In William Shakespeare ‘s Othello, there are broad scope of really interesting characters but our most complex one, is one frequently non paid as much attending to until the really terminal of the narrative. Unfortunately, unlike one of our lead characters, Iago, Emilia is without insightful monologues, intuitive asides and thoughtful soliloquies. Alternatively, most of what is traveling on in her head is left up to reader and his or her reading. Though our apprehension of Emilia ‘s echt purpose is reasonably limited, the drama suggest that her actions were guiltless and were followed by such annihilating events due to unfortunate fortunes.
While as Iago ‘s married woman, she is already in a awful place, she is besides Desdemona ‘s personal attender and is wholly devoted to her. Though Emilia is older and a spot more disbelieving than Desdemona, they develop a really close relationship and frequently bond over the problems of matrimony: Emilia ‘s acrid return on matrimony with Iago contrasts with Desdemona ‘s ab initio idealistic matrimony with Othello.
While most character ‘s ruins are met by their ignorance and uninterrupted misjudged traffics throughout the full narrative, such as Roderigo ‘s misplaced trust in Iago and Othello ‘s misgiving of his faithful married woman Desdemona, it is Emilia ‘s one corrupt act towards Desdemona that turns out to hold the most instantly annihilating effects. It is the loss of Desdemona ‘s particular hankie that Othello had given to her and was noted as their first item of love, that convinces Othello that Desdemona is unfaithful and guilty of the unfaithfulness Iago is impeaching her of.
It is Emilia ‘s larceny that ends up doing her friend ‘s decease. Through her desire to delight her malevolent hubby and unwillingness to talk up about the hankie, she plays a large portion in turning Othello against his married woman who is guilty of nil but sincere love.
Though comparatively, Emilia is a minor character, it is her words and actions that happen to be critical in the flowering of the tragic terminal nevertheless still, by textual analysis, Emilia ‘s aims were ne’er malicious. Upon ab initio reading Othello, one may observe Emilia ‘s purposes as spiteful. After all, she steals Desdemona ‘s hankie and pretends non to cognize what happened to it. While she knows full good how much Desdemona trust her as more than merely an attendant but as a friend, she still abuses this and deceives her. Though at the terminal of the drama, she does eventually talk the truth, this can take one to inquire if possibly it ‘s merely her scruples that has eventually got the best of her. It is because she seems genuinely misguided in trueness and torn between commitment to her hubby, Iago and her kept woman, Desdemona, that we can reason that it is her mistake in judgement instead than ill purpose that leads to the tragic events that take topographic point after the larceny of the hankie.
We see how genuinely dedicated to Desdemona, Emilia is when she begins to come back at all those who speak ill of Desdemona and fierily stands up for her unity continuously. While taking to out Iago ‘s ailment purposes earlier could hold saved Desdemona ‘s life and genuinely cleared Emilia of all accusals, this would hold disestablished Shakespeare ‘s Othello as a echt authoritative calamity.
Whether you believe her purposes were badly guided or non, you can non deny the fact that Emilia is a dynamic character who under goes a alteration from a passive to a more aggressive character throughout the drama. She is ab initio perceived as docile, proven when Iago states that “ She puts her tongue a small in her bosom and chides with thought, ” ( II.i.112 ) , intending she keeps most of her ideas to herself. There are times when even Desdemona has to promote her to talk. This societal selective muteness throughout the drama might be the ground for her floging out at the terminal. At first, her exclusive desire is to fulfill Iago, “ I nil but to delight his phantasy, ” ( III.iii ) but shortly she realizes his true nature and speaks out against him. Her primary purposes are in delighting Iago, irrespective of the item that it is at her kept womans disbursal. This action can non merely written off as malicious because one must recognize that although the hankie is of import, it is merely a material ownership that Emilia could non perchance have seen the problem that would result its disappearing. She could non hold foreseen Iago ‘s program, particularly with being so nescient of his wicked nature nevertheless her purpose becomes questionable when she acts so unmindful when the affair of the hankie ‘s whereabouts arise. Emilia ‘s silence continues to compromise her unity when she stays quiet still after Desdemona tells her that she would hold instead lost her bag and all of its valuable contents than to hold lost the hankie. Although Emilia is cognizant of the sentimental value the hankie holds, she chooses to please Iago ‘s involvement over Desdemona ‘s. She merely becomes leery of her hubby ‘s intent in obtaining the hankie when she inquiries him about it and he insists on claiming it and disregarding her Inquisitions. Emilia ‘s best option here could hold been traveling to Desdemona and confiding in her about Iago ‘s insisting on acquiring her hankie. An intimate conversation that they have on their fidelity to their hubbies in Act V divulges that they do trust each other and if Emilia would hold kept Desdemona ‘s involvement at bosom during this clip, she would hold made it the point of her responsibility to state Desdemona about Iago ‘s continuity in obtaining her nominal gift from Othello. Emilia does look to hold 2nd ideas about taking it though when she asks for Iago to give the hankie back for fright that Desdemona “ run mad when she lack it ” ( III.iii.320 ) This sorrow and concern shows that Emilia was non seeking to maliciously bewray Desdemona, she merely wanted her hubby to be truly pleased with her. We see in his remark, when he believes she is talking of her fondness when she says she has “ a thing for him ” and he calls it “ a common thing ” , that he does non esteem her. Alternatively of lead oning Desdemona, she could hold obviously told Iago that was non successful in obtaining the hankie. She could hold said nil to him and ignored his folly wholly every bit good. When asked if Emilia would of all time be unfaithful to Iago, she answered “ for all the universe ” ( IV.iii.64 ) so lying to him or disregarding him wholly would be an easy misrepresentation for her.
