What do you get when you mix A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Hamlet, and Two Gentlemen of Verona? An awkwardly comedic tragedy, often called a romance, The Two Noble Kinsmen.
Going into this play, all I knew was that this was a romance of doubtful origin. After studying the play, I have no doubts that Shakespeare coauthored this play. We all agreed that some passages just felt like our Bard. Other clunkier passages and less developed characters we could easily see as another’s invention. But honestly, this matters to me only in that it validates our discussion. We are The Bard’s Book Club, after all, not The Elizabethan/Jacobean Drama Book Club.
Ironically, I now have more doubts that this play is a romance than I do about its authorship. Unfamiliar with the plot (I read “The Knight’s Tale” in college, but I couldn’t remember it), I spent most of the play thinking, “Okay, it’s a romance. That means it’ll be like Cymbeline and Pericles and A Winter’s Tale with their grand voyages, adventure, love, and mostly happy endings. Cue the Disney music.” Yeah, I was wrong.
At first I simply recalled Midsummer. We have the Duke and his bride, a group of peasants to entertain them, a love quadrilateral, the May Day celebrations. If you were very creative, you may be able to merge the two plays into one large production (in fact, Katy hopes to do this someday). It would be a major feat, to say the least, but a good director just may pull it off.
Yet we know from the beginning that this isn’t the merry forest tale. In lieu of fairies, we have mourners come to beg the king for help. No Puck confuses and straightens love, and no spells make things better. This is the darker side of Athens.
And with darkness comes madness. Like Hamlet‘s Ophelia, the Jailer’s Daughter is left to madness by her would-be lover. She even narrowly avoids a similar drowning scene, complete with flowers. Yet that’s the point—it’s avoided. She will end happily with a man who loves her, even if all signs pointed to an unhappy demise. We are not reading a full-fledged tragedy, even if this play balances on the brink of one.
Yet, like in Two Gentlemen of Verona, romance and tragedy take the backseat to friendship and broken faith. Unlike the gents, however, the kinsmen are less noticeably opposed. They always seem to truly care about each other, even when arming each other to fight for the same woman. There’s a distinct lack of animosity, and even a lack of difference in character. We can’t easily cheer for Team Palamon and Team Arcite because they’re so similar (though I was more of an Arcite fan). Unless you take issue with pursuing a girl your buddy saw first, neither really do anything that bad. While Proteus was a sort of villain in Two Gentlemen, Palamon and Arcite are equally heroic. As Emilia says when trying to decide between them,
“. . . What a mere child is fancy
That having two fair gauds of equal sweetness,
Cannot distinguish, but must cry for both!”
–IV.ii.52-54
There has to be a difference between the kinsmen, right? And I believe there is a difference, albeit subtle. When Palamon and Arcite pray to the gods, they each choose their own sponsor. Arcite chooses Mars, the god of war. He summons strength and courage with imagery such as “hearts of lions” and “breath of tigers,” and he’s met with the sound of battle. Palamon, however, prays to Venus, the goddess of love and beauty. He tells tales of conquering love, and he’s met with music and doves. Now consider their different experiences in light of Arcite’s line to Palamon when they first see Emilia:
“I will not, as you do, to worship her
As she is heavenly and a blessed goddess.
I love her as a woman, to enjoy her.”
–II.ii.163-135
Arcite is more concerned with the carnal side of love, the earthly. I don’t believe it’s merely an offensive, sexual desire for a woman; rather, I believe Arcite exemplifies the masculine and strong side of love. Emilia is attracted to him just as much as she is to Palamon, and he does win her through his strength (in a way) through the wrestling match, and also in the final contest. He’s also slightly more prone to anger, as he is the first one in the original fight to switch to the passionate thees and thous. He’s the human side of love, and he’s not inherently wrong.
Palamon, on the other hand, signifies the more heavenly, ethereal side of love. He doesn’t just love Emilia like a man loves a woman; he worships her. It’s little wonder that he wins Emilia because the gods directly intervene and spook Arcite’s horse (V.iv.61-65, 104-105). He exemplifies the otherworldly, romantic side of love.
Shakespeare’s romances generally end with reunions and found love. Although darkened by tragic elements, the ending is usually comedic. So, if Palamon is a symbol of romantic love, and he’s the one who, in comedic fashion, marries the girl in the end, does The Two Noble Kinsmen ultimately cross the line into the realm of the romance? I don’t think it does. The play’s ending is still balancing between tragedy and comedy, death and marriage coexisting. Palamon and Arcite both win Emilia, even if only for a short moment, and the happy reunion is marked by grief. Palamon’s courage and strength as well as Arcite’s romance and tenderness both enjoy a victory, suggesting that the truer love wasn’t so clear.
Perhaps this play never did choose a side. As Theseus declares in V.iv.105-109,
“The powerful Venus well hath graced her altar,
And given you your love. Our master, Mars,
Hath vouched his oracle, and to Arcite gave
The grace of the contention. So the deities
Have showed due justice.”
Leave a comment