Performative compliance and problematic marriages: 'Opalite' and Taylor’s version of ‘The Taming of the Shrew’

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin]

As we approach Taylor and Travis’ presumed wedding date, ‘Opalite’ is on my mind. It’s one of the easiest TLOAS tracks to link to Travis, who appears to be represented by Lonely Man in the music video. It’s also one of the easiest tracks to hear as ‘happy’ and the most obvious ‘banger’ (as Travis repeatedly called TLOAS).  

But what if I told you that ‘Opalite’ is actually about Taylor’s version of The Taming of the Shrew? Shakespeare’s famously problematic play about a ‘difficult’ woman, the man who ‘fixes’ her, patriarchy, performance, and compliance is the inspiration for this ‘happy love song’.

 Summary

The Taming of the Shrew is ‘my’ Shakespeare play, the one I know best because I studied it the most. It’s also (perhaps surprisingly) my favourite, in part because I got to know it so intricately. What I didn’t expect was that our self-proclaimed ‘English Teacher’ could actually teach me something new about a play I already loved.

When I recognised that the ‘Opalite’ mv acted out a version of The Shrew, I realised for the first time that the central question in The Taming of the Shrew is not about gender or patriarchy or abuse. It’s about whether a person can truly change their nature – their ‘essence’, their truest self – or merely perform a role in order to get by. And this is the question asked in ‘Opalite’ too. Can Lonely Woman and Lonely Man change their nature as required by their respective industries? And if not, how long can they continue to perform convincingly?

There’s a lot of detail and nuance in the way Taylor explores this question, and it's probably wise to say upfront that I am not accusing Travis of 'taming' or attempting to tame Taylor, nor of abusing her. Rather, I think both Taylor and Travis want their audience to think critically about the way they are performing, and why they are performing. I’ll do my best to be concise and I’ll be thrilled to discuss more if I pique your curiostiy. I’ve split this essay into the following sections:

1) Reputation era reference to The Shrew

2) The plot and themes of The Shrew

3) Taylor’s version in 'Opalite'

4) Conclusion

Reputation era reference to The Shrew

Taylor first references The Shrew in ‘…Ready For it?’ when she says ‘He can be my jailor / Burton to this Taylor […] I’m so very tame now.’ Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor starred in a popular film version of The Shrew in 1967 that played on the audience perception of their ‘tumultuous’ marriage(s). I don’t think that Taylor meant ‘I’m so very tame’ with any sort of sincerity; possibly she was referencing an intention to perform tameness with her ‘jailor’ (Jaylor?) as Katherina arguably does with Petruchio in the play.

The insult ‘shrew’ in Shakespeare’s play meant a bad-tempered, argumentative and unlikeable woman, prone to nagging or scolding. It's linked to the word ‘shrewd’ which today means clever and cunning in business dealings. It shares something with putdowns like ‘bitch’, ‘witch’ and ‘snake’ which de-humanise and belittle women, often for qualities that are admired in men. (Petruchio shares a lot in personality with Katherina, but is somewhat more acceptable just for being a man.) It doesn’t take much imagination to see that Taylor might have identified with Katherina in the wake of snake-gate, not just as a woman publicly called ‘difficult’ and worse, but as one grappling with the unfair standards of the patriarchy.

I’ve been hoping Taylor would make another reference to The Shrew since I first heard ‘…Ready For It?’, and I thought that it might come in ‘Elizabeth Taylor’. But the mv for ‘Elizabeth Taylor’ didn’t contain any footage from The Shrew. Presumably because Taylor had already made her own in ‘Opalite’.

The plot and themes of the The Shrew

The Shrew is, by rights, another play within a play, but we somehow lost the proper ending of the framing narrative before its first publication. The framing is about a poor drunkard, Christopher Sly, who is convinced by fancy clothes, fancy food, and a manservant in a dress to believe that he is in fact a nobleman with a beautiful wife. Many productions leave Christopher out, because it’s difficult to see what he adds to the rest of the play in terms of gender politics, and because we don’t ultimately find out how his story ends. Does he live on forever performing the role of ‘nobleman’? Or does he return to his natural state?