In the undermentioned act, Emilia defends Desdemona really strongly when Othello is interrogating her. She preserves Desdemona ‘s unity by reassuring Othello that Desdemona and Cassio ‘s relationship has been wholly Platonic and ne’er one time did they move in a leery mode. Emilia stresses that she saw nil untrue or incorrect base on balls between them, saying that “ she saw no injury, and so heard/ Each syllable that breath made up between them. ” ( IV.ii.5-6 ) She refers to Desdemona as the criterion for womaly pureness and provinces that if she is non, so no adult female is.
Emilia ‘s most problematic act is seen in Act 5, in the intimate conversation between her and Desdemona refering their hubbies and criminal conversation. When asked, she easy tell Desdemona that “ for all the whole universe. ” ( 5.1.73 ) would she be unfaithful Iago. However, she does non see this a misrepresentation but as justification, as the mere breakage of a dual criterion. She states that it is true that adult females have the same desires and enticements as work forces but it is failing that causes work forces to be so easy unfaithful. One can take her words as a mark that merely as how she can be so volitionally to lead on her hubby, merely as easy, she could make the same with Desdemona but one must besides maintain in head her inexorable defence of Desdemona ‘s unity which proves she would sooner battle for Desdemona than betray her. Emilia has proved plenty that she can be trusted as Desdemona ‘s confidante and that a reference of dishonesty should non be misconstrued into a justification of impeaching her of being sick natured towards her kept woman.
When Othello informs her that it is her hubby, Iago, who has reported to him of the alleged matter between Desdemona and Cassio, Emilia is overtaken in incredulity. She repeatedly asks “ My hubby? ” in response to Othello ‘s claims which serves as non merely a look of daze but a verification of her anterior intuition. This is all she needs to turn wholly against Iago. She begins to set the pieces together and undo the inside informations that Iago did non pay adequate attending to maintaining concealed and she is shortly able to uncover the full narrative before she dies, saying that she will talk as “ broad as the North ” ( V.ii.226 ) all the piece, standing up for Desdemona. When she to the full learns of Iago ‘s strategies, she says, “ may his baneful psyche putrefaction half a grain a twenty-four hours. He lies to th ‘ bosom. She was excessively affectionate of her most foul deal ” ( V.ii.163-65 ) . It is here where we see most Emilia ‘s complete alteration from her get downing passiveness and trueness to Iago. She tells Othello that she is the 1 that stole the hankie when Desdemona foremost dropped it because Iago had some unidentified usage for it. Iago ca n’t stand to see his program crumble before his eyes by being found out because of his married woman so he kills her but even in decease Emilia is true to her kept woman and asks to be laid following to Desdemona, singing “ Williow ” , which was a vocal Desdemona had American ginseng for her earlier. Emilia ‘s last lines “ … So come my psyche to bliss as I speak true/ so talking as I think, alas, I die. ” ( V.ii.256-258 ) , mirror the sarcasm that is brought in her refusal to talk up earlier on in the drama. If she had taken before chances to talk, many unfortunate events could hold been deterred and prevented but alternatively, her hush brought upon decease to Desdemona and herself.
Overall, we can that Emilia ‘s purposes were non doomed. She was a devoted housemaid but was deprived the love of her hubby and in her one effort to delight him, the effects of her actions were far past unexpected. For each of her apparently leery actions, there is a negation that follows which allows the reader to one time see he once more as one of the initial trusty characters. If she was merely able to see her hubby ‘s malevolent purpose a spot Oklahoman, she could hold been a hero but though an externally fiddling character, she is dynamic in the sense that it is her words and actions that play a most cardinal function in the destinies of other characters. Through her errors, her actions portray her non as a lead oning married woman and untrusty friend, but alternatively a resolute adult female with the unfortunate quality of misplaced trueness as her tragic defect.