Literature Essay - Samuel Taylor Coleridge
The poet and critic Samuel Taylor Coleridge claims that Iago's attitude towards life is the motive hunting of motiveless malignity. How far do you agree with this assessment?
It is often said that William Shakespeare was the first playwright to engender his characters with real personality, making them more interesting than any other playwright of his time, and radically changing the face of the theatrical persona from a 2-D cardboard cut-out to a living, breathing three-dimensional human being with thoughts and emotions. Although perhaps a bit harsh on his contemporaries such as Jonson and Marlowe, this statement is truer than ever when one comes to examine Shakespeare's villains.
The evil-doers of Shakespeare's plays are so memorable and thoroughly chilling simply because they are rounded characters and have their own feelings, history and motives. Their inclination towards evil is almost always explained by Shakespeare, and that forms the foundation of their characters. Take Edmund in King Lear, who commands 'Now, gods, stand up for bastards', explaining his evil state of mind is due to the fact that he is a bastard son and has felt second best to his brother Edgar all his life, and is now out for revenge. Richard III, another of Shakespeare's classic villains, is a hunchback and because he has been so 'rudely stamped' he 'is determined to prove a villain'. The ideas that deformity and a being born out of wedlock could lead to an evil inclination were popular ones in Shakespeare's time. One villain however, stands out even in this infamous rogues' gallery. This character is Iago.
Coleridge's claim that 'Iago's attitude towards life is the motive hunting of motiveless malignity' puts him in a league of his own. The idea that he is evil and sadistic not because of any reasonably explainable circumstances, but because he wants to be evil and sadistic, is one that strikes a particularly strong chord of fear and would truly single out Iago as the personification of the perfect Machiavellian evil. But is this statement true enough to give Iago this dubious crown?
There is no doubt that throughout the play, Iago does give reasons for his actions and intentions, and most of these are during the soliloquies, which are traditionally when Shakespeare wants his characters to be speaking the truth to the audience. What must be ascertained if we are to agree with Coleridge's claim, is how true these motives are and how much Iago actually believes them. Are they the true reasons behind his evil, or is he simply using them as an excuse, fishing for reasons to explain his hatred of the Moor and grasping whatever he can, whether it is true or not?
In the first scene of the play, Shakespeare sets up the plot, and we learn that Iago hates Othello, and has enlisted the help of Roderigo, who is besotted with Desdemona and wants Othello out of the way so he can woo her. Iago immediately gives a reason for this discontent with the Moor, and it is that despite his long military history of service with the Moor, he has been passed over for promotion to Othello's lieutenant in favour of the younger Michael Cassio, who 'never set a squadron in the field, / Nor the division of a battle knows / More than a spinster.' This is indeed a substantial gripe, and thus satisfies Roderigo that Iago does indeed hate the Moor, and Roderigo will go along with Iago's plans of trying to plot his downfall while superficially appearing at his side and at his service.
However, how heartfelt is Iago's complaint? While it is understandable that Iago would be annoyed, is it really believable that he would seek Othello's destruction and the break up of his marriage over this, especially considering how many years military service Iago had under Othello and the fact that he remains his trusted ensign? Although not revealed to the audience or Roderigo at this point in the play, the extent of Iago's hatred and his plans to completely destroy and ravage Othello by making him kill his truly beloved wife surely are not justified by being passed over in promotion. Iago himself admits that Cassio has friends in high places, and that it is the way of the world for promotion to reflect connections rather than experience: 'Why, there's no remedy; 'tis the curse of service, / Preferment goes by letter and affection / And not by old gradation, where each second / Stood heir to the first'. He almost seems to say this with a shrug of the shoulders, something which implies reluctant acceptance as opposed to bitter rage.
Roderigo is convinced and goes along with Iago's plans to slander the Moor, and although the audience might be satisfied with Iago's motive at this early point in the play, in retrospect the punishment Iago dishes out to Othello for the remainder of the piece hardly fits the crime. In fact, Iago never actually mentions his passing over as a motive for his hatred again throughout the whole play, moving on to other motives with similar shaky foundations. This could mean one of two things, that either he was embellishing the situation for Roderigo's benefit to convince him to help slander the Moor, or that he was simply using Cassio's promotion as an excuse for him to feel this way. It is far easier to justify to yourself and others your hatred and desire to destroy someone else if you have an excuse, however feeble, to do so. This is the heart of what Coleridge is trying to say, that Iago is motive-hunting and simply using or even inventing excuses to justify his hatred of the Moor and his dark desire to see him suffer. In a recent talk entitled 'Psychoanalysis after Sep.11', Jonathan Lear concludes that 'Iago embodies a hatred that cannot be rationalized, an evil not based on reasons.' This enhances Coleridge's claim that Iago seeks a motive where in truth, there are none that equate the extent of the damage he is willing to do.
The next time Iago mentions a motive for his enmity, it is in I.III, after we have just seen Othello show himself as an eloquent and honourable general, who has won the respect of the Venetian senate and Desdemona's heart. Iago, after convincing Roderigo to keep faith with him and fund their future plans, is as adamant as ever to destroy Othello and his marriage despite this initial setback. After Roderigo leaves, Iago soliloquizes, and reveals to the audience another reason in his mind to hate the Moor. Iago suspects of Othello 'that 'twixt my sheets / He has done my office'. This is indeed a serious offence, and might go a long way to explaining the motivation for Iago's thirst for revenge. However, he immediately adds 'I know not if't be true; / But I, for mere suspicion in that kind, / Will do as if for surety.' He has acted upon a mere suspicion of his wife's infidelity with the Moor, and will use this as an excuse to carry out his devious plans. This in itself is not enough to convince the audience that it is the true motive behind 'honest' Iago's quest to destroy the Moor. It simply lacks weight and any sort of evidence, and Iago again seems to use this suspicion (of which there is no evidence in the rest of the text) as an excuse in his own mind to justify his actions, and spur him on. All this for the honour of his wife, which as the rest of the play will show, he holds in complete contempt and only uses her to aid his plot, and when she steps in, does not hesitate for a second to kill her to secure her silence.
