Thomas Hardy - Tess of Durbervilles

Tess Durbeyfield is a victim of external and uncomprehended forces. Passive and yielding, unsuspicious and fundamentally pure, she suffers a weakness of will and reason, struggling against a fate that is too strong for her. Tess is the easiest victim of circumstance, society and male idealism, who fights the hardest fight yet is destroyed by her ravaging self-destructive sense of guilt, life denial and the cruelty of two men. It is primarily the death of the horse, Prince, the Durbeyfields main source of livelihood, that commences the web of circumstance that envelops Tess. Tess views herself as the cause of her families economic downfall, however she also believes that she is parallel to a murderess. The imagery at this point in the novel shows how distraught and guilt ridden Tess is as she places her hand upon Princes wound in a futile attempt to prevent the blood loss that cannot be prevented. This imagery is equivalent to a photographic proof - a lead-up to the events that will shape Tesss life and the inevitable evil that also, like the crimson blood that spouts from Princes wound, cannot be stopped. The symbolic fact that Tess perceives herself to be comparable to a murderess is an insight into the murder that she will eventually commit and is also a reference to the level of guilt that now consumes her. Nobody blamed Tess as she blamed herself... she regarded herself in the light of a murderess. Her parents, aware of her beauty,view Tess as an opportunity for future wealth and coupled with the unfortunate circumstance of Princes death urge Tess to venture from the engirdled and secluded region of Marlott to seek financial assistance from the Durbervilles in nearby Trantridge . It is here that she first encounters the sexually dominating and somewhat demonic Alec Durberville, whom she is later to fall victim to. Alecs first words to Tess , Well, my Beauty, what can I do for you? indicate that his first impression of Tess is only one of sexual magnetism. Alec then proceeds to charm Tess by pushing strawberries into her mouth and pressing roses into her bosom. These fruits of love are an indication of Alecs lust and sexual desire for Tess as he preys upon her purity and rural innocence. Tess unwillingly becomes a victim to Alecs inhumane,violent and aggressive sexual advances as Alec, always the master of opportunities, takes advantage of her whilst alone in the woods and rapes her. Tess has fallen subject to the crueller side of human nature as Alec seizes upon her vulnerability. After this sexual violation and corruption of innocence, Tess flees home and although she has escaped the trap of the sexually rapacious Alec for the time being,her circumstance is similar to that of a wounded animal - her blood of innocence has been released. At this time Hardy gives reference to Shakespeares The Rape of Lucrece -where the serpent hisses the sweet birds sing suggesting that Alec was equivalent to Satan tempting Eve. Tess is undoubtedly a victim and her lack of understanding over such matters only increases the guilt that already embodies her. To add further to her shame she chances upon a holy man who paints exerts from the bible around the countryside. In red accusatory letters she reads THY, DAMNATION, SLUMBERETH, NOT and is horrified to think how relevant it is to her recent misfortunes. Tess at this stage is a victim to her own self - conscience and she becomes a recluse trapped within her home - away from the society that has unjustfully condemned her whilst in reality she has broken no law of nature. Returning to work in the field, Tess witnesses the rabbits forced further to shelter as the corn rows in which they dwell are reaped and the harvesters kill every one of them with sticks and stones. This is symbolic of Tesss own situation as she is being separated little by little from family and friends and from her childhood innocence ,it is suggestive of the loneliness she now feels. The baby she has baptised as Sorrow dies, his name being an indication of the anguish that has taken place within Tess due to the circumstances of his conceival and it also epitomises what is to follow through the events of her own sorrowful life. In an attempt to start her life anew, Tess decides to move away from the seclusion of Marlott to Talbothays - where no one will know of her past. Although filled with natural optimism, Tesss past has already begun to weave the fatalistic web that will trap her like a fly and from which the ravenous spider of chaotic doom will draw all of her lifes animation out. Talbothays Dairy is the phase of Tesss life in which she experiences her only period of sheer happiness, although at times this is tinctured by mental hesitations as to her purity and righteousness. Here we can see in an abstracted form the way society has entrapped Tess by its assertions of what is supposedly morally correct. Like a fascinated bird Tess is drawn into the wild and overgrown garden by the sound of Angel Clares harp - playing. We gain here, a sense of Tesss affinity within the natural environment as she proceeds as stealthily as a cat through this profusion of growth. Hardy has likened Tess to an animal and this is symbolic also of the eminent disaster to follow. Tess is trapped once again - although on this occasion she is bound to Angel by ideological fetters . Tess is transformed in Angels sight ... a visionary essence of woman - a whole sex condensed into one typical form. Tesss material, physical relationship with Alec has been replaced by a spiritual, idealised one with Angel. She has now become a victim of Angels idealisation as her individuality is becoming further suppressed by his imaginative and ethereal reasonings. As the spring season progresses so does Angel and Tesss romance and eventually she succumbs to Angels charms. After failing to tell Angel of her past, she writes him a letter which is placed beneath his door. In a cruel twist of fate , the letter slides beneath the mat and there it remains - unread. Tess and Angels marriage is marred by ill - omen. Hardy gives reference to the gnats that know nothing of their brief glorification - as Tess herself cannot fathom the potent fatalism that will cause her such sorrow. Hardys continual use of ill -omen gives the impression of the extent of Tesss victimisation to fate; the Durberville coach and the crow of the cock symbolising the death of their relationship. On their honeymoon, traditionally a joyous occasion, Tess confides in Angel the nature of her past. Prior to this confession, Tess is horrified by the portraits she sees hanging on the walls. Angel beholds a similar quality within Tess - an arrogance and ferocity which is the truth linked to her past. On hearing of Tesss unfortunate past, Angel withdraws from reality by refusing to admit that she is the woman that he loved. You were one person; now you are another Angels departure to Brazil leaves Tess almost as a widow . Angel s physical rejection of Tess has subjected her to the cruelty of love, a victim once again - she is broken both spiritually and emotionally. It is at this point in the novel that she begins to understand that her beauty is part of the cause of her destruction. In answer to this she dons

her oldest field gown, covers half her face with a handkerchief, and snips off her eyebrows to keep off these casual lovers. Tess has realised that part of the victimisation she has undergone is because of her beauty, although this realisation has come too late to save her from Alecs lustful actions and Angels idealised ones. Tess seeks shelter one night beneath some bushes to hide from a lustful man and awakens to find pheasants left half - dead by a shooting party. All of these birds are writhing in agony apart from those which have been unable to bear any more and have died through the night. Tess reprimands herself for feeling self-pity; I be not mangled, and I be not bleeding - and although she is not physically marred by the events that have so irrevocably altered her life , emotionally and spiritually she is exhausted. The potent tragedy of Tesss life is that her decisions have always been made with good and pure intentions but have resulted in damaging consequences.Tess is undoubtedly a victim as misery punctuates her life. She is a victim of circumstance in that her individuality makes little difference to her fate, she is a victim of society in the sense that she is a scapegoat of narrow - mindedness and she is a victim of male ideology on the grounds that her powers of will and reason are undermined by her sensuality. Tess herself sums up her own blighted life best; Once a victim, always a victim - thats the law!

Death of the American Dream

On the surface, The Great Gatsby is a story of the torn love between and man and a women. The theme of the novel, however; shows a much larger, less romantic scope. Though all of its action takes place over a few months during the summer of 1922 and is set in a restricted geographical area of Long Island, New York, The Great Gatsby is a highly symbolic dispute on America in the 1920's, in particular the disintegration of the American dream is an era of lacking prosperity and material possession. F. Scott Fitzgerald portrays the 1920's as an era of decayed social and moral values, evidence in its embracing cynicism, greed and empty persuit for pleasure. The reckless feeling that led to decadent parties and wild Jazz music, like the ones shown in The Great Gatsby with the miraculous parties Gatsby throws every Saturday night, resulted mainly in the destruction of the American dream, as the unrestrained want for money and pleasure and to go beyond the noble goals. When World War I ended in 1918, the generation of young Americans who had fought in the war became more disillusioned, as the brutal carnage that they had just faced, made the Victorian social mortality of the early 20th century American seemed like boring, stuffy and empty hypocrisy. The dizzying rise of the stock market, which was the consequence of the war, led to a sudden, sustained increase in the national wealth and a new found materialism, as people began to spend and consume at dangerous levels. A person from any social group or background could, eventually, make a fortune, but the American aristocracy (families with old wealth) disliked the newly rich industrialists and spectators. Additionally, the passage of the 18th Amendment in 1919, which banned the sale of alcohol, created a thriving underworld formatted to satisfy the massive demand for bootleg liquor among both the rich and the poor. Fitzgerald positions the characters of The Great Gatsby as symbols of the 1920's social trends. Nick and Gatsby, who had both fought in WWI, exhibit the new found cosmopolitanism and cynicism that resulted from the war. The various social climbers and ambitious spectators who attend Gatsby's parties show the greedy scramble for wealth. The crash between "Old Money" and "New Money" manifests itself in the novel's symbolic geography. East Egg represents the established aristocracy; West Egg represents the self-made rich. Meyer Wolfshiem and Gatsby's fortune symbolize the rise of organized crime and bootlegging. As Nick explains in Chapter IX, the American dream was originally about discovery, individualism and the quest for happiness. In the 1920's shown in the novel, however; easy money and relaxed social values have corrupted this dream, especially on the East Coast. The main plot of this novel strongly reflects this judgment, as Gatsby's dream of loving Daisy is ruined by the difference in their respective social statuses, Gatsby turning to crime to make enough money to impress her, and the unrestricted materialism that characterizes her lifestyle. Even though places and objects in The Great Gatsby have meaning is only because the characters instill them with meaning. The eyes of Doctor T.J. Eckleburg show this idea. In Nick's mind, the ability to create meaningful symbols amounts to a central component of the American dream, as early Americans invest their new nation with their own comforts and values. Nick compares the green bulk of America rising from the ocean to the green light at the end of Daisy's dock. Just as Americans have given America meaning through their dreams for their own lives, Gatsby instills Daisy with a kind of idealized perfection that she either deserves or has. Gatsby's dream is ruined by the unworthiness of its object, just as the American dream in the 1920's is ruined by the unworthiness of it's object, money and pleasure. Like 1920's Americans in general, fruitlessly seeking a past existing era in which their dreams had value, Gatsby longs to recreate a vanished past, his time in Louisville with Daisy, but isn't able to do so. When his dream crumbles, all that is left for Gatsby to do, is to die; all Nick can do is move back to Minnesota, where the American dream and values have not yet decayed.

The Great Gatsby - The Use of Symbolism

F. Scott Fitzgerald is an author who is distinguished for his use of symbolism in his literature, like in the novel The Great Gatsby. He uses the image of Doctor T. J. Eckelburg's eyes to symbolize a godlike being. Fitzgerald uses the symbol of the two women in yellow at Gatsby's party to represent the values of the 1920's. The food provided at Gatsby's party symbolically represents the members of 1920's society. F. Scott Fitzgerald uses Symbolism in the novel The Great Gatsby as an accurate reflection of life in the American 1920's. In The Great Gatsby the symbol of T. J. Eckelburg's eyes represent a godly being watching over society. Fitzgerald incorporates the eyes

into his novel to represent a pair of all seeing, all knowing and judging eyes, which are meant to intimidate. The character of George Wilson believes that the eyes are the eyes of God. "I spoke to her," he muttered, after a long silence. "I told her she might fool me but she couldn't fool God. I took her to the window- " With an effort he got up and walked to the rear window and leaned his face pressed against it, "-and I said 'God knows what you've been doing, everything you've been doing. You may fool me but you can't fool God!' " Standing behind him Michaelis saw with a shock that he was looking at the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, which had just emerged pale and enormous from the dissolving night. "God sees everything," repeated Wilson. (p.167) Through Wilson's beliefs Fitzgerald explains that the eyes can see everything including Myrtle's infidelities. Myrtle is a typical person of the 1920's. She has put her own life and interests ahead of everyone else's including her husband's. The eyes of God are frowning down on the 1920's society. But above the grey land and the spasms of bleak dust which drift endlessly over it, you perceive, after a moment, the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg. The eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg are blue and gigantic-their retinas are one yard high. The look out of no face but, instead, from a pair of enormous yellow spectacles which pass over a non-existent nose...his eyes, dimmed a little by many painless days under sun and rain, brood on over the solemn dumping ground. (p.27-28) Through Fitzgerald's wording in describing the image of Eckleburg's eyes the reader develops a mental image of an omnipotent being who is constantly watching over the land. The reader discerns that the eyes not only see everything but that they eyes are morbidly unhappy. The use of the word 'brood' suggests that whatever the eyes are seeing has made their owner disappointed. This is Fitzgerald's way of indicating that the people of the 1920's are disgraceful and undignified because of their selfishness. People of the 1920's spent large sums of money on themselves, and they would attend parties where they didn't know the host. This type of behaviour is why the 1920's are known as a decadent era. The eyes not only symbolize a god-like being but also Fitzgerald himself and his negative views of 1920's society. Fitzgerald's negative views of society are also portrayed through his depiction of certain guests at Gatsby's parties. The symbol of the two women dressed identically in yellow at Gatsby's party depict the values of the people of the 20's. The two women in yellow meet Jordan and Nick at one of Gatsby's party and are entirely self involved. "Do you come to these parties often?" inquired Jordan of the girl beside her. "The last one was the one I met you at," answered the girl in an alert, confident voice. She turned to her companion: "Wasn't it for you Lucille?" It was for Lucille too. "I like to come," Lucille said "I never care what I do, so I always have a good time. When I was here last I tore my gown on a chair, and he asked me my name and address- inside of a week I got a package from Croirier's with a new evening gown in it."(p.47) Lucille admits that her general attitude toward life is that she doesn't care what she does as long as she has a good time. Her entire motivation in her life is to enjoy herself. When all she was asked was if she came to the parties often she also felt the need to inform the rest of the guests of her trivial anecdote. The reason that these women are indicative of the generation is because of their self-absorbed character and their egotistical nature. "Gatsby. Somebody told me-" The two girls and Jordan leaned together confidentially. "Somebody told me they thought he killed a man once." A thrill passed over all of us. The three Mr. Mumbles bent forward and listened eagerly. "I don't think it's so much that," argued Lucille sceptically; "It's more that he was a German spy during the war." One of the men nodded in confirmation. "Oh know it couldn't be that because he was in the American army during the war."(p.48) The two women are spreading vicious rumours about their host purely for the sake of attention. They are so egotistical that they are willing to tarnish the reputation of the man who has invited them into his house, simply on the basis that they want to be the centre of everyone's attention. In Fitzgerald's opinion, people of the 20's were mainly made up of this type of person. The symbols of the food served at Gatsby's party represent and personify the people of the 20's. Gatsby's house frequently receives crates of oranges which demonstrates the wasteful character of people in the 1920's. Every Friday five crates of oranges and lemons arrived from a fruiterer in New York-every Monday these same oranges and lemons left his back door in a pyramid of pulpless halves.(p.45) This incredible wastefulness is representative of people who lived in the 1920's. They were wasteful to the extreme because they assumed that they deserved to be wasteful and carefree. After so many years of being unhappy from, among other things, World War I. During the war, they were forced to ration everything, so the twenties was the time to gain back their selfishness. Their personalities are also symbolised by the colossal food buffet served at the party. On buffet tables, garnished with glistening hors d'oeuvre, spiced baked hams crowded against salads of harlequin designs and pastry pigs and turkeys bewitched to a dark gold.(p.44) These symbols all personify the people of the 20's. The people garnished themselves in glistening jewels and clothing just to impress the people that they met. They are all spiced implying that they have made themselves into something that they are not by spicing up their lives with fancy clothing and costumes which hide who they really are. They design themselves as they think they will be most accepted, and are bewitched by the brightness and glow of popularity and richness. People of the twenties wore costumes and this is part of what Fitzgerald is trying to convey. In the novel The Great Gatsby, Fitzgerald uses the literary technique of symbolism to reflect what life in the 1920's was like, through Fitzgerald's eyes. The image of Doctor T. J. Eckelburg's eyes is used to signify a disappointed godlike being. Fitzgerald uses the the two women in yellow at Gatsby's party to as a symbol to represent the values of people in the 20's. The food provided at Gatsby's party is symbolic of people who lived in the 20's. Through Fitzgerald's use of symbolism to describe the costumed characters of the 20's the reader can learn to constantly, and

consistently examine the people that they surround themselves with. The novel also teaches the lesson of being true to one's self, since true closure may only come one honesty is achieved. Fitzgerald is not only a consequential author but an effective moral adviser as well. Bibliography Fitzgerald, F. Scott. The Great Gatsby. Macmillan Publishing Company. New York. 1992.

The Great Gatsby - An Essay about the Character and Function of Nick Carraway
This is an essay about the character and function of Nick Carraway. Despite the title, Nick Carraway is the first character we meet, and appropriately his role in The Great Gatsby is crucial; without him the story would lack balance and insight. The first chapter is primarily dedicated in establishing his personality and position in the book, then moving on to Tom and Daisy. Nick is our guide, path finder in The Great Gatsby; he relates the story as he has seen it and from what others have told him. He strives at all times to be objective, his comments are balanced, as he says just in the first page of the book Im inclined to reserve all judgements. His objectivity is reinforced throughout to us by his scorn of Gatsby he thoroughly disapproves of him he represented everything for which I have unaffected scorn. Yet there is something some heightened sensitivity to the promises of life, an extraordinary gift for hope that is attractive to Nick, and requires him to make several attempts at describing it. He registers contempt for much of what Gatsby stands for the falseness, the criminality, but still he likes him. His ability to laugh at Gatsby and his false airs What was that? . . . The picture of Oxford? shows hes neither charmed nor wholly disgusted by Gatsby. Nick sees him as the best of a rotten crowd, his approval is always relative compared to Tom and Daisy his dream like innocence is attractive, though twisted into an impossible goal and only nearly achieved by criminality. But compared to Toms ruthless attitude to Myrtle and Wilson, Daisys careless abandonment of Gatsby and ultimately their complete inability to see their wrong if you think I didnt have my share of suffering . . . I sat down and cried like a baby put Gatsby in a much fairer light. As Nick says, Gatsby was worth the whole damn bunch put together. His amusingly contemptuous remarks show his sense of humour, and although he is straight-laced, we are not bored by him. We are told of his age thirty, which makes us take his opinions seriously, as he is not some immature unworldly man. Nick is introduced directly, but Gatsby remains a distant character for a good while. The establishment of Nicks reflective, tolerant personality is essential, as are his limitations, so we dont just dismiss him as Fitzgeralds mouthpiece. The fact that he disapproves of Gatsby so early on, helps us to go along with his judgements when he tells us of Gatsby and unfolds the story. Our first mysterious glimpse of Gatsby prepares us for much of what is to come. The imagery of silhouette, moonlight, and shadow in this passage prepare us for Gatsbys shadowy, dark character. Many more of his actions will appear to us and Nick as curious, the fact he is trembling shows he is intense in his emotions and none of this is for show, Gatsby believes he is alone. His concentration on the single green light represents his determination to succeed, his constant drive, all to be with Daisy. He then vanishes just as we are becoming acquainted with him from a distance, echoing the end of the book. The mystery surrounding Gatsby before we meet him adds to his charm. It is similar to the beginning of Shakespeares Othello, we get many different stories and names for him bootlegger; nephew or cousin of Kaiser Wilhelms; something funny about a fellow whod do that; regular Belasco and Ill bet he killed a man'. This forces us, in effect, to reserve all judgement. It would be difficult to introduce Gatsby as candidly as Nick, for we would almost certainly disapprove of him. Thats the drive in this book, to find out the truth about Gatsby because, like Nick, we are sceptical of what he says or what is said about him. Nick is unlike the other characters of the book; he is not one of the careless people. He has a conscience, he is not selfish he has decency, which is well demonstrated in his efforts for Gatsbys funeral. His down to earth character shows how superficial Daisy and Tom are. Tom and Daisy are ruthlessly practical, where Gatsby is a hopeless dreamer. Nick guides us between these two extremes, a detached observer whilst being involved in the action I was within and without, simultaneously enchanted and repelled by the inexhaustible variety of life. His aim to be truthful and objective makes the reader trust him. When he says Gatsby has a rare smile with a quality of eternal reassurance in it we know Nick isnt being charmed by his riches or parties; but is telling it to us straight. His contempt for much of what Gatsby says, but also Nicks tolerance, is emphasised when Nick doesnt mock him "I lived . . . trying to forget something very sad that had happened to me long ago." With an effort I managed to restrain my incredulous laughter. We trust Nick to judge what is genuine about Gatsby and what is more of his romanticising. We have no choice but to identify with Nick, the other characters lack the dimension for us to trust them, which is what Fitzgerald is trying to demonstrate. Seeing Gatsby through Nicks eyes we sympathise for him and his unattainable life long dream, without Nick we could perceive Gatsby as a corrupt mad man trying to disrupt an old girlfriends life. This would not be the whole truth, and not what Fitzgerald would want us to see. While clearly Gatsby is the focus of the book and what he stands for hope, romance, the twisted American Dream; there is an argument for saying Nick is the main character. Gatsby doesnt speak till the third chapter, and he dies after three-quarters of the book. This is of course the only way Gatsby can go, his whole life was Daisy and his dreams, and as he failed there is no future for him. His unbalanced obsession left no room for anything else in his life. Nick is the more in depth character as practically every part of the story is related to us with his thoughts and his perceptions, it is hard for him not to be. He is the character we leave the story feeling we understand and we support his actions and judgements, unlike Gatsby. He is the narrator, but his involvement in the events, no matter how much he tries to stay objective, make a difference. He gets drunk at the party, falls in love with Jordan the skill of Fitzgerald is to establish Nick as a character in his own right, not just Fitzgeralds mouthpiece.

Bibliography Edited Turnbull: Letters of F Scott Fitzgerald 1958

The Great Gatsby

When F. Scott Fitzgerald first published The Great Gatsby, it was named Under the Red, White, and Blue. However, after having revised the novel many times with his many editors, publishers, and personal advisors, Fitzgerald eventually released the book under its contemporary title. Why did Fitzgerald make the change? Under the red white and blue referred to the life of people in America, or under the American flag. His novel is focused on the corruption of the American dream, and the corruption of those residing within. The great Gatsby referred to one of the principle characters in the novel, Jay Gatsby. Why was Gatsby so great that the book was named after him? Jay Gatsby was portrayed by Fitzgerald as the son of God, or of a God. Fitzgerald reminds us of this throughout the novel, and from beginning to end he fills the text with hints as he alludes to Gatsby's divine spirit. The 'Great Gatsby' was a great man- Fitzgerald tells the reader that Gatsby was so great he could not have been a man- that he was a heavenly figure. Fitzgerald wanted the reader to believe that the American dream had died, and to further ingrain his belief in our minds, he destroys religion and morality' but the final and most dismal reality Fitzgerald faces us with is that no man is a great man- the only great man encountered in The Great Gatsby is the son of God- who is superior to man, and cannot be judged by the same rules. An author uses imagery to convey specific thoughts and emotions from his readers. Fitzgerald constantly reminds us that Gatsby is a heavenly figure by associating Gatsby with the moon. The moon is a heavenly body; therefore, Gatsby's presence brings out the heavens. The first time the narrator, Nick, meets Gatsby, it is at one of Gatsby's gaudy parties, and 'the moon had risen higher.'(Fitzgerald p.51) just before Nick met Gatsby. When Nick leaves the party, 'a wafer of a moon was shining over Gatsby's house.'(p.60) After Myrtle had been run over by Daisy, Nick speaks to Gatsby outside Daisy's house, and Nick 'could think of nothing except the luminosity of his pink suit under the moon.' The imagery in this location suggests that Gatsby is innocent of the crime he is implicated in, which is the murder of Myrtle. The moon shining down on Gatsby, making his suit radiate, suggests that heaven looks with favor upon Gatsby. Gatsby is linked with the heavens occurs when he describe! d having kissed Daisy for the first time. ''sidewalk was white with moonlight' The quiet lights in the houses were humming out into the darkness and there was a stir and bustle among the stars' Gatsby saw that the blocks of the sidewalk really formed a ladder and mounted to a secret place above the trees- he could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder.'(pg.117) This particular passage suggests to the reader that Gatsby is indeed a heavenly figure, the son of God, as moonlight shines down upon him, and he has the superhuman ability to hear the sounds of the stars. When Nick saw Gatsby for the first time, Gatsby had been gazing out over the water of the Sound. 'Mr. Gatsby himself, come out to determine what share was his of our local heavens.'(pg. 25). This is an unusual phrase, since we would expect Gatsby to determine where he fit in the local heavens, not which share of the local heavens was his. This shows that Gatsby is not a part of our world; rather, a shareholder. Fitzgerald then moves to establish Gatsby as the son of God by creating moments of Gatsby's life which parallel that of Jesus. The first example of this is when Nick first meets Gatsby, and Gatsby smiles at Nick. 'He smiled understandingly- much more than understandingly. It was one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life.'(pg. 52). The usage of the word eternal suggests that Gatsby is immortal, as is the son of God, who died so that we may all be immortal. Such a deep and compassionate smile can only come from a man of extraordinary power. Fitzgerald continues by elevating Gatsby above his high-class and powerful friends, who attended his parties. 'I wondered if the fact that he was not drinking helped to set him off from his guests, for it seemed to me that he grew more correct as the fraternal hilarity increased.'(pg. 54). This once again illustrates that Gatsby is a higher figure than the rest of society, as his affluent guests fit a level below him. The Great Gatsby was set above everyone, even the best of the best. As the novel and Gatsby's life progress, it follows Jesus' life in parallel. Jesus was brought before the government, and was questioned repeatedly as to his motives, and whether or not he claimed to be the King of the Jews. Gatsby was questioned by Tom on pages 134142. Tom questioned Gatsby's motives, his past, and his occupation. This interrogation was not dissimilar to that of Jesus, as Jesus remained wholly calm during his rough interrogation- Gatsby remained unfazed and composed during his heated interrogation. When Gatsby died, he went in a similar fashion to that of Jesus. Not by the same method, death on the cross, but by an extremely similar process. 'Gatsby shouldered the mattress and started for the pool. Once he stopped and shifted it a little and the chauffeur asked him if he needed help, but he shook his head and in a moment disappeared among the yellowing trees.'(pg. 169). This imagery is consistent with that of Jesus' crucifixion. Jesus had been forced to carry his own cross to the place of the crucifixion (on his shoulder), and similarly Gatsby had carried his mattress (on his shoulder) to the place of his death. People had asked Jesus if he needed assistance carrying his cross, and Jesus refused- just as Gatsby had refused aid from his chauffeur. The reason for Gatsby's death was similar to Jesus', as well. Gatsby had been killed because George Wilson believed that Gatsby had killed his wife, Myrtle. In reality, Myrtle had been killed by Daisy. Therefore, Gatsby had died for Daisy's sin. In the same way, Jesus had died for the sins of mankind, while he himself had committed no sin. Both Jesus and Gatsby had died for the sins of others. Their deaths were similar, but so were their funerals. Gatsby's funeral had few attendees: 'The minister glanced several times at his watch so I took him aside and asked him to wait for half an hour. But it wasn't any use. Nobody came.'(pg. 182). Gatsby's best friend, Wolfshiem, had not attended the funeral- 'Let us learn to show our friendship for a man when he is alive and not after he is dead,'(pg. 180) because Wolfshiem had wanted to keep a low profile, and not jeopardize his own safety by appearing at the funeral. In the same way, Jesus' burial place was kept secret to protect it from graverobbers, and there were few people in attendance at the funeral- to keep the lowest possible profile. Gatsby had tried to improve his life in the same way as Ben Franklin- with a daily schedule to stay on track and an orderly system of life. Ironically, Franklin's list of moral improvements (which Gatsby followed) included number 13, 'Mimic Jesus' (Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin). Gatsby had mimicked Jesus, and ended up the same way as Jesus had- dead. Gatsby's life had not been a waste. As Jesus had saved souls, started a major religion, and helped lead people in a new and better life, Gatsby had changed the narrator of the novel, Nick. 'Gatsby turned out all right at the end; it is what preyed on Gatsby, what foul dust floated in the wake of his dreams that temporarily closed out my interest in the abortive sorrows and short-winded elations of men.'(pg. 7). Gatsby's life, which had much suffering, had served the purpose of helping Nick to learn more about life and about people. Jesus had been the son of a merciful God, sent into a spiritual society composed

of extremely pious citizens. It had been Jesus' task to show God's people how to better live their lives, and to be ready for Judgement Day. Gatsby had been the son of a meretricious God, sent into a meretricious society whose social echelon was dominated by the upper class, who could destroy or control anything they wanted without consequence (as demonstrated by Tom and Daisy.) '[Gatsby] was a son of God- a phrase, which, if it means anything, means just that- and he must be about His Father's Business, the service of a vast, vulgar and meretricious beauty.'(p.104) The parallel thus existed not only between Jesus and Gatsby, but also between a spiritual society and a meretricious society. Gatsby left a lasting impression on the world behind him. After his death, his presence lingered over everyone, as did the death of Jesus. 'As the moon rose higher the inessential houses began to melt away until gradually I became aware of the old island here that flowered once for Dutch sailor's eyes- a fresh, green breast of the new world.'(pg. 189). This image of Long Island, with its beach, water, and green color, expresses hope- this is a land that can become anything- one of the core philosophies of the American Dream. By exposing the pure American Dream beneath the modernized Long Island, Fitzgerald suggests that the American Dream has not only been neglected and unachieved, but that irrevocable corruption had set in. Living under the red, white and blue is thus meretricious, as the American Dream is now a false attraction. Gatsby's life after death was seen through the moonlight- the haze had disappeared- we now see that beneath the superficial world in which we live there is a purity to be found. Beneath the riches and material objects there is an intangible yet concrete basis on which we build our society. Though our society has lost its morality and lost its cause to dream, as demonstrated in The Great Gatsby, ultimately there is a truth which we can find- but we will always lose the truth no matter how hard we try- since we are merely men. The Great Gatsby found his truth after five years, and lost it' but in effect The Great Gatsby's moonlight removed the falsities which concealed the universal truth we all seek.

