Resolving Storms:

masculine relationships in Shakespeare’s The Tempest and its post-colonial adaptations

by

Marion Todd

The degree is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

Master of Arts by Research (English Literature), awarded by the University of Huddersfield.

January 2023
 2

Contents

Dedication, Acknowledgements and A Note on Referencing p. 3

Abstract p. 4

Introduction p.5
Literature Review pp. 6-16

Chapter 1 – The Tempest p. 17

Introduction pp. 17-20
Location, Location, Location pp. 20-21
Problematised Absolutism, and its relationship to Hybrid Masculinity pp. 21-24
Flawed Manhood and the Tempering Female pp. 24-27
Significant Pronouns pp. 27-28
Legacy and Legitimacy pp. 28-31
Chapter Conclusion p. 31

Chapter 2 – Water With Berries p. 32

Introduction pp. 33-34
Patriarchy and Surveillance pp. 34-36
Conflicted Identity pp. 36-39
Neutered Masculinity pp. 39-41
Out of Control and Out of Step pp. 41-42
Teeton pp. 42-44
Derek pp. 44-45
Roger pp. 45-46
Chapter Conclusion pp. 46-48

Chapter 3 – Hag-Seed p. 49
Introduction pp. 49-50
Mirror Man pp. 50-51
Hybrid Masculinity pp. 51-52
The Trusted Equal Other pp. 52-54
Spartan Living pp. 54-58
Re-membering Masculinity pp. 56-58
Inside with Outsiders pp. 58-63
Chapter Conclusion pp. 63-64

Final Conclusion pp. 65-66

Works Cited pp. 67-77

Copyright Statement p. 78
 3

Dedication

For my fathers – my Dad, Ken Tucker, and my father-in-law, Bill Todd, and for Helen and Carl
Giddings, who never had the opportunities I’ve had but who could have done it just as well.

“ . . . that which we are, we are;

One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”1

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to acknowledge with thanks the help and support of their supervisor, Dr. Todd Borlik
in the preparation of this paper, with further assistance being offered by Dr. Sarah Falcus, and the
academic skills advisors, registry, and administration staff of the University of Huddersfield. Without
their advice and guidance this project would never have found its way into print. Unending gratitude is
extended to friends and family who have been unstinting in their belief in this endeavour – in particular,
to Gill Todd who provided financial and moral support; to Simon Todd, for his patience and tea making
skills; to Bernie-Jo Todd and Matilda Todd for their taste in music; to Pawlet Brookes, MBE for her
exemplary work ethic; to Jo Scott for providing mentoring support from the other side of the world in
the final stages of preparing the manuscript; to Kath Lee and Andrew Gowen for keeping my spirits up
with politically incorrect memes, TikTok videos, and mood enhancing photos; to Deb Hubbard for
dragging me out to a gig when I most needed it; and to Carrie Mitchell for cat therapy and midnight
chats. All your contributions are appreciated beyond measure.

A Note on Referencing

This paper’s citation formatting is a composite footnote system designed to reflect the intersectional
quality of the paper, therefore footnotes are not included in the final word count.

1 “Ulysses by Alfred Lord Tennyson”, Poetry Foundation,

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45392/ulysses.
 4

Abstract

Shakespeare’s The Tempest has become widely known for its post-colonial reworkings that discuss
the relationship between the colonizer and the colonized. Whilst this paper cannot hope to compete
with the range of material already in existence on this topic, it does attempt to add a different facet by
taking an intersectional view and discussing how the depiction of colonialism in the play provides an
opportunity to evaluate its effects on ideas of manliness both in the seventeenth century, and in
contemporary settings thanks to its continued readaption. Influenced by the writings of Headlams
Wells, Solomon, and Bridges and Pascoe (to name only a small selection of the authors’ referenced in
this work), this paper considers the importance of acts of collaboration in assisting masculinity to
become less entrenched in ideals derived from mythology and perceptions of fatherhood, with
particular attention to the importance of female influence. Starting with a review of past and present
scholarship, the paper goes on to compare and contrast the relationships in Shakespeare’s The
Tempest, George Lamming’s Water With Berries, and Margaret Atwood’s Hagseed to assess how the
dependency narrative shifts the power dynamic when the central father figure is challenged, what
prohibits the remaking of masculinity, and how manhood can be remade. The outcome of the paper
suggests that by acknowledging that collaboration breeds opportunities for masculinity to develop into
a more accommodating and flexible hybrid identity, masculinity demonstrates a desire to evolve but
retains the ability to dominate and place others in perpetual opposition in order to maintain its own
meanings. Despite attempts to move past its own self-imposed need for competition, masculinity
hampers its own evolution.
 5

Introduction
Since the 1950s The Tempest has been fodder for transversal applications of Shakespeare, inspiring
countless writers to analyse the text and its ability to reflect concerns about gender and colonialism. 2
This study intends to further this work by considering to what extent does The Tempest and two of its
post-modern iterations question traditional patriarchal masculinity and the dictatorial centrality that
stunts its own evolution by keeping some central to the development of social norms and others
outside. The paper considers how this centrality is further problematised by age, ethnicity and social
status, and supports recent calls for more collaboration to increase rates of positive change. By
considering Headlam Wells’ work on an early iteration of evolved masculinity that steers away from an
emphasis on physical strength (known as Orphic masculinity), its occurrence in society and leadership
as discussed by Shepherd and Solomon, leading to a further shift in emphasis towards development
into a more inclusive hybrid, but still ‘work-in-progress’ identity as stated by writers such as Bridges
and Pascoe, each of the three chapters chart a course that provides a comparison between white and
black expressions of the power struggle within masculinity by male and female writers, that point out
the importance of collaboration in breaking down social divides and the acknowledgement that
different backgrounds bring valuable alternative perspectives that can assist in conflict resolution
between previously oppositional binary states. The paper concludes that although traditional
masculinity appears to evolve at a glacial rate, it is evolving despite its tendency to mask its
progression by falling back into negative attitudes and behaviours.

The term ‘hybrid masculinity’ and references to ‘hybridity’ are taken directly from sociological studies
that recognise the greater degree of incorporation of roles and responsibilities previously attributed to
femininity within current forms of male identity. The paper argues that Orphic masculinity exists as an
earlier iteration of hybrid masculinity, beginning the change of emphasis away from physicality
although it did not reach the same degree of incorporation, and also argues that age, social position
and ethnicity are no guarantee of acceptance (see pages 9 and 13). This is achieved by analysing
three texts that present the opportunity to explore masculine identity taken from three key time periods
of masculinity’s evolution. A study of shifting representations of Prospero and Caliban and their
relationship with one another and Miranda in the three texts clarifies the gradual emergence of what
this thesis terms a ‘hybrid masculinity’ - a masculinity that is increasingly comfortable with the other.
Although this thesis cannot hope to provide a comprehensive survey of the transformations of
masculinity from the seventeenth century to the present, it does, by focusing on The Tempest and its
adaptations, illuminate some of the continuities between early modern and contemporary notions of
manliness. Adaptations by Lamming and Atwood bring other voices to the table, express greater
vulnerability, and show that Shakespeare’s text can facilitate greater acceptance of alternate
masculinities than was possible in 1611. The discussion starts with a reflection on past and present
scholarship.

Literature Review

2 Reynolds, Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future, p. 6.

 6

Starting with Octave Mannoni's Prospero and Caliban, texts have used Shakespeare's characters to
break down the dynamics of masculine relationships, their micro and macro implications. Mannoni's
text created a trend in scholarship for using Shakespeare's characters to articulate levels of concern
about disenfranchised sectors of society. Whilst ideas about Caliban representing the 'noble savage'
and Prospero as the European civilizing force were not new, Mannoni synthesised these ideas into a
study of Malagasy people, creating a narrative about dependency, likening the intended
cultivating/civilizing process of Western influence to taming populations caught in a state of wild
‘immaturity’: “I think it can be accepted that taming is simply the artificial prolongation of the childhood
bonds of dependence, and that human sociability has the same biological origin.”. 3 This entirely racist
view cements together ideas relating to biological determinism and non-Western/non-Christian
countries as backward nations, which Ania Loomba observes as central to discriminatory practices,
constructing a 'belated' existence for anyone outside the supposed central masculine norm;
constructed as “others . . . marked by a devastating lack: an inability to be better and even to know
better – that is, to know that they should be better.”. 4 It is important to remember Mannoni’s words are
literally and figuratively coloured by his era, his true meaning veiled by its terminology and tone. Buried
within Mannoni is the idea that the two sides of colonialism suffer from a lack of collaboration, kept
apart by patriarchy’s manipulation of desire, and domination born from white masculinity’s “infantile
complexes which were not properly resolved in adolescence.”5 Expressed as a ‘Prospero Complex’,
the dependency narrative reflects the colonialist’s need for a colonial subject to enjoy a sense of
power and masculine dominance, feeding off the idea of parental supervision and control (particularly
that of a father-figure), focusing on Prospero's treatment of Caliban rather than his relationship with
Miranda, or her influence on the islander. Miranda shapes them both, and the relationship between the
two men. Prospero states, everything is done “in care of thee”, but always with an eye on restoring his
public status (I.ii.16). This study aims to explore these aspects of Prospero as the central father-figure,
the failed statesman, and the transverse effects relationships have on his masculine identity.

Trends in studies looking at The Tempest have concentrated for more than a generation on changing
the emphasis of the play onto representing the repressed, assisting the successful spawning of
postcolonial and feminist writing-back, “To make a speech that compels listeners, one that is heard.” 6
Stephen Orgel's and Stephen Greenblatt's work are two particular gems that are repeatedly re-quoted.

3 Mannoni, Prospero and Caliban, p. 225.

4 Loomba, Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism, p. 39-44;
Levinson, “Teaching in the midst of belatedness”, p. 437;
Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p.17.

Loomba sees the beginnings of factory-farmed, wholesale repression changing up a gear with
The Crusades because of how racial and religious prejudices became packaged together,
although it is possible to begin much further back in time, considering the practices of the Greek
and Roman nations of antiquity (see pp. 6-7).
5 Mannoni, Prospero and Caliban, p. 104

6 hooks, “Talking Back”, p. 124.

 7

Orgel's ‘Prospero's Wife’ considers the absence of the Duchess of Milan, and what that absence
suggests about women as disposable, transgressive, and unreliable. 7 This is compounded by
Prospero's obsessive watchfulness over their daughter, Miranda. Orgel's overall conclusion
importantly considers what absences in the play reflect, but Miranda's singularity spotlights the
importance of the female influence to masculinity (similar to Ariel, she is the essential counterpoint that
creates harmony in the play), otherwise why bother having Prospero's daughter on the island at all? 8
Miranda may appear superficially light on substance, but by applying the lens of single parenthood a
different story of codependency emerges, demonstrating how Prospero retains his mental well-being
from his employment as schoolmaster (“Oh, a cherubin / Thou wast that did preserve me.”) and
Miranda becomes far more accomplished than her female contemporaries. 9 I find it hard to believe
Shakespeare would intentionally create Miranda as a vacuous add-on, especially when other female
characters like Portia and Rosalind show such depth. 10 I therefore choose to address this point by
defending Miranda's importance rather than patronising her as solely an unfortunate commodity,
Prospero's 'pound of flesh' that buys his ticket out of exile. Miranda stands as, “a paradoxical role as
the dependent female who is however crucial for the dynamics of power in the play”. 11 Gender-based
approaches to The Tempest dwell on Miranda or Prospero’s wife but this study cannot be exhaustive,
it endeavours to demonstrate that more can be done to uncover how these characters define
Prospero’s masculinity (as does Caliban).

Prospero's position of doting father and at the same time exiled statesman calls into question what
model of masculinity he represents, relative to the expected forms of manhood promoted by advice
literature. Conduct books, as popular today as they were in the seventeenth century, are the basis of
Alexandra Shepard's text. By considering the conduct books and reports from court proceedings of the
early modern period, Shepard augments Greenblatt's work on self-fashioning by pointing out the
expectations placed on men that directs Breitenberg’s reading of anxious masculinity existing in “a
necessary and inevitable condition that . . . reveals the fissures and contradictions of patriarchal
systems, and, at the same time, it paradoxically enables and drives patriarchy’s reproduction and

7 Orgel, “Prospero’s Wife”, p. 1.

8 Similar to Ariel, Miranda is the essential counterpoint in the play, providing the all important
contrast that keeps the play balanced; after all that is its main theme. Without the airy spirit and
the devoted but headstrong daughter, the play would become a linear herculean battle, and
miss its mark in reflecting the Orphic changes James I was eager to promote.
9 Shakespeare, The Tempest, I.ii.152-3;
Shin, “Single Parenting, Homeschooling”, pp. 381-390. Shin’s exploration of the relationship
between Prospero, Caliban, and Miranda provides a useful alternative slant on their triumvirate,
a gateway text to reading Prospero’s hybridity in relation to the concerns raised by Bridges and
Pascoe et al.
10 Shakespeare was married to someone with her own strength of character, and fathered
daughters of his own. I believe their presence influenced the construction of his female
characters. Speaking as a parent myself, I cannot think of anything in my life that is not
influenced by my children in some way or another.
11 Munoz Valdivieso. “Double Erasure in The Tempest”, p. 299.
 8

continuation of itself.”12 Shepard's work is important to this study because it draws attention to why
Prospero covets the retrieval of his place in Milanese society, when he allowed it to slip through his
fingers and into the outstretched hand of his brother, Antonio. The idea that manhood was not
achieved without economic and social position, a successful marriage and children, and the
maintenance of a household acted to sustain ideas of masculinity as something to be won, and the
consequences attached, both economically and socially, to its loss. 13 By analysing the effects of these
expectations via Shakespeare's construction of Prospero, I address both the qualities required to
perform masculinity convincingly in the seventeenth century, and how they carry on influencing
masculinity today, assisted by continually referring back to Shepard’s work alongside identifying
connections between the eras under discussion.

Currently gender studies considers to what extent masculinity has changed and become more hybrid.
Bridges and Pascoe define hybrid masculinity as, “men's selective incorporation of performance and
identity elements associated with marginalized and subordinated masculinities and femininities.” 14 In
works influenced by Bridges and Pascoe there is a suspicion that men, particularly middle-class white
men who enjoy economic stability, and “accumulate “man points” in other settings” to offset the
inclusion of traditionally feminized activities are unconvincing in their performance of hybridity. 15 The
studies suggest that men, like early modern estate managers, are cultivating an appearance via the
hard work of others.16 Whilst Headlam Wells considers a type of hybrid, Orphic masculinity devoted to
harmonizing diplomacy rather than Herculean heroic belligerence as indicative of King James'
monarchy, Solomon suggests the conflict between competing ideas of absolutism and empiricism
drove the construction of Prospero, masked by James' attempts to promote himself as centred,
civilizing diplomat not pugilist, and ‘nourish father’: this paradox denotes James’ battle with navigating

12 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, p. 6;

Greenblatt, Renaissance Self-Fashioning, p. 3;
Breitenberg, Anxious Masculinity, p. 2.
Stephen Greenblatt's work is voluminous and of great importance to new historicism, the
application of texts to re-evaluate history. His work on the self-fashioning of masculinity will not
be employed at length in this study because the work has been so thoroughly absorbed into
gender performance theory (see Butler’s Gender Trouble and Lennon and Alsop’s Gender
Theory in Troubled Times), particularly relating to unpacking Shakespeare.
13 Shepard, p. 16-17.
14 Bridges and Pascoe, “Hybrid Masculinities”, p. 246
15 Ibid, p. 247;
Prattes, “Caring Masculinities and Race”, p. 6;
Eisen and Yamashita, “Borrowing from Femininity”, p. 804.
16 Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 190. Akhimie points out that whilst
the gentry who owned estates liked to perform an identity of land husbandry, they rarely got
their hands dirty, and relied on the industry of their labourers to create levels of wealth the
workers never enjoyed. In the section, ‘Hard-Handed Men’ Akhimie points out the importance of
the reinforcement of hierarchy through dramatic representation, and how hard-handedness was
used as a discriminating bodily mark, supposedly indicating a lack of mental suppleness, which
is included in Caliban’s character, discussed in greater detail in Chapter 1 (see p.158).
 9

hybridity, fuelling the atmosphere of uneasy reconciliation the play conveys.17 By applying the idea of
hybridity to Prospero, I intend to contribute to the expansion of gender studies specific to The Tempest
by asking to what extent Prospero reflects hybridity, and how this is useful in re-membering
masculinity in the twenty-first century.18 Ultimately, this paper seeks to confront ideas about hybridity
representing the realisation of the threat of miscegenation and loss of masculinity that fuels agendas
from apartheid to himpathy and incel narratives. 19

The topics and texts I describe above only scratch the surface of the analysis to come. By including
two adapted novels based on The Tempest to augment the analysis of the original play (Water With
Berries and Hag-Seed), I expand on the significance of the father-figure in all three texts, its influence
on patriarchy, and the importance of the continued use of Shakespeare to explore what masculinity is,
and how its challenging make-up can be successfully reapplied in collaboration with others in
professionally, politically, and personally constructed states of exile. Exemplifying intersectional
theorizing, this thesis insists on a need to address race alongside masculinity, to focus on Caliban as
well as Prospero. The canonical status of The Tempest as a postcolonial text has spawned a variety of
important works that question and go beyond Mannoni’s reading. Writers like Franz Fanon, Aime
Cesaire, and George Lamming wrestle with a dilemma: “how to recreate an indigenous personality
and destiny when the only literary forms and language available are those of the former colonizer.” 20

17 Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, p. 178;

Solomon, “Going Places”, p, 10;
Spiller, “The Counsel of Fulke Greville”, p. 435.
18 Fullarton, “Grief, Phantoms, and Re-membering Loss”, 289-291. It is worth mentioning that
hybridity is discussed in various different ways in this paper and its meaning can become
confused with intersectional, but primarily hybrid is used to mean mixed, whereas as a coming
together and intermingling of roles, cultures, etc, that have previously been socially constructed
as polarized, is intersectional.
19 Loomba, Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism, p. 26;
Manne, Entitled, p. 7 & 16.

In Chapter 6 of Down Girl, Manne considers the exonerating narratives that tend to benefit
hyperprivileged men (p. 32). The chapter also discusses the flow of sympathy away from female
victims toward their male victimizers – himpathy, a term first coined by Manne’s husband Daniel
(p. 17). Manne also specifies the ‘golden boy’ phenomenon, and its effects on challenging rape
allegations, worth considering when comparing and contrasting Caliban and Fedinand (p. 133).
Ibid, p. 15; Beauchamp, “Our incel problem”, n.pag. Incel, the dangerous subculture of
“involuntary celibacy”, the allegation thrown out by “men and boys who pollute their online
forums with posts blaming women for their sexless lives.”
20 Tiffin, “The Novels of George Lamming”, p. 253.

Cesaire and Lamming are unique in authoring their own retellings of Shakespeare’s play and
critical essays on colonialism. A larger comparative study of their work is not within the scope of
this paper. Whilst I respect the translators who have helped ensure Cesaire’s work reaches
single-language speakers like myself, I feel ill-equipped and uncomfortable attempting an in-
depth analysis of work that I am unable to understand in its original form. To some, this may
seem like a flimsy excuse, even potentially hypocritical from a woman writing about masculinity
 10

The issue of the insistent imprinting of the colonizer’s language onto the colonized, backed up by
distribution of European texts like Shakespeare and translations of The Bible, denote the
rapaciousness of the white man’s desire to occlude other cultures, beginning with the spread of Latin
and followed by English as purveyors of truth and validity. 21 Inspired by Caliban’s, “my profit” quote,
attention is drawn not only to the intended universalism of English (French in Fanon’s and Cesaire’s
cases) but also to the commodification of the colonized as intrinsic to the economics of colonial
enterprise: “Consumption is power.”22 In a recent study comparing Fanon and Mannoni, Laurent
Combres draws attention to their rootedness in psychoanalysis, and concludes that the recognition of
each side of the colonial divide’s location is essential in achieving Fanon’s mission of mutual
recognition without repression, but as this paper points out, divisive social constructs that feast on the
desire that feeds patriarchy’s thirst for cultivation perpetuates injustice, creating a type of masculinity
that exudes a “European cannibal spirit”.23 In other words, patriarchy incites envy and jealousy that
keeps people in conflict, keeping those with power in power, sustained by the powerless.

The “textual resistance”, exemplified by the insistence of writers like Cesaire and Lamming who
“attempt to retaliate against dominant discourses by inverting roles and imposing other meaning as
seen from the vantage point of the colonial subject”, turned the tide of scholarship on The Tempest to
a refreshing navigational heading. 24 Conversely, Cesaire’s “revolutionary cadences” and Lamming’s
densely packed prose may contribute to what Moore Gilbert sees as antagonistic and ineffectual
postcolonial writing, offering “the dominant a greater range of targets.” 25 Whilst this is a factor in
understanding why Lamming’s work may be off-putting to some, J. Dillon Brown emphasizes
Lamming’s work attempts “to transform uncritical, passively receptive readers into skeptical [sic],
suspicious ones, alert to the cultural, ideological, and political frames within which all narrative is
produced and received.”26 In this way Lamming picks up Shakespeare’s baton and runs with it,
inducing his readership to question society whilst negotiating “an ostensibly colonial publishing
structure in order to tender their own anticolonial message – in a form recognizable within that very
structure.”27 The rawness and complexity articulated is therefore necessary not simply to shock but “in
favour of careful re-examination of the roots of individual and collective personality behind the

(another language that I cannot possibly know fully), but my ability to read and understand
masculinity exceeds my competency at reading and understanding French.
21 Anderson, Imagined Communities, pp. 13-18.
22 I.ii.362;
Root, Cannibal Culture, p. 9.
23 Combres, “Critique and Discourses on Colonialism”, paragraph 44;
Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 2;
Root, p. 9.
24 Zaibi, “Rewriting The Tempest”, pp. 107-108.
25 Kelly, “Introduction A Poetics of Anticolonialism”, p. 7;
Moore Gilbert, Postcolonial Theory, p. 202.
26 Dillon Brown, Migrant Modernism, p. 74.
27 Ibid, p. 9.
 11

phenomena of slavery and colonialism”, to convey the true severity and pervading neutering effects of
colonialism’s legacy, but does it in a way that is perhaps unwittingly emblematic of the brutish,
reactionary masculine stereotype postcolonialism wants to disprove. 28

Critics like Mary Chamberlain and Ngugi wa Thiong’o have examined Lamming's work as classically
postcolonial, addressing what Ngugi states as the attempt to escape the “wasteland of non-
achievement” imposed by colonialism, but have paid little attention to how its understanding of race is
related to masculinity. 29 The predominance of postcolonial scholarship on Shakespeare’s comedy
romance and its relationship with gender studies makes The Tempest a necessary tool to examine the
disruptive effects of the colonial father figure’s surveillance of black masculinity, making embracing
hybridity appear like ‘giving in’ to parental insistence, resulting in macho resistance. 30 Remi Joseph-
Salisbury states when “men invert that stereotype for their own gain . . . the stereotype becomes a
source of capital that offers protection from racism and bullying.” 31 Water With Berries recounts how
that ideology can backfire, when Derek’s attempt at affirming his masculinity turns him into an
untouchable rapist.32

Like any individual faced with unreasonable demands, what post-war contemporaries of Mannoni
created was a counter-text that took the re-reading of Prospero and Caliban that much further; Caliban
began to shout out from the shadow of white patriarchy’s “hard rock”. 33 In doing so, postcolonialism
was born but texts created by writers like Cesaire and Lamming do not fully refute Mannoni’s claim of
a dependency narrative; instead they augment it by highlighting the dependency of the colonizer on
the colonized as its means of production. 34 Also by the depiction of characters that replicate the
brutality of the colonizer’s lesson, Cesaire’s and Lamming’s versions of Caliban become the means by
which the colonizer justifies rather than rejects the original campaign of subjection, trapping the
colonized into a fatalistic loop, “since a pattern of history has already been established which makes
militancy and violence only part of the repetitive cycle of the past.” 35

By fracturing Caliban, Prospero, and Miranda into multiple shards, Lamming’s work provides the best
opportunity to pick through the nuances of the colonizer-colonized relationship from a masculine
perspective. The main mission of Water With Berries, points out how the legacy of colonialism has
generated a self-powered machine that keeps other than white men in a perpetual cycle of repressed