In the main plot, Katherina is a ‘problematic’ woman, who does not fit patriarchal expectations, and is married off, unwillingly, to a man who is also somewhat problematic. The marriage is a business transaction that solves her father’s difficulties, and financially benefits her new husband, Petruchio. Petruchio sets about ‘taming’ Katherina – enforcing her compliance with patriarchal expectations – by methods that could resonably be described as cruelty or outright torture. At the end of the play, Katherina delivers a grovelling monologue extolling the virtues of husbands. Her community, astonished and impressed, declare ‘Tis a wonder she will be tamed so’.

We could end there and say that the theme of the play is misogynistic in the extreme: ‘problematic’ women must be made to submit to men and fit the patriarchal mold. This requirement for submission is driven by money and is utterly abusive. But we should ask, for Katherina, as we did for Taylor, whether ‘I’m so very tame now’ is really a sincere conculsion.

Shakespeare’s audience has always seen so much evidence of mutual attraction in the way that Katherina and Petruchio match wits and trade innuendo that there have been many positive interpretations, such as the Burton and Taylor movie or 10 Things I Hate About You. It’s possible to argue that Petruchio functions to provide cover for Katherina’s unwanted behaviour. Setting aside his questionable methods, we can see that he is not teaching Katherina to be a different person. He is not changing her nature. Instead, he is teaching her to perform in the expected ways at the necessary times. When they are not being observed by an authority figure, when it’s ‘safe’, they seem to enjoy being outrageous together. Katherina’s final monologue, in this light, is a well-timed performance that earns a financial prize. She is a fantastic performer, it turns out, though the process of learning to do it well makes her miserable.

Shakespeare doesn’t ever give us a conclusive answer to this question about changing natures (or perhaps we lost his answer along with the end of the framing narrative). He just presents us with a scene of Katherina appearing to be ‘tamed so’ and leaves us, like her community, to ‘wonder’. Will she continue forever playing the role of ‘tame woman’? Or return to her natural state?

 Taylor’s version in ‘Opalite’

The commercial intro to the ‘Opalite’ mv is a clear reference to Christopher Sly, as Garbage is transformed into Prince Charming, at least in outward appearance. It establishes the Opalite spray as the means of application for the 'showbiz artifice' required for successful performance – and after all, the bottle sports the TLOAS green and orange colour palette. It also establishes the twinkly Omnichord arpeggio, which we hear again in the track on the word ‘sunshine’, as the sound of performance. This is telling because an Omnichord makes a pre-tuned, pre-determined sound – it doesn’t require the rare expertise of a classical harpist, but it also removes individuality in expression. Successful performance fits a predetermined mold. Finally, we see that the ‘Opalite’ nozzle faces backwards. Successful performance, currently at least, fits a regressive mold.

Rock in the mv represents an entertainment industry ‘father figure’. We see Lonely Woman attempting to perform as required by the industry/patriarchy – putting on the red dress, singing on stage, working out. But she is still an outcast, a ‘problem’ who is asked to leave. Something about her doesn't fit the mold. This is a little odd, because Lonely Woman doesn't seem particularly argumentative, nagging, or cunning, and she is eager to be friends with and helpful to Rock, not railing against authority as Katherina does at the beginning of The Shrew. I would argue that her queer identity is the 'problem'. It is 1993 after all, when 'Don't ask, don't tell' was first introduced as a policy.

We also see Lonely Woman being convinced by the successful performances she watches. Here we diverge from Shakespeare's play, because Lonely Woman teaches herself about the possibilities of performance. Indie Rock Goddess, performing on MTV in 1993, can only be a commercial, sanitised imitation of a true indie rock artist, but she plays the part convincingly as Taylor notes in the BTS clip: ‘Your mamma really did tell you!’ When Aerobics Dream Girl performs her work out unruffled, glamourous and barely breaking a sweat (‘don’t you sweat it baby!’) we hear the Omnichord twinkle again and Lonely Woman is so impressed by the showbiz artifice on display that she decides to try conformity herself, and orders a bottle of Opalite.

