Free University of Berlin

Wintersemester 2000/2001
HS: Dialogue and Drama in the English Renaissance

Aspects of Communication in
,,The Taming of the Shrew"
by William Shakespeare

by

Juliane Thiessen

Contents

1. Introduction p. 3

2. Question of identity p. 3
2.1. Basis p. 3
2.2. Language creates categories p. 4
2.3. Non-verbal communication through costume p. 8
2.4. Figures of speech as communication p. 10

3. Communication and power struggle p. 11
3.1. Basis p. 11
3.2. Battle for definitions (Act IV, Scene I) p. 12
3.3. Taming the falcon (Act IV, Scenes I-III) p. 16
3.4. Submission? (Act IV, Scene V) p. 20

4. Conclusion p. 24

5. Bibliography p. 26

Who says what in which channel
to whom with which effect¹

1. Introduction

In the following I am going to approach Shakespeare′s ,,The Taming of the Shrew," by analyzing selected dialogues according to their communication patterns.
Main focus here is it to look at relationship and gender structures and their manifestations. The question raised is whether language is specifically used to affirm polarities, or even if these polarities are only a result of defining language. To what extent is reality constructed through this language and for what reason? What positions do non-verbal communication signs, such as clothes and body-language have, and do they influence the interaction as well?

Working with a text always brings up questions and conclusions that may be subjective and just one possible interpretation. I have tried to show different approaches and have backed up my analysis with studies in communication sciences such as works by Watzlawick and Schultz von Thun.²

The main axiom on which I base this paper on is: "All behaviour is communication."³ I am going to present different aspects of language to picture communication as a whole, as a system with various elements, supporting each other.

2. Question of identity

2.1. Basis

Language influences our behaviour and creates cognitive categories. At the same time, language is determined by the society it is used within. This interdependence of society and language creates the world we live in and the world Shakespeare wrote his plays about and for. Problems that may occur by coming up against the limiting factors of such a system are presented in "The Taming of the Shrew."
The mere title presents us with a dilemma. A "shrew" is a tiny mouselike animal with a quite undeserved reputation as venomous and ferocious. So why do we have to tame a shrew? Because it has a pointed nose, is not easy to catch and annoys people? In "The Taming of the Shrew," Katherina′s "pointed nose" or rather her sharp tongue, is the bone of contention. That means that her language is the problem and defines her as a shrew that has to be tamed. It has to be tamed because it does not fit in the language patterns of her gender, society and the hierarchy within her family.

Stories of "Shrews" belong to general medieval tradition of bourgeois satire, as well as folk tales. In these plays "traditionally the shrew triumphed, (...) (it) was the oldest and indeed the only native comic rôle for women. If overcome, (...) (the shrew) submitted either to high theological argument or to a taste of the stick."⁴

The taming of Katherina′s language becomes the central task for Petruchio by "wooing" her. The wooing of Katherina takes up rather less than half the play, and her part is quite surprisingly short; although she is on stage a good deal, she spends most of the time listening to Petruchio. As opposed to the traditional shrew-stories, here the play is his; that is its novelty. By the wooing in Act II, the wedding in Act III and the "taming school" in Act IV, Petruchio overpowers his shrew with her own weapons, combined with strong demonstrations of his natural authority. Only by closely looking at the scenes, we realize in what communicational dilemma Katherina finds herself in.

Katherina is stuck in the rôles of being a woman, a dependant, unloved daughter and a shrew. Petruchio at the beginning of the play gets a plain description of Katherina′s social rôle; she is "renowned in Padua for her scolding tongue" (1.2.99); but his behaviour is equally renowned among his own servants (1.2.106-114). The difference here is that he is male and his sharp tongue is characterised as a male temper, whereas she is solely a shrew. Her only way out of being a social outcast is through Petruchio; but at what expenses?

2.2. Language creates categories

[...]

1 "Lasswell-formula," Lasswell, Harold, D. (1948): "The Structure and Function of Communication in Society." In: Bryson, Lyman (ed.) (1948), The Communication of Ideas. New York 1948: p. 37-51: "A convenient way to describe an act of communication is to answer the following questions: Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect?"

2 Schultz von Thun, Friedemann (1981, 1989): Miteinander Reden 1. Störungen und Klärungen. Allgemeine Psychologie der Kommunikation. Hamburg; Miteinander Reden 2. Stile, Werte und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung. Differentielle Psychologie der Kommunikation. Hamburg.

Watzlawick, Paul / Beavin, Janet Helmick / Jackson, Don D., (1967): Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxies. New York

3 Watzlawick et al., ibid, p. 48

4 Bradbrook, M.C. (1958): "Dramatic Rôle as social image; A Study of the Taming of the Shrew." In: Shakespeare Jahrbuch 94: p. 132-150, p. 134