Shakespearean Plays and The Law as an Instrument of Good Governance or Oppression

Introduction

Law is an integral part of most Shakespearean plays and this is especially considering that many of these involve various aspects of the law. Most plays by Shakespeare show that he was an individual that was significantly fascinated by a diversity of legal aspects that are addressed in the way that the characters act. In addition, Shakespeare is an individual that seeks to show that law is an important part of the lives of individuals in society and that it is essential to ensure that they take notice of it. This is especially the case where in Shakespearean plays, law is an integral part of promoting both good governance and oppression because of the numerous legal technicalities that are involved in the process. In this paper, there will be an attempt to show that while law is supposed to be an instrument of good governance, it can also be used to bring about the oppression of certain individuals in society.

Law as an instrument of good governance

In certain Shakespearean plays, law appears to be an instrument of good governance because it enables them to defend themselves from false accusations. Law is an essential aspect of promoting good governance in society and this is a case that is advanced in Shakespearean plays, where individuals are required to be obedient to laws in order to ensure that there is a level of social order (Cunningham, 2017). Plays such as the Merchant of Venice and Julius Caesar show that adherence to the law is an important part of making sure that there is the advancement of social order as well as the avoidance of unnecessary conflict. It also promotes the advancement of means through which to ensure that there is the creation of initiatives that promote solution to problems without resorting to violence. The achievement of these goals through the use of law cannot be underestimated because it shows that it is a means of advancing the interests of good governance. Furthermore, law in Shakespeare can also be used in order to ensure that the interests of the weak are protected against the strong while at the same time helping those in positions of power to promote the advancement of justice in their own societies. A consequence of such a situation is that individuals come to the realization that it is only through the pursuit of law that it becomes possible to not only promote good governance, but also justice in the societies within which they live. 

 Law ensures that there is the advancement of justice in society since the individuals involved are provided with an opportunity to make sure that they are able to advance their individual interests without hurting those of others. One of the most significant cases of law as an instrument of good governance is seen in The Merchant of Venice, where despite Bassanio being maliciously accused of owing Shylock a debt, he is eventually proven to be innocent of the charges that have been brought against him and is acquitted (Hadfield, 2016). Bassanio’s acquittal comes about because of the actions of his wife, who disguises herself as a lawyer and successfully defends her husband against the charges that have been brought against him. That Bassanio is found not to be guilty following the trap that is set to ensnare him by Shylock shows that the law actually works and that it can be a means of ensuring that justice is achieved at all times. The capabilities displayed by Shakespeare in these play show that despite the attempt by certain individuals to make use of the law as an instrument of oppressing their fellows, the law can be made use of as a means of promoting social justice. Bassanio’s acquittal also allows for the development of a perspective concerning the motivations behind why certain individuals are capable of making use of law as a means of advancing their own interests to the detriment of that of others. In the end, as in the case of Shylock, these individuals end up being considered to be the villains of the plays and justice is served when they gain their just punishment.

The pursuit of law is essential for good governance in Shakespeare plays because it promotes the idea that individuals have to set aside their personal interests for the sake of their societies. One of the most important instances is seen in Julius Caesar, where the title character repeatedly refuses to be crowned king of Rome because it is against the laws of the state. Caesar is an individual that, despite his personal ambitions, is still willing to ensure that he attains them through the workings of the law rather than forcing them on the population (Jenkins, 2016). He is shown not to want to shake up the republican order that has been instrumental in governing Rome for centuries; resulting in a situation where despite his popularity and the desire by the population to have him crowned king, he refuses to be crowned in favor of retaining the status quo of the city. A consequence of his actions shows that there is need to ensure the advancement of law as a means of promoting good governance because it creates a situation where Caesar is put in circumstances where he is tempted to assume a role that could do away with the good governance of the city of Rome. However, his refusal to undertake the tempting task of being a king shows that Caesar is an individual that, despite being a dictator, seeks to ensure that there is the promotion of good governance in his home city. Therefore, in this play, Shakespeare promotes the idea that law can be used as a means of ensuring that there is good governance even though the instances where the society is willing to give up its interests because of the popularity of certain individuals.

Law as an instrument of oppression

Despite law being an instrument of good governance, there are instances where it can also be used as a means of promoting oppression. In Shakespeare plays, law is an important aspect of showing that situations arise where law ends up being a means of bringing about either the destruction or oppression of other individuals. One of the most significant parts of law is that it leads individuals towards taking advantage of it to ensure that their individual interests are protected over those of the weak (Omrani, 2016). Using law as a means of advancing individual interests at the expense of others often leads to the oppression of the latter. The result is that many of these individuals end up in situations where they are not able to undertake actions with as much freedom as they would like because to do so could bring about the ire of their oppressors. The role of oppressors in Shakespearean plays tends to be given to villainous rulers, as seen in the case of Claudius in Hamlet. However, there are instances where this role is given to individuals that are considered to be outsiders in their societies, as seen in the case of Shylock, a Jew living in Italy at a time when there was wide mistrust of Jews. Therefore, in Shakespeare plays, when law is addressed, it is done in such a way as to show that despite its being considered a source of good governance, it is also a means through which oppression can be brought about in society; essentially being an instrument of injustice.

Hamlet is one of the most significant Shakespearean plays that address the issue of law as an instrument of oppression. This is especially the case considering that the title character, Hamlet, is a victim of oppression despite not only being from the ruling class of his country, but also the son of the previous king (Thomas, 2014). Despite the privilege that he grows up with, Hamlet is shown to be a weak individual, whose uncle takes advantage of in order to assume the throne. Claudius, his uncle, is shown to be a conniving individual that makes use of every means possible to ensure that he not only kills his brother, but also pushes aside his nephew, who is the legitimate successor to his father, and instead assumes the throne himself. In this situation, Hamlet is depicted as being an extremely weak individual that is taken advantage of by his uncle in such a way that he ends up being denied his rights as the heir to the Danish throne. When his mother marries his uncle, it seems that Hamlet has essentially been pushed aside and he is shown to be an individual that harbors a lot of resentment for the injustice that he has suffered. The way that Claudius takes the throne is not only suspicious, but also goes against the law because the succession was supposed to go to the legitimate successor, Hamlet. Claudius’ succession to the throne shows that he has no regard for the law and that he can twist it in such a way that suits his own purposes to the detriment of his nephew.

The Merchant of Venice is another play that shows that law is an instrument of oppression rather than good governance. The case of Shylock’s false accusations against Bassanio shows that the law can be used as an instrument of oppression. Shylock’s malicious nature is brought forth through his desire to use the law as a means of destroying the life of Bassanio, an individual towards whom he holds considerable hatred for unexplained reasons. A consequence is that Shylock ends up seeking to ensure that he makes use of the law as a means of attaining his malicious objectives. When he requires that Bassanio pays him a debt by giving him a pound of flesh, Bassanio’s hands are tied because the orginal agreement between these two individuals stated that it was a requirement (Nam, 2015). Therefore, Bassanio’s hands are legally tied and Shylock makes use of this advantage over an individual that he considers his adversary to ensure that he seeks to end Bassanio’s life legally because the extraction of a pound of flesh would only mean death. The legal process that Bassanio is subjected to as a result shows that law can be made use of as an instrument of oppression rather than of good governance.

