| Welcome to Iacon. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| English C/w draft | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 9 2009, 07:52 PM (88 Views) | |
| Loz | Feb 9 2009, 07:52 PM Post #1 |
Advanced Member
  ![]](http://209.85.48.18/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
Well, my PC is going wrong and there are no USB ports so I think I'm going to be backing up a load of stuff on here. Wasp Factory Coursework- Write a critical appreciation of page 150 (Wham!) to 155 (the end of the chapter) How far do the themes and ideas represented here reflect those of the whole text? Frank Claudehame, the novel’s narrator, is trapped in a world over which he has no control, consequently in the course of the novel the reader sees him artificially create the power and control he so craves; the killings of animals, religious rituals to protect him, even the murder of three young relations. In this passage Frank has created something over which he can assert power. He can see himself as almost a God like figure, creating the model village, only to let the dam loose and have it destroyed, much like Noah and the flood. It is through this violence and destruction that, in Frank’s head, allows him to be in command of the world around him. The uncertainties throughout Frank’s life have left him with not only the want to destroy in the present, but to know what will happen in the future, therefore giving him some control over it. He believes his creation the wasp factory allows him to do this, linking it to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ all associated with prophecy, and allowing people to have some control over their lives. Frank sees his factory as better Plan Themes and ideas in the novel addressed in this passage: -Want of power Achieved by Frank’s destroying of the dam. Religion.Destroying of the dam gives Frank almost god like status in his head (links to Noah and the flood?) Also the fact he believes the Wasp Factory can predict the future which would obviously give him some power over it. He links the factory to his replacement to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ things also associated with prophecy and giving people some sort of supernatural control over their lives (this also links in with religion). This is the main theme conveyed in this extract. Frank not only demonstrates his want for power in his destruction- the physical side of power- but also in his more reflective side, wanting to know what will happen in his future. However, in this extract we see Frank achieving, if only on a very small scale, some control, through a situation he has engineered himself, whereas his murders were mainly due to chance- he happened to find the snake, bomb and become interested in kite making. -Religion- This is an important theme throughout the novel due to Frank’s obsessive rituals, and, again, the control they give him. In this extract the obsessive nature of Frank’s rituals dos not come across, however, the importance of the Wasp Factory is very clear, Frank calls it ‘beautiful deadly and perfect’, so in this sense Frank’s reliance and trust in his quasi religious practices are is conveyed. -Permanent childhood- Children often destroy their creations as Frank does here. The way in which he retells this story also reflects this as it is done in a list-like way, as children would tell a story, with little imagery. Frank shows an awareness of this when he calls him self only ‘half a man’ which links with the reason for the murders of Blyth and Paul. -Isolation The fact he still acts in such a childish way shows the isolation from his piers and society he has had his whole life. Frank’s gender isolation may not be conveyed so well because he feels so much he is male. He calls himself an ‘honorary man’, and although he cannot sexually for fill the role of a man this ‘does not discourage’ him. He obviously sees gender separated by behaviour, not just biologically, which makes him feel less the isolation which he is in. -Gender Frank talks about the differences in each gender ‘women can give birth and men can kill’ He sees this as making women the weaker sex, which is the reason he calls them one of his greatest enemies. Frank’s hatred of women stems from this idea, he, thinking he has been castrated, knows he will never be able to reproduce, only to kill- which is why he takes on the role of the man to its upmost extremes. -Franks detachment from his murders: This is shown as he finds more excitement in destroying the dam than murder. He also shows he cannot distinguish between this harmless destruction and murder. Themes not addressed in this passage: -The relationship between father and son -Animal Cruelty |
 |
 
|
| Loz | Feb 12 2009, 05:59 PM Post #2 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Wasp Factory Coursework- Write a critical appreciation of page 150 (Wham!) to 155 (the end of the chapter) How far do the themes and ideas represented here reflect those of the whole text? By Lauren Hyatt Frank Cauldehame, the novel’s narrator, is trapped in a world over which he has no control, consequently throughout the course of the novel the reader sees him artificially create the power and control he craves; the killing of animals, protective religious rituals, even the murder. In this particular passage Frank has created something over which he can assert power. He sees himself as a God like figure, creating a model village, only to let the dam destroy it, like Noah and the flood. It is this violence and destruction that, in Frank’s head, allows him to command the world around him. The uncertainties throughout Frank’s life have left him with not only the want to destroy in the present, but to know what will happen in the future, therefore giving him some control over it. He believes his creation, the wasp factory, allows him to do this, linking it to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ all associated with prophecy; although Frank sees his factory as better than any of these methods, describing it as ‘beautiful, deadly and perfect’ in this passage, they are formed from the same insecurity he shares with people through history. These two crucial elements of Frank’s personality are reflected well in this extract, both Frank’s violence and need to know the future- the physical and mental sides of control. There is one aspect that I believe is not reflected. Frank achieves, if only on a very small scale, some control, through a situation he has engineered himself- He has released the dam on a creation made to be destroyed. This contrasts with his murders, the means mainly due to chance- he happened to find the snake, bomb and become interested in kite making. It is true that he twisted this chance to fit his own needs, but chance still controlled the course of the children’s lives more than Frank. Frank also takes control with his obsessive rituals, for protection against the uncontrollable outside world. Although in this passage Frank’s respect and dependence on the wasp factory is made clear- he obviously believes it is prophetic- the neurotic nature of his daily rituals does not. These rituals are a huge insight into Frank’s mind, how scared he is behind his macho persona, so their not being reflected in the paragraph detracts from the themes and ideas conveyed in this passage. It is Frank’s apparent lack of gender that causes him to take up this macho persona. He knows he is only ‘half a man’ so must make up for his lack of manhood by overdosing on what he perceives as male behaviour- destruction, violence and killing; There is a noticeable change in Frank’s language after the destruction of the dam, he is calmer and reflective, as though his need to participate in manly behaviour is cleansed. He talks about the differences of the genders, saying ‘women can give birth and men can kill’; because of his lack of genitalia he sees the genders separated by behaviour, as the biological differences do not apply to him- behaving like a man makes him feel less the sexual isolation he is in. Gender war is a constant theme running through the book, and is reflected well here, both in Frank’s behaviour and opinions. Frank’s gender isolation, however, is not conveyed as well because he feels so much he is male. He calls himself an ‘honorary man’, and although he cannot sexually fulfil the role of a man this ‘does not discourage’ him. This lack of gender is an important idea in the novel; it is the reason for his murders- he knows Blythe and Paul will grow up to be what he cannot. Frank is, in a way, trapped in a permanent childhood. The flooding of village shows this, as to destroy ones creation is typical chid behaviour. The way in which Frank retell the flooding also conveys this idea, a list like formula with little imagery or abstract diction, reflecting the way a child would recreate an event. Frank shows awareness of his permanent childhood when he calls him self ‘half a man’. Of course, Frank’s childish behaviour could not just be due to his genderless state. He has been isolated from his peers and society all his life, both physically- he lives on an island, and through his lack of identity, meaning not school or socialising. Living with nobody to tease him, teach him and force him to grow up means he has not, and still acts like a small boy, with no social inhibitions. Also child like, Frank cannot distinguish between right and wrong; the destruction of his model village is harmless; however, he describes it as though a murder, with slight differences. Contrast a murder scene with this, there are, in the latter, more active verbs, using the present participle giving a sense of excitement and reliving of the event, more noise, more drama. The dam’s destruction gives him more of a thrill than killing. Because of this, the passage manages to convey Frank’s isolation well, physically simply because he has the space to carry out such a mammoth demolition, and mentally- the way he acts despite his age. As mentioned before Frank uses animal cruelty to assert power. I do not believe this is reflected in this extract, despite his mentions of ‘the wasp that crawled and felt its way about the jar that lay by my bedside.’ This is because, firstly, people do not judge the killing of insects on par with that of animals, and because there is not direct harming of animals in this passage, only references of what is to come- the wasp factory being ‘primed and ready’. It is nearly impossible for one extract to reflect on all the themes and ideas of the whole novel, especially one with so many as The Wasp Factory. This passage, however, manages to reflect many of the main ideas running through the novel. Edited by Loz, Feb 12 2009, 07:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Thyunda | Feb 12 2009, 11:39 PM Post #3 |
Administrator
|
What in tarnation is a wasp factory? |
|
|
|
| Loz | Feb 13 2009, 06:30 PM Post #4 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Book by Iain M. Banks, it's good and hard to explain so you'll have to read it or wikipedia it. |
|
|
|
| Thyunda | Feb 14 2009, 01:16 AM Post #5 |
|
Administrator
|
I know it's a book. I mean, what's a wasp factory in itself? |
|
|
|
| Loz | Feb 14 2009, 11:53 PM Post #6 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Yeah that's what I cba to explain, but is on wikipedia. 