28 Tiffin, “The Tyranny of History”, p. 37.

29 Chamberlain, “George Lamming”,p. 175;
Ngugi wa Thiong’o, “Decolonizing the Mind”, n.pag.
30 Mercer, Welcome to the Jungle, p. 143.
31 Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 70.
32 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 268.
33 I.ii.343.
34 Banaji, “For a Theory of Colonial Modes of Production”, p. 2498.
35 Tiffin, p. 37.
 12

masculine immaturity that creates volcanic outbursts. 36 By denying other than white men the
opportunities to achieve full maturity (as determined by earlier conduct books), the pressure to be a
man and yet treated and addressed as ‘boy’ makes for an incendiary scenario: “. . . two souls, two
thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength
alone keeps it from being torn asunder.”37

To be perpetually reminded of a ‘double-consciousness’ created from the visibility of colour and

masculinity, and yet be denied any real sense of agency has been crippling. 38 For example, in Water
With Berries, Roger (a pianist and composer) is married but because of his economic situation, he
cannot afford an apartment to house himself, his wife, and his piano together. 39 The point Shepard
makes about adequate financial support of a household being essential to manhood, remained
relevant in the 1970s when Water With Berries was written. Despite the economic capacity for female
financial independence in the post-war era, men were still classed as the main ‘breadwinner’. The shift
in economic dominance due to the increase in women’s opportunities, a change away from primary to
secondary and tertiary industries, strikes and disaffected men created by poor labour relations, and
mass unemployment in the 1970s and 1980s emulated a type of neutering which is discussed in
Chapter 2, forcing a greater degree of hybridity both in attitudes to what was considered work fit for
men, and a rebalancing of domestic duties. 40 The intertwining of economic class, race, and gender
that writers like Loomba and Akhimie discuss need considering together, rather than splitting apart, as
it is the interconnectedness of discriminatory practices that creates the fabric of its perpetuation,
something that studies in masculine hybridity recognise, and that Lamming’s novel ably articulates. As
Joseph-Salisbury remarks, hybridity ‘brings about possibilities for double consciousness to be used as
a site of strength, rather than weakness’, in order to formulate a path towards achieving post-racial
resilience.41

The damaging intransigence and injustice patriarchal masculinity inflicts on itself continues to be
scrutinized in Margaret Atwood’s Hag-Seed, where the effects of incarcerating masculine identity is
explored. In Atwood’s earlier novel The Robber Bride, the character of Charis “is stuck with being

36 ‘Other than white’ is an acceptable collective term – see Gov,uk, ‘Writing about ethnicity’.
The point being made in the dissertation is that white men hold all the advantages, and
therefore using terminology that highlights this fact is an important part of demonstrating
the destructiveness of the binary divide.
37 Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folks, p. 6.
38 Ibid.
39 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 76.
40 Growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, I witnessed the debilitating effects of economic hardship
imposed on my family. My father was ‘early retired’ at 50, we were forced to move house in
1984 because of the lack of opportunities, and afterwards my father dotted between short-term
‘consultancy’ roles until he was able to draw on his pension. Economic uncertainty shaped my
upbringing and I was deeply affected by how closely my father’s self-worth was anchored by his
roles as father and professional, which has influenced my choice of topic.
41 Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 24.
 13

white”, jealous of mixed race Shanita who appears capable of metamorphosing. 42 Atwood returns to
envisage “the liberating effects of multiple locations between cultures as opposed to the restraint and
constraint of origins” in Hag-Seed, by charting the disruption of an established masculine identity, and
exploring various notions of achieving freedom. 43 As Carneiro states, “Moral and ethical conundrums
are also lurking between the lines of Atwood’s stories, that is, how her characters and, by extension,
her readers are morally and ethically implicated in their actions and choices.” 44 It is this quality that
makes Atwood’s reworking of The Tempest relevant to this discussion: “she has blurred genre
boundaries to fulfill her own agendas in her scrutiny of cultural myths and contemporary social trends”,
and Atwood herself has remarked that she resists ‘closed boxes’ saying that “ . . . nature does not deal
in closed boxes . . . everything in nature is on a bell curve” making her work intrinsically hybrid, and
resistant to static, delineated thinking. 45

As Atwood is commonly associated with fore-fronting female characters, Collen Etman criticizes,
“Atwood’s emphasis on the Prospero character, the almost exclusively male cast, and less than ideal
depictions of women”, insisting Hag-Seed falls ‘short of giving The Tempest a much needed feminist
update.’46 The important word in Etman’s conclusion is “ideal”, which suggests Etman is looking for
some kind of new female archetype to emerge from Atwood’s novel, and falls into the trap of
continuing the face-off between masculinity and femininity. This is unfortunate. Atwood is “absolutely
topical, or perhaps “prescient” is the right word”, and Etman misses this point. 47 I believe Atwood uses
the central lens of a middle-class, middle-aged white man because she is realistic about how the world
is.48 “Making power visible and challenging its oppressive effects” engages everyone in understanding
the view from inside patriarchy in order to change it without assuming a pre-existing attitude of
stereotypical manhood as its sole driving force. 49 The construction of the characters in Hag-Seed
proves the spotlight isn’t always attractive or necessary to achieve success, and the strength of
feminism should be from within itself, resisting the endless competition and antagonism that feeds
patriarchy’s appetite for struggle and power, opting instead to lead by example. Atwood suggests this
by formulating the female characters in Hag-Seed as supportive, but with an inner self-reliance that
makes it clear they don’t need men to validate themselves. The characters of Estelle, Anne-Marie, and
Miranda are all liberators, facilitating Felix’s escape from downtrodden, bereaved, unemployed exile to
successful mentor. In Aldoory’s words, “Margret Atwood [sic], through appropriating and

42 Atwood, The Robber Bride, p. 57.

43 Rao, “Home and Nation in Margaret Atwood’s Later Fiction”, p. 75.
44 Carneiro, “The good, the bad, and the ugly sides of revenge in Hag-Seed”, p. 136.
45 Howells, “Introduction”, p. 23.
Ferriss, “Why You Should Resist Identity Labels | Margaret Atwood on The Tim Ferriss Show
podcast”.
46 Etman, Feminist Shakespeares, p. 54-55.
47 Howells, p. 22.
48 Atwood, Burning Questions, p. 361.
49 Freire, Pedagogy of Hope, p. 8.
 14

intertextualizing Shakespeare’s The Tempest, reconstructs Miranda to be a motivator of action rather

than a receiver of a patriarchal power.” 50

Creating Miranda as a spirit creature captures the idea that women are free spirits, and women should
use that constructively to be supportive, but not to the point of relinquishing freedom for the sake of
serving masculinity alone. Hag-Seed makes the point that to be free from the past, a death must occur
– the death of a previous identity. Atwood’s Miranda is the spiritual crutch that fills the gap in Felix’s life
until he can form new relationships that help hold himself up again, re-membering his identity, and
mirroring the use Shakespeare makes of Prospero’s daughter in the original play, but adapting the
character to overcome the need for a supernatural element to the story.51 Atwood artfully and
insightfully recognises the pain of the phantom’s presence, whilst understanding the comfort, and
pleasure that comes from imagining Miranda’s continued existence, but also the danger of idealising
her, and avoiding the truth, “No, too painful still. . . . Hold it far back. Pretend it was only a movie.” 52
Whilst Fullarton’s study on phantom limb syndrome shows its pertinence to this study by
demonstrating how the mind creates spiritual crutches for itself to assist the transition after extreme
loss, Zajac’s article focuses on the significance of repetition in processing trauma. 53 I build on their
discussions to demonstrate that despite the pain involved, the traumatic act must be confronted in
order to be resolved. Masculinity must be allowed to grieve for what it once was but not to the point of
allowing it to endlessly wallow in immersive self-indulgence. Atwood is making the point that
patriarchal masculinity needs to see the benefits of change achieved through collaboration with
unexpected sources, relinquishing the urge to see what it has not previously encountered as always-
already a threat, but to shake hands, and introduce itself politely to the “brave new world” that awaits. 54

Current scholarship on Hag-Seed also tends towards concentrating on its metatheatrical/metafictional

qualities, as discussed by Ciobanu, Tatar, and Tolan. 55 Considering Atwood is adapting a text to write a
story about a man who deals with adapting Shakespeare on a daily basis, this is an unsurprising topic
of choice for critical analysis. However, what is most important is Atwood’s fictional adaptor is also
undergoing a process of adapting to imposed change, while he works with other men who are also
undergoing a similar period of transition, and processing trauma. Hag-Seed is therefore as much

50 Aldoory, “Atwood’s Recreation of Shakespeare’s Miranda in The Tempest”, p. 58.

51 In an article in The Guardian from Sat 24 Sep 2016 03.00 EDT, Atwood talks about overcoming
the difficulties presented by transporting The Tempest into a twenty-first century setting, and
resolving issues like how to include appealing characteristics like magic, music, and the
supernatural – https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2016/sep/24/margaret-atwood-rewriting-
shakespeare-tempest-hagseed.
52 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 11.
53 Fullarton, “Grief, Phantoms, and Re-membering Loss”, p. 284;
Zajac, “Prisoners of Shakespeare”, p. 324-325.
54 V.i.183.
55 Ciobanu, “The play’s the thing”, p. 13;
Tatar, “Spirits to enforce, art to enchant”, p. 97;
Tolan, “Margaret Atwood’s Revisions of Classic Texts”, p. 141.
 15

about navigating masculine identity, expectations, and the in-between state of transition as it is about
revenge and reconciliation. Including society’s outsiders (prison inmates) in the story as an
unexpected support group for Felix as he processes different types of grief that relate to the loss of
recognisable masculine identities, Atwood presents an example of inclusive learning working with the
most disenfranchised. By channelling what Freire sees as a dialogical process that resists the creation
of subjects as things and instead sees them as mutually active participants in an exchange, Atwood
challenges masculinity to abandon competition for collaboration, by constructing disadvantaged yet
proactive characters working through their problems together. 56 Whereas Prospero seeks only the
audience’s approval by the end of the play, and Lamming’s central trio reject society, succumbing to
violence, Atwood’s novel manages to satisfy the traditional comedic rule of all’s well that ends well,
and insightfully dismembers culturally conditioned masculinity to discover the benefits of collaborative
hybridity.57 Whilst a utopian ending is not a realistic vision of where masculinity stands at this time (as
evidenced by Bridges and Pascoe), Hag-Seed’s message of more inclusive collaboration is healthier
than its two predecessors, pointing to a productive way forward.

Studies on the use of Shakespeare in prison environments are therefore also essential reading as part
of this research project, to assist in unpacking Atwood’s layering of freedom versus incarceration
metaphors employed throughout Hag-Seed. Prison practitioners like Fabio Cavalli and Curt Tofteland
have gone on to successfully influence the use of Shakespeare as a rehabilitative tool across a
number of institutions, reflected in films and work like Phyllida Lloyd’s Donmar Warehouse production
of The Tempest, showing their collective influence on performance too, whilst providing clear evidence
to support how Shakespeare remains useful in the twenty-first century, particularly for those seeking to
process, and articulate fear of change. 58 This study concentrates on the importance of considering the
effects of static, incarcerated identity, and processing grief resulting from fear of change as integral to
achieving a new state of masculinity that goes beyond the performance of hybridity towards
relinquishing dependence on delineated gender. Shakespeare's strength lies in its malleability
(something masculinity is attempting to learn) and reinterpreting Shakespeare for the purpose of
creating more opportunities to explore its potential to speak to disenfranchised and fractured
masculine identities is a positive step towards further advocacy for men who seek to use their privilege

56 Freire, “Cooperation”, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, p. 167.

57 It is necessary to point out this study concentrates on heterosexual masculinity as homosexual
masculinity already exists in a state of intrinsic hybridity.
58 Curt Tofteland’s work is discussed in Shakespeare Inside by Amy Scott-Douglass (2007),
informing the creation of Performing New Lives edited by Jonathan Shailor (2011), and the
subject of the film Shakespeare Behind Bars, directed by Hank Rogerson (2006). Mariacristina
Cavecchi’s paper, ‘Brave New Worlds. Shakespearean Tempests in Italian Prisons’ provides
insight into Fabio Cavalli’s work that formed the screenplay of the 2012 film Caeser Must Die,
directed by Armando Punzo (2017, p. 1). Phyllida Lloyd’s Donmar Warehouse production of The
Tempest, the last in a prison-themed trilogy of all-female productions including Julius Caesar
and Henry IV, centres on Hannah (Lloyd’s version of Prospero), a left-wing activist who denies
the validity of her sentence, insisting that society forced her into undertaking criminal activity
(aired Jun 17, 2018, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8599552/).
 16

wisely to assist in the dismantling of their own incarcerating archetypes, and achieve more than a
superficial performance of inclusivity.

Triangulating The Tempest, Water With Berries, and Hag-Seed charts the cultivation of expected
models of manhood, considers the factors affecting masculine relationships, and the necessary
changes required to create greater equality and reduce injustice between variations of identity.
Assessing these three central texts alongside scholarship on masculinity, the forces of vocation and
family appear as the two main dominant masculine drives because they offer the opportunity to
establish reputation and legacy - the opportunity to effectively defeat death by living on in spirit. Within
masculinity surveillance and monitoring creates constraints enforced by patriarchal forces in the form
of societal norms and echoes from the past that act like the voices of overbearing fathers. Challenging
Shakespeare therefore satisfies the urge to challenge the past, evidenced by the adaptations, but also
brings the past into the present by encouraging it to be changed by new audiences. Shakespeare
stimulates debate by asking questions about societal structures and relationships, encouraging
established ideologies to move with the times. The next three chapters consider each of the three
central texts in turn, starting with The Tempest, creating a foundation for the study based on
considering what may have influenced the formation of the play’s masculine characters, their
behaviours, and relationships.
 17

Chapter 1 – The Tempest

And in the after birth on the quiet earth

Let the stains remind you
You thought you made a man, you better think again
Before my role defines you

Nail in my head from my creator

You gave me a life now show me how to live 59

Introduction
In 1603, in the year of his accession, James I of England published a work originally intended to
instruct his son, Henry. The ‘Basilikon Doron’ or ‘King’s Gift’ was penned in 1598 when James feared
his life may be cut short.60 Mortality was ever present in the early modern period, with high instances
of deaths relating to childbirth, disease, and infection, as well as the presence of capital punishment
and military actions being common occurrences. Often presented as posthumous letters from parents
to their children, advice texts voiced expectations regarding conduct, principally intended for the
nobility but also popular with those interested in social advancement. As Alexandra Shepard
expresses, many conduct texts were aimed squarely at tutoring men to achieve the idealised state of
‘manhood’ or ‘man’s estate’. 61 The perception was that a man achieved manhood once he gained
governance over himself and his household, aided and abetted by a suitable wife, resulting in
affluence, respectability, and children responsible for continuing his legacy, providing a chance to
snatch a piece of immortality by the transference of accumulated knowledge and assets onwards
beyond corporeal presence, but also in danger of being snatched away by ‘knaves and thieves’, as
pointed out in Twelfth Night.62 The creation of such a strong archetype contributed to maintaining a
patriarchal hierarchy and male hegemony, regardless of whether the reigning monarch was male or
female, determining the underpinning society by emphasising noble masculinity’s responsibility for the
cultivation, and regulation of accepted society, despite the inaccuracy of this attitude and the anxieties
it engenders.63

59 Cornell, Morello, Commerford & Wilk (Audioslave), “Show Me How to Live”.

60 Craigie, “The Basilicon Doron of King James I”, p. 22. See also https://www.bl.uk/collection-
items/printed-edition-of-king-james-vi-and-is-basilikon-doron-or-the-kings-gift-1603.
61 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, Kindle loc. 131;
Kahn, Man’s Estate, p. 210.
62 Murray, “Primogeniture, Patrilineage, and the Displacement of Women”, p. 123;
Kahn, ibid.
63 Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 36. As Akhimie points out, the upper
classes could not exist without the labour of the working classes, therefore it is arguable that
everything was determined by their loyalty to their leaders, rather than solely dependent upon
the adherence of the nobles to a socially coded conduct that eventually filtered down to their
subalterns (p. 148).
 18

Regardless of its transversal readings, The Tempest is a play about men and the journey of a patriarch
from reaction and vengeance to wisdom and virtue, something its transversal readings rely on by
providing a central pillar of dominance to kick against, represented by Shakespeare’s location in the
English canon and by its assessment of patriarchy. As Kahn states, in Shakespeare men must retain
some semblance of fatherhood in order to retain their centrality to achieve manhood. 64 Whilst
Shakespeare’s play Measure for Measure concerns itself with much of the content of the ‘Basilikon
Doron’ concentrating on governance and judgement, The Tempest expands and builds on the content
by exploring underlying anxieties regarding masculinity, mortality and legacy, parenting, and female
influence that underpin the play’s content, and lies behind the message of other conduct material of
the early modern era. 65 As Shepard, Kahn and Akhimie ably assess, the expectations relating to how
men should and should not behave differed between texts and between social groupings, as well as
different ages.66 Levels of respect also differed if a man remained unmarried, often being interpreted
differently depending on context and location. Shepard highlights the presence and number of points
of anxiety this created relating to expected achievement, tying men to a lifetime of competitive
behaviours, seeing their lives as a sequence of levels to be gained, and a litany of protagonists with
which to spar.67 This collection of competitions is portrayed by the characters in The Tempest, creating
it as a mimetic representation of social codes, firmly locating it in the foundations of discussions on
gender and social change.

Whilst Shepard et al assess the depth and breadth of manhood, Oliver Ford Davies, and Hiewon Shin
concentrate on parenting and the importance of the father’s influence and example in educating his
children, something else which The Tempest discusses. Shin points out that in contrast to the usual
ideas of the day offered by Ford Davies, Prospero provides Miranda with the type of education more
usually offered to boys than girls, framing him in a more progressive light than he usually receives. 68
Whilst the connection between Prospero and King James I remains strong in respect of the centrality
of the father figure, this shift towards promoting female education and demonstrating it creates, not a
threat to masculinity, but a beneficial preparation for women to share in the burdens of manhood. It is
a subtle but incisive political message for the time. Despite Shakespeare’s attempt at creating
Prospero as a progressive father, it is the educational function and the father as guide and governor
that has a direct link to King James I’s absolutism, and the colonial enterprise, challenged by the
emerging empiricism that placed knowledge and power in the hands of sailors who gathered

64 Kahn, Man’s Estate, p. 196.

65 Scott, “Discourses of Kingship in Measure for Measure and the Works of James I”, p. 71.
66 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, Kindle loc. 138;
Kahn, Man’s Estate, p. 16;
Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 27.
67 Shepard, Kindle loc. 234.
68 Ford Davies, Shakespeare’s Fathers and Daughters, pp. 168-169;
Shin, “Single Parenting, Homeschooling: Prospero, Caliban, Miranda”, p. 373.
 19

information and experiences many at the centre of government only received second or third hand. 69
Constructing the patriarchal model where educator-father becomes governor-slaver, by the action of
market pressure and the pursuit of greater land gathering than England’s competitors, becomes a hot
topic within a dependency narrative that relies on subalterns keeping their expected place, and forgets
(to its cost) the value of two-way exchange. This packs the exchange between the mariners and
nobles during the opening scene of The Tempest with political value (see ‘Significant Pronouns’), as
well as affecting the reading of the father-schoolmaster relationship Prospero shares with Miranda,
Caliban, and (to a degree) Ferdinand, discussed in ‘Legacy and Legitimacy’ below. 70 The relationship
between Prospero and Caliban demonstrates this one-way traffic,71 but casting Caliban as the
ungrateful student-apprentice-adopted son (whose only acknowledged benefit is that he can curse in a
language that can be understood by the island’s invaders), also provides a continuance of the central
vehicle that creates the other characters that surround Prospero as ways of conveying his transition
from vengeful outcast to born-again statesman (which Caliban in part mirrors by turning from plotting
against his master to seeking for grace by the play’s conclusion). The value of the amicable exchange
of diplomacy rather than angry dictatorship, acting with virtue rather than vengeance, is the grounds
for the plot of The Tempest and is played out by the interactions between a father, children, servants,
slaves, and a collection of individuals who represent different versions of the stages and types of
manhood described by the conduct texts.

This chapter tackles how The Tempest conveys hybrid masculinity as defined in the introduction,
questioning the models of early modern manhood identified by Shepard and the other authors
mentioned above. This chapter points out how the characters in Shakespeare’s play reflect those
models, and how they also differ, to create a more nuanced view of masculine identity, and the
characters’ likeness to the current problematised nature of hybrid masculinity, and the patriarchal
dividend it attempts to mask.72 The following close reading of revealing moments in the play’s text
arises from enjoying the construction of the language in the play, the significant absence of all but one
corporeal female character, the comedy resulting from attempts to try on new identities that don’t fit,

69 Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 9.

Consolidating power with the monarch and signifying an end to feudalism and the beginnings of
worldwide capitalism.
70 Solomon, pp. 5-6;
Shin, “Single Parenting”, pp. 373-374.
71 Caliban has done more to educate Prospero and Miranda, helping them survive their exile by
showing them “all the qualities o’th’isle” (Shin, p.374), Prospero and Miranda only place value
on what they have taught Caliban, indicative of the colonizer’s attitude towards the knowledge
of the colonized. This contrasts, to an extent, with Ariel. Ariel’s talents receive acknowledgement
and praise, creating the veneer of reciprocity between the spirit and his master, but Prospero
still threatens Ariel with the denial of freedom, showing his lack of trust and therefore an
absence of reciprocity in the relationship, the same as with Caliban.
72 Bridges & Pascoe, “Hybrid Masculinities”, p. 247;
Eisen & Yamashita, “Borrowing from Femininity”, p.803;
Knuttila, Paying for Masculinity, p.4.
 20

and how all this works together in a romantic setting that portrays the anxieties within early modern
masculinity.

Location, Location, Location

Like the island in The Tempest, studying the play provides a place of hiatus, allowing time for
experimentation and discovery, where ideas can be tested beyond the confines of accepted norms. 73
Just like the Forest of Arden in As You Like It, and a theatre’s stage, the island provides Prospero with
a space where he can consider his situation, decide what role he wishes to perform, consider previous
actions, and hone a performance with which to capture his audience. 74 As Francis Bacon attests:
Let not a man force a habit upon himself with a perpetual continuance, but with some
intermission. For both the pause reinforceth the new onset; and if a man that is not perfect be
ever in practice, he shall as well practice his errors as his abilities, and induce one habit of both,
and there is no means to help this but by seasonable intermissions.75
One can therefore conclude that Antonio is the agent of reason, not only taking over from his
distracted brother to ensure Milan receives appropriate leadership but also inducing the opportunity for
a period of self-reflection onto Prospero by forcing him into exile, the favour being returned by
Prospero when he causes Antonio and the other nobles to be ‘shipwrecked’. I doubt Antonio intended
his brother and niece to benefit from being sent away in “[a] rotten carcass of a butt, not rigg’d,/ Nor
tackle, sail, nor mast”, 76 in fact quite the reverse is the first reading that springs to mind, but the
outcome of the sojourn is nonetheless profitable for Prospero and his daughter Miranda.Prospero is
given the opportunity to face his past follies and remake his manhood, and Miranda finds love and the
means to secure a strong future, whilst making the most of playing the game patriarchy has designed.

Shakespeare’s inclusion of a game of chess provides the opportunity for Miranda to reveal her
knowledge of masculinity’s manoeuvres that shape her world. 77 Her backhanded statement of support
for her husband-to-be tells the audience that whilst women may play along, they are not deceived by
declarations of fairness, and are well aware of men’s reliance on their support to be successful:
Miranda: Sweet lord, you play me false.
Ferdinand: No, my dearest love,/ I would not for the world.
Miranda: Yes. For a score of kingdoms you should wrangle,/ And I will call it fair play. 78
Miranda decides the diplomatic thing to do on that particular occasion is to allow her husband-to-be to
prevail, in order to save face in front of his future subjects and father-in-law, appearing superficially to

73 Ford Davies, Shakespeare’s Fathers and Daughters, p. 145.

74 Kott, Shakespeare Our Contemporary, p. 222.
75 Bacon, “Of Nature in Men”, p. 418.
76 I.ii.146-147.
77 Also nods to a reference James I made about chess in a speech to Parliament in 1610, when
he speaks of ‘the power of kings to “make and unmake their subjects”’ (Solomon, p. 9).
78 V.i.172-176.
 21

be the adoring fiancée, whilst hinting that Ferdinand is just as likely to fall foul of the lure of ambition as
her father and her uncle, if he pursues a selfishly heroic path.

