This debate dates back to T. S. Eliot’s view of Othello as only 'cheering himself up' and 'not thinking about Desdemona, only himself', and although Eliot's argument is focused on Othello's final soliloquy, Leavis echoes this same position in a rather more general manner, as he states that the 'habit of self-approving self-dramatization is an essential element in Othello’s make-up, and remains so at the very end'. Indeed this is a view that I feel necessary to explore, and as in Olivier's production, Othello appears to convey both an egotism and - as as Olivier himself stated - a 'self-delusion'. This view both magnifies his tragedy and therefore our sympathy, yet also presents us with another perspective; that Othello's character is not sympathetic but insensitive and self-centred, self-approving and self-dramatizing. Leavis' criticism suggests that a large part of Othello's egotism stems from his love of Desdemona. He states that 'Othello's love is a matter of self-centred and self-regarding satisfaction', that it is simply 'pride, sensual possessiveness, appetite, love of loving'.
These relationships are very important because they determine the changes that happen to each character throughout the plot. In these works the minor characters are given the most credit for causing changes and self-discoveries in the main characters. In the novel Fathers and Sons and in the play A Doll’s House by Ibsen, some of the characters discover themselves mostly due to the influence of minor characters around them. In Fathers and Sons, it is clear that the character that went through the most change and self-discovery was Arkady. Unlike his friend Bazarov, he wasn’t certain of his nihilistic beliefs and was more of a follower than a friend to him, “Look, there is one sitting beside you, ready to worship the ground beneath your feet.
To what extent is finding yourself a key theme of the play so far in your view? In my view, finding yourself is a key theme at the heart of Educating Rita that provides the basis of much of Russell’s subtle message he conveys throughout the first act – that people can be much more than they seem and their stereotypes. Through the first scene of the play where the audience is introduced to Rita and Frank we are able to see that both characters are based on completely opposite stereotypes. The juxtaposition and contrast between the two characters highlights their differences and how despite living in the same city they are each from entirely different walks of life. Rita’s stereotype is of the working class wife – brash, honest and upfront about herself and her identity as implied when she says “I was dead surprised when they accepted me… I suppose anyone can get in can’t they?
Naimah Ali Ap Literature Period 6 10/27/14 KING LEAR’S BATTLE WITH EXISTENTIALISM The novel King Lear demonstrates concepts of existentialism. Existentialism is a movement or tendency that emphasizes individual existence, freedom, and choice. Therefore, individuals must fashion their own sense of meaning in life instead of relying thoughtlessly on religious, political, and social conventions. In doing so individuals can minimize their suffering in this world. King lear by the phenomenal Shakespeare showcases how quickly a person can wither away when they are not able to come to terms with life.
Reality; Stoppard’s purpose suggests that we are more affected by fictional things we see in the theatre, rather than real life events. As an audience, we crave the melodramatic. Fowles’s text reminds us more that his characters have independence and freedom outside of the author’s expectations. This is much more realistic as his characters have psychological realism whereas Rosencrantz and Guildenstern do not. Fowles is constantly trying to highlight the differences between art and reality in order to give his characters independence.
A tension arises between defining one's essence in relation to one's existence which is already an unstable concept due to the nature of self-reflection and subsequently defining one's essence in relation to the existence of others. Subjectivity becomes a dilemma for an individual because ultimately “man is nothing else but what he makes of himself” My work is based on the assumption that clarity and consistency in our moral thinking is likely, in the long run, to lead us to hold better views on ethical issues. Jean-Paul Sartre and Peter Singer, Creative Thinkers? Looking at and comparing two famous thinkers, Jen-Paul Sartre and Peter Singer. One defines human beings as nothing but what we make of ourselves and the other is a strong proponent of eliminating poverty, arguing that anyone who has more than they need should be giving to those in need.
The connections in the mentioned themes demonstrates how shared ideas impact differently on individuals in different contexts. Shakespeare’s work deals with the identity of Kingship and monarchical authority and in ‘Richard II’ we see the character Richard struggle with self identity as his throne is threatened to be taken from him. As Bolingbroke takes the crown Richard believes that he is a thief of more than just his kingship, but takes everything of him, as without his role, he has no persona and no existence. We see how much Richard values the relationship between his identity and title and names as he states , while disorientated after losing his kingship ,“Nor no man’s lord! I have no name, no title.
Check your notes; below is a succinct synopsis of that introductory discussion: “Waiting for Conventions” In Waiting for Godot, Beckett implements broken conventions of traditional theatre in order to successfully satirize the detrimental nature of the human condition symbolized throughout this absurdist play (which seems to have no plot). A certain level of tension is created by this plays lack of plot which leaves the audience expecting something to happen that never comes. This lack of plot to some overshadows the reasoning behind why Beckett does this. Although these broken conventions can act as a looking glass into the true meaning of the play, they require the audience to do a certain amount of searching to crack the nut which is Waiting for Godot. Waiting for Godot, unlike many plays follows no specific plot, a concept in which most conventional plays ought to have in order to rope in an audience member to the contents and morals of the play.
– (Wulick, 2016)3 In the book, Jay Gatsby, the character, is so unfathomable, so much a conjecture of the novel's narrator, and yet Leonardo DiCaprio makes him understandable and genuine. The actor's choices highlight the idea that Gatsby is playing the man he wishes he were, and that others want him to be. The audience sees the questions and intentions in his mind, but also believes that he could hide them from the other characters or cast members. Leonardo DiCaprio's acting highlights the novel’s depiction of his character’s personality as "an unbroken series of successful gestures". – (Fitzgerald, Pg.
Analyse the dramatic contribution of the character of Mercutio in the play Romeo and Juliet In this essay I will be evaluating the role of Mercutio and what affect he creates. The character of Mercutio can be seen both absorbing and fear-provoking, Shakespeare implies this by the name as it relates to Mercurial which means change of moods and mercury which is dangerous and is a metal liquid, and they both replicate his character. He is fearless, challenging and demanding ‘by my heel, I care not’ this indicates he does not care what other feel or think about him, he wants everything his way, when he seems to lose control and do everything his way ‘I care not’ it shows his confidence and how he does not fear of the Capulet or anyone else as long as it satisfies him. He is a close friend of Romeo and Benvolio; between them strong friendship, loyalty and understanding is shown and Shakespeare shows this especially between Romeo and Mercutio. Benvolio’s name can come from the word benevolent which means kind and helpful, this reflects his character as he was naïve and was a peacemaker.