In the fourteenth century, mental illness began to be associated with witchcraft. As Dearman points out in his article “Criminal Responsibility and Insanity Tests: A Psychiatrist Looks at Three Cases”, “By the middle of the fifteenth century medical psychology had become so infused with theological and legal ideas of free will that it became impossible to recognize the problem as a medical one” (1390). When madness became associated with moralistic and supernatural elements, individuals acting in peculiar manners were often labeled as sorcerers or witches. Witches and sorcerers were believed to have communicated with Satan out of free will, and were believed to have deliberately decided to act as his agents. This agency was seen as dangerous, as it was thought to permit Satan a channel through which he could further interact with humanity. As George Gifford writes in the early seventeenth century, “Satan is now heard speake, and beleeued. He speaketh by conjurers, by sorcerers, and by witches, and his word is taken. He deuifeth a number of things to be done, & they are put in practice and followed” (3). When madness was associated with Satan and the supernatural, it became a responsibility of the clergy and the Church and was judged and punished according to the Church, rather than the law. As it was not possible to directly condemn or punish Satan for his wickedness, instead, society took to killing his supposed agents. The deaths of witches and sorcerers were often accompanied by confessions, which were most likely a result of torture and delusions.
Although Renaissance society was still influenced by early theories of witchcraft and demonic activity, by the time Shakespeare began to write, madness (associated with witchcraft) was formally dealt with according to the law, rather than religion. In 1563, under the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, a law was passed stating that any first offence of sorcery would result in imprisonment, and that any second offense, would result in death. Later, in 1604, the response to witchcraft became even more severe and the number of hangings and deaths increased (Overholser 338). Although Shakespeare’s personal response to witchcraft is somewhat ambiguous, it is clear that these trials and executions were common affairs throughout his life. The last witch was not hanged until 1684 in England and perhaps more significantly, the prosecution of witches was not outlawed until 1736.
Yet while it was common for society to turn to the supernatural in order to explain madness, madness was also frequently viewed as a medical condition. When madness was not understood as the result of demonic interaction, it was often understood as the result of the planets or the humors. During the Renaissance, it was widely understood that the planets influenced human affairs. The planet’s positioning at the time of one’s birth was believed to affect the individual’s humors and temperament. Similarly, the various positioning of the planets (of which the Sun and Moon were thought to belong) on any given night was also thought to alter one’s humors and temperament. As Overholser points out, “Shakespeare was familiar with the term “lunacy” and “lunatic” and with these other notions concerning the astrological allusions in his plays and sonnets” (338). In many of his plays, Shakespeare uses such language to refer to disturbance or unusual behavior.
An unbalance of humors was also seen as a strong determinant of one’s temperament and disposition. Elizabethan society believed that the human body consisted of four elements: melancholy, phlegm, sanguine and choler. As Overholser states, “Depending upon the predominance of one humor or another there were characteristic physical and psychological types” (342). An unbalance of humors was used to explain both physical illness as well as psychological and mental illnesses, and was often used to describe an individual or their behavior. A melancholic man, for instance, was thought to exhibit “courage, pride, liberality, audacity, cheerfulness, and pleasantness” (Overholser 343) due to the hot and dry nature of melancholy. However, the melancholic individual was also thought to suffer from restless sleeps, fearful dreams, and a doubting fearful and untrusting mind (343). Moreover, the melancholic individual was thought to be especially vulnerable to various physical illnesses and psychological hazards, such as demonic influences. Thus an overly melancholic individual was especially prone to madness.
When madness was considered to be the result of unbalanced humors, treatment was often pursued. In milder cases, physicians were sent to individual’s homes for treatment. While patients were encouraged to take walks outdoors, study, and partake in music, treatments generally focused on realigning the humors and would often consist of bloodletting and various purges and emetics. Certain foods and drugs would also be used, in order to wet or dry the humors, as needed. In 1652, for instance, Nicholas Culpeper spoke of a sappy herb which was thought to be “ very effectual for the Liver and Spleen, opening the Obstructions thereof and clarifying the Blood from Saltish, Choleric, and Adult Humors, Liver, Spleen, Choller, Adult Melancholy, Madness, Forgetfulness, Jaundice, yellows &black” (‘madness’ LEXE). The physicians believed that by ridding the body of excessive humors and by replenishing those that were lacking, the body would reach equilibrium, the mind could be rebalanced and sanity could be regained (Overholser 347).
However, while mild cases of madness were often treated in the home, with many individuals this was not possible. In more severe cases of madness, individuals were often institutionalized in the Bethlehem Hospital, a mental institute outside of London, also known as Bedlam. Living conditions at Bedlam were very poor. Patients were often starved, whipped and used for entertainment. Moreover, public citizens were able to enter Bedlam for a penny and walk around the asylum observing the patients. The abnormal behaviors exhibited by the inmates proved to be a perverse pleasure for many of the visitors, who seemed to make sport of mental illness.
Bedlam was a small institute and was not able to accommodate many. When population would begin to escalate, the hospital would thus release certain individuals, in order to lower residency and maintain itself. Once released, the former inmates would roam the countryside begging for money. As Queen Elizabeth I had outlawed begging, a specific license was needed to do so. Without it, individuals would be whipped and have a whole burnt through their left ear at first offence, and be hanged at their second. While dispatched workers were denied such a license and forced to wander from parish to parish seeking work, the Queen appeared to sympathize with madmen, as generally, they were the only individuals granted a license to beg (Overholser 343).
