You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
The Taming of the Shrew has a history of engendering strong emotions and extremes of opinion in audiences and commentators alike. Extreme opinions regarding the character of Kate and the nature of the taming have been especially prevalent. Comments expressed range from those that, directly or indirectly, fault Kate for her treatment of others, to those that fault her family, her tamer (Petruchio), or male-dominated society for their treatment of her. At one extreme are authors who fault Kate, considering her, for example, a “confirmed and utter shrew” who has “come to get what she wants by making life miserable for those around her” (Draper, 1939, p. 757). At the other extreme are authors who absolve Kate and fault others, excusing Kate's shrewishness as “not bad temper, but the expression of her self-respect” (Hibbard, 1964, p. 23). Other authors fault the play, referring, for example, to a perceived “inherent unpleasantness” (Ornstein, 1986, p. 63). Still others have faulted Shakespeare (Hibbard, 1964). Despite occasional suggestions (Daniell, 1985; Saccio, 1985) that one-sided assessments of this kind cannot adequately account for the complexity of the characterization of Kate and others, extreme opinions regarding Kate's behavior and the nature of the taming are still expressed, with a continuing tendency to blame either Kate or others.
Why does The Shrew continue to lead to such differences of opinion in which one takes sides either for or against Kate? One possibility to explore is that this phenomenon stems from psychological aspects of the play, which reveal extremes in the personalities of both Kate and Bianca. It has been suggested (Sealy, 1994) that the behaviors of the two sisters are dominated by relational