Cohesive Unity in The Taming of the Shrew
All of Shakespeare’s plays have cohesive unity. What this means is that every part of every scene in a Shakespearean play contributes to its central meaning. There are no extraneous scenes. All the scenes either present the main action, or are part of the thematic resonance on the main theme, or are focused allegorical scenes that amplify Shakespeare’s meaning through symbology, analogy, or parody.
Cohesive unity is one of the key techniques that Shakespeare uses to convey his intended meaning. While differing interpretations can be derived from an isolated part of the play, it is almost impossible to do likewise if we must account for the entire play as a compact unified whole. This is how Shakespeare makes clear what his intended meaning is.
Let us look at how this is achieved in The Taming of the Shrew. In almost all parts of the play, the thematic resonance on the central theme of role-playing is obvious. There are, however, two sections where certain aspects of this focus on role-playing warrant closer scrutiny.
The first of these scenes is the wedding scene. Here, it is obvious that Petruchio is role-playing for the purpose of subduing Kate. But Shakespeare is also highlighting something else particularly relevant:
The participants in a wedding ceremony are normally already role-playing, in that they follow the roles traditionally assigned to them. This means that Petruchio is here deliberately refusing to play the traditional role of the bridegroom. But the key point is this: in refusing the traditional role, Petruchio is nonetheless still role-playing. This raises the issue of whether we are ever fully free from role-playing. Is not our very personality governed, at least to some extent, by the roles we choose to play? And furthermore, is there really such a thing as our “real personality”?
The next scene we shall examine is the dialogue between Grumio and Curtis in Act IV Scene 1. To some, this dialogue may appear extraneous, but it is actually a focused allegorical scene that portrays an aspect of role-playing that is important to Shakespeare’s message in the play.
The main point, that Shakespeare is making, in this dialogue is that Grumio is telling Curtis to prepare all the working men and women, in Petruchio’s household, to prepare for the arrival of their master and mistress.
All working men play roles assigned by their work. Here Grumio is instructing the servants to behave differently because of the arrival of Petruchio and Kate. The roles the servants play are changed by the arrival of their master. This long dialogue between Grumio and Curtis is thus an allegorical scene which focuses on how our role-playing is altered by external factors.
Shakespeare is thus emphasizing that the roles we play do change if external conditions change. Since our personality is at least partly governed by the roles we play, this issue again arises: Is there really such a thing as our “real personality,” since this may change with changing external circumstances?
This question is important with regards to what happens to Kate. In the end, did Kate’s personality really change or is she just role-playing? Crucially, is there really a clear difference between what we consider “our personality” and the roles we choose to play? And if the roles we play change, wouldn’t our personality also change?
It should be clear by now that every part of the play contributes to its central meaning. To understand Shakespeare, we need to take heed of the cohesive unity that he crafts into his plays. It is done for the purpose of making clear his intended meaning. The cohesive unity in Shakespearean plays cannot have occurred by chance. Such an all-encompassing structure can only have been deliberately crafted by Shakespeare to be so.
A more complete exploration of the techniques used by Shakespeare to convey his meaning in The Taming of the Shrewcan be found in my book “The Mystical Art of Shakespeare Vol II” (https://kenneth-chan.com/shakespeare/the-mystical-art-of-shakespeare-volume-ii/ ).