In Hamlet and The Merchant of Venice, there is a sense that law is an instrument of oppression rather than as a means of promoting good governance. Individuals are shown to be extremely vulnerable to the law to such an extent that it leads to a situation where they are placed in unjust situations. They essentially become victims of the malicious machinations of others who feel that they can take advantage of the situation for their own benefit. A result is that some characters are not only able to advance their selfish interests using the law, but there are instances where others are duped into undertaking actions that are illegal, leading to the mental oppression of the individuals involved. The case of the title character in Othello is an essential theme because it involves Othello being duped by Iago into killing his wife because of suspicion of infidelity and jealousy (Myers, 2013). Othello can therefore be considered to have committed a crime because of a moment of madness caused by Iago’s influencing him into breaking the law.

Conclusion

Law is an extremely important part of Shakespearean plays and in most cases, it dominates entire plays. A result of this situation is that it leads to the development of means through which to ensure that there is recognition of the various ways of how law can be both an instrument of good governance as well as that of oppression. The contrasts that are displayed in law show that it is essential for individuals to read Shakespeare with a mind open to the the way that legal matters end up affecting the lives of the characters within the plays. In this way, it becomes possible to make a connection of how Shakespeare is relevant to the lives of individuals in everyday life.

Monstrosity in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight

Monstrosity is a term that is normally used for individuals that have completely deviated from the best values of society. It is a means of explaining the duality of man’s nature, where despite the good that is often present in daily interactions in society, there is also a darker side, where the individual involved have secret desires that go against social norms. It is often a constant struggle for these individuals to make sure that they are able to suppress their darker side because they have to hold steady to their moral side in order to continue being accepted by the rest of society. It is therefore essential for individuals to make sure that they are able to seek righteousness through restraining themselves from committing those acts that would be considered monstrous. In this paper, there will be an analysis of the poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in order to demonstrate that the monstrous nature of man is real and that it needs to be suppressed in order to ensure that society does not descend into chaos.

The theme of monstrosity is prominent in he poem, especially in the case where it seeks to show that individuals have to be constantly tested in order to remain committed to their ideals. In the poem, Sir Gawain is shown to be an individual that has the chivalrous characteristics that were most prized in King Arthur’s court (Walker 112). However, despite this side of him being prominent, it is revealed that he is an individual, like all human beings, who has a darker side. This is seen through the way that Gawain has to struggle in order to overcome the temptation that come about through letting go of his human qualities and giving in to the monster within. This ability is especially prominent in the way that he relates with the Green Knight, whose agenda it is to tempt Gawain into giving in to his animal needs. In addition, Gawain is also tempted to commit adultery with the wife of his host, but he overcomes this temptation and ends up in a situation where he is able to retain his chivalric character. Under these circumstances, where Gawain is constantly tested, there is a revelation that what separates man from the animal or monster within him is the attempt to hold on to hold on to ideals, in this case chivalry, that ensures that he is not able to fall into temptation. Instead, chivalry, supported by religion, is what keep Gawain from falling into a situation where he would not have been able to resist the animal instinct that was pulling him towards accepting his monstrous nature (Mills 484).

The struggle against man’s monstrous nature is further shown through the way that Gawain is given tests during the days that he lives with his hosts. During the first two nights of his stay, Gawain kisses his host after the host’s wife attempts to seduce him. However, Gawain resists the temptation to get involved with the host’s wife because to do so would be a considerable betrayal. Therefore, his action of kissing his host is important because it shows his loyalty to him and Gawain’s refusal to give in to the monster within him (Dinshaw 205). It is also a sign of his respect for his host because the latter has taken Gawain in at the worst possible moment where he was suffering despair. Gawain’s loyalty to his chivalry as well as his king make it difficult for him to tarnish the latter’s name because to do so would have been the biggest humiliation that Gawain would have encountered among his peers. These scenarios in the poem show that human beings are in a constant struggle to overcome their animal instincts (Woods 209). This struggle is essential because it allows them to overcome all the tests that are put in their way and help them achieve a level of order because they are able to suppress the monsters within them. The darker side of human nature is seen through the way that Gawain is tempted to undertake actions that go against his religious and chivalrous beliefs, yet he is able to overcome it by an effort of will.

The poem shows that there are instances where individuals can give in to their inner monster because of self-preservation. Gawain, afraid of death at the hands of the Green Knight, conceals from his host that the host’s wife has given him a magic green girdle which she tells him will help to protect him from being harmed (Foley 73). The instinct of self-preservation is one that seems to overcome the need to observe chivalry and leads to a situation where the individual gives into the monster. A consequence is that when Gawain is confronted by the Green Knight about the green girdle, he confesses to his sin, feeling extremely guilty about it. The Green Knight shows Gawain considerable understanding, stating that it was Gawain’s attempt to preserve his life that led him to concealing the girdle from him. Despite this assurance, Gawain remains troubled because he has failed in upholding his chivalrous beliefs and has instead allowed the darker side within him to tempt him into seeking to preserve himself. The tests that Gawain undergoes throughout the story are pertinent to understanding the way that despite their best efforts, human beings tend to be foremost concerned about protecting themselves from harm rather than seeking to advance the interests of their societies. This is the case with Gawain who, despite having travelled to honour a promise by Arthur’s court, is forced into a situation where he instead seeks to protect himself. At that moment, when he feels that he is going to encounter certain death, self-preservation wins out and he keeps the green girdle that he is given from his host.

The character development of Gawain is one that seeks to encourage human beings of their ability to suppress their monstrous nature. He is an individual that seeks to make sure that he does right with all those that rely on him. This is to such an extent that he makes the decision to seek out the Green Knight in order to fulfil the promise that he made to him. As such, Gawain is an honest man, willing to undergo an ordeal that might end up taking his life, as stated that “True men pay what they owe,” (line 444). Gawain is also honest concerning the two kisses from the host’s wife, which is extremely important because it allows him to receive the host’s good faith. The honesty displayed by Gawain is important n showing individuals that they can achieve considerable fulfilment through sticking to their ideals because under such circumstances, they can be able to enhance their image while at the same time maintaining order in their societies. Giving in to the monstrous nature can only lead to their failure to ensure that they are above animals; instead creating chaos where there should otherwise be order. Gawain’s failure to reveal information concerning the green girdle and his subsequent confession about it shows that despite the temptation to let in the monstrous part of their nature, human beings can redeem themselves through maintaining those ideals that keep them separate from other creatures whose monstrous side is more prominent.

In the poem, there is biblical allusion concerning how man is constantly tested to find out how well they are able to suppress their monstrous nature. The Green Knight is described in a way that shows his godlike attributes because he is the one that carries out the tests on Gawain. He is an individual that seeks to find out how well Gawain can hold on to his ideals while at the same time making Gawain work very hard in order to achieve his approval (Carter 29). The Green Knight’s godlike attribute can also be seen in the way that he appears in Arthur’s court and makes his demands. Later in the poem, it is revealed that he does so because the court is one where the tenets of chivalry and religion are held dear, and that he wanted to see whether its members would be able to continue doing so under extraordinary circumstances (Martin 312). The way that the Green Knight behaves is more closely associated to a nature god than to a regular knight, with his tests and location at the green chapel; which is actually a barrow that would normally be associated with a dragon (Evans 723). Therefore, his actions in testing Gawain is to find out how well the latter can suppress the monstrous nature of human beings while at the same time holding on to the ideals that make up human society.

Human beings have an inner monster, and they have to constantly exercise restraint in order to suppress it. Gawain’s trials are an example of his attempt to keep away from animalistic impulses because he does not give into the seductions of his host’s wife. Instead, he seeks to remain honest and maintain his honour at a time when his dark side strains to dominate him. Gawain demonstrates that by keeping their animalistic instincts at bay, human beings are capable of achieving great things. Holding on to chivalrous ethics, as in the case of Gawain, is important in helping individuals achieve their full potential, especially in a society where there is a lack of serious observance of these ideals (Stevens 66). The poem gives the impression that it is essential for human beings to not only observe the chivalric code, but also religion so that they can be able to overcome the evil side of their nature. It is also a means through which to maintain order and fellowship in society because they can be better able to work together towards the achievement of good. Chivalry and religion are essential restraints against man’s monstrous nature, and they should be held onto in order to overcome it.