|
|
|
|
| Loz | Mar 4 2009, 01:42 PM Post #7 |
|
Advanced Member
|
Wasp Factory Coursework Write a critical appreciation of page 150 (Wham!) to 155 (the end of the chapter) How far do the themes and ideas represented here reflect those of the whole text? By Lauren Hyatt Frank Cauldehame, the novel’s narrator, is trapped in a world over which he has no control, consequently throughout the novel the reader sees him artificially create the power and control he so craves; the killings of animals, religious rituals to protect him, even murder. In this passage Frank has created something over which he can assert power. He can see himself as almost a God like figure, creating a model village, only to let the dam loose and destroy it, much like Noah and the flood. In this way he mimics his father, and the god like power he has over Frank’s life. It is through this violence and destruction that, in Frank’s head, allows him to be in command of the world around him. The uncertainties throughout Frank’s life have left him with not only the desire to destroy in the present, but to predict the future, therefore giving him some control over it. He believes his creation the Wasp Factory allows him to do this, linking it to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ all associated with prophecy, and allowing people to have some control over their lives; although Frank sees his factory as better than any of these methods, describing it with the disturbing oxymoron ‘beautiful, deadly and perfect’- in this passage, they are formed from the same insecurity he shares with people through the ages. These two crucial elements of Frank’s personality are reflected well in this extract, both Frank’s violence and need to know the future- the physical and mental sides of control. There is one aspect that I believe is not reflected. Frank achieves, if only on a very small scale, some control, through a situation he has engineered himself. He has released the dam on a creation made to be destroyed.. This contrasts with his murders, the means due to chance- he happened to find the snake, bomb and become interested in kite making. It is true that he twisted this chance to fit his own needs, but chance controlled the course of the children’s lives more than Frank himself. Frank also takes control with his obsessive rituals- protection against the uncontrollable outside world. Although in this passage Frank’s respect and dependence on the wasp factory is made clear- he obviously believes it is prophetic, saying ‘It’s about now and the future’, the neurotic nature of his daily rituals does not. These rituals are a huge insight into Frank’s mind, how scared he is behind his macho persona, so their not being reflected in the paragraph must distract from the themes and ideas it is possible to convey in this one passage. It is Frank’s apparent lack of gender that causes him to take up this macho persona. He knows he is only ‘half a man’ so must make up for this by overdosing on what he perceives as male behaviour- destruction, violence and killing. There is a noticeable change is Frank’s language after his destruction of the village, he is calmer and reflective- as though his need to be manly is cleansed. Whereas before the language is soaked in militaristic semantic fields words such as ‘smash’ and ‘havoc’ making Frank’s actions seem more terrible than they actually are and sentences creating excitement, after the destruction…. . He talks about the differences of the genders, saying ‘women can give birth and men can kill’; because of his lack of genitalia, he has to see the sexes separated by behaviour, as the biological differences do not apply to him- behaving like a man makes him feel less the gender isolation he is in. Gender war is a constant theme running through the book, and is reflected well here, both in Frank’s behaviour and opinions. Frank’s gender isolation is not conveyed as well, because he feels so much he is male. He calls himself ‘an honorary man’ and although he cannot sexually fulfil the role of a male this ‘does not discourage him’. This lack of gender is an important theme running through the novel; it is the reason for his murders- he knows Blythe and Paul will grow to be what he cannot. Frank is, in a way, trapped in a permanent childhood. Conveyed by his destructive behaviour in the extract, as to destroy ones creation is typically childish behaviour, Frank shows awareness of his permanent childhood when he calls himself ‘half a man’. The way in which Frank retells the flooding also conveys this idea, a list like formula with little imagery or abstract diction- reflecting the way a child would recreate an event. Although elevated diction such as ‘exulting’ allows the reader to see frank is an intelligent individual, his story telling also allows them to see his lack of maturity. Of course, Frank’s childish behaviour is not solely due to his genderless state. He has been isolated from his peers and society all his life, both physically- living on an island, and through his lack of identity, meaning no school or socialising. Living with nobody to teach him and force him to grow up means he has not, and he still acts like a child, with no social inhabitations. Also child like, Frank cannot distinguish between right and wrong, the destruction of his model is harmless; however, he describes it as though a murder, with slight differences. Contrast a murder scene with this, there are, in the latter, more active verbs- ‘smashed’, ‘rolled’, ‘unleashed’, often in the present participle- ‘collapsing’ ‘sucking’- to give not only a sense of excitement, but of reliving the event, more noise, ‘the noise was good and dull’, onomatopoeia also being used- ‘spattering’, more drama, long clause sentences such as ‘Dams were disintegrating, houses slipping into the water, bridges and tunnels falling and banks collapsing all over the place; a gorgeous feeling of excitement rose in my stomach…’, adding to this. The dam’s destruction gives him more of a thrill than killing, further conveying the theme of permanent childhood. Previously mentioned, Frank uses animal cruelty to assert power. I do not believe this is reflected in this extract despite mentions of ‘the wasp that crawled and felt its way about the jar that lay by my bedside.’ Although references of what is to become of the wasp- the wasp factory is ‘primed and ready’, there is no direct harming of animals in this passage. |
|
|
|
| Loz | Mar 4 2009, 08:47 PM Post #8 |
|
Advanced Member
|