The Great Gatsby - Writing Techniques

Foreshadowing and Flashback: Two Writing Techniques Repeatedly Used in The Great Gatsby In one of the greatest works of the Twentieth Century, "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald, there are many writing techniques used throughout the novel. However, the two literary devices that occur in just about every chapter in the novel are: foreshadowing, and/or flashback. Immediately in chapter one, upon his arrival in West Egg, Nick Carroway makes the distinction between Gatsby, whom he loves because of his dream, and the other characters, who constitute the "foul dust" that "floated in the wake of his dreams." Nick's instantaneous scorn for these "Eastern" types for shadows all the way to the very end of the novel. At the end the novel, after all the commotion has been caused by these Easterners, Nick refuses to deal with them any longer. He leaves the East, returns to the Midwest, and, for the time being at least, withdraws from his involvement with other people. "Suppose you met somebody just as careless as yourself." "I hope I never will," she [Jordan] answered. "I hate careless people. That's why I like you." (pg. 63) Jordan is explaining to Nick how she is able to drive badly as long as everyone else drives carefully. This quotation represents the writing technique of foreshadowing, which is being used in one of its finest form. Fitzgerald is foreshadowing to chapter seven where Daisy kills Myrtle Wilson because of her reckless driving. Fitzgerald uses foreshadowing to strengthen the plot of his book. In The Great Gatsby, the structure of the novel is influenced by foreshadowing and flashback. Fitzgerald utilizes foreshadowing to the best of its ability to help organize the novel. "Luckily the clock took this moment to tilt dangerously at the pressure of his head, whereupon he turned and caught it with trembling fingers and set it back in place. 'I'm sorry about the clock,' he said. 'It's an old clock,' I told him idiotically." (pg. 92) This quotation is the first use of foreshadowing that is in chapter five. It pertains to all the trouble Gatsby causes as he tries to win Daisy back. The past is represented by the clock and how Gatsby wants to repeat it with Daisy. This quotation foreshadows to the end of the novel when Nick is left to tell the story of the dreamer whose dreams were corrupted. They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clea! n up the mess they had made. In chapter six, Fitzgerald focuses on the first moment of disillusionment which Gatsby has. "Can't repeat the past?" he cried incredulously. "Why of course you can!" (pg. 116) This quotation is clearly foreshadowing almost the entire book. It foreshadows Gatsby's attempts to woe Daisy for Tom and tries to make things the way they were before he left for the army. It also alludes to the fact that he must be rich and powerful to do that. Overall, it shows that he destroys himself trying to get Daisy back from Tom Buchanan. In the beginning of chapter seven Fitzgerald foreshadows the death of Gatsby. "I couldn't sleep all night; a fog-horn was groaning incessantly on the Sound, and I tossed half sick between grotesque reality and savage frightening dreams. I heard a taxi go up Gatsby's drive and immediately I jumped out of bed and began too dress- I felt that I had something to tell him, something to warn him about and morning would be too late." (pg.154) This quotation definitely foreshadows the death of Gatsby. Fitzgerald also foreshadows Wilson's involvement when his wife died. "He murdered her." "It was an accident, George." Wilson shook his head. His eyes narrowed and his mouth widened slightly with the ghost of superior 'Hm!' "(pg. 166) This quote clearly tells the readers that George is not going to let the person who he thinks killed his wife get away with it. Foreshadowing is sparingly displayed though out the novel and especially in the last chapters. Flashback is used quite often in The Great Gatsby. Jordan begins to remember when she met Gatsby with Daisy for the first time and how they were in love. "One October day in nineteen- seventeen.....The largest of the banners and the largest of the lawns belonged to Daisy Fay's house. She was just eighteen...His name was Jay Gatsby and I didn't lay eyes on him again for over four years." (pg. 80) As the reader can clearly see, Jordan begins to narrate about the first and last time that she saw Gatsby with Daisy that was four years ago. In chapter eight, Nick flashes back to the night of Myrtle's death and begins to tell the story of what went on after her death. "Now I want to go back a little and tell what happened at the garage after we left there the night before." (pg. 163) Nick tells the reader about how Wilson thought he had figured out who had killed his wife. Nick follows step by step as he walks all the way to Tom Buchanan's. Nick then describes Wilson killing Gatsby in the pool and then Wilson killing himself. In chapter nine, another flashback is told by Nick. Nick recalls the night of Gatsby's death, and the next day, when all the policemen were at Gatsby's house. "After two years I remember the rest of that day, and that night and the next day, only as an endless drill of police and photographers and newspaper men in and out of Gatsby's front door." (pg.171) Nick then continues into another flashback where he is trying to get people to come to Gatsby's funeral. During this flashback Ni! ck finally meets Gatsby's father, Mr. Gatz, who came to his son's funeral. "Next morning I sent the butler to New York with a letter to Wolfshiem which asked for information and urged him to come out on the next train. [for Gatsby's funeral]...When the butler brought

back Wolfshiem's answer I began to have a feeling of defiance.....The third day that a telegram signed Henry C. Gatz arrived from a town in Minnesota...It was Gatsby's father." (pg. 175) In the last sentence of the novel the reader realizes the story is being told as seen through the eyes of a Dutch sailor which transports the reader into the past. "Boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past." (pg. 189) In chapter nine, Nick begins to recall the past and relive his old memories. His must relieve his lingering thoughts of the past. During the chapter, Nick uses a flashback to tell about Gatsby's funeral for the readers to know what happen the day Gatsby was shot. Flashback in The Great Gatsby also helps to give the reader background information about the characters. As one can see, the book came to life through the use of flashback and foreshadowing. These two main ingredients in this novel made it possible for the reader to be able to understand Gatsby the way Fitzgerald does. It also helps one to understand Gatsby's relentless pursuit his dream. These two elements of the novel were weaved into a classic novel that was and is read and adored by millions of readers and students

The Great Gatsby and the Fall of the American Dream

The book 'The Great Gatsby' by F. Scott Fitzgerald was an 'icon of its time.' The book discusses topics that were important, controversial and interesting back in 1920's America. The novel is 'an exploration of the American Dream as it exists in a corrupt period of history.' The main themes in the book are the decay of morals and values and the frustration of a 'modern' society. The Great Gatsby describes the decay of the American Dream and the want for money and materialism. This novel also describes the gap between the rich and the poor (Gatsby and the Wilsons, West Egg and the Valley of the Ashes) by comparing the differences between the Western United States (traditional western culture) and the Eastern United States (money obsessed values). On a smaller scale this could be seen as the difference between the West Egg (the 'new, money) and the East egg (the 'old' money). The 1920's were a time of corruption and the degradation of moral values for the United States and many other countries. World War One had just ended and people were reveling in the materialism that came with the end of it, new mass produced commodities such as motor cars and radios were filling people's driveways and houses, money was more accessible (before the Great Depression). Cars were becoming a social symbol in the 1920s as we can see with Gatsby's five cars, one of which he gives to Nick and one of which kills Myrtle Wilson later on in the novel. Herbert Hoover (an American President) said in 1925 "We will root out poverty and put two cars in every garage." The parties that Gatsby held every week in the summer were a symbol of the carelessness of the time. Gatsby would hide in the house while the 'guests', most of whom were not even invited, would party, eat and drink until the early hours of the morning without even meeting the guest or even knowing who he was. People would turn up just to be seen or reported in the local newspapers "In his blue garden people came and went like moths among the whisperings and the champagne." This shows the carelessness of the guests. Another quote about the parties refers to the way the guests devour the endless supply of food and never give a thought as to who gave it to them. "Every Friday five crates of oranges and Lemons arrived from a fruiterer In New York- Every Monday these same oranges and lemons left his backdoor in a pyramid of pulpless halves." This is also a symbol; it relates the 'pulpless halves' to the rather 'empty' guests, soulless people obsessed by image and wealth, a corruption of the American Dream. Another sign of the fall of the American Dream in The Great Gatsby is the way Gatsby makes his money. Gatsby gets his fortune through the illegal sale of alcohol ('bootlegging'). The sale of alcohol was prohibited in the United States in the 1920s. Gatsby came from the western United States where there was 'old money.' There he met Dan Cody who taught him how to 'bootleg.' As Gatsby became richer he moved to West Egg in New York. Gatsby's house is a rather artificial place, the house was originally built to impress Daisy with his so-called wealth, and this is a sign of a corrupt way of 'winning' love through money and wealth. Gatsby's house is furnished well with old looking ornaments and (probably) second hand antiques, Gatsby's house also has a library which is full of 'uncut' literature. The conversation between Jordan and an unnamed man at one of Gatsby's parties talks about the books: "Absolutely real - have real pages and everything. I'd thought they'd be a nice durable cardboard." These books and antiques are just Gatsby's way of showing off his wealth to others, however Gatsby doesn't really care for materialism, we can tell this because his bedroom, the only room he really ever uses, is empty compared to the rest of the house. Gatsby's love life is also a sign of declining morals, and also a sign of further corruption of the American Dream. Daisy has an affair with Gatsby; Gatsby then gets concerned that Daisy does not tell Tom about her affair with him in chapter six. Eventually Daisy tells Tom about her affair with Jay Gatsby. The climax of the story comes when Gatsby tells Tom that Daisy never loved him. The fall of the American Dream and corruption is also evident in the position and treatment of children in the story, Daisy and Tom's daughter, Pammy, is treated as an object to show off rather than a child to love. "The child, relinquished by the nurse, rushed across the room and rooted shyly into her mother's dress." The child does not know her mother very well and is still very shy to go near her. Gatsby had never really known of the existence of Daisy's child, as Daisy was probably afraid to tell him about her. "Afterward he kept looking at the child in surprise. I don't think he had ever really believed it it's existence before." The word it instead of her also denotes the child's position as nil. Daisy uses the child as a show item: "I got dressed before luncheon" said the child, turning eagerly towards Daisy. "That's because your mother wanted to show you off" replies Daisy. When the child speaks to Daisy, Daisy never answers or replies to her. Daisy always changes the subject as if she doesn't even notice the child is there. For example, when the girl comments Jordan's dress, Daisy ignores her and asks her what she thinks about her friends: "Aunt Jordan's got on a white dress too" (said the child). "How do you like mother's friends?" (Replies Daisy). Also: "Where's daddy?" (Said the child) "She doesn't look like her father" explained Daisy. 'Daddy' (Tom) is also never around, he was not there when his child was born. Daisy thinks that Tom is 'brutish' and she has never really liked him. The Great Gatsby is a great portrayal of the corruption of society and the fall of the American Dream. The Great Gatsby shows us the way people will fall into the hands of money, greed and power and get involved in illegal activities to get where they want and what they want. This book is a perfect example of the fall of the American Dream in the 1920s. Bibliography: The Great Gatsby - F. Scott Fitzgerald (The school's Penguin edition) Scott Fitzgerald's Criticism of America - Marcus Bailey Fitzgerald and The Great Gatsby

The Great Gatsby - About Nick Carraway

Despite the title, Nick Carraway is the first character we meet, and appropriately his role in The Great Gatsby is crucial; without him the story would lack balance and insight. The first chapter is primarily dedicated to establishing his personality and position in the book, then moving on to Tom and Daisy. Nick is our guide in The Great Gatsby; he relates the story as he has seen it and from what others have told him. He strives at all times to be objective and to make balanced comments just as he said in the beginning of the book, 'I'm inclined to reserve all judgements.' The role of Nick Carraway is so important to the book that the character of Jay Gatsby could not exist. His objectivity is reinforced throughout to us by his scorn of Gatsby which becomes known to the reader when he says he, 'represented everything for which I have unaffected scorn.' He registers contempt for much of what Gatsby stands for; the falseness, the criminality, but he still likes him. His ability to laugh at Gatsby and his false beliefs shows he's neither charmed not wholly disgusted by Gatsby. Nick's amusingly contemptuous remarks show his sense of humor, and although he is straight-laced, he does not bore the reader. Fitzgerald tells the audience of his age, thirty, which makes the them take his opinions seriously, as he is not some immature man. Nick is introduced directly, but Gatsby remains a distant and unknown character for a good while. The establishment of Nick's reflective, tolerant personality is essential, as are his limitations, so we just don't dismiss him as a character speaking the words and feelings of the author. The fact that he disapproves of Gatsby so early on helps us to go along with his judgements when he tells us of Gatsby and unfolds the story. Nick is unlike the other characters of the book; he is not one of the 'careless people.' He has a conscience, he is not selfish, and he has decency that is well demonstrated in his efforts for Gatsby's funeral. His down to earth character shows how superficial Daisy and Tom are. Daisy and Tom are ruthlessly practical, where Gatsby's just a dreamer. Nick guides us between these two extremes, an indifferent observer while being involved in the action. This is evident when Nick said, 'I was within and without, simultaneously enchanted and repelled by! the inexhaustible variety of life.' Nick's aim to be truthful and objective makes the reader trust him. When he says that Gatsby has a 'rare smile with a quality of eternal reassurance in it,' we know Nick isn't being charmed by his riches or parties; but is telling it to us straight. His contempt for much of what Gatsby says, but also Nick's tolerance, is emphasized when Nick doesn't mock him. The reader has no choice but to become acquainted with Nick. The other characters lack the dimension for us to trust them, which is what Fitzgerald is trying to demonstrate. Seeing Gatsby through Nick's eyes makes the reader sympathize with him and his unattainable life long dream. Without Nick we would perceive Gatsby as a corrupt mad man trying to disrupt an old girlfriend's life. This would not be the whole truth and not what Fitzgerald would want us to see. While Gatsby and what he stands for is clearly the focus of the book, there is an argument for saying that Nick is the main character. Gatsby doesn't speak till the third chapter and he dies after three-quarters of the book. Nick is the more in depth character and since practically every part of the story is related to us with his thoughts and his perceptions, it is hard for him not to be. He is the character the reader leaves the story feeling they understand and whose actions and judgements they support, unlike Gatsby. He is the narrator but his involvement in the events, no matter how much he tries to stay objective, make a difference. Fitzgerald sets up Nick Carraway's role as a character in his own right, not just Fitzgerald's mouthpiece.

Signifigance of Bad Drivers in The Great Gatsby

The 1920's was an age of extravagancy. The automobile brought great things for the wealthy. They would ornate their cars with gold plated mirrors and expensive furs for the women to place on their laps while they rode. While there was no drivers test anyone who could afford an automobile could drive one. In The Great Gatsby, a novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the automobile, a symbol of wealth, serves as an instrument of death and destruction. Many of the characters in The Great Gatsby are horrible drivers literally and figuratively. Jordan Baker decides being a careless driver is necessary as long as the other drivers are cautious. Tom and Daisy Buchanan where described as being careless people, "...the smashed up things and creatures and then they retreated back to their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made..." This was an accurate description of the way most wealthy acted in the 1920's as well as most characters in the novel. Jordan Baker, Nick Carraway, and Jay Gatsby were primary examples of the carelessness literally and metaphorically speaking in the novel. Jordan shows the carelessness of the wealthy in the 1920's through her careless actions, Nick shows the theme of bad drivers in the novel through his inability to hinder, and Gatsby shows the theme of bad drivers in the novel through his impossible dream. The wealthy in the 1920's were constantly neglectful of the way they behaved and when they realized they realized they were wrong they would retreat back to their money. They believed that what they did could never be wrong. They thought of themselves to be superior. Gatsby perceived Jordan to be an honest person but Nick notices she cheats and lies to make things better for herself. He reads in a newspaper article that she had moved her ball from a bad lie in the semifinal round of a golf tournament. He describes her as "... incurably dishonest. She wasn't able to endure being at a disadvantage..." Jordan has a discussion with Nick on the topic of bad drivers and it is then she tells him her thoughts on her actions. She says she can be careless and worry free as long as everyone else will be there to clean up after her. Nick Carraway is not the best driver, figuratively speaking, himself. Nick is an example who makes bad choices in life. Nick witnesses first hand the affair between Tom and Myrtle. He first knows when he visits Tom and Daisy's home and meets Jordan. Jordan is who tells him that Tom is on the phone with his mistress, Myrtle, when he leaves the room to take a call. He rides along with Tom into downtown New York and meets Wilson, Myrtle's husband. He's present at the hotel where Tom takes Myrtle and meets Catherine, Myrtle's sister and Mr. McKee. He knows that Tom takes Myrtle here often and they lie to their spouses of their destination. Nick does not inform Daisy or Wilson of this affair or correct Tom when he speaks of morals and honesty in family. Nick also acts as a link between the affair of Daisy and Gatsby. When Jordan tells him Gatsby wishes him to ask Daisy for tea at his house so they may see each other again he invites them both over knowing Gatsby is infatuated with Daisy and Daisy is not happy with her marriage with Tom. Nick

is present at the argument at the Plaza Hotel in New York when Daisy and Gatsby tell Nick that they too are having an affair. He does not speak up when Tom and Daisy argue over morals, when he knows Tom is in an affair. Nick makes choices in this novel that could have prevented the death of Myrtle and Gatsby. Gatsby is also another example of a life driver who makes bad choices. Gatsby's life long dream is to acquire wealth and power in order to acquire happiness. He devotes most of his life trying to recapture the past and dies in its pursuit. His tragic flaw is inability to read people. He assumes that Jordan is an honest person and believes Daisy is still in love with him. At the Plaza Hotel Gatsby still believes that Daisy loves him. He is convinced of this as is shown when he takes the blame for Myrtle's death. "Was Daisy driving?" "Yes...but of course I'll say I was." He also watches and protects Daisy as she returns home. Gatsby cannot accept that the past is gone and done with. For Gatsby, his American Dream is not material possessions, although it may seem that way. He only comes into riches so that he can fulfill his true American Dream, Daisy. However, he never gets to fully fulfill his dream and ends up paying the ultimate price for it. As the 1920's was full of flamboyancy The Great Gatsby was full of bad drivers. The wealthy were the most careless and in The Great Gatsby the wealthy were so careless people died. Jordan Baker believed she could do whatever she wanted, cheat or lie, as long as someone else was there to clean up after her mess. Nick Carraway stood by and watched the corruption in his group of acquaintances. Gatsby spent his whole life trying to reach an unattainable dream. All 3 characters can be described as bad drivers who lead to the tragic end of this novel.

The Great Gatsby - The Death of the American Dream

The American Dream is dead. This is the main theme in F. Scott Fitzgerald's novel The Great Gatsby. In the novel Fitzgerald gives us a glimpse into the life of the high class during the roaring twenties through the eyes of a moralistic young man named Nick Carraway. It is through the narrator's dealings with high society that readers are shown how modern values have transformed the American Dream's pure ideals into a scheme for materialistic power and further, how the world of high society lacks any sense of morals or consequence. In order to support this message, Fitzgerald presents the original aspects of the American Dream along with its modern face to show that the once impervious dream is now lost forever to the American people. The main qualities of the American Dream presented in The Great Gatsby are perseverance and hope. Another famous characteristic of the American dream is the idea of success against all odds. This is shown through the life of James Gatz, who focused all his attention to living the dream and becoming an American hero. Ever since he was young, Gatz worked hard on becoming a great man. This is documented in Gatz's copy of the adventures of Hopalong Cassidy, who was another romantic American figure. While showing this journal to Nick, Mr. Gatz professed, "Jimmy was bound to get ahead. He always had some resolves like this or something. Do you notice what he's got about improving his mind? He was always great for that." (Pg. 175) James Gatz connection to the American dream is further illustrated by the fact that his program for self-improvement is right out of Ben Franklin's Autobiography, right down to the smallest details. The content of the schedule and what it was written on sho! ws two more of the qualities that are part of being an American hero: hard-working ambition and a thirst for adventure. The product of all of James Gatz's hard work is the longing Jay Gatsby, who epitomizes one of the main characteristics of the American dream: everlasting hope. Gatsby desire to win Daisy's love is his version of the old American dream: an incredible goal and a constant search for the opportunity to reach this goal. This is shown when Gatsby is first introduced into the novel. It is late at night and we find him "with his hands in his pockets out to determine what share was his of our local heavens." While Nick continues to watch Gatsby's movements he says: "-he [Gatsby] stretched out his arms toward the dark water in a curious way, and, far as I was from him I could have sworn he was trembling. Involuntarily I glanced seaward-and distinguished nothing except a single green light, minute and far away, that might have been the end of a dock" (Pg. 21-22) The green light that Gatsby reaches out for symbolizes his longing; his longing for Daisy, for money, for acceptance and no matter how much he has he never feels complete. This green light is part of the American Dream. It symbolizes our constant searching for a way to reach that goal just of in the distance, as Nick described it, "Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgiastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that's no matter-tomorrow we will run faster, stretch our arms farther. And one fine morning-" (Pg. 182) Gatsby's goal gave him a purpose in life, which sets him apart from the rest of the upper class. He is constantly chasing his dream of being with Daisy, from the moment he stretches toward her house to his finial days of life when he patiently waits for hours outside her house even though she has already abandoned her affair with him. Gatsby is a man who has all of the purest traits of the old American hero, hope, perseverance, hard working ambition, and a thirst for adventure, but he loses them by wearing the dream's modern face. F. Scott Fitzgerald credits the destruction of the American Dream to wealth, privilege, and the lack of humanity that those aspects create. Money is clearly identified as the main culprit in the dream's death. It becomes easily entangled with hope and success and replacing their positions in the American Dream with materialism. This is shown through Gatsby's use of illegal practices and underground connections to make money. His lavish parties, huge mansion, and giant collection of clothing all represent his corruption. His use of status and privilege is demonstrated when his traffic violation is ignored by the police officer. But the worst qualities of the dream's modern face are evident in Tom and Daisy Buchanan, who live without any hopes or regrets because the foundation of their character is money and wealth. Nick describes the Buchanan's as such: "They were careless people, Tom and Daisy- They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made" (Pg. 180-181) An example of the Buchanan's carelessness and lack of regret comes when Nicks runs into Tom one last time. When confronted with Gatsby's death Tom merely responds "I told him the truthWhat If I did tell him? That fellow had it coming to him" (Pg. 187) Even though Tom admits to the fact that he is responsible for Gatsby's murder and

Wilson's suicide, he continues to claim innocence because he has never known guilt or shame as a member of the established elite. This upper class is shown to be made-up of heartless citizens who have achieved success at the cost of dehumanization and the selling of their souls. There is a sense of hopelessness at the end of the novel to prove that the purity of the American dream is dead with Daisy's baby, Gatsby's death, and Wilson's suicide all examples. The first hint of tragedy begins at the introduction of the Buchanan's daughter. When the girl is brought into the salon Nick observes an obvious disturbance in Gatsby's attitude and thinking, "Gatsby and I in turn leaned down and took the small reluctant hand. Afterward he kept looking at the child with surprise. I don't think he had ever really believed in its existence before." (Pg. 117) Daisy then calls her child an "absolute little dream", crushing all of Gatsby's hopes of recreating the past. Then the replacement of the American dream with materialism is pointed out moments later when Nick and Gatsby try to discern the charm in Daisy's voice. At that moment Gatsby says, "Her voice is full of money", and Nicks reaches a revelation about society: "That was it. I'd never understood it before. It was full of money-that was the inexhaustible charm that rose and fell in it, the jingle of it, the cymbals' song of it. High in a white palace the golden girl." (Pg. 120) With this revelation all of Daisy's charm and beauty is stripped away and only money is left to be admired. Gatsby then realizes that his dream he has been pursing is not that of love but of money hidden behind a human face. Afterwards, When Gatsby dies, any chance of the old American Dream of surviving in the dehumanized modern world id destroyed with him. All of the hopes and dreams that strengthened and uplifted Gatsby are shattered as he lies in his pool, dazed and confused about the world he is living in and about to leave. After shooting Gatsby, George Wilson, the symbol of the common man who is trying to achieve his own success in the modern dream, commits suicide. The deaths of both the rich and poor man trying to achieve their goals symbolize the death of the old American Dream. The dream is now completely lost and can never be restored. Through the tragic story of Jay Gatsby and his failed attempt to reach his dream, F. Scott Fitzgerald also describes the tragic death of American values. The characters in The Great Gatsby are mere examples of Fitzgerald's message- the old American dream and all of its pure ideals have been replaced with money, greed, and materialism. Nick Carraway conveys this message as an outsider, an honest man from the mid-west who witnessed the whole affair as an observer. The Great Gatsby is not about the life and death of James Gatz, but about what James Gatz stood for. It is about the life and death of the old American Dream.

Pygmalion
Writing about what happens to Eliza at the end of the play, Shaw commented "people in all directions have assumed for no other reason than that became the heroine of a romantic, that she must have married the hero of it". Do you agree from your consideration of Higgins's and Eliza with his words the true sequel is patent to anyone with a sense of humour in general and of feminine instinct in particular? George Bernard's Shaws comedy `Pygmalion` presents the unlikely journey of an impoverished flower girl into London's society in the early twentieth century. The two main characters in the play are Henry Higgins, master of phonetician and Eliza Doolittle, a common flower girl. Some say Shaw created a mouthpiece of his own ideas and the character of Eliza is the personification of these views. Bernard Shaw played two main roles in society before the publication of Pygmalion. Two of these may be link to his creation of Eliza and Higgins. Firstly his active role as a supporter of women's right, secondly his campaign for the simplification of spelling and the reform of the English alphabet. The two characters both represent his love for social action. Higgins characters is not only extravagant but also comic. His passionate fondness for sweets and chocolates stands out in contrast to his seriousness and austere mode of living. He is constantly forgetting appointments, stumbling and tripping over something (Act 3 p58) "He goes to the divan, stumbling into the fender and over the fire ions on his way, extricating himself with muttered impatiently on the divan that he almost breaks it". These lines and oddities of his character contribute to the laughs in the play and place Higgins in the tradition of the comic hero. Eliza on the other hand comes across as quite naive, simple and sometimes quite ignorant. Her behavior is the result of a poor upbringing and lack of education. Eliza has a strong moral within her self and is also very ambitious. She proves this well to Higgins with her quick learning skills. Towards the end of the play Eliza instinctually knows that higgins did not of the making of a married man (mainly due to his idealization of his mother), although Shaw stands by his opinion that Eliza would not marry him even if there were no mother-rivals, that she would still refuse the marriage. The play ends with an uncertainty to the plot, whether or not Eliza will marry Higgins, however this is cleared by the epilogue in which he states reasons against such a commitment. Instead Eliza marries Freddy Eynsford Hill. Some may predict she was driven away from Higgins, with his abrupt sense of being, using sentences involving Eliza while in conversation with Colonel pickering, "Thank god its all over" says Higgins without realising the hurt he is causing her with the miserable silences. At the end of the Shaw quotes "people in all directions have assumed for no other reason than that she became the heroine of romance, that she must have married the hero of it". One can only form the conclusion that the ending to the play is suitable if only from learning of Shaw's own opinions and attitudes to feminist ideologies. This is because if it were to end in the obvious way (whereby Eliza would

marry Higgins) Shaw would be failing his own play as someone with knowledge of women's attitudes would know that a person like Eliza would never marry Higgins. If Shaw were to take into consideration the audience expectation he would have ended with Eliza marrying Higgins. The play is essentially a comedy so therefore one could argue that as an experienced play write he should have ended it in a way that conforms to the comedy genre, so therefore the audience can be forgiven for expecting what is an obvious ending. The ending of Pygmalion is serious and in some ways realistic, not at all in keeping with the light hearted and cheerful generic conventions of a comedy. Therefore the audience cannot help but feel somewhat let down that their need for the fairy tale ending (the typical consummation of the hero and heroine) goes unfulfilled. This was distinctive of Shaw (who was a lover of paradox) to have provided such an anti-romantic conclusion to the play. His own need to write a realistic and informed ending was more important. It is not entirely true to someone with feminine instinct that Eliza would marry Higgins. She is in a situation whereby there is opportunity to choose a suitable spouse rather than being pressured into marrying somebody who clearly would not fulfill her and meet emotional needs as a husband should. A person with a feminine instinct would realise this is a far more acceptable conclusion to the play.

