Tag: short essays

Introduction to Albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”

Like the albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”, symbols in literature go beyond their intended meanings. It is up to the reader to extract meanings of his own choice but with reference to the poem or comparative study of the other pieces published in the same genre or other genres. The symbol could be a bird, an object, or even an animal. Albatross – a bird has found its usage as a symbol in several poetic pieces. It is interpreted in several ways in English poetry but it is quite strange that the same symbol has been used by two different poets in the same sense and representing the same meanings. Whereas Baudelaire’s albatross is the poet himself, an odd man out, the albatross of Coleridge represents something that is good, an innocent bird and even faultless. Yet both poets have concluded the same. The albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” represents goodness whereas, in the first poem, its defiance invites divine wrath, in other its derision demonstrates human stupidity.

Albatross in Coleridge

Albatross of Coleridge is someone like Christ. It is a faultless, and “innocent bird” (Saeed) because Biblical studies have also supported two facts about birds; the first one is that the Spirit of God takes the form of a bird, and the second is that birds are spiritual beings. When Coleridge says that “As if it had been a Christian soul, /We hailed it in God’s name. (Coleridge ll. 63-66)”. This is the point where the sailors want to shoot the bird. And they did but they are also sure that it is a “Christian soul” (66) and have nothing to do with some evil spirit or bad omen. This is exactly similar to what happens to Christ. The message of the murder of the albatross in this poem is to convey that human beings have always shunned or killed the messengers of God (Saeed) for it happened with Christ and it is happening with the poet in “The Albatross” as well where Baudelaire compares himself with albatross, a bird which is “kings of the sky” (Baudelaire 5) with “great wings” (6), seems quite ugly and comic now, and the sailors after catching him are playing tricks and making fun of it. Baudelaire has actually the same philosophy that the Urdu poet Iqbal has about the poets. He states in Urdu “a poet is a second messenger of God” (Iqbal) which means that though he is not a prophet, he is JHis representative to spread goodness, but people often kill prophets and turn a blind eye to the poets and here Baudelaire equals himself with the bird saying “The poet resembles this prince of cloud and sky” (Baudelaire 13). It leads to what is called the victimization of the bird by the sailors and the poet by the society. It means the albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” could be different.

Albatross in “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”

Society has always treated birds and poets both with derision and prophets with cruelty. In “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” they kill the bird. It means that they have killed the innocent, or the Christian soul (Saeed), and this killing of the bird was rather a stupidity of the worst kind as the Wedding-Guest had to say, “God save thee, ancient Marinere! / “From the fiends that plague thee thus.” (Coleridge I. 36-38). Michael Raiger compares this idea with several theological studies from Augustine’s doctrines to Milton’s Paradise Lost, saying this is an arbitrary action and it is a psychological issue that arbitrary action takes place when a person is either stupid or has lost sanity. The mariner involved in the killing of the bird himself says “…a saint took pity on / My soul in agony,” (Coleridge IV 11-12).  This mental condition borders insanity and intense despair. Hence this is the point where a person knowingly or unknowingly commits mistakes and demonstrates his stupidity. Similarly, the mob has also the same psyche and Baudelaire is fully aware of this mob psyche of either killing the prophets like sailors or torturing the poets with their stupid derision and neglect whereas a poet becomes “the butt of hoots and jeers” (Baudelaire 15). It is due to the reason that he preaches goodness and does the job of prophets. However, the poets cannot walk with the crowds and stand apart. They cannot mix with them like Albatross which looks beautiful from far off but is quite clumsy and awkward when caught. Similarly, the poet seems to be prevented “from walking” (16) by his “giant wings) (16) which here mean his thoughts. Peter Curman, a Swedish poet has also said the same thing about the poet in his poem “The Monastery Madman” saying that “They say he’s mad. / Anyone who has inside his head / A macro- or microcosm / Must be mad” (Curman 9-13) to support the claim of Coleridge and Baudelaire in the albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” for which they have used the symbol.

