First Initial. Last Name 1

First and Last NameMrs. QueirosENG ___/ Period Assignment NameDate

Exploratory Essay: Feminism in Macbeth and Things Fall Apart

The feminist movement in America has failed. In what has proven to be the most counter

productive movement in recent memory, feminists have done harm to those they swore to

protect. The core of their problem stems from their solution. They attempted to equalize through

segregation. Women now have their own sports leagues, softball provides a baseball simulation

that is designed primarily for women only, and now a woman could never play professional

baseball because they have their own safe haven, softball. They believe by making organizations

that seclude men, they have equalized gender roles in our country. Unfortunately for women, this

strategy has completely backfired, and men and women have never been further apart. The

feminists main redeemable quality however is that their intentions are certainly just, it’s a proven

fact women are treated worse than men in the workplace, at school, or almost any other social

convention. And according to most people women can’t even escape scrutiny in literature.

Literature is often too guilty of depicting women as inferior, and according to many people, two

of the main culprits are William Shakespeare and Chiua Achebe. Yet by others, these men are

hailed as freedom fighters for women’s rights. So which is it? Are these men guilty of social

injustice, or did they understand equal rights better than the feminists themselves?

First we examine Shakespeare, and specifically his classic play Macbeth. Macbeth has

often come under fire for being sexist, partly for the fact that there are almost no female

characters, except of course, for Lady Macbeth. But she in and of itself is what is considered the

problem, Lady Macbeth is as masculine as a women can get. She fits the exact stereotype of

what we consider to be a man. She is strong-willed, cunning, courageous, conniving, everything

a man could ever aspire to be. It seems that Shakespeare only added this woman because it made

sense to the plot, and then made her as masculine, as any of the other leading players. The

second problem lies within the other minor female characters, the witches. They can’t even be

really considered women, they are more demon then they are human. The entire significance of

the witches is to derails and cause chaos in the lives of the men at the play, they possess none of

First Initial. Last Name 2

the nurturing or comforting qualities women are known for. To summarize, the specific problem

people have with sexism in Macbeth is that all the female characters are either evil or extremely

masculine, a true women is never really represented. But in a way, providing no real female

characters is the most pro-feminism thing Shakespeare could have done. Shakespeare shatters the

perception of a woman by making the most powerful character in the play a woman. Lady

Macbeth has no stereotypical female qualities, but her husband, Macbeth, portrays many of

them. Macbeth fulfills the stereotype of a weak fragile woman. He is cowardly, easily deceived,

corruptible and controllable. Through role reversal Shakespeare puts the woman in the play in

the dominant role. I believe this is much more liberating to women than the segregation tactic

many groups have taken. It shows that women can have the characteristics of the strongest men,

and that they are not bound by their gender, they can excel and exceed in a world run by men,

and they can control kings. This isn't the only time Shakespeare uses this tactic, one quick

example is in Romeo and Juliet, in which Juliet is the level headed thinker, while Romeo is the

passionate love-struck fool. Shakespeare uses role reversals to show that women can be among

the strongest of men, and that is much more liberating to women than any softball league.

But then how can Achebe be considered a feminist? The women in Things Fall Apart

certainly aren't as strong or brave as the women in Macbeth. In fact, all of the women in

Achebe's novel are weak. They are fragile, small minded people, that don't do much else besides

cook and clean. They are constantly beaten and abused, and they never have any real significant

role in the Igbo society. They exemplify the stereotype of women that women's right activists

have worked so hard to erase. And there in lies what makes Chiua Achebe such a successful

gender equalizer. Achebe ventures boldly into one of women's darkest times. He focuses in

directly on the time when women were mistreated the most. A time and place where they had no

rights or justice, a time when they were used as tools for labor. Achebe is criticized for

portraying women in such a negative light, but it was necessary. He was showing the world how

far women have come, and how far they still have to go. Achebe's depiction of women as objects

is a celebration of women, it's his way of praising them for how far they have been able to come.

We have to understand the mistakes of the past to help shape the future, and the plight of women

is shown full force throughout Things Fall Apart and it is Achebe's way of both celebrating

women's achievements, and encouraging them to continue to fight for equality.

First Initial. Last Name 3

So it turns out that, not only do Shakespeare and Achebe sympathize with the female

plight, but they improved upon ways to make women equal. Once I established that both men

really were feminists I considered writing a paragraph on which of the two is more of a women’s

rights activist. But I realized it was like comparing apples to oranges, both of their methods are

completely different, but at the same time, very beneficial to women’s plight. Shakespeare by

showing women in powerful positions through role reversal, and Achebe through enlightening

women on their dark past by illuminating their dark history. Its understandable that both men

have fallen prey to criticisms of sexism, but if one is to look at their writings from a less

objective point of view, it can certainly be seen a different way entirely.