Posted on 04/20/2002 7:28:09 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood
Iago as an archetypical devil and his role in Othello mirrors the ancient psychodrama of the pagan Egyptian gods. Iagos line here in this soliloquy also suggests a parallel to the function of Set in the esoteric and pagan Egyptian cosmology.
Iago:
"Divinity of Hell!
When devils will the blackest of sins put on,
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows,
As I do now." (II, III, 340)
Egyptian Book of the Dead: "Behold, I am Set, the creator of confusion, who creates both the tempest and the storm throughout the length and breadth of the heavens." (Naville, p. 39)
Iago serves this role as Set, the Destroyer, who kills his brother Osiris out of jealousy for his popularity. Plotting and weaving a tangled web of deceit, Iago creates confusion, a storm of intrigue that ensnares his victim, Othello. Much like the bejeweled chest of precious wood that Set used to trap Osiris at a feast under the guise of playing a game, Iago also delights in luring victims into a sparkling illusion that imprisons them so that he can manipulate others into serving his desires of destroying them. The entrapment of Othello in a prison of his own delusions of purity and nobility, the manipulation of Cassio under the cherished promise of regaining Othellos favor, and the treasure of Desdemona used to tempt the ever stupid Rodrigo, all fit this model of esoteric cosmogony.
The idea of Iago as an archetype is not new. In Magic in the Web, Action and Language in Othello, Robert B. Heilman writes:
" we move into the symbolic dimension and use the word archetype to describe that compression of possibilities which is so inclusive that all other characters of the same order seem but partial representations of the original idea. Iago is this kind of character; he is infinitely more than the skillful manipulator of a stratagem " (Heilman, p. 12)
Not far from this, we can also see the intent to cast Iago as the Satan of the Judaic, Christian, and Muslim mythoi. A clue to this is where Iago says; "I am not what I am." (I, I, 65) as opposed to the biblical phrase "I am that I am," representing the Judaic God (Exodus 3:14). More imagery and figurative language used in Iagos dialogues with other characters, symbolic interactions with them, is also another way to see Shakespeares intentions concerning the character.
Set, Satan, and Shaitan are the same. "Satan" is a Hebrew word for the pagan Egyptian Set. Satan, Shaitan, Set or Seth ("Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) is a pagan entity, the "adversary" of Judaic theology. (A "pagan" is anyone not Judaic, Christian or Muslim.)
Fraternal agreements prohibit the source reference on this etymology, it is the focus of rancorous theological debates, and is at odds with the "accepted" theology on the subject; of which my fraternity stands in opposition to. However, I will gratuitously include it as an item for debate, speculation and/or discussion, something our adversaries are unwilling to do in the interests of their deception(s). We are also unwilling to reveal certain things, in the interest of our own purposes - - figuratively preserving a Library of Alexandria from our enemies (See preceding essay for Rousseaus reference to Library of Alexandria.)
The Greeks called Set "Typhon," who was the war god assigned to Upper Egypt. This also represents another contravention to the "accepted" etymologies of words like "typhoon" in English, which is erroneously listed as the Cantonese "tai fung" in many dictionaries. English has more commonalties with Greek and Latin.
Egyptian Book of the Dead: "Behold, I am Set, the creator of confusion, who creates both the tempest and the storm throughout the length and breadth of the heavens." (Naville)
Interestingly, "Setebos" was the Patagonian god or devil, alluded to by Shakespeare through Caliban in the Tempest:
Caliban:
"His art is of such power
It would control my dams god, Setebos,
And make a vassal of him."
-The Tempest (I, II)
This is a curious reference by Shakespeare that is indicative for a pattern of etymology outside of established acceptance.
Iago:
"The Moor is of a free and open nature,
That thinks men honest that but seem to be so,
And will as tenderly be led by thnose
As asses are." (I, III, 392)
There is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic in Othello. The father of Othello was an Egyptian. The term "asses" in this soliloquy is a literary allusion to this often-bloody conflict between these forces.
The Egyptian priest Manetho associated the Jews with the Hyksos and Moses with the Egyptian priest Osarsiph. It was at this time that the belief the Jews worshipped an ass an animal holy to the Egyptian god Set was established. Both the Jews and the pagan Egyptians used the labels (i.e., Satan, Set, Seth, or "Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) to defame each other. How fitting that amidst this epic struggle and bloody conflict, the entity known as Satan was born into the World. Such conflict continued through the Maccabean period (with Antiochus Epiphanes), and continues into modern times on several fronts.
[Othellos instruction to Desdemona about the handkerchief is also telling. Ponder the actions of Iago in the play and Othellos words to Desdemona: " Tis true: theres magic in the web of it." (III, IV, 65)]
What does all this have to do with Shakespeare and Othello? Consider the period of time in which William Shakespeare lived, his oft criticized and "unconventional" use of spelling, punctuation and terminology in a time where there was an effort to standardize the English language.
King James I acceded to the throne. He published the detailed treatise Daemonology, because of his concern about witchcraft in Britain (this did have an effect on the presentation of Macbeth and other plays).
