Michael Gorski
ERH 321WX-01
Final Reflective Essay
1 May 2015
Help Received: Met with teacher on multiple occasions and discussed my topic
Challenging the Chain of Command
I have fixated on hierarchy and power for a majority of the course, more specifically, the nature of hierarchy and its function in early modern England. My original thoughts of the hierarchal structure in early modern England were superficial and derived from films, books, and other forms of entertainment. They portrayed the old-fashioned, stereotypical idea of a hierarchal system where the subordinates blindly follow the leader and adhere to his will. Prior to my investigation of Shakespeare and the course, I envisioned this as the standard for all monarchies. My research provided an in-depth view of the hierarchy, more specifically, monarchy during Shakespeare’s time period. Shakespeare consistently challenged his audience’s preconceived notions and revealed the true nature of certain ideals. This practice of challenging ideas was representative of the inquisitive nature of the Renaissance. A renewed interest in knowledge and learning allowed for anyone to question establishment and order. I also observed this trend in my short assignments on The Life Of King Henry the Fifth and The Merchant of Venice. In both of these works, Shakespeare challenges the nature of power and hierarchy. My outlook on the monarchal system of early modern England has shifted from the idea of blind followers to a more complex struggle. Now, the monarchy and the class system of society is more of a struggle to maintain power, than a ruler with an iron will.
My analysis of Henry V had the most significant impact on my understanding of hierarchy. Observations from this play influenced my understanding of hierarchy. In my second short assignment and final research essay, I focused on nobility’s usage of imagery and pageantry in order to maintain power. I noticed that Henry did not expect his subordinates to blindly oblige to his command. Instead, he exerts tremendous effort to maintain his control. Shakespeare reveals the vulnerability of hierarchy. Henry must maintain a particular image to ensure his position of king is not compromised. Shakespeare displays a style of leadership where the ruler is influenced by the opinions of commoners. I also discovered the role of a commoner was influential. In my previous understanding of hierarchy, the general population consisted of insignificant plebeians and their societal influence was minor. In Henry V, his need to convince his subordinates displays the significance of their opinions, which presents a new model of the hierarchy. There are certain events in the play where Henry is concerned with specific opinions of certain soldiers. Shakespeare shows the significance of the role subordinates play in the hierarchy. My focus on imagery and pageantry in Henry V shaped my understanding of early modern English societal structure from my original view into a new outlook displaying the complexity of power. I did not view the monarchy as a system where the ruler commanded insignificant plebeians; instead it revealed the complexity and vulnerability of maintaining power and the significant role subordinates play in society.
The emphasis on role in society and shifting my understanding of the commoner’s significance was also heavily influenced by the third short assignment on The Merchant of Venice. My prior understanding of the subordinate’s role was much like a rifleman in the military. A standard private rarely voices his opinion and has little to no influence in major decisions. He obeys orders and does not question them out of fear of reprimand. Shakespeare challenges this view through the actions of Portia. The cultural perspective of gender roles was women were lower in class than men. They were inferior to the men and therefore servant in nature. Shakespeare not only challenges culturally reality, but also speaks to my new understanding of the commoner’s societal niche. Shakespeare’s portrayal of Portia shaped my opinion of the hierarchal structure. I observed Portia testing the limitations of her role and disrupting order. Shakespeare does not display this challenge in a negative manner. Portia’s actions restore order to the chaos birthed by Shylock’s legal accusations. In this instance, the audience not only sees the disruption of gender roles, but it also alludes to the importance of a person of lower social status’s opinion. My new understanding of societal structure shifted the balance of power from the ruler onto his subordinates.
My understanding of a hierarchal system prior to my research in Shakespeare was largely influenced by my experience at VMI. It began with my time as a rat. I understood my place within the system and did not diverge from my directed path. Diverging from the path generally warranted punishment. As a third classmen, there was no real change in my influence. As a corporal, I still reported to and followed direct orders of cadet officers and commandant’s staff. The most significant influence over my view of hierarchy did not originate with cadet interactions, but more with the commandant’s staff. As a former member of cadre, I observed the ratline being executed by comm. staff, not the first class leadership. Recently, I have been researching events at VMI in the early 1990s for another course. I observed a different hierarchy throughout my research. The corps and its regulations were policed and enforced by the cadets, primarily the first class. My analysis of Shakespeare’s presentation of the nature of hierarchy blended with my research of the “old corps” shaped my understanding. The importance of cadet opinion mirrors Shakespeare’s display of the importance of the commoner.
I began this course with an established view of the hierarchy of Shakespearian culture. It was based on previous, misguided representations of the monarchy. I thought the basic structure included a ruler who commanded unwavering support from his followers. In my experience, society bowed down to the ruler, because he was the ruler. While observing Shakespeare’s portrayal of leadership, my understanding of the nature of hierarchy and power in early modern England gained a more in-depth perspective. Through my analysis of The Life of King Henry the Fifth and The Merchant of Venice, I recognized the true nature of power. Shakespeare portrays the vulnerability of power and more importantly, the complex struggle for power that allows for significant influence from the general population. I previously viewed power as something easily attainable, because the influence of the commoner was not significant. Shakespeare gives power to this group, therefore creating a struggle for power. This shaped my outlook on the monarchal structure of early modern England and in a broader sense, my understanding of authority.
Works Cited
Shakespeare, William, and Barbara Hodgdon. The First Part of King Henry the Fourth: Texts and Contexts. Boston: Bedford, 1997. 19-117. Print.
Shakespeare, William, and Claire McEachern. The Life of King Henry the Fifth. New York, NY: Penguin, 1999. Print.
Shakespeare, William, and M. Lindsay. Kaplan. The Merchant of Venice: Texts and Contexts. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2002. Print.
Shakespeare, William, and Kim F. Hall. Othello, The Moor of Venice: Texts and Contexts. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2007. Print