Manoeuvring pieces on the island’s chessboard is facilitated by Shakespeare’s creation of an Orphic

environment, filled with magic and music, enhancing the intention of creating harmony by the play’s
conclusion.79 Where there is harmony there can also be discord and like many things in the play, even
the music is double-edged, used to celebrate the harmony of Miranda and Ferdinand’s betrothal but
also used to bring the news of Alonso’s ‘death’ to Ferdinand. Apart from the island’s noises, Ariel is the
main source of music in the play and is therefore naturally Orphic, demonstrated by his example being
the one that aids Prospero in “re-defining masculine virtus.”80 Orphic masculinity in the early modern
period, although stemming from a mythological origin like the Herculean hero, was considered the
blueprint for a new kind of leadership that favoured diplomacy. This diplomatic model utilized the motif
of the head/reason being the ruler of the body, likening the king to the reasoned head of the body of
the country, equating the political geography of the country to whatever land came under the King’s
governance, creating England and Scotland as one realm under James I, and conjoining loyalties to
both.81 Therefore Shakespeare’s Orphic play has a definite political message, not just about James I
style of kingship, and his emphasis on applying brain over brawn, but also about loyalty and the new
expectations for the performance of masculinity throughout the whole realm.

Problematised Absolutism, and its relationship to Hybrid Masculinity

Prospero as the central character in The Tempest is emblematic of “[t]he image of James I as royal
“schoolmaster”, a reformer of persons . . . magical reformer of worlds.” 82 Like James, Prospero
assumes the role of civilizer, inhabiting the patriarchal panopticon, monitoring the behaviours of
everyone around him on the island by exerting control over them, presenting himself as the learned
scholar in “an elaboration of a Renaissance myth of origins in which a pre-given, reified, and thus
imposing power of mind . . . creates civility.” 83 James’ harmonizing Orphic mission was spelt out in The
Trew Law of Free Monarchies, and in 1610 the King pointed out that high-born men should not be so
arrogant to assume immunity from dispossession of their manhood, when he reminded Parliament of
his power to ”make and unmake” his subjects; to ”exalt low things and abase high things.” 84 However,
as Solomon goes on to state, this central absolutism cast James’ version of masculinity as static
despite the greater flexibility of thought suggested by a mindset associated with diplomatic agreement

79 As Headlam Wells states, by employing the Platonic model Shakespeare “turns an abstract
metaphysical principle into a political metaphor”, turning Prospero from “the muscle-man. . .
consumed on the sacrificial pyre he has built for himself” to concentrating on employing
creativity and knowledge to reassert his manhood (Headlam Wells, p. 196 & pp. 178-179).
80 Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, p. 195.
81 See Calvin’s Case – Visconsi, “Vinculum Fidei”, pp. 2-4.
82 Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 9.
83 Ibid.
84 Ibid.
 22

arising from collaboration. 85 Constituted as mage, father, teacher, and master of the island, Prospero
therefore clearly characterizes all the elements of James’ style of masculinity and leadership, which
also coincides with current concerns over hybrid masculinity’s attempts to hide static mindsets behind
an illusory facade of inclusivity. 86

Prospero appears to have a collaborative, contractual agreement between himself and Ariel in order to
harness Ariel’s skills to augment his own so that Prospero’s plans to take revenge on those he
believes have wronged him succeed: “Ariel: Let me remember thee what thou hast promis’d,/ Which is
not yet perform’d me.”, but the contract is held in place by threats of returning the spirit to a state of
imprisonment, “Into a cloven pine”. 87 If the only option for Ariel amounts to ‘cake or death’, the
relationship between Prospero and Ariel cannot be considered truly contractual (servant) instead it
amounts to a different variant of slavery, as Prospero himself reveals in his angry outburst when Ariel
challenges him over achieving freedom: “Thou, my slave”.88 Like the loyalty expected of a king’s
subjects, the sword of Damocles swings forever overhead, ready to drop at any moment. The same is
true of Caliban, who lives in fear of being “pinch’d to death”, but unlike Ariel, Caliban is more apt to talk
back to his master, making the threats of punishment based on enacting physical attacks on Caliban
more savage than imprisonment alone, giving Shakespeare the means to make the point that despite
his claims to civility, there is only an illusory veil separating the hare-like Prospero from “thou
tortoise”.89

In their discussion of the current iteration of Orphic masculinity (hybrid masculinity), Bridges and
Pascoe build on Demetriou’s focus to point out hybrid masculinity attempts at obscuring and deflecting
the dominance of hegemonic masculinity with smoke and mirrors. 90 Like hybrid masculinity, Prospero
picks and chooses opportunities to appear conciliatory, like in the example discussed above, by
creating an illusion of a contract between himself and Ariel in order to harness Ariel’s power to achieve
Prospero’s ends. It is my opinion, Prospero’s ‘magic’ is more about clever marketing and persuasion
than it is about actual supernatural power, a perfect metaphor for the self-policing induced by

85 Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 10.

86 Bridges & Pascoe, “Hybrid Masculinities”, p. 248.
87 I.ii.242-243;
I.ii.276.
88 Izzard, “Eddie Izzard "Cake or Death" Sketch From Dress to Kill”;
I.ii.270.
89 5.i.277;
Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folks, p. 4;
I.ii.317.
Here I draw on the idea of Zeno’s paradox, likening the assumed advancement of Prospero to
the hare who creates himself as ahead of the primitive, belated, slow, tortoise – Caliban. This
construction contributes to the binarism within the colonial relationship that positions the
colonized as belated and ‘behind the times’ and the colonizer as justified in its modernizing
mission (further discussion of this point is expanded on in Chapter 2).
90 Bridges & Pascoe, p. 249.
 23

patriarchal mechanisms today that push and pull individuals between different states of desire in order
to control behaviours and identities. 91 The employment of the supernatural creates opportunities for
spectacle in the play that all audiences have enjoyed over the play’s long and illustrious history, but for
the purposes of supporting my theory, the supernatural is just as much about what state of mind
Prospero manages to manipulate in order to exert his masculine dominance, as it is about actual
demonstrations of power. 92

From the outset, Prospero’s reliance on Ariel and the anxiety his imposed servitude masks is present
throughout the play. It is clear that without the spirit’s assistance, Prospero cannot fulfil his long-
awaited need to remake his masculinity by enacting revenge on his usurping brother, Antonio. While
the sailors fight to control the ship, they are unaware their course is being controlled by two storms –
the storm that created Prospero’s exile and the weather phenomenon Prospero has conjured with
Ariel’s assistance, bringing the ship to the location of that exile. The physical effort of the sailors seems
to represent Prospero’s inner struggle – the fight to control his anger and vengeful thoughts towards
his brother. The arguments between the sailors and the courtiers on board the vessel mirror the direct
experiences of both classes at the time (as Solomon discusses – see above) whilst symbolizing the
fight of practicality and reason to overcome societal expectations of paying deference to those of a
higher rank, regardless of their ability to act productively, which also links to the expectations
associated with the parent-child dynamic.93

This opening cleverly encapsulates many of the anxieties and tensions in early modern manhood in
one scene. The completeness of the metaphor of storm (following Shakespeare’s tradition of using
weather and nature to convey the effects of pathetic fallacy – like the “unweeded garden that grows to
seed” in Act 1, Scene 2 of Hamlet and the stormy heath in Act 3 of King Lear), the exertion played off
against courtly behaviour and observance of hierarchy places those who have learned the most
appropriate skills alongside those with status that entitles them to govern, but neither is capable of
succeeding when forces beyond their knowledge or control are determining events. The dynamic
represented by the interaction between workers and courtiers resembles the tension between
knowledgeable children and stubborn, intransigent fathers, but also conveys anxieties which patriarchy
still holds onto today regarding who possesses knowledge that leads to power: “for mercantile activity
not only constituted a unique way of making a living, but also promoted new mathematical and

91 Buchbinder, Studying Men and Masculinities, p. 79;

Breitenberg, Anxious Masculinity in Early Modern England, p. 127.
92 This is not intended to suggest that Ariel and Caliban are easily impressionable because of their
‘native’ background, just that Prospero has a different box of tricks from which to draw upon
because of coming from a different culture that is as alien to Ariel and Caliban as theirs is to
Prospero.
93
Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 9.
MacFaul, Problem Fathers in Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama, pp. 1-2.
 24

empirical ways of knowing the world.”94 Solomon aptly points out that the new empiricism “presented
the monarch with an intellectual imperative: become conversant with contemporary empiricism and
thus control its signification, or fall prey to new strategies of commercial-class empowerment.”95
Shakespeare therefore attempts to demonstrate that both mariner and noble remain at the mercy of
circumstances beyond their control, and their attempts to outdo each amount to the farcical
representation their actions present in the play. The storm is therefore representative of the King’s
power, something that places the sailors and the nobles on an equal footing, one of powerlessness
against a force beyond their control.

Out of sight and unknown to those onboard the ship, Prospero controls their fate. In this way Prospero
is briefly representative of an all-father, holding magical power over death, like the Roman Jove, to
whom he compares himself and which directly correlates to Ptolemy’s model of the universe, where
Jupiter or Jove equates to the age of manhood, an age of anger and ferocity. 96 In controlling nature,
Prospero presents himself not only as manly but godly – common with the idea of King James as
god’s representative on earth as head of the Church of England, but because of his flaws, Prospero
remains a god with feet of clay. 97 In addition to power, magic adds the aspect of secrecy and intrigue
to the motif of interiority and exteriority (what happens on scene and behind the scene). 98 By revealing
that just as much happens behind the scenes as that which is on view, Shakespeare unpacks
masculinity for the audience by letting them experience what is often kept private, and what is
accepted in public in equal measure. The actors move in and out of scenery, acting roles on a stage,
fulfilling what I see as Shakespeare’s intention, to reflect society to stimulate debate, rather than
create an allegorical advice text. Prospero’s air of omnipresence (achieved via his employment of
Ariel) controls the action in The Tempest, echoed in Prospero’s thirst for academic pursuits that aids
his performance of all-knowledgeable controller. This overbearing father motif is important in the play’s
mimetic function, in that it represents a form of character that is identifiable and relatable for the
audience, bridging the gap between life and art, converting the strength of Prospero as powerful
mage/stage manager of events from Herculean power through physical strength into Orphic power as
mental agility.

Flawed Manhood and the Tempering Female

From first impressions Prospero has achieved manhood – he has surpassed the age of majority and
entered into maturity; he has amassed the qualifying expectations of social position, affluence,
education, family, but his manhood is flawed. Prospero has lost the dukedom of Milan to his scheming
brother Antonio, resulting from his preference for attending to his library rather than attending to his
subjects and the maintenance of his realm, and resides in exile with his daughter, Miranda, reflecting

94 Solomon, “Going Places”, p.7.

95 Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 7.

96 Smith, Shakespeare and Masculinity, p. 72.
97 Ford Davies, Shakespeare’s Fathers and Daughters, p. 146.
98 Jungers, “Mimesis & Cie – The (un)walled man”, p. 19.
 25

Bacon’s fears that men’s concentration on self-indulgent study “is but to please them and profit
themselves, and for either respect they will abandon the good of their affairs.” 99 Whilst Prospero’s
pursuit of knowledge reflects James I’s intent to remain well informed because of the proliferation of
information circulating in society via trade, and the emphasis within an Orphic form of masculinity to
promote harmony over antagonism, without balancing that against his other responsibilities
Shakespeare points out how even an established manhood can be undermined by the combined
deception of arrogance, assumed legitimacy (the ‘right’ to rule), and the machinations of those most
invested in achieving power and recognition, following a Machiavellian path. 100

Assumptions generated by the workings of patrilineage at the time The Tempest was written lead to
expecting Prospero to be Antonio’s elder brother. 101 It would be interesting to consider whether the
audience’s opinion of Antonio as usurper would shift if Prospero was played as the younger brother
who squandered the opportunity granted over his elder brother by their father however the relationship
between Antonio and Sebastian (Alonso, King of Naples’ younger brother) is enhanced by their
common bond as second sons to men whose manhood is challenged, spurring them to be interpolated
by the window of opportunity to achieve power and advancement for themselves in order to fulfil
expectations that leadership should uphold a dynamic and active face at all times, fitting with the
previously favoured Herculean model of manhood prevalent in Shakespeare’s tragedies. 102

Alonso’s grief-stricken behaviour mirrors the distraction that resulted in Prospero’s exile and his
manhood is challenged by assuming his son Ferdinand has been drowned in the sea storm raised at
the play’s outset. The portrayal of a grieving father demonstrates the importance of a son to the King’s
masculinity, where the son becomes a metaphor for prowess and faith in the future; hopefully investing
that future with inherited skills and experience that create Alonso as a lasting part of patriarchal
influence.103 The grief that causes Alonso to submerge himself in his own version of Prospero’s “sea-
sorrow”, suggests a clue to the Duchess of Milan’s absence from the action and Prospero’s attention
being diverted into books, explored in Margaret Atwood’s reworking of The Tempest analysed in
Chapter 3.104 There is an unfortunate predestination that is heralded by the King’s assumption there is
no male heir to follow in his footsteps, as James’s son Henry predeceases his father, compounding the
significance of Shakespeare’s blighted monarch to actual events. Having lost his own son to what
Maggie O’Farrell assumes is plague (considering when Hamnet’s death was recorded, but which still
remains unclear), it is possible to imagine Shakespeare infusing the play with concerns of his own that

99 Bacon, “Of Wisdom For A Man’s Self”, p. 387.

100 Solomon, “Going Places”, p. 7;

Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, p. 25;
Ibid, pp. 20-22.
101 Murray, “Primogeniture, Patrilineage, and the Displacement of Women”, p. 121.
102 Headlam Wells, p. 27.
103 Murray, p. 124.
104 I.ii.169.
 26

his audience also shared, but the personal significance to James I pointedly connects the play with
much more than promoting the version of masculinity the King attempted to persuade the populace to
appreciate and adopt.105

We assume Prospero married because he is a father and refers to his wife as “a piece of virtue”. 106
The absence of the Duchess of Milan from the island can be counted as another flaw in Prospero’s
manhood, but it also introduces the importance of what lies behind the scene of what is presented,
often equally important as that which is apparent. 107 According to Shepard, the achievement of
manhood was dependent upon a man marrying and maintaining his marriage to act as a tempering
agent, to add balance to a man’s behaviour, whilst also encountering extensive advice “littered with
warnings that if the choice was misguided a man risked spending the rest of his days in unceasing
hell.”108 The Duchess is only spoken of in the past tense (“was a piece of virtue”), so the audience is
left to guess whether she is dead or whether her virtue has gone, and Prospero has cast her aside for
her transgression – we will never know.109 The play also calls into question the fidelity of Prospero’s
own mother in Miranda’s comment, “Good wombs have borne bad sons.” 110 In architecture, what lies
behind a scene is termed obscene, meaning literally the opposite of what is on view. 111 However if the
possibility of obscenity as is meant in common terms is associated with the Duchess, it unlocks the
duality and also the comedy in Prospero’s opaque explanation. The virtuousness, obedience, fidelity,
and loyalty of a wife was also part of the maintenance of early modern manhood, so the idea that this
may have lapsed once again calls into question Prospero’s lack of care and attention to his dukedom
in preference for his studies, also impacting on the maintenance of his marriage. 112 The theme of what
is in view and what lies behind the scenes continues throughout the play (and is also discussed in
later chapters in relation to adaptations of The Tempest) and underpins how tension is created and
managed within the play’s structure, born out of how the male characters interact with each other and
contrast with the single female one.

Despite the absence of wives and mothers on the island denuding the action of the tempering
influence of mature women to cool the heat of early modern masculinity, Shakespeare employs a
literary device to ensure the feminine influence is not forgotten in the play’s structure (in addition to
changing the spotlight away from maturity, and onto youthful forthright honesty via Miranda and
Ferdinand).113 As Miranda Fay Thomas points out, the presence of ‘feminine endings’ in the text

105 Bogaev, “Maggie O’Farrell Hamnet”, n. pag.

106 I.ii.57.
107 Jungers, “Mimesis & Cie – The (un)walled man”, p. 19.
108 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood , Kindle loc. 917.
109 I.ii.56.
110 I.ii.143.
111 Jungers, p. 19.
112 Kahn, Man’s Estate, p. 12.
113 Shepard, Kindle loc. 595.
 27

softens moments onto an unstressed, downbeat but instead of Thomas’ interpretation of ‘passionate
empathy’, I shift the emphasis slightly to propose this as a tempering device, clearly present in
Caliban’s poetic description of the island’s bounty and his expression of love for his homeland. 114 This
employment of the feminine at the foundations of the play communicates Shakespeare’s intention to
articulate that even if women are kept to working behind the scenes, their influence on masculinity is
profound and unavoidable, and the sooner men openly acknowledge and embrace the existence of
beneficial collaboration and hybridity, the better it will be for everyone hampered by the negative
effects of binarism. Whilst the palimpsestic presence of the mother remains coloured by being
overshadowed by patriarchy continually reasserting itself, the positive impact of increased hybridity is
noticeable in society today particularly in how language has changed to include alternative pronouns.
The importance of pronouns is something not lost on Shakespeare (and discussed in the next section)
because of how their use provides insight into how forms of address denote respect and familiarity, but
also insult (affecting the maintenance of reputation), as pointed out by Thomas. 115 Shakespeare’s
acknowledgement of the importance of pronouns suggests to generations to come how they can
subvert and teach patriarchy how to evolve into something “rich and strange” for the better, in addition
to terms being available to assist manipulation; to flatter and persuade. 116

Significant Pronouns
Despite their status, the nobles onboard the ship do not set a good example for their subordinates to
follow. Instead of keeping to their cabins, trusting in the experience of the mariners, the nobles mill
about on deck, getting in the way and making unhelpful comments. Whilst this creates a comedic
moment of contrasts and opportunities for pratfalls to simulate the ship being tossed about by the
storm, it also shows how difficult situations have the potential to bring out the worst and best in people.
The experienced mariners take their work seriously and protest their attempts are aimed at keeping
everyone safe, whilst the arrogance of the nobles keeps them from being useful; they prefer berating
the sailors to lending a hand steadying the vessel, believing staying on deck to face the storm
demonstrates greater bravery:
Boatswain: Work you, then.
Antonio: Hang, cur! Hang, you whoreson, insolent/ noise-maker! We are less afraid to be
drowned than/ thou art.117
This small exchange between these two characters is loaded with meaning relating to early modern
manhood. Exchanges between men involving insults, similar to now, were sometimes considered as
inverted signs of comradeship, but insults like the ones mentioned above are clearly meant to belittle
and convey disrespect.

114 Shakespeare, The Tempest, p. 30.

115 Shakespeare, The Tempest, pp. 36-38.

116 I.ii.402.
117 I.i.41-44.
 28

As Shepard points out, the maintenance of reputation was central to a man’s status in society, which
even an unintentional slip of the tongue or unguarded gesture could call into question. 118 It shows
Antonio as a man not in control of his temperament, prepared to blame and shame without foundation,
in an attempt to place himself above the advice of the more experienced Boatswain. Antonio’s words
constitute a total insult, threatening the Boatswain with hanging, using words that attack the Boatswain
as a man (he is likened to a dog – “cur”), attack the morals of his family (“whoreson”), as well as
accusing the Boatswain of being disrespectful, and making empty utterances that have no value
(“insolent noisemaker”). The use of the informal ‘thou’ reminds the Boatswain that he’s inferior, a
convention Prospero conforms to when addressing his slaves (for example, I.ii.193). The fact that the
Boatswain is trying to do what he can to keep everyone safe under life-threatening conditions
completely by-passes Antonio, whose only thought is that the Boatswain is telling him what to do, not
the other way around. Antonio’s response to the Boatswain resembles a child wanting to have its own
way, regardless of the good counsel of a parent. It is petulant. The contrast between the actions of the
Boatswain and Antonio’s response asks questions of who is best placed to govern the situation – the
one with experience or the one with status. It raises questions about reason versus passion; mind over
matter, connecting back to James I’s preference for Orphic leadership, using “the arts of civilization’ to
‘put an end to the factionalism that had threatened national stability”; bringing Scotland and England
under a single monarch, and by working to achieve foreign alliances to reduce the likelihood of future
hostilities, thus reducing emphasis on physical action in masculinity (the Herculean) and turning it
towards cerebral reason. 119

Legacy and Legitimacy

The maintenance of reputation wasn’t just about the performance of accepted masculinity and
demonstrations of respect at any given moment, but also about how that reputation would resonate
into the future, beyond a man’s lifetime. Prospero as a parent who states he does everything with his
daughter in mind, despite the obvious self-interest that drives his actions, is heavily invested in
ensuring something of himself continues to influence the future, calling upon what Benedict Anderson
describes as “the mystery of regeneration . . . dimly apprehending a combined connectedness . . . in a
language of ‘continuity’’. 120 This is reflected in Prospero’s obsessive policing of Miranda’s chastity
within his carefully engineered plan to resurrect his own manhood. As Mary Murray states, whilst

118 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, pp. 140-141.

Shepard discusses many different incidents that all add up to indicating that the
maintenance of reputation was key to establishing a legitimate form of manhood in the
early modern era. Instances cited range from incidents of youthful exuberance, intended
to give young men the opportunity to ‘blow off steam’ ahead of taking on the expected
responsibilities of marriage and running a respected household (see Chapter 4) to an
assessment of gestures of disputed status (see Chapter 5), and gendered components of
honesty and reputation (see Chapter 6).
119 Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, p. 18.
120 (I.ii.16);
Anderson, Imagined Communities, p. 10.
 29

“death can raise fundamental issues of meaning for individuals, it also poses a threat to the continuity
and stability of the social order.” 121

In Act 1, Scene 2 Prospero recounts the events that lead to Miranda and himself washing up on the
island. The language used in this passage draws on images of parenting and pregnancy, turning
Prospero’s withdrawal to his library and his subsequent expulsion into something like a woman’s
‘confinement’ or ‘lying in’, “which rais’d in me [Prospero]/An undergoing stomach to bear up/ Against
what should ensue.”122 Whilst I agree with Thomas’ edition, to have the “stomach” to prevail means
possessing “staunch determination”, considering Prospero’s relocation acts as an opportunity for re-
birth and for him to be both father and mother to Miranda, the metaphor has additional relevance
regarding arguing for Prospero as a representative of hybrid masculinity. 123 In particular Prospero
represents the ability for affluent fathers to choose their parenting duties, relying on servants to fulfil
the more disagreeable parts of household management, but ultimately stands as “a summation of
Shakespeare’s ambivalent feelings about patriarchy.” 124

By employing the same mode of thought as the conduct books that promote cultivating a man’s
manners and mind like cultivating a fertile piece of land into something fruitful that will benefit state and
society, it is suggested that the educated mind (one like Prospero’s that can be made strong enough to
master the elements), encourages early modern men to be educated as part of gaining self-mastery,
on their route to achieving manhood.125 Without a son to mould into his own image, Prospero
concentrates on cultivating Miranda into a valuable crop that he intends to trade to achieve an
important alliance to safeguard his legacy. Prospero points out that Miranda has already proven to be
his saviour (“O, a cherubin/ Thou wast that did preserve me.” - I.ii.153-154), but she also provides him
with gainful employment as her schoolmaster, assisting the maintenance of her father’s manhood and
preventing his identity from lapsing into ‘impotence’.126 In return Miranda profits more “[t]han other
princes can that have more time/ For vainer hours, and tutors not so careful.”, by being taught “to

121 Murray, 2004, p. 123.

122 Grace, “Giving Birth in Jane Austen’s Day", n.pag.

I.ii.156-158.
123 Shakespeare, The Tempest, p. 71.
124 Prattes, “Caring Masculinities and Race”, p. 8;
Ford Davies, Shakespeare’s Fathers and Daughters, p. 146.

Caliban is employed to do all the heavy, physical work whilst Ariel manages surveillance
so Prospero still has time to devote to his own pursuits and the education of his daughter.
125 Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, pp. 186-188.
Akhimie devotes the whole book to expanding on the metaphor of cultivation, and its link
to the colonial mission. In particular, describing Prospero as an example of “marvellous
husbandry” – not cultivating the land, but by “the regulation of plenty in a fantastic
otherworld”, employing his “cultus animi” to cultivate a legacy for himself (p. 186).
126 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, p. 245.
 30

speak up, rather than being silent.” 127 By becoming both father and mother, and schoolmaster to
Miranda, Prospero inhabits a hybrid location – the stay-at-home-Dad who not only makes sure there is
food on the table but helps with homework too – but it does not do well to liken Prospero too closely to
any current contemporary models of masculinity because in doing so, the historical nuances of his
activities are lost. Better to keep him, as Shakespeare appears to intend, as stimulus for discussion
rather than a model to emulate.