There is the matter of the King James Bible to consider. There was pressure from the Church and open condemnation concerning secular drama. (English theatres were actually shut down for 18 years prior to 1663 when a puritan government came to power.) Latin was used in the churches, composed the language found in bibles, hymnals and was frequently used by the nobility in matters of state affairs. Often history has been colored by the occlusion of religious concerns; translations were subject to interpretation not always in the interest of accuracy.
Camille Paglia, professor of humanities and media studies at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia, artfully depicts the dynamics at work in her book Sexual Personae, Art and Decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson:
"Spenser, Shakespeare, and Freud are the three greatest sexual psychologists in literature, continuing a tradition begun by Euripides and Ovid. Freud has no rivals among his successors because they think he wrote science, when in fact he wrote art. Spenser, the Apollonian pictorailist, and Shakespeare the Dionysian alchemist, compete for artistic control of the English Renaissance. Shakespeare unlooses his metamorphic flood of words and personae to escape Spensers rigorous binding " (Paglia, p. 228)
Unless the whole of the professors book is taken in as a scholarly commentary on pagan beauty and its relation to sex, culture, politics and art or literature, there is some confusion for most readers concerning the analogies being made here
"Spensers radiant Apollonian armouring becomes Miltons louring metallic daemonism, militant and misogynistic. Satans legions gleam with hard Spenserian light. Milton sinks when he sings of the foggy formlessness of good. His God is poetically impotent. But his noisy, thrashing Spenserian serpents and monsters; his lush Spenserian embowered Paradise; his evil, envious Spenserian voyeurism: these are immortal. Milton tries to defeat Spenser by wordiness, Judaic word-fetishism, tangling the Apollonian eye in the labyrinth of etymology. Shakespeare succeeded here by joining words to pagan sexual personae " (Paglia, p. 228-229)
This "Judaic word-fetishism" from the above, is most illustrative. Like the complexities of the Elizabethan court protocols (relaxed under King James I), the use of language, definitions, etymologies, and the recording of history has also suffered a suppression by those with an interest to keep some things hidden. This is why I will assert that despite authoritative and scholarly denials, William Shakespeare had privy to occult knowledge not commonly available to others in his time, as well as a powerful English Kings ear and patronage.
Iago as the Setian, or Satan does not separate him from being human, but does indicate Iago as both devil and human (Antichrist), the embodiment of original evil. (Heilman, p. 41)
Iago represents an inherent, autonomous evil, not a developing one as in the character of Macbeth. Desdemona unknowingly contributes to Othellos willingness to eat the poison pome, tricked by the perspicacious serpent that is Iago. The Garden of Eden represented by Desdemonas purity is plowed asunder with the sins of sanctimonious delusions, Othello murders her and takes upon himself the power to render his Gods divine judgement. Satan conquers the human spirit with Othellos seppuku.
Iago:
"Divinity of Hell!
When devils will the blackest of sins put on,
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows,
As I do now." (II, III, 340)
"The Iago evil is redefined for us: his method is planned confusion, The metamorphosis of opposites, the use of "shows" that keep things from being seen in their "true colors." (Heilman, p. 65)
This idea of planned confusion from Heilman shows the analogy I made earlier with the Egyptian Book of the Dead and these same lines of the soliloquy. The bejeweled chest of Sets game to trap Osiris, the weaving of a web, an illusion, the storm of intrigue and the tempest prior to Othellos arrival in Cyprus. The purity of Desdemona is also a subject Iago continues to assail
Iago: "So will I turn her virtue to pitch," (II, III, 350)
These images of color are a tool used to portray the darkness, iniquity or evil all throughout Othello as are other references employed to contrast against the divinity and virtue of the Judaic mythoi. Just as the ideas of the heavens being blackened by the gathering storm, the bright daytime sky is always darkened by foul weather. Much of the play projects the imagery as occurring during the night. There is a metaphorical divergence at work as a dramatic device illuminating a contemplative audience to the spiritual battle between the sacred and the profane, of Providences divine light and the primordial darkness of Chaos.
"When dominated by the Spectre, the self becomes a hermaphroditic Selfhood, whom Blake calls Satan or Death Incestuous self-insemination: the grappling duo is a new Khepera, the masturbatory Egyptian cosmos-maker. Actors and audience are a sexual octopus of many legs and eyes.
The contest between male Spectre and female Emanation is archaic ritual combat. I find homosexual overtones in the betrayal of the self into a queasy spectral world ruled by dark, deceiving male figures. Note the elegance with which Blakes Spectre theory fits Shakespeares Othello. A conspiratorial Spectre, Iago, is homoerotically obsessed with splitting Othello, through jealous fears, from his Emanation, Desdemona. (Jealousy and fear are the Spectres regular weapons.) Othello, cleaving to his Spectre instead of casting him off, destroys himself. He ends by not killing his Spectre but his Emanation." (Paglia, p. 287-289)
Iago also represents homoeroticism in Othello from the beginning. Not just in his obsessive hatred for Othello but in a seeming contempt for heterosexual relations as evidenced by his reference of Cassio being "A fellow almost damned in a fair wife." (I, I, 21) There is the opening act, the masturbatory fever pitch and sexual imagery of Iagos speech.