In conclusion, the monstrous nature of human beings and their need to suppress it is an important subject in the poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. The poem shows that human beings have to constantly hold on to chivalrous ideals in order to ensure that they overcome the monstrosity that is the dark side of their nature. The tests that Gawain undergoes are reminiscent of what all humans undergo on a daily basis as they struggle to keep away their animalistic characteristics and seek to achieve their full potential through maintaining values that are essential for order to prevail within their own societies.

Analysis: Persuasion by Jane Austen

Restored hope for Fredrick

In the novel Persuasion, Jane Austen attempt to consider the various aspects of influence that family and friends might pressure an individual into making decisions that are not good for him or her. This is exactly what happens in the novel, where Anne is persuaded by her friend, Lady Russell, her father, and the older sister to break off her engagement to Frederick, who is a clever and ambitious young man, but with no personal fortune. As a result of this, the two go their separate ways and it is only after some eight years that the two meet again (Austen, 12). The fact that neither of them is married is a testament of the love that they share; despite the fact that circumstances have changed for Frederick, who is now an eligible bachelor with plenty of wealth. While Anne regrets her decision to break off their engagement, Frederick, on the other hand, still hurting from her rejection, does his best to ignore her through his not allowing any personal contact with Anne (Fitzpatrick Hanly, 1001). The return of Frederick into her life seems to secretly restore Anne’s hope that they would get back together and she often feels hurt from the way he treats her as well as his attention towards other younger women of her social circle.

Determined to move on and make a new life

When the Crofts rent out her family home because of the debts that Walter, Anne’s father, sustains due to his lavish lifestyle, Anne chooses to live with her own life and completely ignore Frederick’s cold treatment of her. She avoids Frederick as much as possible determined that it is best for her to do so as she has no further hope of having him as a husband; not after her rejection (Austen, 24). This creates a situation where, despite the pain that she is feeling, she keeps on living her own life, even going to the extent of joining her father and her older sister in Bath, despite their low opinion of her. Her determination to move on and make a new life for herself is rewarded through her making the acquaintance of her estranged cousin, William, who develops an interest in her not just as family, but also as a woman (Vandersluis, 88). This helps Anne to come out of her shell and enables her to regain her pride not only in her womanhood, but also in her beauty, of which until William came into her life, she had not been confident.

Making her own decisions

The fact that she chooses to avoid any association with Frederick is the first important decision that she makes on her own as this enables her to think clearly about her life and future. Because of her consequent choices, she is able to regain some pride in herself, which she had lost during her period of separation from Frederick. Since she is able to make her own decision, her life opens up to new possibilities, and not dominated by her feelings of regret concerning her rejection of Frederick through breaking of their engagement. This circumstance enables her to begin her association with her cousin, William, but while the two of them would have made a perfect couple, she chooses not to accept his suit, because she has no feelings for him.

Don't Tweet Your Brains Out by John Ramsay

John Ramsay, in his speech, shows that while Twitter has been able to ensure that there is the advancement of social good, it also has the potential to ruin the lives of those individuals who use it. This is especially the case where Ramsay makes reference to Jofi Joseph, a White House official who ended up losing his job because he lived a double life on Twitter where he made confidential and at times snide remarks, concerning his bosses, available on the network. The result was that he ended up being fired from his job despite having been among the most promising individuals at the White House who, just before being fired, had been slotted for promotion. Ramsay notes that even his bosses could not believe that such a brilliant man could descend so far from his position as to essentially bring down his career through the temptations brought about by a social network that did no really add any quality to his life. Therefore, the major lesson of the speech is that individuals have to be careful concerning what they choose to make public through social networks because they have the risk of jeopardizing their own lives and careers.

The Grimm Fairy Tales

When on reads the Grimm Fairy Tales, one comes to the conclusion that Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm are attempting to express their feelings about the world and the contradictions that exist within it. This collection of stories reveal the irony of living the human life as well as those of other creatures, some being happy with their lot in life while others remain sad due to their poverty as well as the tragic events that happen in their lives. The Grimm brothers use their stories to display the true nature of human beings; that nothing is ever permanent and that changes occur once in a while. Throughout their stories, one comes to the realization that there is the extensive use of imagery, symbolism, figurative language, style and tone in relation to the development of the themes involved.

The use of imagery is very extensive in throughout the Grimm Fairy Tales especially when making contrasts between the beauty of the world and the ugliness which is contained within it. This can be seen when, in Tom Thumb, the two men, not caring that their offer to buy Tom from his father would end up separating them. In fact, their only concern seems to be able to make a lot of money using Tom and they do not care at all concerning the feeling of alienation that they would be subjecting him to. The image of Tom as a tiny individual is used to show just how much individuals look down upon the less privileged individuals in society and how they make every attempt to exploit these people. It can be said that the image of Tom Thumb as a little fellow shows that despite his size, he is able to survive in a world that is hostile to his existence as Tom uses his wits to ensure that he is able to survive within it. This image may also be used to show the price which human beings have to pay because of their greed as well as their unthinking ambitions, and this instance can also be perceived in Hans in Luck. The image that is presented of Hans attempting to make his life better as well as to have something useful shows how human ambitions can at times be detrimental instead of helpful because he ends up losing all of his wages as well as all that he attained through barter. While this is the case, in most of the Grimm Fairy Tales, the image of happiness is continuously displayed with very few instances where there is any form of sadness, showing that most of these stories were written for the purpose of entertaining children.

Symbolism is a major style used in the development of the theme of the Grimm Fairy Tales and an excellent example of this, is in The Fisherman and His Wife, where the wife, despite having everything wants more; a symbol of her greed. The fact that she continues to demand more from her husband despite having everything that she needs can be considered to be symbolic of human nature, where we are never satisfied with what we have but continue to aspire for more. In addition, in the story Old Sultan, Sultan the dog can be considered to symbolize unwavering loyalty because despite the favor which the wolf did him in saving his life, Sultan decided to bark at the wolf whenever he comes to steal his master’s sheep. Furthermore, the fight between domestic animals and wild animals in this story shows that despite the poor treatment that the former receive from their masters, they are extremely loyal, while the latter are very cowardly creatures.

The Grimm brothers use figurative language to depict the contrasting characteristics of the characters that they depict in their stories, and a good example of this is that of the talking wolf in Tom Thumb which is an oxymoron used to depict the possible unique ability of Tom to communicate with animals. It is well known that wolves do not have human speech and the Grimm brothers depicting it as talking clearly shows the contrast in a situation where it would normally be impossible for normal conversation to take place. Figurative language can be seen all over the Grimm Fairy Tales and it is used to express the points or instances which can be considered to be the most important in the stories.

The tone of the stories can be considered to range from either being neutral to ironical. This is because of the contrast which the Grimm brothers attempt to make between the different characters in their stories, often depicting extreme good and extreme evil. The tone of the stories can be said to show that the world is a very beautiful place to be born into if one does not mind there not being any happiness all the time. The tone in these stories can be said to bring about quite a number of ironical scenarios, where an environment which is described as being beautiful is infested with evil people such as the thieves in Tom Thumb. In addition, the tone of the stories, such as that of The Elves and the Shoemaker, displays the advantages of doing good because eventually, these good acts are going to be rewarded. It can further be said that the tone of the stories depict the true feelings of their writers about the world and how the situation within it affects the different people living in it. The irony in the stories, such as The Fisherman and his Wife, helps to deliver the writers’ message to the reader as well as fostering an understanding of the subject matter involved.