Despite Prospero’s claim that he has been a careful tutor to his daughter, he has been careful to limit
the education he extends to Caliban, teaching Caliban enough language to aid communication but
denying him the opportunity of achieving his own manhood, primarily by being denied the opportunity
to people the island with his offspring. 128 This particular act of patriarchy, controlling breeding on the
island, continues to engage with what Akhimie identifies as the importance of the farming and land-
husbandry metaphor within colonialism but also with Ania Loomba’s observation about the
commonalities between the language of equestrianism and race, that links the language of horse
bloodlines with racism. 129 The threat of miscegenation must have felt very real at the time The
Tempest was written, brought about in part by the increase of social mobility, the assumed threat of
itinerant cultures like gypsies, and any misinformation that was circulating about the dangers of
producing a ‘dappled child’ that were also included in Arthurian legend. 130 It is important, despite the
clearly upsetting and inaccurate nature of these beliefs, to acknowledge the lived realities of people
that held these views in the early modern period, and think about them carefully in relation to the
opportunities we have today to counter such myths.

Like Hercules, discovering the horrors within Cacus’ lair, when Prospero realises, despite his and
Miranda’s efforts to educate Caliban, he remains capable of the sickening act of rape, “no violence can
be too great when one is dealing with a monster of such depravity.” 131 As Kahn points out, “Severe
physical punishment of children by parents and schoolmasters became widespread”, and despite
“deliberate insubordination” including “assertions of bravado rooted in the pursuit of illicit sex” being a
way of challenging patriarchal codes, “disciplinary correction claimed the legitimate use of violence in
order to reinforce patriarchal principles” with “Household heads . . . accorded primary responsibility for
disciplining their subordinates”. 132 Caliban’s treatment, whilst shocking to audiences today, would have
appeared completely justified at the time The Tempest was written, accurately reflecting the expected

127 I.ii.171-173;
Shin, “Single Parenting”, p. 382.

128 I.ii.351-352.
129 Loomba, Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism, p. 23.
130 Vaughan & Mason Vaughan, Shakespeare’s Caliban, pp. 34-36;
Loomba, “Race and the Possibilities of Comparative Critique”, p. 504;
Loomba, Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism, pp. 47-48.
131 Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, p. 180.
132 Kahn, Man’s Estate, pp. 15-16;
Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, Kindle loc. 1585.
 31

behaviour of a strong patriarch, and arguably somewhat lenient considering the attempted rape of a
Duke’s daughter, but as Prospero admits, “We cannot miss him; he does make our fire,/ Fetch in our
wood, and serves in offices/ That profit us.” 133 Without Caliban’s useful ‘offices’ Prospero and Miranda
would be forced to acquire the bodily marks of manual labour, something Prospero would do anything
to avoid in order to ‘save face’. 134 Instead Prospero punishes Caliban for an attack on Miranda’s
womanhood by reducing Caliban to female domestic duties, introducing the idea of atonement through
experiencing something of the early modern woman’s expected role.135 By limiting Caliban’s
opportunity to achieve his own legacy, Prospero stamps his authority as all-father over the story,
cementing his connection with the colonial master.

Chapter Conclusion
The middle aged single-father-statesman-exile-academic presented to us by Shakespeare is a multi-
faceted gestalt of manhood’s expectations as laid out in the conduct books of the day. The chief
identities performed by Prospero, their impact, and wider representation provide insight into how
masculinity was thought of in the early seventeenth century and how re-readings of the play, using
various different lenses to adjust the gaze, focus on how Shakespeare can still help articulate the
conflicts and illuminate some of the continuities between early modern and current notions of
manliness, providing fertile ground for productive reflection and open discussion about sensitive
topics. In a virtualized environment where abstraction can assist in dispersing the awkwardness that
comes with performing day-to-day roles, it is therefore possible to see how resolutions safely explored
and successfully acted out on stage can emanate and inform the improvement of strategies that
encourage nuanced masculinities instead of existing as strictly delineated boxes. In this way,
Shakespeare occupies a central location in culture, facilitating debate using a Socratic style method
(asking more questions than those he answers to engender the audience to make up their own
minds), whilst providing opportunities to learn from the past but in a present tense.

It is Shakespeare’s capacity to stimulate serious social debate whilst remaining an entertaining open
forum that fosters re-creation through reinterpretation and adaptation. Although Prospero is more often
allied with outdated forms of hegemonic masculinity, it is possible to identify Shakespeare’s politically
astute attempt at introducing progressive ideas in amongst the presentation of a superficially standard
father figure. The next two chapters will go on to further this discussion by considering how Prospero’s
influence evolves via the continued effects of colonialism and the repeated follies of patriarchal
mechanisms.

133 I.ii.312-314.
I am sure there are instances throughout history when men have killed for much less of a
transgression committed against them than this.
134 Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 41.
135 Shin, “Single Parenting”, pp. 379-380.
 32

Chapter 2 – Water With Berries 136

Give me instruction
Give me a target and a cause
Lend me destruction, because
Because it's okay
Because my past, it was a lie
It's never too late, to try
...
So put your trust in me
So I can show you how
To leave your past behind
So I can make you mine137

Introduction
The analysis moves forward more than 350 years, to the advent of postcolonialist writing and a
seminal re-working of Shakepeare’s play that foregrounds Caliban and not Prospero, George
Lamming’s Water With Berries. This novel considers the effects of paternalism in patriarchy and its
reliance on masculine anxiety, desire, gratitude, and surveillance, and the effects of female influence.
Lamming foregrounds the emasculation of living behind ‘the Veil’ of colonialism (presenting itself as
successful whilst attempting to explain away exploitation and hide inhumanity), by constructing three
anti-heroes and the events that unfold around them. 138 Utilizing a canonical text to strike towards the
heart of culture was necessary to change perspectives in the early 1970s; using the tools that assisted
colonialism to enable its demolition. 139

Water With Berries is an angry book; a modern confrontational appropriation. The slow burn of
repressed yet ultimately volcanic anger and frustration of three emigrant Caribbean men eventually

136 I would like to take a moment to acknowledge the passing of George Lamming that
occurred just months before my thesis submission. Rest in peace, assured that your work
lives on.
137 Tremonti (Tremonti), “Trust”.
138 Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folks, p. 122.
139 The effectiveness of this activity is questioned by ‘The Master's Tools Will Never
Dismantle the Master's House’ by Audre Lorde, something that seems necessary but also
unlikely given the concerns about the self-preserving activities observed within hybrid
masculinity, discussed in Chapter 3 - ‘What does it mean when the tools of a racist
patriarchy are used to examine the fruits of that same patriarchy? It means that only the
most narrow parameters of change are possible and allowable.’ (1984, p.1). Lamming
attempts to counter the prevalence of patriarchy by striking at the effects of Colonialism at
its heart, whilst also showing its effects on female agency, regardless of colour. Ultimately
Lamming’s book suffers from falling back on the now established stereotypes of black
brutality and female sacrifice, but is essential to my study of masculinity because of this.
 33

sprays out in acts of molten violence stemming from an inability to reconcile the past, process the
present, and create positive ways forward; they are unable to construct a satisfactory hybrid existence
in their adopted home. Whilst Aboim and Vasconcelos see migration as an opportunity to break away
and remake masculinity, Lamming’s book tells the story of the problematic nature of this reconstruction
and its pitfalls, concentrating more on what Harbi Mahdi Al-Azawi sees as “that sense of disconnection
and disorientation.”140 Teeton, Roger, and Derek travel to London from the fictional island of San
Cristobal, with hopes of achieving greater success and safety: Teeton escapes from custody following
involvement in local insurgent activities, facilitated by his wife, Randa; Derek leaves to ‘make it’ as an
actor among the bright lights of London’s West End; Roger abandons his life of affluence to emerge
out of his notorious father’s shadow, intent on a divergent legacy with his white American wife,
Nicole.141 Lamming’s three emigrants represent shards of Caliban, emasculated and arguably
feminized by colonialism. Located as third-class citizens below the white elite and their advocates,
unlike Caliban there is no “freedom, high-day” to celebrate at the end of the book, or the open
acknowledgment that the thrice-double asses have blindly followed a fatalistic path towards their own
doom.142 Instead of presenting his protagonists as everyday Orphic heroes that exhibit post-racial
resilience against the effects of colonialism arising from experiencing their relocation to the ‘mother
land’, Lamming presents a turning back towards satisfying the expectations of the dominant white
society by resorting to brutality. 143 As Roberts and Elliott state:
The characterization of boys and men in the margin as regressive and patriarchal impedes the
ability to address problems like violence, misogyny, and homophobia and overlooks the
possibilities for transformation that emerge among marginalized communities. 144
Lamming engages a constructed Caribbean literary tradition of glorifying the working poor/peasantry,
foregrounding the plight of the underdog and portraying stifled black masculinity, forced to extremes to
be noticed, but recreates dominant representations of boys and men from working-class margins,
typecast as backward looking non-progressives suffering from ingrained prenotions of their identity,
instead of showing them ‘springing back’ from adversity via productive collaboration. 145

140 Aboim & Vasconcelos, “Migration after empire”, p.1;

Harbi Mahdi Al-Azawi, “The Genesis of Violence and Self-Destruction”, p.20.
141 Sealey, “The Composite Community”, p. 26.
San Cristobal is constructed by Lamming as a composite representation of the
Caribbean, presenting something of a romanticized united front focused on achieving
independence from colonial ties, but also a satirical koint about a British outlook that all
people of the Caribbean islands appear the same, despite their retention of diversity that
embraces what Sealey states about composite community.
142 III.i.182;
V.i.297.
143 Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 16.
144 Roberts & Elliott, “Challenging Dominant Representations”, p. 87.
145 Rosenberg, “39 The Canon/Canonicity”, p. 348;

Roberts & Elliott, “Challenging Dominant Representations”, p. 88;

Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 16.
 34

Despite the problematic nature of Lamming’s representation of backlash, the novel voices the ‘angry
young man’ closely associated with the post-war era, but instead of 1950s Jimmy or Archie Rice the
1970s subaltern speaks, expressing disillusionment, made impotent by indecision and stasis,
questioning their place in the world and the world’s effect on them, “curiously sewn together into a
transparency by denegations”. 146 Choosing to split Caliban three ways, Lamming exemplifies W. E. B
Du Bois’ insight that “ . . . race and racism are multidimensional, polyvocal, and ever changing, and
consequently require varied kinds of criticism and conceptual counter-attacks.”147 Lamming creates a
post-war platform for unpacking the masculinity that created colonialism (and vice versa), describing it
engulfing its victims, black and white, male and female. Colonialism sits like a smouldering mountain,
ever present and threatening and no-one in the book is spared the effects of its long shadow.
Lamming’s use of words associated with violence, legislative language, and judgement maintains
tension throughout, rising to a peak in the final pages, encapsulated by Derek’s realization that mirrors
the effects of colonialism: “It was his fraudulent stewardship of other people’s lives which had brought
such appalling disaster on everyone.” 148 The fetid atmosphere of surveillance and hidden secrets
augmented by feelings of repression and expected failure coming from the lower classes spotlights
their entrapment in elite white patriarchal masculinity’s created systems that control and contain
society, rather than facilitating integration and liquid identities.

Patriarchy and Surveillance

Within the text, qualities of intrigue and distrust commonly associated with traditional romance and spy
novels arises from the taught action – all the characters watch each other, second-guess each other,
make assumptions, as well as micro-managing their own thoughts and behaviour. The exchanges that
take place in the Mona bar are summarized early on in the novel: “Hardly an angry word might pass in
that pub, but what a cremation of character took place over the passing drink.”149 The possibility of
‘being caught between the tongues of the Mona firing squad’ aptly expresses the atmosphere of being
constantly watched and assessed by a judgemental community, easily turned from advocacy to
adversary.150 The microscopic attention Lamming pays not just to what people say but how what they
say is carefully crafted before its utterance, or even withheld, fearing its interpretation, is a key factor in
the creation of the novel’s oppressive atmosphere contaminated by overthinking.

As part of surveillance, Lamming creates observant mediators as the regulating parental voice, the
knowledgeable advisor that Anderson and Manning identify as intersecting with the colonizer, as an
important agent of interpreting truth (something the colonial enterprise relies upon to create itself as

146 Callow, “How John Osborne’s Entertainer still speaks to a broken Britain”, n.pag.
Spivak, Can the Subaltern Speak? p. 24.
147 Rabaka, Du Bois A Critical Introduction, p. 46.
148 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 266.
149 Ibid, p. 40.
150 Ibid.
 35

authority, present in the insistence on learning its languages). 151 The Mona bar is full of them, packed
with opinions; a place where truth is constructed, and ‘official’ masculinity performed; where the
publican is seen “as a standard of reference” and other men “were no more than a calculated
diplomacy whose end was approval”. 152 A notable exchange takes place between Jeremy (San
Cristobal cultural attaché and Mission official) and Teeton, where Teeton is watching Jeremy for any
micro-expressions or key phrases that will reveal the true cause lying behind their encounter. Teeton
assumes Jeremy’s true mission is to uncover Teeton’s plans, when the most devastating part of their
encounter isn’t the likelihood of Jeremy detecting Teeton’s renewed links to the Secret Gathering,
instead his parting shot is, ‘“That Randa died . . .” . . . “Suicide,” Jeremy concluded on a note of brutal
triumph.”153 From the moment he enters the bar, Jeremy announces what version of masculinity he
performs:
Jeremy hesitated. There was an obvious show of national pride in his obstinacy. He was proud
of everything which distinguished him from the publican. He was determined to spend his
money according to his taste. 154
Lamming is saying money talks; money gives Jeremy legitimacy and the confidence to be arrogant
and particular about his requirements. Jeremy (a mutated Ariel), has achieved status within a realm
populated by English bureaucrats and ‘city men’; creating a mature masculinity for himself faithful to
both sides of the colonial veil – a successful hybrid that incorporates the resistance to remaining in the
background insisted by Du Bois and Spivak, and answering back to the establishment like Lamming,
addressing “. . . a complex strategy of reform, regulation and discipline”. 155 Despite Jeremy’s hybridity,
his problematic existence exudes masculinity’s need to compete in even the smallest ways. The
meeting with Teeton resembles a gun fight, rather than ‘“. . . trying to renew [a] friendship,”’ with the
two men verbally circling each other, testing each other’s ability to hold their fire until they can deliver
the most piercing attack:
“Are you working on something to do with the sea?”
“I’ve given up painting,” said Teeton.
Jeremy looked astonished. It was as though a healthy pair of eyes had asked to be made
blind.156
Jeremy’s question appears metaphorical, its true meaning being ‘Are you planning on returning to San
Cristobal?’, which Teeton fends off by treating the question literally. The astonishment Jeremy displays
is both mock and actual surprise, responding to both meanings lodged within his question, reflecting
the mimicry and mockery that Bhabha states distinguishes the exchanges at the ambivalent fulcrum

151 Anderson, Imagined Communities, pp. 13-18;

Manning, “Out of the Clear”, n.pag.
152 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 104.
153 Ibid, pp. 107-127.
154 Ibid, p. 110.
155 Bhabha, The Location of Culture, p. 122.
156 Lamming, p. 109.
 36

between the colonizer-colonized relationship. 157 Jeremy is probing Teeton, attempting to appeal to his
bruised masculinity by suggesting re-joining his comrades in arms would shrug off Teeton’s coat of
desertion to reveal a true masculine heroic emblem. Lamming uses the metaphor of blindness to
question why Teeton would squander his artistic talent and also why he would reside in London, a
situation created out of his wife’s self-sacrifice and not his own, retreating from a cause he is so
passionate about back in the Caribbean. The tightly packed meaning in this exchange contains
various implications for Teeton’s masculine self-image, confirming he resents women’s influence
because he is a man that thinks he should be master of his own destiny, but ultimately falls foul of
blinkered fatalism generated by the colonial past and patriarchy.

Surveillance is emblematic of the Foucaultian patriarchal panopticon personified by Prospero and

discussed in Chapter 1, something Lamming also employs to place emphasis on the paternalistic gaze
that controls as an inner conscience/regulator and as outside voices associated with advice and
authority.158 Women and men are part of the patriarchal systems of surveillance in Water With Berries,
chiefly portrayed by the overly attentive Old Dowager. Initially relenting to the presence of a tree trunk
in Teeton’s room, the Old Dowager uses it to retain close access to her lodger and his activities: “It
was their game, an example of the formula they had made for being together.” 159 Obsessively cleaning
and checking the tree trunk for any signs of infestation that might cause damage mirrors the Old
Dowager’s attitude towards Teeton – she doesn’t want him damaging her house/reputation in any way;
her appearance of care and attention masks her pure self-interest, embodying the Colonial enterprise
in a composite Prospero-Prospero’s wife. Patriarchy is therefore all-enveloping and intended to create
anxieties by interpolating people towards constant value judgements, weighing and measuring them
against established norms, generating competition, that by extension feeds colonial enterprise, and
the functioning of hegemonic masculinity, sometimes at great personal cost. 160 By placing the Old
Dowager within the patriarchal mechanism, Lamming compounds the confrontational binarism
between black masculinity and traditional feminine models within a post-colonial context by making
women appear complicit in the neutering force of white colonial patriarchy.

Conflicted Identity
Water With Berries can be read as an ‘anti-colonial’ book and also, against Lamming’s intentions, an
‘anti-male’ book that invests in the patriarchal dividend because of its treatment of women. 161 Connell
goes on to suggest “men’s relationships with particular women or children, or groups including women
and children define interests that are stronger than their shared interest as men,” supporting the

157 Bhabha, The Location of Culture, pp. 122-123.

158 Buckbinder, Studying Men and Masculinities, p. 80.
159 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 33.
160 Buckbinder, Studying Men and Masculinities, p. 80;
Connell, The Men and The Boys, Kindle loc. 246.
161 Connell, The Men and The Boys, Kindle loc. 487;
Eisen & Yamashita, “Borrowing from Femininity”, p. 806;
Knuttila, Paying for Masculinity, pp. 4-5.
 37

portrayal of Derek’s dichotomy – his loyalty to both Roger and Roger’s wife Nicole, over Roger’s
accusations of infidelity and the subsequent abortion plans.162 Derek displays his masculinity in the
form of a keenness for reason, justice and chivalry, requiring evidence of Nicole’s infidelity: “He had to
clear the air; to make sure that he hadn’t misplaced a trust”. 163 Derek’s interest in truth, not
supposition, creates an opportunity for Lamming to inject irony – Derek seeks the truth about others,
but is not prepared to deal with the truth about himself, which ultimately leads to his downfall. Derek’s
reticence to elevate himself to an authority/advice figure suggests his masculinity has become
feminised by his familiarity with subjection, something Derek is wary of exacerbating by increasing his
level of intimacy with Roger. Lamming shows through Derek’s actions an intention to avoid recreating
himself paternalistically, mirroring Roger’s rejection of fatherhood by insisting Nicole aborts her
pregnancy. Lamming therefore demonstrates the depth to which colonialism shapes the black man’s
behaviour. Derek is left in limbo, unable to provide constructive advice to reassure Roger because of
his fear of intimacy, and unable to support Nicole for fear of being accused of being her lover or siding
with ‘the enemy’. Instead Derek and Roger focus on attempting to facilitate eradication of the in-
between (symbolised by Nicole’s pregnancy), by arranging an abortion, but in doing so unknowingly
elide themselves with early modern matrons who “policed the bodies of unmarried women for signs of
illegitimate pregnancy”. 164 By focusing on the outward trigger rather than the inward dichotomy,
Lamming presents a view of black masculinity hog-tied by its inability to swap vengeance for virtue,
and preferring aborting a child than accepting evidence of a hybrid existence.

The three central anti-heroes follow a tragic arc, more reminiscent of Richard III, Macbeth, Hamlet,
and Othello (a role Derek has played) than The Tempest, creating a story intersected with encounters
and reports that pile a pyre of incendiary events underneath them, building their reasons for reacting.
Their journey includes no respite from their racialized existence, navigating microaggressions
contained in verbal and non-verbal language that constantly confirms their status, epitomized by Derek
and Roger self-consciously policing their behaviour in the Mona bar, and insightfully described by the
Old Dowager as nothing but reaffirming binary splits between sections of society shifting depending on
whether they agree or disagree. 165 Lamming uses tragedy as representative of the colonial trap – the
three men split apart by their own indecision, pride, and jealousy, condemned to enact the role of

162 Connell, The Men and The Boys, Kindle loc. 612;
Lamming, Water With Berries, pp. 98-99 & pp. 150-151.
The landmark Roe v. Wade decision came just 2 years after Water With Berries was first
published, in a time considered less progressive than the 21st century, and yet the
decision has just been repealed, returning women in the U.S. to Nicole’s position – bodies
ruled by anyone but themselves (Blackman & Supreme Court Of The United States;
Donegan, “Roe v Wade has been overturned”, n.pag).
163 Lamming, p.147
164 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, Kindle loc. 95.
165 Peterson, “Micro Aggressions and Connections in the Context of National
Multiculturalism”, p. 1404;
Lamming, p. 78-80 & pp. 42-43.
 38

colonialism’s bogeymen, the monstrous men of violence, the role of bully learned from a lifetime of
being bullied. Whilst I cannot bring myself to condone their actions, I can understand them.

Despite Lamming’s attempt to construct Teeton, Derek, and Roger as devoid of individual agency,
pressured into irrationality by their conditioning, it is difficult to react entirely sympathetically towards a
murderer, a rapist, and an arsonist. The hints at possible alternative paths for the men build the reader
to moments of potential promise but Lamming only uses them to increase the impact of their tragedy,
like the encounter with Myra on the heath that could result in Teeton actually participating in a version
of the Ceremony of the Souls to unburden himself from the baggage of the past, instead of only
reflecting on its significance. 166 Each man resists what is within their own power – to reconcile
themselves with their own past actions and preconceptions, and look within themselves for ways they
can achieve personal success, if only in relatively small, private ways. Instead they deflect their
anxieties and personal failings outwards, to fulfil masculinity’s desire for attention and display,
channelled into violence against white women, emblematic of colonial bounty and their ultimate
constructed opposite; re-enacting the defiling of their own country by destroying the white man’s
greatest treasure.

Truth is closely associated with justice, a highly prominent part of the post-colonial and decolonial
agendas, and present in Lamming’s repeated use of language loaded with judgement and related
terminology throughout the novel, but particularly prevalent during the two accounts of Teeton meeting
Myra on the heath, an inverted confessional, taking place outside in an open secular space but with
the same intimacy and opportunity for absolution. In these encounters Lamming stresses Teeton’s
feelings of being judged, and convincing himself agency is denied because of the accumulated actions
of his life, and its circumstances:
He was repenting the charge against himself. He heard a verdict which seemed to make any
future effort just short of redemption. He was cut off; he had cut himself off by a fugitive act. 167
Teeton not only feels cut off from any deep sense of heritage because of the activities of colonialism
but also cut off from achieving manhood by the neutering actions of his wife and the Old Dowager,
firstly taking charge over his release from jail, and subsequently governing his living space in London.
The women act as a hinge of betweenness that challenges and confuses its other interpretations, by
aligning it with the activities of the colonizer rather than as the productive location of intermixing.
Lamming creates Randa, the Old Dowager, Nicole, and Myra as representative of collaboration but not
collaboration in order to realise cooperation – rather they become representative of unforgivable
collaboration with the enemy, in their interaction with white colonial power. 168 Reading betweenness in

166 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 129.

167 Ibid, p. 167.
168 The main female characters in Water With Berries are all cast as violated and unfaithful
colluders. Randa has an affair with the American Ambassador to secure her husband’s
release from jail; Nicole is a white American and representative of the new empire of US
influence; the Old Dowager is the widow of a plantation owner; Myra is the Old Dowager’s
daughter.
 39

this way explains how patriarchy is able to squeeze itself into every crevice of operation, engaging in
dialectic pragmatism, enabling and preserving its power-mongering persistence at the fulcrum of
binarism, creating the tension observed by both Fanon and Bhabha in their appreciation of a state
without stability for the colonized emigrant, pulling back and forth within a relationship defined by
creating and breaking with dependence. 169 Lamming’s intention to convey how problematic it is for the
colonized to distance himself from the colonizer’s activities, even on the everyday level, reveals it as a
paranoiac preoccupation, colouring every action, reaction, and relationship.

Neutered Masculinity
The pressure cooker effect that is generated and spreads out pre-eruptive tremors that fracture the
story’s characters is caused by the accumulated instances that contribute to Teeton, Derek, and Roger
feeling emasculated and denied the acquisition of manhood. Manhood in early modern England was a
prerequisite for attaining total agency within society dependent first on age but also political, social,
financial, and sexual success, values that continue through into Lamming’s era.170 Lamming’s novel
projects the 1970s attempts to learn but more often fend off the progressivism the 1960s promised.
Television and films still largely concentrated on the muscle-bound heterosexual white male riding to
the rescue with alternative forms of masculinity designed to be either comic or threatening. 171 It is
therefore unsurprising, given Water With Berries was published in 1971, that its emphasis is mostly
from the male view. In addition, Lamming employs nationalism to provide the opportunity for Teeton’s,
Derek’s, and Roger’s actions to be viewed as part of a political struggle, the fight for the underdog to
be heard, therefore increasing the emphasis on a return to promoting masculinity as the warrior/hero,
not the political mediator Lamming equates with the colonizer and femininity.

