I recently attended the production of Shakespeare’s All’s Well that Ends Well at the Delacorte Theater in Central Park. I usually try to read the play before seeing the production, but I forgot to do that in this case. Hearing that the play is considered one of Shakespeare’s “problem plays,” I asked my mom for a brief summary. She told me that the play was considered problematic because the heroine, a resourceful, kind woman named Helena, spends the entire play mooning after a cad who doesn’t deserve her. When she manages to land him at the end of the show, the audience is left wondering why she wanted him so badly in the first place.
After seeing Helena and Bertram in action, I saw that problem immediately. Unfortunately, All’s Well that Ends Well is problematic for other reasons in addition to that one.
First, the play seems to imply that women are angels and men are animals. Helena accepts Bertram’s disdain for her because she can’t conceive of receiving better treatment from him. As pointed out in this review from The TheatreSource,
“But Helena continues to love Betrtam despite his flaws, seemingly resigned to the fact that he s a man and men will be cads. This is a familiar sentiment, given the recent public sexual scandals and discussions of wives that stand faithfully by their husbands.”
So true. I despise the idea that men just can’t help themselves from being horny jerks.
Of course, by the end of the play, Bertram realizes what a jerk he’s been this whole time and looks at Helena with new eyes. Bully for him. He learns that he should not have treated Helena so poorly. That’s a good lesson to learn. And yet, while watching the play progress, I often felt sorrier for Bertram than I did for Helena.
Because even though I understood that Helena is a good person, even though I understood that Bertram is immature and foolish, I could not get around the fact that Bertram is forced to marry someone against his will. And I don’t think anyone should ever have to marry someone against his will no matter WHAT his reasons are.
Essentially, Helena pulls out the version of the Grand Romantic Gesture that I can’t stand, the one that puts public pressure on someone to accept a romantic offer. Helena chooses Bertram for her husband right after she saves the king’s life. There’s no way Bertram can refuse her without looking like the world’s biggest tool, and that’s a terrible position to be put in. Look at how people felt like they had the right to criticize Mila Kunis because she didn’t immediately accept an offer of a date made by a total fucking stranger. “Come on, Mila, do it for your country! This guy’s done so much for America!” “Come on, Bertram. Marry Helena. She’s done so much for the king!”
I mean this as a criticism of the play itself, not of this particular production. I thought the production was lovely and well-paced and the actors strong. Still, I can see exactly why this is considered a “problem play.” The characters show a fundamental lack of respect for the idea of consent.
Articles
Blog Posts
Interviews
Novels, Fiction & Silliness
I agree with you about that. I also took Helena’s rightfulness with caution, maybe just because overworshipped characters always vex me however much they deserve it. Bertram’s unprovoked hostility towards her and his repulsion for her mere company do grade him indeed, but he is allowed not to be interested in her. If you watched Queer as folk, it reminds me of the case of Brian, who is deemed heartless for not falling instantly in love with Justin, and the whole cast seemed to force him into that relationship.
Revising the play, it seems to me Bertram wasn’t even particularly mean to her, just politely uninterested until she pulled the Grand Romantic Gesture. His hostility started AFTER the marriage. The only immoral act on his part was towards Diana, otherwise he was just immaturely standing up for his right, and the definite goal he also had, to go to the war. I also read Helena as somewhat of a hypocrite, constantly speaking about how humble she was while acting with selfish entitlement, on the proposal and after it (‘I am not worthy, I am not worthy, but you have to kiss me as you are my property’). I am also told to be immature, but Bertram may have been doing the same thing as Helena did: the most reasonably determined things to earn what he wanted, in his case being a soldier. Being Helena unfairly worshipped by everyone (I am not good at history, but I found it hard to believe everyone was so liberal about ranks and ancestry at the time), and Bertram unfairly despised by everyone both gave me a bad feeling. That may cloud my judgment, though, as I incline to be critical towards shilled characters, and defend hated ones. And some reviews write Helena told the king Bertram doesn’t have to marry her if he doesn’t want to, but I couldn’t find any trace of that in the play. Even if she said that, that scene still would be a disturbingly stalkerish gesture to pull, since she must see the king’s reaction coming, let alone the public’s, to Bertram’s rejection, and she KNEW Bertram wasn’t interested in her, or at least could have deduced it from the fact that if Bertram wanted her he would have proposed to her himself. She may have been thinking her low rank bothered him, but it would be a better gesture from her to wish for fortune and nobility from the king, and let Bertram come to her as a suitor if he wants instead.
Though it may send a good message if I interpret Bertram as a strong independent personality, who doesn’t let others decide what he should feel and how he should judge, and finally manages to force the others to realize that he is a person with free will, whether they like it or not, not an object to be given and taken without his consent. In the beginning, the Roussillon countess tells Helena “you WILL be my daughter-in-law”, without even counting her son’s part in it. Then Helena practically buys him from the king, who blackmails him into consenting, after a great deal of outrage how he dares reject her when she is so wonderful and would suit his house so well. I admired the way he told the king that it’s HIS decision and judgement to make. His mother can also fume to herself that she is so nobler than nobility that he should be her SERVANT, he doesn’t care. Helena must meet HIS conditions, not the king’s, to have him, and she has to learn there is not much thanks in a forced, loveless marriage.
But my personal antipathy aside, do you expect political correctness from a medieval tale? I don’t think arranged marriage is something a truly loving suitor would resort to, but it WAS legal and normal.