Shakespearean comedies often address the widely accepted notion in Elizabethan England that suggested that order and balance should prevail both in the world and in the depicted representations of world, although the form of the works often employed a sense of comic disorder. Social, noble, and spiritual hierarchies are described through language and events throughout almost all of Shakespeare's work, although the methods by which he created structure in his plays differ. In many plays, including Twelfth Night and Measure for Measure, Shakespeare uses comedy caused by chaotic or confusing situations to reveal an underlying order within the universe. The Comedy of Errors, one of Shakespeare's earliest comedies, does exactly this in several ways. It establishes order not by events (many scenes are confusing for both the audience and the characters), but by imposing a structure in which the themes are perfectly balanced. Specifically, this play uses a recurring balance between unity and separation to suggest that, even in a highly illogical fictional world, an underlying sense of order fuels the plot. The references to unity and separation are constant from the beginning to the end of the work: the idea of ​​unity is described through acts or references to bind, bind, confine, union, marriage and bond while the idea of ​​separation is described through dissolution, divorce, release, release, lose or cut off. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay A careful analysis of The Comedy of Errors reveals that Shakespeare's choice of plot, character development, and language is used to create a direct balance between recurring themes of unity and separation. The play's events are fueled directly by separation and unity, with a lost father, Egeon, recalling the memory of a shipwreck that separated him from his twin sons and his desire to be reunited with them. The twins' separation from each other and lack of knowledge about each other creates much of the tension within the show, and their union ultimately leads to the restoration of order. In an essay exploring specific symbols that suggest motifs of bonding and liberation, Richard Henze suggests that “this is a game of fate, and it is in the very special sense that fate is the gravitational pull of society that brings men together if they had once been separated” (36). It is this “fate” that creates order in the world that Shakespeare is portraying, and it is the reunion of separate characters that creates a sense of satisfaction and structure. However, it is not only the general events of the play that are driven by the acts of union and separation: even the action on a very small scale follows this structure. For example, Vincent Petronella discusses in his essay "Structure and Theme through Separation and Union in Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors," how both Antipholuses are used to represent a balance of separation and reunion. Antipholus of Ephesus complains at the beginning of the work about his marital ties and his unity with his wife because, as he explains, he wishes to dine with a prostitute without having to ask his wife's consent. In Scene I of Act III, he finds himself physically locked out of the house, as his wife has mistaken her twin brother, Antipholus of Syracuse, for him. Suddenly he is helplessly separated from the bonds of marriage and the life from which he had previously wished to free himself (Petronella, 483). The liberatory-binding theme continues with Antipholus of Ephesus when his wife Hadrian orders him to be boundassuming he has gone mad: “Tie him, tie him, let him not come near me” (IV. iv.106). This quote also offers a balance between separation and unity: she wants him to be forced to keep him separate from herself. The balance of Egeon and his sons are separated and then reunited, restoring order, as is the desire of Antipholus of Ephesus to be freed from the unity of marriage, his separation from his life, and his reunion with his wife at end describe a level of order used by Shakespeare using the themes of separation and unity. Action and narrative devices, however, are not the only references to the balance between separation and unity: Shakespeare also deals with these themes through symbols and direct language. The Comedy of Errors has two specific symbols that seem to recur throughout the work, both in the dialogue and the action, almost to the point of absurdity: the chain and the rope. Different arguments can be made about the symbolism behind the objects, but according to Henze, the themes of separation and unity offer a solid option. He argues that both objects directly relate to unity and separation on multiple levels. The more obvious level of patterning between chain and rope and the themes of unity and separation suggests that the physical use of either could be seen as an act of binding, limiting or holding. The rope, Henze argues, represents the more physical aspect of unity while the chain, intended as a gift for the wife of Antipholus of Ephesus, was meant to represent a stronger unity in their marriage and within the community. Henze suggests that the chain, while not necessarily a physical symbol, can be defined as a “social” symbol. After being locked out of the house, however, Antipholus promises to give the chain to the landlady of Porpentino: "That chain I will give / (If only to spite my wife) / To my landlady there," (III .i.117-119), which shows a breakdown of unity in the marriage and a separation, emotionally, from