Fools

I hate April Fool's Day. I always have. Perhaps it is my humorless Scottish heritage, but I find that a whole day in which one is unable to trust even one's closest friends causes too much emotional distress. It reminds me, though, of Shakespeare's Twelfth Night.

Bahktin wrote about Carnival-like situations of chaos and reversal. He wrote about distressing language. Other theorists like Irigaray and (oh my, it's been a while. In one of the first entries of this blog I have a list. . .) hypothesized about the necessity of structure - of a tomorrow returned to the way it was in order for a reversal day, a Twelfth Night, or April Fool's, to function for society. I think what they meant, is that ultimately, role reversals support the status quo by relieving rebellious tendencies.

The reversals in Shakespeare's play (ignoring the typical gender switches) include Malvolio's ideas of control and marriage above his station, Sir Toby's alliance with servants in the rebuttal, and Feste (another of Shakespeare's unfunny fools). Ultimately, the tricks they played on each other caused real pain. Malvolio's ideas of marrying Olivia would have been their own punishment eventually. Olivia showed great strength, especially over her own household. She was never in any danger of falling for his delusions, and Malvolio would have found disappointment and humiliation anyway. Even Olivia acknowledges finally that he has been ill-treated. Depending on the interpretation, she may or may not find it funny. Helena Bonham-Carter didn't laugh.

Sir Toby spent most of the play drunk and carousing, a role stereotyped for servants. He resents Malvolio's self-righteousness, especially as that should have been Sir Toby's role, were he as he should be. I believe that it is ultimately Sir Toby's fear of reprisal (Olivia's?) that rights him at the end, and sends him into a hopeful marriage and responsibility.

Feste catches my interest more than the other characters. Some of the unfunny fools are merely droll, but Feste seems to have some depth, some reason for acting and speaking as he does. I believe he appears in the play as lately returning from a war. His songs vary, from the bitter to the sweet to hysterical. He plays with words the way a writer does, half for fun, and half hoping that wisdom will spring out of it. Or perhaps he hopes that his wordplay will hide something.
A fascinating character!

After all the analysis, I still believe that Shakespeare disparaged role reversals. Although he preceded the Enlightenment era by perhaps a century or more, he seems to propone responsibility to one's social class and loyalties. It looks like citizenship at a more feudal level.