Antony and Cleopatra

Fitz, L.T. Egyptian Queens and Male Reviewers: Sexist Attitudes in Antony and
Cleopatra Criticism. Shakespeare Quarterly 28 (1977): 297-316.

Annotated by Ellany Page

In Egyptian Queens and Male Reviewers: Sexist Attitudes in Antony and

Cleopatra, L. T. Fitz argues that the role of Cleopatra has been denied its proper
place among the protagonists of Shakespeares tragedies because of the generally
sexist approach of reviewers in analysis of the character. According to Fitz, there is
indecision among critics about whether the play is about the downfall of a great
leader or about transcendental love, but both views make an analysis of
Cleopatras character incomplete (297). Fitz claims that the majority of male critics
are threatened by what Cleopatra represents, and as a result, Shakespeares
meaning in Antony and Cleopatra has been obscured.

Fitz points out that in previous analyses, Cleopatra is compared only to

other female characters and as a result is denied consideration as a tragic heroine.
Furthermore, she is generally referred to as the archetype of a typical woman:
passionate, childlike, mysterious, with feminine wiles, cunning, and little
intelligence. Fitz answers that Cleopatra is in actuality quite different from a typical
Shakespearean woman, referring to the characters liveliness and charm despite
and even because of traits that are generally considered negative when concerning
a typical woman.

Though Fitz allows that Shakespeare possibly disapproved of Cleopatras

behavior as evidenced by her effort to overcome it, he did however offer
understanding of her reasons for making use of her feminine wiles. Shakespeare
addresses the underlying fear and insecurity of the aging woman facing a world in
which women are valued only for youth and beauty. Cleopatra claims the control
that she is accustomed to through her talent for making herself fascinating and
magnetic to men.

Many critics simplify women into two extremes when addressing Antony
and Cleopatra: the wicked and manipulative represented by Cleopatra, or chaste
and submissive represented by Octavia (304). This view, writes Fitz,
overemphasizes the relatively unimportant character of Octavia. The sexism of
critics is further evidenced in their attitude to the overt sexuality of Cleopatra.
When equally bawdy lines are spoken by male characters throughout the works of
Shakespeare it is not viewed with the same level of disgust. Rather, it is completely
taken in stride and left without comment.

Fitz goes on to address the reasons why the play has never been included
with the famous four great tragedies: Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, and King Lear. She
compares Antony and Cleopatra to King Lear, referencing both plays subject of love
and their relationship to the ruling of the public. The neglect of the plays inclusion
with the others seems to imply that love between the sexes is lower on a hierarchy
of values than familial love. If this is the case, Fitz asks why Othello holds a place
among the four great tragedies, while Antony and Cleopatra does not. The
difference is that Othello concerns a male protagonist, while Cleopatra is denied her
proper role as heroine.

Another example of the sexism of Cleopatras critics is the double standard

by which they assess the actions of the Queen and Antony. What is considered
noble and worthy of praise in Antony is viewed with disgust in Cleopatra. The
criticism of her concern for public duty and her self-interest implies that love ought
to be the foremost concern of women while men may put many interests before that
of the women they love. Fitz cites Cleopatras submission to Thidias to save herself
and her people in comparison with Antonys return to Rome at the beginning of the
play as well as the fact that he is criticized for neglect of public duty while she is
questioned for taking part in the battle of Actium. Fitz also compares the motives
for suicide of each of the title characters and finds them to be almost identical in
number and reason. This double standard has the result of placing Cleopatra in the
position of antagonist rather than co-protagonist with Antony.

This view that Antony is the only protagonist of the play is to Fitz the most
extreme example of sexism in assessments of the tragedy. After all, Antony dies in
act four and the last act of the play is Cleopatras alone. The form that other
Shakespearean tragedies take is that the play is not over until the death of the
tragic hero. Though many see this fact as a flaw in the script, Fitz sees it as

evidence that the main conflict is between Cleopatra and Caesar, and Antony is
merely a middleman.

Perhaps the most convincing evidence that Fitz gives is in her comparison
of the play to Plutarchs Life of Marcus Antonius on which it was based.
Shakespeares adaptation shows that he had much more interest in Cleopatra as a
human being than as a source of trouble for Antony. He pays close attention to her
motivations, and the majority of his changes to the plot serve to provide
understanding for Cleopatras actions. Shakespeare completely fabricates the dare
of Caesar as a reason for fighting at sea, for example, rather than having Cleopatra
suggest it as in Plutarchs version. The fact that Cleopatra flees the battle of Actium
provides for her blame in the downfall, which, according to Fitz, is another
requirement of a tragic hero. Fitz justifies the act using fear as Cleopatras excuse
and referring to her ignorance of the result and her fervent apologies. Unlike
Plutarch, Shakespeare includes a denial that Cleopatra conspired with Caesar,
justifies her fear in Antonys lines that he will kill her, and includes her dying
speeches among other additions which elicit sympathy for the Queen. Most
importantly, he includes her name in the title.

Fitz concludes the essay by asserting that Shakespeare elevates

Cleopatras role to that of a unique and complex tragic heroine. Though there is
most likely not only one protagonist of Antony and Cleopatra, for the sake of
argument Fitz provides reasons why Cleopatra could be seen as the only one: she
learns and grows throughout the course of the play while Antony does not. She
struggles against her theatricality and inconsistency, and eventually, through her
suicide, the traits are overcome. Cleopatra learns that she is a woman before she is
a queen. Fitz claims that there is a need for Cleopatra to be demythologized and
in so doing, her humanity and rightful place as a tragic heroine will be
acknowledged (315)