A postcolonial interpretation of The Tempest is one that gained popularity in the second half of the 20th century. This particular reading of the play implies that Shakespeare consciously promoted colonialism in the New World in the guise of the magician Prospero, a usurpation of Caliban, "the slave." It can be argued that Caliban represents the Native American, while Prospero can be seen as the European imperialist. This interpretation calls into question the values ​​and opinions of the past. This presents Caliban in a sympathetic light and shows an increased understanding of his plight while raising questions about Prospero's rule on the island. However, this reading is not universally accepted in modern times. One critic comments that it is "simply absurd to impose on The Tempest our twentieth-century preoccupation with the imperialist rape of the Third World."1 In contrast, Stephen Greenblatt responds that it is "very difficult to say that The Tempest is not about imperialism. »2 This essay aims to show that colonialism is a major problem in the play, and while Shakespeare does not condemn it outright, he certainly questions the practice and demonstrates unprecedented (for his time) empathy for the colonized. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The question of legitimate authority is introduced immediately into the play, indicating that it will play a major role in events who will follow. The King of Naples, Alonso, and his entourage are caught in a frightening storm at sea. Panic ensues and the normal hierarchy of power relations is disrupted. The boatswain takes control of the situation and orders Antonio, Duke of Milan, not to intervene: “You are spoiling our work; keep your cabins :/ You are helping the storm. (1.1.16-17). He continues by asking Sébastien, the king's brother: “What are you doing here?... Do you want to sink? (1.1 45-46). Those around him are shocked and insulted by this treatment inflicted by a “humble” boatswain and threaten him with hanging. However, this reversal of authority, this theme of the ruler contested by the governed permeates the play. We soon learn of Antonio's successful palace revolution against his brother. This is followed by Antonio's plot with Sebastian to kill Alonso while he sleeps and Caliban's attempted insurrection with Stephano and Trinculo against Prospero's rule of the island. The overarching problem, however, is Prospero's claim to rightfully rule the island. He is arrogant in his rejection of Caliban's claims and appears free of conscience when he usurps Caliban's rule. Frank Kermode, in his introduction to the play, comments that: "It is the natural assumption of a European prince...There is ample evidence of the corrupting effect on the natives of contact with dissolute Europeans - " Christian savages sent to convert pagan savages," as Fuller put it.3 Kermode makes this point. that the practice of colonialism was so ingrained in the psyche of European thought of the time that few, if any, thought twice about the morality of extending European rule to new areas inhabited by "uncivilized" and "savages." Little consideration was given to the natives of these areas as they were deprived of their land and. of their freedom because they did not respect the conformity of European life or appearance. This is what Prospero did to Caliban, but we will talk about that later, in Meredith Anne Skura's essay “Discourse and. the Individual: The Case of Colonialism” highlights that we all fall into theThe trap of prejudging, of making hypotheses before being able to base them. She takes the example of the association of “Caliban” with “cannibal”. She says: Caliban is not a cannibal - in fact, he rarely touches meat - his name seems more like a parody of stereotypes than a mark of monstrosity, and in our haste to confirm the connection between "cannibal" and “Indian” outside the text, we lose sight of how Caliban cuts the connection within the text. .4In short, only if one can lose all preconceived ideas and stereotypes about what is different, what is unknown, can one judge a situation morally and ethically. This is what is necessary for the postcolonial reading of The Tempest, and once this is done, we can see that Caliban has been openly and unjustly dispossessed of what belongs to him. When Caliban says to Prospero: "This island is mine, by Sycorax my mother/ That you took from me.../ I am all the subject that you have/ Who was the first my own king" (1.2. 334- 336), he claims the title of king of the island by inheritance The only claim that Prospero can have is one that rests solely on the superior virtue and aptitude of government However, Antonio, in taking the position of Prospero. as Duke of Milan, argued that Prospero was "incapable" of ruling and that the usurpation was therefore justified.5 Thus, Prospero undermines the basis of his title by establishing his own rule on the island of Caliban. This angle, Prospero's hypocrisy becomes evident Our sympathies for Caliban are further aroused in the early scenes of the play with Miranda, Ariel and Caliban having to raise doubts in later scenes (1.2.78, 87, 77). , 1.2.246) and his censure of Caliban must be seen in this light.6 Caliban is not the brutal and callous savage of the 17th century and 18th century writers portrayed him as he was, which allows more easily ignore the unjust oppression he suffered at the hands of Prospero. He is able to learn a language and with this new language he is able to eloquently express his feelings and, for example, the beauty of the music that the island has: Do not be afraid; this island is full of noises, sounds and sweet airs, which give pleasure and do no harm. Sometimes a thousand tinkling instruments will buzz around my ears; and sometimes voices, which, if I had awakened after a long sleep, would make me sleep again; (3.2 174-182). He can speak in verse rhythms, unlike Stephano and Trinculo. He can follow plan and reason and form romantic attachments. All of this combines with his childish gullibility which serves to evoke pity and ultimately humanize him. Prospero is aware that Caliban is not a manifestation of pure evil, but he constantly treats him as if he were. When Gonzalo comments that, although the islanders are “monstrous in form,” “their manners are gentler, more amiable than those of our human generation” (3.3.29), Prospero responds: “You have spoken well; for some of you here present I am worse than the devils. (3.3 30-32) Here, Prospero implicitly ranks Antonio's evil as greater than Caliban's evil. There are still other faults to be found in Prospero's regime. Paul Brown, in his essay “The Storm and the Discourse of Colonialism,” compares and contrasts the reign of Prospero to that of the “vile witch” Sycorax. He argues that Ariel's constant reminder that she was saved from his regime makes Prospero's regime seem benevolent to the end. But "his black and feminine magic contrasts ostensibly with that of Prospero insofar as it is seen as viciously coercive, and yet, behind the apparent voluntarism of white male rule lies precisely the threat of.265