The Esau-Jacob dualism in Shakespeare

[book...@yahoo.com]

Possibly the sickness being referred in some off-the-wall commentators
is a consequence of the dualism charted by religion and social
philosophies of the "Jeckle and Hyde" sort, where men are especially
affected by a more animal-like disposition that has been denied.

In the Bible, we have the parable of the twins, Esau ("hairy") and
Jacob ("he deceives”), marking the division between Esau, who has
birthrights and preference by his father, and Jacob, his mother's
favorite who uses deceit to win the blessing. Esau, the rougher twin,
who spends time hunting and smiting enemies instead of learning;
versus Jacob, the peaceful tent dweller, who puts on an animal skin to
pretend he is Esau at the deathbed of Isaac. And Esau sells his
birthright to Jacob.

Famous anecdote about how Jacob reconciled with Esau; but Esau's
descendents factor negatively in Hebrew history, as when the Edoomites
helped the Babylonians destroy Jerusalem, and in the case of King
Herod the Great in Jesus time.

Evidently, interpreters of the Bible view Jacob as Israel, and that
the enmity with Esau's tribe is G-d's will, despite the traditional
understanding of birthright/covenant and Jacob and Rebekah's deceit
with Isaac. Yet, some argue that Esau must be integrated with Jacob
as a new whole, and that man must accept the Esau factor as part of
his nature.

Question is, Did religion and social philosophy in Shakespeare's time
recognize an Esau-Jacob sort of dualism playing out in history? Does
the canon reflect this in its frequent portrayals of doubles, twins,
conflict between siblings with markedly different personality types
over birthright and preference?

In the War of the Roses, does this sort of dualism come into play? Is
Shakespeare's preference for the cultivated garden at court and
special interest in natural flowers and herbs a reflection of a
religious-social philosophy affirming British civilization and
establishment?

Lear is interesting in the comparison pattern of characters like the
three daughters and the two brothers who come to an agreement in the
end. One might say Lear's predicament is a result of failing to
accept the Esau-Jacob factor in his family, who deceive him.

Tempest has a rough and hairy Caliban without inheritance, who a
god-like Prospero enslaves, while he cultivates his daughter.

Hamlet wants an Esau side to complete the revenge plot. But Laertes'
Esau side lacks moderation and gets Polonius' weak advice.

Othello has his Esau side, but is entangled by a more Jacob-like Iago.
He murders, but will have his "service to the state" remembered.

Anthony and Cleopatra seems to show Anthony sacrificing love on the
altar of war, with too little of the Jacob cleverness for survival.

Possibly some of the change we see in Shylock in MOV comes as a sort
of displacement of Esau's covenant in favor of the Jacob sanction
required by civilization?

Well, there are surely several kinds of dualism in the canon that
involve Shakespeare's interest in twins, double identities, analytic
character comparisons, etc.. Personally, I have no problem with using
Esau-Jacob dualism to have on hand when it comes to appreciating the
archetypal significance of some of the action. bookburn

[ChessFire]

This is an excellent article by Bookburn, and worth universal
attention, IMO, especially considering what Ted Hughes said on the
same subject, except he used another, older, dualism.

But I will not remark more here on this since so few people have read
Hughes or are willing to go into his thoughts on all. For me, here is
a very pregnant paragraph of what is said below:—

> Question is, Did religion and social philosophy in Shakespeare's time
> recognize an Esau-Jacob sort of dualism playing out in history?  Does
> the canon reflect this in its frequent portrayals of doubles, twins,
> conflict between siblings with markedly different personality types
> over birthright and preference?

Good post!

Phil Innes

====