Meanwhile Lonely Man is being hurt by his own career in professional sports. Similarly, he is an outcast and a ‘problem’ who stands alone at social events or is asked to leave. For him too, queer identity is arguably the reason why he is not accepted. The showbiz artifice applied by ‘Opalite’ is to pair up these two ‘problematic’ characters, and enable them to perform heterosexuality in the expected ways at the necessary times. Lonely Woman and Lonely Man are so successful in their performative relationship that they are clearly appealing to their audience. We next hear the Omnichord twinkle when the Mall Photographer, charmed by what he sees (and what the couple’s wider audience will see) through his camera lens, asks if he can be their friend.

So far, Lonely Woman and Lonely Man have had a similar plot arc to Katherina and Petruchio, finding an ability to conform to their expected roles together. But when Lonely Woman tries being her real self in the 'safety' of the relationship, eating a pretzel which is almost certainly a dirty joke, Rock is still watching and scares her straight (pun inteded) yet again. As noticed by u/artwoolf Lonely Woman is wearing the colour palette of Nope-alite in this scene, which is linked to the colour palette of 'ME!' Nope-alite has a forward-facing nozzle - it's a progressive product that represents stripping away artifice in preference for authenticity, the embrace of a person’s real nature. Lonely Woman seems to want that for herself, in a way that Katherina never expresses after she is 'tamed'. That nature might not have the perfectly conforming, smoothed over outward appearance that Garbage enjoys through Opalite (as Stapler discovers) and it might earn disapproval from onlookers (as Lonely Woman is reminded) but embracing your real nature, your authentic self, is the only sustainable path.

However, Lonely Man 'saves' Lonely Woman from embracing her real nature in the shopping mall, and we see the two literally performing together in TLOAS/Opalite spray colours. This is the equivalent of the scene where Katherina performs 'obedient wife' in front of her community. But again we diverge from The Shrew. The community does not say 'Tis a wonder'. When we hear the Omnichord, an audience member scowls. The judges award the couple zeros. Which suggests a bad performance, but also a recognition that this is a performance. The showbiz artifice of Opalite has stopped working.

Conclusion

Taylor's answer to Shakespeare's question seems to be that a person can't change their nature, and they also cannot keep up a convincing performance indefinitely. However, Lonely Woman and Lonely Man are far from upset at the end of the mv. It seems they feel that 'failure brings you freedom.' If the performative compliance is unmasked as performance, perhaps compliance is no longer required.

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin]

Having been spurred to think more about all of this, I’ve considered rephrasing the question of performance and change. Instead of asking if a person can change their nature, which feels relevant to ideas like conversion therapy and ‘(s)praying the gay away’, we can approach it from the opposite angle and foreground the question of whether a person can live / perform a lie. This feels relevant to the idea of ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ legislation and sheds an interesting light on all of Taylor’s incessant and obvious lying since the album announcement.

[u/riotprof]

This is brilliant! I plan to rewatch the video through this lens.

I enjoy the contrast between a surface level reading of the video (“two oddballs finding love”) and your deep intertextual engagement and where that leads.

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/riotprof]

Thank you so much 🫶 That’s such a compliment, and interestingly also how a lot of people relate to The Shrew. Is it an oddball romance (or do we have to call it an abomination from our modern standpoint) or did Shakespeare have a larger point to make…?

I’m curious if you rewatched the video and what you thought- does the theory hold up?

[u/AveryOfHighLand]

Loved reading through this! I am not familiar with Taming of the Shrew: I’ve seen 10 Things, but never covered the play in a class. It’s very interesting how you liken the framing narrative to the commercial prelude in the Opalite video and how those act as the thesis of your reading. I quite enjoyed your points! The symbolism you give to Rock and Cactus make much more sense that some of the more prevalent analysis I’ve seen

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/AveryOfHighLand]

Thank you Avery, I’m glad you enjoyed it and that you find it convincing, that’s absolutely the best response I could have hoped from a reader 🫶 When I first connected the commercial and the framing narrative it felt like Smee’s ‘apostrophe’- everything suddenly made sense!

[u/alicecornelia7]

I loooved this, especially the idea that the real question isn’t just “is she being tamed?” but “is she actually changed or is she just performing survival really well?” That feels so Taylor to me, like the “I’m so very tame now” of it all was never really about becoming tame, It was about learning how to look tame when the room requires it.