It should also be noted in reference to the pagan Egyptian mythos, Set had a battle with Horus, son of Osiris, where he was emasculated. Set managed to tear out one of the gods eyes.
Iago seems to have this sexual impotence about him, an inborn hostility for women and disgust for heterosexuality as a result. Iago also feels rendered impotent that he was passed over for position by Othello in favor of Cassio, as well as by his own rage. This rage could also be construed as a sadomasochistic component to Iagos character.
In addition, the description to Othello by Iago about Cassios nocturnal speech conjures up a homoerotic imagery. It is also interesting to contemplate the prohibition of women being on the stage, where men in drag portray female characters.
Iago also sets out to mutilate Othellos spirit, much the same as Set dismembering Osiris. Iago as Set, declaring war, plucks away at Cassio, Othellos favorite son, whos vision is partially taken away by drink. Cassio does rise to take Othellos place as governor of Cyprus. Horus accedes to the throne of the heavens. Wounded, the Setian is bound and tortured in the Abyss
I use Othello to paint a picture showing there is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic. Often it is claimed by the Neo-Pagans that Satan is only found in Christianity. How can this be if Satan is undeniably a Hebrew word adapted from the name of the Pagan Egyptian god Set? The Jewish synod of rabbinical authority will deny that Satan even exists. How do they reconcile that with the fact that it is a Hebrew word?
The point is that in avoiding their true pagan roots, the Neo-Pagans are participating inadvertently in a Judaic word-fetishism. This should give some of the Judaic/Christian community cause for reflection and cooperation.
I have offered up a riddle for you to ponder, especially for the Christians who are constantly criticized and bashed for their beliefs in this insipid modernity of prime time television
Works Cited
Heilman, Robert B., Magic in the Web: Action and Language in Othello, Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1956.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668. Ed. Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1994.
Kaufmann, Walter. Tragedy and Philosophy. New York: Doubleday, 1968.
Lenson, David. Achilles Choice, Examples of Modern Tragedy. Princeton and London: Princeton University Press, 1975.
Miller, Aurthur. Tragedy and the Common Man, 1949. A Collection of Plays, Perspectives. n.p., n.d., 1379-1381.
Naville, Edouard, trans. Egyptian Book of the Dead of the XVIII to XX Dynasties, Berlin, 1886.
Paglia, Camille, Sexual Personae: art and decadence from Nefertiti to Emily Dickinson, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990. Rpr. First Vintage Books Edition, September 1991, New York.
Rousseau, Jean-Jaques. The Social Contract and Discourses. Trans. G.D.H. Cole, Rev. J.H. Brumfitt and John C. Hall. London: Guernsey Press, 1973.
Williams, Raymond. Modern Tragedy, Essays on the idea of tragedy in life and in the drama, and on modern tragic writing from Ibsen to Tennesse Williams. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1966.
SEE ALSO:
Velikovsky, Immanuel. Oedipus and Akhnaten; Mythh and History. New York: Doubleday, 1960
Put me on your bump list for any other essays you might post.
I haven't seen that one. I view very few films. I tend to read more. Hollywood pumps out a lot of "maird." (I don't know if the French spelling is correct.)
However, when films come out based on Shakespeare - - I'm there. Roman Polanki's adaptation of Macbeth, produced by Hugh Hefner, is a masterpiece.
Another film that represents the despair theme you speak of is American Beauty, which is analagous to Death of a Salesman in a sense (I'm not convinced it didn't come from there to begin with).
I could list about one hundred films I really like both modern and classic - - takes too much time...
I have a few bookmarked, don't know if they are still there...
There is also a site you should see. I dont know if this link will work, but you could drop Luminarium in your search engine and find a lot of compelling interests.
Another one is http://www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/. Surf around there and let me know what you think. I don't quite know what is happening there, seems intelligent, but what's the agenda?
"The general will alone is capable of directing the forces of the state according to the end of its institution - which is the Common Good." - Jean Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract. 1762.
That one is the most infamous, abused and liberaly interpreted of Rousseau's statements. It is generally used by the left to condemn anything they do not believe to be for the "common good" and can be liberally applied to any of the instances you cite.
Mark W.
I found it at Luminarium. An intelligent woman for sure. Wanted your opinion / impressions of it. Her notebooks are interesting...
That one is the most infamous, abused and liberaly interpreted of Rousseau's statements. It is generally used by the left to condemn anything they do not believe to be for the "common good" and can be liberally applied to any of the instances you cite.
The Left has it's own dogma like a religious sect. When I hear conservatives use the rhetoric, I cringe...
Can we "ping" Hollywood to this discussion?
I'm with you on that. Just like there are Liberals who don't know why they are liberal, there are Conservatives who don't know why they are conservative. Knowing the philosphical underpinnings of issues helps to clarify them. I, for one, describe myself as a conservative with libertarian tendencies. I would dump about two/thirds of the federal code into the nearest harbor (and to hell with the environmentalists).
Some of what passes for conservatism these days would have the Founders taking up arms again. Perhaps these posts will provide some ammunition to fight that battle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.