Malvolio Torture Of Torture

It is easily comprehended that there is certain ambiguity surrounding the character of Malvolio. His name clearly indicates that he is a malcontent; however doubt lies within whether he is a sympathetic or unsympathetic malcontent. This ambiguity creates the question of whether his treatment from others is righteous or whether the actions inflicted upon him are nefarious. The former would emphasise Malvolio’s narcissistic and hypocritical character – masked by Puritan beliefs. These traits make the torture of him seem reasonable because of his attempts to ‘social climb’; raising his importance in the lands of Illyria. However, another sympathetic interpretation displays Malvolio as a hardworking steward, loyal to his household, creating an impression that his treatment is essentially torture and unjustifiable. This further raises the question of whether Malvolio’s ‘torture’ has darker undertones beyond the jovial nature of the play, or whether it is understandable.

Malvolio can easily be seen as a victim of his own affection and loyalty towards Olivia. During her time of bereavement, he attempts to help her. The affection is clearly not unrequited as Olivia, ‘would not have him miscarry for half of my dowry’, which implies that Malvolio goes beyond his role in her eyes. Furthermore, she also appreciates his estimation of situations as Olivia says ‘If it be a suit from the count, I am sick or not at home – what you will to dismiss it’, as this shows her belief in his judgement. This creates pathos for the character of Malvolio because a loyal servant such as himself should not deserve a punishment which borders on torture.

Excluding the question of whether sympathy can be found in his treatment, it is arguably his personal traits w...

... middle of paper ...

...ectly to gain the courtship of Olivia however the audience know this is a prank organised by the sub plot.

In conclusion, Malvolio’s presentation is filled with ambiguity. Phillip Voss who played Malvolio in 1997 said ‘I would like the audience to be heartbroken by him and to feel embarrassed. They must laugh, but then feel embarrassed. They must laugh, but then feel embarrassed”. Malvolio may be viewed as ignorant, hypocritical or loyal but modern day interpretation is based on the context of the time. Modern day audience’s find the carvinalesque aspect more amusing, while a Shakespearian audience found the mockery of the puritan values far more comedic; the latter creating more pathos in modern audiences. Malvolio’s interpretation relies on the theory of what is ‘funny’ to a certain audience, which is forever changing. Thus, reactions to him will always change.