Bartells:

-436 discusses an author, Geographical Historie of Africa, Leo Africanus, who witnessed Cannibals and
was a contemporary to Shakespeare. The author creates the Moor as a representation of the Other
while he is a Moor himself. Bartells states that he does disservice to himself when he does this.
- 449 Perspective on Moor is tampered because of his reputation with the state, implying that, if not, he
would be regarded with the same monstrous otherness.
-Marriage goes against laws of nature which humans consider to exist, thus, it is inhuman. This is done in
order to make the Moors identity more of a political concern.
-450 Alienate the other as a means of re-assuring the self.
Iago attempts to sow monstrosity in the monsters ranks, illuminating Othellos humanity in the process.
Moor does not have a capacity for evil- he is demonized beyond that. Demonizing the Moor is a
reassurance of self, via alterity.
The Monstrous in Othello stems from the crossing of social boundaries, represented by the idea of the
beast in Venetian finery. This is contrasted with the image of the clearest other present in the text, the
cannibals. The monstrous gains depth of field from the conflict from the conflict between the societal
image of the Self and the Other it creates. This depth of field is used to define anything that is
considered by the society to break those distinctions of Self and Other, creating the image of the
monster as it appears in Othello. This occurs in Henry James The Turn of the Screw, as the two ghosts
romance are seen as a perversion of the socio-gender norms of the time period, and are seen as
Monstrous because they blur the line between the societys perception of itself and the antithesis of
itself, the Self and the Other.
Sharpe Andrew (on Foucault) 71, bestiality and the mixing of beast and man to create monstrousity.
-76-77 Legal scholars of the time used empirical, physical grounds as a method to establish otherness.