The Induction of The Taming of the Shrew
What is everyone's opinion on this supposedly unique (to Shakespeare, anyway) feature? It introduces characters that seem to have little to do with the central plot. It's a play within a play, yet in the exterior portion, nothing much seems to happen. There is some commentary from Sly on The Taming of the Shrew, but it's only praise--nothing too in depth at all. Also (I've peaked ahead), at the end of the play, there is no word of Sly, nor the Lord, nor anyone else in the induction. Does anybody have any ideas as to why this induction exists, and what to make of it?
I looked on sparknotes (insert wicked laughter), and it says, although critics disagree, that the induction parallels the relationship between Katherina, Baptista, and Petruchio through Sly and the Lord: the Lord controls Sly in a fashion similar to that in which Petruchio and Baptista control Katherina, for their own devices. Being somewhat familiar with The Taming of the Shrew (having seen Kiss Me Kate a while ago), I think I agree with this.
I was just wondering what everyone else thought.
Comments
I think that the induction and the relationship between the Taming of the Shrew and Taming of a Shrew have so many parallels and similar ideas, that just like in Shakespeare's sonnets, we can't be sure exactly what he was trying to say. There are certainly a lot of themes though that make the situation in the induction a lot more comedic: The disguising of servants as nobles and nobles as servants, the use of language and violence to assert power, and the desired roles and traits of women.
In my opinion, that's what is fun about this play...thinking about all of the ties between the two halves of the play. I don't like the actual plot-line so much...Taming of women isn't my cup of coffee whether in jest or not.
Posted by: Erica Pinigis | September 24, 2006 11:39 PM
I agree with both of your statements. I think thatlSHakespeare was trying to show how the two plays interwine. (or two parts of the play.)In the induction, Sly is thought to be a Lord, but in reality he is just some craftsperson. Who is made to believe, after a drunken stupor, that he is a Lord, by everyone, (even the lord of the house) setting up different scenarios. In the actual, play within a play, of the Taming of the shrew, Percuttio, and Hortensio along with others, switch roles as well. Perhaps, this is to show a sort of connection, and also to set up what is going to happen. Since "players" are performing the play for Sly and the Lord. A little insight into how it is being presented?
Posted by: Brandi Crotty | September 25, 2006 01:36 PM
I agree, but I also consider this play a work of absurdism--not in the sense of the nihilistic French absurdism, but just full of things that make not a whit of sense. It's important to remember that Shakespeare's plays were meant to entertain all classes of society. I consider the induction primarily a way to increase the absurdity of the presentation--another layer of weird comical BS, if you will. I think the dialogue in this section is some of the most amusing stuff in the play. Additionally, it's interesting to think about how this framing technique has been reshuffled and used since Shakespeare's time (notably in a few adaptations of Shakespeare's own stuff, like Neil Gaiman's take on "Midsummer Night's Dream," though that's a bit left-field).
Posted by: Devon Sykes | September 25, 2006 01:56 PM