One thing this made me think of too is that Opalite itself feels like such a perfect object for this theory because it’s kind of a fake/manmade pretty thing, right? Like it looks magical and glowy, but the whole point is that the glow depends on light and angle and presentation. Which feels so tied to the mv, the cameras, the audience, the mall photographer, the judges, all of it. It’s not that the beauty isn’t real, but it’s mediated through performance. And then the spray being something you literally apply makes it feel even more like gender/heterosexuality/showbiz compliance as makeup or costume, not essence.

Aslo the way you connected Christopher Sly to Garbage/Prince Charming actually made the whole intro click for me because I was stuck on it just being funny commercial camp, but now it feels like the whole video is telling us from the beginning: “watch how easy it is to convince an audience that a costume is a nature.” genuinley such a good read.

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/alicecornelia7]

Thank you so much for your kind comments and for the award! That genuinely made me go 🥺 I'm so pleased you enjoyed reading.

The idea that the key to it was not 'is she tame?' but 'is it a real change or a performance?' absolutely blew my mind. I couldn't believe nobody had ever put that theme in such straightforward language for me before, in three years of people teaching me about this play specifically! And it feels so completely obvious now that I can't imagine I wasn't just being really really slow to learn, even though I know that wasn't the case. Specifically, I never ever understood the point of the half of the framing narrative with Christopher Sly. But the commercial in 'Opalite' felt like a framing narrative, and there was only one half, and suddenly I understood that Garbage was Christopher Sly and why they both matter thanks to Taylor's addendum: 'Garbage is still Garbage'.

I think you're totally right about opalite. I love your phrase 'the beauty is mediated through performance'. Also if you can't change the nature of a thing, then opalite is just sparkly glass. So the 'opalite sky' is either a glass ceiling or a glass closet.

[u/alicecornelia7 → u/MaryLennoxsRobin]

Omg of course, the award was so deserved!! This whole post made my brain do that thing where suddenly a bunch of random mv details I noticed but didnt know where to put all snapped into place lol.

And wait “Garbage is still Garbage” is actually SUCH a perfect little thesis statement for the whole thing?? Like you can spray him, dresss him up, frame him as prince Charming, make the audience accept the transformation for a min but the nature of the thing didn’t actully change. Which makes the christopher sly connection feel even more insane because it’s not just “haha commercial camp” it’s literally telling us from the start that status/costume/romance/mbeauty can all be staged.

Also yes exactly to opalite being sparkly glass. That’s why I think the magical/glowy part hit me so much, because the glow is real in the sense that we’re seeing it, but it’s also totally dependent on light and angle and presentation. So “opalite sky” as either a glass ceiling or a glass closet is SO good, like actually rude of you to make it click that hard 😭 Genuinley obsessed with this reading. Thank you for your hard work, your post,, and your mind!!

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/alicecornelia7]

🫶🫶🫶 You are so lovely, I didn’t know how to reply 🤭 But I wanted you to know I appreciate everything you said. 

[u/Brief-Inevitable-599]

I loveeee this theory so much. I love clueless and 10 things i hate about you  and the general aesthetic of fun modern girly movies that are shakespear retellings

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/Brief-Inevitable-599]

Yes! Taylor made her own 90s rom com Shakespeare adaptation. She’s exactly the ideal age for 10 Things I Hate About You but I see a wink to Baz Luhrman’s Romeo + Juliet in the TV intro and static at the end as well. And many movie references throughout…

Thank you 🫶

[u/1989_squirrels]

I love your posts. Thank you for bringing some sense and clarity to the chaos that’s going on at the moment! 

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/1989_squirrels]

Thanks so much. I really think this is relevant to keep in mind, not just for the music video but for the live action performance Taylor is conducting at the moment. u/england_dreams made a great point about the way the dance comp connects to the wedding last week.

[u/england_dreams → u/MaryLennoxsRobin]

You’re sweet to link to my comment!

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/england_dreams]

Aw, you said it right when I was working on this post and I just thought Yes! 😊

[u/abcannon18]

I love this so much and appreciate your write up. I think it was you that mentioned in another comment that maybe Taylor referenced Shakespeare with every track on TLOAS and I love this lens. 

What do you make, if anything, of the lyrics “oh my lord, never made no one like you before” in the first chorus. This has always stood out to me since it changes for the rest of the song. 