The Wasp Factory Coursework Write a critical appreciation of page 150 (Wham!) to 155 (the end of the chapter) How far do the themes and ideas represented here reflect those of the whole text? By Lauren Hyatt The Wasp Factory is a novel of the dark, disturbing and macabre. Centring around teenager Frank Claudehame author, Iain Banks, delves into the dark side of the human psyche, exploring a wide range of controversial issues, reflected in Frank’s disconcerting behaviour and opinions. Frank is trapped in a world over which he has no control, consequently throughout the novel the reader sees him artificially create the power and control he so craves; the killings of animals, religious rituals to protect him, even murder. In this passage Frank has created something over which he can assert power. He can see himself as almost a God like figure, creating a model village, only to let the dam loose and destroy it, much like Noah and the flood. In this way he mimics his father, and the god like power he has over Frank’s life. It is through this violence and destruction that, in Frank’s head, allows him to be in command of the world around him. The uncertainties throughout Frank’s life have left him with not only the desire to destroy in the present, but to predict the future, therefore giving him some control over it. He believes his creation the Wasp Factory allows him to do this, linking it to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ all associated with prophecy, and allowing people to have some control over their lives; although Frank sees his factory as better than any of these methods, describing it with the disturbing oxymoron ‘beautiful, deadly and perfect’- in this passage, they are formed from the same insecurity he shares with people through the ages. These two crucial elements of Frank’s personality are reflected well in this extract, both Frank’s violence and need to know the future- the physical and mental sides of control. There is one aspect that I believe is not reflected. Frank achieves, if only on a very small scale, some control, through a situation he has engineered himself. He has released the dam on a creation made to be destroyed.. This contrasts with his murders, the means due to chance- he happened to find the snake, bomb and become interested in kite making. It is true that he twisted this chance to fit his own needs, but chance controlled the course of the children’s lives more than Frank himself. Frank also takes control with his obsessive rituals- protection against the uncontrollable outside world. Although in this passage Frank’s respect and dependence on the wasp factory is made clear- he obviously believes it is prophetic, saying ‘It’s about now and the future’, the neurotic nature of his daily rituals does not. These rituals are a huge insight into Frank’s mind, how scared he is behind his macho persona, so their not being reflected in the paragraph must distract from the themes and ideas it is possible to convey in this one passage. It is Frank’s apparent lack of gender that causes him to take up this macho persona. He knows he is only ‘half a man’ so must make up for this by overdosing on what he perceives as male behaviour- destruction, violence and killing. There is a noticeable change is Frank’s language after his destruction of the village, he is calmer and reflective- as though his need to be manly is cleansed. Whereas before the language is soaked in militaristic semantic fields words such as ‘smash’ and ‘havoc’ making Frank’s actions seem more terrible than they actually are and sentences creating excitement, after the destruction…. . He talks about the differences of the genders, saying ‘women can give birth and men can kill’; because of his lack of genitalia, he has to see the sexes separated by behaviour, as the biological differences do not apply to him- behaving like a man makes him feel less the gender isolation he is in. Gender war is a constant theme running through the book, and is reflected well here, both in Frank’s behaviour and opinions. Frank’s gender isolation is not conveyed as well, because he feels so much he is male. He calls himself ‘an honorary man’ and although he cannot sexually fulfil the role of a male this ‘does not discourage him’. This lack of gender is an important theme running through the novel; it is the reason for his murders- he knows Blythe and Paul will grow to be what he cannot. Frank is, in a way, trapped in a permanent childhood. Conveyed by his destructive behaviour in the extract, as to destroy ones creation is typically childish behaviour, Frank shows awareness of his permanent childhood when he calls himself ‘half a man’. The way in which Frank retells the flooding also conveys this idea, a list like formula with little imagery or abstract diction- reflecting the way a child would recreate an event. Although elevated diction such as ‘exulting’ allows the reader to see frank is an intelligent individual, his story telling also allows them to see his lack of maturity. Of course, Frank’s childish behaviour is not solely due to his genderless state. He has been isolated from his peers and society all his life, both physically- living on an island, and through his lack of identity, meaning no school or socialising. Living with nobody to teach him and force him to grow up means he has not, and he still acts like a child, with no social inhabitations. Also child like, Frank cannot distinguish between right and wrong, the destruction of his model is harmless; however, he describes it as though a murder, with slight differences. Contrast a murder scene with this, there are, in the latter, more active verbs- ‘smashed’, ‘rolled’, ‘unleashed’, often in the present participle- ‘collapsing’ ‘sucking’- to give not only a sense of excitement, but of reliving the event, more noise, ‘the noise was good and dull’, onomatopoeia also being used- ‘spattering’, more drama, long clause sentences such as ‘Dams were disintegrating, houses slipping into the water, bridges and tunnels falling and banks collapsing all over the place; a gorgeous feeling of excitement rose in my stomach…’, adding to this. The dam’s destruction gives him more of a thrill than killing, further conveying the theme of permanent childhood. Previously mentioned, Frank uses animal cruelty to assert power. I do not believe this is reflected in this extract despite mentions of ‘the wasp that crawled and felt its way about the jar that lay by my bedside.’ Although references of what is to become of the wasp- the wasp factory is ‘primed and ready’, there is no direct harming of animals in this passage, so is not reflected as it is through the whole novel. It is nearly impossible for one extract to reflect on all the theme of the whole novel, especially one with so many as The Wasp Factory. This passage, however, manages to reflect many of those running throughout the novel, some obviously, some subtly. Word Count: |
|
|
|
| Loz | Mar 24 2009, 01:07 PM Post #9 |
|
Advanced Member
|