Conclusion

Concluding the argument, it is fair to state that the major objective of both poets was to prove the innocence of the albatross like the prophets and poets through the albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”. And they have used this symbol to bring home their readers in which they have proved highly successful. Both have used this symbol as a representation of goodness and innocence that often becomes a victim of mass cruelty and human stupidity. The divine wrath that human beings invite is often the result of this defiance of innocent and goodness and victimization of sane souls such as prophets and messengers. Hence, the albatross in in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” is a spiritual bird that brings a message of goodness.

Works Cited

1. Baudelaire, Charles. The Albatross. 2012. RPO. <http://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/poems/albatross>. Accessed 07 Dec. 2013.
2. Coleridge, Sameul Taylor. “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.” n.d. Poetry Foundation. <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173253>. Accessed 07 Dec. 2013.
3. Curman, Peter. “The Monastery Madman.” n.d. TSWTC. <http://www.tswtc.org/documents/tsvetanka.htm>. Accessed 07 Dec. 2013.
4. Iqbal, Muhammad. Gabriel’s Wings. Lahore, Pakistan: Sang-e-Meel Publications, 1984.
5. Rogers, Michael. “I Shot the Albatross.” The Journal of the Friends of Coleridge 28 (2006): 73-82.
6. Saeed, Dr. Ismael Mohammadfahim. “The Bird Symbol in English Romantic and Post-Romantic Poetry.” n.d. IRCO. <http://www.ircoedu.uobaghdad.edu.iq/uploads/42/The%20Bird%20Symbol-Amended-%20Final.pdf.>. Accessed 07 Dec. 2013.

Relevant Questions in Albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”: Poet, Albatross, and Jesus

1. How do the portrayals of the albatross in “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Charles Baudelaire respectively, serve to symbolize the poet’s message or the overarching themes in their respective works?
2. In “The Albatross” by Charles Baudelaire and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, how does the albatross hold significance within the context of the Christian allegory present in both poems, and how does it relate to the character of Jesus?
3. Analyzing the killing of the albatross in both “The Albatross” by Charles Baudelaire and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, how does this pivotal event shape the moral and spiritual journey of the characters in each poem, and what commentary do the poets offer on human actions and their consequences through this shared symbol?

Introduction to Common People in Prince

Generally, Machiavelli is considered the pioneer in suggesting pragmatic pieces of advice to dictators that is why it seems interesting to see common people in The Prince. He has also shed light on the character of the common people who are the ultimate subjects, and play an important role in the formation of governments and consolidation of the powers of the princes and dictators. His views are drastically opposed to the humanists of the Renaissance era who gave more importance to the general public, but his views are contained within the powers and authorities a prince wields, exploiting the common people. His comprehension of the character of the common people is devoid of any religious values or morality prevailing at that time. It is because he, in fact, is a political theorist and not a literary writer like Chaucer who has pointed out idiosyncrasies and flaws in the general dealings of his characters in his famous “The Canterbury Tales”. Most of his views are generalities based on his own observation of the people as a crowd to be governed and brought under the authority of law. According to him, human beings or common people are both good and unruly based on their circumstances whether it is peace or chaos. He has used the specific term “plebe” for the common people and the role of the prince is to exploit his plebe to serve his own interests, not theirs. In fact, the welfare and attitude or behavior of the people are to be manipulated for good governance to keep the prince in power. In order to understand the plebs better, Machiavelli has divided the plebs into two distinct groups; the nobles and the common people in The Prince. However, he has counted the nobles within the common people as slightly different and observed the role and character of the commoners as a political entity with some drawbacks and qualities based on circumstantial necessities.  

