Adultery – in whatever context or culture – makes for an interesting tale; and Shakespeare is no exception to this temptation.
However, though adultery is suspected, it is present only in the minds of Sir John Falstaff.
The Merry Wives of Windsor is a light-hearted, romantic comedy. The merry wives in question are
Mistress Ford (wife to Ford) and Mistress Page (wife to Page). They decide to join forces - and to teach the dishonorable Sir John Falstaff an object lesson when he proposes to make love to them, their husbands being away. Mistress Ford invites Sir John Falstaff to her home, only to have him bundled out – in disgrace – in a basket of old linen. His disgrace is compounded when he is dumped into the muddy waters of the river Thames. Undaunted and unashamed, Sir John Falstaff wishes to try again – and has to be smuggled out of Mistress Ford’s home disguised as an old woman; but not before he is soundly thrashed and beaten. Wives may be merry (fun-loving) and honest (chaste) too; Shakespeare seems to be saying in the words of one of his principal characters. It is not right or proper (of their menfolk) to suspect them of disloyalty.
This, in sum, is the gist (and essence) of the play. There remains the question of Sir John Falstaff, who is a knight only in name. As he himself confesses – in the final scene of the last act – that love, in some respects, makes a beast a man; and in some other, a man a beast. In the former case, that love were properly be called love; while in the latter case it should more properly be labeled as merely (physical) lust.
But this play – as so many of Shakespearean plays – has another layer to it; that of class and the class divisions that accompany it. The characters are clearly demarcated into two categories: the gentlemen (with pretensions of nobility) and the
commoners. Both the groups of characters have little or no love lost for each other. The nobility (represented by Sir John Falstaff, Fenton and Doctor Caius) looks down upon the commoners; while the commoners (such as Shallow, Slender, Ford and Page) also treat the nobility with a certain amount of disdain, if not disrespect. Interestingly, even at this early stage, these differences are based upon family, birth and upbringing – and not upon wealth. The commoners (such as Ford and Page) rank lower in social status, even though they are wealthier than the gentlemen!
As a representative of the British nobility, Sir John Falstaff cuts a sorry figure indeed. And no doubt, it is persons of the character of Sir John Falstaff that has brought the British royalty to its current state of disgrace.