Lamming’s novel chiefly concentrates on the problems created when masculinity is placed on a level
of subservience historically associated with the female, but feminine agency is also prominent but in
very limited ways. The novel reflects that women were still considered largely disposable and
disregarded at the time Lamming was writing, when they offer an important alternative view to
blinkered masculine mindsets that trap men into pursuing unachievable archetypes that keep them
from a broad range of self-development options. 172 Negatively equating non-Christian and other than
white races with previously constructed pejoratives derived from classist and sexist ideologies creates
race as ‘a highly malleable category’ and a tangled system of complex interrelated terms intended to

169 Bridges & Pascoe, “Hybrid Masculinities”, p. 249;

Buchbinder, Studying Men and Masculinities, p. 134;
Loomba, Colonialism/Postcolonialism, pp. 174-176.
170 Shepard, Meanings of Manhood, Kindle loc. 288.
171 Perhaps one of the few exceptions being Star Trek, whose inclusivity and innovative
character and plot lines began to introduce more progressive ideas steadily whilst still
providing enough butchness and ‘eye-candy’ for traditionalists (see Slomka, n.pag.
amongst an array of other sources that delve into this topic).
172 Faludi remarks that women are accustomed to navigating the location of The Other, so it
is surprising that ‘othered’ men are not more open to learning from those experiences –
Faludi, Stiffed, p. 13.
 40

contribute to the preservation of subservience for whoever is assigned the location of Other, rendering
them uncultivated despite their location often within social multiplicity that relies on tolerance for its
sustenance.173 For masculinity to be framed within this picture creates a paradoxical pressure cooker
that fuels the action within Lamming’s novel. How can a gender that is used to being the driving force
come to terms with subservience or compromise? This question is asked and answered by
Shakespeare, observed in Prospero’s journey from vengeance to virtue, but arguably inverted and
denied to Lamming’s characters.

Lamming believes that the interdependence that forms between the colonizer and the colonized must
be violently broken apart if the colonized are to rise up and rebound from their past, but women
become sacrificial scapegoats instead of collaborative partners in the struggle to change patriarchy’s
path.174 This particularly resonates through the failed marriages in the story, where Teeton and Roger
appear embarrassed by Randa’s and Nicole’s dynamism. The two women use their bodies to give
birth to new opportunities. Randa’s affair with the American Ambassador to safeguard Teeton, and
Nicole’s mixed race pregnancy are both intended to represent the breaking Lamming calls for but
instead their husbands regress, unable to resolve and relinquish the past's hold over them because it
is an identity they understand. Despite everything, Teeton and Roger (Derek too) appear stuck in the
mode of children of the colonial father, an identity so familiar it remains preferable to an unknown
future, framing them as fighters for a cause and involving the thrill of the chase. If they accept the new
life the actions of their wives offer, the chase is concluded and they remain emasculated because their
wives have engineered the win, not the men. The men insist on seeing the actions of their wives as
betrayals, robbing their husbands of their ‘moment’, causing them to ‘lose face’ in pursuit of
recognition, rather than seeing avenues to positive alternative lifestyles. 175

The male view is determined and influenced by its opposing but also parallel female partner, yet the
binary construction of gender sets male and female against each other, dissuading both from
collaboration with each other. Lamming uses this to construct his female characters as effective
agents of colonial neutering, contributing to Teeton’s, Derek’s, and Roger’s feelings of suffocation,
suggesting true freedom is “achieved only through an act of violence directed at the female body.” 176
The main female characters (Randa, Nicole, Myra, and the Old Dowager) all take action against the
three men equating to denying them ‘man points’ to count towards the acquisition of manhood. 177

173 Loomba, Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism, pp. 2-7;

Akhimie, Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference, p. 209;
Roberts & Elliott, “Challenging Dominant Representations”, pp. 91-92.
174 Kent, “A Conversation with George Lamming”, p. 91.
175 Appearing to take over masculine leadership by ‘wearing the trousers’, indicative of the
threat felt by men experiencing the new wave of women’s liberation that took place in the
post-war era – see Faludi, Stiffed, p. 14.
176 Simones da Silva, The Luxuary of National Despair, p. 173.
177 Eisen & Yamashita, “Borrowing from Femininity”, p. 804;
 41

Taking charge in one form or another challenges masculinity in general but the three men see it as a
further act of repression, reflecting female characters devised in other works by Lamming who “reject
the dependence on male authorization”. 178 The overall effect is to push masculinity into
overdetermination – to hypermasculine acts of violence that unleash the release of an angry, abused
child magnified many times over, conforming to perpetuating the stereotypes Rogers and Elliott find so
damaging to perceptions of marginalized men. 179 This macho response is also part of what Mercer
identifies as part of the fetishisation of the black male body (something also present in Teeton’s
relationship with the Old Dowager), that marries sex with violence in the story. 180 The men are
ultimately jealous of the action the women have taken to exercise and take back some control for
themselves, compounding their anxieties regarding powerlessness when masculinity demands the
acquisition and display of power. They do not consider the women part of what Bhabha considers as
the opening up of a ‘third space’ of hybridity in which to formulate a new and productive existence,
‘branching off’ away from the determinations of either traditional masculinity or colonial discourse. 181

Out of Control and Out of Step

Colonialism projects the idea that the colonized don’t have either the knowledge or intelligence to
either control themselves or take charge of and use their resources to their fullest potential, fulfilling
what A. J. Simoes da Silva recognises as “. . . the colonizer’s reductive image of the colonized as
incapable of shaping their own future.”182 Dipesh Chakrabarty talks about the belatedness that the
colonizer depends on, together with its activities as interpreter/mediator controlling knowledge and
information dissemination (particularly relevant to the process of appropriating Shakespeare as it
continues to frame Lamming as learning from the colonizer); it relies on persuading the colonized they
are backward/behind-the-times/obscene, creating the first stages of dependency that places the
colonizer at the top and the colonized below, but is also transpositional, with child being capable of
teaching its parent, in the quasi-parental structure demonstrated in Chapter 1. 183 In Shakespeare’s
The Tempest, the colonial-parent Prospero acts with good timing (aided by Ariel), controls the action,
and achieves his desired outcomes. In Water With Berries the instances of missed opportunities,
delay, and repressed responses combine to enhance the action’s runaway-train momentum, with
neither Teeton, Derek, nor Roger having the ability to apply the brakes or find other ways to relieve
pressure that safeguard them from boiling over into violent outbursts. The female influences that had

Swan, Man Points, p. 8. Whilst I recognise that Swan’s book is humorous rather than
academic, it makes a valid point about masculine perceptions that still circulate in society.
178 Simones da Silva draws attention to Lillian in The Emigrants and Fola in Season of
Adventure but the same is true of Nicole, Randa, Myra, and the Old Dowager – The
Luxuary of National Despair, p. 45 & p. 116.
179 Rogers & Elliott, “Challenging Dominant Representations”, p. 88.
180 Mercer, Welcome to the Jungle, p. 134.
181 Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 10-12.
182 Simoes da Silva, p. 200.
183 Chakrabarty, The Crises of Civilization, Kindle loc. 578.
 42

attempted to temper the situation only stoked the fires (in Roger’s case, literally and figuratively),
perceived as meddlers not menders, "there is no place in the new Caribbean society for an equally
active female subject.”184 This lack of control therefore feeds the colonial assumption they are the
saviours, which doesn’t help Lamming’s cause towards arguing for independence however without
colonial interference, there would be no need for Lamming to state his case, but it is the denial of the
female that is the defining factor in the downfall of Teeton, Derek, and Roger (discussed throughout
this chapter), compounded by the effects of the suppressive conditions engendered by the actions of
colonialism. The deep seated need for revenge resonates loudest and prevents the central characters
from finding a more virtuous course.

Each of the following character oriented sections points out key aspects of Lamming’s form and
content of Water With Berries that channel its Shakespearean influence whilst also communicating
Lamming’s intention to foreground the neutering effects of colonialism that prevent the three central
characters from obtaining manhood, forcing them into destructive Herculean acts rather than Orphic
acts of harmonious reconciliation. The sections also continue the discussion on the effects of the
resonating parental voice, how it manifests itself internally and externally, and controls actions,
reaction, and lack of action, trapping the central characters in a no-man’s-land of negative
ambivalence instead of progressive reconciliation.

Teeton
Teeton is the first character Lamming introduces. The book opens with a positive outlook, “ . . . this
black dawn erupting from the heart of September.” 185 There is the suggestion of a new beginning for
Teeton, a black man on the verge of a fresh start. The breaking up of the old empire and the
dissipation of the influence of white men in grey suits is metaphorically projected into the weather
conditions, "The fog was breaking up.”186 It suggests the muffling pall of negative influence is
beginning to lift, and the sunshine of Caribbean independence will shine through. Hope is also implicit
in “growing without much notice from anyone”, and “a plant which had defied some foreign soil”. 187
There is a note of success by quiet yet consistently applied effort. The use of “defied” is significant. By
using this word, Lamming is already introducing ideas of struggle, fighting against the odds and
despite opposition, despite assumed unfavourable conditions, introducing Teeton as heroic (even
before the reader learns of Teeton’s involvement with the underground movement, the Secret
Gathering).188 The phrase, “coming to fruition without a name” suggests the plant has survived without
being claimed, free and unlabelled, it can exist untroubled in its patch of ground, creating a connection
with acts of unnaming by prominent black activists like Malcolm X and like Césaire does in his revision

184 Simoes da Silva, The Luxuary of National Despair, p. 164.

185 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 31.
186 Ibid.
187 Ibid.
188 Ibid, p. 36.
 43

of The Tempest.189 Lamming presents Teeton as someone who wants to be as rooted as a plant,
grounded and sure of itself.

Alone, in his room, Teeton therefore appears self-assured and dynamic, but as Lamming takes us on a
cinematic pan around Teeton’s room, the reader is made aware of the prominence of colonialism, “. . .
a white plaster head of Columbus on the mantelpiece.” 190 The presence of the bust seems odd and
introduces the fact that despite being where he lives, the room is not Teeton’s. Reflecting his own
country’s experience as ruled by Britain, Teeton’s room is part of Mrs. Gore-Britain’s house (her name
suggesting the bloody struggle of the colonial project). Columbus commands attention, once more
demonstrating the presence of “everyday racism” associated with living “Under the Veil” (Lamming’s
apt choice for the title of the second part of his novel), fulfilling Lamming’s intention to make the
suffocating influence of colonialism explicit. 191 The bust also makes the gender bias in the story
explicit; men dominate. The black tree trunk salvaged from the garden stands in contrast to the bust.
Reminiscent of the tree the tramps dream of using to hang themselves in Waiting for Godot, it also
conjures up connections to Billie Holiday’s song, “Strange Fruit”, as well as its more obvious
association with Ariel’s prison in The Tempest.192 Another black figure in the room and representative
of nature rather than nurture, it is possible to imagine Teeton sometimes talking to and confiding in it.
As an extension of himself, the tree is described in human terms – likening the branches to arms and
the splits like ribs – the tree is Teeton’s twin moving from outside colonialism to sitting within it, a visual
reminder of Teeton’s double-consciousness as man and black-man.193

The control Mrs. Gore-Britain (most frequently referred to as the Old Dowager) exercises over Teeton,
demonstrates that patriarchy is not the exclusive province of the heterosexual male. 194 The Old
Dowager embodies the “dial-a-man” strategy of the white female who keeps patriarchy in her back
pocket to do her bidding, but the strategy is ultimately doomed to fail because patriarchy only serves
itself – the Old Dowager is just as much a pawn in patriarchy’s game as Teeton. 195 The Old Dowager
has inveigled her way, passive-aggressively, into retaining access to Teeton’s room and by extension
to Teeton. The odd thing about their relationship is Teeton’s complicity in its maintenance; he is fully

189 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 31;

Césaire, A Tempest, p. 20.
190 Lamming, p. 32.
191 Rabaka, Du Bois A Critical Introduction, p. 42;
Peterson, “Micro Aggressions”, p. 1404;
Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p. 3.
192 Beckett, Waiting for Godot, p.93;
ReelinInTheYears66, “Strange Fruit”.
193 Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folks, p. 6.
194 Loomba, Colonialism/Postcolonialism, p. 89.
Also evidenced by the numerous writings on Margaret Thatcher (like those of Stuart Hall
and Beatrix Campbell), and my own experience of growing up in the Thatcher era.
195 Hesse, “‘Karens’ try to make unequal power structures work for them”, n.pag.
 44

aware, “It was their game”, but he feels trapped by its “rules”. 196 It is not until the second half of the
book when the rules are abandoned, but only when the Old Dowager changes the game by spiriting
Teeton away to Scotland in an effort to safeguard her reputation whilst also tightening her controlling
grip on Teeton, after Nicole’s dead body is discovered in Teeton’s room. 197 Here, Lamming portrays
colonialism as a well-meaning old lady paving the road to hell with her good intentions. 198 It is this
hybrid state the Old Dowager inhabits of doting maternity and dominating father-figure that Teeton
cannot resolve. The Old Dowager represents the emasculating power of colonialism, embodying
Lamming’s view of Prospero as ‘some malevolent old bitch with a bad conscience’. 199

Like Prospero, the Old Dowager constantly makes the reader aware of her power to give by taking
power away from Teeton, taking charge over their relationship, but Teeton also uses this to his
advantage to limit who gets close to him (for example, asking the Old Dowager to fend off interest from
a journalist and photographer, to stop them from digging into his past, resulting from a spike in interest
due to his forthcoming art exhibition). 200 Whilst colonialism is undoubtedly “like an illness” for Teeton, it
also has a commensalism that Teeton and the Old Dowager enjoy initially but it becomes parasitic,
with the Old Dowager living off Teeton’s presence: “The Exhibition was like a reward for every service
she had rendered him; and the invitation to tea was a testament of his devotion to her.” 201 Teeton
seeks freedom from both the Old Dowager and what she represents, but not in order to progress –
Teeton feels compelled to return to what he thinks is unfinished business back on San Cristobal,
confirming a confusing commitment to repossessing the past and not resolving it, retaining
colonialism’s (and by extension patriarchy’s) grip on him by succumbing to vengeance and not virtue.
Through Teeton, Lamming projects the will to be free from the mental bondage and emasculation of
colonialism, free from the overbearing presence of a quasi-parental control, free from being treated
like a child, but ultimately unable to cut the ties because of his resistance to fully embracing the
opportunity his wife’s sacrifice offers.

Derek
The character of Derek is a professional actor whose only activity is inactivity; playing corpses on-
stage encapsulates the reduction of blackness to being seen but not heard performed to an audience,
and unwilling to address his agent’s failure to secure him better roles. 202 As mentioned in Chapter 1,
professional success was part of achieving manhood in early modern England (and remains a defining

196 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 33.

197 Ibid, p. 190.
198 Although this phrase is sometimes attributed to Johnson and Virgil, the phrase has
passed beyond any authorship and become a commonly uttered proverb.
199 Lamming, The Pleasures of Exile, p.99.
200 Lamming, Water With Berries, pp. 179-184.
201 Ibid, p. 113;
Ibid, p. 184.
202 Franklin, “Invisibility Syndrome and Racial Identity Development”, p.761.
 45

factor in today’s perceptions of masculinity) – this absence emasculates Derek. 203 Lamming uses
Derek to characterise someone visibly on scene but who retains invisibility; so acclimatised to rejection
that he is content to make a living out of death: ‘“Death is my bank.”’204 Initially Lamming creates
Derek as a happy-go-lucky character, making jokes about his ignoble state (like the smiling minstrel
derided by the stranger encountered by Roger), taking pride in the nuance of pose he applies to each
part he plays; like the victims of slavery, death has become second-nature.205 Lamming points out his
outrage at how the colonized are lulled into accepting such a low station in life, finding it comfortingly
normal to be left with only crumbs to feed on. The soporific effect of subjection and dependence
denudes Derek of the capacity to take risks, to the point of inaction in preference for experiencing
more failure: ‘“The only way to avoid failure is to avoid flaws. Which is just a way of saying that you
won’t do anything at all.”’ 206 Avoidance of taking control and absence of dynamism places Derek in
direct opposition to heroic masculinity, confirming colonialism’s need to feminize black men to exert
control over them.

Derek once played Othello, symbolic of the fall of the heroic black man destroyed by jealousy, allowing
himself to be persuaded that his white wife, Desdemona, is having an affair. Despite Lamming’s
intention for Derek to reflect the orphaned Caliban (Derek was brought up by the Church in San
Cristobal), Derek’s attempts to mediate between Roger and his wife Nicole includes shades of Iago by
allowing Roger to succumb to his paranoia over Nicole’s pregnancy. Eventually Derek’s inner turmoil
over his inability to help his friend and resolve his own feelings towards his actions results in a descent
to nihilism, resulting in raping a white female co-actor onstage in front of a live audience. 207 This
desperate attempt by Derek to release himself from inaction and place himself centre stage, in the
spotlight where he can be seen and heard, is a hypermasculine tantrum provoked by prolonged
colonial emasculation – going far beyond Spivak’s request to let the subaltern speak. 208 By doing so,
Derek reverts to how Othello is perceived by the other characters in Shakespeare’s play, the rampant
sexual predator that finishes what Caliban intended for Miranda. This supports Kobena Mercer’s view
that by fetishizing the black male body, black men are coerced into hypermasculine, macho
performances of masculinity by the expectations placed upon them by the colonizer.209 Whilst Mercer’s
view cannot justify rape, it does chart the circumstances that might provoke it.

Roger
The inability to reconcile the twin legacies of an overbearing father and the influences of colonialism
are Roger’s burden. Like the other two ‘Calibans’, Roger’s masculinity is fractured by anxieties

203 Buchbinder, Studying Men and Masculinities, p. 5.

204 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 88.
205 Ibid, p. 91.
206 Ibid, p. 95.
207 Ibid, p. 268.
208 Spivak, Can the Subaltern Speak? pp. 27-28.
209 Mercer, Welcome to the Jungle, p. 143.
 46

concerning what he believes he should portray. Lamming creates Roger as someone actively seeking
an escape from the suffocation of privilege, leaving behind his success as a pianist in favour of
‘slumming it’ with Derek. By constructing Roger’s character in this way, Lamming draws attention to
colonialism’s suppression and eradication of black expression, blanketing the Caribbean with the
colonizer’s ways and ideals, reflected in Prospero’s initial treatment of Caliban. Despite his musicality,
Roger (unlike Caliban) is deaf to the music of the islands; he finds no inspiration there, apart from the
inspiration to leave which likens his actions to Caliban seeking a more benevolent master: “There was
only sound of fury and noise conferred on the landscape from outside.” 210 In addition, Roger achieves
what Caliban is denied, he achieves a marriage to a white woman, Nicole, providing an answer to the
question, ‘What if Caliban had ended up with Miranda?’

Instead of the happy romance of Ferdinand and Miranda, Roger becomes Othello and Caliban;
jealous and disbelieving of his wife’s capacity to adjust completely to life in a mixed relationship,
preferring to believe Nicole has been unfaithful and is carrying another man’s child. Roger and his
marriage represent the continued fears of miscegenation, but interestingly from the other than white
side of the racial divide. Nicole’s fantasy affair also manifests because Roger wants to cut all ties with
his own father, including resisting becoming a father himself. This resistance creates a neutering
paradox – Roger prepares to deny himself his own legacy because of his inability to see himself as
completely separate from his father (mirrored by the creative impotence he experiences, unable to
write new music to support his marriage financially), governed by the constructed and as yet
unresolved reticence over committing to full integration into a mixed existence. Roger is colonized in
every sense – haunted by his father’s example and his upbringing, whilst pregnant with fear of
appearing traitorous by collaborating with the offspring of the colonizer and living against his father’s
wishes. Roger, like Teeton, is therefore unable to let go of the past whilst attempting to fight against it
because he cannot relinquish his old identity for one shaped by the actions of a woman.

Chapter Conclusion
Teeton, Roger, and Derek all react like bears being baited, tied to their past and being continually
snapped at by the surrounding society, provoking them into lashing out; inhabiting the central location
expected of masculinity and revealing its vulnerability to attack. 211 Left alone at the centre of things
means no matter how well defended you are, if the majority opinion lies beyond your walls, you will be
overcome by its pressure. In this way Teeton, Roger, and Derek are what Lamming concedes about
himself, that they are both Prospero and Caliban. 212 There lies their paradoxical location and the nub
of their tragedy. Teeton, Derek, and Roger are unable to resolve their individual relationship with
patriarchal power because of their preformed perception of their agency, even made incapable of fully
committing to fraternal support. Desire for individual power and the fight against the internalised

210 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 92.

211 Klenbort, “Real Men Don’t Cry”, p. 221.
212 Lamming, The Pleasures of Exile, p. 15.
 47

policing of the colonial master leaves them blind to actual opportunities – like the story of the man who
lived by the river. 213

Leading them to acts of violent macho nihilism, Lamming conveys a turning away from forming a new
hybrid masculinity through Teeton’s, Derek’s, and Roger’s inability to process their past and by
rejecting important female influences within their lives. Water With Berries depicts men in the 1970s
not at all removed from their seventeenth century brethren when Teeton and Roger both demonstrate
their belief that “a woman's subjection to her husband’s will was the measure of his patriarchal
authority and thus of his manliness.” 214 Due to colonialism's influence the men display a belief that
their only opportunity to exert ‘authentic’ masculinity exists in their domestic arrangements. When
Nicole and Randa choose to use their bodies to create opportunities the men cannot achieve for
themselves (create themselves as effective catalysts for positive change), instead of the men
celebrating their wives’ interventions they continue to see them through the lens of their masculine
preconceptions. Teeton and Roger appear resentful of anything they haven’t initiated themselves,
particularly when it comes from a source constructed as subordinate to their own (including the Old
Dowager’s construction of Teeton’s escape from possible accusations of murder over the discovery of
Nicole’s body in his room, mirroring the previous escape from San Cristobal). In a similar fashion,
Derek’s ‘home’ is the theatre and the act of rape onstage is a violent backlash against feelings of
betrayal Derek harbours against his cultural conditioning, and the theatre’s resistance to providing
better opportunities for the furtherance of his career. 215 Like his two comrades, Derek believes his
place of greatest hope and refuge is colluding with colonialism to keep him neutered, enacting a death
to his career prospects, and cutting him off from his desired legacy. Lamming embraces Anderson’s
and Manning’s vision of mediation as evidence of colonial interference therefore negating the
opportunity for any voice to act as informed adviser, demonstrating deep levels of distrust,
exacerbated by the presence of constant surveillance that encourages the hypermasculine
backlash.216

The focus of the story attempts to concentrate the gaze of the colonized but in doing so, also
highlights the importance of the feminine tempering influence that Shakespeare recognises as
essential to creating concord not conflict, addressing what Simones da Silva recognises as “the
contradictions of the blended identity produced by the colonial system”. 217 The men see themselves
forging ahead alone to create a future for themselves, whilst the women remain where the men place
them until called upon to join them in their prepared future. Using the construction of the belatedness

213 “Take This Sabbath Day”.