Sections of Common People in The Prince

Machiavelli’s’ common people comprises of a division of the society into two distinct sections; the nobles and the plebs or general populace. He sheds light on the interaction which is between the nobles and their own local subjects that is that “each [noble] acknowledge and loved by his own subjects” (Chapter 4) by which he means that the nobles should be controlled first by the prince to control the common people. He also points out that there is always a difference within this social structure in which the character of the common people is very important. It is because “common people don’t want to be ruled or ordered around by nobles” (Chapter-9) which means that if there is dissatisfaction among the common people against the nobles, this means there is a way for the prince to exploit this character of the common people to his own end.  The advice for the prince is from the point of view of the common people because it is hard to satisfy the nobles but it is easy for the prince because he “can satisfy the people without harming anyone” (Chapter-9) the reason which he says is that because “what the nobles want is to oppress the people” (Chapter-9). In this connection, he goes in the favor of the people due to their having few desires. He also warns the prince against these nobles, as they are more prone to harming and attacking him. However, practically, he can secure his position among them easily, but when it comes to the common people, as they are multitudes, they are “of a threat than the nobles” (Chapter-9). It is also that in this conflict between the nobles and the common people in the Prince, the common people are always winders because of their numbers and the real stability of the state lies within them not in the nobles. Therefore, the sane advice for both is that if the state is to be stable, the character of both of these sections should be understood. It means wise princes “have taken every care not to drive the nobles to desperation and to keep the common people satisfied and contented” (Chapter-9) which means understanding each one of these sections is vital.  Although as a section of the same people, nobles are easy to gather around, Machiavelli demonstrates his disgust for this section. He is of the view that they are always greedy for positions, eager to oppress and seek their own interests instead of the prince. His comments on this section, actually, make his views about the character of the common people clear that if you “arm your people, you man those arms yours” (Chapter-11) which means that it is the empowerment of the common people in The Prince instead of the upper strata that he wishes to propound.

Political Common People in The Prince

However, as a political entity, he has also presented his acute understanding of the inherent good and bad qualities of the common people. These common qualities are generally considered within the framework of the principality, as to how these contribute to its stability and how these make a person unstable and weak.  As for his opinion about the character of the common people, he refers to men saying “they are ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, cowardly and greedy” (Chapter-17) adding that they only seek their own interests “as long as you are doing them good, they are entirely yours; they will offer you their blood, their property, their lives, and their children” (Chapter-17). However, this entirely depends on the prince how to make the people show this good side of their character. He means that as they are inherently good, they also want something good in return for these offerings. However, if there is none, they turn against the prince and the ruler. Again it depends on their position and the role of the people. If the common people have been taken as mercenaries, he says, “they are disunited, ambitious, undisciplined and disloyal” (Chapter-12) when they see that there is danger. However, when they see that there is some gain, the same lot is courageous and friendly. It is up to the prince or the ruler to keep them united by showing them what they are impressed by the most, as he states that the common people are “always impressed by appearances and outcomes, and the world contained only common people” (Chapter-18). The best course in this connection is to bring a parliament to win their favor. Hence, the role and character of the common people as a political entity are very important, and a good and sagacious prince knows how to manipulate this major power entity in order to consolidate his own power by offering appearances by constituting a parliament and making them see their own good.

Understanding of Common People in The Prince

However, what his understanding of the common people shows is that in his views they are simpletons and easy to be deceived, as he advises his prince to be a deceptive person as well. His view is that it is the nature of the common people to be “impressed by appearances and outcomes” (Chapter-18). He means that they are easy to be misled by the false appearances of the good things to come. This means that they are unable to discern what lies ahead for them. Therefore, they cannot be entrusted to be advisors, nobles, or ministers. However, some of them are intelligent and the prince can choose them with care and precaution. This does not mean that the character of the common people has changed. Their role as the harbinger of stable and solid governance is a sure way to become a good and powerful prince. A popular prince, according to Machiavelli, just knows the character of the common people and should know how to lead them, how to show them bravery, how to show courage and boldness, and how to encourage them. It is because ultimately, it is they who are to solidify his power, and their character judgment in this connection is manipulated by him. He states that “a prince must have the friendly people” (Chapter-9), and it is the role of the prince to mold their character into a friendly one through his actions toward them as shown through common people in The Prince.

Simplicity of Common People in The Prince

Despite being simpletons and easily led astray, Machiavelli has also listed several qualities of the people that can prove an asset for the stability of the state. This shows his in-depth understanding of the character of the common people in The Prince during those eras. He is of the view that the common people are more prudent in having sound judgment. They want peace and the status quo in order to flourish. When there is discontent, their role is prominent but during peace times, they want to enjoy life. Therefore, there are two things dear to them; their property and their women.  People often forget some injury or cruelty against them, but they never forget these two wounds. He states that a ruler must “keeps his hands off people’s property, because a man forgets the death of his father sooner than he would forget the loss of property his father left to him” (Chapter-17). If this is done, then the people start becoming discontented and this changes their overall character and role. They become hostile toward the prince and the state. He also states that freedom is very important to the common people. If they are habitual of living in servitude, then it does not matter. However, once they have tasted the freedom, they will never “forget their former freedom” (Chapter-5) in which case their character has been hardened, and they will prove a grave danger.