‘Both Carter and Duffy’s strength is in exploding the stereotype of women as passive and demure.’ Compare ‘The Bloody Chamber’ and ‘The World’s Wife’ in the light of this statement. When reading old texts, whether novels, poems, plays or epics there is a clear distinction between the sexes; men being strong, rational heroes, whilst women are reduced to hysterical helpless creatures, needing to be rescued. Angela Carter and Carol Ann Duffy seek to destroy this stereotype with their iconoclastic short story and poetry collections ‘The Bloody Chamber’ and ‘The World’s Wife’. In these retellings of traditional stories women are powerful, strong, and heroic; men keeping only half of their traditional role, that of the evil beast. The first of Carter’s stories ‘The Bloody Chamber’ is based on the story of Bluebeard and his wives. The narrator of this story is a traditional fairytale heroine, innocent, passive, naïve- and about to fall into great danger. Carter also uses the narrator to tie the feminist concept of the male gaze into the story, the idea that a man upon seeing a woman thinks he can do something to or for her, and woman are constantly aware of this. The narrator becomes aware of how her then fiancée, The Marquis, views her when she sees him ‘look at her with lust’ It is not she who Carter uses to transform the female typecast, but her Mother. She differs from the stereotype of passive and demure and this is clear from the moment of her introduction. Her adventurous childhood is described, involving ‘outfacing a junkful of Chinese pirates’ and ‘shooting a man eating tiger’, and she constantly asks her daughter if she is ‘sure she loves him’ differing greatly for traditional fairytale mothers, eager to marry their daughters off; she is very much the hero of this tale. But the fairytale males’ strength is not just portrayed in a good light, and Duffy mimics this beastly aspect in her poem ‘Mrs. Beast’. The narrator here contrasts greatly with the hero of ‘The Bloody Chamber’, she is the villain, empowered- yes, but cruel and uncaring to those she supposedly loves, calling The Beast ‘a pig’ and ‘horrid’, she is the domineering one, the Beast succumbing to her every whim. Mrs. Beast is a repulsive character, a woman embracing masculine attributes and activities, controlling, drinking and playing poker. The main aspect of her masculinity is her lack of emotion, wanting ‘the less loving one’ in the relationship to be her, and making sure she conveys the main reason she is in this relationship with the beast is because ‘the sex is better.’ Here there is another contrast with The Mother, in that she remains feminine and maternal whilst being heroic. Although extremely different, these two different women are both the strength of their own stories, because of them differing from the female stereotype. The Mother in ‘The Bloody Chamber’ stops the story falling into tradition- the narrator being saved by a male, whilst the Mrs. Beast’s twisted character is the basis of her namesake poem. Both ‘Little Red Cap’ by Duffy and Carter’s ‘The Company of Wolves’ portray an older generation of women, a generation stifled and pacified by men, the Grandmother of the Little Red Riding Hood Story used to represent these women. Whilst they are both Grandmothers as passive and demure, the stereotype of women is transformed by their granddaughters, entangled by the same wolf as them, but managing to avoid their fate. Where the Grandmothers’ were eaten by their wolves, the girls in these stories defeat the wolves, each in their own way. The girls are prepared for the wolves, Carter’s Little Red Riding Hood packing a knife in her basket, and Duffy knowing the nature of the wolf, knowing he ‘would lead me deep into the woods’. This gives the girls strength, they have not been manipulated, but have gone bravely into danger. As mentioned before, both girls defeat their wolves, Little Red Cap chopping her wolf ‘scrotum to throat’ after ‘ten years in the woods’. She does this after realising that the wolf has been stifling her own voice, keeping her passive and demure, as happened to her Grandmother. Carter’s Little Red Riding Hood does not have a long relationship as Duffy’s does, indeed she has only just meet her wolf, but does not kill him. She instead tames him, using him as her protector, sleeping ‘between the paws of the tender wolf’. It is the wolf’s fate in which these stories differ the most. Whilst Duffy sees the wolf as suppressing the narrator, an obstacle in her way that needs to be moved, Carter sees him as something to be used the girl’s advantage, allowing to keep his male role of protector, whilst empowering the girl. ‘The Courtship of Mr. Lyon’ and ‘Pygmalion’s Bride’ both show women succumbing to the will of men, not exactly exploding the stereotype of women. Both women seem to be manipulated, almost forces, into their prospective relationships. Beauty sacrificing her old life in order to save Mr. Lyon and start a new one, and Pygmalion’s Bride finally accepting his advances after many refusals. The Courtship of Mr Lyon keeps the women passive- using a third person narrator, adding to the passiveness of the character, however, Pygmalion’s Bride differs from this in that the first person narration allows the Statue to give her side of the story- an empowering act in itself, Pygmalion is changed from a sympathetic character into a lecherous, perverse man. These differ from others in their own collection, Duffy showing a woman being manipulated by the man, and only realising this when it is too late, and Carter not giving a voice to her heroine- indeed this Beauty is the only one without. Although seemingly not agreeing with the statement, these poems do not disprove it. The Courtship of Mr.Lyon, on it’s own may not be as effective as Carter’s other stories, but it contrasts with ‘The Tiger’s Bride’ very well, allowing a stark difference between traditional fairytale sand Carter’s within the book. Pygmalion’s Bride shows a woman who regrets her old passive nature, now taking up a strong and assertive one, in this way it is similar to Duffy’s other poems ‘Little Red Cap’ and ‘The Devil’s Wife’. Duffy and Carter whilst exploding this stereotype of women choose a clever setting to do so in, a strength in both their writings. The fairytale and myth are both genres that rely heavily on gender stereotyping, making their reversal more shocking and effective. This shows that, of course, whilst not the only strength to their writhing, Duffy and Carter’s exploding of the stereotype of women is their most important; it is this portrayal that allows their stories to shock, without it many of their tales would be the same traditional writings that have always been told. And to simply re-tell the story was certainly neither of their intents. Word Count: 1,100 Edited by Loz, Mar 29 2009, 01:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Loz | Apr 2 2009, 08:49 AM Post #10 |
|
Advanced Member
|