Huckleberry Finn - Conflict Between the Individual

The conflict between society and the individual is a theme portrayed throughout Twain's Huckleberry Finn. Huck was not raised in accord with the accepted ways of civilization. Huck faces many aspects of society, which makes him choose his own individuality over civilization. He practically raises himself, relying on instinct to guide him through life. As portrayed several times in the novel, Huck chooses to follow his innate sense of right, yet he does not realize that his own instincts are more moral than those of society. From the very beginning of Huck's story, Huck without a doubt states that he did not want to conform to society; "The Widow Douglas she took me for her son, and allowed she would sivilize me... I got into my old rags and my sugar hogshead again, and was free and satisfied"(Twain, 2). Miss Watson lives with Huck and she is always picking at him, trying to make him become conventional. According to the essay, The Struggle to Find Oneself Huck has become so used to being free that he sees the Widow Douglas' protection solely in terms of confinement. She doesnt let Huck smoke when he wants and she is always nagging. "Miss Watson would say, "Don't put your feet up there, Huckleberry;" and "Don't scrunch up like that, Huckleberry -- set up straight;" and pretty soon she would say, "Don't gap and stretch like that, Huckleberry -- why don't you try to behave?"(Twain, 3). We get the feeling that Huck is an individual, a person who is independent and has the willingness to live a life free of complications. According to Ryan Schremmers essay Examination of Freedom as an Overall Theme in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn the theme of freedom is shown in Huckleberry Finn, which parallels to his distancing from society: One of the most prominent and important themes of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is freedom. Freedom not only from Huck's internal paradoxical struggle in defining right and wrong, but also freedom from Huck's personal relationships with the Widow Douglas and his father, as well as freedom from the societal institutions of government, religion, and prejudices. When Pap returns for Huck, and the matter of custody is brought before the court, the reader is forced to see the corruption of society. The judge rules that Huck belongs to Pap, and forces him to obey an evil and abusive man. One who drinks abundantly and beats his son. In this case Pap symbolizes the viciousness and cruelty of civilization. Later, when Huck makes it look as though he has been killed, we see how society is more concerned over finding Huck's dead body than rescuing his live one from Pap. This is a society that is more anxious about finding a dead body than it is in the safety of people. This situation prepares us for Hucks need to escape from society. In Schremmers essay we see how Huck struggles for freedom from two families. He tries to stay away from getting "sivilized" from Widow Douglass and tries to escape his fathers brutality. Later on in Chapter VI Pap kidnaps Huck and puts him in a cabin in the woods. We see how Huck prefers the freedom of the wilderness to the limitations and restrictions of society. "It was pretty good times up in the woods there, take it all around" (Twain 32). But when Huck feels Paps presence, is when we see how his feelings about being free in the wilderness change. The theme becomes even more evident once Huck and Jim set out, down the Mississippi in chapter VIII. Huck enjoys his adventures on the raft, "Nothing could be better"(115), Huck thought. But only a few pages later the raft and Jim provide the same comforts. Nothing had ever sounded so good to him as Jim's voice, and Huck felt "mighty free and easy and comfortable on the raft"(128). He prefers the freedom of the wilderness to the restrictions of society. Also, Huck's acceptance of Jim is a total defiance of society. Huck realizes that society would "call me a low down ablitionist and despise me for keeping mum,"(Twain 62) but he decides not to conform to society. Ironically, Huck believes he is committing a sin by going against society and protecting Jim. He does not realize that his own instincts are more morally correct than those of society'. According to the Hartford Courant we understand Hucks feelings about accepting Jim and going against the norm: Most amusing is the struggle Huck has with his conscience in regard to slavery. His conscience tells him, the way it has been instructed,

that to help the runaway, nigger Jim to escape--to aid in stealing the property of Miss Watson, who has never injured him, is an enormous offense that will no doubt carry him to the bad place; but his affection for Jim finally induces him to violate his conscience and risk eternal punishment in helping Jim to escape. In chapter sixteen, we see the most inhumane action of society. Huck meets some men looking for runaway slaves, and he fabricates a story about his father on the raft with smallpox. The men fear catching this disease and instead of rescuing him, they give him money and advise him not to let it be known of his father's sickness when seeking help. These men are not hesitant to hunt slaves, yet they refuse to help a sick man. Huck's acceptance of his love for Jim is shown in chapter thirty-one. Huck writes a letter to Miss Watson to return Jim, yet he ends up ripping the letter and wishes to free Jim. "'All right, then, I'll go to hell'- and he tore it up." Here, we see that Huck concludes that he is evil, and that society has been right all along. Huck doesnt realize that his goodness comes from within. He doesnt become aware that those inner qualities are not paralleled to external behavior. If Huck was to catch on that he would be eager to change how society functions instead of running away from it. Huck acts as a much nobler person when he is not confined by the hypocrisies of civilization. Throughout the story we see how he distance himself from society and creates his own world in which he follows his own feelings of whats moral and honorable. From the beginning of the story we see his instinct come into play and how it affects his decisions throughout the story. He almost always goes his own way, makes up his own mind, and lives by his own standards.

Huckleberry Finn - Critical Essay

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is the noblest, greatest, and most adventuresome novel in the world. Mark Twain definitely has a style of his own that depicts a realism in the novel about the society back in antebellum America. Mark Twain definitely characterizes the protagonist, the intelligent and sympathetic Huckleberry Finn, by the direct candid manner of writing as though through the actual voice of Huck. Every word, thought, and speech by Huck is so precise it reflects even the racism and black stereotypes typical of the era. And this has lead to many conflicting battles by various readers since the first print of the novel, though inspiring some. Says John H. Wallace, outraged by Twains constant use of the degrading and white supremacist word nigger, "[The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is] the most grotesque example of racist trash ever written" (Mark Twain Journal by Thadious Davis, Fall 1984 and Spring 1985). Yet, again to counter that is a quote by the great American writer Ernest Hemingway, "All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called Huckleberry Finnits the best book weve hadThere has been nothing as good since" (The Green Hills of Africa [Scribners. 1953] 22). The controversy behind the novel has been and will always remain the crux of any readers is still truly racism. Twain surely does use the word nigger often, both as a referral to the slave Jim and any African-American that Huck comes across and as the epitome of insult and inferiority. However, the reader must also not fail to recognize that this style of racism, this malicious treatment of African-Americans, this degrading attitude towards them is all stylized of the pre-Civil War tradition. Racism is only mentioned in the novel as an object of natural course and a precision to the actual views of the setting then. Huckleberry Finn still stands as a powerful portrayal of experience through the newfound eyes of an innocent boy. Huck only says and treats the AfricanAmerican culture accordingly with the society that he was raised in. To say anything different would truly be out of place and setting of the era. Twains literary style in capturing the novel, Hucks casual attitude and candid position, and Jims undoubted acceptance of the oppression by the names all signifies this. Twains literary style is that of a natural southern dialect intermingled with other dialects to represent the various attitudes of the Mississippian region; he does not intend to outrightly suggest Negro inferiority. Had Twain intended racial bigotry, he would not write the about the sympathies of Huck towards Jim. This can easily be seen in that Huck does, in various points in the book, realize Jim to be a white equivalent at times. Huck tells the reader, when he realizes that Jim misses his own family and children, "I do believe he cared just as much for his people as white folks does for theirn" (150). I do believe that Twains literary style, that is, his informal language through Huck, is more a captivation of thoughts as though in a conversation than as an intended use of white supremacist inclination. Any words that seem to degrade African-Americans is merely a freelance use of Southern jargon and not deliberate. That is, Huck talks the way he knows how and was taught according to the society then to stylize a specific treatment at black slaves. However, his sympathies towards Jim throughout the river odyssey has taught Huck to overcome certain stereotypes, such as black stupidity and apathy, but not quite thoroughly to rebel against societal prejudices. Huckleberry still believes Jim to be irrelevant and pig-headed at times, as in their exchange over the Biblical story of King Solomon and the French language. Huck does not tell Jim but to the reader," If he got a notion in his head once, there warnt no getting it out againI see it warnt no use wasting words you cant learn a nigger to argue" (76-79). Huckleberry is also a very important character to study to further contemplate Twains literary style in that Huck is the main character and the voice through which Twain conveys the images of the South. The reader will notice that Huck acts based on his own morals. Despite the Widow Douglass and Miss Watsons attempt to "sivilize" Huck by teaching, sheltering, and instructing him on how to behave, Hucks actions throughout the novel do not always reflect their teachings. The protagonist has limited perspective and his outlook in life is honest, containing no propagandist suggestions. Huck neither advocates slavery nor does he protest against it. He sees slavery as a natural occurrence in daily life and the inferior disposition of slavery to be of little significance. Whenever a situation occurs that requires Huck to assist Jim, Huck does so accordingly to his own moral standards. He may agitate over the morality of helping a runaway nigger, as southern society condemns the act, but his own love for Jim allows Huck to accept his own "wickedness". "I come to

being lost and going to helland got to thinking over our trip down the river; and I see Jim before me all the time But somehow I couldnt seem to strike no places to harden me against himhow good he always was I was the best friend old Jim ever had in the world, and the only one hes got now I [will] steal Jim out of slavery again; and if I could think up anything worse, I would do that, too" (206). Finally, Jim and many other African-American slaves seem to accept their lesser positions as contended to "white folks". This is the most critical junction that has earned Twain innumerable criticism and caused such long discrepancies among the scholars of American heritage literature. The oddest, most peculiar description in the novel after Hucks almost symbolic acceptance of Jims persona, Twain makes a pivot that then mocks Jims buffoonery towards the end. After all that Huck and Jim has endured together, Huck seems to compromise it all simply to please the childish and ridiculous ploys of Tom Sawyer. Outrageous proposals such as having rats, snakes, and spiders occupy the same small "prison" Jim is in, that Jim water a plant with his tears until it flowers, that Jim make engravings on stone to reveal his oppressed imprisonment in the hut when Jim is living quite well, etc. All of these preposterous acts might make the reader laugh aloud! Yet, they serve a different meaning and belong to a wider course. For one, Huckleberry extremely admires Tom Sawyer. The situation is not merely targeting blacks and humiliating them, it is rather simplistic. Towards the beginning of the novel, Huck specifically says, being proud but humble about faking his death," I did wish tom Sawyer was there; I knowed he would take an interest in this kind of business, and throw in the fancy touches. Nobody could spread himself like Tom Sawyer in such a thing as that" (33). Later and throughout the novel, anytime Huckleberry managed to trick somebody, he would imagine Tom to be there and more capable. Though the reader knows Huck is quite intelligent by himself, seeing how he dupes so many people with his stories. Huck continues this stark admiration of Tom even to the end when he says, "He [Tom] knowed how to do everything" (250). However, Huck does not seem to possess a kind of jealousy towards Tom but still maintains the innocence of simplicity. Try as Tom might, Huck is not swayed by his "Spaniards and A-rabs", magicians, and genies. Claiming them, after trying it himself by rubbing an old tin lamp and an iron ring, "was only just one of Tom Sawyers lies" (16). This also suggests that Tom plays on the ignorance of others. So when Tom makes plans to free Jim, Tom is just bragging his knowledge and continuing his usual insulting of others when they disagree or question him. He again plays on the ignorance of Jims caretaker Nat by having Nat believe he was hallucinating. Huck and Tom undertake so much trouble but it all makes the novel appear very boyish and reminiscent of the Mother Goose nursery rhyme on what boys are made of. Once more, Mark Twain isnt necessarily suggesting that African-Americans are inferior and should be discriminated against, the author desires to capture the innocence and playfulness of childhood, specifically depicting Huckleberry as a true boy. Huckleberry Finn is a wonderful book that captures the heart of the reader in its brilliance and innocence. Despite many critics have attacked its racist perspective; the piece merely represents a reality that occurred during antebellum America, the setting of the novel. Twains literary devices in capturing the focal of excitement, adventure, and human sympathy is a wonderful novel that should be recognized, not for bigotry, but that it is the candid viewpoint of a boy that grew up in that era. And even then, the protagonist does overcome some social prejudices of slavery because he is concerned with the well-being of his runaway slave friend Jim. That the mockery of the slave race in the end allowed by Huck is more about fulfilling the awes of Huck towards Tom. The novel is a success because it does not fail to capture the one singular point of growing up for Huck: boyhood.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn - Society And The River

In The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain develops criticism of society by contrasting Huck and Jims life on the river to their dealings with people on land. Twain uses the adventures of Huck and Jim to expose the hypocrisy, racism, and injustices of society. Throughout the book hypocrisy of society is brought out by Huck's dealings with people. Miss Watson, the first character, is displayed as a hypocrite by Huck "Pretty soon I wanted to smoke, and asked the widow to let me. But she wouldnt. And she took snuff too; of course that was all right, because she done it herself" (Twain 8). Huck did not understand why she does not want him to smoke, "That is just the way with some people. They get down on a thing when they don't know nothing about it" (Twain 8). When Huck encounters the Grangerfords and Shepardsons he describes Colonel Grangerford as, " a gentleman, you see. He was a gentleman all over; and so was his family"(Twain 86). On Sunday when Huck goes to church he sees the hypocriticalism of the families, "The men took their guns along, The Shepardsons done the same. I t was pretty ornery preaching-all about brotherly love, and suchlike" (Twain 90). Huck with his anti-society attitude, you would presume that he would have no problem in helping Jim. Yet he fights within himself about turning over Jim to the authorities, by this action within Huck shows that he must have feelings that slavery is correct so that the racial bigotry of the time may be seen. This decision for Huck is monumental even though he makes it on the spot. He has in a way decided to turn his back on everything that "home" stands for, this allows us to leave our thought of bigotry behind and begin to see Jim for what he really is a man. Hucks attitude for Jim is racist which is seen when he decides to play a trick on Jim during their voyage. After Huck plays his trick his attitude toward Jim begins to change, "It was fifteen minutes before I could work myself up to go and humble myself to a nigger; but I done it, and I warn't ever sorry for it afterward, neither" (Twain 72). The dialogue throughout the book between Huck and Jim illustrates that Jim is more than property and that he is a human being with feelings, and hopes for a better future. The river provides a place for Huck and Jim to escape the harsh society around them and develops into a god. The river provides a

pathway for the action to progress, unlike other forms of travel it proceeds to guide the book in one direction down a set path. The godlikeness of the river controls the adventures, "It is the River that will not let them land at Cairo, where Jim could have reached freedom; it is the Rive that separates them the River that reunites them, " (Eliot 333). Society has lost the moral meaning of the river, " the river was forgotten, and precisely by the "dwellers in cities," by the "worshippers of the machine" (Trilling 325). It is through the adventure of Huck and Jim that Twain tries to show the power that can only be displayed by the natural force of the river, "the river was forgotten, and precisely by the "dwellers in cities," by the " worshippers of the machine" (Trilling 325). Whenever Huck goes to shore he eventually seeks the refuge of the raft and the river. The problems of society become apparent to Huck when he goes ashore, while watching the gun fight between the Grangerfords and Shepardsons he becomes ill with the violence between these two families, "I wished I hadnt ever come ashore that night, to see such things" (Twain 94). The river never deals with the insignificant matters of society, and allows Huck the freedom to be himself. The river is freedom, the land is oppression, and that oppression is most evident to Jim. In Hucks dealings with society he sees people for who they truly are, "He sees the real world; and he does not judge it-he allows it to judge itself" (Eliot 329). Huck is rejuvenated by the river, when he goes ashore he faces society and all the injustices that it carries. When he returned to the raft he felt free again, "Other places do seem so cramped up and smothery, but a raft dont. you feel mighty free and easy and comfortable on a raft" (Twain 96). The river becomes the place where freedom is felt for Huck and Jim on a grand scale. The end of the novel may appear to distract from the maturing of Huck and seem to regress Huck back to the state he was at the beginning of the novel. When Twain really was just trying to fade Huck out, "Huck Finn must come from nowhere and be bound nowhere" (Eliot 335). The return of Tom, with his elaborate scheme to free Jim is merely to set Huck into the background of the novel again. Tom returns to let the reader see the transformation of Huck, "Mark Twain, Huck Finn whose fate it must always be to seek a freedom beyond the limits of any civilization, ended his novel by contrasting Toms and Hucks sense of the Territory." (Pearce 361). The ending simply shows the changes Huck has gone through during his voyage to the boyish attitude him and Tom shared at the beginning of the novel. Huck and Jims adventures allow us the chance to examine the society they live in. It also gives us an opportunity to examine society today along with ourselves. Freedom the one thing that both Huck and Jim are searching for they only find on the river. Twain is showing us in this story that sometime we must break away from society and what the world views as correct and just. He is showing us that we have the strength inside to stand on our own and make decisions for ourselves. Twain, through Huck, gives us the chance to see all the things in the world as they really are. Not so that we judge the world but so we can stand up for what is right.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn - Literary Analysis

Ransomed? Whats that? ... it means that we keep them till theyre dead (10). This dialogue reflects Twains witty personality. Mark Twain, a great American novelist, exploits his humor, realism, and satire in his unique writing style in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Mark Twain, born in 1835, wrote numerous books throughout his lifetime. Many of his books include humor; they also contain deep cynicism and satire on society. Mark Twain, the author of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, exemplifies his aspects of writing humor, realism, and satire throughout the characters and situations in his great American novel. Mark Twain applies humor in the various episodes throughout the book to keep the reader laughing and make the story interesting. The first humorous episode occurs when Huck Finn astonishes Jim with stories of kings. Jim had only heard of King Solomon, whom he considers a fool for wanting to chop a baby in half and adds, Yit dey say Sollermun de wises man dat ever live. I doan take no stock in dat (75). Next, the author introduces the Grangerfords as Huck goes ashore and unexpectedly encounters this family. Huck learns about a feud occurring between the two biggest families in town: the Grangerfords and the Sheperdsons. When Huck asks Buck about the feud, Buck replies, ... a feud is this way: A man has a quarrel with another man, and kills him; then that other mans brother kills him; then the other brothers, on both sides, goes for one another; then the cousins chip in and by and by everybodys killed off, and there aint no more feud (105). A duel breaks out one day between the families and Huck leaves town, heading for the river where he rejoins Jim, and they continue down the Mississippi. Another humorous episode appears n the novel on the Phelps plantation. Huck learns that the king has sold Jim to the Phelps family, relatives of Tom Sawyer. The Phelps family mistakes Huck for Tom Sawyer. When Tom meets with Aunt Sally, he ... [reaches] over and [kisses] Aunt Sally on the mouth (219) This comes as a surprises to her and Tom explains that he [thinks] [she] [likes] it (219) Later, Huck runs into Tom on the way into town and the two make up another story about their identities. The two then devise a plan to rescue Jim. They use Jim as a prisoner and make him go through jail escaping clichs. While going through these rituals he replies I never knowed b fo twas so much bother and trouble to be a prisoner (252). In the end, though, Tom reveals that Jim owns himself. Twain uses humor as a way to add realism to multiple situations. Mark Twain employs several examples of realism in the way he wrote The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Twain explores the gullibility of society when the duke and king go to the camp meeting and collect money from the poor, unsuspecting, church-going people. The king makes up a story about his profession as a pirate who lost his crew at sea, to which the people respond saying, Take up a collection for him, take up a collection! (128). Twain uses deceit, lying, and hypocrisy throughout the novel, which appear in various chapters. Twain also reveals examples of realism through the dialect the characters use in the novel. In his book, Twain utilizes the real dialect used at the time, which further demonstrates the realist qualities which he possesses. Throughout the book, Twain includes many different dialects including the Missouri Negro dialect; the extremest form of the backwoods Southwestern dialect; the ordinary Pike County dialect, and four modified varieties of the last (2). Other examples of realism occur throughout the setting. The story takes place in St. Petersburg and on the Mississippi, near Twains place of birth. In particular, Mark Twain makes use of the episodes of realism as a way to satirize society.

Satire, another element in Twains writing, occurs many times throughout his novel as well. A convincing example of satire occurs in the first chapter when Huck says, [b]y and by they fetched the niggers in and had prayers, and then everybody was off to bed (5). This pokes fun at the fact that Miss Watson tries to become a better Christian and a better person but still owns slaves and considers them property. Another satisfactory example of satire occurs when Pap becomes outraged at the thought of a black man having the opportunity to vote. However, the black man actually has more education than Pap (27). Twain uses the Boggs-Sherburn event to include more satire. When Boggs enters the story he says he has come to murder Colonel Sherburn. Sherburn then proceeds to shoot Boggs and the townspeople plan to lynch him. Sherburn laughs in their faces and says to them, you are cowards (142). Finally the crowd breaks up and moves on (142). Huck reflects on this incident and says ... the pitifulest thing out is a mob (142). Another prime example of satire occurs when Huck goes to the Phelps plantation and sees the two frauds, the king and the duke, tarred and feathered. He points out that [h]uman beings can be awful cruel to one another (222). Mark Twain includes numerous examples of satire throughout the novel. Through the use of humor, realism, and satire, Twain illustrates these aspects of his writing style. His style portrays the flaws in society and how pre-Civil War people treat each other. Mark Twain, one of the great American novelists of the nineteenth century, uses his books to teach others about life in the 1840s.

Nathaniel Hawthorne - Hypocrisy In The Scarlet Letter

In The Scarlet Letter Hypocrisy is evident everywhere. The characters of Hester, Dimmesdale, Chillingworth, and the very society that the characters lived in, were steeped in hypocrisy. Hawthorne was not subtle in his portrayal of the terrible sin of hypocrisy; he made sure it was easy to see the sin at work. Parallels can be drawn between the characters of The Scarlet Letter and of todays society. Just because this book is set in colonial times, does not mean its lessons are not applicable to the world we live in. The first character, Hester Prynne, is guilty of adultery and of hypocrisy. She loves Dimmesdale yet she says nothing while for seven years Dimmesdale is slowly tortured. This love she felt that was so strong, that it made her break sacred vows must have disappeared. Why else would she condemn her supposed love to the hands of her vengeful husband. Dimmesdale is continually tortured by his inner demons of guilt that gnaw at his soul, and Chillingworth makes sure these demons never go away. Hester allows this to happen. Physically and mentally the minister begins to weaken, slowly he becomes emaciated, and he punishes himself constantly. Only when Hester knows that if Chillingworth is aloud to continue, that Dimmesdale will surely go insane if she does not reveal her secret. Why did Hester wait so long? She did not reveal who her lover was on the scaffolding when she had the perfect opportunity to. Also, she did not tell her husband who her lover was. Why did Hester Prynne keep secrets that ended up hurting everyone. Hester can atone for her sin of adultery, but every day that she keeps the secret of her lover, and the true identity of Rodger Chillingworth a secret she is committing a sin. If Hester would have Take heed how thou deniest to him---who, perchance, hath not the courage to grasp it for himself---the bitter, but wholesome, cup that is now presented to thy lips!(Dimmesdale 47) things would have been infinitely better for everyone. Everyone Hester Prynne loves, she does in a hypocritical way. She loves Pearl enough to sacrifice to feed and clothe her, but she does not love Pearl enough to give her a father. Hester loves Dimmesdale, but she does not love him enough to expose his sin publicly, and she conceals her knowledge of Chillingworth. Either you love something whole-heartedly, or you dont. Hawthorne might have portrayed Hester in a more favorable light then the other characters, but still she should have to wear a scarlet H in addition to her A. The second character, Arthur Dimmesdale is the epitome of hypocrisy. Hawthorne intended his name to have symbolic meaning. Dimmesdale meaning dim or not very bright. Arthur might be bright in the areas of theology, but when it comes to hypocrisy, he is a fool. Dimmesdale says very near the beginning of the book What can thy silence do for him, except to tempt him---yea, compel him, as it were---to add hypocrisy to sin?(Dimmesdale 47) He knows what will happen to him if he endures his sin in private, but he is too weak at this point in the book to admit it. The tapestries of biblical adultery, which are found in Arthurs room are hypocritical. These are supposed to help him atone for his sins by making him feel guilty, but he feels no better. Arthur goes and preaches every week on how bad sin is, and how he is the worst sinner of them all. These partial confessions just make him more of a hypocrite. Dimmesdale knows how the parishioners will interpret these confessions, he is not blind to their looks of adoration. Dimmesdale enjoys being viewed as a saint, when he knows he is a truly a sinner. The years of torture the minister receives, are brought on by his own doing. If his supposed commitment to the community had stopped him from admitting his sin, he would have not been tortured. His love of the community is very similar to Hester Prynnes love of Pearl. Dimmesdale only loves his community enough to preach in it, but he is preacher harboring a great sin, and so he cannot truly guide his community spiritually. Dimmesdales and Hesters love are alike in their limitations. While Dimmesdale does speak up for Hester keeping her Pearl Truth in what Hester says, and in the feeling which inspires her! God gave her the child, and gave her, too, an instinctive knowledge of its nature and requirements,---both seemingly so peculiar,---which no other moral being can posses. And, moreover, is there not a quality of awful sacredness in the relation between this mother and this child.(Dimmesdale 78) but he cannot love her enough to be her husband. The scene at the scaffolding at night is a truly disgusting scene of hypocrisy. Arthur seizes the opportunity to go up on the scaffolding and feel better about his sin, but when he sees a fellow man of the cloth walking by, he cowers. Would it not have been better to have his sin revealed? Then when Hester and Pear stand with him Pear asks Wilt thou stand here with mother and me, to-morrow noontide?(Pearl 105)The minister is given another chance to redeem himself, but he cowers yet again! Dimmesdale is selfish, he tries to atone in private, by whipping himself and fasting. This accomplishes nothing, he knows in his heart that no punishment in private will get him forgiveness from the lord. Yet he continues his practices of private punishment, so he temporarily feels better about himself. Another occurrence of hypocrisy was when Hester finally revealed the true identity of Rodger Chillingworth. Dimmesdale was overcome with anger, how could Arthur have been mad? Hester had finally conquered her weakness of

character, and told him the truth. Dimmesdale could only see that she had been harboring a terrible secret in her heart. After that, the agreement to run away to the Old World was another instance of a character weakness of Arthur. He had not atoned for his sins, but he would still run away with Hester. He even interpreted the flood of sunshine to mean that God himself approved of their plan. Dimmesdale in The Scarlet Letter is the ultimate incarnation of hypocrisy. He represents how the Puritan ideals had been twisted into something that reeked of hypocrisy. Dimmesdale pretended to be a good, just, and wise minister, in reality, he was a bad, unjust, and foolish. Dimmesdale recognizes the danger of hypocrisy, but his character is too weak to avoid the pitfall of hypocrisy. The third character of Roger Chillingworth is a man who at one point was guided by intellect, and not his emotions. He pretends to be Dimmesdales friend, but inflicts grievous wounds upon the reverend. At the beginning of The Scarlet Letter Rodger returns to his wife, only to find her being publicly condemned for adultery, his emotions began to take over. At that point, his only goal in life is revenge. When he eventually figures out who Hesters lover was, he begins to torture Dimmesdale in such a way that he does not know he is being tortured. Chilingworths emotions rule him, his single-minded pursuit of revenge overtakes him. He is supposed to be a scholar, a man of reason. Revenge for the betrayal of Hester is the driving force in his life. The actual torture he inflicts is purely mental, and is successful in breaking Dimmesdales body and soul down. During one instance Chillingworth sees what he has become The unfortunate physician, while uttering these words, lifted his hands with a look of horror, as if he had beheld some frightful shape, which he could not recognize, usurping the place of his own image in a glass. IT was on of those moments---which sometimes occur only in the interval of year---when a mans moral aspect is faithfully revealed to his minds eye. Not improbably he had never viewed himself as he did now.(Hawthorne 118) He sees just how far evil he has become, but still Chillingworth continues his vengeful work. The Puritan society itself was a lesson in hypocrisy. Supposedly, they were firm believers in the Bible, but the Bible advocates forgiveness and toleration. The whole societys basis was on religious enlightenment. Yet, why was it that the first thing that was to be built in Boston was a prison? Why is the first building thought of a place of punishment? Another example of religious hypocrisy happened early in the book. Hawthorne described some gossiping housewives that were talking about Hester's punishment. Each one of the housewives was advocating harsher punishment for Hester. The magistrates are God-fearing gentleman, but merciful overmuch,--that is the truth, added a third autumnal matron. At the very least, they should have put the brand of a hot iron on Hester Prynnes forehead. Madam Hester would have winced at that, I warrant me.(Housewife 36). Religion is often the source of much hypocrisy. A great example of God being perverted into something else, were the Crusades. Christian soldiers were told to go and kill in the name of God, so they went off into the holy lands and killed the infidel. Fanaticism to a deity is not a good thing. The terrorists of 9/11 killed so many people did so in the name of God also. Their creed actually does not call for anything like that. Perversion of God by those who hold power is a sin. Its impossible to truly believe in a religion, and feel justified in killing or persecuting others. The infamous Bill Clinton fiasco was made into big issue because of fundamentalists in government. Newt Gingrich (a former prominent Republican) was much to busy thumping his Bible to even read it. He called for Clintons head, even thought Newt liked to philander too. This man was exactly like Arthur Dimmesdale in some respects. Both of them were guilty of a sin they themselves were condemning. Hypocrisy was present in Puritan society and it endures still even today. Hypocrisy is the major theme in The Scarlet Letter. Hawthornes work was meant to highlight the hypocrisy in Puritan society, and in the people that make up the society. The Scarlet Letter was meant to expose just how much of a sin hypocrisy is, and just how it causes so much pain and suffering.

