Many authors have employed the art of comparing and contrasting phenomena to foreground essential themes and topics in their works of literature. This is especially true for Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing, where the delicate balance between parallels and contrasts has been effectively applied to showcase the ideals of marriage in the Elizabethan period. Considered one of Shakespeare’s happier tragic stories, Much Ado About Nothing bears several themes. However, none of them stands out as the theme of marriage and the formulation of relationships does. Throughout the romantic-comedy-tragedy story, Shakespeare highlights the traditional Elizabethan mechanisms of courtship and marriage employed by the upper class instead of the more laid-back, pragmatic, and unconventional approach that deviates from the norm. The relationships central to this theme are the conventional Claudio-Hero relationship and the unconventional Benedick-Beatrice courtship. By peeling back the layers, Shakespeare attempts to shed light on “shallow” relationships vis-à-vis “deep” relationships. In Much Ado About Nothing, Claudio-Hero, and Benedick-Beatrice’s relationships are constantly compared and contrasted through plot, language, and characterization.
The Claudio-Hero relationship is fronted as the central relationship of the plot. However, the Benedick-Beatrice one is intentionally written to run concurrently as a form of dramatic critique and challenge to the conventional former arrangement. To the 21st-century reader, the Claudio-Hero arrangement might appear obtuse, outdated, and, to some extent, tragically funny. The play carries two predominant building blocks of relationships: shallow and lust-induced, as in the case of Claudio-Hero, and a deeper emotional relationship, as in the case of Benedick-Beatrice. “Two salient modes of conceptualizing eros and marriage emerge from the complex controversy over changing sexual values articulated in Elizabethan conduct literature: a dualistic sensibility, in which sexual love is idealized beyond physical existence on the other hand or derided as lust on the other, and which views marriage as a necessary evil; and a more realistic, multi-faceted sensibility, which, while retaining much of the skepticism about erotic love contained in the first view, nevertheless begins to conceive of affectionate marriage with great respect as the basis of an ordered society”(Rose 13).
As per their characters, there are numerous instances of parallelism and stark contrasts between the polar opposite pairs of Claudio-Benedick and Hero-Beatrice. The first parallel between this pair is that both individuals of each pair are good friends. Hero and Beatrice are cousins who spend much of their time together, to the extent that they even share a bed, indicating a lot of love and trust between them. This is shown in her answer upon being asked if she spent the night with Hero; Beatrice answers, “No, truly not, although until last night I have this twelvemonth been her bedfellow” (Act 4, Scene 1). Just like this pair, Claudio and Benedick are both young, decorated soldiers under the stewardship of Don Pedro and appear to be good friends through their interactions.
Another similar instance is that both couples have had prior knowledge of each other before the scenes in the play. This is indicated from earlier on when Beatrice queries the messenger about the arrival of Benedick. She asks, “I pray you, is Signior Mountanto returned from the wars or not?” (Act 1 scene 1). Hero then proceeds to clarify that she means Benedick. This is affirmed by the witty banter that Benedick and Beatrice exchange, implying familiarity and ease. Claudio also reveals that he has known Hero since before the war by saying, “Oh my lord, when you went onward on this ended action, I looked upon her with a soldier’s eye…” (Act 1 Scene 1). He clarifies that he has desired to marry her since the war ended, and his perception of her has changed.
On the other hand, the differences in their characters are as stark as their similarities are apparent. For one, Claudio and Hero appear tied to tradition and convention, whereas Benedick and Beatrice do not conform. This is clear in multiple instances, such as their language use and self-professions as they speak of their ideals.
As members of the upper class, Claudio and Hero have an arranged marriage based on convenience rather than a personal connection and love, as in the case of Benedick and Beatrice. Claudio’s approach to marriage is the polar opposite of Benedick’s. Claudio defers using an intermediary’s help in wooing Hero, whereas Benedick chooses the direct approach in wooing Beatrice. Although it seemed conventional at that time, the use of a wingman and marriages of convenience have grown to be viewed as relics of the past by the people in the 21st century who now prefer Benedick’s approach. Thus, Shakespeare was hinting at a change in the social norms, using Benedick to challenge the rigid conventions of the upper-class Elizabethans.