The Wasp Factory Coursework Write a critical appreciation of page 150 (Wham!) to 155 (the end of the chapter) How far does the language and styles represented in this extract reflect that of the whole text? By Lauren Hyatt The Wasp Factory is a novel of the dark, disturbing and macabre. Centring around teenager Frank Claudehame author, Iain Banks, delves into the dark side of the human psyche, exploring a wide range of controversial issues, reflected in Frank’s disconcerting behaviour and opinions. Trapped in a world over which he has no control, Frank artificially creates the power and control he so craves; through animal cruelty, protective religious rituals, even murder. In this passage Frank has created something over which he can assert power. He sees himself as a God like figure, creating a model village, only to let the dam destroy it, mimicking Noah and the flood. It is through this violence and destruction that, in Frank’s head, allows him to be in command of his surroundings. The uncertainties throughout Frank’s life have left him with not only the desire to destroy in the present, but to know what will happen in the future, therefore giving him some control over it. He believes his creation the Wasp Factory allows him to do this, linking it to ‘entrails and sticks and dice and books and birds and voices and pendants’ all allegedly prophetic, giving people some control over their lives; although Frank sees his factory as better than any of these methods, describing it with the disturbing oxymoron ‘beautiful, deadly and perfect’- in this passage, they are formed from the same insecurity he shares with people through the ages. These two crucial elements of Frank’s personality are reflected well in this extract, his violence and need to know the future- the physical and mental sides of control. There is one aspect that I believe is not reflected. Frank achieves, if only on a small scale, some control through a situation he has engineered himself. He has released the dam on a creation made to be destroyed. This contrasts with his murders, their means due to chance- he happened to find the snake, bomb and become interested in kite making. It is true that he twisted this chance to fit his own needs, but chance controlled the course of the children’s lives more than Frank himself. Frank also takes control with his obsessive rituals- protection against the uncontrollable outside world. Although in this passage Frank’s respect and dependence on the wasp factory is made clear- he obviously believes it is prophetic, saying ‘It’s about now and the future’, the neuroticism of his daily rituals does not. They are a huge insight into Frank’s mind, how scared he is behind his macho persona, so their not being reflected in the paragraph detracts greatly from the themes and ideas conveyed in this one passage. It is Frank’s apparent lack of gender that causes him to take up this macho persona. He knows he is only ‘half a man’ so must compensate for this by overdosing on what he perceives as male behaviour- destruction, violence and killing. There is a noticeable change is Frank’s language after his destruction of the village, he is calmer and reflective- as though his need to be manly is cleansed. Whereas before the language is soaked in militaristic semantic fields words such as ‘smash’ and ‘advancing’ making Frank’s actions seem more terrible than they actually are and long sentences creating excitement,; after the destruction sentences transform into short statements of fact ‘All our lives are symbols’ adding a greater sense of control to the narrative, and binary oppositions inundate the paragraph; ‘The Wasp Factory…is part of life, and- even more so- part of death’, reinforcing the difference between the two sections of this extract, and the theme of balance running through the book- after all Frank kills Esmeralda only because she is a girl. Binary Oppositions continue, with Frank discussing gender differences, saying ‘women can give birth and men can kill’; because of his lack of genitalia he has to see the sexes separated by behaviour, as the biological differences do not apply to him- behaving like a man makes him feel less the gender isolation he is in. These two styles of writing are common throughout the novel, because of Franks duel personality- his destructive and thoughtful side, his male and female side, and this is reflected well in this passage. Gender war is a constant theme running through the book, and is reflected well here, both in Frank’s behaviour and opinions. Frank’s gender isolation is not conveyed as well, because he feels so much he is male. He calls himself ‘an honorary man’ and although he cannot sexually fulfil the role of a male this ‘does not discourage him’. This want to be a man is conveyed well in the language Frank uses, words like ‘havoc’ and ‘pushed’, suggest Frank tries to convey his violent side through his writing as vividly as he possibly can. The lack of imagery also suggests this; he does not try to beautify his world, seeing this as a feminine aspect, but describes it with masculine, military directness. Frank is, in a way, trapped in a permanent childhood. Conveyed by his destructive behaviour in the extract, as to destroy ones creation is typically childish behaviour, Frank shows awareness of his permanent childhood when he calls himself ‘half a man’. The style in which Frank retells the flooding also conveys this idea, a list like formula with little imagery or abstract diction- reflecting the way a child would recreate an event. Although elevated diction such as ‘exulting’ allows the reader to see frank is an intelligent individual, his story telling also allows them to see his lack of maturity. Of course, Frank’s childish behaviour is not solely due to his genderless state. He has been isolated from his peers and society all his life, both physically- living on an island, and through his lack of identity, meaning no school or socialising. Living with nobody to teach him and force him to grow up means he has not, and he still acts like a child, with no social inhibitions. Also child like, Frank cannot distinguish between right and wrong, the destruction of his model is harmless; however, he describes it as though a murder. However, contrast a murder scene with this, there are, in the latter, more active verbs- ‘smashed’, ‘rolled’, ‘unleashed’, often in the present participle- ‘collapsing’ ‘sucking’- to give not only a sense of excitement, but of reliving the event. Adding to this effect there is more noise, ‘the noise was good and dull’, onomatopoeia also being used- ‘spattering’, more drama, long clause sentences such as ‘Dams were disintegrating, houses slipping into the water, bridges and tunnels falling and banks collapsing all over the place; a gorgeous feeling of excitement rose in my stomach…’, adding to this. When describing Esmeralda’s death Frank is relatively calm- few active verbs are used, and when they are long vowel sounds- as in ‘swooping’ make them seem more relaxed. The scene is also picturesque, with Esmeralda searching for flowers, with ‘the wind blowing in her blonde hair’. This sedate style proves the dam’s destruction gives him more of a thrill than killing, and again links in with the two main styles in which he tells his story. Throughout this small passage, the language and style of the rest of the text are reflected well- due to the duality of it. The level of destruction- and therefore excitement- Frank goes to in the first part allows him to nurture his reflective side in the second. It was essential to do this in order to reflect the overall text well, as Frank’s is a personality of two sides, and The Wasp Factory a book that aims to address the duality of gender, nature, and ultimately the duality of man. Word Count: With Quotes: 1281 / Without Quotes: 1,178 |
|
|
|
| Kez | Apr 2 2009, 08:38 PM Post #11 |
Iacon's Critic
|
Ahhh, so glad my English coursework is in, done and fucked off. 
