Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Paroles, Honour’s Fool: Fe/Male Folly in Shakespeare’s All’s Well That Ends Well and Early Modern England

Research output: Journal Publications and ReviewsRGC 21 - Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

Abstract

While the pervasive association of women and folly in Shakespeare’s plays and early modern culture has been analysed by a number of scholars, the relationship of folly to masculinity has so far gone largely unaddressed in the critical literature. Drawing on historical scholarship by Christopher Goodey, this essay argues through a reading of Paroles’ folly in All’s Well That Ends Well that the complex relationship of folly and gender cannot be adequately understood without taking contemporary models of masculine honour into account. Rather than referring to an actual lack of intelligence, the use of “fool” for women and the lower ranks was often motivated by the need aristocratic men felt to define themselves against their supposed inferiors and to deny dishonourable tendencies within themselves. This background enables a revaluation of the character of Paroles. While he has been widely regarded as little more than an amusing example of the traditional braggart soldier, I argue here that Paroles embodies early modern men’s fear of folly. In his depiction of Paroles’ foolish passion, Shakespeare shows how debilitating manly honour could be for the men who felt obliged to live up to its standards, and that embracing “effeminate” folly could bring about their liberation. © 2020 Reto Winckler.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)382-394
JournalShakespeare
Volume16
Issue number4
Online published14 Sept 2020
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020
Externally publishedYes

Research Keywords

  • class
  • Gender
  • knave
  • masculinity
  • Much Ado About Nothing
  • politics

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Paroles, Honour’s Fool: Fe/Male Folly in Shakespeare’s All’s Well That Ends Well and Early Modern England'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this