In conclusion, the use of imagery, symbolism and figurative language in these stories greatly contributes to a greater understanding of the stories. They create situations which are familiar to the reader and they allow him to decipher the true meaning of what the stories is saying. Despite what many people who read it may think, they are not the kind of stories to be taken lightly because they are full of lessons. Instead, they have many lessons to give about the reality of human life in the world and the main message which can be made out of it is that there is not guarantee of happiness in the world and that we should live in it as best as we can.

Comparison of Brave New World and 1984

When one makes a study of Brave New World and 1984, one will come to the conclusion that both of these books are political satires which deal with the issues concerning the suppression of human nature in favor of one which is based on absolute control. One would say that both of these books depict the future world as a dreary place within which to live because the means through which the hums society interacts within them is very different from what is the case today. The interaction between human beings has traditionally been the means of transmitting knowledge from one generation to another, but this is not the case because in these societies, the fact that humans are able to interact does not mean that they learn anything from one another. A common depiction of these books is based on the belief that there will be less human interaction in the future, and this is seen in Brave New World, where because of a lack of serious human relationships, such as family, the issues are traditionally discussed more deeply do not take place and instead, there develops a type of society that is socially stagnant. While in the current world, the individuals get to have a better understanding of the issues being discussed because of regular interaction, in Brave New World, the opposite turns out to be true because of the fact that human beings, during the future age, are not conditioned to act independently of each other.

The events which are described in Brave New World, such as the establishment of a breeding program involving different castes of human beings, is not similar to those in 1984. This is because of the fact that in the latter, human beings, while being dominated by a single party whose purpose is to have absolute control of the society, has not made any attempt to alter humans physically. The main procedure used in gaining the absolute control and devotion among human beings is through the rewriting in history so that it is in the favor of the ruling party’s policies and objectives. Because the sources of history in the state described in 1984, known as Oceania, are either vague or scarce in content, it creates a situation where individuals get only a shallow understanding of the subject matter. In 1984, it is seen that because of the destruction of history, knowledge has become static, not being able to grow as it should. In both of these books, those people who possess knowledge or items that contain knowledge of the independent human nature of the past are completely ostracized from society or are put to death because of their perceived threat to the societal order. This makes it extremely difficult for knowledge to be transmitted and the lack of this knowledge has made the people in the societies described in the books disillusioned with life. This is especially true in Brave New World, where individuals have been conditioned by the ruling elite, to consume a drug known as soma, which is a hallucinogen used to ensure that they do not worry about their troubles.

The theme of control is prevalent in both Brave New World and 1984, and this is based on the need for the ruling elite to retain their power in what they consider to be the ideal state. Apart from working towards the destruction of all knowledge that concerns the past of human beings, they also adopt diverse methods to ensure that they have absolute control over the human society so that there are no rebellions. In Brave New World, there develops a caste system where human beings are no longer born in the natural way and are instead developed in laboratories. These are altered during their development so that they can best suit the purposes of the different castes to which they are assigned, with the higher castes being developed with such characteristics as intelligence while the lower castes are purposely given less intelligence so that they can work towards serving the interests of the higher castes. Because of their synthetic development, the lower castes of the society, who form the majority of the population in Brave New World, is not equipped to deal with the issues of day to day life and they have instead become artificial. It is possible that when Aldous Huxley was writing his book, he felt that the latter was the likely scenario that would face the world if there were no sources of human history from which people could get the knowledge and wisdom that they could use to make their lives more meaningful. In addition, it is possible that he believed that the intellectual development of the human race would be brought to a standstill because intelligent thought is often found in those instruments that perpetuate human history.

In 1984, on the other hand, there has developed a thought police whose purpose is to ensure that any material that individuals possess that might threaten the ruling order are apprehended and sentenced to death. The need for the party’s survival has created a situation where children in Oceania are indoctrinated with the need to spy on everyone who might possibly have any information that threatens the regime. This indoctrination is so great that these children end up also spying on and surrendering their own parents to the though police if the latter indeed have any dissenting material. In this way, children have become the means through which the government spies on its citizens and this is a sign that the normal traditional values of family loyalty have been destroyed, leaving behind a situation where there is no loyalty between individuals and families in the society. Independent thought has greatly been encouraged through the study of human history and this has ensured the development of new ideas. Because of this, the governments in both 1984 and Brave New World have ensured that this ability has been immensely diminished. These governments have come to realize that it is only through the study of old ideas that new ideas are developed and this has led to their destruction of material that may contain information that may be a threat to them.

In conclusion, as seen in both books, despite the large reserves of information that can lead to the further development of the human race, the ruling elite has chosen to destroy such information, perceiving it as a threat. In both of these books, the information provided by these governments do not have the qualities which the original sources of information have because most of the information gotten from the sources that are approved are often instant and shallow. These governments do not allow individuals to contemplate on the information which they read and this ensures that they do not have independent thought. The lack of independent thought due to the absence of knowledge has come to put the human race into a dark age of intellectual stagnation, as seen in these two works. When one reads these books, one comes to the conclusion that the ability to think through the learning of the previous work of others is what has helped the advancement of the human race. The inability to think and the reliance on shallow sources of information such as the internet is likely to see the end of the world as we know it. Human beings learn about their past from books and with this knowledge, the take action to avoid the mistakes of their past. Therefore, without adequate knowledge, the human race will probably end up destroying itself because it will not have the ability to learn from its past.

Little Shop of Horrors

Little Shop of Horrors is a play that seeks to display the folly of unchecked ambition as well as the attraction of individuals to the promise of wealth and power. These are themes that are seen throughout the play where the character of Seymour is attracted to the promises made to him by the plant Audrey II concerning attaining all that his heart desires, and this, in the end, proves to be the cause of his downfall. In this play, the themes of unchecked ambition and the false promises of wealth and power are highly prominent and dominate its entire plot.

The theme of unchecked ambition is extremely prominent in Little Shop of Horrors and this is mainly as a result of the desires that the characters of Seymour and Mushnik have. Seymour is an individual who desires to achieve success in his life and it is as a result of this desire that he is shown to constantly want to get out of the Skid Row neighborhood. Additionally, he has a major crash on his fellow employee at the flower shop, Audrey, in whose honor he names the strange plant that he finds. Therefore, when he realizes that Audrey II has the potential of saving the flower shop, after Mushnik decides to close it, he convinces Mushnik to give Audrey II the chance to bring in more customers. The result is that Seymour ends up becoming indispensable to Mushkin, who, on realizing that his business is completely dependent on Seymour, takes advantage of his innocence and decides of adopt him in order to keep him tied to the shop.

The theme of false promises of wealth and power is explored in this play and this is in relation to Seymour. Seymour, after coming to the realization that Audrey II needs blood in order to survive decides to give it his own blood. However, when he cannot do it anymore, Audrey II asks him to kill people in order to provide it with blood, promising him that if he does so, it will make all his dreams come true. While he has doubts concerning this course of action, he succumbs to his baser instincts and ends up killing people, beginning with Orin, Audrey’s boyfriend, in order to ensure that Audrey II has a constant supply of blood. The result is that Audrey II keeps on asking for more as it grows and this leads to a situation where it ends up killing Audrey, the woman that Seymour loves. This is when Seymour realizes his folly, but by then, it is too late because Audrey II has become too powerful and cannot be killed.

