Introduction
William Shakespeare was an actor, a poet, and a playwright. He is still one of the most popular figures in the literary field many decades after his demise. His expertise in poetry earned him several titles in the field. For example, he was fondly referred to as the ‘Bard of Avon’ and the ‘national poet’ (Henderson 12). Most of his popular works were produced in a span of about one decade. The period referred to started from 1589 and ended in 1613. He mainly focused on comedies and histories.
“Much Ado About Nothing” is one of Shakespeare’s most prolific comedies. As already indicated, this literary icon was a successful playwright and poet during his time. His popularity rose considerably in the 19th century when his plays became well known. Many students of literature have performed and interpreted his writings over the years.
Shakespeare addressed a range of themes in his plays. They included the themes of love, death, and human nature in general. The theme of inconstancy is prominent in his “Much Ado About Nothing.” Many instances of inconsistency are highlighted in the play. In the current paper, the author addresses this theme in the context of a quote drawn from the work.
An Analysis of the Theme of Inconstancy in the Play “Much Ado About Nothing”
In the play, Benedick, one of the characters, is quoted by Shakespeare, saying, “…for man is a giddy thing, and this is my conclusion” (Shermer p. 86). An analysis of this line reveals the inconsistent nature of mankind. The term ‘giddy’ refers to the aspect of being impulsive. Impulsiveness, on its part, indicates a situation where someone acts on instincts without planning.
Impulsive individuals rarely take the time to consider the consequences of their choices. Such individuals are not consistent in life. On the contrary, they seem to change their mind from time to time. The quote “for man is a giddy thing” (Shermer 86) is Benedick’s description of the inconsistent and unreliable character of the man.
The giddy nature of mankind is evident throughout the play (Shermer 86). Shakespeare illustrates some of the characters as acting on instincts. A case in point is Don John, the bastard prince. He is the brother to Don Pedro. It appears that his major objective in life is to humiliate his sibling. As a result, he attempts to create hatred between Don Pedro and Claudio. He tells the latter that Don Pedro is attempting to woo Hero. However, he fails in his mission. The misunderstanding he has created between the two is quickly resolved.
In spite of the setbacks, Don John is determined to revenge against his brother. He accuses Hero of infidelity. He goes ahead to prove his claims by letting the duo witness Borachio enter Hero’s bedchambers. His plans are successful, and he is in a position to derail the wedding plans. A critical analysis of this character reveals that he is driven purely by his quest for revenge (Buccola 91).
He fails to weigh the consequences of his actions on himself and on other people around him. For example, his actions result in a break-up between Claudio and Hero. At the end of the play, John pays for his treachery following his capture.
Individuals who act on instincts end up making rash decisions in life. For example, Claudio portrays ‘giddiness’ when he declares his love for Hero. He meets Hero for the first time and falls in love. He even declares his intentions to court her by making it known that he is serious (Buccola 91). Moments later, Claudio discloses to his friends Benedict and Don Pedro that he intends to marry Hero.
The decision is hasty since he has not even taken the time to know Hero. However, this does not stop the two from engaging each other. They fall in love and finalize their wedding plans.
Claudio’s hasty decision to announce his love for Hero leads to a number of problems for the couple. Distrust takes root, wreaking havoc to their marriage. For example, Don John finds it easy to come between the two. When he accuses Hero of infidelity, Claudio is easily swayed. As a result, Hero is publicly humiliated by Claudio on their wedding day (Buccola 91).
The move by Claudio to disgrace Hero is another instance of human inconstancy. It is apparent that he acts on instincts. He is determined to punish her without taking into consideration the impacts of his actions. He does not even question the allegations made by Don John (Buccola 91). His decision leaves Hero devastated. He risked his alleged love because of his unreliable nature. The love could have come to an end as a result of the baseless claims.
Persisting Inconsistencies in the Play
Inconstancy simply means inconsistency. The theme is related to the ‘giddy’ nature of man. As indicated earlier, individuals who act on instincts are inconsistent. Benedick and Beatrice fall in love in spite of the fact that they were longtime adversaries (Buccola 91). The love between the two is as a result of treachery on the part of their friends.
Pedro and his friends make sure that Benedick overhears them talk of how Beatrice is madly in love with him. Beatrice is taken through the same kind of treatment. The trick works, and the two finally discover that they are in love. Both of them are determined to reconcile. The theme of inconstancy is evident in this interaction, given that the two were previously not in good terms.
The theme of inconstancy is also evident when Benedick announces his plans to get married. He had previously shared with his friends that he does not intend to get a wife (Shermer 86). He despised marriage and love openly to the extent of discouraging his friend Claudio from marrying Hero (Buccola 91). He finds it hard to believe that Don Pedro is serious about getting married.
Pedro tells him that he will settle down in life when he finds the perfect woman to marry. Towards the end of the play, Shakespeare makes it apparent that Benedick is madly in love with Beatrice. The former publicly declares his love for the girl and makes known his intentions to settle down with her. Benedick is also ready to show his devotion to Beatrice by slaying his friend Claudio for having humiliated Hero.
Beatrice despises Benedick at the beginning of the play. Their long-standing animosity is made clear. Even after the arrival of Benedick from war, the two treat each other coldly (Shermer 86). Beatrice refers to Benedick as a mysterious man and a dull fool. The two terms show the degree of contempt that Beatrice has towards Benedick. However, her attitude towards him changes when she overhears a conversation between Hero and Ursula.
The two were discussing Benedick’s underlying love for her. She is delighted since she regards herself as a loved woman. From that moment on, she is ready to reconcile with Benedick. When Benedick declares his love for her, she gladly accepts his proposal. The two even plan for their wedding ceremony (Shermer 86). The theme of inconstancy is evident when the two characters come together. The two fall in love and forget their hatred towards each other.
Conclusion
“Much Ado About Nothing” is one of Shakespeare’s most popular plays (Henderson 12). The play addresses the theme of inconstancy in detail. The characters are inconsistent, and they change their opinions about other people and issues from time to time. Examples of characters who exhibit inconstancy are Beatrice and Benedick. Initially, the two were not in good terms, and there were no signs that they would ever reconcile. Benedick is quoted stating that he does not believe in love and that he had no intentions of getting married.
However, towards the end of the play, the two are in love and even have plans to hold a wedding. Giddiness is evident in the play where the characters act on instincts. For example, Don John is so obsessed with revenge against his brother that he plans to humiliate him without considering the gravity of his actions (Buccola 91). In the play, giddiness and inconstancy are closely related. Individuals who are giddy are largely inconsistent. Since they act on instincts, they change their decisions frequently.
Works Cited
Buccola, Regina. “Much Ado about Nothing (review).” Shakespeare Bulletin 24 (2006): 89-92. Print.
Henderson, Diana. Alternative Shakespeares, New York: Routledge, 2008. Print.
Shermer, Michael. “Much Ado about Nothing.” Scientific American 306 (2012): 86-86. Print.