a variety of reactions, illustrating the diverse personalities within characters.

However, the nature of morality is not strictly aligned to what is ethically acceptable. While Prospero is reminiscing about how Miranda and he arrived to the island, he expresses gratitude towards Gonzalo, who “Out of his charity, who being then appointed / Master [captain] of this design [boat], did give us, with / Rich garments, linens, stuffs, and necessaries” when they were forced out to sea (I.ii.192-195). Many stories throughout history feature characters that aid one another, even if it would be considered illegal due to external legislation. Gonzalo unethically went against his superior’s authority when he aided Prospero, hence aligning with his kind nature since it can be inferred that Antonio nor Alonso did not intend on providing necessary supplies to Prospero and Miranda. Previously, Prospero explains how he and Miranda got to the island after he neglected his royal duties:

Fated to th’ purpose did Antonio open

The gates of Milan, and i’ th’ dead of darkness.

The ministers for th’ purpose hurried thence

Me and [Miranda’s] crying self  (I.ii.153-156)

Removing a person from their position for their faults in adhering to their duties is an ethical decision, but going beyond removing their privileges and rendering them unable to survive is not moral. Antonio expelling his brother and niece from Milan can be logically justified, albeit overdramatic since it was cruel to go without providing Prospero and Miranda the basic necessities to continue living, even if Prospero had left all of his tasks for Antonio to tend to. To recapitulate, ethics do not determine whether an action is morally good or morally bad.

To conclude, the individual traits and beliefs that make up characters present an opposing cast in story-telling, whether it be through books, movies, or any other types of art. Shakespeare demonstrates this standard through The Tempest: Ferdinand and Caliban’s purposes for serving others diverge due to their natures, Miranda and Sebastian’s actions towards the authority of their relatives, and lastly, Gonzalo and Antonio’s clash with ethics and morality.