The Tempest Johannesburg July 2019

Caliban: Shakespeare’s Howling Monster

Dedré Engelbreȝt

Shakespeare’s sea-beast and half-human, Caliban, has been interpreted as an agent of

colonial awareness and political discourse in a number of Shakespearean readings.
Nevertheless, Harold Bloom strongly maintains that Caliban, an attempted child-rapist and
murderer, “cannot be interpreted as being somehow admirable” 1 as modern interpretations
would like its audiences and readers to believe. A text-oriented theoretical approach seems to
have been abandoned, especially in Julia Taymor’s 2010 film-adaptation of The Tempest,
where Caliban is portrayed as a black man inhabiting the island. This approach is seriously
problematic as it attempts to establish Caliban as a marginalised other to the remainder of the
characters, when in fact, the character represents much more than just a politically
marginalised race-group. Caliban is not an admirable character because of his flawed ethical
reasoning and wilful rejection of knowledge and understanding. His thoughts and actions do
not allow him to transcend beyond a servitude status, creating a different set of interpretative
racial implications with Taymor’s casting of a black Caliban as a character who “is anything
but a celebration of the natural man”.2 Furthermore, his child-like dependence is tainted by
his childish sense of entitlement.
***
Caliban demands that the island is his by his birthright, but, there is no evidence to support
his claims. He accuses Prospero in stating: ‘This island’s mine by Sycorax, my mother,
Which thou tak’st from me’ (I.II.334-335).3 The “half amphibian”4, son of a witch and some
demonic force in Prospero’s reference to him as a ‘Hag-seed’ (I.II.368), was only born on the
island after his mother was exiled to it. That makes him an occupant of the island but not
indigenous or native. Caliban is assertive in his claims but that does not imply that it is
justified. He displays some capability of reasoning in his realisation that he can use the
language Prospero taught him to rival Prospero’s demands. Caliban states that ‘you taught me
language, and my profit on’t/ Is I know how to curse. The red plague rid you/ for learning me
your language’ (I.II. 366-368).

Caliban’s ethical reasoning is problematic in his wilful rejection of knowledge. He rejects

any form of responsibility for his attempt to ‘violate/ The honour of [Miranda]’ (I.II. 350-
351). He responds to Prospero’s explanation, saying that if ‘thou didst prevent me; I had
peopled else/ This isle with Calibans’ (I.II.352-353), revealing that he was, in fact,
contemplating multiple rapes. He is capable of though and reasoning, but not of
understanding. His reasoning capabilities are used to a limited end. Caliban pleads with
Prospero that he, Caliban, showed Prospero ‘all the qualities o’th’ isle’ (I.II.340) and
submitted to Prospero as a subject, but now, Prosper is unjustly keeping him from ‘the rest
o’th’ island’ (I.II.347). Nevertheless, even though Caliban lays claim to the island as his, and
accuses Prospero of usurping him as the only ‘king’ (I.II.345), he gives the island away
immediately to Trinculo and Stefano in a desperate moment of instant gratification. He enters
into a similar agreement with them, stating that ‘I’ll show thee every fertile inch o’th’ island,/

1
Harold Bloom, Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human (New York: Riverhead, 1998), p. 665.
2
Ibid., 662.
3
All references to the play are to William Shakespeare, “The Tempest”. In The Norton Shakespeare 2nd Edition, edited by
Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean Howard and Katherine Eisaman Maus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).
4
Bloom, Shakespeare, p. 663.

1
The Tempest Johannesburg July 2019

And I will kiss thy foot’ (II.II.140-141) and that ‘I’ll swear myself thy subject’ (II.II.144). In
a moment of bitter comedy, Caliban gives away his self-proclaimed right to the island, and
subjects himself to Trinculo and Stefano as Harold Bloom states, “poor Caliban, hero of our
current discourse on colonisation, celebrates his new freedom from Prospero by worshipping
Trinculo as his god”.5 His reasoning is revealed to be limited and his dreams of freedom are
moderated in his celebration of a new master: “”Ban, ‘ban, Cacaliban/ Has a new master’
(II.II.175-176). Caliban loses even more sympathy in is flawed and untruthful statement to
Stefano and Trinculo that ‘by sorcery [Prospero] got this isle:/ From me he got it’ (III.II. 50-
51), when he surrendered the island to Prospero for affection and ‘water with berries in’t’
(I.II.337). It is clear that Caliban does not understand the knowledge exchanged between him
and Prospero and he is entering into a similar misunderstanding with Trinculo and Stefano.
Some sympathy is demanded in Caliban’s display of imagination but, it is not sufficient to
declare him as a noble or admirable character. He ‘[cried] to dream again’ (III.II.138),
dreaming of freedom and showcasing an element of imagination but, his imagination diverts
to horror and chaotic thought when he plans to ‘batter [Prospero’s] skull, or punch him with a
stake,/ or cut his weasand with thy knife’ (III.II.85-86).