Therefore, the plot of this play is dominated by the themes of unchecked ambition and the false promises of wealth and power. These are shown through the actions of the characters as they seek to ensure that they make use of an unusual plant in order to make their fortunes. However, all of these attempts end up being for nothing because the plant is actually manipulating the whole situation in order to fulfill its desire of achieving world domination.

Literary Devices in Hamlet

In Hamlet, Shakespeare uses various literary devices to enhance the different characteristics in the play. Among the most significant devices that he uses include metaphors, tone, style and motifs. The use of these devices is extremely significant in the play since it builds the characters within it as well as the various themes which are revealed.

Metaphors

In the play Hamlet, there are plenty of instances where metaphors can be found and they are used to reveal the feelings of the main character concerning those who are around him. Among the metaphors which are used in the play is when Hamlet states, "My father's brother, but no more like my father than I to Hercules”(Act 1 scene 2). Later on, he further states, "My fate cries out, and makes each petty artery in this body as hardy as the Nemean lion's nerve." The metaphors which are mentioned above are used by the author of the play to reveal that despite the fact that Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle, had killed his brother to attain the throne, they were extremely alike to each other. It shows Hamlet’s belief that both his uncle and father were men who valued their own power more than those people who were around them. It is because of this that eventually, the both came to their downfall because had they valued their people, then the tragic events which took place in the play would not have happened. Another important metaphor that is used in the play is that related to the cannon fire which accompanies the king’s toasts and this helps to show that Claudius, the king, is united with the land that he rules. In reference to the cannon fire, Hamlet states, "…or that the Everlasting had not fix'd his canon 'gainst self-slaughter!" (Act 1 scene 2). This is used to express Hamlet’s wish that his uncle Claudius would turn into a cloud (a play with the name Claudius) so that when the cannons shot into that cloud, it would be able to kill him. This would in essence freed Hamlet from his promise to his father’s ghost that he would kill Claudius to avenge his death.

Tone

When one considers the tone of this play, one would say that it is extremely dark. This is especially because of the fact that almost all the characters within it are either thinking dark thoughts or are plotting to commit evil things. From the very beginning of the play, we see that there is plenty of anxiety and uncertainty concerning the events that are taking place or are likely to take place. The mood in which Hamlet is put after talking to his father’s ghost is extremely dark, and those who know him come to believe that he is going mad. This dark mood is also transmitted to those who are around him and their actions, either directly or indirectly, reflect the darkness which is in the play. The soliloquies which Hamlet has concerning the dark aspects of life such as betrayal and mortality are some of the things which contribute to the tone of the play. However, from the first line of the play when the guard, Bernardo yells, “Who’s there!” (Act 1 scene 1) the dark tone of the play is set. It is later revealed that this may have been an expression of the anxiety which the guards felt after seeing the ghost of their former king several times during the nights.

Style

One of the aspects of style that is revealed when one reads Hamlet is the use of verse among the main characters when they speak. These characters often use words which have an unaccented syllable followed by an accented one. This creates a rhythmic pattern in their speech and it can be said that Shakespeare used this style of writing in order to keep the attention of the audience on the play and the characters within it. An example of the use of verse in the play is in Act 1 scene 2 when Hamlet states, “O, that this too too solid flesh would melt, Thaw and resolve itself into a dew!” When one considers Hamlet’s soliloquies, one will find that he often speaks in a formal tone, and this is used to reveal that he comes from the nobility. The fact that verse is used in the play is a way for Shakespeare to separate the nobility from the commoners, who often speak in prose, not seeming to use the formal ways of the former. When Hamlet communicates with the commoners who are his friends, he also speaks in prose. For example, when he speaks to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, he says “….how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how express and admirable! in action how like an angel!” (Act 2 scene 2). This can also be used to reveal Hamlet’s character as being a humble man despite the fact that he is the prince of his country. 

Motif

Throughout the play, the motif of incest is alluded to especially when there are conversations concerning the relationship between Claudius and Gertrude. These allusions stem from the way these two are referred to in conversations between Hamlet and his father’s ghost. One gets the sense that the marriage between Claudius and Gertrude is forbidden and that their being united is an act of incest. These two were previously brother- and sister-in-laws and despite this, with the death of Gertrude’s husband, she chooses to be with her husband’s brother. In addition, the way Laertes speaks of his sister Ophelia, especially after her death has overtones of incestuous desire within it. This desire is seen in sexually suggestive terms and in action when as Ophelia is being buried, Laertes jumps into her grave and holds her. One of the most revealing suggestion of incest in the play is the obsession which Hamlet has with the sex life of his mother and his uncle. Another motif that can be seen in the play is that of misogyny and this is seen through Hamlet’s reaction to his mother’s marriage to his uncle. The disappointment and abandonment which he feels leads him to come to look down upon women as mere weaklings. This acts as an inhibitor to the relationships which Hamlet has with the women in his life since he considers them to be frail creatures that cannot be trusted. The hatred towards women that Hamlet feels is what brings him to tell his mother, “Frailty, thy name is woman” (Act 1 scene 2).

Significance

The play is highly significant because it is a revelation of the true nature of human beings in the world. One of the most noteworthy themes in the play is that of ambition and this is seen when Claudius takes steps to eliminate his own brother so that he can not only take his throne but also his wife. In addition, once it is revealed to Hamlet that it is his uncle, who killed his father; his main ambition in life is to ensure that he takes revenge on Claudius on behalf of his father. The dark tone which is dominant in the play is also highly significant because it is a revelation of the dark nature of human beings. Human beings are often blinded by their own needs and they cease to care about the needs of those with whom they share their lives. This can be seen through Gertrude’s reaction to her son’s dark mood when she ends up believing that he is going mad. If only she had thought to dig deeper into her son’s thoughts, perhaps the real reason for his dark mood would have been revealed and as a result, the tragic events at the end of the play would have been avoided. It can, therefore, be said that the play is significant since it reveals the true nature of the life which human beings have to live.

 References

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Farnham, United Kingdom: Scolar Press, 1969.

The Monster by Mary Shelley

When one considers the novel The Monster by Mary Shelley, one comes to the conclusion that it is a work based on the study of morality. The morality of the main character, The Monster, is clearly presented and it shows the conflict between the religion and nature. It can be said that despite the fact that Shelley was a well known atheist, who did not believe in the role of God in the lives of mankind, the events that take place in the life of the main protagonist are full of biblical allusions. It is a stark contrast to the beliefs of Shelley, which after reading the text would come into question since she was a believer of the in born morality that can be found in mankind. Shelley’s belief that the God is nonexistent and that man has the ability to choose his own destiny is clearly in contrast with what she writes in the novel. The biblical allusions that can be related to the life of The Monster and his creator are in conflict with what Shelley believed, and because of this, one would come to the conclusion that despite her denying it, Shelley was a believer in the existence of God and His influence in the lives of men. It can further be said that Shelley may have found it difficult to separate the religious beliefs that were current in her time from her own personal convictions, and this is expressed through the confusion through which The Monster undergoes in his attempt to find his place in the world.

