Authors often act as cultural historians, immortalizing the popular perspectives and social opinions of their time with their written word. Shakespeare himself perfectly encapsulated in his writings the Renaissance mentality towards gender and the roles and responsibilities that men and women play in society. In her time, as in ours, women are seen as having virtuous traits, such as piety, obedience, chastity, patience, and modesty. Men, on the other hand, fill honorable roles, demonstrating great wisdom, courage, gallantry, power, logic, and strength. However, Shakespeare went further to reflect the beliefs of his era and actually questioned, challenged, and changed those gender ideals. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In Shakespeare's plays, Henry VI Part 3 and Richard III, the notion of gender is often contested. Often, characters do not fit into a perfect mold of “masculinity” or “femininity,” but rather these traits overlap and characters behave in ways that are complex, fluid, and simply universally human. Women were cunning and skillfully gained power through their speech, family and marriages. Men were sometimes weak, collapsing at the will of their enemies, helpless and unreasonable. Thus, Shakespeare raises the question of whether gender is a natural disposition that occurs simply and effortlessly, or whether it is a socially created binary that requires frequent reinforcement. Understanding Shakespeare's intricate construction of gender in his plays will not only give us insight into Renaissance generalizations of gender, but will also give us modern readers the opportunity to confront our own notions of genre. This is not to say, however, that these works did not, to some extent, follow conventional ideas of genre. Many of the female characters in both Henry VI and Richard III have moments of pure femininity, where they display nothing but the expected, ladylike qualities of a woman. Women are often praised for being compliant and gentle, while also being virtuous and graceful. Lady Elizabeth Gray masterfully achieves this balance and perfectly demonstrates her virtuous elegance in Act III, Scene 2 of Henry VI, Part 3. After losing her husband, the Dowager Lady Elizabeth Gray is left landless and powerless. Although King Edward's proposal to give the lady his lands if she loves him would solve Elizabeth's problems, she immediately rejects him, thus maintaining decorum. Indeed, she describes the "love" she feels for Edward as "love unto death, my humble thanks, my prayers, that love which virtue begs and virtue grants." (III.2.73, 74) Lady Elizabeth is careful to make it clear that she is not behaving in any way inappropriately or without modesty, but is rather, as she says, virtuous. However, when Edward proposes, for lack of better words, to make an honest woman out of her, she is quick to accept his offer. This scene isn't played as romantic or sweet, but rather as a needy woman practically selling herself out to maintain her and her children's class status and comfortable lifestyle, but doing so in a socially respectable way. This exchange is very similar to when Richard tries to woo Lady Anne Neville in Act I, Scene 2 of Richard III. At first Lady Anne is continually hesitant, rejecting Richard's advances and even insulting him. However, Richard's perseverance, his permanent imperturbability and his flattering character finally pushed the lady to accept his proposal. Although we readerswe are aware of Richard's less than romantic intentions in wanting to marry her, we are nevertheless expected to believe that she has fulfilled her feminine duty in succumbing to Richard's demands and agreeing to marry him. Male characters in Shakespeare's plays embody social expectations of masculinity and what it means to be a "manly" man. Men are expected to display strength, both in body and mind. The perfect gentleman is also supposed to find a balance between being honorable, intelligent, and reasonable in his behavior, as well as powerful, tenacious, and courageous in his actions. In Richard III, the character of Henry Richmond is almost sanctified, painted to be an exemplary man and leader. He is noble, just and aspires to achieve peace, but does not crumble in the face of war. His speech to his men before the battle in Act V, scene 5 can only be described as heroic and emotional. He comes across as understanding, caring, and admirable. He refers to his soldiers as “loving fellow countrymen” and claims that their cause is dutiful, divinely ordained by God himself. Henry displays an optimistic but modest attitude and treats his men as his equals, his comrades in a just and virtuous battle. Of course, it is important to note that, having written this play under the reign of a Tudor monarch, it is likely that Shakespeare sought to portray the original Tudor, Henry Richmond, as a strong, decisive and brilliant leader. However, the fact remains that Richmond exemplified what a man should be. Another character who upheld social expectations for men, albeit in a slightly less conventional way, is Warwick. In Act III, Scene 3 of Henry VI Part 3, Warwick changed sides, from York to Lancaster, after receiving news of Edward's hasty marriage to Lady Elizabeth Grey. While it is easy to assume that it was Edward's betrayal and humiliation of Warwick that caused him to switch