Conclusion

In short, his proposition in suggesting such a diverse role and character of the common people in The Prince is that he wants his prince to solidify the foundations of his state, and none else could replace the role of the common people. Hence he has put the common people in contrast to the nobles who are, though of sound judgment and generally shrewd, highly dangerous for a state. Therefore, his logic about the role of the people by analyzing their character is suitable for the princes and their stable governments. If they are given a good leader, who is the prince, they are irresistible and prove assets during foreign onslaughts or any adverse circumstances. These common people often prove stronger and fearless in the defense of the state than the nobles as they have more at stake. In addition, they love peace and calmness more than general instability as they have more at stake than the nobles do even in these circumstances. Therefore, to keep the government and the state stable, their temperament and behavior count very much, and a sagacious prince needs to understand this temperament in changing circumstances. It is also that if the people are satisfied and there is perfect peace, it serves the interests of the price and consolidates the establishment of laws, statutes, and institutions. More peace and prosperity bring more people into governance, which further strengthens the institutions and leads to the power of the prince. Therefore, the character of the people in consolidating the power of the prince as a political entity is a very important one. They do not demand much as opposed to lords and nobles but very little that is the absence of oppression and promises of a good future.

Works Cited

1. Machiavelli, Niccolò. The Prince (1513). Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions, 1993.

Relevant Questions about Common People in The Prince by Machiavelli

1. How does Machiavelli characterize the relationship between a ruler and the Common People in The Prince?
2. What specific strategies does Machiavelli advocate in The Prince for securing the support or control of the Common People in The Prince, and what are the implications of these strategies?
3. In The Prince, how does Machiavelli’s guidance on handling Common People in The Prince reflect the broader themes of political realism and pragmatism in his philosophy of leadership?

Introduction to Values and Characters in The Odyssey

Characters in The Odyssey by Homer have a strong influence not only on the Western literary canon but also on Western cultural values that the Western nations cherish. From the Anglo-Saxon period to the present modern period, Odyssey, his wife Penelope and their son Telemachus have been used to create epithets, similes, and metaphors that embody the Western values that the intellectuals intend to inculcate among their people. Therefore, most of the heroes of Western literature have been termed after these names. However, despite this, to evaluate or judge the characters of Odyssey on the canons of Western morality is not only unjustifiable but also very difficult on account of the wider gap of time and place. Also, there is a huge gap between that period in which some other values were cherished but according to the modern moral standards, those are not appreciable. It seems a dubious supposition to impose the modern canons on the classic mythical heroes but to prove that most of the Western values derived from those characters is not only easy but also correct. It is because, after all, it is Greek literature and philosophy that has laid the foundation of modern Western civilization.  Most of the Western values have been derived from the Greek and Roman civilization. Therefore, these three characters in The Odyssey embody the Western values that are still cherished in the world such as courage, leadership style, patience, mental ingenuity, faithfulness, and claim to a rightful position.

Odysseus and Other Characters in The Odyssey

As far as Odysseus is concerned, though he has been presented as a military hero in the Iliad, most of his qualities emerge in The Odyssey. Not only he is articulate, but also brave with innate leadership qualities. His intelligence and compassion have come to the forefront. His intelligence comes into play when he faces Calypso, Cyclopes, and other adventures in which he leads his men from the front.  His mental sharpness comes out as a leader when he faces that one-eyed monster. He says, “Cyclops, you asked about my famous name. / I’ll tell you” (Book VI  662), asserting his leadership role that nobody else is there to do. Not only he loves his wife but also leaves everything else to come home for her. This is the compassionate side of his characters that the Western culture has borrowed. He also is not less courageous, which has been shown in several other heroes in  Western literature. Terming him “brave, glory seeking, articulate and resourceful” Beardsley has stated in his book, The Ideal of “The Odyssey” that Odysseus could be called “conscience” which is the most modern concept of the Western values due to which the whole charter of human rights have been created (Beardsley). The modern concept of critical decision-making has also been borrowed from Odysseus and other characters in The Odyssey.