214 Kahn, Man’s Estate, p. 15.
215 Lamming, Water With Berries, p. 268.
As if the bench becomes an alter on which Derek enacts a black mass.
216 Anderson, Imagined Communities, pp. 13-18;
Manning, “Out of the Clear”, n.pag.
217 Simones da Silva, The Luxuary of National Despair, p. 151
 48

present in binarism, the men expect the women to remain behind until they can bring them forward.
For the women to be the ones that create the forward path is therefore alien to the men, causing them
to react as if their ‘moment’ has been stolen from them. The onstage rape therefore redirects the
spotlight (literally and figuratively) back onto Derek, and likewise the light of the fires lit by Roger and
Teeton have the same effect, actions that reassert masculine power over the female and the colonizer
simultaneously. Like its predecessor, Water With Berries places men at the centre but by breaking the
characters of Caliban, Miranda, and Prospero into different parts, Lamming provides greater scope to
consider the relationships between the colonizer and the colonized, but the missed opportunities to
confront past actions and create new resolutions results in tragedy, not harmony. The breach of trust
created by colonialism denies the main characters the benefits of collaboration and hybridity. 218

218 It doesn’t matter how much of an Achilles the men attempt to become, they will never
reach the tortoise they believe to be slower/lesser than themselves (Borges, The
Perpetual Race of Achilles and the Tortoise, pp.1-8). The tortoise isn’t slow, it is simply
using a different set of values to achieve goals Achilles doesn’t acknowledge. Instead of
attempting to become Achilles, Teeton, Derek, and Roger should learn from the tortoise,
moving slowly enough so they notice opportunities that lie around them rather than
rushing past along a path that only leads to their destruction.
 49

Chapter 3 – Hag-Seed

Court is in session, a verdict is in

No Appeal on the docket today just my own sin
...
I cry out to God, seeking only His decision
Gabriel stand and confirms, I’ve created my own prison 219

Introduction
As part of the Hogarth Shakespeare series, Margaret Atwood’s novel Hag-Seed (2016) was written to
celebrate the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s death. The novel achieves its celebratory mission,
by retelling the story of The Tempest and doing it in a way that addresses current changes in
masculinity, demonstrating how Shakespeare remains relevant despite its age and associations with
outmoded ideas and identities. The series may be criticised for creating palimpsestic works rather than
appropriating the text in Lamming’s style but by doing so the theme of processing the past, rather than
attempting to run from it, avoid, or tip it in the river is fulfilled. 220 As Sofia Munoz-Valdivieso observes,
there are many ways of seeing Atwood’s work (something shared with the original play). Whilst I agree
to an extent that it is refreshing to read the book as a “post-modern take on a canonical play that
retrieves humanist readings of the artist-magician Prospero after decades of distrusting him as a
patriarchal tyrant and a proto-colonizer”, I also see how this observation hides the important
reconsideration of masculinity that the play and its literary children afford. 221 In Atwood’s retelling, the
broken nature of Prospero’s identity and its reformation is achieved through processing grief over the
loss of his old masculinity in dialogue with himself, with new and old acquaintances, and with
Shakespeare, fulfilling a process of “repetition as a means to work through trauma”. 222 In this way
Atwood delves deeper into the Orphic qualities of Prospero (see Chapter 1), by constructing Felix as
not simply seeking to “reconcile old enemies”, “accomplish his mission by means of a dynastic
alliance”, and create unity by employing “the arts of peace” as outward performative actions. 223 Instead
Atwood invites the reader deeper inside Prospero/Felix to see the workings of his transformation,
exposing his personal crisis as part of the crisis in modern masculinity. An intersectional stance
channelled into Hag-Seed creates opportunities to confront masculinity by first deconstructing Felix’s
masculine identity, then observing how Atwood builds it up again via productive interactions rather
than imprisoning Felix in the hypermasculinity that destroys Teeton, Derek, and Roger.

219 Tremonti & Stapp, “My Own Prison”.

220 The widely publicized incident regarding The Colston Statue resulted in We Are Bristol
History Commission exhibiting the recovered statue and information about Sir Edward
Colston to gauge public opinion and decide on the statue’s future. Successful public
engagement with the incident has resulted in a useful report on how the past is
processed by different sectors of the community (Burch-Brown, J & Cole, T et al.).
221 Munoz-Valdivieso, “Double Erasure in The Tempest”, p. 106.
222 Zajac, “Prisoners of Shakespeare”, p. 325.
223 Headlam Wells, Shakespeare on Masculinity, pp. 27-28.
 50

The manner of Felix's internal erosion and character formation is significant to compare and contrast
with The Tempest and Water With Berries in seeing him as the new improved hybrid vehicle, with a
greater capacity for self-development achieved from a fuller analysis of masculinity’s machinery, and
acknowledging the benefits of sharing power reserves present in other identities. 224 Influenced by
Susan Faludi’s Stiffed that confronts manhood’s self-constructed betrayal and “the cultural forces that
distort [men’s] lives”, and Amy Scott Douglass’ Shakespeare Inside that recounts stories of transition
and growth, I intend to explore the effects and significance of masculinity’s internal workings versus its
exterior performance, “through the experiences of identification, role-playing and catharsis.”225 Traced
by Atwood’s central protagonist’s journey, the themes of legacy, reconciliation and redemption
appearing in The Tempest continue to be assessed by ‘“. . . a prisoner inside the play he himself has
composed.”’ 226

Mirror Man
Hag-Seed and Water With Berries blend characters from The Tempest together, encouraging readers
to see themselves as complex gestalt identities – central and othered simultaneously. 227 Felix is both
watcher and watched, aware of his masculine centrality but also continuously engaged in self-
surveillance. At the beginning of Atwood’s novel the reader is introduced to Felix’s preoccupation with
appearance and what it might say about the person within:
Felix brushes his teeth. Then he brushes his other teeth, the false ones, and slides them into his
mouth. Despite the layer of pink adhesive he’s applied, they don’t fit very well; perhaps his
mouth is shrinking. He smiles: the illusion of a smile. Pretense, fakery, but who’s to know? 228
From the outset, Atwood draws attention to an ageing man observing his own masculine anxieties
stemming from what it is to be genuine. Sharing in Water With Berries’ intention to look inside
masculinity at the underlying factors that construct fears of a ‘mixed’ existence, Atwood calls upon the
reader to consider an interweaving of identities, and meanings of hybridity (even down to her main
character’s mixture of natural and false teeth). Drawing attention to Felix’s bridgework also asks the
question, to what extent are we all man-made, when society imposes expectations on every part of
identity, right down to the appearance and meaning of a smile.

The fall of Hag-Seed’s main character is achieved by eroding reputation, showing Felix to be a self-
involved snob who deserves a lesson in humility, evidenced by his condescending attitude towards

224 Hybrid cars help wean people off direct fossil fuel consumption whilst still supporting the
petrochemical industry.
225 Faludi, Stiffed, back cover;
Scott Douglass, Shakespeare Inside, p. 1.
226 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 275.
227 In John Hughes’ The Breakfast Club (1985), and as the title of the book suggests,
everyone is part man, part monster – “. . . a brain, an athlete, a basket case, a princess
and a criminal”.
228 Atwood, p. 9.
 51

Tony’s administrational role at the Makeshiweg Festival, “[h]e’d fallen into the habit of letting Tony run
the mundane end of the show, because, after all, Felix was the Artistic Director.”229 Atwood's early
characterization of Felix as an elitist who looks down on others, supports the notion that white middle-
class masculinity’s opinion of itself is a “golden boy”, above that of any other identity that exists around
it, even other masculinities. 230 By manipulation of administration’s dull stereotype, Tony is able to
effectively engineer Felix into unknowingly constructing the path towards his own demise, in true Iago
fashion. Tony’s version of masculinity demands he stands in the spotlight alone; his role of supporting
administrator is too ‘feminine’ for his ego. Tony wants to possess the high ground, therefore
constraining and ultimately isolating himself in a lofty and exposed position, not unlike the one Tony
constructs that topples Felix. Atwood’s construction of Tony also encapsulates the tragedy of Water
With Berries, in that Tony only succeeds in replicating patriarchy’s existing mission of plot and
counterplot to reaffirm binary divisions; he does not evolve in order to achieve success. Masculinity is
constantly seeking to peel away parts of itself in order to create a pure form, but whilst engaged in
competitive scenarios, masculinity ends up embattling itself within the constant power-play of
patriarchy.231 As the clash between Tony and Felix demonstrates, they both resort to belittling each
other in order to raise themselves up - “Felix the cloud-riding enchanter, Tony the earth-based
factotum and gold-grubber” in Felix’s opinion, and Tony framed in his own mind as benevolent dictator,
freeing the festival from Felix’s potentially damaging outlandish productions. 232 At this point, neither
Tony or Felix command sympathy and prefer lone acts of Herculean heroism to Orphic collaboration;
ironically resisting the influence of the collaborative environment present in the successful stage
productions the Makeshiweg Festival relies upon and the hybridity that would benefit them both.

Hybrid Masculinity
Although this thesis advocates for the benefits a greater degree of masculine hybridity affords, Hag-
Seed reminds us of its problematic nature, as pointed out in critical studies by men and masculinity
scholars like Bridges and Pascoe, confronting concerns about men cherry-picking aspects of
subordinated masculinities and traditional feminine activity, not only associated with caregiving and
parenting, to gain social ‘smarty points’, but also selecting the most high profile exposure for hybrid
masculinity in the workplace, and placing itself superior to other masculinities. 233 Immersing himself in
work after the death of his wife, Felix resorts to leaving his daughter Miranda in the care of others,
something Prattes states contributes to divisions in masculinity (between those who can afford to
choose their level of involvement in caregiving and those who cannot), and masking the continuation

229 Atwood, Hag-Seed, ibid, p. 11.

230 Manne, Down Girl, pp. 132-133.
231 Roberts & Elliott, “Challenging Dominant Representations”, p. 88;
Bridges & Pascoe, “Hybrid Masculinities”, pp. 247-250.
232 Atwood, p.12 & p.18-23.
233 Bridges & Pascoe, p. 249;
Eisen & Yamashita, “Borrowing from Femininity”, p. 801;
Prattes, “Caring Masculinities and Race”, p. 8.
 52

of inequality in the provision of child support particularly in middle and upper class families. 234 It also
suggests more affluent men can ‘play’ at being hybrid, and devote ‘quality time’ to appear progressive,
happily running junior to football practice, gardening, DIY, car maintenance, and other ‘man cave’
activities, but drawing the line at changing nappies, laundry, and cleaning toilets. 235 Felix admits:
He’d hired help, of course – he’d needed some women, since he knew nothing about the
practical side of baby care, and because of his work he couldn’t be there with Miranda all the
time. But he’d spent every free moment he could with her. Though there hadn’t been many free
moments.236
Whilst this example appears to agree with common assumptions about masculinity, it is necessary to
remember Felix is a single parent, attempting to adjust to holding down a job and managing a family in
the wake of his wife’s death, whilst still in the learning phase of being a new parent. What Atwood
demonstrates is how easy it is to assume a man is offloading his responsibilities onto others, when the
reality is the same as many middle-class single parents regardless of gender. The creation of an
economic sector that provides child support to working parents is therefore problematised by this
situation, in that it creates jobs and facilitates greater flexibility to maintain parents’ careers, and also
seemingly provides a haven for those with sufficient money wishing to pick and choose their level of
interaction with their children. Whilst there is a case ably argued by the authors mentioned that
confirms support systems can be exploited, employing the gains made towards achieving greater
equality to advocate for, and empower those without the same opportunities needs addressing.

The Trusted Equal Other

There is a desire to create a new legacy, to assist the re-membering of Felix’s manhood. In this way
new relationships become stand-ins for the family Felix has lost, rather than just replacement work
colleagues, to create what Curt Tofteland calls “circles of trust”. 237 The success of the prison theatre
group means more to Felix than simply doing a good job (the reconstruction of his life and identity
depend on it), and this dependence, like that of Prospero, results in a greater intensity and meaning
for relationships involving expressions of gratitude, once more demonstrating the significance of
Mannoni’s dependency narrative, not just as an analysis of colonialism but also of masculinity. 238 As
pointed out in Chapter 1, success inside and outside the home were, and continue to be part of
society’s expectations for the average fifty-year-old man. Felix's profound loss of home, family, and
career cut him off from an identity defined by the titles ‘husband’, ‘father’, and ‘artistic director’, titles
associated with roles Felix performs everyday, and that signify achievement; they have societal value
and equate to responsibility, dependability, respectability, fertility, and legacy. The loss of his family and
career therefore equate to Felix losing himself, and call into question his adequacy, both in terms of
adequately fulfilling his sexual potential and also his civic duty to contribute to established norms.

234 Prattes, “Caring Masculinities and Race”, pp. 8-9.

235 Knuttila, Paying for Masculinity, pp. 120-123.
236 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 14.
237 Tofteland, “We Know What We Are, But Not What We May Be”, n.pag.
238 Mannoni, Prospero and Caliban, p. 45.
 53

Faludi draws attention to what the loss of these markers of manhood can mean, when she recalls the
actions of Shawn Nelson in 1995, an act of extreme backlash that is reminiscent of the collapse of
Lamming's characters, confirming the importance of the triumvirate of home, family and career to the
fabric of traditional masculine identity. 239 When Felix considers rebuilding his career, the thought of
being ‘found out’ and judged by those he despises is initially too much, “Tony and Sal, working
together as they obviously had already, would make sure his head stayed underwater. So why give
them the satisfaction of trying?”240 Instead Felix chooses to trust and confide in a fan of his previous
work at the Meckeshiweg Festival – Estelle, the ‘auspicious star’ that offers Felix the teaching role at
the prison, contrasting with Lamming who portrays women as meddlers, contributing to the neutering
effects of colonialism (discussed in Chapter 2). 241 Felix is escaping the neutering visited on him by the
actions of other men; re-membering himself not by seeking to dominate women but by benefiting from
their skills and expertise.

In ‘12. Almost Accessible’ Felix’s doubts about his suitability surface, “Is he a bad influence? . . . Is it
really that helpful, Mr. Duke”, asking his alter ego to assess the acceptability of Felix Phillips’
endeavours.242 Whilst perceivable reduction to the position of inadequate pushes Felix into
hyperreactivity, his behaviour is checked quite pointedly by Anne-Marie when Felix wanders into
dangerous territory that could quite easily stimulate domineering acts of overcompensation,
reminiscent of Teeton, Derek, and Roger. When Felix assesses Anne-Marie might be exposed to
unwanted attachment to one of the participants in his Shakespeare group, Felix decides to step in but
is quickly rebuffed, and shown to be overstepping his boundaries:
“I’ll talk to him,” said Felix. “Straighten things out.”
“You’re not my real dad,” she said. “I can deal with this. It’ll be all right. Trust me.” 243
This example demonstrates Felix's desire to reassert his fatherly control over his Shakespeare group,
and by extension Anne-Marie, revealing Felix’s underlying traditional values. Whilst a misogynist may
be lurking closely below Felix’s surface, Atwood keenly asserts Felix is not providing a ‘tasty piece’ for
his students to lust over, cleverly using a play on Prospero’s pinching punishments to indicate Felix’s
departure from previous masculine models: ‘“Consider her participation a privilege. Any trouble –
pestering, groping, pinching, dirty talk, and so forth – and she’s gone, and so are you.”’ 244 In addition,
by indicating his inmate-students are ‘potential rapists’, the distrust Felix harbours towards his fellow
man arguably brings out his feminine side, but more importantly locates the inmate-students’
relationship to the original play as variations of Caliban.245

239 Faludi, Stiffed, p. 31.

240 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 32.
241 I.ii.181.
242 Atwood, p. 79.
243 Ibid, p. 184.
244 Ibid, p. 88.
245 Russell, Shirley Valentine.
 54

By inviting Anne-Marie to be part of Felix’s production, Felix confirms Anne-Marie’s pre-existing

feminine hybridity by Atwood creating her as ‘one of the boys’, confirmed by showing Anne-Marie’s
inner Caliban in her physicality and mannerisms, challenging Felix’s perceptions of femininity with her
language, and hinting at what his own daughter might have grown up to be: “That foul mouth of hers
had always startled him. He was never ready when a slice of filth came out of her child-like mouth.”246
This pre-existing female hybridity, as Faludi points out, stems from other genders placed in a system
of adapting to a masculine world. 247 Whilst masculinity has been distracted by its box-making activities
to contain and control others, men have not seen the one they have constructed for themselves (ibid).
Masculinity might be the castle men defend, but they omit seeing the reinforced inflexibility patriarchy
attempts to use to reinforce its structure, making it into a prison.

Spartan Living
The admission that Felix needs, “a den, a hidey-hole, a place where . . . he could recuperate”
acknowledges his acceptance of ‘how badly he was wounded’ by losing his job and his family. 248 Felix
wants to escape painful memories by relocating to a ‘man cave’ and avoiding uncomfortable
conversation about his departure from the Makeshiweg Festival, but he tries to dismiss his emotions
as a self-indulgent overreaction, attempting to reassert traditional masculine stoicism:
By choosing this shack and the privations that would come with it, he would of course be
sulking. He’d be hair-shirting himself, playing the flagellant, the hermit. Watch me suffer. He
recognized his own act, an act with no audience but himself. It was childish, this self-willed
moping. He was not being grown-up.249
The language here has an ascetic quality (a prescription of sackcloth and ashes) but the relocation
carries with it undertones of military action, and a restating of what remains of Felix’s masculinity,
retreating to regroup, treat his wounds, and plan his next move: “Felix Phillips was washed up, but F.
Duke might still have a chance; though at what he could not yet say.” 250 The mention of being “washed
up” not only brings to mind Prospero’s island exile, but also casts Felix as a dirty dish that needs

246 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 97.

247 Faludi, Stiffed, p. 13.
The topic of feminine adaption is also reminiscent of arguments by Hélène Cixous and
Luce Irigaray, that women are less inhibited and narrow-minded, shuttling between
differently gendered perspectives more easily than men who are taught to dread being
perceived as feminine, easily evidenced by the greater acceptance of women integrating
elements of masculine clothing into their attire than vice versa, despite the initial
resistance resulting from women appearing to overtake masculinity both physically and
metaphorically by ‘wearing the trousers’.
248 Atwood, p. 30.
249 Ibid, p. 31.
250 Ibid, p. 36.
Using the name ‘Duke’, whilst being an obvious link to Prospero, is also heavy with
masculine symbolism because it was the nickname of movie legend, John Wayne
(https://www.biography.com/actor/john-wayne), adding to Felix’s attempt to repackage
himself as traditionally tough, but with a twist of elegance, more like Gregory Peck.
 55

cleansing, sullied by the losses he has experienced: ‘F. Duke’ represents a carefully constructed
identity cleansed of previous failings.

Rejecting aspects that denote the traditional feminine world of soft furnishings and concentrating on a
style of living that can be maintained by DIY, more closely allied with technical and engineering work
than domestic comfort demonstrates Felix guarding what remains of his manhood (he doesn’t have a
Caliban on which to offload any ‘excess of femininity’ in order to keep his masculine identity
uppermost). At this point, Atwood uses Felix’s hypersensitivity to domesticity to convey an
understanding that plunging into domestic activity potentially compounds the neutering effects of a
man losing his job, leaving only traditionally feminine activities for him to perform. Going ‘too far’ and
establishing a fully lined and padded environment, complete with garden, would also denote
acceptance and ‘giving in’ to being neutered. 251 As Murray Knuttila observes, conversations about
domestic arrangements between young married couples in Canada demonstrate an unspoken
acceptance that keeping the home clean and tidy is mostly done by women, equated to ‘acts of love’ in
order to offset their disagreeable aspects.252 The tendency for men ‘to enjoy a baby but not change a
diaper, to bathe but never scrub a toilet and to sleep but never launder the sheets’, encourages the
appearance of men getting more time to enjoy ‘the good life’ than women and supports the hybrid
masculinity template that suggests men have more opportunity to pick and choose what domestic
duties they fulfil (ibid; Prattes, 2022, p.9). Whilst Felix does display a kind of ‘censored’ domesticity,
Atwood is also clear - ‘The [domestic] activity was therapeutic.’ (Atwood, 2016, p.38). This begins to
introduce the idea that by balancing the masculine and feminine aspects of the self, Felix’s masculinity
will heal, but it does little to refute the theory that men have more choice and therefore can enjoy
domestic activity as a diverting change, rather than dull necessity.

Whilst Felix may, to some extent, conform to the model of hybrid masculinity Bridges and Pascoe et al
criticize, Atwood makes it clear that masculinity is trying to do better, but that it is hampered by its own
self-determined legacy of imprisoning heroic white ‘Malboro Man’ archetypes.253 The depiction of the
interiority and the exteriority of Felix’s performance of masculinity draws attention once more to
Jungers’ observations about the dividing line between what is presented to the world and what is kept
hidden.254 Bringing hybridity into Hag-Seed by blending characters from The Tempest together within a
layered narrative intersecting with a discussion of interior versus exterior and its relationship to
gendered roles, Atwood demonstrates Jungers’ intention to make an “unwalled man”, a man

251 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 39.

252 Knuttila, Paying for Masculinity, p. 120.
253 Faludi, Stiffed, p. 12.
Atwood’s own experience of living wild is employed in Hag-Seed to provide contrast
between the urban and country styles of masculinity, but also to explore the interaction
between the ‘natural’, interior personality and ‘cultured’, exterior performance. For more
on the traditional idea of the wilderness as a place for men, a place to be tested see
Weatherby and Vidon (2018).
254 Jungers, “Mimesis & Cie – The (un)walled man”, p. 19.
 56

unfettered by conditioning, remade within an alternative environment.255 By resetting masculinity,

forcing it into self-assessment, it therefore becomes a path to self-knowledge, confirming
Shakespeare’s importance as a cultural mirror integral to reflecting on public and private life.

Re-membering Masculinity
By conceptualising Felix as ‘broken’, it is possible to consider his reconnection with the outside world
as essential to ‘mending’ him. This concept is problematic because it feeds negative ideas about
wholeness that particularly have adverse effects on people with non-normative needs and ex-
offenders, a debate that is outside the scope of this current project but is worth holding in mind when
considering what affects identity construction. 256 Freire considers the human condition to be that of
unfinishedness which stimulates the desire to learn (Freire, 2001, p.56). It is by noticing this nuanced
difference between ‘broken’ and ‘unfinished’ and applying it to Hag-Seed, that the relevance of Freire’s
theory points out a subtle but important distinction - whilst unfinished intimates a work in progress,
broken intimates that something was once perfect and now is not. It is this idea of a perfect man that
connects back to the beginning of this dissertation, when I drew attention to the Herculean and the
Orphic models of male identity. By making masculinity static like a heroic marble statue (white and
unchanging) it fractures from the force of anxiety the need for change manifests.

Using Fullarton’s concept of re-membering, Felix processing his loss becomes like learning to do
without an amputated limb. Throughout the story Felix draws on memories of Miranda combined with
his assumptions about how she would have matured to provide comfort and inspiration for achieving ‘a
transformative process of re-membering, rather than recuperative process of “getting oneself back.”’ 257
Fullarton’s theory suggests that by using the dead to help process change, the opportunity to gradually
readjust instead of expecting immediate readjustment to do without may encourage what Freud
recognised as melancholia, but this process is actually more natural, as processing grief cannot be
expected to conform to a socially determined timeframe for mourning. Felix has to give himself time to
formulate new activities, a new style of life, to readjust his habits, before he can let go. As Fullarton
states:
In order to reform habitual accommodations, we must deliberately transform a hitherto
unreflective engagement, which means that we must first find a way to make the habit
conspicuous. Adapting then requires that we reform or relinquish habits that, though formerly
efficacious, have become ineffective, and that we replace them with effective ones that reflect
our new circumstances.258
Atwood cleverly complies with Fullarton’s theory whilst also inverting it – making Felix’s relocation to
the cabin and Miranda’s presence only conspicuous to the reader, keeping Felix’s transformation a
private matter, whilst channelling Miranda’s likeness to Ariel as Felix’s unseen servant. This supports

255 Jungers, “Mimesis & Cie – The (un)walled man”, p. 25.

256 For example see Do Rozario (1997), Smith (1999), and D'Orazio (2013).
257 Fullarton, “Grief, Phantoms, and Re-membering Loss”, p. 285.
258 Ibid, pp. 287-288.
 57

the idea that traditional masculinity doesn’t want to be seen to be changing, and must change itself
from the inside, seemingly unaided. Change denotes a type of defeat, giving in to external pressures,
but also conveys the potential for patriarchy to secretly absorb aspects of other identities it knows to
be advantageous, effectively cannibalizing culture it appears to react against. 259

By stripping down his living arrangements, Felix stays largely self-reliant and provides himself with the
right amount of activity to begin the healing process but “It wasn’t enough.” 260 By carrying Miranda
around as an active part of himself, this assists in considering to what extent Felix achieves masculine
hybridity and not just a pale imitation of its performance, by actively employing a female spirit to
facilitate his re-engagement with society (also reflected in his relationships with Anne-Marie and
Estelle). Carrying his daughter around inside suggests Felix is experiencing a kind of pregnancy, not
pregnant with life but with a creative force for self-improvement, a catalyst for wider change; to put
Miranda’s spirit to good use and assuage Felix’s guilt:
Too late, too late. Why hadn’t he noticed, earlier, the flushed cheeks, the quick breathing, the
drowsiness? Because he wasn’t there, or else he was there but immersed in some arcane
scheme or other. Cymbeline – was that the project that had triggered his absence? That he’d
found more precious than his loved darling? His fault, his most grievous fault. 261
This example also underpins what ultimate price could be paid for men missing the advantages
greater involvement in traditional femininity can afford: it could result in the death of something more
precious than can be imagined.