Hawthorne Writing Style

Nathaniel Hawthorne was a prominent early American Author who contributed greatly to the evolution of modern American literature. A New England native, Hawthorne was born in Salem, Massachusetts on July 4, 1804 and died on May 19, 1864 in New Hampshire. An avid seaman, Hawthorne's father died in 1808 when Nathaniel Hawthorne was only a young child. After his father's death, Hawthorne showed a keen interest in his father's worldwide nautical adventures and often read the logbooks his father had compiled from sailing abroad. Hawthorne was a descendant of a long line of New England Puritans, which sparked his interest in the Puritan way of life. After he graduated from Bowdoin College in 1825, Hawthorne returned to his home in Salem were he began to write in semi-seclusion. Hawthorne published his first novel, Fanshawe in 1828. In 1839, Hawthorne was appointed weigher and gauger at the Boston Custom House. He later married Sophia Amelia Peabody in 1842. In the following years, Hawthorne wrote his more famous novels which shaped his own literary style, as well as the genres of the romance novel and short story. Eventually, Hawthorne developed a style of romance fiction representative of his own beliefs. Although Nathaniel Hawthorne's writing style was often viewed as outdated when compared to modern literature, Hawthorne conveyed modern themes of psychology and human nature through his crafty use of allegory and symbolism. To begin with, Hawthorne's style was commonplace for a writer of the nineteenth century. During the time period in which Hawthorne wrote, printing technology was not yet advanced enough to easily reproduce photographs in books. Therefore, Hawthorne frequently wrote lengthy visual descriptions since his audience had no other means to see the setting of the novel. (Magill:1 840). One example of such descriptions was in The Scarlet Letter when Hawthorne intricately describes the prison door and its surroundings. Another aspect of Hawthorne's writing which was exclusive to his time period was the use of formal dialogue which remained fairly consistent from character to character (Magill:2 140). Such overblown dialogue was evident in The Scarlet Letter when the dialogue of Pearl, a young child, exhibited no difference from the dialogue of the other characters in the novel. Hawthorne adopted the use of overly formal dialogue partly from a British writer, Sir Walter Scott, whose works were popular in the United States and Great Britain (Magill:1 841). Although Hawthorne's dialogue was overly formal, it was an accurate tool in describing human emotion (Gale). Absence of character confrontation was another component of Hawthorne's literary style. Hawthorne frequently focused more on a character's inner struggle or a central theme than on heated encounters between characters (Gale). One example of this style can be

found in The Scarlet Letter since the novel was almost solely based on the commandment 'Thou shall not commit adultery' (Magill:1 846). Despite dated dialogue and dated writing style, Hawthorne implied various modern themes in his works. One of Hawthorne's recurring themes throughout his works was his own view on human nature. Hawthorne explored an interesting human psychology through his exploration of the dark side of human consciousness (Magill:1 841). In The Scarlet Letter, Hawthorne introduced 'a profound comment on the breakdown of human relationships in the society of the seventeenth century' (Harris 304). Hawthorne's theme that human nature is full of wickedness was also evident in 'Young Goodman Brown' when the title character encountered great difficulty in resisting temptation (Magill:3 1143). One outstanding aspect found in Hawthorne's writing was the concept of neutral territory. Hawthorne described this concept as 'a neutral territory, somewhere between the real world and fairy-land where the actual and imaginary may meet, and each imbue itself with the nature of the other' (Litz 145). The concept of neutral ground was most evident in the Custom House section of The Scarlet Letter and served as the area in which romance took place (Magill:1 1569). Hawthorne's modern themes were also modeled by Hawthorne's own religious beliefs. Although it was not the only reason Hawthorne wrote The Scarlet Letter, his Puritan background contributed greatly to his portrayal of a sinner in a strict Puritan community (Litz 157). Hawthorne also raised questions concerning the morality and necessity of Hester Prynne's exile in The Scarlet Letter. One reason for these inquires was Hawthorne's disbelief in heaven, hell, angels, or devils since modern science was undermining the Bible (Magill:2 847). Unlike the frankness commonly found in modern twentieth century literature, the nature of literature in the nineteenth century was more conservative. Therefore, Hawthorne implied more modern themes through the use of symbolism. One of Hawthorne's most obvious symbols in The Scarlet Letter was Pearl, the living product of the adulterous affair between Arthur Dimmesdale and Hester Prynne. Even though some of Hawthorne's symbols were fantastical, they represented an anachronistic moral standpoint of Hawthorne himself. (Gale) An example of this symbolism was Hester's moral sin of adultery symbolized by an overly ornate scarlet 'A' on Hester's breast. In fact, few authors who worked outside realism have been as concerned with morals as Hawthorne was. (Magill:2 1572). Hawthorne also employed allegory as a way of presenting themes. Hawthorne often achieved allegory by placing characters in a situation outside of the ordinary (Magill:2 1572). In The Scarlet Letter Hawthorne presented a highly complex variation on his usual theme of human isolation and the human community (Harris 304). Hester Prynne was a superb example of both these themes since she was isolated from a strict Puritan community. Possibly, Hawthorne's recurring theme of isolation stemmed from his own experience of seclusion (Gale). Hawthorne explored the themes of penance for sins and cowardliness when Arthur Dimmesdale struggled with himself to make his sin public. In conclusion, Hawthorne's literary style did indeed contain elements such as description and dialogue, which seemed out of place when compared to modern twentieth century literature. However, Hawthorne's style was typical of the literary style of the time. Nevertheless, Hawthorne addressed modern themes and expressed his own view on human nature and religion. In addition, Hawthorne's symbolism was an essential tool in addressing topics, which were too radical to be publicly addressed in the nineteenth century. Therefore, Hawthorne's symbolism an astute way to express his own beliefs. Hawthorne also achieved a unique form of allegory by placing characters in unusual situations. Hawthorne used various symbols to imply themes of adultery, sins, and human morality. All in all, Hawthorne deeply examined every facet of human nature and drew conclusions from the experiences of the characters in his work. WORKS CITED Hawthorne, Nathaniel. The Scarlet Letter. Fitzgerald, Sheila ed. Short Story Criticism. vol.4.

The Scarlet Letter - Roger Chillingworth

Throughout all forms of literature, the author will often provide situations and characters, each which can contain a strong symbolic meaning. Symbolism allows a character to be expressed as almost anything. Through the symbolism of a single character, any type of character trait, story, or way of life can be told. Also, a character can represent a strong and demanding feeling. One of these feelings is that of revenge, a controlling obsession possessed by a character. It is a problem that may lead to feelings or acts of sin and evil. The actions, feelings, thoughts, and looks of one character may symbolize that chain of evil and sin, including the root of all evil. In Nathaniel Hawthornes The Scarlet Letter, symbolism is used throughout the novel to describe the character Roger Chillingworths acts of revenge, representing sin and evil, including the devil, which lead to the decomposition of his character. Near the beginning of the novel, as Roger Chillingworth first appears as a character, his symbolic relationship with the devil and sin is first apparent. Roger Chillingworth first appears as a stranger of the new colony. After being held captive by Indians after he was shipwrecked a year before, he learns of Hesters sin. Shortly after, the symbolic relationship between Chillingworth and the devil is first shown in Chapter 4, where he disguises himself as a physician, and provides a new identity for himself as Roger Chillingworth. said Old Roger Chillingworth, as he was hereafter to be named. Pg. 81 The Stranger entered the room with the characteristic quietude of the profession to which he announced himself as belonging. Pg. 76. After changing his name to Roger Chillingworth, and labeling himself as a great physician, he is able to deceive the colony. This may relate to the devil in the way that stories have told how the devil often disguises itself in order to tempt someone, or perform another evil. The primary and deadly evil seen vividly through Roger Chillingworth is that of vengeance. It is his primary sin and problem in the novel, which eventually leads to his defeat and his death. What once began for Chillingworth as an act of vengeance, slowly transformed into a life of endless obsession. Not the less, he shall be mine. Pg. 78. Roger Chillingworth tells Hester that the father of her child will be known and that Chillingworth will make it certain that he learns the man, and confronts him. The reader may experience the intensity of Chillingworths plans for the future, as the foreshadowing of his obsession is apparent. As the passion of his revenge grows, Chillingworths actions become more sinful and symbolic. this learned man was the physician as well as friend of the young minister. Pg. 109. Chillingworth decides to become good friends with Reverend Dimmesdale, the father of Hester Prynnes child, in order to ensure the slow and painful torture of the reverend. These black weeds have sprung up out of a buried heart to make manifest of an unspoken crime. Pg. 129. Chillingworth speaks to the reverend about the blackness of secrets in order to torture the reverend by increasing the pain of his guilt. Chillingworths evil symbolism is also apparent here in his obsession of destroying the reverend. Although Chillingworth was the only character with no

problem at the start of the novel, his dedication to vengeance and pure evil, leads to his defeat as he remains the only character who never repents for any of his sins. The structure of Chillingworths character is carefully decomposed throughout the novel. Hester had been looking steadily at the old man, and was shocked, as well as wonder-smitten, to discern what a change had been wrought upon him in the last seven years. But the former aspect of an intellectual and studious man, calm and quiet, which was what she best remembered in him, had altogether vanished and had been succeeded by an eager searching, almost fierce, yet carefully guarded look. Pg. 103. The quote greatly relates to what has happened to Chillingworth throughout the novel. After dedicating his life to revenge, he begins to change for the worse. Once again, he relates to the devil because sin and evil (revenge) will often lead to a terrible defeat. Soon, Chillingworth learns that the reverend may have the strength to escape his destiny for him. Chillingworth realizes, that if Dimmesdale finally makes public of his sin, he will have escaped Chillingworth, because Chillingworth will no longer be able to slowly destroy him through guilt. The physician knew, then, that, in the ministers regard, he was no longer a trusted friend, but his bitterest enemy. Pg. 211. Chillingworth gains a deeper hate for Dimmesdale now as he becomes stronger. Finally, at the end of the novel, as the reverend finally decides to reveal his shame, Chillingworth grabs him violently and screams, Do not blacken your fame and perish in dishonor. I can yet save you. Pg. 235. As Dimmesdale confesses and escapes Chillingworth, Roger has been defeated. After dedicating the last seven years or his life to torturing the reverend, Chillingworths motive for living, and his obsession, is no longer present. After Dimmesdale dies upon the scaffold, Chillingworth does very little with the rest of his life, and dies a year after the death of the reverend. The symbolism Chillingworth possesses holds meanings that are very powerful. First, both his attitude, and the result of his revenge describe the effects of ones vengeance. Not only did he slowly decompose the life of Reverend Dimmesdale, but after the death, he lost reason for living, and died also. Now, at the beginning of the book, certain empathy can be felt with Chillingworth. Many can relate to having a spouse or friend who has wronged the other through lying, cheating, and/or evil or sins. Every day, you may hear about a person who has committed adultery, breaking apart a family or causing others grief. A reader will understand the need for revenge when something of this nature occurs, and will at first side with Chillingworth. Yet, as the book progresses, his side of evil is shown through his actions, thoughts, looks, and feelings. Chillingworth appears as a character, brought into a destined for perfection society, as the sinful tempter of the colony. One, whos vengeful tactics led to the deaths of two men, and whos sinister plan changed the aspects of a society. Although he was originally the only character without a problem or a sin, he became the one who performed the worst sins of all.

Symbolic Characters in The Scarlet Letter

Symbolic characters are very important in most powerful novels. One classic that uses characters as symbols is The Scarlet Letter. This novel is about a woman in Puritan society, Hester, who commits adultery with her minister, Arthur Dimmesdale. She has a daughter, Pearl, and is forced to wear a scarlet letter the rest of her life. Arthur hides his sin and becomes extremely troubled. Hesters husband, Roger, takes it upon himself to judge and punish Arthur for his sin and becomes like the devil. Many characters in the novel are symbols for something. Three characters that are symbolic are Roger Chillingworth, the young woman, and Pearl. One character in the story that is symbolic is Roger, Hesters husband. He is the symbol of a life consumed with revenge. When the reader first meets Roger, he is a mostly normal man. He was small in stature, with a furrowed visage, which, as yet, could hardly be termed aged. There was a remarkable intelligence in his features... (p. 56) The only unusual trait of his is a slight deformity of the shoulder. He is an intelligent man who spends most of his time reading. When Roger finds out that Hester has been unfaithful to him, he vows to take revenge on the man who sinned with her. Later he finds out that the man is Minister Arthur Dimmesdale and meticulously plots revenge. His life becomes consumed with the carrying out of his revenge. He himself sins as he tries to destroy Arthurs soul. Roger soon comes to resemble the devil. He even notices this similarity in himself. He says, I have already told thee what I am! A fiend! (p. 158) Hester also says that she pities him, ...for the hatred that has transformed a wise and just man to a fiend. (p. 159) Each of them recognize that Rogers life centered around hatred and revenge have made him like the devil. The symbol working in Roger, living to destroy, shows that tearing down another person causes as much damage to ones own life. Roger is the symbol of a life consumed by desire for revenge. Another symbolic character is the kind young woman. She is symbolic of hope in the story. Surrounded by people criticizing and being self-righteous the young woman alone has kind words to say to and about Hester Prynne. The first instance when she is kind is at the beginning when Hester is on the scaffold for the first time. Other women were making remarks like, This woman has brought shame upon us all, and ought to die. (p. 49) But the young woman says,...let her cover the mark as she will, the pang of it will be always in her heart. (p. 49) Even thought this remark is not extremely kind it is the only thing said in Hesters defense. Later in the scene the young woman speaks again. Oh, peace, neighbors, peace! whispered their youngest companion; do not let her hear you! Not a stitch in that embroidered letter, but she has felt it in her heart. (p. 51) Once again, she is the only person to defend Hester. This makes her symbolic of the hope that Hester can return to a somewhat normal

life. She is Hesters hope. At the end of the story, the reader learns that the young woman dies and Hester makes her burial robe. Hester saw and recognized the self-same faces of that group of matrons, who had awaited her forthcoming from the prison-door, seven years ago; all save one, the youngest and only compassionate among them, whose burial-robe she had since made. (p. 225) The death of the kind woman, who symbolizes hope, is significant because Hesters hope also dies and she is forever an outcast in the society. The young woman is symbolic of hope in the novel. Another character who is symbolic is Pearl, who symbolizes secret sin. Pearl is wild and uncontrolled like the passion that caused the sin. Throughout most of the book, Pearl is wild. When she is in the forest with her mother, she fits in with the wild things and they seem to accept her. ...the mother forest, and these wild things which it nourished, all recognized a kindred wildness in the human child. (p. 188) Nature recognizes in Pearl a wildness. Also, Pearls character is described as developing, ...the steadfast principles of an unflinching courage, an uncontrollable will, a sturdy pride... (p. 165) All of these characteristics relate to sin, especially sin that is not recognized. While committing the sin, a person has strong will, pride, and courage just like Pearl does. Pearl is wild and passionate. Also, when the sin is discovered, Pearls character changes dramatically. Before, Pearl had been wild and almost insensitive, when her father, Arthur, finally admits he is Pearls father and is dying, Pearl changes. Pearl kissed his lips. A spell was broken. The great scene of grief, in which the wild infant bore a part, had developed all her sympathies; and as her tears fell upon her fathers cheek, they were the pledge that she would grow up amid human joy and sorrow, nor forever do battle with the world, but be a woman in it. (p. 233) Pearl is not wild after this experience. Instead she is sensitive and calm. As soon as Pearl, or the sin, is acknowledged she is no longer wild and passionate but controlled, calm, and happy. Pearl is the symbol of hidden sin. Pearl, the kind woman, and Roger are all symbolic in the novel. Each characters symbolism adds a deeper meaning to the book and allows for more strong themes to be created or interpreted in the novel.

The Scarlet Letter - 17th century Life

The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne expresses the aspects of relationships, religion, community, discipline and punishment in the puritan community of 17th century Boston. Relationships between men and women were very constrained and that is what made adultery such a bad sin in the eyes of everyone in the community. Religion seemed to govern over all, people would look up to reverends and the community believed that fate was their destiny. Public discipline and punishment were used to discourage everyone else from committing the same crime or sin as the offending "criminal" did. The community was to follow the beliefs of god and to do their duties the best they could, yet were there to criticize and punish all who disobeyed the religion or laws. In 17th century Boston every thing was very strict and everyone was expected to follow the laws, which makes Hester's sin such an excellent example of the beliefs of that time period. The first scaffold scene is very important because the scene sums up the beliefs of the general public at that time, and gives a prospective of what Hester Prynne must deal with. In the beginning of chapter two the scene is described as "it could have betokened nothing short of the anticipated execution of some noted culprit,"(47) showing that the whole town was there for a ruthless public punishment. The crowd was not there for an execution though, but there for a public punishment of Hester Prynne who had committed adultery. A townsman describes Hester's punishment to a stranger as, "they have doomed Mistress Prynne to stand only a space of three hours on the platform of the pillory, and then thereafter, for the remainder of her natural life, to wear a mark of shame upon her bosom."(58) This scene shows the weight of values and morals upon society in the 17th century and how public punishment was not only used as punishment but as a way to discourage others from committing the same crime. The community was key in this punishment because it helped alienate Hester and further her pain. The punishment brings forth Hester's underlying pain, "[Hester] sent forth a cry she turned her eyes downward at the scarlet letter, and even touched it with her finger, to assure herself that the infant and the shame were real."(55) This pain only breaks surface once, yet throughout the whole story Hester must deal with the shame and emotional pain of the scarlet letter. The stranger sums it up best with the quotation, "Thus she will be a living sermon against sin, until the ignominious letter be engraved upon her tombstone." Since religion was such a key part of their lives, anyone who did disobey their god was looked down upon. What made religion ironic in this story was how everyone looked up to a reverend that had committed the same sin as someone they looked down upon severely. Dimmesdale says, "before the judgment-seat, thy mother, and thou, and I, must stand together! But daylight of this world shall not see our meeting!"(134) The reverend knows his sin and wants be punished with Hester and Pearl, yet not until what he calls "judgement day." In the 17th century, Puritans believed that there was a stern God who had decreed in advance the fate of each person for all time. Therefore, there was not much people felt they could do to become a better person in God's eyes but do his biding with their jobs. To increase their chances of getting to go to heaven the townspeople would often get one step closer to God by getting close to a religious leader, which was bad for Arthur Dimmesdale who was probably farther away from God than everyone else because of his sin. Relationships were looked upon as something sacred and a woman should be loyal to her husband. Once married it was considered a horrible offense if you were un-loyal to your spouse. "They have not been bold to put force the extremity of our righteous law against her. The penalty therefor is death."(58) A townsman

explains that the penalty is death for her crime (showing the harshness of the 17th century), yet that the other party in the affair must have played a strong role in tempting her, so they just sentenced her to the letter on her chest and three hours on the scaffold. The stranger shows how most people reacted when only seeing one of the guilty two parties up on the scaffold, "it irks me, nevertheless, that the partner of her iniquity should not, at least, stand on the scaffold by her side." Women still did not have that many rights, so anything Hester said in her defense would have just have been ignored. Relationships were not supposed to be broken unless by divorce, even if the husband was at the bottom of the sea-where Hester's husband was believed to be. Through relationships, religion, community, discipline and punishment the reader can get a better understanding of what was expected of towns people in the 17th century. The Scarlet Letter shows the pain and suffering a woman went through when she broke her marriage, and disobeyed her religion. She then was sentenced to a public punishment to be humiliated, tormented, and alienated by the community around her. The fate driven religious society in 17th century Boston would not accept sin of any kind and the punishment for adultery was death. Instead, the community branded Hester Prynne with the letter "A" for the rest of her life and made her stand in front of the whole community as an example for everyone that sin and corruption was not accepted in their society.

The Scarlet Letter - Light and Darkness

Nathaniel Hawthorne, author of The Scarlet Letter, felt that the Puritans were people who believed that the world was a place where the battle between good and evil was a never-ending one. Throughout the novel, Hawthorne uses the symbols of light and dark to depict this battle among the characters Hester Prynne, Pearl, and Roger Chillingworth. After Hester commits her sin, her beauty almost immediately vanishes into darkness. Her hair no longer hangs freely about her face, instead she ties it up in a bonnet. Hester is not perceived as an evil person, but her sin makes her "light" hide away. The sun is used as a descriptor of the goodness or pure nature of character. Because of her sin and the scarlet letter, Hester is no longer pure, therefore she is not seen in the sun. Hawthorne states, "It was only the darkened house that could contain her. When sunshine came again, she was not there." While on a walk to the forest, Pearl, Hesters daughter states, "...the sunshine does not love you. it runs away and hides itself, because it is afraid of something on your bosom." This is evidence that the scarlet letter itself may be the cause of Hesters darkness. Pearl is the character most recognized for her presence in the sun. She is drawn to the sun, as the sun is drawn to her. While at the governors house, Pearl notices how brightly the sun shines through the windows. She requests that, "the sunshine be stripped off its front and given to her to play with." Hester responds by saying, "No my little Pearl. Thou must gather thine own sunshine. I have none to give thee!" Pearl has been seen as a character that always persists on knowing the truth. While in the forest Pearl wants to hear a story from Hester. She asks Hester if she has ever seen the Black Man. Hester replies that she has seen the Black Man once before. This suggests that the Black Man may be her husband, Roger Chillingworth. Roger Chillingworth is a character who is almost Satan-like. Chillingworth is described as the Black Man by Pearl and his own description of himself suggests that he is a fiend of some kind. When Chillingworth discovers that Dimmesdale was the father of Pearl, he taunts him and makes him feel more guilt than he already possesses. Hester feels guilty because she has suppressed from Dimmesdale who Chillingworth really is. Chillingworth says, "Ye that have wronged me not sinful, save in a kind of typical illusion, neither am I fiend like who have snatched a fiends office from his hands. It is our fate. Let the black flower blossom as it may!" The black flower, as Chillingworth describes it, is the truth of all the events leading up to who the father is, and who Chillingworth is. The truth is a dark truth, therefore it is related with the darkness. Hester, Pearl, and Chillingworth are all characters associated with good and/or evil. Hesters character is at first beautiful and after she bonds with the scarlet letter she is seen with the darkness, and shadows. Her transformation occurs when she takes the bonnet off, and detaches the letter. Almost immediately her light comes back and she is beautiful again. This is her physical exposure to Pearl, as well as the exposure of her adulterous sin. Pearl does not have anything to expose, but she does witness Hesters transformation in the light. Pearl, for the first time, expresses human emotion, which happens in her mothers light. Roger Chillingworth is the dark force in this particular story. He suffices the truth through Dimmesdale and Hesters guilty feelings. Hence, Chillingworth is the tool for exposing the dark truths.

The Scarlet Letter - The Morality Issue

Through Hawthorne, the book The Scarlet Letter is written about love, sin, and most of all morals. Hawthorne creates many different perspectives on characters and their views. His vivid descriptions of the main trio of characters allow the reader to make there own decisions on who is morally right or wrong. Is Hester a victim, or a temptress, or maybe Dimmesdale is in the wrong for falling for the temptress. Chillingworth, who is at first thought to be the victim, but in the end the villain? Through Hawthornes writing we the reader must decide on the morality issue among Hester, Dimmesdale, and Chillingworth. Hester, who is essentially the main character in The Scarlet Letter, therefore, is the most vividly described character in the book. In committing an act so looked down upon by her community in Salem, she must be burdened by an "A" on her chest. As Hester suffered greatly for her transgression, the citizens suffered as well, whether knowing or not, through their hypocritical and cruel punishment. She

was morally wrong in what she did, but Hester Prynne was honest enough to herself to reveal the adulterous acts that she committed. She became more accepted in her community as she accepted herself and the "A" on her chest. We all have sins, but if we don not admit to our sins we wont be forgiven. The reverend Dimmesdale said "But still, me thinks, it must needs be better for the sufferer to be free to show his pain, as this poor woman Hester is, than to cover it all up in his heart." This statement is true because she because she began to reconstruct her life. The community began calling her sister of Mercy, and the "A" was said to stand for "Able." Though Hester was morally wrong in her act, she was morally right in accepting her wrong. This leads us to the Reverend Arthur Dimmesdale, the man who assisted in ruining Hesters reputation. Though, a holy man, and a man who is very much revered by the people of Salem, he commits a sin in which goes totally against the words he preaches. His choice to keep his black secret locked deep within his soul resulted in the deterioration of his health. Each time he would deliver a sermon to his congregation, he grew weaker and more ashamed of what he did. In doing so, he chose his congregation over his health, to remain the most respected man in the community. A choice that caused him to suffer much more than Hester and Chillingworth ever did. Dimmesdale was morally wrong in his act, but in keeping this enormous secret from the community, the town of Salem was better off. This was the moral thing to do for the good of the community. His soul became blackened by his secret as well as from Roger Chillingworths evil torture. Chillingworth is probably the most mysterious character in the book because of how he changes as the book goes on. He went from a kind and gentleman, to an evil man who many thought worked with "Black Magic." It was in fact the largest sin of all in Chillingworths mission to inflict torturous revenge on the reverend Arthur Dimmesdale. In a quote from Dimmesdale in the book he says "That old mans revenge has been blacker than my sin. He has violated, in cold blood, the sanctity of a human heart." In doing these terrible acts of evil it is stated throughout the book that Chillingworth was growing uglier and uglier as time went on. This was a sin that he himself was affected by his devilish acts. In the beginning Roger Chillingworth seems to not be in the wrong, though in the end he becomes the most immoral one of them all. When you think about this book, its about morals, sin, and how morally they handle their sin. In Nathaniel Hawthornes The Scarlet Letter it is the criminal that seems good and the good that seems criminal. With Hester accepting her sin she is forgiven, therefore she did the morally right thing. Dimmesdale is a slightly different case. He might be wrong for committing the sin and keeping it a secret, but in keeping his sin a secret for the well being of the community, he is forgiven. Then there is Chillingworth, a man who was taken over by the devil himself. He is a murderer. He killed Dimmesdale through his "Black Magic" and torture. That in my opinion is the ultimate sin, and definitely morally wrong.

An examination of two modern interpretations of Shakespeare's `A Midsummer Night's Dream'

Modern theatres and audience expectations are very different to the expectations of Shakespeare's time. Shakespeare's Globe Theatre was rediscovered on the South Bank in 1989 which, at the time, was an entirely different experience of any theatre we know today. There was no roof, no cushioned seats, and most of the audience would be standing in a circular space on the floor, whilst cheering on the actors, like fans at a football match. Modern theatre audiences watch the play silently in respect to others and sit comfortably, admiring a radiant stage with professional actors dressed up to scratch and realistic props which take the audience into another world. Whereas, at The Globe, theatre expeactations were very different. The audience depended upon good weather and sunlight to enhance the enjoyment of watchting the play. Only the affordable would sit in the tiers surrounding the edge of The Globe, onlooking the stage with very few props basic costumes and no background. However, the audience were still taken away, but by the visualative words which created a sense of escapism. In Shakespeare's Globe, the audience expectation was very different from todays. The audience did not expect realism from the props and believed anything. For example when Oberon states, `I am invisible,' which is how Shakespeare painted the scenery with his words without the use of camouflaged costumes or blending backdrops. These days, the audience expect much more than just words. Other detail such as stage directions also affect the audience expectations of today. A modern playwright brings much more detail compared to Shakespeare's stage directions. This can be seen from the play `Death of a Salesman,' written by Arther Miller. The first page of the play is filled with stage directions. For example, `the flute plays on. He hears it but is not aware of it,' shows some extent of the detailed instructions a modern playwright uses compared to Shakespeare who used simplicity in his stage directions. Instead of details, he used straight forward instructions such as, `Enter Puck.' Detailed stage directions were not necessary because Shakespeare would have been there at the time telling the actors what to do, and how to do it. Due to the lack of stage directions telling us exactly how Shakespeare imagined his play, modern playwrights must draw up their own interpretations of the play. They can do this through their own choice of actors, lighting, music, effects and direction. As a result of the lack of detail from the original text and wide choice of variations, interpretations can be very different. Shakespeare's `A Midsummer Night's Dream,' is a comedy which shares many similarities to another famous Shakespeare play, `Romeo and Juliet.' They both begin the same with `two star crossed lovers' who were fated in the stars to be together and whose parents disapproved of them being together. In `A Midsummer Night's Dream,' the moon is frequently mentioned by the characters, `Methinks how slow this old moon wanes; she lingers my desires,' the moon being associated with madness throughout the play. In `Romeo and

Juliet,' the stars are regularly referred to in a similar manner. The play `A Midsummer Night's Dream' has been interpreted in many different ways. In two of these interpretations, there are very many similarities projected in very different ways. One interpretation is the BBC version directed by Jonathan Miller. The second is the 1998, Twentieth Century Fox version, directed by Michael Hoffman. In the BBC version, the play starts off with Theseus and Hippolyta, who look quite old for a married couple. Hippolyta's tan and hair style suggests that she does look foreign. Theseus and Hippolyta did not seem to be in love and she looked disgusted. Egeus, Hermia, Demetrius, and Lysander are all discussing Egeus's disapproval of his daughter's lover. Helena, who is supposed to be blond and fair, is actually ginger, ugly and has glasses! There is hardly any movement which suggests nobility. There is also hardly any lighting and the atmosphere is dull and dark. The scene did not contain any special effects. In the scene, they were sitting in English Castle- like setting. Although the play was intended to be situated in Athens, Shakespeare would not have been there so he would not have any idea of what it looked like, so he may have intended the play to be in this setting. The room was a library or a study and looked very formal. Theseus was seated for this scene and he was an educated, rich learned man. The room was very dark, with little natural light coming from the windows. The use of the darkened set added prominence to the actors, because the rest of the set was dull. Despite the fact that the play was situated in Athens, the dull coloured costumes were from the Elizabethan period. They were probably modern dressed for Shakespeare's time. The Twentieth Century Fox Version was situated in Italy at the turn of the 19th century. This version of act 1 scene 1, was very different to the BBC version. In the background, there is classical joyous music being played, and lit up fairies fly about which are seen in the film later on. The scene started off with a lot more movement. There was preparation for the Duke's wedding who looked in his forties or fifties. Hippolyta, who looked in her thirties, and Theseus were very much in love compared to the other version. Hermia was pretty, as intended and so was Helena, who had long blond hair and was `fair'. The costumes were more bright and colourful. They were Italian costumes from the 1900's. Theseus and Hippolyta talk in an office or study about their wedding. Theseus talks to Hippolyta, the Queen of the Amazons, by using a lot of war like imagery when he speaks. For example, `with pomp, triumph, and revelling.' The general tone of this scene is that it has more excitement, more liveliness and brightness. Act 1, scene 2 of the BBC version is the gathering of Quince, Bottom, Snug, Flute, Snout and Starveling in a pub or caf rehearsing for a play for the wedding. Quince, who is in charge of organising, is very down to earth and serious. Bottom appears to be full of himself, and is always interrupting rudely. Quince asks `Is all our company here?' and Bottom replies, `You were best to call them generally, man by man according to the script.' They are all wearing very simple clothes, putting forward the idea that they are working class men. Although there is hardly any movement in this scene compared to the film, it is the most lively scene in this version so far. In the 1998 film version, many new ideas are put forward. For example, instead of just getting on with rehearsing the play, they turn it into a competition. Bottom flirts with another woman, despite him having a wife. During his flirtatious moments, his wife sees what he does and gives him evil looks. This gives an insight of what Bottom is really like and is all cleverly acted to music being played. Also Bottom creates a scene because of his loud and vain actions. Children spill water over his head and everyone laughs at him. The director creates sympathy for the character and he makes the audience like Bottom, compared to the other version, where Bottom is seen as simply irritating, but funny. The new ideas have all been put forward without the use of adding in extra text, also his wife is not mentioned in the text. The director has deviated from what Shakespeare would have intended the play to be like, because he did not include his wife, the sympathy for the character, or the competition. We know that it has been deviated, otherwise, Shakespeare would have included it in his stage directions. However, it may be similar to what he intended because Shakespeare would have been there at the time so he could have improvised scenes during the practices. In this scene as opposed to the scene in the other version, you can actually tell that Quince is supposed to be in charge because he is louder, more enthusiastic and takes more control over Bottom. The position on the soliloquy is changed to after the rehearsals as a reminder for the viewers of the other plot. In this scene there is generally more camera movement showing people in their everyday lifestyles and exaggerated movement to make it funnier. Also the use of malapropism adds to the comedy, for example, when Bottom interrupts Quince yet again, 'I'll speak in a monstrous little voice, `Thisne, Thisne!' in line 55. The malapropism where he tells them to `rehearse more obscenely and courageously,' in line 111 shows his stupidity. Act II, scene I, of the BBC version starts off with three fairies along with Puck in the woods at night. It is dark, but the moon lights up their faces. They are going round in circles, talking amonst each other. At this point, Puck is inevitably seen as mischeivious. `Sometimes for the three- foot stool mistaketh me; Then slip I from her bum, down topples she,' says Puck to the fairy on line 52. Oberon and Titainia, King and Queen of the fairies are fighting. There is hardly any movement, however the voices and expressions liven it up. They wear creative costumes in a magical yet dull, angry atmosphere. There is no music or sounds other than howling in the background. In the Twentieth Century Fox version, Puck is much more older and the rest of the characters are very attractive. Puck and the first fairy were drunk since Theseus was getting married and wanted everyone to be happy. This added to the comedy. Oberon, played by Rupert Everett in this version, is much younger than the BBC version. Thunder bolts and lightening occur when Oberon enters, this is because they `square', then Titania played by Michelle Pfeiffer, places her finger over her lips and all goes calm. There are spectacular special effects in this scene when the thunder strikes rocks and alights them. However, this is not what Shakespeare would have intended because there were no facilities at the time and also the audience expectation came from the words. The set is illuminated by the fire. The use of SFX throughout the scene in this film shows the power of the fairies associated with nature. Titania and Oberon wear very creative costumes and are dressed like Kings and Queens. In this scene, there is much more movement and the atmosphere is less tense and more comical.