Caliban has been reduced to the legal category of a monster. As the son of a witch and an
assumed devil, he had a number of physical deformities, as implied by the text. This renders
him less human, and more monster-like, undercutting any forced attempted reading of the
character as a marginalised race-group. Initially, Trinculo cannot identify Caliban, asking
‘what have/ we here, a man or a fish?’ (II.II.23-24). Furthermore, Caliban is repeatedly
referred to as a ‘howling monster, a drunken monster’ (II.II.170), ‘servant monster’ (III.II.3),
a ‘man monster’ (III.II.11, and a ‘hag-seed’ (II.I.369). These repeated references to a monster
imply a physical deformity of some sort. Taymor’s approach in casting Caliban as a black
character is problematic as her objectification of a marginalised race limits the character
when, according to Elizabethan law, he is more than just the other. Caliban’s monster-status
is rather established as a legal category because of a physical deformity, which further hints
at a moral and ethical deformity, evident in Calilban’s attempted rape and contemplation of a
number of rapes of Miranda, and the brutal contemplated murder of Prospero.
As the son of a sorceress and the devil, Caliban is not a monster based on his actions, but
rather on his appearance. Shakespeare created a parallel between the physically-deformed
monster, who exhibits brutal intentions and thoughts, and the fully-human noblemen who
contemplate murder in a sophisticated manner. Antonio states to Sebastian that his ‘strong
imagination sees a crown/ dropping upon [his] head’ (II.I.203-204) as they contemplate the
murder and conceive their plans to usurp the king, Sebastian’s brother. Antonio attempts to
persuade Sebastian that anyone else who could possibly lay a claim on the throne, including
the king’s daughter, Claribel, is too far from Naples (II.I.240-249). These noblemen, who
should display a high level of reasoning, are, as Harold Bloom states, “savage reductionists” 6,
and display no ethical dimensions at all.
Taymor’s film is problematic as her casting of Caliban does not run parallel with the
dialogue. She reduced the monster-status to a race, severing the relationship with the
metaphysical. Taymor opened herself up for criticism through her casting of Caliban, a
monster and deformed sea-beast, as a black man. In her 2010 film-adaptation, Trinculo’s
confusion between ‘a man or a fish’ (II.II.24) appears just absurd and Trinculo’s dialogue is
cut. His original dialogue is problematic as Caliban is too human. Furthermore, Caliban’s

5
Ibid., p. 677.
6
Ibid., p. 677.

2
The Tempest Johannesburg July 2019

cowardice speech, in which he expresses his fear of Prospero’s ‘spirits’ (II.II.3) haunting him,
is also cut. Taymor appears to attempt to create a Caliban that is less cowardice.

Caliban cannot be completely condemned. He developed a dependence on a master, who

he mistakes for a god when he immediately replaces Prospero in the very same plan he
conceives to kill Prospero. His dependence is emphasised when he bestows the island to
Trinculo and Stefano for their assistance to get rid of Prospero and states that ‘I will kiss thy
foot. I prithee, be my god’ (II.II.141). He acts out as if he was born to serve. The chain of
being is left unchanged as Caliban assumes the role of the servant and monster under man out
of his own volition. Taymor’s film lacks a successful transformation, referred to by Mario
Klarer as “the connecting phase between text and performance”,7 between the Shakespearean
Caliban and the 2010 film-adaptation’s black Caliban. Taymor’s production creates serious
racial implications in her casting of a character that never transcends beyond the role of
servitude, as black man. The idea of a black Caliban feeds into racial stereotyping that a black
man is born to be a servant.
***
Caliban, Shakespeare’s howling monster and sea-beast, is assertive in his self-proclaimed
entitlement to the island, however, his limited reasoning and horrific imagination taints any
sympathy evoked for the occasional child-like character. His childish assertiveness and blind
need for instant gratification renders him less admirable when he reverts to irrationality and
thoughtlessness. Caliban is not a figure of political oppression – he is more than just a
politicised racial category. He is the metaphysical containment of a legitimate Elizabethan
legal category as a physically deformed half-human. He will always be the son of a witch.

Works Cited:
Bloom, Harold. Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human. New York: Riverhead, 1998.

Klarer, Mario. An Introduction to Literary Studies. New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis
Group, 2013.

Shakespeare, William. “The Tempest”. In The Norton Shakespeare 2nd Edition. Edited by
Stephen Greenblatt, Walter Cohen, Jean Howard and Katherine Eisaman Maus.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

7
Mario Klarer, An Introduction to Literary Studies (New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 2013), p.
65.