Theme of Identity in "The Duchess Of Malfi" and "Fantomina"

This essay is going to compare the ways in which, and to what effect, identity is shown to be related to performance within Webster’s ‘The Duchess of Malfi’ and Haywood’s ‘Fantomina’. There will be a particular focus on how both of the main characters control their identities through their performance, and how they use their ability to perform to reject or fight against the identities that have been created for them as a result of circumstances out of their control, alongside a discussion of the varying importance of this in terms of contextual factors. Not only this, but the contrast between the performances of the characters will be investigated in relation to their social class and how this has an effect, comparing one of the minor characters from The Duchess of Malfi, Julia, to Fantomina. Looking at ‘Fantomina’, it’s clear that she’s a character who feels deep isolation shaped by her environment which is essentially out of her control. As a result of this, she chooses to control her own identity, the only thing she can control, through her changing performances and moving through the class system as she wishes. The way that Fantomina is treated depends on her apparent social status and this is created through her performance. The effect of this is that Beauplaisir treats her worse when she appears to be of a lower status and so this ultimately leads her to question that idea that the divisions of class are based purely on clothes and manners - “And many other such questions, befitting one of the Degree she appear’d to be”. Interestingly, the verb “appear’d” itself suggests that even Beauplaisir believes that this is just an act, not that this changes his attitude or behaviour towards her. Thompson views this in itself as a tragedy - “Fantomina’s performative talents allow her to perpetuate a marvellously renovated romantic economy, whereby ruined women might infinitely reconstitute themselves as whole bodies.” Whilst it can clearly be connoted that this is a tragic story of how Fantomina desperately tries to reconstruct her identity through her various performances, as Thompson states above, there could also be some truth in the idea that Fantomina doesn’t know who she is and that these performances are not just an act, but an act of rebellion against the class system. This could be her way of experimenting and finding out who she really is, despite the consequences of her actions. She finds that she’s in love with Beauplaisir despite the obvious differences in class, conveying the idea that possibly Fantomina believes that if she can love someone who is of a higher class, why can’t someone of a higher class love her too, rejecting that class has anything to do with identities.

Now looking at ‘The Duchess of Malfi’, there is a particular moment in which the Cardinal says that the Duchess might want to get married in secret and Ferdinand adds that marriages like these are executed rather than celebrated, despite that she (the Duchess) thinks she’s making her own path. She comments that Ferdinand’s speech sounds rehearsed which is a metatheatrical moment linked to performance. “I think this speech between you both was studied, it came so roundly off.” This highlights hypocrisy as the Duchess herself has no moral leg to stand on. The Duchess marries someone who isn’t an aristocrat and she chooses her own husband which challenges patriarchal authority. She then goes on to bear children against her brother’s wishes which disrupts patriarchal order in terms of social class as he’s ‘below’ her. The Duchess rejects the stereotype of being a lusty widow through her remarriage and her unwillingness to mope about her situation, a clear performance in order to protect her well-known identity. The Duchess rejects the identity that has been given to her through her defiance of following her brothers’ wishes. She marries and bears children against her brothers wishes, essentially saying that she will not be controlled because of the name she has been assigned. Alternatively, she still holds the power despite her actions, both good and bad. “I am Duchess of Malfi still”. Despite any of her performances, she is the Duchess, and even if she doesn’t want to be at times because of her brothers attempts at controlling her lifestyle, nothing will change that. Comparing ‘Fantomina’ to ‘The Duchess of Malfi’, it can be noticed that the transitioning of status into something that can be created rather than something assigned or given appears to be rife in these separate texts. Fantomina uses her low social class to change her identity daily and in order to get what she wants, and to change how people see/treat her, despite ultimately falling for Beauplaisir despite his treatment of her. The Duchess doesn’t change her identity in order to get what she wants, she knows that her brothers don’t want her to marry a lower social class and that Antonio too is advised not to marry someone of a higher social status. There is a great performance contrast in terms of social class however, and the effect of this is made clear within the texts, although it could be argued that both characters are the same in their rejection of their identities despite this. “Duchess figures as an idealized portrait, or icon, of Aragonian dynastic identity. She acknowledges this role as venerated icon as she protests against the celibacy imposed on her: Why should only I, Of all the other princes of the world. Be cas'd up, like a holy relic?”. In the early 1600’s when The Duchess of Malfi was published, women’s sexual behaviour, or lack of, was one of the key defining factors in terms of identity. They were either chaste and pure, or whores.