Penelope and Other Characters in The Odyssey

Whereas the case of his wife Penelope is concerned, she is the name of a faithful woman, who can do everything to preserve her chastity. Her strong determination to remain true to her husband wins the hearts of modern readers. At some moments, it appears that she is almost accepting the claims and hands of the suitors, but at the right moment, she again makes them wait for her. This concept of being a faithful wife still holds great importance in the Western world. She is not only herself faithful, but Odysseus also trusts her on account of which he says that “I myself know very well Penelope” (Book V 268). In their book, Culture and Values: A Survey of the Western Humanities, “Cunningham et. al. have termed her as “circumspect and discreet” because she holds back the aggressive suitors for such a long time that it wins her love of no less than a man, Odysseus (Cunningham et al 2014). However, her faithfulness lies in the fact that she does not utters any word to complain to Odysseus about how she suffers in his long absence. This shows the traits of all characters in The Odyssey.

Telemachus and Other Characters in The Odyssey

Telemachus is the son of Odysseus. He is quite young when his father leaves for Troy and does not return for the next twenty years. As he is not able to guard his mother, he plays his role as a son of the king of Ithaca and claims his rightful position when his father returns. He embodies the spirit of a son of a true hero who is to return someday and if not, he is ready to claim his rightful place. He shows leadership qualities from the very start – the reason that even Odysseus trusts his son at the end. He discloses his identity to Telemachus and not Eumaios who is quite loyal to him. When Telemachus considers him one of the gods, he clearly states, “Why you compare me to immortals? / But I am your father?” (Book XVI 235) which shows how much he trust his son who is trust worthy. Then he joins his father to cause the downfall of the vicious suitors who have been sitting in the lawn of their home. There are other characters who also embody great qualities such as Eumaios who is a faithful servant of Odysseus. He stays with his wife until he returns. However, these three characters in The Odyssey are considered embodiment of the values that the Western civilization still upholds.

In short, Odysseus, Penelope, and Telemachus, the main characters in The Odyssey,  have now become household names due to their qualities. Several pieces have been written on and around their characters. Several heroes have been created, imitating them and several adjectives have been created to appreciate or depreciate other characters. But the qualities that they displayed in this long epic are still considered bedrock of the Western values. Therefore, to say that they are symbols of the values that the West cherishes and feels proud to hold is not wrong, for almost all the Western values owe a great deal for their derivation from the Greek civilization. The characters created by the Greeks still are role models for great and immortal values.

Works Cited

1. Homer. The Odyssey. Trans. Ian Johnston. Second. Arlington: Richer Resources Publications. 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2015.
2. Beardsley, David A. The Ideal of “The Odyssey.” The Ideal in the West. 2012. Web. 22 Feb. 2015
3. Cunningham, Lawrence & John Reich, Lois Fichner-Rathus. Culture and Values: A Survey of the Western Humanities. 8. Vol. 1. Cengage Learning, 2014. Print.

Relevant Questions about Characters in The Odyssey Symbolizing Western Values

1. How does Odysseus embody the value of cunning intelligence and heroism?
2. What role do the gods and goddesses play in the characters’ lives and their adherence to moral values in The Odyssey?
3. How do characters like Telemachus and Penelope exemplify the values of loyalty and perseverance in the face of adversity?

Introduction to the Greek Code of Honor in The Odyssey and The Iliad

The Odyssey and The Iliadshow values like every book of a civilization does and these values come to the fore through its people, their celebrations, their religious beliefs, and their literary pieces. As Greeks lived too far in the past, it is only the literary masterpieces that the world has found in order to evaluate the excellence of their civilization and their ways of life. As Homer is the most popular Grecian poet, as well as the most popular classic figure on account of his famous epics, it is through epics The Odyssey and The Iliad that their values, they used to live by, could be evaluated. Those values form the core of their civilization and way of life, and it was considered an honor to abide by them. Several of those values go totally against the topical charters, but several of them surprise the modern reader that they existed more than 2,800 years earlier in Greece. From the reading of The Odyssey and The Iliad, several values and moral codes can be observed which form their Grecian honor code. Some of them go against their Greek norms, but some of them conform to the Greek civilization. Almost all the heroes of the Greek era abides by those values in order to win the honor and respect of the people. The values that set their code of honor are arête, means physical and mental power and ingenuity, ergon, which means manual labor, time, means the ability to take away a gift, war booty or a trophy, kleos, which means to win public opinion, xenia orhospitality or guest friendship, loyalty to the land and the people and above all the prevailing religious belief.

