Growing up, I have been taught that family comes first, thus my loyalty lies with them. When it comes to family there seems to be an agreed notion that the safety and care of one’s loved one takes precedence over other aspects in life. However, not not all families operate with this pledged loyalty to one each other, which seems quite evident in Life Is a Dream. In Act 1, Scene 4, upon realizing that Rosaura is his kin Clotaldo ascends into a storm of confusion, questioning whether he should lead her before the King, which would result in her death, for he states, “I can’t conceal him, though, and thus infringe upon my sworn obedience. I’m torn between these deeply felt emotions and the duteousness I owe my liege. Why vacillate? Pledged loyalty, and not our lives, or loves, must take precedence. Just so, let loyalty abide!” (p. 16) He then later mentions that he’ll go to the King, reveal that this is his son, but that he must be killed. While it is evident that Clotaldo does love his child, thus hopes that the King will not put Rosaura to death, the mere act of being willing to sacrifice the life of your creation is unsettling. I thus question why loyalty to the King was greater than loyalty to his own blood, to the human that he created (and abandoned).
This can also be seen in the relationship between King Basil and Segismund, in which Basil’s loyalty seems to given to the stars than it is to his own child. Segismund is thus held captive, his life ended before it began, all because his father decided that he was guilty before he could prove his innocence. On the other hand, in Act 3 there are soldiers, who not related to the royal family, are more loyal to the Prince than his own family is, as they refuse to see a native person take the thrown when an heir of Basil is alive. While this theme is not the most important, I believe it does serve as a testament to the distorted family dynamics seen throughout this play. When I then think about the loyalty that I have to my own family, I can not help but to ask myself, “What circumstances could arise that would persuade me to sacrifice my loved ones (especially the life of my child)?”.
I also see this as a way of explaining why Segismund was originally seen and prophesized to be a beast. If he was raised to be like an animal, then he will behave as such. Basil was fulfilling and ensuring the prophecy by leaving his son to never know humanity or civility. Similarly, in our day an age, we think that kids tend to reflect their backgrounds, particularly their parents (or authoritative figures). It takes a special sort of person to break the mold of their background, and, like Segismund, see the wrong of the past and seek to correct it and be different in the future.
This is a really interesting point that I did not pick up on myself. The atypical family dynamic makes me consider the context in which the play was written. The Spanish Golden Age was defined by the rise of the Habsburg dynasty, and flourished politically and militarily. The incredible success of this era must have imbued Spanish society with a vigorous pride and hope in their new social order and a strong loyalty to the king and country. The romantic period of literature also recalls the traditions of court order and nobility which prioritized fealty to one’s ruler above all.