Ableism and Racism in Caliban’s Characterization

The Tempest is a play full of hijinks and betrayal, and does a great job of rounding out complex characters, but there is one major character who was not given the time to develop in a satisfying way, but in fact feeds into harmful stereotypes, and is used as the butt of jokes in the play. Caliban is described as a half demon humanoid creature, a monster used as a slave for a great part of the play, despite the fact that he had much to offer and had the potential to grow into a respectable character. It is essential to fully understand the nature of this play to dive into Caliban and his depiction both in the play and in stage productions. Critically analyzing Caliban’s characterization is important for contemporary plays and discussions in classrooms, as it feeds into negative stereotypes about disabled people, and on another level reflects racist sentiments from Shakespeare’s age that persist even today.

Caliban is first introduced as a slave for Prospero and Miranda, who describes his work for them as “mak[ing] our fire, Fetch[ing] in our wood, and serve[ing] in offices That profit us” (Act 1.1, line 373). He is repeatedly referred to as a slave by Prospero, reducing him to one role and dehumanizing his character. This interesting dynamic almost seems counterintuitive, as it is revealed that before Prospero and Miranda washed ashore the island, Caliban and his mother were its only inhabitants, and should be looked at as an expert on surviving on the island. His subjugation mirrors the dynamics between early colonizers and indigenous peoples, who were exploited for their knowledge of the land and treated as subhuman. In the same vein, it’s important to see the similarities between Prospero’s treatment of Caliban and the treatment of enslaved people in the United States. In a production in 1986, Julie Tymor cast Peter Callendar, a black actor, in the role of Caliban, calling attention to the problematic power disparity between Caliban and Prospero in a visceral way by referencing the power dynamic between white slave holders and black enslaved people. “In casting an African in this role, one automatically brings to the forefront the obvious themes of colonization and usurpation that clearly were part of Shakespeare’s worldview” (Friedman). This production and casting choice forces the audience to look at how problematic Caliban’s treatment really is, and why his depiction as comedic relief at the expense of his dignity and pride is insensitive.

In DeCoursey’s article about Caliban’s character, he recognizes the duality of the word “slave,” citing Richard Marienstras who says, “it is possible to become a slave through an accident of fortune or as a result of war; but one may also be a slave by nature, as when one’s disposition is to subject oneself to unworthy or despotic masters” (qtd. in DeCoursey). This brings attention to the circumstances that have brought Caliban to his position as a “slave” to Prospero and Miranda; it is referenced that Prospero treated Caliban kindly until he is implied to have attempted to assault Miranda (Act 1.1, line 416). While this can be seen as an “accident of fortune,” we do not see the events described take place, and so we must wonder if Prospero waited for the first opportunity to turn away Caliban and make him out to be a subhuman monster. This is reminiscent of the ways black enslaved people were portrayed as subhuman, attempts made to sow fear of black men and perpetuate violence against white women, and to identify biological differences between white people and black people using biased pseudoscience. These tactics were employed to normalize the enslavement and inhumane treatment of people of color and especially black people. Caliban’s character serves as a reflection of negative racial stereotypes, tying it to the history of slavery and how people were characterized in similar ways to dehumanize them and justify their enslavement. It is no secret that Caliban’s appearance falls outside what we would consider “normal”. He is described and historically portrayed to be a deformed humanoid creature, which is reason enough for Prospero, as well as Stefano and Trinculo later in the play, to view Caliban as someone who is a slave by nature. This feeds heavily into the ideas that have been used to enslave people of color and specifically black people, which brings up a lot of painful historical baggage, especially as we see portrayals of the character being played by a black actor.

We also see the word “monster” thrown around heavily in regards to Caliban, especially in his first interaction with Trinculo and Stefano, who do not even bother to learn his name. However, despite the heinous connotation with this word, both in what it can say about physical appearance as well as a personality trait, Caliban is often treated as a fool, and becomes the subject of pranks. Initially, Stefano wishes to capture Caliban and return to Naples with him and give him as a gift to “any emperor that ever trod on neat’s leather” (Act 2.2, line 71). This mirrors how physically disabled people have been put on display as entertainment in circuses, which offered terrible living conditions and treated their employees as though they were mindless zoo animals. Caliban’s treatment in the play is quite discomforting, as he is the only explicitly disabled character. What is most disheartening about Caliban’s characterization and his development throughout the play is that the way he is portrayed is quite contradictory from one scene to the next. In one scene, Caliban is portrayed as an independent, intelligent person who is resentful of being ruled over by Prospero, saying “this island’s mine by Sycorax, my mother, Which thou tak’st from me” (Act 1.1, line 396) and outlining the ways in which Prospero and Miranda betrayed and exploited him by getting him to “showed[sic] thee all the qualities o’ th’ isle, The fresh springs, brine pits, barren place and fertile” (Act 1.1, line 403). His knowledge of the land and ability to show Prospero and Miranda how to survive on the island shows a deep sense of intelligence and a rich inner consciousness, but this characterization doesn’t hold up with his relationship with Stefano. When he first meets them, he is scared and confused, but once again puts himself in a position to be used, promising Stefano and Trinculo to show them the fruits of the land (Act 2.2, line 166). This shows that Caliban, who seemed to have a deep understanding of how he was used by Prospero and Miranda, displays foolishness as he puts himself in this position once again, and happily, it seems, to the point where Trinculo calls him a “howling…drunken monster” (Act 2.2, line 185). While this could simply be to show Caliban’s low intellect, his display of intelligence in the beginning versus his foolishness with Stefano and Trinculo begs the question of whether this text purposefully forces Caliban, whose only role is seemingly to be the fool, to perpetuate harmful stereotypes for physically or mentally disabled people.

While we do not know if this is what Shakespeare had in mind in his depiction of Caliban’s physical appearance or his characterization of Caliban throughout the play, the fact that he is described as physically disabled and then treated like an object for entertainment reflects our history of ableism and the exotification of disabled people. It is more accurate to say that Caliban’s so-called “monstrous” appearance is less terrifying than it is a subject of humor and cruelty, which makes the parallels between him and the treatment of disabled people all the more gut wrenching. Additionally, Caliban’s inferior position in reference to the other characters in the play reflects the horrifying experiences that African enslaved people went through to a degree that cannot be ignored. Identifying these similarities is not just for the sake of it, or to simply point out the ways we have evolved since the play was written, but since we still work with these texts, it is important to understand the historical context that is brought up with these depictions, and acknowledge the values of the time it was written in conjunction with the harm that is still ongoing today. Caliban’s characterization in this play is important to understand through ableist and racist lenses because it gives us the platform to continue to have these conversations and continue progressing away from these harmful ideals.

Works Cited

DeCoursey, Matthew. “The Logic of Inequality: Caliban’s Baseness in The Tempest.” Sage Publications, vol. 64, no. 1, Nov. 2003, pp. 43–51. Sage Publications, journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/doi/pdf/10.7227/CE.64.1.6.

Friedman, Michael D. “Where Was He Born? Speak! Tell Me!: Julie Taymor’s Tempest, Hawaiian Slavery, and the Birther Controversy.” Shakespeare Bulletin, vol. 31, no. 3, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013, pp. 431–52, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26354969.

Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. The Tempest. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1958.

Urban, David V. “Fully Human, Created in God’s Image: Caliban in Shakespeare’s The Tempest Urban.” Fully Human, Created in God’s Image: Caliban in Shakespeare’s The Tempest, vol. 69, no. 3, Sept. 2020. Malibu: Johns Hopkins University Press, muse-jhu-edu.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/article/764667.