|
|
|
|
| Loz | Apr 8 2009, 07:10 PM Post #12 |
|
Advanced Member
|
“The gods are behind the troubles of mankind.” Which playwright do you think demonstrates this more fully – Euripides or Sophocles? Both Euripides and Sophocles demonstrate Gods causing trouble and creating chaos in their tragedies, plagues, famine and madness are all afflicted on mortals by them throughout the course of the three plays I will be concentrating on, ‘Medea’ and ‘The Bacchae’ by Euripides and ‘Oedipus The King’ by Sophocles. However, it is questionable whom demonstrates the God’s troublesome nature, as they both also create characters which put mortals at fault, and events which show the Gods in a favourable light. ‘The Bacchae’ sees Dionysus as the cause of Thebes’ problems, having possessed the women, and tricked their King, Pentheus, resulting in his death at his own Mother’s hands. However, the destruction he is wreaking can be traced back to human error- Dionysus is seeking his revenge. Agauë, Dionysus’s aunt, her sisters and Pentheus all denied his divinity, enraging the immortal. Apollo, the only God in ‘Oedipus the King’ is illustrated quite differently to Dionysus. Like him, Apollo causes great harm to Oedipus’s city of Thebes, killing many of it’s inhabitants with a great plague, causing ‘A blight on the fresh crops and the rich pastures, cattle [to] sicken and die, and the women [to] die in labour, children stillborn…’’, despite the horrendousness of it, he does this not out of a personal grudge, as does Dionysus, but because he wants to expose the truth about Oedipus’s incestuous relationship. Both Gods are at fault here, Dionysus being an immortal could have risen above the insults, and proved himself in another manner, Apollo could have chosen a far less destructive manner in which to convince Oedipus to seek the truth of his past. The behaviour and circumstances in which the mortals find themselves troubled by these Gods also changes the audiences perception of which is more at fault, and therefore, which playwright demonstrates their troublesome nature more fully. Pentheus could have avoided his fate, but Oedipus could not- despite his best efforts; the audience therefore puts more blame on Pentheus, whom committed hubris and must accept the consequences. The sense of Pentheus being in the wrong gives Dionysus more sympathy, where Apollo gains none. Apollo is the more godlike of the two, not being given a speaking part throughout the play, his voice only heard through others. Dionysus is a speaking character in The Bacchae, whilst Apollo is never seen- only talked about. Distancing Apollo from the audience means he is seen to blame less than Dionysus, though killing far more people, for less of a reason. The people Apollo kills are also at a distance from the audience, no relationship is built with them, as one is with Pentheus. Again this leads to Dionysus being perceived as more cruel There are virtually no Gods throughout Medea, only Helios used as a ‘dues ex machina’ right at the end. Human emotions- and their being taken for granted- are the real cause of troubles in this play, and Euripides hoped to convey the power of emotions through this play. Plan Bacchae and Oedipus Dionysus has a reason for his revenge; Apollo does this to expose INCEST D: More blame on Apollo, although could be said Dionysus should have risen above human insults. Pentheus could have avoided his fate, Oedipus could not. More blame on Pentheus, he committed hubris, and must accept the consequences. Apollo more godlike, kills more peeps than Dionysus. Apollo distanced from audience- but Dionysus is seen at a personal level. No relationship with peeps Apollo kills, but Pentheus is a character audience knows and can sympathise with. The chorus however colour our opinion of Pentheus, they enjoy the cult so his suppressing it could make him seem like an oppressive and tyrannical leader. This is also true of Oedipus, but chorus to build him up- they constantly refer to his greatness as a leader, and refuse to believe he has committed any crimes. Both demonstrate Gods causing troubles for humans, but it is Sophocles’ hero who can be sympathised with more, and therefore he who succeeds in more fully demonstrating the troubles Gods cause for mankind, despite his references to the gods as saviours also. Medea and Bacchae Medea and The Bacchae contrast- Medea no gods, human emotions, Bacchae deals with the power of a god However, this God’s cult celebrates emotions and passion. Dionysus is quite human in the Bacchae, angered and resentful at mere mortals. This is similarity is continued, when Pentheus plans punishments just as harsh as Dionysus’s in order to punish the God. It has more similarity with Medea than Oedipus although Medea involves no Gods and Apollo plays an important role in Oedipus. Both Bacchae and Medea show how emotions should not be under estimated. Both main characters in Medea and the Bacchae contrasts an emotional and unemotional side. Medea a romantic, Jason a pragmatist; Dionysus emotional, Pentheus rational. Medea and Oedipus Gods both prayed to a lot in both. (Medea p.22) but the Gods save the main character in Medea, whereas they partly deliver Oedipus his peripeteia. All All main characters have a hamartia which causes a peripeteia or loss where it could have been avoided. Oedipus in his relentlessness to discover the truth of his past, despite Teiresias and Jocasta warning him against finding out, Medea in her fear of a damaged kleos and timé, ultimately leading her to kill her own children and Pentheus in his refusal to accept Dionysus even when his city was close to ruin. With this both Sophocles and Euripides show mortals are as much to blame as Gods sometimes for their troubles. Euripides and Sophocles conclusion Euripides keeps a balance between human and godly error, where in Oedipus the blame is only on fate and the God that exposed this fate. Whether Apollo can be blamed is a matter of personal opinion, should he have left Oedipus to enjoy his life unaware of it’s nature, or did it need to be exposed? Issues to be addressed… -Are the Gods important in plays??????? -Negative representation of Gods?????? -Any positive representations of Gods?????? -Where are mankind the cause of their own problems???????? -Opinions of other characters in play. Characters in Bacchae: Chorus paint good picture of Dionysiac worship, ‘We run with the God of laughter’, enjoy the cult. But some aspects they tell of it may be disturbing ‘ dance, delirious, possessed’ ‘Wild snakes, nurse them and twine them round their hair’ Teiresias and Cadmus also worship Dionysus. Makes us think Pentheus is oppressive not letting his subjects worship whom they wish, less sympathy for him. Characters in Oedipus: Chorus love Oedipus, refuse to believe he has done crime. See him as a good king, audience sympathises more with a good leader/man. He is also rude to Teiresias Characters in Medea: Nurse says ‘If only they had never gone. If the Argo’s hull Never had winged out through the grey-blue jaws of rock And on towards Colchis!’ implying she blames Jason for Medea’s state. Tutor ‘everybody loves himself more than his neighbour’ Chorus also blame that bastard Jason ‘her husband who has betrayed her’ but to the end turn against her, feeling her revenge is to extreeeeeme. The nurse also says ‘I’m afraid some dreadful purpose is forming in her mind . She is a frightening woman’ implying that Medea’s nature is also likely to get her into trouble. (cannot let her kleos be damaged! |
|
|
|
| Loz | Apr 20 2009, 02:37 PM Post #13 |
|
Advanced Member
|