The Duchess clearly didn’t want this to be a defining factor in terms of her identity and so expresses this in the protest quoted above, connoting that she doesn’t believe that, merely because of her status as the Duchess, and indeed as a woman, she should be forced to make her sexual choices based on how it will affect her supposed identity. Now looking at this same idea in regard to Fantomina which was published in 1724, Tauchert says that “Women, quite simply, have no identity or substance beyond the masquerade as such. But because – in the Lacanian model that contextualises this account – subjectivity in itself is founded in lack, the status of woman as lacking identity or substance of any kind, positions her in turn as emblematic of “the subject” itself, in a way unobtainable by men.” Tauchert has a valid point in that Fantomina appears to not know who she is when she isn’t performing and changes her appearance and in turn her identity, for men. Performance was becoming less important in terms of status and therefore identity – The Duchess married whoever she wanted despite his lower status and social class and Fantomina got to sleep with anyone of varying classes because of her performative changes that affected her worth/value. The fact that both characters chose their own paths despite the fading but still evident societal pressures says something in terms of the changing role of identity in terms of performance, although it could be argued that performance is still important because of this last point – the Duchess’ absence from the ending of the play asks us to question how central her actions are – can any woman really have an impact/opinion or control her own life when she is seen as just a woman and nothing more in the eyes of society? Finally, focusing on and comparing Julia from ‘The Duchess of Malfi’ and Fantomina, it can be argued that both Julia and Fantomina can be seen as ‘sexual adventurers’ or, in other words, whores. However, if we look deeper into the reasons behind their actions, we’ll see that actually the demands of society on them has played a significant role and that their performance is something that has been pushed onto them for varying reasons, rather than them actively choosing to behave this way. Their personal identities have essentially been chosen for them as a result of the pressure and demands of society that have led them both to making these choices. Their performances aren’t really their identities, it’s simply an act that they are judged for and isn’t really them. “Julia’s first speech betrays the deep inner struggle of a woman who has compromised herself for uncertain gain and finds herself the victim of a cynical and abusive man. ‘You have prevailed with me beyond my strongest thoughts: I would not now find you inconstant.” Her words imply that her decision to commit adultery was a painful one, the result of an ongoing struggle between the demands of sexuality and morality. As the interview progresses, Julia defends her own constancy and integrity as the Cardinal attacks them.” The fact that Luckyi uses the word victim is interesting because it conveys that Julia is not at fault and essentially, in my opinion, highlights the idea that someone else has pressured or forced her to do something. In this case it appears to be the demands of society that cause her to act the way she does rather than her individual choices.

This is how Julia is expected to behave because of her scandalous ‘identity’ and therefore could potentially feel forced into doing so. In contrast to this, Fantomina is of a low social class and therefore is seen as not much more than an object to all those around her. She is also expected to behave in the promiscuous ways that she does, but both of their performances differ based on their social classes in terms of what is socially acceptable for each. Although they both at least seem to feel guilty or their actions at different points, Fantomina never appears to be shamed throughout the novel whereas Julia definitely does during the play. This shows identity to be based on performance as their performances are essentially the only thing that gives them their identities, linking back to what Tauchert said about women having no identity beyond their façade or mask. In conclusion, both Fantomina and The Duchess control their identities purely through their performance and they use their ability to perform to reject and fight against the identities that have been created for them as a result of circumstances out of their control such as social class and the demands of society. This is important in terms of context in that status is becoming something that can be controlled to a greater extent than it was pre-1600’s and, as can be evidenced throughout this essay, status and identity go hand in hand – both becoming something that can increasingly be crafted through the act of performance alone. On the other hand, Fantomina and Julia both perform in the ways that society expects of them, not necessarily in the ways they want to, in contrast to the Duchess, suggesting that they don’t have a choice in their performances and therefore they don’t get to shape their own identities as performance appears to be identity in the two texts. Despite all of this, the Duchess is absent from the ending of the play as a result of her murder which asks us to question how important her actions really are. How can any woman have an impact or any sense of control her own life when she is seen as nothing more than a woman?