As an overall view, I prefer the Hoffman version, firstly because it is more livelier together with more action, and secondly because I believe Shakespeare should be accessible for everyone and eventually original Shakespeare will die out if it is not updated to suit modern tastes. Shakespeare would have not intended his play to be like many of the modern interpretations of today, as stage directions were not given so he would have his own setting in his mind, however, the modern directors of these interpretations can come up with how the scene was supposed to look like because of the words from the original play. This is one reason to how Shakespeare may have intended the play to be like the modern film interpretation.

Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream

In Shakespeare's play A Midsummer Night's Dream, one of the main reoccurring themes is love. Shakespeare writes of love that is passionate and impulsive, or sensible and reasonable. In Act three, Bottom, a crude commoner states on opinion of love. "And Yet, to say the truth, reason and love keep little company together now-a-days; the more pity, that some honest neighbors will not make them friends." (Act III, Scene i, line 136) However, in many ways, reason and love are already much more closely linked in their society than the modern day reader is used to. Shakespeare has one example of real love in this play: Hermia and Lysander's. Their love is pure and simple. They have no reason to be in love with each other, but yet have hopelessly fallen so. This is Shakespeare's symbol of ultimate innocence. However, often with innocence comes abuse of that quality, as in A Midsummer Night's Dream. Egeus, Hermia's father, feels that Hermia is too innocent to choose her own husband, and that it is his place to choose one for her. Although perhaps he is only doing this to 'protect' her, it shows his opinion of Hermia's incompetence. He illustrates this value system when explains to Theseus "And, my gracious duke, This man hath bewitch'd the bosom of my child. Thou, thou, Lysander, thou hast given her rhymes, And interchanged love-tokens with my child' With cunning hast thou filch'd my daughter's heart, Turn'd her obedience, which is due to me, To stubborn harshness." (Act I, Scene I, line 27) In many ways the opposite of real love, Hermia and Demetrius' relationship is symbolic for practicality and sensibility. Hermia does not love Demetrius and refuses to marry him. It is not even clear what Demetrius' motives are. One can speculate, however, that he desires to marry Hermia for her money or respectable family. Whatever the reasons, it is apparent that this relationship is quite contrasting in comparison to Hermia and Lysander's. It seems to be more of a business arrangement than anything else. Egeus explains this to Lysander by saying "True, [Demetrius] hath my love, And what is mine my love shall render him. And she is mine, and all my right of her I do estate unto Demetrius." (Act I, Scene I, line 97) With these relationships, Shakespeare illustrates the irony of love in the values of the community and culture. In this way, The reader discovers that sensible marriages are more likely to be embraced by the community than passionate ones and that Bottom's suggestion that love should be more closely linked to reason has, form a modern reader's eye, already been followed.

Shakespeare - Analysis of Sonnet 2

In Sonnet 2, Shakespeare stresses to his lover that beauty will not last, and that it is selfish and foolish for anyone not to prepare for the loss of beauty and youth by having a child to carry on unsurpassed beauty. The sonnet can be cynically seen as Shakespeare's attempt to get his lover to sleep with him rather than as a lesson in living life. In the first quatrain Shakespeare says that later on, your youth will be worthless. The greatness of your youth, admired by everyone now, will be, will be as worthless as a "tatter'd weed of small worth held". Shakespeare says this worthlessness will be when forty years of age wrinkles your brow and when there are, "deep trenches in thy beauty's field". The personification is seen in the metaphor: "deep trenches in thy beauty's field" which can be seen as wrinkles in a beautiful face. This gives readers a picture of the old age that has yet to come for some. In the second quatrain, when what has yet to come for some has came, and when you are asked, where is your beauty now? And when you're asked, "where are all the treasures of thy lusty days?" You must reply that These "treasures of thy lusty days" or offspring from your youth are lost in "thine own deep sunken eyes" states the poet. In this place of old age where your youth is, is also greed and selfobsession which is written as "all-eating shame and thriftless praise" by Shakespeare. The metaphor of "all-eating shame" is effective in how readers sense a feeling of negativity from the words of Shakespeare's hand. In the third quatrain, where Shakespeare's hand rhymes of regret, the ideal answer is shown. The poet states, "This fair child of mine shall sum my account and make my old excuse, proving his beauty by succession thine!" This was the answer wished to be used but could not be. Shakespeare says, "How much more praise deserved thy beauty's use" which regrets, if only your beauty could have been put to a greater use. The couplet then describes what it would be like to have this baby. Shakespeare poetically states that this baby would be "new made when thou art old" This means that the baby would be young while you are old. The final line tells how you would see your own blood flow warm through the baby while you are cold. "And see thy warm blood when thou feel'st it cold."

Shakespeare - Equivocation in Macbeth

In Macbeth, Shakespeare uses the theme of equivocation to effectively illustrate the evil nature of the witches. Equivocation is the use of ambiguous expressions in order to mislead. The prophecies of the witches play a mischief in this play, as they are a form of deception

that at times use vague language to dodge an issue. The three influential prophecies, which the witches make in this play, are that the protagonist Macbeth will become the king of Scotland, Banquo will be the father of the king of Scotland, and Macbeth will not be killed until the Birnam wood moves to Dunsinane hill. The sources of these prophecies are the witches who put together the devious words into Macbeth's mind, which demonstrates the evil nature of the witches. In Macbeth, one of the earliest prophecies that the witches make is that Macbeth will become the king of Scotland. "All hail, Macbeth! that shalt be king hereafter!"(I.iii.50) is the prophecy in which no indication of the doom of Macbeth is present. The literal meaning of this apocalypse is that Macbeth will become the king of Scotland. Thus, his ambition to take the pursuit of breaking the natural order to become the king becomes ungovernable. This is evident when Macbeth is shown hallucinating of a dagger before he kills Duncan, the real king of Scotland. Macbeth says, "Is this a dagger, which I see before me, / The handle toward my hand? Come let me clutch thee"(II.i.33-34), which shows that he is in a great doubt on whether to assassinate Duncan or not. The metaphorical meaning of the revelation disclosed by the witches is that Macbeth will ultimately be ruined in the future after he reaches his ambition of becoming the king, as he will have to face the resistance of the loyal nobles of king Duncan including Banquo, Macduff, Malcom, etc. Macbeth is greatly affected by this prophecy and becomes the target of the mendacious and perplexing words spoken by the witches and kills the king. Hence, the witches are of evil nature because they indirectly ruin Macbeth's life. Another evil prophecy of the witches is that Banquo is to be the father of the king of Scotland. This lies in conflict with the prophecy described above, which states that Macbeth will be the king, because he is not the son of Banquo. The emblematic meaning of this prophecy is that Banquo will die, as he would create potential resistance for Macbeth, and Macbeth will not let his ambition let down, therefore, Banquo's life is at high risk. Later in the play, Macbeth conspires to kill his best friend, Banquo, and the latter tells his son, Fleance, that he would take revenge for father's death. Banquo says, "O, treachery! Fly, good Fleance, fly, fly, fly! / Thou mayst revenge. O slave!"(III.iv.18-19). The misleading and ambiguous nature of the witches is very well reflected in this prophecy. Third Witch: Hail! First Witch: Lesser than Macbeth, and greater. Second Witch: Not so happy, yet much happier. Third Witch: Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none: So all hail, Macbeth and Banquo! (I.iii.64-68) The words "Lesser" and "greater", and "Not so happy" and "happier" are total contrast to each other, and they imply cryptic meaning which has been explained above. The witches use supernatural powers to prophesize the hidden meaning that evinces their evil nature. Another major prophecy that the witches make after Macbeth becomes the king of Scotland is that he cannot be killed until the great Birnam wood moves to Dunsinane hill. Again, Macbeth takes the literal meaning and believes that the Birnam wood has to move to Dunsinane hill supernaturally, which is not possible under normal circumstances; hence, he becomes carefree and jovial. The irony is that the trees of Birnam wood could be cut and held onto hands to help hide the enemies of Macbeth, which would assist them to kill him, and simultaneously, cause the Birnam wood to move to the Dunsinane hill as prophesized by the witches. The prophecy, "Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be until / Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill / Shall come against him." (IV.1.92-94), is not very much explicit. Macbeth fell into his tragic flaw of ambition and ignored the metaphorical meaning of the prophecy. He says, "That will never be: / Who can impress the forest, bid the tree" (IV.i.94-95). Macbeth is finally killed at the end of the play, and Malcom becomes the king of Scotland, which signifies the return of order. In this tragic play, the witches ruin brave Macbeth's life by setting a trap that exploits his tragic flaw of ambition through the use of equivocal language. The indulgence of the witches in his life by making prophecies remarks for their supernatural evilness. Equivocation is found in the prophecies of the witches. Macbeth revolves around these prophecies; hence, equivocation plays an important role in this play. It is due to equivocation in these prophecies that Macbeth becomes disoriented and looses his balance, which makes this play a successful tragedy. Hence, the theme of equivocation extensively demonstrates the evil nature of the witches.

Shakespeare - Equivocation in Macbeth

In Macbeth, Shakespeare uses the theme of equivocation to effectively illustrate the evil nature of the witches. Equivocation is the use of ambiguous expressions in order to mislead. The prophecies of the witches play a mischief in this play, as they are a form of deception that at times use vague language to dodge an issue. The three influential prophecies, which the witches make in this play, are that the protagonist Macbeth will become the king of Scotland, Banquo will be the father of the king of Scotland, and Macbeth will not be killed until the Birnam wood moves to Dunsinane hill. The sources of these prophecies are the witches who put together the devious words into Macbeth's mind, which demonstrates the evil nature of the witches. In Macbeth, one of the earliest prophecies that the witches make is that Macbeth will become the king of Scotland. "All hail, Macbeth! that shalt be king hereafter!"(I.iii.50) is the prophecy in which no indication of the doom of Macbeth is present. The literal meaning of this apocalypse is that Macbeth will become the king of Scotland. Thus, his ambition to take the pursuit of breaking the natural order to become the king becomes ungovernable. This is evident when Macbeth is shown hallucinating of a dagger before he kills Duncan, the

real king of Scotland. Macbeth says, "Is this a dagger, which I see before me, / The handle toward my hand? Come let me clutch thee"(II.i.33-34), which shows that he is in a great doubt on whether to assassinate Duncan or not. The metaphorical meaning of the revelation disclosed by the witches is that Macbeth will ultimately be ruined in the future after he reaches his ambition of becoming the king, as he will have to face the resistance of the loyal nobles of king Duncan including Banquo, Macduff, Malcom, etc. Macbeth is greatly affected by this prophecy and becomes the target of the mendacious and perplexing words spoken by the witches and kills the king. Hence, the witches are of evil nature because they indirectly ruin Macbeth's life. Another evil prophecy of the witches is that Banquo is to be the father of the king of Scotland. This lies in conflict with the prophecy described above, which states that Macbeth will be the king, because he is not the son of Banquo. The emblematic meaning of this prophecy is that Banquo will die, as he would create potential resistance for Macbeth, and Macbeth will not let his ambition let down, therefore, Banquo's life is at high risk. Later in the play, Macbeth conspires to kill his best friend, Banquo, and the latter tells his son, Fleance, that he would take revenge for father's death. Banquo says, "O, treachery! Fly, good Fleance, fly, fly, fly! / Thou mayst revenge. O slave!"(III.iv.18-19). The misleading and ambiguous nature of the witches is very well reflected in this prophecy. Third Witch: Hail! First Witch: Lesser than Macbeth, and greater. Second Witch: Not so happy, yet much happier. Third Witch: Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none: So all hail, Macbeth and Banquo! (I.iii.64-68) The words "Lesser" and "greater", and "Not so happy" and "happier" are total contrast to each other, and they imply cryptic meaning which has been explained above. The witches use supernatural powers to prophesize the hidden meaning that evinces their evil nature. Another major prophecy that the witches make after Macbeth becomes the king of Scotland is that he cannot be killed until the great Birnam wood moves to Dunsinane hill. Again, Macbeth takes the literal meaning and believes that the Birnam wood has to move to Dunsinane hill supernaturally, which is not possible under normal circumstances; hence, he becomes carefree and jovial. The irony is that the trees of Birnam wood could be cut and held onto hands to help hide the enemies of Macbeth, which would assist them to kill him, and simultaneously, cause the Birnam wood to move to the Dunsinane hill as prophesized by the witches. The prophecy, "Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be until / Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill / Shall come against him." (IV.1.92-94), is not very much explicit. Macbeth fell into his tragic flaw of ambition and ignored the metaphorical meaning of the prophecy. He says, "That will never be: / Who can impress the forest, bid the tree" (IV.i.94-95). Macbeth is finally killed at the end of the play, and Malcom becomes the king of Scotland, which signifies the return of order. In this tragic play, the witches ruin brave Macbeth's life by setting a trap that exploits his tragic flaw of ambition through the use of equivocal language. The indulgence of the witches in his life by making prophecies remarks for their supernatural evilness. Equivocation is found in the prophecies of the witches. Macbeth revolves around these prophecies; hence, equivocation plays an important role in this play. It is due to equivocation in these prophecies that Macbeth becomes disoriented and looses his balance, which makes this play a successful tragedy. Hence, the theme of equivocation extensively demonstrates the evil nature of the witches.

Shakespeare - Lady Macbeth

Lady Macbeth is the most evil character in Macbeth Throughout the play the character of Lady Macbeth is consistently displayed as the most evil character in the play through her ambition, cruelty, and manipulation.

AMBITION - When Lady Macbeth leans about the witches' prophecy that Macbeth will ultimately be King, she fears he will be too kind-hearted to achieve this status so she begins to take matters into her own hands. Her soliloquy imploring dark powers to take all compassion from her is appalling in its unnaturalness: Come, you spirits That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here, And fill me, from the crown to the toe, top-full Of direst cruelty (I, v, 40-43) - Lady Macbeth is far more ambitious then Macbeth is. She appears to be mentally strong and her conscience did not seem troubled by the murders that she was a part of. Her determined ambition is what keeps Macbeth focused on committing the murders. It is not until later in the play when Macbeth is able to adopt ambition of his own as he plans the murder of Macduff's family on his own. However, this ambition he receives is that which came from Lady Macbeth. CRUELTY Lady Macbeth rarely shows any sympathy towards any characters throughout the time of the play. When she finds out the prophecies given to Macbeth by the witches, she immediately takes action and creates a plan. She works out the details of the plan to kill the king, and when Macbeth cannot return the blood-stained daggers to Duncan's room, she takes command of the situation and returns the daggers herself. Infirm of purpose! Give me the daggers. (II, ii, 51-52) She also plays a key role in the murder of Banquo. During the feast whilst there are guests over, Macbeth is so unsettled by seeing the ghost of Banquo that he nearly has a mental breakdown. Lady Macbeth shows no regard for this as she immediately ridicules him. Lady Macbeth's true cruelty is shown when her death has no effect on the play as she is not considered a hero. Her character is that of such pure evil that it is difficult for the audience to sympathize for her on a personal level. Her crimes were considered so brutal that it would be difficult for anyone to ever forgive her. MANIPULATION Lady Macbeth is an exceedingly conceded character as seen in as she openly defies heaven. Her true nature can be reflected through the imagery of blood, violence, death, as from the beginning of the play she is set out on an inevitable course of destruction. Macbeth is first introduced as an admirable individual and a hero to Scotland, it is Macbeth's fatal ambition that is unleashed by Lady Macbeth. His true personality can be revealed as he admits: I am in blood Stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er (III, iv, 136-138) Lady Macbeth instigated the actions which eventually led to Macbeth committing the acts that he did. Throughout the play the audience is constantly reminded of Macbeth insecurity as he is always questioning his own actions. Lady Macbeth's primary role in the play is to give Macbeth the vital push and then sustain him until he can control his own conscience and actions. Lady Macbeth uses a specific techniques to ensure that Macbeth keeps to his purpose such as accusing Macbeth of being a coward. As Lady Macbeth herself possesses characteristics that are regularly only present in a male such as single-minded courage and cruelty. She shuns Macbeth for his failure to live up to the standard which she, as a women, has set. Using her physical characteristics of a women, and mental characteristics of a man, Lady Macbeth ridicules her husband for not being able to murder Duncan as seen in the following quote: I have given suck, and know How tender `tis to love the babe that milks me; I would, while it was smiling in my face,

Have plucked my nipple from his boneless gums, And dashed the brains out, had I so sworn as you Have done to this (I, vii, 54-59)

Macbeth - Presentation of Characters

Macbeth, a play by William Shakespeare written sometime between 1603-1606, is a tragic story of death and deceit amongst the noblemen of Scotland. The two main characters are Macbeth, Thane of Glamis and his wife Lady Macbeth. The play is based around the conflict in Scotland at the time between the King and rebellious Scotsmen, who were overcome single-handedly by Macbeth on the side of the King, Duncan. Macbeth and his fellow kinsman Banquo were met on a heath by three witches who prophesised Macbeth becoming Thane of Cawdor, and later King of Scotland. When he later learned he had been made Thane of Cawdor for his service to the crown, he believed that it was the work of the witches. However, rather than leaving it to the witches, Macbeth decided he would have to kill the king himself if he wanted the crown, fulfilling his ambition. Therefore, with the influence and assistance of his wife, he eventually murdered King Duncan, with himself then becoming king. He is r! esultantly guilt ridden, but his wife is very calm and accepts no responsibility for Duncan?s death. The tables turn later on in the play though, with Macbeth continuing his killing to gain more power and becoming more independent from his wife, eventually leading to her going mad and committing suicide. This play and the topics explored within it were very relevant to the time in which it was written. Practising witchcraft became an executable offence in 1604, so the witches in the play would have caused quite some controversy. Regicide, the murder of a king or queen, was also an extremely serious crime as the king was believed to have been chosen by God, so to kill the king was to act against God and also nature. Today it is still the only executable offence in the United Kingdom. The King of England when the play was written, James I, was interested in the supernatural. He also survived an assassination attempt in his youth and had an ancestor named Banquo, who was historically evil but was made good in Shakespeare?s play. All of these aspects of the play would have appealed to King James which implies it may have been written for him. The whole idea of rebellion and deceit is also linked to more topical events of the time, namely the gunpowder plot of 1605 when an attemp! t was made to blow up the Houses Of Parliament. Act 1 Scene 1 of the play sets the scene with a very short, mysterious gathering of the three witches. They appear suddenly, in midconversation, which is dramatic and creates unclear ideas about the dubious topics of conversation. This in turn creates an air of tension, suspicion and an ominous atmosphere. The presence of thunder and lightning is a symbol of evil and creates a more hostile atmosphere. This suggests that the rest of the play will be full of deceit; revenge; anger and pain, implying the play will be a tragedy. This scene creates a sense of mystery and intrigue, and as the scene is short, there is little evidence to go on, so there is nothing about which the audience can be decisive or certain. As far as what we learn about Macbeth goes, we know that the witches plan to meet Macbeth later in the play on the same heath as they are in this scene. We also learn that there will be some sort of battle from which Macbeth will emerge victorious. They show this in the! ir conversation: ??When the battle?s lost, and won? This shows that one side, (as we later learn the rebellious Scots led by Macdonald) will emerge losers and the other (Macbeth) will emerge victorious. This is speaking in a contradictory way, and makes use of antithesis. This has relevance to many instances later in the play where characters have contradictory thoughts. Antithesis is used again in this scene in the ultimate stanza, the witches chant a warning: ??Fair is foul, and foul is fair, Hover through the fog and filthy air? This implies that appearances are deceptive, and it creates a sense of mystery and encourages thought as to what significance this may hold for later in the play. As it is a rhyming couplet, it is more memorable and dramatically effective to the audience. The confused messages it conveys provoke deep thought amongst the members of the audience. This scene is similar to an introduction or prologue to a novel. Act 1, Scene 2 of the play is the ?real? beginning. The audience hears about the gruesome way in which Macbeth slaughtered the opposing Scotsmen, led by Macdonald. In this scene, a wounded soldier who comes fresh from battle glorifies Macbeth: he is credited to the entire defeat of the Scots single-handed. The audience builds a picture of Macbeth as a very brave, courageous fighter and leader in battle. The King of Scotland, Duncan, also values Macbeth very highly, which leads to his becoming Thane of Cawdor. Duncan shows his gratitude to Macbeth during the soldier?s account of the battle: ??O valiant cousin, worthy gentleman!? This shows that the king

regards Macbeth so highly he sees him as a relative. He sees him as a brave and loyal soldier; a heroic fighter. However, Macbeth appears quite ruthless, and he seems to have no conscience when fighting for his king. He gives the impression of being a little arrogant and ostentatious. This is evident particularly in the brutal way in which he slaughtered Macdonald, as described by the wounded soldier: ??Till he unseamed him from the nave to th? chops, And fixed his head upon our battlements? This shows that Macbeth is a cold-hearted predator when it comes to battle. Here, Macbeth is not at all troubled by the blood he has shed. This is notably comparable to Act 2, Scene 2 where he is the complete opposite, plagued with guilt over his murderous actions where the blood symbolises guilt. In turn, both relate back to Act 1, Scene 1 and the prediction of contradiction later in the play. After this scene, the feelings of the audience about Macbeth are that he is a noble, loyal servant to the king, who goes fearlessly into battle, and would die for his cause. He does, however, appear much more brutal and violent than first imagined. This scene also reinforces the witches? prophecy that they would meet Macbeth on the heath once the battles are over and he emerges victorious. However brutal he may appear though, the audience gets the impression that he is a very loyal servant, and is a very trustworthy character. Act 1, Scene 3 is a very significant part of the play and has an adverse effect on the remainder of it. This is the scene first prophesised in Act 1, Scene 1 where the witches say they will meet Macbeth. Towards the beginning of this scene, we learn that the witches are in fact evil. One of them punishes a woman who refused to give her a chestnut by creating a storm for the woman?s husband at sea. All three witches get pleasure out of this evil. There is also an indication that they may have some kind of supernatural powers, as they have a cut-off thumb, which they claim is from the husband of the woman who refused the witch a chestnut. This suggestion of magical or supernatural powers reinforces the intrigue created in Act 1, Scene 1. As Macbeth enters, his first words echo the final words of the witches in the first scene, as he addresses Banquo: ??So foul and fair a day I have not seen? This refers back to the witches: ??Fair is foul and foul is fair? The significance of Macbeth saying this is that he is again suggesting the idea of appearances being deceptive in terms of them winning the battle, but at the same time the weather being horrific. This is ironic as he is the character who later becomes two-faced and deceptive, so he is in fact talking about himself. Following the introduction to the third scene comes the primary climax of the play: the meeting of Macbeth, Banquo and the witches. The witches greet Macbeth with a prophecy - that he will become Thane of Cawdor, and then King of Scotland. At first, Macbeth appears slightly taken aback. However, he soon dismisses what he considers an absurd prediction. Banquo is similarly startled and surprised, and questions the accuracy of what the witches have said. They also tell Banquo that he will have children who will become Kings of Scotland, although he will not make it himself. Here Macbeth re-enters into the conversation, appearing rather disturbed by what has been said, and he is anxious to hear the basis upon which the witches have prophesised. He demands to know more of them: ?? Stay, you imperfect speakers, tell me more? This shows his apprehension to relieve his ignorance. The witches promptly depart, and although Macbeth and Banquo engage in light conversation about the occurrence, they do not really take it seriously. Shortly afterwards, Ross meets Macbeth and Banquo. He praises Macbeth?s efforts in the battles, and goes on to inform him of his honorary new role, Thane of Cawdor. At first, Macbeth is shocked, and he immediately questions Ross. Once Macbeth acknowledges the news of the traitorous behaviour of the then present Thane of Cawdor, he believes that his honour is the work of the witches and that they are able to change the future. Macbeth immediately jumps to the obvious conclusion: he believes that, having fulfilled the primary part of the prophecy: he will soon accomplish the second and become king. He demonstrates this in his aside: ??Glamis and Thane of Cawdor. The greatest is behind? This is the first sign that Macbeth has some kind of deceitful, evil side to his nature. Banquo intelligently tracks Macbeth?s thought, and speaks aloud about his concerns of the evil nature of the witches, and what chaos they could potentially cause. He refers to them as ?instruments of darkness?, using imagery of darkness representing evil. Shakespeare makes use of dramatic irony here, as we, the audience, are aware from Act 1, Scene 2 that Macbeth has been made Thane of Cawdor for his bravery and not by the witches. Macbeth is presented as a very confused character at this point though; arguing with himself in his asides. He unsuccessfully attempts to rationalise as to whether the witches? intentions are good or evil. However, already his thoughts turn to potential regicide. At this point in the play though, Macbeth is very uncomfortable with the thought of killing the king, and he is very insecure as he shows in another of his asides: ??My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical? Here he demonstrates that for the moment, his evil thoughts are only fantasy. It appears here that Macbeth is quite gullible and has been deceived into believing the witches prophecy, simply because they were aware of his becoming Thane of Cawdor prior to him. Macbeth?s times of silence during his asides concern Banquo and Ross. However, from the moment that Macbeth learns he is Thane, his lies begin, as he claims he has forgotten about killing the king to Banquo and Ross when in fact his ambitions have been fuelled and his mind is on nothing else. There is an evident uncertainty as to what will happen next, with the idea prominent in Macbeth?s brain. The original impression of Macbeth to the audience is immediately put into question. Although he has done no physical harm to anyone, his treacherous thoughts lead the audience to begin to doubt the loyalty and devotion of Macbeth to his King and country he was originally credited with. Act 1, Scene 4 is where Macbeth really begins to weave his web of deceit. The scene begins with King Duncan talking of the dishonesty and mistrust he experienced with the previous Thane of Cawdor. This is ironic considering the treacherous thoughts the new Thane of Cawdor, Macbeth, has already begun to have. Similarly, the beginning of Act 1, Scene 6 is ironic with King Duncan and Banquo talking about the security and pleasantness that Macbeth?s castle offers them for their visit. In Act 1, Scene 4, Macbeth enters and King Duncan immediately beings to praise him for his efforts in the recent battles. The King is very grateful, and tells Macbeth that he can never repay him for his duties. Here Macbeth is extremely two-faced, telling the King that to serve him is in itself enough of a reward for his duties: ??The service and the loyalty I owe, In doing it, pays itself? Considering his regicidal thoughts in the previous scene, this is extremely dishonest and deceitful of Macbeth. This again demonstrates an example of the last line of Act 1, Scene 1, where the witches suggest that appearances can be deceptive. In this scene, Macbeth discovers a second obstacle he must overcome if he is to fulfil his ambition and the witches? prophecy. King Duncan announces that, following the betrayal of the previous Thane of Cawdor, the new heir to his throne will be his son, Malcolm. This news is devastating to Macbeth, as obviously, if he is to become King, he not only has King Duncan to surpass, but also the obstacle created by the Prince of Cumberland and new heir, Malcolm. However, Macbeth is very successful at keeping his feelings hidden. He does not actually address the subject directly though; he decides to invite the King and his subjects to dinner at his home. King Duncan is oblivious to any ulterior motives Macbeth has, and merely takes the invitation as a kind gesture. In the subsequent aside,