“The gods are behind the troubles of mankind.” Which playwright do you think demonstrates this more fully – Euripides or Sophocles? By Lauren Hyatt Both Euripides and Sophocles demonstrate Gods causing trouble and creating chaos in their tragedies, plagues, famine and madness are all afflicted on mortals by them throughout the course of the three plays I will be concentrating on, ‘Medea’ and ‘The Bacchae’ by Euripides and ‘Oedipus The King’ by Sophocles. However, it is questionable whom demonstrates the God’s troublesome nature, as they both also create characters which put mortals at fault, and events which show the Gods in a favourable light. ‘The Bacchae’ sees Dionysus as the cause of Thebes’ problems, having possessed the women, and tricked their King, Pentheus, resulting in his death at his own Mother’s hands. However, the destruction he is wreaking can be traced back to human error- Dionysus is seeking his revenge. Agauë, Dionysus’s aunt, her sisters and Pentheus all denied his divinity, enraging the immortal. Apollo, the only God in ‘Oedipus the King’ is illustrated quite differently to Dionysus. Like him, Apollo causes great harm to Oedipus’s city of Thebes, killing many of it’s inhabitants with a great plague, causing ‘A blight on the fresh crops and the rich pastures, cattle [to] sicken and die, and the women [to] die in labour, children stillborn…’’, despite the horrendousness of it, he does this not out of a personal grudge, as does Dionysus, but because he wants to expose the truth about Oedipus’s incestuous relationship. Both Gods are at fault here, Dionysus being an immortal could have risen above the insults, and proved himself in another manner, Apollo could have chosen a far less destructive manner in which to convince Oedipus to seek the truth of his past. The behaviour and circumstances in which the mortals find themselves troubled by these Gods also changes the audiences perception of which is more at fault, and therefore, which playwright demonstrates their troublesome nature more fully. Pentheus could have avoided his fate, but Oedipus could not- despite his best efforts; the audience therefore puts more blame on Pentheus, whom committed hubris and must accept the consequences. The sense of Pentheus being in the wrong gives Dionysus more sympathy, where Apollo gains none. Apollo is the more godlike of the two, not being given a speaking part throughout the play, his voice only heard through others. Dionysus is a speaking character in The Bacchae, whilst Apollo is never seen- only talked about. Distancing Apollo from the audience means he is seen to blame less than Dionysus, though killing far more people, for less of a reason. The people Apollo kills are also at a distance from the audience, no relationship is built with them, as one is with Pentheus. Again this leads to Dionysus being perceived as a crueler God. The two Euripides plays contrast; there are virtually no Gods throughout Medea, only Helios used as a ‘dues ex machina’ right at the end, whereas Dionysus, obviously, plays a major role in ‘The Bacchae. ‘Medea’ is solely about human emotions, and the havoc they can wreak when underestimated, whilst, on the surface at least, ‘The Bacchae’ is about the power of a God, and the supernatural. However, the emotional aspect of both plays can be linked closely, when considered the God Euripides has represented in ‘The Bacchae’. The cult of Dionysus was one that embraced strong passions and emotions and the humanity of Dionysus’s emotions is apparent throughout the play, angered at resentful at mere mortals, with Pentheus’ punishments sometimes just as harsh as the ones Dionysus has given. Emotions play an important part in both Euripides’ plays, and those shown are similar, despite one play showing them from a mortal, another from a God. The characters Medea and Dionysus both have a more unemotional counterpart, Medea’s- a romantic, is Jason- a pragmatist, and Dionysus’s- emotional and passionate is Pentheus, a rational King. These subdued characters are the ones who underestimate their opposite’s emotions, resulting in their doom. ‘Medea’ and ‘The Bacchae’ have more in common that ‘Medea’ and ‘Oedipus the King, yet there are some similarities between these two plays. Gods are both perceived as saviours in these plays, prayers are sent to many Gods in Oedipus, QUOTE, and Medea, as mentioned before, is saved by Helios QUOTE. Even Apollo is prayed to in Oedipus QUOTE, despite destroying Thebes, and delivering Oedipus his peripeteia. The power of the Gods is seen clearly here, as they praised and worshipped however badly they behave. All main characters have a hamartia which causes a peripeteia or loss where it could have been avoided. Oedipus in his relentlessness to discover the truth of his past, despite Teiresias and Jocasta warning him against finding out, Medea in her fear of a damaged kleos and timé, ultimately leading her to kill her own children and Pentheus in his refusal to accept Dionysus even when his city was close to ruin. With this both Sophocles and Euripides show mortals are as much to blame as Gods sometimes for their troubles. Chorus colour our opinions throughout the plays. The chorus however colour our opinion of Pentheus, they enjoy the cult so his suppressing it could make him seem like an oppressive and tyrannical leader. This is also true of Oedipus, but chorus to build him up- they constantly refer to his greatness as a leader, and refuse to believe he has committed any crimes. Medea chorus’ opinion change of her, All main characters have a hamartia which causes a peripeteia or loss where it could have been avoided. Oedipus in his relentlessness to discover the truth of his past, despite Teiresias and Jocasta warning him against finding out, Medea in her fear of a damaged kleos and timé, ultimately leading her to kill her own children and Pentheus in his refusal to accept Dionysus even when his city was close to ruin. With this both Sophocles and Euripides show mortals are as much to blame as Gods sometimes for their troubles. Chorus colour our opinions throughout the plays. The chorus however colour our opinion of Pentheus, they enjoy the cult so his suppressing it could make him seem like an oppressive and tyrannical leader. This is also true of Oedipus, but chorus to build him up- they constantly refer to his greatness as a leader, and refuse to believe he has committed any crimes. Medea chorus’ opinion change of her, Plan Bacchae and Oedipus Dionysus has a reason for his revenge; Apollo does this to expose INCEST D: More blame on Apollo, although could be said Dionysus should have risen above human insults. Pentheus could have avoided his fate, Oedipus could not. More blame on Pentheus, he committed hubris, and must accept the consequences. Apollo more godlike, kills more peeps than Dionysus. Apollo distanced from audience- but Dionysus is seen at a personal level. No relationship with peeps Apollo kills, but Pentheus is a character audience knows and can sympathise with. Both demonstrate Gods causing troubles for humans, but it is Sophocles’ hero who can be sympathised with more, and therefore he who succeeds in more fully demonstrating the troubles Gods cause for mankind, despite his references to the gods as saviours also. Medea and Bacchae Medea and The Bacchae contrast- Medea no gods, human emotions, Bacchae deals with the power of a god However, this God’s cult celebrates emotions and passion. Dionysus is quite human in the Bacchae, angered and resentful at mere mortals. This is similarity is continued, when Pentheus plans punishments just as harsh as Dionysus’s in order to punish the God. It has more similarity with Medea than Oedipus although Medea involves no Gods and Apollo plays an important role in Oedipus. Both Bacchae and Medea show how emotions should not be under estimated. Both main characters in Medea and the Bacchae contrasts an emotional and unemotional side. Medea a romantic, Jason a pragmatist; Dionysus emotional, Pentheus rational. Medea and Oedipus Gods both prayed to a lot in both. (Medea p.22) but the Gods save the main character in Medea, whereas they partly deliver Oedipus his peripeteia. All All main characters have a hamartia which causes a peripeteia or loss where it could have been avoided. Oedipus in his relentlessness to discover the truth of his past, despite Teiresias and Jocasta warning him against finding out, Medea in her fear of a damaged kleos and timé, ultimately leading her to kill her own children and Pentheus in his refusal to accept Dionysus even when his city was close to ruin. With this both Sophocles and Euripides show mortals are as much to blame as Gods sometimes for their troubles. Chorus colour our opinions throughout the plays. The chorus however colour our opinion of Pentheus, they enjoy the cult so his suppressing it could make him seem like an oppressive and tyrannical leader. This is also true of Oedipus, but chorus to build him up- they constantly refer to his greatness as a leader, and refuse to believe he has committed any crimes. Medea chorus’ opinion change of her, Euripides and Sophocles conclusion Euripides keeps a balance between human and godly error, where in Oedipus the blame is only on fate and the God that exposed this fate. Whether Apollo can be blamed is a matter of personal opinion, should he have left Oedipus to enjoy his life unaware of it’s nature, or did it need to be exposed? Issues to be addressed… -Are the Gods important in plays??????? -Negative representation of Gods?????? -Any positive representations of Gods?????? -Where are mankind the cause of their own problems???????? -Opinions of other characters in play. |