Best Quality in The Odyssey and The Iliad

The term used by Homer for pointing out the best quality in human beings is arête, which is one of the best examples in the Homeric epics. It has been translated in several ways but the best way in which it could be defined is that it is a personal trait where an individual uses his best potential to the maximum to achieve the best results. It has been, however, closely associated with mental agility, bravely, strength, courage, and even deceptiveness is included in it. Both have been given in The Odyssey and The Iliad. It means it involves all human faculties and abilities that he could use to his advantage. For example, Odysseus himself says about Achilles in The Iliad Book-I that “To your health, Achilles, for a generous feast” (1,229) which shows that a good health is the first point in arête, which clearly shows that Achilles is far above all other Greeks including Odysseus in strength. That is the very reason that he is a respected figure among all others. Odysseus himself is no less strong and the best proof is provided by the Phaeacian Prince Alcinous when he says, “Come, my friends, / let’s ask our guest…He’s no mean man, not with a build like that …/ Look at his thighs, his legs, and what a pair of arms—his massive neck, his big, rippling strength! (8, 326-329). However, this is not the only quality: a hero or a good person must have the mental faculty sharper than others to win the respect he desires. Odysseus, in this respect, excels Achilles who is far stronger than Odysseus. He displays this quality on several occasions during his decade long itinerary he undertook to reach home. However, its best display is shown when he along with his comrades is trapped in the cave of one-eyed monster, Polyphemus, who asks his name in response to which he says “Nobody” adding ““Cyclops, you asked about my famous name. / I’ll tell you. Then you can offer me a gift, / as your guest. My name is Nobody. / My father and mother, all my other friends—/ they call me Nobody.’  (8, 484-488). When he, along with his surviving comrades, hatches a plot to blind him and succeeds in it, Polyphemus blurts out; “Nobody is killing me, my friends, / by treachery, not using any force.” (6, 539-540). When he sees that they are out of the harms’ way and that monster cannot do anything to harm them he boast over this quality addressing Polyphemus ““Cyclops, if any mortal human being / asks about the injury that blinded you / tell them Odysseus destroyed your eye”(8, 662-667). This implies that the common Greeks see their entire world as the one in which a person demonstrates his supreme importance in the face of difficulties and conflicts and arête is the only yardstick to measure his success or failure. It became the ideal of the excellence of a person and quickly became a yardstick to measure the effectiveness of a leader. Bravery and mental faculty were not enough; wit and courage were also its fundamental elements. To say that my name is “Nobody” and then when the Cyclops says that “Nobody is killing me” shows how witty Odysseus is. Even deceptiveness is also allowed on occasions when it is necessary to save the lives of comrades and Odysseus displays this when he is in Phaeacia and listening to the tales of blind Demodocus regarding the Trojan Horse. He could not control his emotions saying “I am Odysseus, son of Laertes, / well known to all for my deceptive skills—my fame extends all the way to heaven” (9, 225-228 ).