By replicating pregnancy, Felix encapsulates the ultimate hybrid masculine single parent (if only
subconsciously), finding a way to process his apparent betrayal of his wife’s gestational protection of
their combined legacy by carrying Miranda’s spirit with him, but ultimately Felix knows the pregnancy
is phantom: “She’s not here. She was never here. It was imagination and wishful thinking, nothing but
that. Resign yourself.”262 Constructing a version of Miranda out of Felix’s subconscious gives Atwood
the opportunity to portray masculinity’s wish to shape femininity as an entirely controlled yet
complementary entity, adding realism to this supernatural element of the novel, making Miranda
appear moody (“Is she in her room, sulking on her bed, as teenage girls do?”, p.148) and bereft of
social skills (“What is bathing? What is skiing? . . . She knows so little about the outside world.”,
p.167). In Felix’s mind, Miranda knows about ‘making do’, living out in the country, but would lack the
socially coded details Atwood herself struggled with when transitioning from homeschooling out in the
Canadian countryside to city life and mainstream school in Toronto, something that informed the
writing of Cats’ Eyes and is revisited in Hag-Seed.263 By extension, because Miranda resides in Felix’s
imagination (as an Ariel equivalent), Felix’s own anxieties about fitting in and schooling himself to

259 Root, Cannibal Culture, p. 21.

260 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 39.
261 Ibid, p. 186.
262 Ibid, p. 106.
263 Yentob, “Margaret Atwood: You Have Been Warned!”
 58

readjust are channeled into this relationship. The inference here suggests masculinity must learn to
work with and learn from its ‘feminine’ qualities, in preference to domination that curtails both genders’
development.

Inside with Outsiders

As a man stripped of the markers of traditional manhood, Felix (like Prospero) turns to teaching to help
fill the void and assist the process of rebuilding his life. From existing within the contained space of his
cabin, Atwood charts Felix’s gradual re-membering by moving him from one masculine controlled
environment to another, the Fletcher County Correctional Institute. 264 Using the theme of constriction
within Atwood’s works, her intention to tackle concepts of patriarchy, punishment, and justice is made
explicit.265 Atwood changes from relying on conceptualised ideological or mental prisons, to test Felix’s
progress in a challenging environment populated by alpha males to determine whether he will fully
embrace new collaborative practices or simply use them to descend into vengeance.

In addition to the important female influences already mentioned, the ‘circle of trust’ is widened and the
dependency narrative enhanced as Felix’s relationship with the inmate-students/actors develops. It
also constitutes a type of initiation (indicative of Felix’s need to cast off feelings of inadequacy and
defeat, journeying towards reconstituting his manhood), to see if he can act his new part convincingly
until he adjusts to it fully, “[c]ourtly, as befits an old-school gentleman like the one he imitates.” 266 Felix
surprises himself and completes his re-membering because he is willing to be challenged by the input
from others gained whilst teaching Shakespeare to prison inmates:
He was back in the theatre, but in a new way, a way he’d never anticipated in his earlier life. If
anyone had told him then that he’d be doing Shakespeare with a pack of cons inside the
slammer he’d have said they were hallucinating.267
As Shakespeare in prison programs in Italy and the United States attest, the positive ripple effects
begin by firstly respecting the inmate-actors, by not patronising them, not thinking of them beneath the
task of taking on Shakespeare by feeding them “Pablum for prep school juveniles.” 268 As Felix goes on
to observe in the novel, Fletcher Correctional “was a medium- to maximum security facility; these were
grown men, they’d lived lives that had driven them far beyond those parameters.”269 In ‘8. Bring the
rabble’, "Felix discovered that he was less prepared for the conditions inside than he’d thought he
would be. He’d had to assert his authority, draw a few lines in the sand.” 270 Beginning a journey that
fosters building self-esteem, positive self-expression, and mutual appreciation for Felix and his inmate-
actors has to start on a firm footing.

264 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 48.

265 Harris, “Hag-Seed by Margaret Atwood review”, n.pag.
266 Atwood, p. 99.
267 Ibid, p. 54.
268 Ibid, p. 52.
269 Ibid.
270 Ibid, p. 54.
 59

The realisation of attempting to foster creativity in a building that shrieks conformity and demands
obedience therefore presents obvious problems with promoting hybridity and identity experimentation.
Ben Laws and Elinor Lieber state, “Typologies of prison life in men’s establishments have tended to
emphasize the most desolate features of prison life such as aggression, violence, exploitation, and
stark displays of individualism.”271 Despite the obvious drawbacks this backdrop presents, the size of
contrast between what has been achieved by practitioners working on productions of Shakespeare
and their working environment is perfect to highlight how even small initiatives can create big change.
As Scott-Douglass states, people transformed by Shakespeare continue to struggle in the face of
society’s opinion of ex-offenders: “Mike makes a decent living working at a dry cleaners, but he has to
put in 70 to 80 hours per week for a boss who uses his knowledge of Mike’s criminal history as a
threat that he could fire him at any minute.”272 It is possible to see Shakespeare as merely a temporary
salve, to soothe the monotony of a stretch inside when considering Mike’s story, but as he goes onto
say, ‘“I think you could contribute 70 to 80 percent of my success to it.”’273 As Tofteland’s programme
attests role models created both inside and outside prison create techniques and strategies men can
use constructively. Men get the opportunity to tailor their support, concentrating on facilitated
discussion functioning on questions, not answers, engaging in the dialogical practices Freire
champions, engaging in self-improvement, and in doing so perform a masculinity re-made.274 Also, as
Shailor points out:
This opens up a space for reflection and evaluation: How am I like/not like this character? How
do my own interpretations, motivations, and choices compare to those of this character? What is
the best choice in this situation? These questions become more than academic as performers
draw upon their own experiences to inhabit their role, as they stretch to perform in new ways,
and as they encounter their spontaneous feelings and responses to the actions of other
characters. Theatre provides opportunities then for performers to become more self-aware, to
expand their sense of what it means to be human, to develop empathy, and to exercise their
moral imaginations (by developing their understanding of what is true, what is good, and what is
beautiful).275

The employment of Shakespeare to assist ‘habilitation’ is nonetheless a double-edged sword.276

Shakespeare is an empire and projects imperialist ideas by the fact of its omnipresence in world
culture (emulated by every major cultural franchise you can think of from Amazon to Zoom), therefore:

271 Laws & Lieber, “King, Warrior, Magician, Lover”, p. 1.

272 Scott-Douglass, Shakespeare Inside, p. 106.
273 Ibid.
274 (Dacanay, 2016)
275 Shailor, Performing New Lives, p. 23.

276 Curt Tofteland argues that many inmates were never habilitated in society in the first
place, meaning they were born into circumstances that created them as outsiders from
the beginning, so the idea of rehabilitation is meaningless (Pensalfini, p.234).
 60

Prison Shakespeare is always in a struggle to escape the institutional power of both

Shakespearean drama and the prison context itself, and the tendency of his work to provide a
model of socialization.277
Rather than Shakespeare creating models of socialization, to split a semantic hair I think it is the
interpretation of Shakespeare that creates the models more than the texts themselves. The texts are
stimulators, not stone tablets. That said, there are inescapable colonial/patriarchal overtones in Felix’s
control of the inmates that stand at odds with any attempt to soften the hard edges of prison identity,
particularly because performing Shakespeare often brings with it the epithet of ‘doing it properly’.
Felix’s approach would have Harold Bloom running for cover to find solace in early stage history, but
make Sir Antony Sher smile because it pushes boundaries and challenges perceptions of
properness.278 By imbuing Shakespeare with a properness that sits at odds with its well-documented
bawdy humour and violence, as Akala states, “we sanitize Elizabethan England quite a lot and project
onto Elizabethan England this kind of sense of properness and the Elizabethan theater that absolutely
just didn’t really exist at the time.”279 Atwood cleverly offsets the control and discipline via Felix
encouraging the inmate-actors to add their own individual touches, encouraging them not only to free
themselves from previous ideas of their capabilities, but invoking Prospero’s final request and set
Shakespeare free from static interpretation. Similarly masculinity can afford greater innovation, to
allow for more free-willed, individual interpretations.

Instead of an imperialist colonial power, Mariacristina Cavecchi prefers to draw on Peter Brook’s
metaphor, seeing Shakespeare as the coal that fuels empowerment. 280 Atwood brings the application
of rap into Felix’s production, partly to ‘beef up’ the florid text in recognition of what hybridity in The
Tempest suggests within a prison setting, but also to recognise the inmate-actors have backstories of
their own and other cultural influences that are important to their self-esteem and identity, that (like any
performer) assist the creation of a well-rounded characterisation. Like Lin-Manuel Miranda’s
groundbreaking musical Hamilton, the combination of an old story told using rap adds value: using
contemporary methods assists engagement, increasing the likelihood that participants will process
their own histories whilst taking part. Felix sees the fruits of his carefully controlled reins when, on
Wednesday, February 27, 2013, he is treated to ‘“Hag-Seed. By Caliban and the Hag-Seeds.”’281 Felix
finally experiences and understands the true benefit of hybridity and collaboration, “[h]e feels a little
choked” as he reflects on what he and the group have achieved, over and above his origin revenge

277 Ward & Connolly, “The play is a prison”, p. 128.

278 Bloom is scathing about alternative readings of The Tempest, calling them ‘not even a
weak misreading, . . . simply not interested in reading the play at all.’ (Bloom, p.662)
During the Equality Shakespeare Festival’s actors’ panel Alexandra Gilbreath, Dame
Harriet Walter, and Amanda Harris shared anecdotes about Sher’s ‘test me’ approach to
pushing boundaries and his attitude towards ‘proper’ Shakespeare (16 May 2022).
279 Bogaev, 2017, np.
280 Cavecchi, 2017, p. 1.
281 Atwood, Hag-Seed, pp. 173-176.
 61

plot, which is made to look trivial and petty by comparison.282 Despite the benefits of changing the text
to highlight the benefits of encouraging greater self-expression, Atwood has been criticised for the
inclusion of the rap sections, criticisms that suggest it assists in reverting Caliban to a brutish
misogynist, the kind of image stereotypically connected with rap culture, but I agree with Antonia
Randolph, that Atwood recognises it as “a lens for understanding subordinated men”, and as such,
should be excused for replacing some of The Tempest’s most lyrical moments.283 Innovation is the key
to Felix’s transformation, and the transformation of masculinity is neatly encapsulated in the extended
metaphor created by Atwood and exhibited in the free-willed creative bravery of the inmate-students
that take breaking with traditional Shakespeak to a new level.284

The cultivation of culture is assisted by bringing the top level of society down to meet the innovation
coming up from below. Whilst those at the top both in age and status, represented by Sal
O’Nally/Gonzalo, can dream of an idealised utopia, they do nothing to create effective change.
Preserving the status quo sustains those holding the reins of power, whereas innovation presents the
potential for intervention, and a redistribution of power away from the established ruling elite. The
success generated by Shakespeare in prison programmes challenges policy on how to treat those
consigned to society’s scrapheap, as well as breaking apart the stereotypical image of the masculine
offender, that redresses “overlooking some of the possibilities for transforming masculinities that
emerge among those in the margins of society.” 285 Reflecting successful projects out in the real world,
like that featured in ‘Shakespeare Behind Bars’ and ‘Shakespeare at San Quentin’, Felix’s and
Estelle’s collaborative programme works to reinvigorate men’s self-worth and identity, turning a prison
into a recycling centre, where manhood is remade out of character development that instils in its
participants the realisation of self-knowledge, and books passage back to reasoned adulthood, leaving
behind reactive immaturity.286 This disruption of established perceptions of society’s offenders assists
masculinity’s development towards greater hybridity in showing how arguably the most masculine of
men benefit from self-reflection, and finally achieve honesty about themselves. As Scott-Douglass
observes about Curt Tofteland’s work at Luther Luckett Correctional Complex, the programme taught
vital literacy and social skills in “a safe forum in which violent offenders are able come to terms with
their pasts".287 By removing the layers of masculine make-up that masked their anxieties, causing
them to become typecast into habitually negative behaviours, inmates peel themselves away from
their pasts, shedding the old skin and confirming their intent to leave that part of themselves behind:

282 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 176.

283 Randolph, “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Beautiful”, p. 200;
Harris, “Hag-Seed by Margaret Atwood review”, n.pag.
284 Milner, “ShakeSpeak App Lets You Text Like Shakespeare”, n.pag;
Steinkoler, “When Dumbness, or Unbehagen before the Master, Becomes “Shakespeak”,
pp. 42-44.
285 Roberts & Elliott, 2020, p. 88.
286 shakespearbehindbars, “NEWSCLIP Shakespeare Behind Bars – CNN”;
TEDXTalks, “Hope from adversity | Shakespeare at San Quentin | TEDxSanQuentin”.
287 Scott-Douglass, Shakespeare Inside, p. 1.
 62

“Watching the many faces watching their own faces as they pretended to be someone else – Felix
found that strangely moving. For once in their lives, they loved themselves.” 288 In essence by working
with Felix in a state of controlled rebellion, “the value of Shakespeare’s work for those who are
disenfranchised lies not necessarily in its power to socialize or rehabilitate but rather in its edgy,
festive, subversive and transgressive potential.” 289 Inmate-students are taught how to find personal
freedom of expression within a highly controlled environment to assist their reentry into society,
teaching them the self possession to stay away from recidivism. In essence, by teaching offenders
how to find freedom whilst living within captivity a vital lesson in remaking masculinity whilst navigating
societal expectations is learned.

Felix enjoys a re-acquisition of a central role in the lives of his inmate-actors and for himself by
acquiring a revitalised career, but his taste of rejection and dispossession has been an important jolt to
his ego. The grief and regret for past events and separation from family form a common bond between
Felix and his students, equally sharing in creativity as a means to process their emotions. The request
to include a photo montage of precious photographs into the prison’s production of The Tempest
provides an important outlet for emotions that are held back out of sight, expressed in a non-verbal
way that fits with perceived conventional masculine models. The opportunity for the inmate-actors to
open themselves up to positive expressiveness is important within an environment defined by hard
edges and clean dividing lines, but some limitations still prevail. Reflecting on PPod’s previous female
roles, Felix recognises, “[p]laying a girl, he’d risk being treated as one. It would be ruinous for the
Ferdinand as well: having to pitch those swooning love speeches to a surly fellow inmate.”290 Via Felix,
Atwood makes a useful distinction between the more robust, arguably manly role of Lady Macbeth
(because of her plea to ‘unsex me’) and the impressionable young girl, Miranda. Whilst the usual issue
of homohysteria in a prison setting surrounding the portrayal of Ariel is easily overcome by conceiving
him as a behind-the-scenes effects specialist, playing a juvenile female role like Miranda is a step
beyond current tolerances, indicating the realities of masculinity that still need addressing. 291

In Hag-Seed the inmate-actors come from a variety of backgrounds, including white-collar criminals
like Bent Pencil. By accurately reflecting a social cross-section Atwood doesn’t shy away from the
uncomfortable reality of white, heterosexual, middle-class, middle-aged men being the central focus,
reminding the reader the central view from the patriarchal panopticon needs refocusing, as well as
adjustment being necessary in peripheral society for change to be embraced as positive development
and not a threat to perceived stability. By providing a rundown of the inmate-actors’ past
transgressions, class and racial influences (pp.133-137), Atwood points out the thin divide separating
those who reside inside, and those outside society. Felix’s role as teacher positions him between
individual agency and societal expectations and the power emanating from the larger controls imposed

288 Atwood, Hag-Seed, p. 58.

289 Ward & Connelly, “The play is a prison: the discourse of Prison Shakespeare”, p. 129.
290 Atwood, p. 87.
291 Anderson and McCormack, “Inclusive Masculinity Theory”, p. 548.
 63

by the prison environment filter into Felix’s control over the inmate-actors. Like Prospero, Felix seeks
to control his Calibans’ language (“he’d limit the curse words permitted in the class”, p.56), but not to
the extent of limiting free expression. Instead Felix creates a gateway to getting inside the text, to open
up the possibilities of understanding, breaking through the walls of the Shakespearean bastion to
prove the texts are for everyone, and by breaking down one barrier Atwood demonstrates other
barriers to self-improvement can also be challenged.

The all-seeing eye of patriarchy is also present in Felix’s use of internet surveillance to track the
activities of his adversaries (Tony and Sal O’Nally), the presence of prison guards, and in the
constraints society applies in general that have to be navigated in order for Felix to fulfil his plan for
revenge. Felix is therefore just as susceptible to patriarchy’s enticements and capable of manipulation
(like Tony), evident in his use of 8Handz legal and illegal activities in realising his revenge strategy.
The difference is Felix shows sensitivity to the wider consequences of pursuing his ambition and what
collateral damage that might entail. 292 The fact that revenge remains Felix’s aim is understandable but
also sad because of its reality. Revenge remains the primary stimulus for crime and whilst patriarchy
distributes power unevenly, and maintains hierarchies that create jealousy to fuel economic markets
and political systems, what lines are used to divide gender, class, and race will continue to create
battlegrounds.293 Whilst Felix’s retention of traditional masculinity traits demonstrates an intention to
‘save face’, his willingness to accept help and openly acknowledge the value of outside contributions
goes further than Prospero’s colonial ‘use and abuse’ policy.

Chapter Conclusion
The decision to use Atwood’s retelling of The Tempest in this final chapter is based upon its subtle but
central hybridity. Remi Joseph-Salisbury might argue that Atwood is attempting to create a post-racial
text that tiptoes around the necessary discussion of racial injustice in order to join Meryl Streep in
declaring, “We’re all Africans really?”. 294 I conclude that Atwood’s subtlety is far more effective and
egalitarian in its approach than Lamming because it deftly avoids white people feeling repeatedly
slapped on the nose for the crimes of their ancestors that can provoke more antagonism than
advocacy, as seen in the recent resurgence and visibility of white supremicist attitudes. Whilst works
like Lamming’s are necessary to release the view from the Other’s side and shock white patriarchal
society into realisation of the reach and depth of its oppressive practises, it does not provide a working
model for progression. Whilst Felix is not the poster-boy for progressive thinking either, Atwood is
effective in describing taking action constructively, concentrating on showing what can be done to
address inequality and injustice, not by covering up the past but by confronting it, and coming to terms
with its effects, providing the opportunity to see the patriarch in a fractured state whilst experiencing a

292 Felix worries about the possible consequences of Anne-Marie ‘leading on’ WonderBoy
(p.184), and the general recklessness of his revenge plot that involves drugging his
adversaries (p.192).
293 Antonello & Gifford, How We Became Human, p. xxxi.
294 Joseph-Salisbury, Black Mixed-Race Men, p.15;
Lee, “Meryl Streep: 'We're all Africans really'”, n.pag.
 64

taste of the injustice it may have visited on others in the past. I see Hag-Seed (beyond its celebratory
function), recognising that past follies and trauma can be resolved within a continuously dialogical
environment that stimulates reflective reassessment, resulting in masculinity evolving proactively.

Arguably Felix achieves a ‘new age’ hybrid masculinity, that at times appears hypocritical in its
attempts to be inclusive but nevertheless sincere in its efforts to embrace change, and successful in
reconstituting itself after being torn apart and consumed by grief. 295 Felix recognises the benefits of
change, seeing his losses as part of useful lessons that lead to identity evolution. Equating losing
family members to a demand to ‘snap out of it’ (‘it’ being self-indulgent, egotistical masculinity) is an
insensitive analogy but sometimes dramatic change happens to us, and for us at the same time.
Felix’s ‘pregnancy’ results in giving birth to a new version of himself, one that is more aware of
patriarchy’s mechanism. Like Neo being shown ‘The Matrix’, Felix’s taste of powerlessness reminds
him that he is not the fulcrum of all activity, that patriarchy is at work around and through him;
everyone must learn to use patriarchy creatively in order to bend it towards change.296 Here, Atwood
implies change (no matter how devastating) is a catalyst for improvement; to consider past lives not
ending but put to use within a continuous flow of change and development, informing how we
progress, absorbed into the process of change in memories that influence how we move forward (like
a continued conversational Ceremony of Souls; like Felix carrying Miranda with him as his motivator).
Felix’s imposed exile feels like an admonition, and a process of repentance for Miranda’s death and
his own shortcomings. By working at the prison, Felix slowly and carefully washes away the blood he
feels he has spilt by facilitating remaking lives considered lost. In effect Felix’s mission centres on an
almost messianic state of achieving resurrection, not to resurrect and re-establish old versions of
masculinity that have failed or are failing, but instead replenish and renew masculinity through
absorbing new collaborative experiences. In this way Atwood artfully crafts a believable central
protagonist, accurately representing the state of ‘middle-of-the-road’, hybrid masculinity, one that
attempts to be progressive but still has some way to travel in order to leave its centrality behind in
favour of stepping out of the spotlight and bringing the house lights up to illuminate the collective effort.

295 Edmonds, Redefining ancient orphism : A study in greek religion, p. 5.

296 Wachowski & Wachowski, The Matrix.
 65

Final Conclusion

Regardless of identity or background, the pursuit of overcoming injustice and engendering agency and
personal freedom is a collective responsibility that starts within each individual. This paper has argued
that patriarchy and masculinity still hold the key to wider social change but they cannot achieve
change in isolation, they have to be encouraged to break out from self-inflicted incarceration and
engage. In The Tempest, the greater part of the text is given over to Shakespeare charting the plot of
revenge and redemption, whilst keeping the idea of remaking broken identity bubbling under the
surface. In Lamming’s version, everything is broken, leaving the possibility of mending anything
unlikely. By unpacking and augmenting Prospero’s descent into exile, and diving deeply into
masculine anxiety about what constitutes manhood, Atwood provides greater scope for discussing
how masculinity is strangled by patriarchy’s vice-like grip on power distribution that maintains
hierarchies instead of fostering level collaboration. Opportunities appear apparent for everyone to
benefit by engaging in dialogue and advocacy, appreciating every individual for their individuality,
recognising everyone contributes regardless of their age or identity, and that every contribution
(negative and positive) is an opportunity for re-evaluation and progress.

Living in a post-colonial age where it is easy to blame men for much of what is bad in the world, this
paper extends an invitation to pause and reflect on the effects of this blame game, not in an attempt to
engage in himpathy, but to ensure that what sits in plain view is not overlooked and left in the hands of
assumptions about masculine privilege. 297 As Lamming points out, if masculinity is continually beaten
down the likelihood for violent backlash is increased, resulting in a wave of destructive behaviour that
catches all in its wake. To me this is what The Tempest signifies – a story of how to ride out the storm
without being drowned by it. Perhaps this is why Shakespeare retains its usefulness for those
searching for ways to remake their lives; rather than by appearing unchanging, because Shakespeare
has proven itself to be so adaptable, it continues to inspire people, encouraging them to look at their
own capacity for flexibility. In Is Shakespeare Still Our Contemporary? John Elsom collects together
essays that respond to Jan Kott’s work that insists Shakespeare enjoys a unique location within
culture because it taps into something universal about humanity. Rather than subscribing to this
fangirling, I prefer Elsom’s reading that states “Shakespeare is an elastic writer.” 298 In this way
Shakespeare encapsulates the avoidance of boxes preferred by Atwood whilst incorporating the
potential to consider stereotypical extremes as well as nuanced variations of masculinity. The recent
Equality Shakespeare festival and the publication of Shakespeare and Social Justice in addition to the
many successes achieved by Shakespeare in Prison projects highlight the scope for continuing to
include Shakespeare as part of assisting masculinity’s transition beyond entrenched stereotypes into
something more fluid and self-determined. By being both dead and apparently immortal Shakespeare
remains capable of commenting on current events with a freedom that is sometimes denied living
writers; its elasticity makes Shakespeare everyone’s voice, everyone’s advocate, a playground where

297 Manne, Down Girl, p.17.

298 Elsom (Ed.), Is Shakespeare Still Our Contemporary?, p. 4.

 66

everyone can play out possibilities safely, and constructively in collaboration. 299 I conclude that
because of this elasticity combined with its Socratic style of asking questions rather than answering
them, Shakespeare encourages individuals to make up their own minds, leaving them with a sense of
their own freedom to re-examine their personal beliefs beyond what society prescribes, turning the
gaze from the action on stage to the internalized ‘I’, giving people the opportunity to determine what
masculinity is for them, and not rely on any pre-prepared model of manhood to legitimize identity. This
is the freedom Derek, Roger, and Teeton forget – they forget they have the freedom not to repeat the
actions of the past, not to allow the actions of the colonizer to keep them down; they are not owned by
anyone but themselves. Whilst Atwood’s reworking of Prospero into Felix’s model goes further into
exploring both backstory and plans for the future than Shakespeare’s original, it is also successful in
expanding on Shakespeare’s incipient hybrid masculinity but still comes up against similar problems
caused by masculinity’s encasement within patriarchal mechanisms of power and control. It will clearly
take patience, stamina, and persistence to move masculinity through this current ‘inbetween’ stage
and into a future unfettered by gender.