Macbeth reveals his real feelings: ??The Prince of Cumberland - that is a step on which I must fall down or else o?erleap.? Here again Macbeth is planning to murder someone, though this time the new obstacle in his path to achieve his ambition is Malcolm, Prince of Cumberland. This shows the greed and jealousy behind his loyal, humble exterior. This is all an example of dramatic irony, as we, the audience are aware of Macbeth?s true intentions, whereas King Duncan and the Prince of Cumberland are not. This scene is again similar to Act 1, Scene 6 in which the guests arrive at the home of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. There is a conversation between King Duncan and Lady Macbeth, and there are many similarities visible here between the behaviour of Macbeth in Act 1, Scene 4 and that of Lady Macbeth in this scene. She is extremely welcoming and displays kindness towards King Duncan, when in fact behind this she is planning his death making the scene very ironic. We see a great contrast in Lady Macbeth compared to her behaviour in the previous scene, in which she asks to lose her conscience to enable her to assist in the murder of King Duncan. This is again comparable to Macbeth in Act 1, Scene 4 where he plans to murder Duncan, but is extremely two-faced in the subsequent scene by being welcoming and kind to the King. Lady Macbeth makes a great effort to ensure that Duncan feels completely relaxed and secure in her hands as hostess. She shows this when speaking to him: ??All our service in every point twice done, and then done double.? This demonstrates the effort made to make Duncan feel completely comfortable and at ease, in complete trust of Lady Macbeth and wholly unaware of her cruel intentions. The words of Duncan only reinforce how susceptible he has been to the lies of Macbeth and his wife. He shows this in the last line of the scene: ??Conduct me to mine host. We love him highly.? These are doubtless the words of someone unreservedly ignorant to his fate. Act 1, Scene 5 is the first scene in which we meet Lady Macbeth, the other main character of the play. The first impressions of Macbeth gained by the audience are positive which become increasingly negative as the play develops. In great contrast, the very first impressions we gain of Lady Macbeth are of an evil, scheming and ambitious character. She suggests that she is going to influence Macbeth into making sure he becomes King. She has a hunger for power and is selfish, with no conscience. This scene appears to suggest that Lady Macbeth is the dominant force in her relationship with her husband. She makes a bizarre appeal to the spirits to make her less effeminate and more brutal and courageous. She asks for supernatural help, which links her to the witches at the beginning of the play. She wishes to lose her femininity and become more masculine, and to exonerate her conscience of any evils she may commit. An example of this is in her appeal to the spirits: ??Come, you spirits that tend on moral thoughts, unsex me here, and fill me from the crown to the toe top-full of direst cruelty. Make thick my blood.? This indicates her desire to be less of a stereotypical female, and to have the fortitude to employ whatever means necessary to accomplish her aspirations. Lady Macbeth appeals to the spirits to remove her maternal instincts, from which we are able to make an educated guess that she has given birth to a child. However, we are also aware that the child subsequently died, as later in the play we learn that Macbeth has no children. The death of this child may have caused Lady Macbeth bitterness, which fuels her ambition to become Queen of Scotland. There is also significance in her asking the spirits to thicken her blood, as later in the play Shakespeare uses imagery to make blood represent guilt. Therefore, asking for the thickening of her blood represents allowing her to withstand guilt, and removing her conscience. From the point of view of the audience, the introduction of Lady Macbeth is very dramatic and violent. Her appeal to the spirits is of great compassion and sincer! ity; she immediately appears very cold, hard and malicious. Lady Macbeth doubts the capabilities of her husband upon delivery of his letter, and immediately decides to make it her responsibility to ensure he fulfils his ambition. She believes that Macbeth will be too good-natured to go through with the deed. However, she is also aware of the ambition of her husband. It is on this basis that she decides to take the responsibility. She will influence him to ensure he goes through with it, because she is unsure to what lengths he will go. She demonstrates this in commenting to herself on the letter: ??Yet I fear thy nature. It is too full o th? milk of human kindness.? This implies that although Macbeth may be very ambitious, Lady Macbeth has doubts as to whether or not he will go to the extent of killing his King. However, in the age in which this play is set, women could only make something of themselves with the aid of a man. The status of a woman?s husband determined her own status. Therefore, it is actually debatable whether Lady Macbeth is doing this to assist her husband, or if it is for her own person gain to become Queen. In addition, she offers encouragement to her husband for him to not let his true feelings be outwardly visible. This is an example of the witches? idea of appearances being deceptive. She tells him: ??Your hand, your tongue; look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under?t.? This indicates that Lady Macbeth wants Macbeth to be outwardly loyal but inwardly deceitful: extremely two-faced. Lady Macbeth appears to be the dominant force in her relationship with Macbeth. She makes the decisions and takes the actions. They are very open and honest with each other though, and there is a lot of evident love and passion between them. She does appear to be in control all the time and Macbeth seems to have little choice but to agree with her. This is shown again when she demands ?leave all the rest to me?, relating to the planning of Duncan?s murder. Act 1, Scene 7 contains the famous soliloquy of Macbeth, in which he debates over whether or not he should murder King Duncan. He puts forward one reason for killing him: fulfilling his ambition. In contrast, he puts forward many reasons as to why he should not kill Duncan. These include Duncan?s innocence, the trust Duncan has for him and how regicide is an unnatural act as according to the divine right of Kings. As God has chosen the King, he would be going against God and killing him would unbalance nature, causing chaos or a political storm. In addition, Duncan is a good king, great pity would be caused and there would be complications in dealing with the guards and kinsmen. Duncan would have no opportunity to defend himself, so it would not be even-handed justice, and also the significant matter of Macbeth?s conscience in killing his own King. This is all summed up in his reason for killing in his soliloquy: ??I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent, but only vaulting ambition.? This indicates that although there are many reasons against killing Duncan, his ambition to become King is so strong it dominates over them all. Mentally, Macbeth appears relatively stable in his soliloquy, as he is able to rationally debate with himself whether or not he should kill Duncan. He does appear quite confused, although at the end of his soliloquy he logically makes up his mind not to kill Duncan. Macbeth is presented as a strong character for defying his ambition. He exclaims his decision to Lady Macbeth almost straightaway: ?? We will proceed no further in this business.? This shows he has decided not to go ahead with the murder. Nevertheless, when it comes to overcoming his wife?s ambition, he fails. Lady Macbeth easily influences him and persuades him that to murder Duncan is the right thing to do. Lady Macbeth pressurises Macbeth by making him feel un-manly and cowardly, and she makes him feel inferior to her. To the audience he appears weak for his inability to remain defiant against his wife. She blackmails him into murdering Duncan: ??And live a coward in thine own esteem, letting ?I dare not? wait upon ?I would?.? This shows how she makes him feel cowardly and secondary to her, and in doing so persuades him to take part in Duncan?s murder. Lady Macbeth is a manipulative character, and the perception of her

by the audience is of an evil, spiteful character with no conscience who will stop at nothing to achieve her ambition. The feeling of the audience towards Macbeth is partial respect for deciding not to go ahead. However, the audience?s perception of Macbeth is that he is cowardly for giving into his wife?s manipulation. She takes her persuasive methods to such an extent as to say she would rather kill her own child than give in to conscience and reason over the issue of killing Duncan. She expresses this to Macbeth: ??I would, while it was smiling in my face, have plucked my nipple from his boneless gums and dashed the brains out, had I so sworn as you have done to this.? This may show that Lady Macbeth is really such an evil, vicious and ambitious character that she would rather kill her child than not achieve her full potential in society. It may also be an indication that she has in fact rid herself of her femininity and been overcome so as her maternal instinct is lost. On the other hand she could be using hyperbole to persuade her husband by touching a raw nerve in making him feel cowardly and effeminate. Lady Macbeth?s character comes across in this scene as extremely strong, and with no apparent doubt in her mind about what actions to take concerning the fulfilling of her ambition. She is manipulative and tactical in her persuasion of her husband to kill Duncan. Macbeth in comparison is very weak in fighting his side of the argument, which in fact assists his wife in persuading him. This may have been because he was so uncertain in his aside as to whether killing Duncan was the right thing to do. Throughout the whole of Act 1, Lady Macbeth has changed very little. If anything, she has gone from being an ambitious, nasty character, to a scheming, extremely ambitious, uncaring, plain evil character who will stop at nothing to achieve her goals. Macbeth appears to have changed from being a heroic warrior, to a devious, two-faced liar. However, at this point in the play, he is still the character who questions the morality of certain actions. In comparison, it would appear that! Lady Macbeth takes the action primarily, and then faces the consequences and suffers later. This becomes apparent further on in the play, where the pair appear to swap their roles. Macbeth becomes dominant, and Lady Macbeth a guilt-ridden wreck. In Act 2, Scene 1 we see Macbeth with Banquo. Shakespeare does this to show the audience how the pair have grown apart and how Macbeth is becoming increasingly evil. The first indication of this is in the apprehension with which Banquo greets Macbeth when they meet - unlike King Duncan, Banquo does not feel secure and feels the need to ask for his sword from his servant upon hearing someone enter the room. This scene uses a lot more of the imagery found in Act 1, Scene 3 where darkness represents malevolence, and creates an evil atmosphere. The atmosphere is very appropriate as Macbeth is again dishonest with Banquo. When Banquo mentions his dreams of the witches and how they have disturbed his thoughts, Macbeth claims to have forgotten about them altogether, when in fact it is the exact opposite. He seems to become more isolated as the play develops, and he conceals his true feelings simply, yet effectively here, claiming: ??I think not of them? This is a complete lie, which represents the obvious divide that now exists between Macbeth and his formerly close friend Banquo. Eventually this distance leads Macbeth to have Banquo murdered. Following the departure of Banquo, Macbeth begins his hallucination. He believes he can see a dagger in front of him. The dagger he sees could be a representation of his ambition to become King of Scotland. The fact that he is hallucinating is also an indication of his mental instability and insecurity at the time. It could be argued that the dagger is proven to be his ambition when it leads him to the chamber of Duncan: ??Is this a dagger which I see before me, the handle toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee.? His desire to hold the dagger here is an indication of his desperation to accomplish the deed as swiftly as possible, before he has any regrets. Following this, Macbeth believes that ?gouts of blood? are appearing on the dagger. The blood could represent guilt and the appearance of it on the dagger suggests that some kind of supernatural work, of witchcraft or wizardry is responsible. Macbeth?s mind in this scene appears to be dazed, confused and unsure of what he is doing. It shows that he has very mixed up emotions and is not coping well. His ambition is taking over his guilt and rationality. However, the hallucination represents the mental fight Macbeth is having between the two. Another idea is that the witches have sent the hallucination, which causes his confusion. His character does now seem completely evil, and he no longer has any physical influences, such as Lady Macbeth in Act 1, Scene 7. He is killing, or planning to kill of his own accord, and this makes him evi! l and nasty. It is notable, however, that although he does eventually kill Duncan, he does not find the task easy. I believe that Shakespeare has included this scene to develop Macbeth into a more complex, emotional character. His mentally unstable appearance suggests that he may not be entirely responsible for Duncan?s murder. Act 2, Scene 2 is set immediately after Macbeth has murdered King Duncan. This scene is incredibly ironic considering what happens later in the play, when Macbeth and Lady Macbeth exchange roles from the way they behave in this scene. Macbeth is even more confused and dazed than he was before killing Duncan, and he displays an immediate regret for doing it. Having killed him, he goes immediately to Lady Macbeth without even completing the deed and disposing of the daggers. For the first time in the play, Macbeth displays an air of authority in declaring that he will not return to the scene of the crime, and that Lady Macbeth must do it for him. He is extremely paranoid, scared and frightened. This is indicated in Macbeth?s inability to say Amen, suggesting that he feels he will go to hell and is very unholy for killing Duncan, as he tells Lady Macbeth: ??List?ning their fear I could not say ?Amen? when they did say ? God bless us?.? This shows that he truly feels God no longer blesses him. In addition, Macbeth hears a voice that says he will never sleep again: ??Sleep no more: Macbeth does murder sleep, the innocent sleep.? This shows that his character has a regret immediately for killing Duncan. He has murdered someone in his sleep, and in the form of Duncan, sleep symbolises innocence. Therefore, Macbeth believes he will be unable to sleep. Sleep depravation can cause depression and make one unhealthy, so by taking Duncan?s sleep, Macbeth feels he too will be deprived of the privilege. All of these things Macbeth does are representations of evil taking away innocence; in the form of sleep, Duncan and religious faith. Shakespeare then introduces a new form of imagery, which becomes more significant later in the play, in particular to Lady Macbeth. Macbeth feels he cannot wash off the blood of Duncan, which represents the way in which his conscience will plague him for the rest of his life. Blood is a symbol of guilt here, and Macbeth feels he will never lose his. He uses hyperbole and says there is so much blood on his hands, that to wash them in the sea would only turn the waters red rather than cleanse him. Shakespeare presents Macbeth?s guilt and remorse here in the form of him being unable to wash off the blood. In talking of washing the blood off his hands, Macbeth means the mental blood in its representation of guilt. He regrets murdering Duncan very much, and hallucinates again hearing a knocking sound. He appeals to the knocking to awaken Duncan again, and shows how much he regrets his actions at the end of the scene: ??Wake

Duncan with thy knocking. I would thou couldst.? This shows that at this moment in the play, Macbeth would do anything to bring King Duncan back to life. Lady Macbeth, in direct comparison, copes perfectly well with the whole situation. At the very beginning of the scene, she appears quite agitated and nervous, appealing to shrieking owls to silence themselves. However, once Macbeth has returned to her, she appears completely calm and relaxed about the situation. She immediately complains to her husband for having not completed his task by bringing the daggers back to her, instead of disposing of them. Again she tries to make him feel cowardly for not completing it, however this time unsuccessfully. Lady Macbeth states to Macbeth that if they think about the deed too much they will both go mad. This is ironic as she goes mad later in the play. She does at this point though, appear to be in control of the situation. She orders Macbeth around by telling him to ensure all his tracks have been covered, and to forget that the whole event ever occurred. Having smeared the blood over the Kings guards, Lady Macbeth returns with a com! pletely clear conscience. She redirects all criticism onto Macbeth and will not accept any responsibility for assisting in the murder of King Duncan. She also calls Macbeth a coward for not returning the daggers here: ??My hands are of your colour, but I shame to wear a heart so white.? This supports the suggestion that Lady Macbeth feels no guilt, as if blood is a representation of guilt, her white heart represents no guilt whatsoever. Despite having no conscience regarding the deed, Lady Macbeth remains very paranoid about anyone discovering their guilt. She hears a knocking noise many times towards the end of this scene, which unnerves her and makes her apprehensive. Later in the play, the roles are exchanged almost perfectly. Macbeth gradually becomes increasingly evil, and loses his conscience altogether. Lady Macbeth, in comparison, goes mad and commits suicide because of her guilt in assisting in Duncan?s murder becomes so strong she is unable to live any longer. She now feels she is unable to wash the blood off her hands, whereas Macbeth has forgotten about the incident completely. He also manages to become much more independent from her, and is able to continue his corruptive behaviour without her assistance and support. Shakespeare has structured the play to reflect Macbeth?s moral dilemma, in that each scene goes in a sequence of good and evil. For instance, Act 1, Scene 1 is evil, Act 2, Scene 2 good, then Act 1, Scene 3 evil again. This represents the changing opinions and feelings of Macbeth about whether or not to kill Duncan. The way that he is constantly changing his mind about whether or not he should fulfil his ambition follows the same pattern as the representations of good and evil in each scene. Notably, both the final scene studied and Macbeth?s opinions emerge evil, with Macbeth?s guilt-ridden actions in the final scene, and Duncan?s death towards the end of the studied section of the play. Shakespeare uses imagery throughout the whole of the play. However, most prominent are his representations of good and evil, as light and darkness. Quite stereotypically, the storms, bad weather, thunder and lightning in the scenes with the witches represent their evil presence, and some indication of supernatural activity. Shakespeare also uses blood to represent guilt, and there are many references made throughout the play to blood, which signifies its representation of evil later in the play. The use of asides is also effective, as it allows the audience to know Macbeth?s deepest inner thoughts, giving them the advantage of dramatic irony over the other characters. This engages the audience, as they can anticipate how the play will develop. However, this play clearly demonstrates Shakespeare at his most successful, with unexpected plot twists that prove the predictions of the audience wrong. In conclusion, I believe Shakespeare has very successfully portrayed the moral dilemma faced by Lady Macbeth and her husband. He challenges certain stereotypes, such as women?s femininity, and men?s masculinity. He does this by giving Lady Macbeth the role of appealing to the spirits to unsex her, enabling her to assist in Duncan?s murder without maternal instincts of femininity creating any boundaries or restrictions to her potential capabilities. Macbeth is presented as a very strong character physically, able to overcome large armies of men. However, mentally he is weak willed and finds coping with his ambition very difficult. He has internal conflicts with himself trying to decide whether or not to fulfil his ambition and become King, or to remain loyal to his master and King, Duncan. He does actually come to his own conclusions in deciding to not commit the deed. However, he has no strength of character and allows Lady Macbeth to manipulate him by questioning his masculinity. Eventually, this leads Macbeth to not only taking the life of his King, but to continue his tyranny as king by slaughtering anyone who dares to cross his path. Lady Macbeth in comparison does exactly the opposite. She starts by appealing to the spirits to unsex her, and she becomes a spiteful, evil, manipulative character. Her ambition is even greater than Macbeth?s, and it fuels her onwards to persuade her husband to go ahead and commit regicide, allowing her to become Queen. Following her becoming Queen, however, she begins to lose her hard, cold exterior, and can no longer remain free of responsibility for Duncan?s death. Eventually, the thought of her guilt horrifies her so much that she goes mad and commits suicide. This suggests that she was only able to accept no responsibility with the false cover of the spirits, and not independently. Macbeth, however, had the natural resilience to cope with the responsibility. This is proven in his progression to become a stronger and more powerful king. The feeling of the audience towards each character also changes as the play develops. Macbeth appears a heroic warrior at first, and by ! the end of Act 2, Scene 2 the audience views him as an evil, unkind, dishonest character, who is extremely selfish. Lady Macbeth is viewed as a manipulative, evil character at first. However, when she goes mad with guilt, there is some sympathy from the audience towards her. Finally, this play teaches some quite important moral values: that one should never let power influence rational decisions; that honesty eventually prevails; that ambition can be extremely dangerous; and that ultimately, good always overcomes evil.

Macbeth Composition
Life itself can either be great or not so great. Sometimes your up on top of the world and sometimes your lying face down in the dirt. Either way you got to take what life gives you and make the best of it. In this soliloquy, MacBeth's recognition scene, he offers the reader a very negative and dark worldview. In essence he says that 1) life is repetitive and boring, 2) that man is puny and insignificant, and 3) that life itself is rendered meaningless and absurd by the finality of death. MacBeth's worldview is extremely negative and pessimistic, and he sees no hope at all. Given the experience of life and literature, one might disagree with him and offer evidence to the contrary.

There are many examples to prove MacBeth wrong in his view of life as being boring and repetitive. First, in the play MacBeth, king Duncan decides to make MacBeth Thane of Cawdor. How boring can it be to rule all of Cawdor and know that the king thinks very highly of you. Second, man has invented video games, TV, sports, and amusement parks to entertain man. So how can all those things just mention still make life boring? There is no way life is boring and repetitive because there is always something you can find to entertain yourself. MacBeth also thinks that man is puny and insignificant but that is truly wrong. Man is the supreme being of the Earth. Look how powerful the Pope, president of the United States, generals etc. can be. Every catholic would do anything the Pope would ask. Another reason to prove the views of MacBeth wrong comes right out of the play. The king of Scotland means a lot to the people and has the most power throughout the land. Once MacBeth killed king Duncan he knew he had to king Malcolm who has the heir to the throne in order for nothing to stand in his way of the throne. Obviously Malcolm was pretty significant to MacBeth if he wanted to murder him. Furthermore, you can look at history and see how Cesar ruled most of the world for over 600 years. There are just to many examples to prove that man is in no way puny and insignificant. There is no way life is meaningless even with death in mind. Every culture in the world believes in a God and a afterlife. They spend their lives praying and worshiping their Gods hoping that the afterlife will be grand. You should not fear death because you get to go to heaven, which is what you want heaven to be. Therefore there is no reason why you should fear death. The way MacBeth views the world as a dark place is extremely wrong. Throughout this paper there has been many examples on how life is exciting and very meaningful. Even though there are bad days or even weeks in life, the good days always out weighs the bad. In conclusion, life is what you make of it so you can't blame others for your life and the way you live it.

Macbeth Contrasting Shades

In everyday life normal people like you and I sometimes pretend to be what we are not, or we "wear a mask". It is a defense-mechanism that can be used for social or even political augmentation. In Macbeth, a tragedy by William Shakespeare, Macbeth hides his true nature as he strives for the pinnacle of political influence by killing his king, Duncan. Shakespeare uses "fair and foul" contradictions to reflect Macbeth, who appears to be a fair noble thane, but in turn is a foul person and deceptive murderer. Macbeth takes advantage of the king's trust, uses a false identity, and murders those around him to gain supreme sovereignty. The first step Macbeth takes in seizing for the crown is taking advantage of Duncan's nae sense of trust. While watching the thane of Cawdor getting hung, Duncan comments, "There's no art to find the mind's construction in the face. He was a gentleman on whom I built an absolute trust."(2.4 13-16) Duncan lacks the essential insight to detect treachery within his own ranks. He also does not see the inconsistency of Macbeth's character, which leads to the king's bloody murder. Lady Macbeth clarifies their sneaky plan in killing Duncan when saying, "Bear welcome in your eye, your hand, your tongue. Look like th'innocent flower, but be the serpent under `t." (1.6 76-77) After this effective plan resulting in murder, a wise old man says to Macduff and Ross, "God's benison go with you and with those that would make good of bad and friends of foes." (2.4 55-56) This warning is used by Shakespeare to foreshadow the knowledge of Macbeth's betrayal. Macduff, unlike Duncan, suspects Macbeth and does not convene with him. After killing off those that truly prevent him from taking the throne, he has to hide his true colors. Macbeth "wears a mask" of false innocence, and must seem like a good and loyal King to his subjects, when in fact is guilty of numerous slaughters. If Macbeth slaughtered all that opposed or suspected him, he would have nobody to rule. Therefore, some alliances must be maintained regardless of their nature. His wife reminds him that the other nobles are important to the longevity of his reign. "Come on, gentle my lord, sleek o'er

your rugged looks. Be bright and jovial among your guests tonight." (3.2 30-32) Macbeth cannot hide his foulness, even when his own survival depends on it. During a feast with other nobles, Macbeth almost reveals the truth when seeing an imagined ghost of murdered Banquo. Without association with others, Macbeth's reign would be superficial and short. Well, as bad as we can feel about ourselves when we must "wear a mask", we can comfort ourselves by relating to the extremity of Macbeth, who lived a series of lies and deception before he was killed by Macbeth and justice was returned to Scotland. By use of contradiction, Shakespeare made a complex character who was not what he seemed.

Macbeth - The Hands of Gods

The last moments of a production are important because they can greatly alter the audiences' interpretation of the entire play. This is especially true in William Shakespeare's Macbeth. A number of unanswered questions such as who is responsible for Macbeth's fate and whether peace is restored to the kingdom gather at the end of the original play. In each of the different productions, directors Roman Polanski and Trevor Nunn allude to these answers. Shakespeare's play ends with Malcolm saying to his kinsman: We shall not spend a large expense of time Before we reckon with your several loves And make us even with you. My Thanes and kinsmen,

Henceforth be Earls, the first that ever Scotland In such an honor named. What's more to do, Which would be planted newly with the time,

As calling home our exiled friends abroad, That fled the snares of watchful tyranny, Producing forth the cruel ministers Of this dead butcher and his fiend-like queenWho, as 'tis thought, by self and violent hands Took off her life-this and what needful else That calls upon us, by the grace of grace We will perform in measure, time, and place. So thanks to all at once and to each one, Whom we invite to see us crowned at Scone. (5.11.26-41) Because his speech merely recaps past events that the audience already knows and does not provide any revelation into the unanswered questions of the play, Malcolm's speech leaves the audience with ambiguities. The speech contains no comments on where to place the blame of Macbeth's fate, thus the audience must decide for themselves as to whether Macbeth alone stands responsible for his fate or whether the witches participation holds them as the responsible ones.

Director Roman Polanski attempts an answer to this ambiguity in the last scene of his production of Macbeth. The evening turns to dusk, and the air holds a hazy mystical feel. The sound of the witches playing a flute-like musical instrument rises from behind two large rocks. Then Donalbain, leaving his horse behind, limps toward those rocks intently looking for those whom he believes reside there. He then disappears behind the rocks and the music stops, insinuating that they will now prophesize the future for Donalbain. In his last scene, Polanski leaves the viewer with the notion that the witches control fate like puppeteers with their dolls, the kingdom and its inhabitants are as mere pawns in their game. Donalbain stands to gain the throne after the death of his elder brother Malcolm; therefore he becomes the perfect toy for the witches. Polanski creates this notion that the witches control the kingdom and its inhabitants in order to prove that ultimately Macbeth does not control his own fate and therefore does not hold responsibility for his own actions. Macbeth foreshadows the idea that fate holds ultimate power and people only act out their minor roles in the brief production of life, when he says, Lifes but a walking shadow, a poor player/ That struts and frets his hour upon the stage/ And then is heard no more"(5.5.23-25). Polanski reinforces the same idea stated in Macbeths speech in the final moments of the production with the image of the witches controlling Donalbain just as they ultimately control Macbeth during his life.

The last moments of a production are important because they can greatly alter the audiences' interpretation of the entire play. This is especially true in William Shakespeare's Macbeth. A number of unanswered questions such as who is responsible for Macbeth's fate and whether peace is restored to the kingdom gather at the end of the original play. In each of the different productions, directors Roman Polanski and Trevor Nunn allude to these answers. Shakespeare's play ends with Malcolm saying to his kinsman: We shall not spend a large expense of time Before we reckon with your several loves And make us even with you. My Thanes and kinsmen,

Henceforth be Earls, the first that ever Scotland In such an honor named. What's more to do, Which would be planted newly with the time,

As calling home our exiled friends abroad, That fled the snares of watchful tyranny, Producing forth the cruel ministers Of this dead butcher and his fiend-like queenWho, as 'tis thought, by self and violent hands Took off her life-this and what needful else That calls upon us, by the grace of grace We will perform in measure, time, and place. So thanks to all at once and to each one, Whom we invite to see us crowned at Scone. (5.11.26-41) Because his speech merely recaps past events that the audience already knows and does not provide any revelation into the unanswered questions of the play, Malcolm's speech leaves the audience with ambiguities. The speech contains no comments on where to place the blame of Macbeth's fate, thus the audience must decide for themselves as to whether Macbeth alone stands responsible for his fate or whether the witches participation holds them as the responsible ones. Director Roman Polanski attempts an answer to this ambiguity in the last scene of his production of Macbeth. The evening turns to dusk, and the air holds a hazy mystical feel. The sound of the witches playing a flute-like musical instrument rises from behind two large rocks. Then Donalbain, leaving his horse behind, limps toward those rocks intently looking for those whom he believes reside there. He then disappears behind the rocks and the music stops, insinuating that they will now prophesize the future for Donalbain. In his last scene, Polanski leaves the viewer with the notion that the witches control fate like puppeteers with their dolls, the kingdom and its inhabitants are as mere pawns in their game. Donalbain stands to gain the throne after the death of his elder brother Malcolm; therefore he becomes the perfect toy for the witches. Polanski creates this notion that the witches control the kingdom and its inhabitants in order to prove that ultimately Macbeth does not control his own fate and therefore does not hold responsibility for his own actions. Macbeth foreshadows the idea that fate holds ultimate power and people only act out their minor roles in the brief production of life, when he says, Lifes but a walking shadow, a poor player/ That struts and frets his hour upon the stage/ And then is heard no more"(5.5.23-25). Polanski reinforces the same idea stated in Macbeths speech in the final moments of the production with the image of the witches controlling Donalbain just as they ultimately control Macbeth during his life.