Both relationships are subject to third-party interventions. In the case of Claudio and Hero, the first instance of intervention is when Don Pedro takes the role of intermediary and woos Hero on Claudio’s behalf. The prince says, “I will assume thy part in some disguise and tell fair Hero I am Claudio, and in her bosom I’ll unclasp my heart and take her hearing prisoner with the force… then after to her father I will break, and the conclusion is she shall be thine” (Act 1 Scene 1). This harmless deception kick-starts this relationship. However, external influence on this relationship is not limited to benevolence, as is the case with Don Pedro, as it is also affected by the hostility of his bastard half-brother, Don John. Don John conspires to sabotage the relationship facilitated by his brother, forming an inner instance of parallelism and contrast. It should be noted that Pedro is Spanish for Peter and that Peter and John are a famous pair in Christianity, forming a pseudo-parallel situation where one builds and the other destroys the same relationship, pitting them as the real Hero vis-à-vis villain story in this play. Similarly, despite the initial attraction between Benedick and Beatrice, it takes the intervention of outside parties to get them to admit their love for each other. The prince conspires with Claudio, Leonato, and Hero by telling them, “I will in the interim undertake one of Hercules’ labors, which is to bring Signior Benedick and the Lady Beatrice into a mountain of affection, th’ one with th’ other” (Act 2 Scene 2).
Perhaps the most significant contrast is in the use of language by these two couples as a building mechanism in their respective relationships. It is easy to be blinded by the apparent themes of marriage and honor foregrounded by Shakespeare, “scholars have, however, identified an overarching theme that unites the two contrasting plotlines, a theme to which the play as a whole is said to be dedicated: the power of words” (Ungelenk 149). In the case of Claudio, he is straightforward with his words. He clearly articulates his desire to wed Hero, although he first tells his proxies before finally saying the words to her. In Act 1 Scene 1, he says, “I would scarce trust myself, though I had sworn the contrary if Hero would be my wife.”
This direct use of words to speak truths contrasts Benedick’s banter-like style of masking the truth in ambiguous words and phrases. He tells Beatrice, “I do love nothing in the world so well as you. Is not that strange?” (Act 4 Scene 1). Ironically, at this point, it has already been established that they love each other. This witty exchange of words carries on to the very end, where despite being confronted with evidence of their love for each other, they still refuse a direct profession of love. In place of it, Benedick says he is marrying Beatrice out of pity, to which Beatrice retorts that she is marrying him because she heard that he had consumption. (Act 4 Scene 4).
In summary, Much Ado About Nothing is a tragic-romantic-comedy that compares and contrasts two plotlines: the Claudio-Hero and Benedick-Beatrice relationships through plot, language, and characters. The parallels and contrasts act as tools to foreground the underlying critique by Shakespeare on the Elizabethan ideal of marriage in upper-class society. Where the conventional Claudio-Hero relationship is shown to fluctuate and be vulnerable to outside attacks, the unconventional and more personal Benedick-Beatrice relationship shows a steady trajectory owing to a solid interpersonal foundation. This bolsters the 21st-century preference of using interpersonal relationships as building blocks for marriages instead of intermediaries and marriages arranged out of convenience.
Works Cited
“Much Ado About Nothing – Entire Play | Folger Shakespeare Library.” Folger, www.folger.edu/explore/shakespeares-works/much-ado-about-nothing/read.
Rose, Mary Beth. “Moral Conceptions of Sexual Love in Elizabethan Comedy.” The Expense of Spirit: Love and Sexuality in English Renaissance Drama, Cornell University Press, 1988, pp. 12–42. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt207g7fw.5 . Accessed 19 Feb. 2024.
UNGELENK, JOHANNES. “CARESSING WITH WORDS: MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING.” Touching at a Distance: Shakespeare’s Theatre, Edinburgh University Press, 2023, pp. 148–85. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/jj.7358693.9 . Accessed 19 Feb. 2024.
write