Despite Shelley’s atheistic beliefs, one can conclude that she was a keen reader of the bible and this is why The Monster is so full of allusions. When one considers The Monster, one would be tempted to compare it to the story of Cain in the bible. While this may not have been Shelley’s original intention when portraying this character, it can be said that it came about unconsciously, since The Monster is rejected both by the society, when he attempts to become a part of it, and by God, since the latter is not the one who created him. The separation which The Monster feels is like that of Cain since he is forced to wander the earth alone without any support from either his creator or from the society. In addition, it can be said that The Monster experiences the same rejection which was experienced by Cain in the bible. The story is meant to show the atheistic beliefs of the author, but it eventually comes to do the exact opposite as seen when Victor, The Monster’s creator, comes to be disgusted by what he has created. This is a sign that despite Shelley’s belief that human beings are superior in their own right, there are limits to their knowledge. Humans do not have the capacity to bear the knowledge and to become creators the way God in the bible is portrayed. The morality of the ability of human beings to create life comes into question, because they do not have the capacity to accept their creations, instead looking upon them as abominations, the way Victor does towards his creation.

One of the most significant parts of the story is when, after creating the Monster, Victor becomes horrified by what he has done because his creation is a grotesque creature. While this may have been true, the Victor does not act like a creator would, because of the fact that he knew exactly what he was creating and could have designed it in any way he wanted to. This turns out not to be the case and his hatred for his creation leads to the Monster reciprocating the same feelings towards its creator. This leads to the Monster going to the extent of killing the brother of its creator in an attempt to hurt him. Victor, on the other hand, refuses to take responsibility for his creation and as a consequence, he is indirectly the reason for some of the bad actions that are taken by it. The Monster demands that his creator creates a mate for him, because since he is not able to fit into the human society and he is hated by the one who created him. The Monster, because he is unable to enter human society, considers himself to be the first of a new species and this is why he demands a mate from his creator. While Victor initially agrees to these demands, he comes to regret this action and destroys the female companion that he was creating for the Monster.

Mary Shelley’s story has been considered by some to be a substitute expression of the feelings which were troubling here deeply because due to the not often cordial relationship between herself and her husband. It has been said to have been an attempt to express her true feelings of the hurt she was undergoing. One would even go as far as to say that she may have related herself directly with the Monster because of the fact that he was shunned by the man who had created him. The idea is that the Monster was a representation of the rage that was going through Shelley because of the hurt that she felt because of her husband’s treatment of her and their relationship. The events which took place in the novel, especially in those places where the Monster expressed his sense of alienation were a true representation of Shelley’s feelings. The issue of morality comes into question in the novel, since the question being asked is whether Victor Frankenstein was right in creating the Monster then after it came to life, rejected it in disgust. It can be suggested that the Monster is a representation of Mary Shelly while Victor is a representation of her husband. Victor’s rejection of the monster is an expression of how Shelley felt when her husband rejected her and was unfaithful. In essence, one would say that Frankenstein is a novel which represents the feelings of Shelley during her early married life.

In conclusion, it can be said that the novel is a representation of the conflict between nature and the ability of human beings as creators. As has been stated above, the biblical allusions that can be related to the life of The Monster and his creator are in conflict with what Shelley believed, and because of this, one would come to the conclusion that Shelley was a believer in the existence of God and His influence in the lives of men. The novel is a story concerning the Monster’s attempt to search for a purpose and a place to belong in life. All these attempts turn out to be futile and as a result, the Monster comes to become bitter towards the person who created him. The novel shows man as a destroyer, because after creating the Monster, he comes to fear his ugliness and because of this ends up neglecting it. Furthermore, he chooses to destroy the female companion he was making for the Monster because of his belief that it did not have the right to exist and to propagate itself. This shows that while man has the ability to create, he is not able to take responsibility for his creations once he seen that what he has made is faulty. Finally, the personal life of Mary Shelley can be seen to be tightly entwined with the story in Frankenstein and because of this, it can be viewed as a fictional representation of the real life events that she was undergoing.

The Performance of Macbeth

The performance of Macbeth by various theatrical groups has, from its beginnings to the present, been based on an attempt to replicate the original situation as was written by Shakespeare. The fact that this attempt has continued to be of immense influence in the performance of this play shows just how the individuals who are involved in it are conscious of the importance of depicting the play in an accurate way. Macbeth is one of the greatest plays and works that were created by Shakespeare for performance on stage and because of this; it has remained exceedingly popular to the present day. When this play is performed in theatres, one will find that most of the scenes remain loyal to the original play since changing any aspect of the script within Macbeth would be detrimental to it on stage. One of the most notable aspects of the play is the fact that some the characters, especially Macbeth, are portrayed in a very negative light, and he ends up doing things that are morally wrong. In the performance of the play, this happens despite these characters having the knowledge that what they are doing is wrong, they tend to do it because of the belief that they are within their rights. For the duration of most of the play, it can be seen that the various actors attempt to remain loyal to the original script often depicting the characters in the play in the most realistic manner as possible. In order to create a situation where there is a contrast of characters that leads the play to its culmination, the performance of the various actors is often crucial in the depiction of the laying bare of the original plot of the play for the audience and this keeps the latter interested in the play.

Just like in the original performance of Macbeth, the actors on the current stage performances often use the characters’ personalities, as depicted in the original script of the play, as well as other events to convince the audience that what they are viewing is the real plot of the film. By doing this, these actors ensure that they maintain the element of revelation that often serves to captivate their audiences at the high point of the play. These stage actors attempt to depict the characters in a way that is almost as exactly as Shakespeare did in his play and by being loyal to the script; the play follows the same course of events as when it is performed on the Shakespearean stage. The performance of Macbeth on stage is highly significant because it is a revelation of the true nature of human beings in the medieval Scotland as told in the sources that Shakespeare used in writing the play. One of the most noteworthy themes in the play, in any of its performances, is that of ambition and this is seen when Macbeth takes steps to take the throne of Scotland despite the fact that he is not in direct line to the said throne. The dark tone which is dominant in the play is also highly significant because it is a revelation of the dark nature of Macbeth and his wife because it shows that they are blinded by their own needs and they cease to care about the needs of those with whom they share their lives.

In the performance of the play, it can be said that the actors put a lot of thought in their characters especially when it comes to the physical appearance of the said characters. In performances, it is seen that the actors seem to be selected from those people who are similar in appearance to the characters that are depicted in the play. This gives the audience the opportunity to appreciate the various characters within the play and to identify with them in a more intimate way than if their appearance were changed. In addition, there is the potential that many of the audience prefer the characters on the stage to remain loyal to the original. It can therefore be said that the performances of the play are highly successful because they ensure that there is a sense of continuity from the original play by Shakespeare. It can be concluded that when the performance of Macbeth is done on stage in the current period, most of the actors tend to remain absolutely loyal not only to the appearance of their characters but also to the original script and this goes a long way in making the play authentic.

Existentialism in The Stranger by Albert Camus

Albert Camus’ story, The Stranger, is an existential work which attempts to show the futility of being obsessed with roles that have been set by society; it shows that human beings should exist in their own terms. In The Stranger, the chief character is indifferent to all the things that go on around him and is instead interested only in his own self, essentially endorsing existentialism. Throughout the story, Meursault seems to be an incredibly selfish man who is only interested in himself and does not in the least care for the happenings taking place around him. This creates a situation which helps in the development of the plot of the story, since there is an exploration of the indifference as well as the existential way of life that is displayed by Meursault.

One of the aspects of existentialism that is shown in this story is that of individuals choosing to remain indifferent to others and only be concerned with what concerns them. This is especially the case in the funeral of Meursault mother’s and the man’s obvious indifference to the funeral symbolize his detachment from the world, which he believes to be a place full of nothing but conflict and agony as well as his optimism when it comes to death. In the story, Meursault shows a lack of care towards the diverse events that take place, even the ones that society might consider as being necessary for all of its members, and is thus looked down upon by other individuals who have attended the funeral. His mother’s funeral symbolizes existentialist joy that can be found in death, the liberation from all of the complications, conflicts, and miseries that are often experienced in life as a result of societal expectations.