Unlike many of his contemporaries who made sport of madmen, Shakespeare appeared to be interested in understanding madness, as opposed to merely using it for comic effect. Despite the period’s wide spread analysis of madness, alternative views were beginning to emerge. In 1580, a physician by the name of Johann Weyer argued that witches were mentally ill, rather than demonic. The physician became very distressed with the treatment of witches, stating, “It is highly unpleasant to see how people in order to kill errors are busy killing human beings” (Zilboorg 209). Working against popular beliefs, Weyer argued that witchcraft was a medical condition, as were confessions and various other oddities. Although Shakespeare makes use of witches and madness all throughout his plays, the extent to which he accepts and rejects various ideologies is somewhat ambiguous.
Shakespeare’s portrayal of madness is very complex. In Hamlet, for instance, Shakespeare creates a seemingly mad character, Hamlet. There are many factors accounting for Hamlet’s madness. He appears to be influenced by the moon, his father’s death, interaction with a ghost, his mother’s hasty re-marriage and Ophelia’s rejection. . To an extent, Shakespeare is exploring the cause of madness through Hamlet’s surroundings. Before Hamlet talks with the ghost, he states that “By the overgrowth of some complexion/ (Oft breaking down the pales and forts of reason)…Or by some habit too much o’erleavens…Being nature’s livery or fortune’s star” men fall to corruption (1.4.29-35). Thus before Hamlet ever begins to act madly, he comments on the nature of corruption, which may also be read, as an account for madness.
However, despite various events, which might account for Hamlet’s mad appearance, it is uncertain whether Hamlet ever actually does go mad, or whether he is merely feigning madness in order to seek his father’s revenge. Guildenstern goes so far as to speak of Hamlet’s madness as a “crafty madness” (3.1.8). Thus another question arises regarding the authenticity of madness. If Shakespeare is implying that Hamlet’s peers were perhaps misunderstanding Hamlet’s madness, there is possibly an extended criticism to Shakespeare’s own contemporaries and society’s understanding of madness.
Ophelia is another character that stretches the conventional perimeters through which madness was understood. As Ophelia had been driven mad before she took her life, one must question whether she really did have any agency at the time of her death. Ophelia’s suicide is the only moment throughout the play in which she is able to take control of her own life. However, in order to read Ophelia’s final moment as a moment of strength and self-exertion, one must believe that her suicide was deliberate. In other words, one must believe that there was reason in her madness.
Through Hamlet and Ophelia, Shakespeare begins to question conventional understandings of madness, and to explore the complexity behind such a condition. Shakespeare challenges the tendency to reduce mad men and women to a monolithic category and people. In the article “Recent Work in Renaissance Studies: Psychology Did Madness Have a Renaissance?” Neely distinguishes between the words ‘mad’ and insane. “Unlike insanity...madness is not defined as the opposite of sane and is not exclusively a medical condition. It is seen as an extension of, a kind of, the normal: people run mad, fall mad, are beside themselves, and then recover themselves” (778). It is this transient nature of madness, which seems to intrigue and fascinate Shakespeare. Although he makes use of his contemporaries' astrological, supernatural and medical views of madness, the extent to which Shakespeare accepts these theories, remains somewhat ambivalent. As always, it is not an analysis, yet rather an exploration of the nature of a phenomenon that appears to most captivate Shakespeare, and in turn, his audience.
Works Cited
Dearman, H.B. “Criminal Responsibilities and Insanity Tests: A Psychiatrist Looks at
Three Cases”. Virginia Law Review. 47.8 (1961). 1388-1398.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0042-6601%28196112%2947%3A8%3C1388%3ACRAITA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-H
Gifford, George. A dialogue concerning vvitches and witchcrafts. University of Illinois,
1603. STC/1100:06.
Herold, Niels. “Madness and Drama in the Age of Shakespeare.” Comparative Studies in Society and History. 37.1 (1995), 94-99.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010-4175%28199501%2937%3A1%3C94%3AMADITA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A
Neely, Carol Thomas. “Recent Work in Renaissance Studies: Psychology Did Madness Have a Renaissance?” Renaissance Quarterly. 44.4 (1991) 776-791
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0034-4338%28199124%2944%3A4%3C776%3ARWIRSP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U
Overholser, Winfred. “Shakespeare’s Psychiatry—And After”. Shakespeare’s Quarterly.
10.3 (1959). 335-352.
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0037
3222%28195922%2910%3A3%3C335%3ASPA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Folger. Ed. Mowat A. Barbara & Paul Werstine. New York: Washington Square Press, 1992.
Zilboorg, Gregory & George W. Henry. A History of Medical Psychology. New York: W.W. Norton & Company Inc., 1941
Lexicans of Early Modern English. 2007 University of Victoria. 14 March 2007.
“Mental Health History Timeline”. A Middlesex University Resource by Andrew Roberts. March 14, 2007.
"The Interior of Bedlam," from A Rake's Progress by William Hogarth, 1763.McCormick Library, Northwestern University” Quest For a Cure: Care and Treatment in Missouri’s First State Mental Hospital. March 14, 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment