Demetrius: Tragic Hero or Misunderstood Jerk? Discuss.
Anyone tackling A Midsummer Night's Dream has to, at some point, tackle the thorny issue of Demetrius. At the beginning of the play, he is betrothed to Hermia, with her father's approval, despite having "made love to Nedar's daughter, Helena" (I.i.107). By the end of the play, however, he is married to Helena and vows that he "will for evermore true to" her" (IV.i.175). We have three paired sets of newlyweds, but Demetrius is the only character with an object of desire that changes (and stays changed) over the course of the play, the only one who loves a different person at the end than he does at the beginning.
So the question is this: despite the happy (or at least joyous) ending of the play, is the fate of Demetrius one to merit pity or joy?
When he first speaks to Hermia, his are not words of love, but of law, of privilege:
When we see him with Helena in pursuit, he tells her,
Later, when Theseus finds the lovers in the woods, and Egeus calls Demetrius to take what is rightfully his (Hermia), Demetrius states:
Could the promise of riches, status, and marriage be the socially acceptable version of the pansy potion, making a boy "madly dote" (II.i.171) on that which normally makes no difference whatsoever to a man? Could this then mean that the pansy potion has "corrected" the effects of Egeus' "prestige potion" of a marriage arrangement?
Some have argued that the ending of Midsummer is actually sad and tragic, in that Demetrius is no longer feeling his true feelings (since he's still under the pansy potion's effects). Sure, it can be played that way. Or it can be simply ignored (as many productions do). But I think there's another way to play this: Demetrius first loved Helena, then abandoned that love for the promise of status and money, and only by the pansy potion is returned to his "natural taste." And that way the ending truly is magical, joyous… and happy.
So the question is this: despite the happy (or at least joyous) ending of the play, is the fate of Demetrius one to merit pity or joy?
When he first speaks to Hermia, his are not words of love, but of law, of privilege:
Relent, sweet Hermia, and, Lysander, yieldHe simply wants what has been promised to him, a marriage. There is no discussion of love. Even when confronted with the revelation of his past liaison with Helena, he says nothing; he does not (cannot?) deny it. When Helena speaks of Demetrius' feelings, she only states that "Demetrius loves (Hermia's) fair" (I.i.182); even she knows that it's not Hermia that he loves, but what makes her fair (some critics attribute this to complexion or race, but it could also be money, power, status). Already, we begin to wonder of his true loyalties.
Thy crazed title to my certain right.
-- I.i.91-92
When we see him with Helena in pursuit, he tells her,
I love thee not; therefore pursue me not.While he tells Helena that he doesn't love her, neither does he say that he loves Hermia. Hermia may "slayeth" him, we also get the feeling that all of this stems from a perceived pre-marital ownership, as he refers to her only as "my Hermia." Even what he continues to tell Helena puts into question his emotional state:
Where is Lysander and fair Hermia?
The one I'll slay, the other slayeth me.
Thou told'st me they were stolen unto this wood;
And here am I, and wood within this wood,
Because I cannot meet my Hermia.
Hence, get thee gone, and follow me no more.
--II.i.188-194
Do I entice you? do I speak you fair?While he does state that he does not love Helena, he expands upon that, saying he "cannot love" her, perhaps because of his marital agreement. Does he feel remorse for this? Could this be the reason why he is "sick when (he does) look on" her?
Or, rather, do I not in plainest truth
Tell you, I do not, nor I cannot love you?
...
Tempt not too much the hatred of my spirit,
For I am sick when I do look on thee.
-- II.i.199-201, 211-212
Later, when Theseus finds the lovers in the woods, and Egeus calls Demetrius to take what is rightfully his (Hermia), Demetrius states:
My lord, fair Helen told me of their stealth,Yes, he is still under the spell of the pansy potion, but there is nothing in the speech that is false. He had been "betrothed" to Helena before Hermia (the result of his having "made love" to Helena?). He admits to once having a love for Hermia, but he now seems to equate that love to "an idle gaud // Which in (his) childhood (he) did dote upon," in a reference to 1 Corinthians 13:11
Of this their purpose hither to this wood,
And I in fury hither followed them,
Fair Helena in fancy following me.
But, my good lord, I wot not by what power-—
But by some power it is--my love to Hermia,
Melted as the snow, seems to me now
As the remembrance of an idle gaud
Which in my childhood I did dote upon,
And all the faith, the virtue of my heart,
The object and the pleasure of mine eye,
Is only Helena. To her, my lord,
Was I betrothed ere I saw Hermia,
But, like in sickness, did I loathe this food;
But, as in health, come to my natural taste,
Now I do wish it, love it, long for it,
And will for evermore be true to it.
-- IV.i.159-175
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.But now, he says, he has returned to his "natural taste." He has become a man.
Could the promise of riches, status, and marriage be the socially acceptable version of the pansy potion, making a boy "madly dote" (II.i.171) on that which normally makes no difference whatsoever to a man? Could this then mean that the pansy potion has "corrected" the effects of Egeus' "prestige potion" of a marriage arrangement?
Some have argued that the ending of Midsummer is actually sad and tragic, in that Demetrius is no longer feeling his true feelings (since he's still under the pansy potion's effects). Sure, it can be played that way. Or it can be simply ignored (as many productions do). But I think there's another way to play this: Demetrius first loved Helena, then abandoned that love for the promise of status and money, and only by the pansy potion is returned to his "natural taste." And that way the ending truly is magical, joyous… and happy.
[of course, the problem is how to present this onstage... in some kind of pre-play tableau? i don't know... i just don't know...]



I don't know if I'm jumping the gun, and that you will cover these topics in your next entry, but I want to get them out in case you weren't going to discuss them.
First, for me this play can be summed up in Bottom's comment to Titania, " ...to say the truth, reason and love keep little company together nowadays." Keep that in mind and all else falls pat: The radical shifts of affection, Titania loving an ass, the lack of any difference between Demetrius and Lysander, the lack of any meaningfull difference between Hermia and Helena, the constant finding of differences where none exist to explain the change of affections, Lysander breaking his oath to Hermia, Helena turning on Hermia, and Puck loving every minute of it.
Next, this play is Romeo and Juliet with a happy ending. And Pyramus and Thisby is Romeo and Juliet, and it would have been Hermia and Lysander's story if it had turned out badly.
Finally, note the number of times senses get jumbled. Bottom goes into the wood to SEE a noise he heard. Snug the Joiner asks Theseus if would like to SEE the epilogue or HEAR a Bergomask dance (he should HEAR the epilogue or SEE a Bergonmask dance), Pyramus SEES a voice, he can HEAR Thisby's face, and "The eye of man hath not HEARD, the ear of man hath not SEEN, man's hand is not able to TASTE, his tongue to CONCEIVE, nor his heart to REPORT what my dream was." I haven't figured this one out completely, but I know it is not just ignorance on Bottom's part. He uses the correct words for senses most of the time.
Reply to this
Great commentary, Kevin.
I love the Bottom line... it really does sum up the play.
Your observation about R&J/P&T foreshadow my transition between the plays (it's always been my opinion that one prompted the other ... though historically we don't know what came first).
As for the jumbled senses, it is something I wanted to discuss, but hadn't gotten around to it yet. Like you, I'm not sure what to make of it exactly, but it's got to be there for a reason...
Reply to this