|
|
|
| Loz | Apr 21 2009, 07:01 PM Post #14 |
|
Advanced Member
|
“The gods are behind the troubles of mankind.” Which playwright do you think demonstrates this more fully – Euripides or Sophocles? By Lauren Hyatt Both Euripides and Sophocles demonstrate Gods causing trouble and creating chaos in their tragedies, plagues, famine and madness are all afflicted on mortals by them throughout the course of the three plays I will be concentrating on, ‘Medea’ and ‘The Bacchae’ by Euripides and ‘Oedipus The King’ by Sophocles. However, it is questionable who demonstrates the God’s troublesome nature, as they both also create characters which put mortals at fault, and events which show the Gods in a favourable light. ‘The Bacchae’ sees Dionysus as the cause of Thebes’ problems, having possessed the women, and tricked their King, Pentheus, resulting in his death at his own Mother’s hands. However, the destruction he is wreaking can be traced back to human error- Dionysus is seeking his revenge. Agauë, Dionysus’s aunt, her sisters and Pentheus all denied his divinity, enraging the immortal. Apollo, the only God in ‘Oedipus the King’ is illustrated quite differently to Dionysus. Like him, Apollo causes great harm to Oedipus’s city of Thebes, killing many of it’s inhabitants with a great plague, causing ‘A blight on the fresh crops and the rich pastures, cattle [to] sicken and die, and the women [to] die in labour, children stillborn…’’ despite the horrendousness of it, he does this not out of a personal grudge, as does Dionysus, but because he wants to expose the truth about Oedipus’s incestuous relationship. Both Gods are at fault here, Dionysus being an immortal could have risen above the insults, and proved himself in another manner, Apollo could have chosen a far less destructive manner in which to convince Oedipus to seek the truth of his past. The behaviour and circumstances in which the mortals find themselves troubled by these Gods also changes the audiences perception of which is more at fault, and therefore, which playwright demonstrates their troublesome nature more fully. Pentheus could have avoided his fate, but Oedipus could not- despite his best efforts; the audience therefore puts more blame on Pentheus, whom committed hubris and must accept the consequences. The sense of Pentheus being in the wrong gives Dionysus more sympathy, where Apollo gains none. Apollo is the more godlike of the two, not being given a speaking part throughout the play, his voice only heard through others. Dionysus is a speaking character in The Bacchae, whilst Apollo is never seen- only talked about. Distancing Apollo from the audience means he is seen to blame less than Dionysus, though killing far more people, for less of a reason. The people Apollo kills are also at a distance from the audience, no relationship is built with them, as one is with Pentheus. Again this leads to Dionysus being perceived as a crueller God. The two Euripides plays contrast; there are virtually no Gods throughout Medea, only Helios used as a ‘dues ex machina’ right at the end, whereas Dionysus, obviously, plays a major role in ‘The Bacchae. ‘Medea’ is solely about human emotions, and the havoc they can wreak when underestimated, whilst, on the surface at least, ‘The Bacchae’ is about the power of a God, and the supernatural. However, the emotional aspect of both plays can be linked closely, when considered the God Euripides has represented in ‘The Bacchae’. The cult of Dionysus was one that embraced strong passions and emotions and the humanity of Dionysus’s emotions is apparent throughout the play, angered at resentful at mere mortals, with Pentheus’ punishments sometimes just as harsh as the ones Dionysus has given. Emotions play an important part in both Euripides’ plays, and those shown are similar, despite one play showing them from a mortal, another from a God. The characters Medea and Dionysus both have a more unemotional counterpart, Medea’s- a romantic, is Jason- a pragmatist, and Dionysus’s- emotional and passionate is Pentheus, a rational King. These subdued characters are the ones who underestimate their opposite’s emotions, resulting in their doom. ‘Medea’ and ‘The Bacchae’ have more in common that ‘Medea’ and ‘Oedipus the King, yet there are some similarities between these two plays. Gods are both perceived as saviours in these plays, prayers are sent to many Gods in Oedipus, ‘O lord of the stormcloud, Zeus, Father… Artemis, Huntress,… I cry to you Dionysus’, and Medea, as mentioned before, is saved by Helios. Even Apollo is prayed to in Oedipus ‘Apollo, lord of light, I beg you’, despite destroying Thebes, and delivering Oedipus his peripeteia. The power of the Gods is seen clearly here, as they praised and worshipped however badly they behave. The protagonist in each play has a hamartia, which becomes fatal, if not to themselves. Oedipus in his relentlessness to discover the truth of his past, despite Teiresias and Jocasta warning him against it, Medea in her fear of a damaged kleos and timé, ultimately leading her to kill her own children, even the nurse a ‘I’m afraid some dreadful purpose is forming in her mind, she is a frightening woman’ implying that Medea’s nature is also likely to get her into trouble; Pentheus in his refusal to accept Dionysus even when his city was close to ruin. All of these tragedies could have been avoided, if not for these fatal flaws. With this both Sophocles and Euripides show mortals are as much to blame as Gods sometimes for their troubles. The Chorus colour our opinions of characters throughout the plays, changing out perception of whether Gods or mortals are in the wrong. In ‘The Bacchae’ the chorus enjoy Dionysiac worship, calling him ‘The God of laughter’. Pentheus’s banning of the cult therefore, makes him seem a tyrannical leader, oppressing his subjects. There is also, however, a unsettling picture built up of the cult, also through the chorus. They talk about how bacchants ‘dance, delirious, possessed,’ and females nursing animals, ‘Wild snakes, nurse them and twine them round their hair,’ allowing an understanding of why Pentheus has stopped the worship, and disturbing some so much they may turn against Dionysus completely. Oedipus’s chorus are completely on his side, constantly referring to his greatness as a leader, and refusing to believe he has committed any crimes. The audience, seeing how he is loved by his people, and a good man, sympathise with him more when his downfall comes. Medea also has a chorus on her side, at the beginning, calling Jason ‘her husband who has betrayed her’, as well as the chorus the nurse also blames Jason, saying ‘If only they had never gone. If the Argo’s hull Never had winged out through the grey-blue jaws of rock And on towards Colchis!.’ The chorus’s opinion of her changes towards the end of the play though, feeling her revenge is too extreme. Whether Jason or Medea is made out to be the evil one, it is hard to blame Gods for their troubles, however, in the argon, Jason tries to do this. He says it was not of Medea’s own doing that she helped him, but Aphrodite’s, whom made them fall in love. In this argument, Jason implies that the God’s are not only behind men’s troubles, but everything they do. I believe that whilst Euripides keeps a balance between human and godly error, Sophocles’ shows only fate and Gods to have done any wrong. Yes Oedipus has his hamartia, but with a God against you, his downfall would have come with or without it. Whether Apollo can be truly blamed is a matter of personal opinion, should he have left Oedipus to enjoy his life unaware of its nature, or did it need to be exposed? Either way, I believe because of this, and because of the more ‘Godlike’ aspect of Apollo in ‘Oedipus’, that Sophocles demonstrates more fully God’s being behind mankind’s troubles, Euripides being more focused on human failings. Edited by Loz, Apr 21 2009, 10:48 PM.
|
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · Stories/scripts · Next Topic » |
6:04 AM Nov 27