Comparison of Persuasion in The Odyssey and The Iliad

And Achilles is no less deceptive as he rallies the whole army, when Agamemnon demands a prize he replies “And where do you think, son of Atreus, / You greedy glory-hound, the magnanimous Greeks / Are going to get another prize for you” (1, 130-133) which shows both his power to respond, persuade as well as win public support. Odysseus does the same when he returns from the journey and meets his old servant to check his loyalty with him and then Telemachus to check what is happening in his land. However, there are two other values included in the Greek arête which are kleos or sense of glory and other is aidos or sense of duty. As far as glory is concerned, even deceptive skills are allowed to seek glory and win public opinion as stated by the speech of Achilles who accuses Agamemnon of running after glory but he himself is seeking the same. However, whereas the sense of duty is concerned, it was taken by the Greeks very seriously. Achilles asks Calchas to predict what is there in store and he says “I live / And look upon this earth, no one will lay a hand / On you here beside these hollow ships, not even “Agamemnon, who boasts he is the best of the Achaeans.” (1, 193-196). This is makes him even more respected and honorable in the eyes of his soldiers that he is on the one hand, berating his enemy and displaying here is his sense of responsibility as a hero. Odysseus also feels this burden of duty and saves his comrades from any mishap during his journey and also feels the same about his nostos – the reason that he says; “But still I wish, / each and every day to get back home, / to see the day when I return.” (5, 268-276). However, the best of the arête is that which is praised by the enemy himself as Sarpedon asks his friend about Greeks and specifically Achilles that “They are strong, and fight with our best, / Ah my friend, if you and I could only /  Get out of this war alive and then?” (12, 320-323) which they know that they cannot. However, if they can, it means that they would be considered immortal like gods, for it was not a mean feat to hoodwink Achilles and escape. Sometimes even the heroes do not abide by the code set by society or they violate it due to a weakness in character or to achieve some end or deliberately due to some other reason. Sometimes honor is showered after the hero is compared to his opponent such as Ajax who relates another story about the blood price saying “a man accepts compensation” (9.652) which means that the forgiver stays in the same town but shows restrain which Achilles should have shown towards Agamemnon.

Hard Work in The Odyssey and The Iliad

The other value that a society values high in a person is the ability and the will to do manual hard work more than all others do. This is called ergon. The concept about hard work is that gods and men hate the person who leads an idle life and live like a parasite. All Greek heroes have displayed some manual skills as Odysseus is a skilled woodworker (4, 311-340) while Priam himself has built the palace. Time or the material possession of a trophy and prize is also a Greek value that is honored in a hero or even a simple individual. That is why Achilles says “I am not going to be the only Greek without a prize” (1, 127) adding to ask Menelaus that “now you’re threatening to take away the prize / that I sweated and the Greeks gave me” (1, 171-172). It is the threat of losing a prize that actually spurs a war between both the heroes; Agamemnon and Achilles. The major objective is that it is through gifts and prizes that they used to sway public opinion in their support. However, there must be one thing cleared that sometimes these gifts have no value but it is the value that is associated with these gifts by the people that counts.

Virtues in The Odyssey and The Iliad

Another value regarded highly among the Greeks was hospitality. It is considered a great virtue to befriend a guest and extend proper honor to him. In Homeric language, it is called xenia which is closely associated with the value of the sense of duty or responsibility. Hence, it was a duty of a good Grecian to respect his guest. The Odyssey shows several examples of bad hosts and bad guests such as Penelope’s suitors are very bad guests, while Polyphemus is a bad host along with good hosts such as the Phaeacians, who honored Odysseus. However, it also involves connectedness or association with a friend such as Achilles shows with Patroclus and with his death, he feels deep anguish saying to his mother that he thinks himself “a dead weight on the earth” (18, 109). It means that sometimes heroes consider several other issues and welfare of their near and dear ones which prompt them to demonstrate arête.

Loyalty in The Odyssey and The Iliad

Loyalty to the land, people and faith was also considered another character trait honored well. Achilles and Odysseus both are half-divine and half human being. Hence, there is no doubt about their having inherited religious touch and hence they pay proper respect as Achilles says, “When you two speak, Goddess, a man has to listen / No matter how angry” (1, 225-226) which shows how religious entities were regarded high in the Greek culture. Even his depression and sorrow over the death of his friend Patroclus is also a show of deep loyalty while Odysseus shows the same thing to his wife, his people and his land when he states that “I myself know very well Penelope / although intelligent, is not your match” (1, 268-269) which he says to Circe when he is trapped. Even Zeus also supported his yearning to go home which is due to his loyalty to the religious order, his wife and above all his people. Even Achilles pays proper homage to the religious entities despite his victories.

