十八、十九世紀時，大部分的評論家將《暴風雨》解讀為複雜的象徵寓言，其中一系列如自然與文化的二元對立相互競爭主權。關於米蘭達（Miranda）的角色，早期的批評家不是沈默不語就是僅將她視為美麗和完美女性氣質的象徵。較近期的解讀則是以後殖民的詮釋為主，專注在博思普（Prospero）和當地土著卡力班（Caliban）、賽克拉絲（Sycorax）以及愛瑞兒（Ariel）上。米蘭達做為「完美」女人的角色長期以來被視為理所當然，因此在一些主要的閱讀中，米蘭達諷刺地如「光亮的陰影」般消失。本文重新將米蘭達放置回核心角色，認為「完美」女人的角色並不只是莎士比亞的創造，更超越文本受到設想「女性不完美」的社會、種族和性別政治的決定。父權統治下的「完美」女人的角色顯著地影響米蘭達對性別及自我認同的表述甚或誤解。本文因此比較解構米蘭達的身體，探討她如何在文藝復興的歷史背景、現代批評詮釋、視覺藝術及劇場演出中被建構成「超自然神話」（Dolan 96）。

Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth century, most critics read The Tempest as a complex allegory in which a series of binary opposites such as nature and culture compete for supremacy. On the subject of Miranda, the early critics either were silent or merely regarded her as an emblem of beauty and ideal womanliness. In more recent readings, post-colonial interpretation dominated, focusing on Prospero and the indigenous Caliban, Sycorax, and Ariel. The role of Miranda as the “perfect” woman has long been taken for granted and thus ironically fades into nothing more than a “bright shadow” in some major interpretations. In this essay, I reposition Miranda as a central character and argue that the role of Miranda as the “perfect” woman has not only been created by Shakespeare but been conditioned beyond the text by social, racial and gender politics that presume “female imperfection.” Such a role as the “perfect” woman under patriarchal domination has significantly influenced Miranda’s formulation or even misconception of gender and identity. This essay hence undertakes a comparative deconstruction of Miranda’s body, which has been constructed as a “transcendental myth” (Dolan 96) in the Renaissance historical context, modern critical interpretation, visual art, and theatrical performance.