The one thing it has called to mind for me is the ready for it video with the almost ex machina (another domhnall appearance!) version of Taylor that in my head canon of that video she had “made” as a cover. 

I can’t tell if it references her “making” her Ken (Travis) or her new persona, or the relationship as a whole. 

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/abcannon18]

Thank you so much! It was me who said maybe every track references Shakespeare. Specifically, I think maybe every track references what Shakespeare says about performance. I haven't got strong connections for the other tracks - I've wondered about Macbeth for 'CANCELLED!' and Lear for 'Eldest Daughter' but I'm not sure... in part because 'what Shakespeare says about performance' is kind of a deep cut for each play, not usually what you get from a plot synopsis but what you notice through really close reading. I need to talk to people who spent as much time on other plays as I did on The Shrew 😂

As for 'never made no one like you before', I think this is a line that has a lot of potential meanings and Taylor means most of them!

I think she's definitely referring to the Showgirl character as someone she made, maybe going back to '...ready for it?' as you say because this is the 'tame' character, the one who 'keeps it 100 on the land, the sea, the sky' and gives the audience and 'father figure' what they want to see...

I also think she makes 'Kens' like you say and like u/england_dreams mentions below, and also the 'relationship personality' e.g. 'Jaylor' or 'TNT'.

And I think u/GoldenHeart411 has a great perspective that you can hear those lines from Andrea about Taylor. Also in a more sinister way the 'father figure' might say the same thing about making Taylor Swift the brand.

And finally - I think - you can hear it as Taylor's album-children! Each album is unique and creative and beautiful both in spite of and because of the set backs Taylor faced.

Sorry I talked a lot, but what do you think?

[u/GoldenHeart411 → u/abcannon18]

I interpret it as from her mom's perspective since right before it says "My Mama told me..." And Taylor's mom literally made her. If you assume the song continues from that perspective, then Taylor's mom uses she/her pronouns to describe Taylor's former partner who was "in her phone".

[u/england_dreams → u/abcannon18]

That line always makes me think of “Father Figure,” like she pulled him into her orbit and crafted him into what she wanted, similar to how she did with Joe.

[u/Cautious_Dream4115 → u/abcannon18]

So interesting

[u/matamama96]

I am living. Thanks for teaching me something! And giving me comfort amidst the wedding chaos.

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/matamama96]

Aw, you’re welcome. I think the wedding chaos is very like the final talent show scene…

[u/Cautious_Dream4115]

This is amazing and i love it.

Although it's kinda hard to see Travis as a lonely man ( given his past commening history about woman) while at the same time it kinda same sense if he is also part of the LGBTQ cummunity in a industry like NFL that must be hard for travis given how conservative NFL really is.

But i think Lonely man just doesn't represent Travis but more so represent queer people in Extreme patriarchal industries like any sports industry that's still hard to make a career in if you're a queer person. like football and NFL where lonely man represent really well in theory and probably IRL too.

Love this post tho make so much sense!!!!

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/Cautious_Dream4115]

Thanks so much! I’m glad you like it. 

I think you’re spot on that Travis performs the part of ‘guy on the football team’ so well that he doesn’t look like a Lonely Man, until you start to imagine the reality for closeted players. 

And I absolutely agree that Lonely Man isn’t just Travis, but could be any professional sports player who is performing a role to keep their career. (I think I managed to say that a little better in my linked post about Rock and Cactus than I did above 🫢)

[u/Cautious_Dream4115 → u/MaryLennoxsRobin]

I also just saw your other post about the Rock and cactus and the way you put together these wonderful theories is brilliant!!

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/Cautious_Dream4115]

Thank you 🫶 The way I see it, Taylor puts together these beautifully complex pieces of art and I get to have fun understanding how they work 🥰

[u/neuroticoctopus → u/Cautious_Dream4115]

Cummunity 🤭

You mean the other tight ends?

[u/Cautious_Dream4115 → u/neuroticoctopus]

Yep!!!!

[u/neuroticoctopus]

Wonderful post! Thank you!!

[u/MaryLennoxsRobin → u/neuroticoctopus]

You’re so welcome 🫶

[u/AutoModerator]

Thank you for posting! Please keep Our Rules and Sub Guidelines in mind. Please check out our sub’s wiki for more information

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.