Initially, Meursault is troubled when he hears of the death of his mother but when he goes to the funeral, he ends up being unaffected, believing his mother is in a better place. With reference to his mother’s death, he states that “Mother died today or maybe yesterday; I can't be sure”, showing that despite his mother’s death, he is at peace with it and he does not feel any sort of sadness or loss. This shows a possibility of Meursault’s belief that the day that his mother died is not important and that she is perhaps better off in this state. Thus, he chooses not to concentrate on the funeral service, and instead chooses to focus on the people who have attended the funeral. He does not display any of the regret or happiness that members of society would have expected him to express towards the people who have come to support him in his time of need, since he has just lost his mother.

When he is deplored by society and incarcerated for killing a man, his freedom is taken away from him, and any values or desires that he was once able to act upon would not be able to be acted upon anymore. This essentially interferes with his existential way of life because he is no longer able to act upon those impulses which were a basic part of his life. Meuersault seems to have lost all interest in life as a result of his incarceration and this creates a situation where he finds all accusations made against him irrelevant. When questioned repeatedly about his indifference towards his mother’s funeral while he is incarcerated, Meursault becomes upset and impatient. He finds it ridiculous and redundant the way society is condemning him for his beliefs and not for the crime he committed. When a priest questions Meursault, he ends up sharing his thoughts and beliefs, revealing that his mother’s funeral was a moment of joy and not of grief. He states that his indifference towards his mother’s funeral is as a result of his love for her and his wish that she rest in peace free from the problems of the world. The funeral, therefore, ends up being a symbol of hope for Meursault, that he can be free from the world and free from the expectations of society on him.

In conclusion, The Stranger is a story that endorses existentialism as seen through the manner that Meuersault considers the world. It is revealed that because of the societal restrictions, this character is highly pessimistic about life and he does not seem to derive joy from it. This is a man who does not consider death with fear or sadness; he looks upon it as a means of salvation from the problems that plague individuals in the world.

The Stranger by Albert Camus - Analysis

In “The Stranger”, Meurstault’s mother’s funeral and Meursault’s obvious indifference to the funeral symbolize his detachment from the world, a place full of nothing but conflict and agony in his eyes, and his optimistic attitude regarding death. In the text, Meursault shows a lack of care towards many events and circumstances, even the ones that might be considered essential for the average person, and is thus looked down upon by members of society. His mother’s funeral symbolizes the ironic joy that can be found in death, the liberation of all life’s complications, conflicts, and miseries. Initially, Meursault is perturbed upon discovering his mother’s death. However, upon going to his mother’s funeral, he is unaffected, believing his mother is in a better place. Of his mother’s death, he says, “Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday; I can't be sure.” This shows that despite the fact that his mother is dead, he does not feel any sort of sadness or loss, and it is possible that he considers when she died not to be important.

Instead of concentrating on the funeral service, as normal people would, Meursault instead focuses on the people who have attended the funeral. He does not display any of the regret or happiness that people have come to support him in his time of need, when he has just lost his mother.

Some other memories of the funeral have stuck in my mind. The old boy’s face, for instance, when he caught up with us for the last time, just outside the village. His eyes were streaming with tears, of exhaustion or distress, or both together. But because of the wrinkles they couldn’t flow down. They spread out, crisscrossed, and formed a smooth gloss on the old, worn face.

Meursault is detached from most things in the world and shows a lack of care towards most occurrences. However, when Meursault is free to bond with Marie, a girl he likes, he enjoys life, even if for brief moments. But even towards Marie, he seems to be indifferent because of his belief that the happiness which he is feeling is only momentary and that it will come to an end soon. When Marie asks him whether he loves her, he states that it does not mean anything, and this shows that he has no intention of taking his relationship with her further than it already is a carnal one. Meursault states, “She was wearing a pair of my pajamas with the sleeves rolled up. When she laughed I wanted her again. A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her it didn’t mean anything but that I didn’t think so. She looked sad.”

When he is deplored by society and incarcerated for killing a man, his freedom is essentially confiscated from him, and any values or desires that he was once able to act upon would not be able to be acted upon anymore. In addition, any appreciation he had for life and the world in which he lived is vanquished. Meursault’s trial is not focused on his assassination of the Arab man, but on his “indifference” and his “lack of emotion”, both which should be irrelevant. When questioned repeatedly about his indifference towards his mother’s funeral while he’s incarcerated, Meursault becomes upset and impatient. He finds it ridiculous and redundant the way society is condemning him for his beliefs and not for the crime he committed. Meursault is subject to execution and, at this point, is almost entirely detached from the world. He remembers his mother had told him stories of his father going to executions. Meursault believes that if he would be freed from jail, visiting executions would be joyful for him. This is due to the fact that Meursault finds joy in people being freed from their pain, their troubles, and the world itself. When a priest questions Meursault, Meursault begins divulging all his thoughts, revealing how his mother’s funeral was a moment of joy and not of grief. He was “indifferent” to his mother’s funeral because he loved her and wanted her to rest in peace and be free from the world’s complexities. Meursault’s mother’s funeral is the symbol of hope for Meursault, the symbol that he can find absolute interest in something that will last forever, and the symbol that he can be free from the world and free from society’s expectations.

When Meursault kills the Arab man, it reveals his indifference to the world and to all those who are around him. He does not experience any guilt when he is confronted for this action, he does not display any of the remorse that would be expected. He instead refers to the killing as an act which was inspired by the glare of the sun and the heat. He does not account for the reason why he shot the Arab four more times despite the fact that he was dead. One would surmise that Meursault was not only indifferent, but that he actually took a perverse pleasure in hurting other people. He realizes that his actions will land his in trouble yet he goes ahead and does them anyway. It is as if he finds satisfaction in the act of taking the Arab’s life, despite the fact that there was no real antagonism between them. Meursault gives a vivid description of how he ends up murdering the Arab in cold blood:

The trigger gave; I felt the smooth underside of the butt; and there, in that noise, sharp and deafening at the same time, is where it all started. I shook off the sweat and the sun. I knew that I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of a beach where I'd been happy. Then I fired four more times at the motionless body where the bullets lodged without leaving a trace. And it was like knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness.

This may have been the reason why he agreed to help his friend, Raymond, take revenge on the latter’s Arab lover because of her perceived unfaithfulness. His incarceration is a time for reflection for Meursault and it helps him to solidify his belief of being indifferent to the world around him. He does not spend his time regretting his actions as one would expect, and instead, he spends most of his time attempting to catalogue all the things he owned in his apartment. He even becomes indifferent to the fact that Marie, his girlfriend, does not come to visit him in prison, contemplating that it was human nature to forget and that it was very likely that he would also be forgotten once he was dead as he states “maybe she had become tired of being the girlfriend of a condemned man. It also occurred to me that maybe she was sick, or dead. These things happen. Anyway, after that, remembering Marie meant nothing to me. That seemed perfectly normal to me, since I understood very well that people would forget me when I was dead.”

When Meursault is approaching the end of his life since the court is likely to sentence him to death, he is visited by a priest in an attempt to save his soul. Meursault remains adamant in his atheistic beliefs, stating that God is a waste of time and that he has no interest in Him. The priest does his best to persuade this strange man, “...he said firmly, "God can help you. All the men I’ve seen in your position turned to Him in their time of trouble." Obviously, I replied, they were at liberty to do so, if they felt like it. I, however, didn’t want to be helped, and I hadn’t time to work up interest for something that didn’t interest me.” The lack of interest displayed by Meursault is an indication of his belief that there is no God and that even if His existence were true, then his soul was already condemned. It shows his lack of faith in anything or anyone in the world, because priests, in many circumstances, tend to be a symbol of hope and salvation since they have the power to grant forgiveness for sins.

