By: Prarti Satya
Shakespeare’s works are incredibly lauded within the realm of English literature, and one commendation they often receive is for presenting more complicated female characters than other playwrights of 16th century England. These plays incorporate social phenomena such as familial obligation, patrilineality, and the subservience of women to the male figures in their lives to provide insight into the roles these women had to play in their Western societies. However, 20th and 21st century film adaptations of these plays have found ways to blend the stories that Shakespeare has so masterfully crafted with cultures that he never wrote about. The adaptability of these storylines makes them so influential, which is why filmmakers, scholars, and art enthusiasts alike should continue to recognize the relevance of these centuries-old works, even now.
Hamlet, Bollywood, and the Plight of Ophelia
The tragic heroine Ophelia is a prime example of a complex female character in Shakespearean literature. Her presence throughout Hamlet presents a criticism of women’s lack of autonomy, and her consistent subjection to the whims of the men in her life indicate the inescapable predicament of being a woman in early modern society. Throughout the play, she finds herself constantly trapped between different, often conflicting, expectations placed on her. Her inability to fulfill all the expectations that are placed on women in early modern society drives her to madness and ultimately her death.
However, 14th century Denmark is not the only cultural context in which this commentary is relevant. In Vishal Bhardwaj’s film Haider, the play is adapted to the conflict in Kashmir, transforming this tale of Danish royalty into one of India-Pakistan unrest and counter-insurgency. The character Ophelia, renamed Arshia, finds her narrative modified to fit this new narrative, but the crux of what she symbolizes remains incredibly consistent. She seems to possess more autonomy in this film than in the original play, a product of the centuries-long time jump between the two works, but it becomes apparent from her very first interaction with her male relatives that she does not possess much autonomy. She attempts to act as an anchor for protagonist Haider over the course of the film, but she inevitably finds herself driven to madness as a result of the ongoing violence around her. Thus, Bhardwaj makes a statement on the impact that war has on those perceived to be innocent, namely women. In juxtaposing Arshia, a woman who seems to be largely in control of herself, with the inescapable nature of this conflict on residents of Kashmir, this film explores the different impacts that war has on men and women, acknowledging the highly gendered experiences that women in conflict areas face. In being perceived as “innocents” in conflict spaces, women often end up in positions where they have decreased control over their circumstances. Even with a character who is fairly confident and assertive, Arshia still finds herself a victim of her circumstances. In this sense, her narrative directly parallels that of Ophelia while still drawing attention to this specific issue left untouched by the original play.
King Lear and Patriarchal Inheritance in Feudal Japan
Another instance can be found in the tragedy of King Lear, a play that centers on father-child relationships. The core conflict of this play centers on King Lear’s need to determine which of his three daughters will inherit his land and wealth, given his lack of sons. The play explores the different ways that Lear’s daughters operate within a patriarchal society and the power they hold in such a male-dominated system.
Transposing King Lear into a different cultural context can offer a great deal of information on the role of women within the culture in question, which director Akira Kurosawa accomplishes through his adaptation Ran, molding the Lear narrative to fit the culture of feudal Japan. Perhaps the most immediately striking detail about this adaptation is the gender-swapping of Lear’s daughters. In the film, Kurosawa chooses not to present the bounds of patriarchy in the same way, drawing the story away from the deference of Lear’s daughters to his authority. In making the three women into men, he instead presents a clear statement on the social hierarchy in feudal Japan. Women were, in the early feudal period, capable of inheritance and ownership, possessing individual rights to a surprising degree. It was not until the 16th century and the rise of the samurai class that women began to see these rights decline. Ran is set in the 17th century, shortly following this decline. Therefore, the decision to make these three characters men is a clear reference to the decline in rights that women experienced by placing the power in this play squarely in the hands of a cast of men.
Conclusion
In placing these incredibly Western narratives into new cultural contexts, directors and Shakespeare fans alike are able to fuse the complex themes present in these works with diverse backgrounds. The production of these adaptations promotes intercultural and historical understanding, presenting snapshots of these diverse periods in the form of narratives that have already proven to be immensely popular. It also indicates the existence of cultural similarities, bridging the perceived gap between Western and Eastern cultures. By asserting that there are issues such as that of gender hierarchies that plague societies regardless of their location, these adaptations imply the presence of consistent phenomena between the two hemispheres. This assertion makes clear why Shakespearean works should not be viewed as outdated. Rather, these works should continue to be reinterpreted and reexamined, as they carry ideas and political arguments that continue to influence a wide variety of societies centuries later.