25,863 words (excluding footnotes)

299 Ibid, p. 2.
In particular I am thinking of Salman Rushdie who was brutally stabbed days before the
submission of this paper. I hope he does not become another one to add to the list of people
murdered for believing in the right to ask questions.
 67

Works Cited

Akhimie, P. (2018). Shakespeare and the Cultivation of Difference. Routledge. Google Books.

Aboim, S. & Vasconcelos, P. (2020). “Migration after empire: postcolonial masculinities and the
transnational dynamics of subalternity”. Postcolonial Studies, 24(3), pp. 1-22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2020.1846848.

Aldoory, A.H. (2017). “Atwood’s Recreation of Shakespeare’s Miranda in The Tempest”. CS Canada
Studies in Literature and Language, 14(3), pp. 58-62. DOI: 10.3968/9352.

Anderson, B. (1983, 2016). Imagined Communities Revised Edition. Verso.

Anderson, E. & McCormack, M. (2018). “Inclusive Masculinity Theory: overview, reflection and
refinement”. Journal of Gender Studies, 27(5), pp. 547-561. DOI: 10.1080/09589236.2016.1245605.

Antonello, P. (2015). “Maladaptation, Counterintuitiveness, and Symbolism: The Challenge of Mimetic

Theory in Evolutionary Thinking”. In Antonello, P. & Gifford, P. (Eds.) How We Became Human (pp. 47-
75). Michigan State University Press.

Antonello, P. & Gifford, P. (2015). “Introduction”. In Antonello, P. & Gifford, P. (Eds.) How We Became
Human (pp. xi-liii). Michigan State University Press.

Atwood, M. (1993). The Robber Bride. Doubleday.

Atwood, M. (2016). Hag-Seed. Penguin Random House UK. Kindle and Print Editions.

Atwood, M. (2022). Burning Questions. Penguin Random House UK.

Bacon, F. (1996, 2008). “Of Wisdom For A Man’s Self”. In Bacon, F. The Major Works (pp. 386-387).
Oxford University Press.

Bacon, F. (1996, 2008). “Of Nature in Men”. In Bacon, F. The Major Works (pp. 417-418). Oxford
University Press.

Banaji, J. (1972). “For a Theory of Colonial Modes of Production”. Economic and Political Weekly,
7(52), pp. 2498-2502.

Beauchamp, Z. (2019). “Our incel problem”. The Highlight by Vox. https://www.vox.com/the-

highlight/2019/4/16/18287446/incel-definition-reddit.

Bhabha, H. K. (1994, 2004). The Location of Culture. Routledge.

 68

Blackmun, H. A. & Supreme Court Of The United States. (1972) U.S. Reports: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S.
113. The Library of Congress. https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep410113/.

Bloom, H. (1998, 1999). Shakespeare The Invention of the Human. Fourth Estate.

Bogaev, B. (2017, 25 July). “Akala and Hip-Hop Shakespeare”. Shakespeare Unlimited, 78. Folger
Shakespeare Library. https://www.folger.edu/shakespeare-unlimited/akala-hip-hop-shakespeare.

Bogaev, B. (2020, 4 August). “Maggie O’Farrell Hamnet”. Shakespeare Unlimited, 150. Folger
Shakespeare Library. https://www.folger.edu/shakespeare-unlimited/maggie-ofarrell-hamnet.

Borges, J. L. (2010). The Perpetual Race of Achilles and the Tortoise (Esther Allen, Suzanne Jill
Levine & Eliot Weinberger, Trans.). Penguin.

Breitenberg, M. (1996). Anxious Masculinity in Early Modern England. Cambridge University Press.

Bridges, T. & Pascoe, C. J. (2014). “Hybrid Masculinities: New Directions in the Sociology of Men and
Masculinities”. Sociology Compass, 8(3), pp. 246-258.

Buchbinder, D. (2013). Studying Men and Masculinities. Routledge. Kindle Edition.

Burch-Brown, J & Cole, T et al. (2022). “The Colston Statue: What next?” We Are Bristol History
Commission Short Report. Bridging Histories, Bristol.

Butler, J. (1990, 2010). Gender Trouble. Routledge.

Callow, S. (2016, 12 August). “How John Osborne’s Entertainer still speaks to a broken Britain”. The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/aug/12/how-john-obsbornes-entertainer-still-
speaks-to-a-broken-britain.

Carneiro, R.M.O. (2019). “The good, the bad, and the ugly sides of revenge in Hag-Seed”. Interfaces
Brasil/Canadá, 19(2), 136-140.

Cavecchi, M. (2017). “Brave New Worlds. Shakespearean Tempests in Italian Prisons”. Will forever
young! Shakespeare & Contemporary Culture., 11(2017), pp. 1-21.

Césaire, A. (2002, 2019). A Tempest. (Richard Miller, Trans.). TCG Translations (originally
published as Une Tempête, 1969).

Chakrabarty, D. (2018). The Crises of Civilization. Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.
 69

Chamberlain, M. (2018). “George Lamming”. In Schwarz, B (Ed.) West Indian intellectuals in Britain
(pp.175-195). Manchester University Press.
https://www.manchesteropenhive.com/view/9781526137968/9781526137968.00014.xml.

Ciobanu, E. (2020). “The play’s the thing”: re-imagining Shakespeare’s The Tempest in Forbidden
Planet, Prospero’s Books and Hag-Seed. University of Bucharest Review Re-Writing, Re-imagining
the Past, X/2020(2), pp. 6-19.

Combres, L. (2016). “Critique and Discourses on Colonialism: Fanon vs. Mannoni”. Research in
Psychoanalysis, 2(22), pp. 218-226. https://www.cairn.info/revue-research-in-psychoanalysis-2016-2-
page-218.htm.

Commerford, T., Cornell, C., Morello, T., & Wilk, B. (2002). “Show Me How to Live”. Track 2 in
Audioslave by Audioslave (Cornell, Commerford, Morello, & Wilk). Sony Music Entertainment Inc. and
Interscope Records. https://secondhandsongs.com/work/133236.

Connell, R. W. (2000). The Men and The Boys. Polity Press. Kindle Edition.

Craigie, J. (1948). “The Basilicon Doron of King James I”. The Library, s5-III (1), pp. 22-32.
https://doi.org/10.1093/library/s5-III.1.22.

D'Orazio, D. M. (2013). “Lessons learned from history and experience: Five simple ways to improve
the efficacy of Sexual Offender Treatment”. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and
Therapy, 8(3-4), pp. 2–7. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100975.

Dacanay, A. (2016, 15 November). “Curt Tofteland of Shakespeare Behind Bars: Creating a Circle of
Trust”. Still Point Theatre Collective. https://www.stillpointtheatrecollective.org/post/curt-tofteland-of-
shakespeare-behind-bars-creating-a-circle-of-trust.

Dillon Brown, J. (2013). Migrant Modernism. University of Virginia Press.

Do Rozario, L (1997). “Spirituality in the lives of people with disability and chronic illness: A creative
paradigm of wholeness and reconstitution”. Disability and Rehabilitation, 19(10), pp. 427-434. DOI:
10.3109/09638289709166568

Dobson, M. (Chair). (2022, 16 May). “17:30-18:30: Actors’ Panel: Leading actors share their memories
of working with Sir Antony Sher”. The Equality Shakespeare Festival.
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/edacs/departments/shakespeare/events/2022/the-equality-
shakespeare-festival.aspx.
 70

Donegan, M. (2022, 24 June). “Roe v Wade has been overturned. Here’s what this will mean.” The
Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/24/overturning-roe-story-is-women-
unfreedom.

Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). The Souls of Black Folks Annotated. Dover Thrift. Kindle Edition.

Edmonds, I. R. G. (2013). Redefining ancient orphism : A study in greek religion. Cambridge University
Press.

Eisen, D. B. & Yamashita, L. (2019). “Borrowing from Femininity: The Caring Man, Hybrid
Masculinities, and Maintaining Male Dominance”. Men and Masculinities, 22(5), pp. 801–820.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17728552.

Elsom, J. (Ed.) 1989, 1995). Is Shakespeare Still Out Contemporary?. Routledge.

Etman, C. (2017). Feminist Shakespeares: adapting Shakespeare for a modern audience in the
Hogarth Shakespeare Project. The University of Charleston, South Carolina at the College of
Charleston and The Citadel.

Faludi, S. (1999, 2000). Stiffed The Betrayal of Modern Man. Vintage.

Ferriss, T. (2022, 23 February). “Why You Should Resist Identity Labels | Margaret Atwood on The Tim
Ferriss Show podcast”. YouTube. ..

Ford Davies, O. (2017, 2018). Shakespeare’s Fathers and Daughters. The Arden Shakespeare,
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

Franklin, A. J. (1999). Invisibility Syndrome and Racial Identity Development in Psychotherapy and
Counseling African American Men. The Counseling Psychologist, 27(6), pp. 761–793.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000099276002.

Freire, P. (1992, 2021). Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Bloomsbury
Academic.

Freire, P. (1998, 2001). The Pedagogy of Freedom: Ethics, Democracy, and Civic Courage. Roman &
Littlefield.

Freire, P. (2018, 2020). Pedagogy of the Oppressed 50th Anniversary Edition. Bloomsbury Academic.

Fullarton, C. (2020). “Grief, Phantoms, and Re-membering Loss”. The Journal of Speculative
Philosophy, 34(3), pp. 284-296. Penn State University Press.
 71

Grace, M. (2018, 11 January). “Giving Birth in Jane Austen’s Day: Confinement, Lying-in, and
Churching". English Historical Fiction Authors [Blog].
https://englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.com/2018/01/giving-birth-in-jane-austens-day.html.

Greenblatt, S. (1980, 2005). Renaissance Self-Fashioning. The University of Chicago Press.

Harbi Mahdi Al-Azawi, B. (2017). “The Genesis of Violence and Self-Destruction in George Lamming’s
Water With Berries”. Al-Adab Journal, 1(120). DOI:10.31973/AJ.V1I120.301.

Harris, A. (2016, 6 October). “Hag-Seed by Margaret Atwood review – an inventive riff on The
Tempest”. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/oct/06/hag-seed-the-tempest-
retold-by-margaret-atwood.

Headlam Wells, R. (2000, 2006). Shakespeare on Masculinity. Cambridge University Press.

Hesse, M. (2020, 29 May). “‘Karens’ try to make unequal power structures work for them”. The
Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/karens-try-to-make-unequal-power-
structures-work-for-them/2020/05/29/31adc68a-8a3b-11ea-8ac1-bfb250876b7a_story.html.

hooks, b. (1989). “Talking Back”. Discourse, Fall-Winter 86-87(8), SHE, THE INAPPROPRIATE/D
OTHER (Fall-Winter 86-87), pp. 123-128. Wayne State University Press.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/44000276.

Howells, C.A. (2021). “Introduction”. In Howells, C.A. (Ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Margaret
Atwood (2nd ed, pp. 20-34). Cambridge University Press. Google Books.

Hughes, J. (1985, 7 June). The Breakfast Club. Universal Pictures.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088847/.

Izzard, E. (2010, 30 March). “Eddie Izzard "Cake or Death" Sketch From Dress to Kill”. YouTube.
https://youtu.be/PVH0gZO5lq0.

Joseph-Salisbury, R. (2018). Black Mixed-Race Men: Transatlanticity, Hybridity and ‘Post-Racial’

Resilience. Emerald Publishing Limited.

Jungers, J. -J. (2020). “Mimesis & Cie – The (un)walled man”. Acta Europeana Systemica, 5 (1), pp.
19-26. https://doi.org/10.14428/aes.v5i1.56933

Kahn, C. (1981). Man’s Estate Masculine Identity in Shakespeare. University of California Press
 72

Kelly, R.D.G. (1972, 2000). “Introduction A Poetics of Anticolonialism. In Cesaire, A”. Discourse in
Colonialism (J. Pinkham, Trans.) (pp. 7-25). Monthly Review Press. Kindle Edition. (Original text
published 1955).

Kent, G. E. (1973). “A Conversation with George Lamming”. Black World, 22(5), pp. 88–97.

Klenbort, S. (2012). “Real Men Don’t Cry”. In McKenzie, W. & Papadopoulou, T. (Eds.) Shakepeare
and I. (pp. 221-232). Continuum International Publishing Group.

Knuttila, M. (2016). Paying for Masculinity. Fernwood Publishing.

Kott, J. (1965, 1981). Shakespeare Our Contemporary (B. Taborski, trans.). Methuen & Co. Ltd.

Lamming, G. (1971, 2016). Water With Berries. Peepal Tree Press.

Lamming, G. (1960, 2005). The Pleasures of Exile. Pluto Press.

Laws, B. & Lieber, E. (2020). “‘King, Warrior, Magician, Lover’: Understanding expressions of care
among male prisoners”. European Journal of Criminology, January, pp. 1-19. DOI:
10.1177/1477370819896207.

Lee, B. (2016, 11 February). “Meryl Streep: 'We're all Africans really'”. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/feb/11/meryl-streep-berlin-film-festival-diversity-were-all-
africans-really.

Lennon, K. & Alsop, R. (2020). Gender Theory in Troubled Times. Polity Press. Kindle Edition.

Levinson, N. (1997). “Teaching in the midst of belatedness: the paradox of natality in Hannah Arendt’s
Educational Thought”. Educational Theory, 47(4), pp. 435-451.

Loomba, A. (2009). “Race and the Possibilities of Comparative Critique”. New Literary History, 40(3),
pp. 501-522. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27760273.

Loomba, A. (2002, 2013). Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism. Oxford University Press.

Loomba, A. (1998, 2015). Colonialism/Postcolonialism (3rd Ed.). Routledge.

Lorde, A. (1984). “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.” Sister Outsider:
Essays and Speeches. Crossing Press. http://www.editmedia.org/teaching-material/the-masters-tools-
will-never-dismantle-the-masters-house-audre-lorde/.
 73

MacFaul, T. (2012, 2015). Problem Fathers in Shakespeare and Renaissance Drama. Cambridge
University Press.

Manne, K. (2019). Down Girl. Penguin Random House UK.

Manne, K. (2020). Entitled. Penguin Random House UK.

Manning, E. (2022). “Out of the Clear”. e-flux Journal, 125(March). https://www.e-

flux.com/journal/125/452291/out-of-the-clear/.

Mannoni, O. (1956). Prospero and Caliban (Pamela Powesland, Trans.). Methuen & Co. Ltd. Google
Books and Print Editions.

Mercer, K. (1994). Welcome to the Jungle. Routledge.

Milner, N. (2016, 7 April). “ShakeSpeak App Lets You Text Like Shakespeare”. Independent School
Parent. https://www.independentschoolparent.com/education-news/shakespeak-app-lets-you-text-like-
shakespeare/.

Moore Gilbert, B. (1997, 2000). Postcolonial Theory Contexts, Policies, Politics. Verso.

Munoz Valdivieso, S. (1998). “Double Erasure in The Tempest Miranda in Postmodern Critical
Discourse”. Sederi, 9, pp. 299-304. Universidad de Málaga.

Murray, M. (2004). “Primogeniture, Patrilineage, and the Displacement of Women”. In Women,

Property, and the Letters of the Law in Early Modern England (pp. 121-136). University of Toronto
Press.

Ngugi, wa Thiong’o (1986). “Decolonizing the Mind”. In Narvaez, D.F. (2020). Understanding the
“Cultural Bomb” of Whiteness. https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/moral-
landscapes/202006/understanding-the-cultural-bomb-whiteness.

Orgel, S. (1984). “Prospero’s Wife”. Representations 8, pp. 1-13. University of California Press.

Pensalfini, R. (2016). Prison Shakespeare: For These Deep Shames and Great Indignities. Palgrave
Macmillan.

Peterson, M. (2020). “Micro Aggressions and Connections in the Context of National Multiculturalism:
Everyday Geographies of Racialisation and Resistance in Contemporary Scotland”. Antipode, 52(5),
pp. 1393-1412. DOI: 10.1111/anti.12643.
 74

Prattes, R. (2022). “Caring Masculinities and Race: On Racialized Workers and “New Fathers””. Men
and Masculinities. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X211065024.

Rabaka, R. (2021). Du Bois A Critical Introduction. Polity Press.

Randolph, A. (2006). ““Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Beautiful”: Black Masculinity and Alternative
Embodiment in Rap Music”. Race, Gender & Class,13(3/4), pp. 200–217.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41675181.

Rao, E. (2021). “Home and Nation in Margaret Atwood’s Later Fiction”. In Howells, C.A. (Ed.) The
Cambridge Companion to Margaret Atwood (2nd ed, pp. 68-81). Cambridge University Press. Google
Books.

ReelinInTheYears66, Allan, L. (Abel Meeropol) performed by Holiday, B. (2018, 22 February). “Billie

Holiday - "Strange Fruit" Live 1959 [Reelin' In The Years Archives]”. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DGY9HvChXk.

Reynolds, B. (2003). Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future.
Palgrave Macmillan.

Roberts, S. & Elliott, K. (2020). “Challenging Dominant Representations of Marginalized Boys and Men
in Critical Studies on Men and Masculinities”. Boyhood Studies, 13 (2), pp. 87-104.
https://doi.org/10.3167/bhs.2020.130207.

Rosenberg, L. (2011). “39 The Canon/Canonicity (a) Anglophone Caribbean Literature and the
Canon”. In Bucknor, M. A. & Donnell, A. (Eds.) The Routledge Companion to Anglophone Caribbean
Literature (pp. 347-355). Taylor and Francis Group.
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/hud/detail.action?docID=716494.

Root, D. (1996). Cannibal Culture Art Appropriation, and the Commodification of Difference. Westview
Press.

RuPaul’s Drag Race (2020, 3 September). “Best of Political Challenges (Compilation)”. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkXCAJSvFzg.

Russell, W. (1989, 27 October). Shirley Valentine. Paramount Pictures.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098319/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1.

Scott, A. (1998). “Discourses of Kingship in Measure for Measure and the Works of James I”.
Parergon, 15(2), pp. 71-93. Australian and New Zealand Association of Medieval and Early Modern
Studies (Inc.). https://doi.org/10.1353/pgn.1998.0012.
 75

Scott-Douglass, A. (2007). Shakespeare Inside. Continuum.

Sealey, K. (2018). “The Composite Community: Thinking Through Fanon’s Critique of a Narrow
Nationalism”. Critical Philosophy of Race, 6(1), pp. 26–57.
https://doi.org/10.5325/critphilrace.6.1.0026.

Shailor, J (Ed.). (2011). Performing New Lives. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Shakespeare, W. (2022). The Tempest. Thomas, F. A. (Ed.). The Arden Shakespeare, Bloomsbury
Publishing Plc.

shakespearbehindbars (2013, 19 February). “NEWSCLIP Shakespeare Behind Bars - CNN - Bruce

Burkhart – 2/13/03”. YouTube. https://youtu.be/XEik144ucxk.

Shepard, A. (2003). Meanings of Manhood in Early Modern England. Oxford University Press. Kindle
and Print Editions.

Shin, H. (2008). “Single Parenting, Homeschooling: Prospero, Caliban, Miranda”. Studies in English
Literature, 1500-1900, 48(2), pp. 373-393. Rice University. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40071339.

Simoes da Silva, A. J. (2000). Cross / Cultures 44 The Luxuary of National Despair George Lamming’s
Fiction as Decolonizing Project. Rodopi.

Singh, J. G. (2019, 2020). Shakespeare and Postcolonial Theory. The Arden Shakespeare,
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

Slomka, E. (2020, 27 February). “‘Star Trek’ and progressive representation in television”. The
Northern Iowan. https://www.northerniowan.com/12436/opinion/star-trek-and-progressive-
representation-in-television/.

Smith, J.D. (1999). “Thoughts on the changing meaning of disability: New eugenics or new
wholeness?” Remedial and Special Education, 20, pp. 131-133.

Smith, B. R. (2000). Shakespeare and Masculinity. Oxford University Press.

Solomon, J. R. (1991). “Going Places: Absolutism and Movement in Shakespeare's "The Tempest"”.
Renaissance Drama, 1991(22), pp. 3-45. The University of Chicago Press for Northwestern University.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41917271.

Spiller, E. A. (2000). “The Counsel of Fulke Greville: Transforming the Jacobean "Nourish Father"
through Sidney's "Nursing Father"”. Studies in Philology, 97(4), pp. 433-453. University of North
Carolina Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4174681.
 76

Spivak, G. C. (1985, 2020). Can the Subaltern Speak? (Estefania Penafiel Loaiza, Artwork). Afterall
Books.

Steinkoler, M. (2012). “When Dumbness, or Unbehagen before the Master, Becomes “Shakespeak”,
Comradery and Joy in Shared Lack”. Division Review, 6, pp. 42-44. https://pep-
web.org/browse/document/dr.006.0042a.

Swan, J. (2015). Man Points – The Definitive Guide to Measuring Your Manliness. Penguin.

“Take This Sabbath Day”. The West Wing, 1(14). YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfLZrPq136I.

Tatar, Y. (2020). ““Spirits to enforce, art to enchant”: metatheatricality and art in The Tempest and Hag-
Seed”. Timisoara, 26, pp. 93-100 & p. 271.

TEDXTalks (2017, 10 March). “Hope from adversity | Shakespeare at San Quentin |

TEDxSanQuentin”. YouTube. https://youtu.be/ws4GZvNeQhQ.

Tiffin, H. (1979). “The Tyranny of History: George Lamming’s Natives of My Person and Water With
Berries”. Ariel 10 (4), pp. 37-52. John Hopkins University Press.

Tiffin, H. (1986). “The Novels Of George Lamming: Finding a Language for Post-Colonial Fiction”. In
Bock, H. & Wertheim, A. (Eds.) Essays on Contemporary Post-colonial Fiction (pp. 253-274).
https://www.academia.edu/43705743/Finding_a_Language_for_Post_colonial_Fiction_The_Novels_of
_George_Lamming.

Tofteland, C. (2019, 11 November). “We Know What We Are, But Not What We May Be: The Circle of
Trust”. Cal Shakes. https://calshakes.org/the-circle-of-trust/.

Tolan, F. (2021). “Margaret Atwood’s Revisions of Classic Texts”. In Howells, C.A. (Ed.) The
Cambridge Companion to Margaret Atwood (2nd ed, pp. 130-144). Cambridge University Press.
Google Books.

Tremonti, M. & Stapp. S. (1997, 15 October). “My Own Prison”. Track 3 in My Own Prison by Creed
(Stapp, Tremonti, Marshall, Phillips). Wind-up & The Bicycle Music Company.
https://www.songfacts.com/facts/creed/my-own-prison.

Tremonti, M. (2018, 8 June). “Trust”. Track 4 in A Dying Machine by Tremonti (Tremonti, Friedman,
Whitlock). Napalm Records. https://genius.com/Tremonti-trust-lyrics.
 77

Vaughan, A. T. & Mason Vaughan, V. (1991, 1993). Shakespeare’s Caliban. Cambridge University
Press.

Visconsi, E. (2008). “Vinculum Fidei: The Tempest and the Law of Allegiance”. Law and Literature, 20
(1) (Spring), pp. 1-20. Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Cardozo School of Law.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/lal.2008.20.1.1.

Wachowski, Lana & Wachowski, Lilly (1999). The Matrix. Warner Bros.

Ward, S. & Connolly, R. (2020). “The play is a prison: the discourse of Prison Shakespeare”. Studies in
Theatre and Performance, 40(2), pp. 128-144.

Weatherby, T. G., & Vidon, E. S. (2018). “Delegitimizing wilderness as the man cave: The role of social
media in female wilderness empowerment”. Tourist Studies, 18(3), pp. 332–352.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797618771691.

Yentob, A. (2017). “Margaret Atwood: You Have Been Warned!”. imagine . . . BBC. Last aired:
19/04/2022. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b093tw95.

Zaibi, L. (2016). “Rewriting The Tempest, George Lamming’s Water with Berries”. Postcolonial
Interventions, 1(2), pp. 107-134.

Zajac, P.J. (2020). “Prisoners of Shakespeare: Trauma and Adaptation in Atwood’s Hag-Seed”.
Studies in the Novel, 52(3), pp. 324-343. Johns Hopkins University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1353/sdn.2020.0046.
 78

Copyright Statement

i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/ or schedules to this thesis) owns any
copyright in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he has given The University of Huddersfield the right to use such
Copyright for any administrative, promotional, educational and/or teaching.

ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts, may be made only in accordance with the
regulations of the University Library. Details of these regulations may be obtained from the Librarian.
This page must form part of any such copies made.

iii. The ownership of any patents, designs, trademarks and any and all other intellectual property rights
except for the Copyright (the “Intellectual Property Rights”) and any reproductions of copyright works,
for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be
owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property Rights and
Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without permission of the owner(s) of
the relevant Intellectual Property Rights and/or Reproductions.