Hamlet and his hesitation

One should start by defining `Hamlet'. `Hamlet' is a tragedy. The tragic action stems from a flaw or failing act of shame or horror, and as a result the protagonist suffers intensely. The protagonist- Hamlet in this play has a fatal defect or tragic trait in his characteruncertainty, delay of action. There are also two conflicts involved: an inner conflict in the mind and soul of the protagonist, and an outer or physical one as he comes into collisions with his opponents. But the centre of a tragic impression is the sense of waste. There is a profound sense of sadness, wasted talent and unnecessary suffering towards or at the end. The character of Hamlet stands quite by itself. It is not a character marked by strength of will or even of passion, but by refinement of thought and sentiment. It is more his taste to indulge his imagination in reflecting upon the enormity of the crime and refining his schemes of vengeance, than to put them into immediate practice- his ruling passion is to think and not to act. Hamlet is plagued by self-doubts. In his second soliloquy, the essence of his true conflict is uncovered. He is committed to seeking revenge for his father, King Hamlet, yet he cannot act on behalf of his father because of his revulsion towards extracting that cold and calculating revenge. Hamlets self-condemnation takes several forms, including a series of imaginary, demeaning insults that he absorbs like a coward- he feels he has done nothing to take revenge on Claudius and feels like he lacks the ability- `unpregnant of my cause'. Hamlet fails to quell his apprehensions of committing murder, so he tries to focus his attention on a plan to ensure Claudius admits his own guilt. He stages the play `The Mousetrap' where Claudius's crimes are re-enacted, forcing the King to reveal his own guilt. This gives him proof that revenge on Claudius would be justified- so he sets out to `catch the conscience of the King.' Hamlet tries to find reason for his inadequacy- `Am I a coward?' but his hesitation does not make him one. He is a Prince, an intellectual and has a sense of social duty towards Denmark and its people. One should ask, why does Hamlet procrastinate in taking revenge on Claudius? He is a man of great moral integrity who is forced to commit an act, which goes against his deepest principles. Through his soliloquies, he tries to make sense of his moral dilemma. To take another perspective, one could say that Hamlet has become so disenchanted with life since his father's death that he has neither the desire nor the will to exact revenge. He is also faced with an appearance- reality dilemma- he does not know whom to and who not to trust- what the other characters may appear to be, may not be reality. Hamlet would rather have confirmation of his uncle's betrayal or treachery before taking action. His third soliloquy-`To be, or not to be' is governed more by reason than by frenzied motion as compared to the previous one. He asks whether one should live or not, but it could also be a question as to whether to take action or not; a question between reason and passion. To me, the opening line of this soliloquy does not suggest that Hamlet is hesitating, but rather that he contemplates and sparks an internal debate within himself. I agree that Hamlet possesses a quality of nobility. It is noble and reasonable for him to confirm Claudius's guilt and also to confirm that the ghost of his father is an, `honest ghost.' He prepares to duel against Laertes at the near end, although there was no honour on Laertes' part as he avenges his father's death. `There is special providence in the fall of a sparrow...the readiness is all.' Throughout the play Hamlet has known more than any of the others, but here he accepts the fact that no man has achieved knowledge about the true nature of reality. From these lines one can conclude that Hamlet is content and has `resigned to his fate.' He seems to have resolved the conflict he had previously with himself and answers a question he once asked- `Let be.' As with all tragedies, the moral order in the end is re-established, as Hamlet kills the King and although he himself dies, Denmark is left in the hands of a responsible Fortinbras- Prince of Norway. Hamlet was definitely plagued by self-doubts, and this did result in his hesitation, but it did not make him a coward and rather brought his honesty and nobility to the fore. He would not have wanted to regret something that shouldn't have happened, and although he lost the power of action in the energy of resolve, he thought about his plans and reasoned, and in the end it counted.

Hamlet Brutal Truth

Disillusionment. Depression. Despair. These are the burning emotions churning in young Hamlet's soul as he attempts to come to terms with his father's death and his mother's incestuous, illicit marriage. While Hamlet tries to pick up the pieces of his shattered idealism, he consciously embarks on a quest to seek the truth hidden in Elsinore; this, in stark contrast to Claudius' fervent attempts to obscure the truth of murder. Deception versus truth; illusion versus reality. In the play, Prince Hamlet is constantly having to differentiate amongst them. However, there is always an exception to the rule, and in this case, the exception lies in Act 2, Scene 2, where an "honest" conversation (sans the gilded trappings of deceit) takes place between Hamlet and Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern. Via the use of prose and figurative language, Shakespeare utilizes the passage to illustrate Hamlet's view of the cosmos and mankind. Throughout the play, the themes of illusion and mendaciousness have been carefully developed. The entire royal Danish court is ensnared in a web of espionage, betrayal, and lies. Not a single man speaks his mind, nor addresses his purpose clearly. As Polonius puts it so perfectly: "And thus do we of wisdom and of reach^ By indirections find directions out" Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 71-3 The many falsehoods and deceptions uttered in Hamlet are expressed through eloquent, formal, poetic language (iambic pentameter), tantamount to an art form. If deceit is a painted, ornate subject then, its

foil of truth is simple and unvarnished. Accordingly, when the pretenses of illusion are discarded in Act 2, Scene 2, the language is written in direct prose. Addressing Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern, Hamlet pleads with them to deliver up honest speech about the intent of their arrival: "[offer up] Anything but to th' purpose." Act 2, Scene 2, Line 300 In a gesture of extreme significance, in a quote complementary to Polonius' aforementioned one, Hamlet demands: "Be even and direct with me whether you were sent for or no." Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 310-11 Being the bumbling fools they are, Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern disclose their intentions and purposes to Hamlet, revealing the King and Queen's instructions. Thus does truth prevail in this passage. For this reason, the whole passage is devoid of the "artful" poetic devices that are used in the better portion of the play. The recurring motif of corruption also appears in the passage. Due to the wicked internal proceedings in the state of Denmark (e.g. murder, incest), Shakespeare implies that the whole state is "soiled", which in turn has a direct negative consequence in the grand universal scheme of things. Imagery of warped and distasteful plants, in place of the traditional "aesthetically correct" beautiful flowers in a garden, serves to further reinforce the degeneration theme: "'Tis an unweeded garden that grows to seed. Things rank and gross in nature possess it merely." Act 1, Scene 2 Essentially, all of life, and all that was good and beautiful in life (e.g. the garden) is sullied. Hamlet, the disillusioned idealist, continues with the motif when he disheartenedly declares: "the earth, seems to me a sterile promontory^" -Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 321-2 [the air] "why, it appeareth nothing to me but a fouled and pestilent congregation of vapors." -Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 325-6 The above lines represent Hamlet's cosmic view on the planet. He finds the world to be empty and lifeless, dirty and diseased, and his particular place in it to be desolate and lonely. Indeed, he feels so isolated and entrapped in his native land that he says: [the world is a prison] "A goodly one, in which there are many confines, wards, and dungeons, Denmark being one o' th' worst." -Act 2, Scene 2, Lines 264-6 This view of the world exemplifies the micro/macro concept, where Denmark is the "micro" manifestation of a prison for our hero. The taint of "micro" Denmark leads to repercussions that in turn affect the whole universal order, leading to the consequence of the world itself becoming the "macro" manifestation of a prison in Hamlet's eyes. Further along in the same paragraph, Hamlet offers up his opinion on man, extolling his virtues and excellent qualities ("what a piece of work is man^"). Yet, it is tremendously ironic, that the ideal type of man Hamlet is describing is nowhere to be found in the play. Hamlet himself is indecisive, unable to take action, Claudius is a slave to his lusts and passions, Polonius is a simpering, servile old fool, and Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern are mindless ninnies. Quite simply, no "true man" as Hamlet describes him exists in the play. As a result of this dismal realization, and because of his inability to adapt to the "unnatural state of things in Denmark", Hamlet has lost the love for life he once had. This loss of enthusiasm also stems from the fact that he intrinsically knows there is more wickedness brewing under the superficial illusionary surface of calm that Claudius is trying to promote. As a culmination of all these factors, Hamlet loses all faith in man: "And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?" Scene 2, Act 2, Lines 332-3 Drawing on Biblical allusions, Hamlet redefines the position of man as simply "that which came from dust". From this stance, it is inferred that solely God is Truth. Man, coming from the lowly earth, cannot be depended upon to deliver pure and true thoughts, as his source of origin itself is impure and unclean. If one establishes this rationality for mankind's nature, then all the characters in the play can be accounted for.

Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark

Is Hamlet a tragic hero, a weak revenger or a political misfit? Shakespeare's Hamlet is at the outset a typical revenge play. However, it is possible to see Prince Hamlet as a more complex character as he can be seen as various combinations of a weak revenger, a tragic hero and a political misfit. In order to fully understand the world in which Hamlet finds himself, it is necessary to examine all three of these roles and either dismiss them or justify Hamlet's behaviour as a revenger. As a tragic hero, Hamlet displays many typical qualities of a traditional hero in a Elizabethan revenge tragedy. Hamlet is the Prince of Denmark and therefore belongs to a social elite. Hamlet can be described as being too noble to take revenge. As a very well educated scholar of Wittenberg University in Sweden he has to think extensively before taking revenge. He feels the need to question revenge yet he is reluctant to do so rashly without considerable thought "thus conscience does make cowards of us all". We see that this happens in the first few moments of the play when Hamlet doubts the ghost is his father and he needs further prompting and reassurance throughout the play "So art thou to revenge, when thou shalt hear". Hamlet constantly rationalises and stops himself from acting with any degree of passion. This could be seen either as a weakness or as a personal strength. Hamlet can and is frequently

described, as a man with a tragic flaw, this being that his tendency to contemplate his actions is not a positive quality but that instead this brings about his downfall. Hamlet appears to many critics to be too much of an intellectual to play the role as a typical revenger "O what a rogue and peasant slave am I! Is it not monstrous that this player here, but in a fiction, in a dream of passion". Hamlet also seems to be a victim of bad luck. The accidental killing of Polonius in this mother's bedroom as well as the interception of Hamlet's ship by pirates and his subsequent return to Denmark are two such examples. However this bad luck could also be described as the tragedy of fate depending on ones personal view. Shakespeare's own view was that fate existed and that the decisions that Hamlet makes during the play make little difference to the final outcome. It seems that as Hamlet is unable to kill Claudius while he has the chance. Early in the play his fate must be that he dies as a consequence. Hamlet himself becomes fatalistic, on his return from exile. "-Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alexander returneth to dust the dust is earth". He has either lost heart totally or he has realised that, in order to take any sort of revenge on his uncle, he might actually have to die himself. Strangely in keeping with this his giving up on life his highly self critical and analytical soliloquies stop during Act Five. It is unclear whether this is a realisation that his fate is sealed or that a last attempt at preventing himself from taking action. Critic Catherine England says this about the issue of fate throughout Hamlet: "He can and does still make choices and act on them. Only he accepts that there is a higher power with responsibility for how things turn out; and in V.ii.215-220 he argues that that power is ultimately a caring one. So he believes that he can go through life more calmly, without fear, and ready for, and accepting of, whatever eventuates, even though he can't know what that will be." Critics debate whether is Hamlet has to die in the play. One of the most interesting, although new is that Hamlet is too virtuous to live in the human world and therefore there is no choice but for him to die. However it is also possible for Hamlet to be considered a weak revenger in comparison to the traditional revenger who is a man of action. The traditional hero in revenge plays comprised most of the qualities that Hamlet possesses. The question that Shakespeare asks in this play is whether Hamlet's inaction is a quality to be admired or criticised. Shakespeare uses an old legend and changes it so that it is suitable for the purpose he requires. If Shakespeare is questioning the idea of taking revenge, it is ironic that his story is far from original and that it is based around the convention of the revenge play. Hamlet is many ways is typical of a traditional revenger. As all plays of the time the central character would have been a member of the aristocracy and usually of the court too. As a Prince who is well educated, hamlet fits the traditional role of a revenger. However due to his interest in philosophy and his studious nature, intellectually and morally he does not fit in with the traditional role of a revenger. His education could be seen as either a blessing or a curse. Hamlet can be categorised as either a morally strong man for not taking revenge or as a failure. If Hamlet is shown as strong then we can see him as a `modern thinker' and a positive role model. His constant questioning and uncertainty of traditional and socially accepted boundaries a totally new and extraordinarily bold move. The pressure that is put on him by the ghost of his father pressure, to act as a revenger out of duty is delayed which requites an almost superhuman strength of character. This must have been a radical idea at the time, to depart from the traditional role. Hamlet can be seem as a weak revenger, a weak willed coward who lets his family name before tarnished and who allows his uncle to outsmart him. This would have been controversial at the time as family reputation, dignity and honour were one of the most important values. A modern audience could see Hamlet as both a weak revenger but also as a morally courageous man who tries to do the right thing. The modern audience's preoccupation with the psychology aspect of Hamlet is the main reason that `Hamlet,' unlike most other revenge plays is still extensively performed, studied and read. As taking revenge is illegal but more importantly in violent situations is socially and morally unacceptable. This makes it just as relevant today, as in the Elizabethan conflict. The ghost of Hamlet's father can be seen as either a spirit, as shown traditionally or as a conscience or apparition of the dead. Hamlet's careful consideration and reasoning for and against revenge and the condemnation of his own character and the self-destruction of it, is a remarkably accurate portrayal of a man driven to despair or even madness. The audience sympathises with Hamlet's situation when the ghost of his much-respected father appears to him. In nearly all productions King Hamlet appears as an old man with an air of grace and dignity and the audience has the impression of a well respected, brave warrior whose death was a tragic loss to his kingdom "Together with that fair and warlike form in which the majesty of buried Denmark did sometimes march?" . This is something Hamlet feels he must aspire to be, even though most critics agree he could not fulfil this ambition. After his fathers death we see that his world dramatically changes. Hamlet is oppressed and forbidden to travel back to university, "Denmark's a prison...a goodly one, in which there are many confines wards, and dungeons". The only person he can trust is Horatio, "Good my lord tell it. Hamlet: No, you will reveal. Horatio: Not my lord by heaven," as he is aware that Ophelia is not being loyal to him and it can he debated that the `madness' he pretends he is suffering from changes into a real mental instability and he is unable to release himself from acting, which then becomes a reality. This spirals to Ophelia's own madness and what seems to be her suicide, and Hamlet looses someone who could have stabilised his life. We also see Hamlet and his mother being spied on by Polonius. This is an example of the unbalanced political situation and a justification for Hamlet's paranoia. The death of Polonius is unfortunate and it is obvious that Hamlet is being cold and uncaring which

is unsurprising. Hamlet's situation is made worse as no-one else in the court apart from Horatio is aware of the murder Claudius has committed. Claudius is a popular leader which makes Hamlet's position more dangerous and lead to a great deal of isolation with his native Denmark. Apart from Horatio, Hamlet cannot trust anyone, which increases his sense of isolation. My view is that Hamlet fits all the three categories well and that not one of the views: weak revenger, tragic, hero or political misfit, classifies him accurately. He is a combination of all three and at times vacillates between weak revenger and tragic hero, making him particularly venerable and open to attack. The political problems in Denmark are a contributing factor which simply lead Hamlet to his death but have no bearing on his ability to be either a tragic hero or a weak revenger. I think that Hamlet is a tragic hero with a fatal flaw that he think to much, and is too introspective that ultimately leads to his own and other friends and family members' death.

Women in Hamlet
In William Shakespeare's Hamlet, women play an important role. They are the ones whom the men use to play out their nefarious plots. They are quite easily manipulated and have almost no say in anything. It seems as though Shakespeare thought of them as tools, as most men did at the time. Ophelia is the first woman in the play who seems to be being manipulated. Her father, Polonius, uses her to spy on Hamlet. He sets her up in a hall, where she is to meet Hamlet Polonius and King Claudius spy on them. She goes along with this, even though Hamlet is the man she loves. Her father is so easily able to convince her that Hamlet does not actually love her, that it is no wonder young women of the time would nearly always marry the man their father chose out for them. Gertrude is not immune to this mistreatment. She has no trouble believing that there was no foul play involved in the death of her husband. Claudius is so convincing, he even gets her to marry him. The fact that their marriage happens a mere few weeks after Hamlet Sr.'s death goes to show how quickly women of the time turned their back on things that no longer interested them. If her dead husband could not provide her with some divertissement, she wanted nothing to do with him; she certainly didn't want to waste her time grieving. She felt that Claudius would be someone fun and could give her what she wanted, so without thinking about those around her, especially Hamlet, she went ahead and married him. She also betrays Hamlet by telling the king of his visit to her room. She tells him of how he killed Polonius and made her swear not to tell him. The fact that she could betray her own son for her husband, who is not even his father, is proof that the man controlled women they were married to. In conclusion, it is evident that women were not strong-willed individuals in William Shakespeare's time. They did what was asked of them without much of a fight. This certainly did not help with their oppression. It was not until women started standing up for their rights that they were heard and taken seriously. It is a shame that it took so long for them to do it. There may have been many intelligent women who may have helped invent or create things that would have greatly helped civilization, unfortunately mankind missed out on that opportunity.

Romeo and Juliet and the West Side Story

Romeo and Juliet, the West Side Story, both amazing stories both end in tragedy, one more some on less. They were both different, yet based on the same story line. There were a lot of similar things and a lot of different things. You will soon learn the differences, the similarities and the different atmosphere within each story. Romeo and Juliet takes place in a time, where guns and basic engineering had not been introduced. Where swords and daggers were used to enforce law. And disobeying the law would get you hung, or banished. Within this world, to families with a ravage feud, disrupted the normal peace in the city. The feud had been going on for centuries, the cause was unknown. Two lovers, oblivious to the others heritage, fell in love. They kissed and rejoiced, before knowing the others name. Soon they learned of the others heritage, but it was too late to back out of such love. Romeo leaped the Capulet walls, and listen to Juliet pour out her love for him. By the next day, they were scheduled for marriage, and would be married soon. After the marriage, Romeo was as happy as could be. He met Tybalt, a Capulet, and greeted him with open arms. A friend of Romeo began to fight Tybalt though, and was slain. Although Romeo's love was unmatched by any other, he could not let his friend die, and do nothing. He slew Tybalt and cursed himself for doing so afterwards, the Prince banished Romeo. In his place of banishment. Juliet is angered with Romeo but soon find that he did it because Tybalt killed his friend. He heard news of Juliet's death. He raced back to the town to be with his wife. And drank poison in an effort to bring them together in the beyond. Juliet wasn't really dead, and when she awakened, and found Romeo she could not control her feelings, she acted quickly, and killed herself so she could be with him. The West Side Story takes place in a time where racism was a growing problem. It took place in the depths of New York. In a run down part of town, where there is no rich, only poor. Where kids are tortured on the streets, by gangs. The gang which supposedly owns the town is known as the Jets. They are feared by many, but not the Sharks. The Sharks is another gang, a new one the members consist of no girls like the jets. But when the jets are American, these juveniles are Puerto Rican. None the less, in this time and age, there are guns and general engineering. The law is enforced by police. A former member of the Jets meets a girl, she is beautiful beyond reasoning, and while looking at her he can focus on none else. His name was Tony, her name Maria. All though they don't know this yet each other, they feel as if they were destined to meet. Maria's boyfriend Chino slips her mind, as she is focused on Tony. She doesn't know his name, but doesn't care she is too deeply in love and knows he is as well. Tony walks toward her, not knowing not caring. This is what he

had been waiting for, something big just around the corner. They fell in love like quicksilver, but soon found that they were each others enemies but it was too late. Later that night Tony made his way to Maria's apartment he found her their, and proposed his love. Although they never married, they acted as if they were. Soon Maria finds out about a gang war, and tells Tony to go stop it. He cant Tony's best friend is killed so in rage he killed Bernardo, Maria's brother. Maria hears news of this from Chino, and she begs him to tell her if Tony is all right. Chino finds Maria and Tony are in love and begins to track Tony down. Maria is extremely angered with Tony, but soon finds that he did it because her brother killed his best friend. She forgives him, but Tony had to hide cops were looking for Jets, Sharks, and Tony. Chino was also looking for Tony, so he his in the bottom of a drugstore. Maria is delayed and can't get to Tony so they can leave. So she sends Anita to give him a message. Anita is willing to do this for her, but on arriving at the drugstore she is harassed by Jets, and can't give him the message because she's angered. Tony hears that Maria is dead, and runs outside and tells Chino to get him; he finds tat Maria isn't dead, and runs to her, but is shot in the process. Maria wants to kills herself but doesn't. It ends in tragedy. Many differences and similarities evolved from these stories. They are in the many, both stories end in tragedy, one a little less then the other. Although they are both Tragic well written. The differences are noticeable, but as you can see there are many noticeable similarities. Like Tony and Maria meeting not knowing each others heritage as Romeo and Juliet. And Romeo hearing of Juliet's death, and taking a step toward his death, as Tony did yelling for Chino to get him to.

Romeo' s Depression
Many people view the tragedy Romeo and Juliet as simply a romance-filled play where the protagonists die at the end. However, this play also involves the mounting depression of Romeo Montague; he suffers constantly throughout the first act and displays many of the modern symptoms of teen depression. Rosaline, the woman who is currently starring in his dreams, rejects his pitiful advances time after time, thus, causing his sleepless nights and effeminate attitudes. Exhibiting social withdrawal, sensitivity to rejection, and hopelessness, Romeo is surely depressed (http://www.teen-depression.info 2). Unsuccessfully, his family and friends try to interpret his convoluted emotions. Confused by Romeo's odd behaviors, the Montagues and their allies are beginning to discuss and try to resolve his issues. They are wondering where Romeo is after a brawl when issues of his sudden disappearances begin to arise. Benvolio observes, "Towards him I made, but he was ware of me/And stole into the covert of the wood" (I, i, 125-126). Avoiding civilization and a desire of isolation are common symptoms of teen depression (http://www.teen-depression.info 2). Romeo does not want to associate with anyone; he feels they will destabilize his so-called "love" for Rosaline. When stating that Romeo "[. . .] stole into the covert of the wood" (I, i, 126), Shakespeare utilizes the word wood as a symbol for how Romeo is lost in a dark, shadowy corner of his own mind. Also representative of his emotions, Romeo has been frequently locking himself away in his room in order to sulk in his intensifying misery. In the same conversation, Montague apprehensively states, "And private in his chamber pens himself,/[. . .]/And makes himself an artificial night" (I, i, 139-141). Creating a dark and melancholy space signifies Romeo's state of mind; he feels trapped by his heart, undeserving of love, and afraid of being turned away. Rejection is a sensitive area for a depressed teen; specifically Romeo, who has a proliferating fear of it. Discoursing with Benvolio about his feelings divulges a sudden realization about his sensations. Referring to Rosaline, Romeo cries, "She hath forsworn to love, and in that vow/Do I live dead that live to tell it now" (I, iv, 22). In Romeo's mind, Rosaline is being stubborn by waiting for true love--he wants her now and feels "dead" because she refuses to have him. By using the oxymoron "[. . .] I live dead" (I, iv, 22), Shakespeare is illustrating that Romeo feels like life is pointless until Rosaline accepts him; if she does not love him, then who? Living dead is possible today; it causes the victim to portray a useless and abandoned behavior. Difficulty coping with fear, anger, and rejection is another obvious depression symptom (http://www.teen-depression.info 2). Still pouring his heart out to Benvolio, Romeo selfishly complains, "Well in that hit you miss. She'll not be hit" (I, i, 209). Although Romeo has tried to capitalize on every ounce of his charm and flaunt every drop of his beauty, Rosaline still refuses to accept his love. Her negative responses trigger Romeo's feelings of self-doubt, hurt, and hopelessness. Romeo's childish conduct will never appeal to Rosaline; therefore, he feels that there is no promise in any future relationships. Changing his mind is discovered to be a more demanding task than expected when Mercutio, making the most of his wit, coerces the following statement out of Romeo, "Under love's heavy burden do I sink" (I, i, 22). Unrequited passion is treading heavily on Romeo's chest, causing him to regress into the darkest, most desolate areas of his soul. In a swift change of events, however, immediately after making this testimony he is swept away by the indescribable beauty of Juliet Capulet. Romeo has faith that he will never be obligated to experience heartache again! Nevertheless, this is a tragedy, and his ecstasy is trounced when it is discovered that Juliet is his mortal enemy. Shocked, Romeo exclaims, "O dear account! My life is my foe's debt" (I, v, 120). The one phenomenal lady who has blessed him with inexpressible joy is in total control of his fate. Discovering a deplorable truth of that magnitude would cause any human to become depressed; in fact, numerous depression cases are caused by traumatic events such as conflicts with a boyfriend or girlfriend (http://www.teen-depression.info 2). Hopelessness, sensitivity to denunciation, and social abandonment are just a few of the scores of depression symptoms. Still, Romeo does ultimately get what he desires--an infinity to spend with Juliet in eternal sleep. His loneliness, pain, and heartache went recognized in the most ghastly way possible, although his heart's wishes were fulfilled. Depression is simply a tragic disorder that inflicts insufferable emotional pain upon a human's mind. Shakespeare depicts the relation between despair and Romeo and Juliet best in the closing lines when the Prince declares, "For never was a story of more woe/Than this of Juliet and her Romeo" (V, iii, 309-310).

Shakespeare Era
The institution of marriage in the Renaissance Period was both secular and sacred. Secularly, it served as a union of two parties interested in acquiring property, money or political alliances. Marriage was also sacred in that it bound the love of a man and woman and sought procreation. William Shakespeare's work vividly displays the sacredness of love and marriage. Popular critics of his time considered Shakespeare the greatest love poet of all time. It was once said "he represented in an inimitable and masterly manner all the phenomena and manifestations of love." A working knowledge of both marriage and inheritance procedures in the Renaissance Period affords a better understanding of Shakespeare's works. No property right was more significant than the right to succeed to landed estate. No right was more symbolic of the status of women, too. First, land descended to the eldest son to the exclusion of his siblings. But if there was no son, land went to the daughter. If there were more than one daughter then they were all equal heiresses. Common law gave a limited preference to males, as it gave daughters preference over collateral males, such as the nephew, or uncle, or male cousin. The younger son often received no inheritance after the bulk of it was given to the eldest son, so many times they sought higher education in order to provide for any family they might have in the future. The next to be considered for the inheritance of a deceased landowner was the widow. The widow had a large common law right which became very well protected in the 16th century. She was entitled to a third of her husband's land for life because of her right of dower. A husband could leave his wife less by specifying it at the time of his marriage. But by the time of Edward I, the dower became an irreducible third and husbands could instead now specify more dower. The legitimate heir, however, did reserve the right to object to this if he did. Over time the widow's third became a well protected right that extended over any land her husband had ever held during their marriage. If a husband wished to alienate land he had to get his wife's consent. If he alienated without her consent she could claim dower against the purchaser. Interestingly enough, a woman could not contract herself out of dower because it would put her rights at the mercy of the dishonest and those who would wish to take advantage of her. Shakespeare created lovers whose main concern was not what they would inherit, but rather the love felt for each other. One's inheritance was of great importance to a family's well being and, in many cases, survival. This was not usually the concern of many of Shakespeare's main characters. Many of his couples, such as Lysander and Helena, Romeo and Juliet, and Othello and Desdemona married for love rather than financial conveniences and inheritances. Shakespeare based his most unforgettable plots on love versus societal norms. Courtship of Shakespeare's time held two major forms. First, and most commonly, parents and friends were the matchmakers. They selected the possible spouse, performed careful examination of his economic prospects, and then brought the couple together to find out if there were any strong feelings of dislike between them in order to ensure that the couple would get along well in marriage. Parents did not advocate "forced" marriages because the best marriages were those that were equally consensual and desired by both parties. Freedom of choice varied for each child in a family. Each child had a certain amount of freedom in choosing their mate, depending on their different role. The eldest son was under the greatest pressure since he inherited the bulk of the estate. His marriage was often critical to the family's survival because they depended on him for financial support. Because a daughter's only real future lay in marriage, she had less freedom over her choice in a mate. Her family had to make sure she would be provided for. The youngest son had the most freedom because he often had to make his own fortune, as the inheritance was all but gone by the time he was old enough to provide for himself. The family did not depend on him and therefore had less interest in whom he married. If there were no signs of aversion between a couple then the planning of the marriage would commence. After the couple consented, the settlements were signed and a formal church wedding was arranged. The second form of courtship was handled for the most part by the parties involved. A man attracted to a certain woman would ask her family for permission. Keith Wrightson suggests in his documentation of 17th century marriage practices that "it seems reasonable to conclude that among the greater part of the common people marriage partners were freely chosen, subject to the advice of friends and a sense of obligation to consult or subsequently inform parents if they were alive and within reach." If the man was both financially and personally acceptable, permission was granted and courtship continued with visits, gifts, and expressions of love. In Shakespeare's play A Midsummer Night's Dream, he gives evidence to couples matched by their own will. The play begins with Theseus and Hippolyta talking of their upcoming marriage. Now fair Hippolyta, our nuptial hour Draws on apace; four happy days bring in Another moon^but O, methinks, how slow This old moon wanes! She lingers my desires, Like to a step-dame or a dowager Long withering out a young man's revenue... (I.i. 1-6) Theseus demonstrates here that the entry to marriage is of his own desire rather than a match made by parents. Hippolyta is equally as happy as Theseus over their union and chooses Theseus herself. Knowing that couples were usually matched by parents, Shakespeare went against societal norms and often displayed love as being the sole desire of the couple. This often became his central theme; lovers doomed by their disapproving families. Before a couple could officially be considered married by the church and common law, there were four basic requirements. First, the bride's family had to consent and a dowry be offered. Second, both parties had to be of equal social class. The third requirement was for the parties to publicly declare the wedding and to have witnesses. Finally, the couple had to consummate the marriage. In Measure for Measure, Claudio and Juliet are married by common law standards. However, they were married in secret and not in public, therefore, Claudio is arrested for impregnating Juliet without being legally married.