In conclusion, it can be said that the main theme of this book is that of indifference because of how the main character behaves towards the world. This indifference seems to be born out of pessimism towards life as Meursault does not seem to derive joy from it. Instead of looking upon death with fear or sadness, he looks upon it as a means of salvation from the troubles of the world. It is possible that when Camus was writing this book, he was contemplating on the meaninglessness of the physical world, since it is a place of pain and suffering, and the escape from it through death.

Things Fall Apart - Achebe's Criticism of Pre-Colonial Igbo Culture

Things Fall Apart is the story of a society at a crossroads between the traditional way of life, and modernity, as represented by the coming of the white man and the colonial government. It is the story of Okonkwo, the main character, who struggles to attain his position in society and once he achieves it, this position comes to be threatened by the coming of the colonial government. In writing this novel, Chinua Achebe seems to be criticizing some of the traditional ways of the Igbo society through the various characters that are encountered in the novel. Among the things which Achebe looks at are; the killing of hostages for in exchange for a life taken; the definition of masculinity; and finally, the violence displayed by some of the men in Igbo society.

Among the most prominent of the characters in this novel is Okonkwo, whose personality can be said to be thoroughly masculine and who is used as an example from which all the other men in Umuofia are defined. There are instances throughout the novel where Okonkwo is described as doing things which one would associate with masculinity. He is extremely hardworking and ambitious, whose aim is to build his reputation to the highest level that can be attained in his society. While this is the case, he seems to have an extremely difficult relationship with his son, Nwoye, whom he believes not to be manly enough. Okonkwo is, throughout the novel, seen to treat his son quite harshly, even in very trivial situations. This creates a situation where the relationship between these two is extremely strained and there is a rift between them that cannot be filled. As a result, Nwoye eventually chooses to leave his father’s home and join the missionaries, where he eventually comes to find peace. In this case, Achebe seems to be criticizing the aloof nature of Okonkwo in raising his son, believing that if he shows any affection for Nwoye, then the boy will end up being weak and effeminate.

Achebe criticizes the Igbo practice of killing of hostages from another village in revenge in a situation where a person from the said village has taken a life. He uses the case of Ikemefuna to show his disapproval since this boy was brought to Umuofia as a hostage, where he was put in the charge of Okonkwo. Ikemefuna becomes a part of Okonkwo’s household and is, in fact, treated as an older brother by the latter’s children. However, there comes a time when the Oracle declares that Ikemefuna, has to be put to death in revenge for the killing of an Umuofian years earlier. Okonkwo is the one who gives the deathblow with his matchet despite the fact that he had grown extremely fond of the boy. He kills Ikemefuna not because he has to, but because of the fact that he does not want to be seen as weak by his peers. Okonkwo later feels disturbed by this action and goes to speak to his best friend Obierika, who, ever the voice of reason in the novel, tells him that he should not have participated in the killing of Ikemefuna. Obierika further reveals that he himself did not participate in the putting to death of Ikemefuna, and this can be said to be Achebe’s way of showing his disapproval of the practice.

In Things Fall Apart, violence and a quick temper are associated with masculinity and it is something which is associated to all the men within the society. The most prominent of these is Okonkwo, who, despite his being a kindhearted man; he displays his manly authority by ruling his household with a heavy hand, often beating his wives whenever they do anything to offend him. He is also seen to have a particularly bad temper as seen when he almost shoots Ekwefi after she insults his pride. In addition, whereas the other men of Unuofia choose to submit to colonial rule, Okonkwo chooses to retain the past ideals of his society by remaining violent. This eventually leads to a point when he hacks a colonial officer to death with a machete, thinking that this will lead to the men of Umuofia rising against colonial rule. When this does not happen, he realizes that his way of life is gone, and as a result, hangs himself. In this case, Achebe displays his disapproval of the violent ways of the Igbo culture and how such violence might lead to the destruction of the people.

Analysis: The world is a beautiful place by Lawrence Ferlinghetti

Lawrence Ferlinghetti writes the poem “The world is a beautiful place” to express his feelings about the world and the contradictions that exist within it. It is a poem which shows the irony of living the human life, some being happy with their lot in life while others remain sad due to their poverty as well as the tragic events that happen in their lives. Ferlinghetti uses this poem to display the true nature of human life, that nothing is ever permanent. In this paper, we shall analyze the imagery, symbolism, figurative language, style and tone in relation to the development of the theme.

The use of imagery is very extensive in this poem especially when making contrasts between the beauty of the world and the ugliness which is contained within it. This can be seen when it is stated that the world can be very beautiful if the people who live within it do not mind “a bomb or two.” The image of a bomb is used to refer to the wars which happen from time to time all over the world especially in the developing countries. It can be said that the image of the bomb when contrasted to the beauty of the world may be Ferlinghetti’s way of stating that the world is beautiful just the way it is but it is the human being who makes it not to be a pleasant place to live in due to his corrupting influence over it. This image may also be used to show the environmental price that the world has to pay whenever human beings go to war. The image of the upturned faces may be used to refer to the helplessness that people in the society feel due to the fact that although they have no hand in the making of the decisions to go to war, they are always the first ones to suffer when these wars begin. The image of happiness is continuously displayed in this poem but there is a sudden stop to it when Ferlinghetti mentions that it all ends in death.

Symbolism is a major style used in the development of the theme of this poem. A good example of this, as mentioned above, is the mentioning of a bomb to symbolize war. The line “a few dead minds/ in the higher places” can be considered to symbolize the decisions of people in authority concerning things that are vital without thinking about the consequences of their actions in future. Furthermore, the line “….or such other improprieties/ as our Name Brand Society/ is prey to” symbolizes the dominance of capitalism in the society something which Ferlinghetti was very much against. The line “…and its priests/ and other patrolmen/and its various segregations/ and congressional investigations/ and other constipations…” symbolizes to the governmental establishment and its ingrained corruption that is rampant within its ranks.

Ferlinghetti uses figurative language to depict the contrasting characteristics of the world, and a good example of this is in the line “comes the smiling/mortician” which is an oxymoron used to symbolize death. It is well known that death is a sad event but Ferlinghetti’s depicting it as smiling clearly shows the contrast in the world as a place where a lot of happiness can be found as well as great sadness. Figurative language can be seen all over the poem and it is used to express the points which can be considered to be the most important in the poem.

The tone of the poem can be considered to be either neutral or ironical. This is because of the contrast which Ferlinghetti makes between two very different matters. For example, he states that the world is a very beautiful place to be born into if one does not mind there not being any happiness all the time. This is an ironical statement because of the fact that Ferlinghetti is attempting to depict the world as not being an ideal place to live in. It can further be said that the tone of the poem depicts the true feelings of its writer about the world and how the situation within it affects the different people living in it. The irony in the poem helps to deliver the poet’s message to the reader as well as fostering an understanding of the subject matter involved.

In conclusion, the use of imagery, symbolism and figurative language in this poem greatly contributes to a greater understanding of the poem. They create situations which are familiar to the reader and they allow him to decipher the true meaning of what the poem is saying. Despite what many people who read it may think, it is not as negative a poem as it is considered to be. Instead, it has many lessons to give about the reality of human life in the world and the main message which can be made out of it is that there is not guarantee of happiness in the world and that we should live in it as best as we can.