Thomas Rymer on the handkerchief
So much ado, so much stress, so much passion and repetition about an Handkerchief? Why was not this call'd the Tragedy of the Handkerchief? … Had it been Desdemona's Garter, the Sagacious Moor might have smelt a Rat: but the Handkerchief is so remote a trifle, no Booby, on this side Mauritania, cou'd make any consequence from it. [160]
I do not think Rymer's criticism that Shakespeare's use of the handkerchief as a dramatic device is flawed is valid. I believe this opinion as Rymers criticism on the play Othello if it was based around Desdemona underwear would not effect the play that significantly. I do agree that Othello should worry more if Cassio was walking around with Desdemona's underwear compared to a handkerchief. However a possession that holds high sentimental value and the powers that the handkerchief allegedly possesses is bound to cause Othello to become jealous as he believes Desdemona gave it to Michael Cassio, whom is good looking man with high social class. The importance of the handkerchief to Othello is profoundly projected by the speech he gives about it, in order to make Desdemona feel guilt and encourage to come fourth with the truth. He describes the handkerchief in a way which gives it super natural attributes, Othello says: "Twound make her amiable and subdue my father Entirely to her love; but if she lost it Or made a gift of it, my father's eye Should hold her loathly, and his spirits should hunt After are fancies." The whole speech talks about a warning that if a lover receives the handkerchief and looses it there love will fall about and all shall be lost. This superstition adds depth to the play, making it in my opinion believable to a Elizabethan audience meaning people can see how consequences can develop from something as simple as a handkerchief.