the wife. The chain then falls into many different hands over the course of the show, creating what Henze explains should be seen as a kind of unity within the community. He writes that the chain can be seen “as a symbol of social bonds that consistently performs its symbolic function. He lures Antipholus S. into society and marriage, never ends up in the hands of the prostitute (landlady), and finally helps rejuvenate the marriage between Antipholus and Adriana” (38). Furthermore, Adriana actually says that she sees the chain as a representation of her husband's sincerity in their marriage. “Where gold; and no man that has a name, / with falsehood and corruption is ashamed" (II.i.112-113). He is suggesting that a gift made of gold from a man results in a clean relationship, because “no man who has a name” would bring corruption or shame to the precious gift (Henze, 39) There are numerous other smaller symbols within the Comedy of Errors that likely reinforce the balance between unity and separation, but of these I believe. that the rope and chain are the most significant. Symbols and plot that suggest separation, unity and the importance of balance between them are not the only ways in which Shakespeare reinforced this point: in fact, it could be considered that the language of the dialogue has the most extensive trace of separation and unity. Almost all the main speeches of the work use images of bond, marriage, separation, loss and liberation, especially during the moments of major development of the plot twins from the father suggests themes not only by the plot, but also by the language Egeon uses to describe the wreck. His wife and himself, he explained, "We tied ourselves to the two ends of the mast / And, floating upright, obedientto the current, / We were carried towards Corinth, as we thought" (Ii86-88). This idea of ​​tying oneself, or binding oneself with ropes, to the masts of the broken ship, is in perfect balance with the real action, the separation of the parents from the sons Egeon further explains that while the two boys were tied to different trees, each with one of the servants (both named Dromio). The boys and their father were separated, therefore, each tied to another person and traceable throughout the rest of the work. For example, Dromio of Ephesus uses terms that reflect the unity and bond of himself with his master, Antipholus of Ephesus, when Antipholus is accused of being possessed: "Master, I am. here bound for thee" (IV.iv .124). This theme of fraternal bonding and unification can be considered part of the balance between separation and unification. Antipholus and Dromio are open to their compassion for each other, having been companions since shipwreck, Antipholus of Ephesus travels to Syracuse to try to win back his lost brother, while Aegeon also finds himself in Syracuse, trying to reunite with his children. The satisfaction created by the unification of the family (including the mother, Aemilia) is recognized in the last lines of the work, spoken by Dromio of Ephesus: “No, then thus:/ We came into the world as brother and brother; / And now let us go hand in hand, not in front of each other” (Vi424-426). The last lines of a Shakespearean play have a lot of meaning and I would say this directly follows that pattern. The themes of separation and reunion, which were consistently used in the development of the plot, symbols and language of The Comedy of Errors, make their final appearance here. The final unification of the brothers ("hand in hand") after an entire play fueled by separation and confusion, is in line with one of the conventions of Shakespearean comedies: the idea that the end of the play will bring an orderly and will reveal the balance of forces. By using the themes of separation and unity throughout the play, Shakespeare was able to use the themes to create a sense of order and structure within a world that seemed to have none. An essay of this length is unable to discuss the vast number of references to themes of unity and separation within the work, but I hope to have touched on some key evidence that suggests that the use of plot, symbols and Shakespeare's language works to express those themes. Further examples include the conversation between Luciana and Adriana that addresses the husband's role in a marriage and their ability to bind the wife to her duties: “Oh, know that he is the brake of your will... There is no but the donkeys will be harnessed like this”, (I.ii.13-14), which suggests a type of bond and unity from which Adriana wishes to separate, and Antipholus of Syracuse's announcement that she has decided to “lose herself”, in the search of his family: "I to the world am like a drop of water / Which in the ocean seeks another drop", (I.ii.35-36), which suggests that he is simultaneously separating himself from his life while he joins the rest of society, or the rest of the drops in the ocean. This creates the balance between separation and unity that Shakespeare used as a way to create an underlying structure in the play. The movement of the plot, the recurring symbols within the physical captions and dialogue, and the language used by the characters suggest a balance between unity and separation. The separation of the family at the beginning is remedied by the unification of the family at the end, the attempt to break ties and separate (from marriage, from society or from physical ties) translates into a desire for reunion, and the language of the whole work in the last lines suggests that a.