sexist, offensive, and unacceptable in the modern era. In Shakespeare’s day, audiences would have accepted sexist attitudes toward women in this comedic play as commonplace. Thus, in order to properly examine the ironic circumstances presented by the author, the twenty-first-century reader must view the play with sixteenth-century eyes.

The plot of The Taming of the Shrew centers on the notion that women may be manipulated by men at will. This concept is part of what is known as the “Elizabethan World Order.” Women were considered what might be called second-class citizens today and were forced to a lower place in society with respect to the status men. As such, they were expected to be subservient and obedient to their husbands so they would be happy and free as required by the natural order of things in society.

With this understanding, we might look at Katherine’s idea of freedom and happiness as the drama unfolds. Petruchio proclaims his attitude, which serves as a succinct plot summary:

Marry, so I mean, sweet Katherine, in thy bed; / And therefore, setting all this chat aside, / Thus in plain terms: your father hath consented / That you shall be my wife your dowry 'greed on; / And will you, nill you, I will marry you. / Now, Kate, I am a husband for your turn; / For, by this light, whereby I see thy beauty,-- / Thy beauty that doth make me like thee well,-- / Thou must be married to no man but me; / For I am he am born to tame you, Kate, / And bring you from a wild Kate to a Kate / Conformable as other household Kates. / Here comes your father. Never make denial; / I must and will have Katherine to my wife.

Katherine has a different view of happiness and freedom. When Petruchio says, “we have 'greed so well together/That upon Sunday is the wedding-day,” she replies, “I'll see thee hang'd on Sunday first.” She envisions freedom after breaking the chains that bind her to Pertuchio’s will. To an Elizabethan audience, this is ironic. The way to true happiness in that era was obedience, so the audience knows she will eventually become Petruchio’s devoted, subservient, and happy wife. This is dramatic irony. Shakespeare and his Elizabethan audience share the knowledge to which Katherine is not privy. She will become “a worthy and obedient wife.”

An example of verbal irony is demonstrated in act 4. Petruchio has a new plan. He now “knows better how to tame a shrew.” His words are ironic because their meaning implies something different from what is expressed. The speaker’s words explicitly state an attitude that is the opposite of what he utters: “This is a way to kill a wife with kindness.” He will attempt to tame the shrew by making her believe he is kind and gentle, not manipulative and oppressive.

To locate examples of irony in The Taming of the Shrew, the analyst must separate from modern society and become immersed in the attitudes of sixteenth-century England. Identifying verbal irony is not too difficult because it is based on finding dialogue where a character expresses something specifically, but uses words which intentionally mean the opposite. Dramatic irony is more complicated in this play because the knowledge of future circumstances, like becoming a happy, subservient wife, is not natural to the modern reader.

In The Taming of the Shrew, Shakespeare uses verbal, dramatic, and situational irony.

An example of verbal irony is in act two, scene one. Petruchio describes Kate as having "wondrous qualities and mild behavior." This is ironic because we know Kate is not at all mild. She is temperamental and outspoken. What Petruchio says is not true, and he knows it as well as we do.

Once Kate and Petruchio are married, we expect Kate to be the tempermental one, but Petruchio shows bad behavior in mistreating his servants. This role reversal is ironic. Kate is hungry, but Petruchio throws out the meat, saying it was not worth eating

I tell thee, Kate, 'twas burnt and dried away,
And I expressly am forbid to touch it;
For it engenders choler, planteth anger;
And better 'twere that both of us did fast,
Since, of ourselves, ourselves are choleric,
Than feed it with such over-roasted flesh.

This is not what we are expecting, and therefore it is an example of situational irony. It soon turns to dramatic irony, as Petruchio informs the audience of his plan.

Last night she slept not, nor to-night she shall not;
As with the meat, some undeserved fault
I'll find about the making of the bed;
And here I'll fling the pillow, there the bolster,
This way the coverlet, another way the sheets;
Ay, and amid this hurly I intend
That all is done in reverend care of her-
And, in conclusion, she shall watch all night;
And if she chance to nod I'll rail and brawl
And with the clamour keep her still awake.
This is a way to kill a wife with kindness,
And thus I'll curb her mad and headstrong humour.
He that knows better how to tame a shrew

In scene three of this act, Kate laments on his treatment of her. She does not know why Petruchio is behaving this way, but we do—that is why it has become dramatic irony.

The more my wrong, the more his spite appears.
What, did he marry me to famish me?
Beggars that come unto my father's door 1960
Upon entreaty have a present alms;
If not, elsewhere they meet with charity;
But I, who never knew how to entreat,
Nor never needed that I should entreat,
Am starv'd for meat, giddy for lack of sleep;

Kate begs Grumio for some food, and Grumio makes up excuses as to why it is not good for her. We know that it is really because Petruchio told him to starve her as his way of trying to "tame the shrew."

One of the most famous scenes in The Taming of the Shrew is when Katharina and Petruchio meet, starting around 2.1.184. The two of them exchange barbs that are both sharp and suggestive. When Petruchio claims to have been “moved to woo thee for my wife” (in an emotional sense), Katharina urges, “let him that moved you hither / Remove you hence” (in a physical sense) and says she knew him for a “moveable,” or a piece of furniture. He retorts that, if he is a stool, she should sit on him. She calls him an ass who is “made to bear,” and he replies that she is a woman who is likewise made to bear--children.

The witty repartee goes on. Petruchio compares Kate to a wasp, so she warns him, “beware my sting.” He says the wasp’s sting lies in its tail, she says in its tongue (referring to stinging words), and, after a series of wordplays about wasps, Petruchio crudely asks if he should leave “with my tongue in your tail?” Even when she hits him, the conversation continues. He threatens to strike her back, and she replies that he would then lose his arms (his actual arms as well as his coat of arms) and be no gentleman.

There are several kinds of humor on display in this play, including slapstick and mistaken identity, but this battle of words is one of the most memorable.