I got possession of Julietta's bed. You know the lady; she is fast my wife, Save that we do the denunciation lack Of outward order. This we came not to, Only for propagation of a dow'r Remaining in the coffer of her friends, From whom we thought it meet to hide our love (I.ii. 146-52) It was very important that marriage be witnessed. When it is found that Claudio disregarded this requirement, one of the main concerns of the play becomes whether or not he will die for it. Shakespeare emphasizes the risks and consequences of not following the requirements to marriage by presenting Claudio's life in danger at the start of the play. The church-sanctioned age for marriage was at a minimum 14 years for men and 12 years for women. The average age, however, was around 21 years for the eldest son and 20 for women. In Shakespeare's most famous play, Romeo and Juliet, the readers are able to see the significance of age in marriage. Juliet's mother, Lady Capulet, demonstrates the fact that it was possible to marry off a daughter at the extremely young age of 14 years old. Juliet is 13 when the plays starts and Lady Capulet is already in great haste to marry her off. Therefore, she feels it most pertinent to talk the matter over with her daughter immediately: ...younger than you, Here in Verona, ladies of esteem, Are made already mothers. By my count, I was your mother much upon these years That you are now a maid-- (I.iii. 69-73) Lady Capulet felt that it was high time Juliet be married. The reader can see here the emphasis on the considerably young age of Juliet but realize, as well, that it was definitely conceivable in that time period. Shakespeare uses the knowledge of the church-sanctioned age to create Romeo and Juliet, and point out the characteristics of young lovers. Shakespeare's time period marked a time where marriage was an important aspect of people's lives. The ways in which people were matched and married was very evident in many of his works as he strove to depict love and the relationships that developed between men and women. The procedures to inheritance are an important aspect of marriage in that it gives people a better understanding of the reasons behind the way marriages were handled around the Renaissance era. Shakespeare's work can be used in comparison to other poets of different times to attest to the continuity of the fundamental features of marriage over the centuries. His work still has a compelling effect on its readers today because it focuses on the sincerity of the heart, often defying basic rules of society, even in modern times.

Techniques Used In Shakespearean Comedies

Shakespeare is known as one of the world's greatest playwrights. He has written tragedies, histories, and sonnets. But one of Shakespeare's greatest talents was writing comedies. He used many techniques when writing a comedy and some of these seem to be consistent through out his comedies. One of the first techniques that should be discussed is the subject matter of Shakespeare's comedies. Shakespeare always uses love and marriage as the content for his comedies. This can be seen in the comedies Much ado about nothing, As You Like it, A Midsummer Nights Dream, and The Taming of The Shrew, where the characters fall in love and get married. Another technique that Shakespeare incorporates into his comedies is the use of the lower class for comedy. Shakespeare tends to poke fun at the lower class and make them into fools in his comedies. An example of this is in Much Ado About Nothing, where Shakespeare has the constable Dogberry and his foolish assistant Verges run around acting like they are riding horses. Another example of Shakespeare's use of the lower class for comedy is in The Taming of The Shrew. In that comedy Shakespeare makes Petruchio's servants bumbling and incompetent. The use of eavesdropping is another very important device in Shakespeare's comedies. This technique plays a major role in Much Ado About Nothing where it is used to get Benedick and Beatrice together. Also it used considerably in As You Like it. The last technique is the one everyone knows and loves, the happy ending. Shakespeare consistently has a happy ending in his comedies. These happy endings usually involve the lovers finally getting together and getting married after they have solved the problem that had been keeping them apart. This can be seen in Much Ado About Nothing where the situation between Claudio and Hero was cleared up and they were able to marry. Also Benedick and Beatrice was able to marry with the help of their friends who showed them how they truly felt about each other. Similar situations occur in Shakespeare's other plays. The overall result being a touching and enjoyable ending to the comedy. As it can be seen Shakespeare was an excellent comedic writer. He used many techniques in his comedies and often these techniques would be reused in other comedies. With such skill in writing these plays and the intuitive use of these techniques it is no wonder why we treasure Shakespeare's comedies.

Mark Twain
The Adventures Of Hukleberry Finn The summary of the novel : Huck escapes from the lonely cabin in which his drunken, brutal father had imprisoned him. On Jacksons island he meets Jim, a runaway slave. Together they float down the Mississippi River on a raft, occasionally stopping

at the banks. In these brief episodes, Huck participates in the lives of others, witnessing corruption, moral decay, and intellectual impoverishment. He learns from Jim of the dignity and worth of a human being. Life on the river comes to an end when Jim is captured. Huck, reunited with Tom Sawyer, helps him to escape, subordinating societys morality to his own sense of justice and honour. The youth experience of the novelist is presented in the work THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN, novel about life on the Mississippi. The Southern traditions, the situation of the Negro slaves, the life during the XIXth century in the South of the United States, all is presented in a humorous but full of understanding manner. The following excerpt from Chapter 16 dwells on Hucks rather pragmatic behaviour in a very dramatic situation. As the raft taking him and Jim downstream approaches the mouth of the Ohio River, Jim grows more and more excited because he believes that when he can head up the Ohio he will be out of slave, and therefore be free. Huck, in his turn, begins to realize for the first time that he is actually helping a slave to escape. His conscience, formed by the mid-19th century American Southern society, goads him until he decides he will turn Jim in as a runaway slave. But when he is faced with the actual situation of having to inform on Jim to two Negro hunters, Huck finds himself unable to carry out his abominable plan and improvises an elaborate story that makes them believe there is smallpox on the raft. By enlisting himself in Jims cause, Huck becomes a self-proclaimed social outlaw. He goes through two moral crises in which he is denounced by his conscience, but he finally decides to go to Hell that is to defy the laws of God and of man and to stay loyal to Jim who has by now become his alter ego. The novel is written in the first person narrative, thus the feelings of the main character (Huck himself) are expressed more directly, offering the whole story authenticity and freshness. The scene presenting Hucks inner struggle is very impressive and of a peculiar dramatism. Huck leaves his raft feeling sick, disgusted with himself and with the idea of cheating his friend so cruelly. Still, he thinks it is his duty to inform the authorities. Very soon, he meets two men in a skiff. The men are white, they carry guns and they are looking for runaway niggers. When he is asked if there are any men on his raft, Huck answers that there is only one. At this point he still doesnt know what to do. But when he is asked if his man is white or black, he hesitates for a while, trying to brace up and out with it. The clash between his feelings of friendship towards Jim on one hand, and his prejudices as a Southern boy, on the other, now reaches its climax. Huck regards his incapacity of telling the truth as a matter of courage after all, thinking he isnt man enough, but in fact his loyal heart cant accept to betray a true friend. Finally, he takes a decision, in spite of his prejudices, and he tells the two men that his man is white. The attitude didnt seem very convincing, as the two men expressed their wish to see for themselves the man on the raft. Huck immediately wish to see for themselves the man on the raft. Huck immediately invents a story: the man on the raft is his father, he says, and his father is ill. He lets the two men guess that the so-called father has got the smallpox, a very unpleasant and, at the same time, very dangerous disease. The two men leave in a hurry, feeling pity for Huck and giving him some money. As they dont want to catch the disease, they dont even have a look on the raft. Jim is saved but Hucks soul is tormented by various questions: had he done right or wrong? Would he have felt better if he had given Jim up? He decides he had done wrong according to the Southern rules concerning runaway slaves, but he realizes he would have felt miserable if he had betrayed his friend in need. Huck is in fact the victim of the social prejudices, but he is aware of the contradiction between his feelings of brotherhood towards and these prejudices. He cant help regarding Jim as a human being, a faithful friend, and thus finally he acts like a man helping another man. Huck is guilty from the point of view of the Southern prejudices and laws, but from a human point of view he is innocent, because he saved Jims life. Huck is an objective narrator. He is objective about himself, even when that objectivity is apt to reflect discreditably upon himself. He is objective about the society he encounters, even when, as he often fears, that society possesses virtues and sanctions to which he must ever remain a stranger. He is an outcast, he knows that he is an outcast. Possessing neither a wide background of economic fact and theory, nor a comprehensive knowledge of scientific or philosophical methods, he had a genuine contempt for all pretense and hypocrisy, and exposed to humorous view the tyrannies of chivalry, of slavery, and of religion. Mark Twain is the greatest American voice of his day.

Keats - Ode to a Nightingale Summary

The speaker opens with a declaration of his own heartache. He feels numb, as though he had taken a drug only a moment ago. He is addressing a nightingale he hears singing somewhere in the forest and says that his "drowsy numbness" is not from envy of the nightingale's happiness, but rather from sharing it too completely; he is "too happy" that the nightingale sings the music of summer from amid some unseen plot of green trees and shadows. In the second stanza, the speaker longs for the oblivion of alcohol, expressing his wish for wine, "a draught of vintage," that would taste like the country and like peasant dances, and let him "leave the world unseen" and disappear into the dim forest with the nightingale. In the third stanza, he explains his desire to fade away, saying he would like to forget the troubles the nightingale

has never known: "the weariness, the fever, and the fret" of human life, with its consciousness that everything is mortal and nothing lasts. Youth "grows pale, and spectre-thin, and dies," and "beauty cannot keep her lustrous eyes." In the fourth stanza, the speaker tells the nightingale to fly away, and he will follow, not through alcohol ("Not charioted by Bacchus and his pards"), but through poetry, which will give him "viewless wings." He says he is already with the nightingale and describes the forest glade, where even the moonlight is hidden by the trees, except the light that breaks through when the breezes blow the branches. In the fifth stanza, the speaker says that he cannot see the flowers in the glade, but can guess them "in embalmed darkness": white hawthorne, eglantine, violets, and the musk-rose, "the murmurous haunt of flies on summer eves." In the sixth stanza, the speaker listens in the dark to the nightingale, saying that he has often been "half in love" with the idea of dying and called Death soft names in many rhymes. Surrounded by the nightingale's song, the speaker thinks that the idea of death seems richer than ever, and he longs to "cease upon the midnight with no pain" while the nightingale pours its soul ecstatically forth. If he were to die, the nightingale would continue to sing, he says, but he would "have ears in vain" and be no longer able to hear. In the seventh stanza, the speaker tells the nightingale that it is immortal, that it was not "born for death." He says that the voice he hears singing has always been heard, by ancient emperors and clowns, by homesick Ruth; he even says the song has often charmed open magic windows looking out over "the foam / Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn." In the eighth stanza, the word forlorn tolls like a bell to restore the speaker from his preoccupation with the nightingale and back into himself. As the nightingale flies farther away from him, he laments that his imagination has failed him and says that he can no longer recall whether the nightingale's music was "a vision, or a waking dream." Now that the music is gone, the speaker cannot recall whether he himself is awake or asleep. Form Like most of the other odes, "Ode to a Nightingale" is written in ten-line stanzas. However, unlike most of the other poems, it is metrically variable--though not so much as "Ode to Psyche." The first seven and last two lines of each stanza are written in iambic pentameter; the eighth line of each stanza is written in trimeter, with only three accented syllables instead of five. "Nightingale" also differs from the other odes in that its rhyme scheme is the same in every stanza (every other ode varies the order of rhyme in the final three or four lines except "To Psyche," which has the loosest structure of all the odes). Each stanza in "Nightingale" is rhymed ABABCDECDE, Keats's most basic scheme throughout the odes. Themes With "Ode to a Nightingale," Keats's speaker begins his fullest and deepest exploration of the themes of creative expression and the mortality of human life. In this ode, the transience of life and the tragedy of old age ("where palsy shakes a few, sad, last gray hairs, / Where youth grows pale, and spectre-thin, and dies") is set against the eternal renewal of the nightingale's fluid music ("Thou wast not born for death, immortal bird!"). The speaker reprises the "drowsy numbness" he experienced in "Ode on Indolence," but where in "Indolence" that numbness was a sign of disconnection from experience, in "Nightingale" it is a sign of too full a connection: "being too happy in thine happiness," as the speaker tells the nightingale. Hearing the song of the nightingale, the speaker longs to flee the human world and join the bird. His first thought is to reach the bird's state through alcohol--in the second stanza, he longs for a "draught of vintage" to transport him out of himself. But after his meditation in the third stanza on the transience of life, he rejects the idea of being "charioted by Bacchus and his pards" (Bacchus was the Roman god of wine and was supposed to have been carried by a chariot pulled by leopards) and chooses instead to embrace, for the first time since he refused to follow the figures in "Indolence," "the viewless wings of Poesy." The rapture of poetic inspiration matches the endless creative rapture of the nightingale's music and lets the speaker, in stanzas five through seven, imagine himself with the bird in the darkened forest. The ecstatic music even encourages the speaker to embrace the idea of dying, of painlessly succumbing to death while enraptured by the nightingale's music and never experiencing any further pain or disappointment. But when his meditation causes him to utter the word "forlorn," he comes back to himself, recognizing his fancy for what it is--an imagined escape from the inescapable ("Adieu! the fancy cannot cheat so well / As she is fam'd to do, deceiving elf"). As the nightingale flies away, the intensity of the speaker's experience has left him shaken, unable to remember whether he is awake or asleep. In "Indolence," the speaker rejected all artistic effort. In "Psyche," he was willing to embrace the creative imagination, but only for its own internal pleasures. But in the nightingale's song, he finds a form of outward expression that translates the work of the imagination into the outside world, and this is the discovery that compels him to embrace Poesy's "viewless wings" at last. The "art" of the nightingale is endlessly changeable and renewable; it is music without record, existing only in a perpetual present. As befits his celebration of music, the speaker's language, sensually rich though it is, serves to suppress the sense of sight in favor of the other senses. He can imagine the light of the moon, "But here there is no light"; he knows he is surrounded by flowers, but he "cannot see what flowers" are at his feet. This suppression will find its match in "Ode on a Grecian Urn," which is in many ways a companion poem to "Ode to a Nightingale." In the later poem, the speaker will finally confront a created art-object not subject to any of the limitations of time; in "Nightingale," he has achieved creative expression and has placed his faith in it, but that expression--the nightingale's song--is spontaneous and without physical manifestation.

Keats - To Autumn Summary

Keats's speaker opens his first stanza by addressing Autumn, describing its abundance and its intimacy with the sun, with whom Autumn ripens fruits and causes the late flowers to bloom. In the second stanza, the speaker describes the figure of Autumn as a female goddess, often seen sitting on the granary floor, her hair "soft-lifted" by the wind, and often seen sleeping in the fields or watching a cider-press squeezing the juice from apples. In the third stanza, the speaker tells Autumn not to wonder where the songs of spring have gone, but instead to listen to her own music. At twilight, the "small gnats" hum above the shallows of the river, lifted and dropped by the wind, and "full-grown lambs" bleat from the hills, crickets sing, robins whistle from the garden, and swallows, gathering for their coming migration, sing from the skies. Form Like the "Ode on Melancholy," "To Autumn" is written in a three-stanza structure with a variable rhyme scheme. Each stanza is eleven lines long (as opposed to ten in "Melancholy", and each is metered in a relatively precise iambic pentameter. In terms of both thematic organization and rhyme scheme, each stanza is divided roughly into two parts. In each stanza, the first part is made up of the first four lines of the stanza, and the second part is made up of the last seven lines. The first part of each stanza follows an ABAB rhyme scheme, the first line rhyming with the third, and the second line rhyming with the fourth. The second part of each stanza is longer and varies in rhyme scheme: The first stanza is arranged CDEDCCE, and the second and third stanzas are arranged CDECDDE. (Thematically, the first part of each stanza serves to define the subject of the stanza, and the second part offers room for musing, development, and speculation on that subject; however, this thematic division is only very general.) Themes In both its form and descriptive surface, "To Autumn" is one of the simplest of Keats's odes. There is nothing confusing or complex in Keats's paean to the season of autumn, with its fruitfulness, its flowers, and the song of its swallows gathering for migration. The extraordinary achievement of this poem lies in its ability to suggest, explore, and develop a rich abundance of themes without ever ruffling its calm, gentle, and lovely description of autumn. Where "Ode on Melancholy" presents itself as a strenuous heroic quest, "To Autumn" is concerned with the much quieter activity of daily observation and appreciation. In this quietude, the gathered themes of the preceding odes find their fullest and most beautiful expression. "To Autumn" takes up where the other odes leave off. Like the others, it shows Keats's speaker paying homage to a particular goddess--in this case, the deified season of Autumn. The selection of this season implicitly takes up the other odes' themes of temporality, mortality, and change: Autumn in Keats's ode is a time of warmth and plenty, but it is perched on the brink of winter's desolation, as the bees enjoy "later flowers," the harvest is gathered from the fields, the lambs of spring are now "full grown," and, in the final line of the poem, the swallows gather for their winter migration. The understated sense of inevitable loss in that final line makes it one of the most moving moments in all of poetry; it can be read as a simple, uncomplaining summation of the entire human condition. Despite the coming chill of winter, the late warmth of autumn provides Keats's speaker with ample beauty to celebrate: the cottage and its surroundings in the first stanza, the agrarian haunts of the goddess in the second, and the locales of natural creatures in the third. Keats's speaker is able to experience these beauties in a sincere and meaningful way because of the lessons he has learned in the previous odes: He is no longer indolent, no longer committed to the isolated imagination (as in "Psyche"), no longer attempting to escape the pain of the world through ecstatic rapture (as in "Nightingale"), no longer frustrated by the attempt to eternalize mortal beauty or subject eternal beauty to time (as in "Urn"), and no longer able to frame the connection of pleasure and the sorrow of loss only as an imaginary heroic quest (as in "Melancholy"). In "To Autumn," the speaker's experience of beauty refers back to earlier odes (the swallows recall the nightingale; the fruit recalls joy's grape; the goddess drowsing among the poppies recalls Psyche and Cupid lying in the grass), but it also recalls a wealth of earlier poems. Most importantly, the image of Autumn winnowing and harvesting (in a sequence of odes often explicitly about creativity) recalls an earlier Keats poem in which the activity of harvesting is an explicit metaphor for artistic creation. In his sonnet "When I have fears that I may cease to be," Keats makes this connection directly: When I have fears that I may cease to be Before my pen has glean'd my teeming brain, Before high-piled books, in charactry, Hold like rich garners the full ripen'd grain... In this poem, the act of creation is pictured as a kind of self-harvesting; the pen harvests the fields of the brain, and books are filled with the resulting "grain." In "To Autumn," the metaphor is developed further; the sense of coming loss that permeates the poem confronts the sorrow underlying the season's creativity. When Autumn's harvest is over, the fields will be bare, the swaths with their "twined flowers" cut down, the cider-press dry, the skies empty. But the connection of this harvesting to the seasonal cycle softens the edge of the tragedy. In time, spring will come again, the fields will grow again, and the birdsong will return. As the speaker knew in "Melancholy," abundance and loss, joy and sorrow, song and silence are as intimately connected as the twined flowers in the fields. What makes "To Autumn" beautiful is that it brings an engagement with that connection out of the realm of mythology and fantasy and into the everyday world. The development the speaker so strongly resisted in "Indolence" is

at last complete: He has learned that an acceptance of mortality is not destructive to an appreciation of beauty and has gleaned wisdom by accepting the passage of time.

Keats - Ode on a Grecian Urn

Summary In the first stanza, the speaker stands before an ancient Grecian urn and addresses it. He is preoccupied with its depiction of pictures frozen in time. It is the "still unravish'd bride of quietness," the "foster-child of silence and slow time." He also describes the urn as a "historian" that can tell a story. He wonders about the figures on the side of the urn and asks what legend they depict and from where they come. He looks at a picture that seems to depict a group of men pursuing a group of women and wonders what their story could be: "What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape? / What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy?" In the second stanza, the speaker looks at another picture on the urn, this time of a young man playing a pipe, lying with his lover beneath a glade of trees. The speaker says that the piper's "unheard" melodies are sweeter than mortal melodies because they are unaffected by time. He tells the youth that, though he can never kiss his lover because he is frozen in time, he should not grieve, because her beauty will never fade. In the third stanza, he looks at the trees surrounding the lovers and feels happy that they will never shed their leaves. He is happy for the piper because his songs will be "for ever new," and happy that the love of the boy and the girl will last forever, unlike mortal love, which lapses into "breathing human passion" and eventually vanishes, leaving behind only a "burning forehead, and a parching tongue." In the fourth stanza, the speaker examines another picture on the urn, this one of a group of villagers leading a heifer to be sacrificed. He wonders where they are going ("To what green altar, O mysterious priest...") and from where they have come. He imagines their little town, empty of all its citizens, and tells it that its streets will "for evermore" be silent, for those who have left it, frozen on the urn, will never return. In the final stanza, the speaker again addresses the urn itself, saying that it, like Eternity, "doth tease us out of thought." He thinks that when his generation is long dead, the urn will remain, telling future generations its enigmatic lesson: "Beauty is truth, truth beauty." The speaker says that that is the only thing the urn knows and the only thing it needs to know. Form "Ode on a Grecian Urn" follows the same ode-stanza structure as the "Ode on Melancholy," though it varies more the rhyme scheme of the last three lines of each stanza. Each of the five stanzas in "Grecian Urn" is ten lines long, metered in a relatively precise iambic pentameter, and divided into a two part rhyme scheme, the last three lines of which are variable. The first seven lines of each stanza follow an ABABCDE rhyme scheme, but the second occurrences of the CDE sounds do not follow the same order. In stanza one, lines seven through ten are rhymed DCE; in stanza two, CED; in stanzas three and four, CDE; and in stanza five, DCE, just as in stanza one. As in other odes (especially "Autumn" and "Melancholy"), the two-part rhyme scheme (the first part made of AB rhymes, the second of CDE rhymes) creates the sense of a two-part thematic structure as well. The first four lines of each stanza roughly define the subject of the stanza, and the last six roughly explicate or develop it. (As in other odes, this is only a general rule, true of some stanzas more than others; stanzas such as the fifth do not connect rhyme scheme and thematic structure closely at all.) Themes If the "Ode to a Nightingale" portrays Keats's speaker's engagement with the fluid expressiveness of music, the "Ode on a Grecian Urn" portrays his attempt to engage with the static immobility of sculpture. The Grecian urn, passed down through countless centuries to the time of the speaker's viewing, exists outside of time in the human sense--it does not age, it does not die, and indeed it is alien to all such concepts. In the speaker's meditation, this creates an intriguing paradox for the human figures carved into the side of the urn: They are free from time, but they are simultaneously frozen in time. They do not have to confront aging and death (their love is "for ever young"), but neither can they have experience (the youth can never kiss the maiden; the figures in the procession can never return to their homes). The speaker attempts three times to engage with scenes carved into the urn; each time he asks different questions of it. In the first stanza, he examines the picture of the "mad pursuit" and wonders what actual story lies behind the picture: "What men or gods are these? What maidens loth?" Of course, the urn can never tell him the whos, whats, whens, and wheres of the stories it depicts, and the speaker is forced to abandon this line of questioning. In the second and third stanzas, he examines the picture of the piper playing to his lover beneath the trees. Here, the speaker tries to imagine what the experience of the figures on the urn must be like; he tries to identify with them. He is tempted by their escape from temporality and attracted to the eternal newness of the piper's unheard song and the eternally unchanging beauty of his lover. He thinks that their love is "far above" all transient human passion, which, in its sexual expression, inevitably leads to an abatement of intensity--when passion is satisfied, all that remains is a wearied physicality: a sorrowful heart, a "burning forehead," and a "parching tongue." His recollection of these conditions seems to remind the speaker that he is inescapably subject to them, and he abandons his attempt to identify with the figures on the urn.

In the fourth stanza, the speaker attempts to think about the figures on the urn as though they were experiencing human time, imagining that their procession has an origin (the "little town") and a destination (the "green altar"). But all he can think is that the town will forever be deserted: If these people have left their origin, they will never return to it. In this sense he confronts head-on the limits of static art; if it is impossible to learn from the urn the whos and wheres of the "real story" in the first stanza, it is impossible ever to know the origin and the destination of the figures on the urn in the fourth. It is true that the speaker shows a certain kind of progress in his successive attempts to engage with the urn. His idle curiosity in the first attempt gives way to a more deeply felt identification in the second, and in the third, the speaker leaves his own concerns behind and thinks of the processional purely on its own terms, thinking of the "little town" with a real and generous feeling. But each attempt ultimately ends in failure. The third attempt fails simply because there is nothing more to say--once the speaker confronts the silence and eternal emptiness of the little town, he has reached the limit of static art; on this subject, at least, there is nothing more the urn can tell him. In the final stanza, the speaker presents the conclusions drawn from his three attempts to engage with the urn. He is overwhelmed by its existence outside of temporal change, with its ability to "tease" him "out of thought / As doth eternity." If human life is a succession of "hungry generations," as the speaker suggests in "Nightingale," the urn is a separate and selfcontained world. It can be a "friend to man," as the speaker says, but it cannot be mortal; the kind of aesthetic connection the speaker experiences with the urn is ultimately insufficient to human life. The final two lines, in which the speaker imagines the urn speaking its message to mankind--"Beauty is truth, truth beauty," have proved among the most difficult to interpret in the Keats canon. After the urn utters the enigmatic phrase "Beauty is truth, truth beauty," no one can say for sure who "speaks" the conclusion, "that is all / Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know." It could be the speaker addressing the urn, and it could be the urn addressing mankind. If it is the speaker addressing the urn, then it would seem to indicate his awareness of its limitations: The urn may not need to know anything beyond the equation of beauty and truth, but the complications of human life make it impossible for such a simple and self-contained phrase to express sufficiently anything about necessary human knowledge. If it is the urn addressing mankind, then the phrase has rather the weight of an important lesson, as though beyond all the complications of human life, all human beings need to know on earth is that beauty and truth are one and the same. It is largely a matter of personal interpretation which reading to accept.

Keats - La Belle Dame sans Merci - The role of the nature

In Keats La Belle Dame sans Merci, the role of nature is relatively simple. In this poem, nature represents all that the protagonist (the knight) loves and needs. Obviously that desire is embodied in the lady he meets in the meadows, but the subtle symbolism within nature runs throughout the poem as well. If everything is right with the knight, nature is blossoming. Indeed, perhaps part of the knight himself is nature, as hinted at in stanza three when the unseen questioner comments I see a lily on thy brow/With anguish moist and fever dew/And on thy cheeks a fading rose/Fast withereth too. On the surface, the two flowers can be taken to designate the colour of the knights facial features - he is obviously tormenting himself over some matter, and it is causing him to sweat and become pale. However, that the metaphors used are flowers represents the force, the almost representation of nature within the knight. In literature, the sun is always brighter and the flowers always hold more beauty when the main character is going through happy times. Humans tend to associate good weather and health in the land around with good times in characters lives (and vice versa). This is exactly what happens in La Belle Dame sans Merci. It is even evident from the very first line the knight says, in stanza four: I met a lady in the meads. A meadow is the perfect location in this instance for the knights woeful tale to begin. In the readers mind, it is a simple setting, but clearly a place of great natural growth. We imagine everything as bright and grass-covered, with perhaps a sprinkling of flowers here and there. This is the very essence of nature at her best, and so begins the knights happiest time. Soon after the knight and the lady meet, he makes three garlands for her out of the flowers found in the meadow. Stanza five, where this event can be found, is entirely a metaphor for making love. The knight, in a way, is nature, so when the lady puts on the garlands, she is actually adorning herself with the knight. To solidify the lovemaking theory, the last two lines speak of the ladys reaction: She looked at me as she did love/and made sweet moan. The connection is quite evident - the lady is enjoying the knights advances intensely, in both the surface scene and the sexual underneath. The same symbolism that is true for stanza five also applies to seven. Finally, we see that perhaps the lady represents nature in a way as well when she gives the knight roots of relish sweet/And honey wild, and manna dew. These things are sweet, it is true, but have little real substance. Man does not live on bread alone; likewise, one cannot survive on honey alone. The manna dew is especially symbolic. Manna is the substance sent by God to the Israelites in order to survive in the wilderness. Obviously the lady cannot have given the knight real manna, but what she did give him he thinks of as equal to that which God gave the children of Israel. However, she only gave him manna dew. As the knight reflects upon his encounter, he speaks of it in those terms because, while at the time he thought it was the stuff of life, the end-all be-all of experiences, he realises now that it was merely a hoax, and has no real substance. In the final stanza, the symbolism is clear. ...the sedge is withered from the lake/And no birds sing exemplifies the knights intense sadness. The whole experience can be summed up in that nature meets something that looks like its counterpart, but is rather its undoing.