Doubt: A Parable, By John Patrick Shanley

In the layered play, Doubt: A Parable, playwright John Patrick Shanley reveals Sister Aloysius’ alloyed personality, one that is cold yet sincerely caring. After her examination of a suspicious relationship between a student and a priest, she draws conclusions that she believes will protect her students. Without the support of others or even concrete evidence, Sister Aloysius leaves no room for doubt. Similarly to Laertes in The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark by William Shakespare, her concern comes off as overbearing and disconnected. Sister Aloysius’ relationship with her students parallels Laetes' misinterpreted interest in his sister Ophelia as a relationship that challenges the definition of kindness set by society’s golden rule:

However, as the daughter of Polonius, councillor to the king, her love life is heavily controlled by her father. Yet, this is not the only person interfering with her autonomy; Ophelia’s brother, Laetes treats her as his own “mock-daughter” (Olivas, 2015, p. 12). In his “moral instructions,” Ophelia is “treated as an object” (Olivas, 2015, p. 12). Laertes warns that “For Hamlet, and the trifling of his favor / …Forward, not permanent, sweet, not lasting / The perfume and suppliance of a minute / No more” (Ham. 1. 3. 6-11). Clearly, “by stating such powerfully dismissive words, Laertes exhibits his objectification of Ophelia” (Olivas, 2015, p. 13). He rejects Hamlet’s affection towards her as false and short-lived before ordering that they end their relationship. However, despite this outwardly cruel manipulation of his sister to benefit his personal reputation “Laertes thinks that Hamlet will eventually hurt Ophelia” and thus his warning does truly look out for her genuine wellbeing (Tovsen, 2012, p. 8). This deceitful yet somehow sincere concern parallels the honestly caring but misunderstood relationship of Sister Aloysius and her students because both involve individuals that are helping others, albeit through undesirable means. This leads to the conflicted question: can it really be kindness if your means of doing so are characteristically

However, it goes beyond the simple definition by alluding that “acts of kindness, caring, and altruism… go above and beyond business as usual or usual care” (Corazzini et al., 2005). But, some argue that the rule “is simply too idealistic” as it would require “a utopian world to operate in” (Puka, 2021). The rule itself is too broad; it rides on the “assumption of similarity: that others are like ourselves and therefore want to be treated similarly” (Bennett, 2013). This is exemplified by Sister Aloysius and her strict interpretation of morals. She holds everyone to her standards; however, not everyone agrees with her ideals. Thus, she is left misinterpreted and distanced. The Golden Rule betrays Sister Aloysius as society perceives her as insensitive while she believes that she is doing the right thing. On the other hand, Laertes clearly is an abomination to the Golden Rule as he does not regard his sister with any of the respect he would award himself; however, he is still looking out for Ophelia in the long run. Does the Golden Rule negate that he is being kind? No, despite his means, ultimately Laertes was being considerate and following the definition of kindness. The Golden Rule is merely a quixotic extension of