Othello: Noble Hero Or Gullible Fool?

1903 Words8 Pages
Typically, tragedies feature a central character (protagonist) possessing a fatal flaw which leads them to their downfall. Shakespeare takes this “Greek Tragedy” concept and uses it in this play, presenting Othello as the un-mistakable tragic hero. However, whether Othello is noble is argued against by critics, such as F.R Leavis. Leavis fails to understand how someone responsible for their own suffering can be deemed heroic. I, on the other hand, stand closer to Bradley’s early 20th century interpretation of Othello’s character. Nevertheless, I might not go as far as saying that Othello is ‘noble’. Othello definitely falls into the category of ‘Tragic Hero’ by the standards of Greek philosopher, Aristotle who created a definition for the ‘Tragic Hero’. They must: be the central character in the play, have a hamartia- ultimately leading them to destruction and must fight against an antagonist[2]. Be that as it may, a tragic hero is not necessarily a noble one. The English dictionary defines noble as;[1] “Distinguished by title or rank” or “constituting a hereditary class that has special social or political status.” By these definitions, Shakespeare seems to portray Othello with a sense of nobility. Othello is a general in the Venetian Army, increasing his social status and portraying his heroic qualities. The juxtaposition of the “Moor”: Othello, in a white society and the fact that he is accepted by many of the locals demands respect for Othello from the audience. This respect is needed early on to create a greater shock at Othello’s actions in the denouement. In contrast, definitions such as; “of an exalted moral or mental character” or “admirable in dignity of conception, manner of expression, execution, or composition[1]” dampen his characterization of a noble hero. One must act noble before they become a noble person. Therefore, I believe Shakespeare

More about Othello: Noble Hero Or Gullible Fool?

Open Document