allegiance, it makes no sense that the loyal and truly devoted Warwick would switch sides because of such a superficial reason. Warwick did not let his bruised ego get the better of him and did not sell his loyalty to bolster his pride. Rather, it was Edward's lack of responsibility and judgment that convinced Warwick. Warwick is honorable and just and simply wishes to serve a deserving king. Warwick applied his personal beliefs regarding morals, honor, and duty and strove to support a dignified king. There are many characters, however, who transgressed the roles they were supposed to play and acted as they wanted, regardless of their gender or social position. Many of the women in Henry VI Part 3 and Richard III manage to wield great power despite their social roles. Indeed, it is often their position as women that allows them to gain such influence and authority. The prime example of this is none other than Queen Margaret, who never fails to cross the blurry line between male and female behavior, and embody every characteristic she chooses to do so. Margaret breaks the norm for women of her time and does "evil" and "manly" things to do what she thinks is right and protect her son's best interests. This makes her a thoughtful, realistic, and multidimensional portrayal of a female character in a work of fiction. In Act I, scene 4 of the play, Henry VI, part 3, Margaret takes on a masculine role when she tortures and ultimately kills Richard, the Duke of York. It goes against everything expected of a woman. She is not reserved, kind and gentle, but rather domineering, cruel and vindictive. She taunts York, belittling him and his attempt to usurp the crown. The fact that she put a paper crown on himon her head is the culmination of the passionate fury she feels towards York and the ultimate manifestation of the ridiculousness she wants him to feel. By showing York her son's bloody handkerchief, she is not only trying to hurt him even more, but is acting against nature, feeling proud and rewarded for the death of a child, of a son. Margaret is ruthless and violent, but she acts so ferociously to protect her son Richard and secure the future she fervently believes is rightfully hers. Her maternal instinct, her love and will to protect her child can be considered fundamental, basic part of femininity, thus making her essentially feminine. By placing her in this paradoxical split characterization, Shakespeare managed to create an incredibly intricate female character: she was at once tough and ruthless, caring and maternal. A mother and a warrior. The character of Margaret possesses both masculine and feminine characteristics, and these two different ranges come together in one victorious and powerful human being. This character creation reflects a union of masculine and feminine and can be linked to Shakespeare's queen and patron, Queen Elizabeth, who perfectly personified this juxtaposition of masculinity and femininity. Many of the female characters, aside from Margaret, are also written as multi-dimensional, complex women. Lady Elizabeth Grey, for example, was an ideal woman in Henry VI, Part 3. She accepted Edward's impetuous marriage proposal and ran for cover when she found herself in danger. However, in Act IV, Scene 4 of Richard III, he summons the courage to address Richard. Indeed, what Queen Elizabeth said to Richard about her desire to marry her daughter, Princess Elizabeth, is perhaps one of the harshest, fiercest, and most deserved things anyone has ever said to Richard. Elizabeth used a cruel spirit to bring Richard down. He answers Richard's question about how to woo Elizabeth with a list of absurd ideas, bringing many of Richard's heinous crimes to light. For example, she suggests that he “send her, through the man who killed her brothers, a pair of bleeding hearts; on it engrave "Edward and York"; then maybe he will cry. (IV.4.276-278) He goes on to tell Richard that he could also give her “a handkerchief; who, tell her, has drained the purple sap from her sweet brother's body, and bid her wipe her weeping eyes with it. (IV.4.281-283) Elizabeth refers, of course, to Richard's murder of her two sons, princes Edward and York. He doesn't stop there and continues to list other bad deeds of Richard, such as the murder of George, Duke of Clarence, and his brother, Rivers, and his wife, Lady Anne Neville. In this way, Elizabeth surpasses her role as distrustful and compliant and brutally defends her daughter with a sharp and unrepentant tongue. It is curious to note that at the beginning of Act V, scene 4, all three women: Queen Margaret, Queen Elizabeth and the Duchess of York are all gathered around, linked in conversation by their hatred of Richard, a man . Margaret and Elizabeth, who have often been pitted against each other, acting as obstacles to each other, are now united in their efforts to destroy Richard. The scene seems to present these women as witch figures, as they are plotting evil and casting curses. It also wouldn't pass the Bechdal test, a modern creation that simply tests whether a story contains at least one scene in which two or more female characters converse about anything but men. Although the scene has flaws, these do not necessarily detract from its merits. This scene introduces a rudimentary version of sisterhood. These women are united and working..