Conclusion

In short, the Greek civilization, as depicted by Homeric epics The Odyssey and The Iliad, has several values which were to be adopted by the heroes and the common lot alike in order to win the respect, honor, and homage of the whole nation. All Homeric heroes have almost all of these qualities though sometimes they may have displayed some slight defiance but it is human nature to be strayed away. The value that has set the code of honor of the Greeks of the Homeric era were arête which is interpreted as the holistic ability of mind and body of a person to display during trying times. It also includes manual hard work, the ability to get away with his prize or booty, hospitality, and loyalty towards the nation as well as the religious order. Even when Odysseus or Achilles violated these values, they are reprimanded either by the religious entities or by the people themselves in order to keep them on the right track and they both understand the importance of this code of honor. Therefore, The Odyssey and The Iliad demonstrate the code of honor that the Grecians have set for themselves and for their heroes in order to win respect and lead the nation.

Works Cited

1. Homer. The Odyssey. Xist Publishing, 2015.
2. Lattimore, Richmond, ed. The Iliad of Homer. CUP Archive, 1962.
3. Kowalczyk, Kamila. “Poetic Inspiration in Homer’s ‘Iliad’ and ‘Odyssey’.” Scripta Classica, vol. 6, 2009, pp. 9-14.

Relevant Questions about The Odyssey and The Iliad: Fundamental Values of The Grecian Code of Honor

1. How do the actions and decisions of Achilles in The Iliad and Odysseus in The Odyssey reflect and evolve in relation to the Grecian code of honor, and what lessons about honor can we draw from their respective journeys and character developments?
2. In both The Odyssey and The Iliad, how do the protagonists, Odysseus and Achilles, exemplify or challenge the concept of kleos (glory or fame) as a fundamental value in the Grecian code of honor, and what is the significance of their pursuit of kleos in the context of these epic narratives?
3. The themes of xenia (hospitality) are prominently featured in both The Odyssey and The Iliad. How do these epics portray the importance of xenia as a vital component of the Grecian code of honor, and what insights do they provide into the expectations of hosts and guests in ancient Greek society?

Introduction to Sissy Jupe

Without Sissy Jupe, the novel Hard Times by Charles Dickens seems to be a harsh criticism on the rise of capitalism and industrialization of the society of that time. Not only Dickens has pictured very harsh conditions of the industrial centers but also presented harsh situations and treatments that the different characters have to go through. The matter of fact is that some of the characters have been named in a way that they show the seamy side of reality of capitalism and its impacts. The proliferation of industry and consequential financial prosperity has divided the society into classes where the hands (the laborers) are facing the worst of the social ills in the shape of unemployment, exploitation and even outright expulsion from the social fabric. The hard shackles of the capitalism and industrialization has wrested the society of its moral and spiritual heritage.

Sissy Jupe Among Other Characters

Another important thing is that there is no room for personal and individual development which is amply shown by Charles Dickens through his two female characters which stand in contrast to each other. Although the system does not support the left-over people such as Sissy Jupe, Thomas Gradgrind and Mr. Choakumchild take up the responsibility in Coketown, an emblem of the worst sort of industrialized city. It also is a fact that the atmospheric pleasantness of the novel comes through Cecilia or Sissy Jupe who enters the scene and spreads a fresh wave of happiness. Sissy Jupe, though comes from the circus and left by her family, has had her influence that not only impacts the entire novel but also the very household where she lives. Symbol of better times, she stands in contrast to Louisa Gradgrind, the dear but mathematically measured daughter of Mr. Gradgrind.

Sissy Jupe and Louisa

If Sissy is to be understood as a fresh wave of happiness, it is imperative to create a binary of her character with some other characters of her age. Here Louisa Gradgrind immediately comes to mind. She is the major female character in whose shadow Sissy Jupe emerges yet prevails her when the novel reaches its end. Also, Sissy Jupe does not receive attention that she deserves. In fact, it is the difference of upbringing. Louisa has been brought up in a purely utilitarian atmosphere of Gradgrind where only mathematical and monetary value rules the roost. She knows only the value of money and of hard facts. However, as compared to her, Sissy Jupe is the child of nature despite the fact that she has been from almost a broken family, as she was left by her father to live on herself.

Sissy Jupe and Gradgrinds

Moreover, Sissy Jupe lives with Gradgrinds, as her father leaves her. She is taken by Gradgrind for her upbringing. Hence, Mr. Gradgrind is keeping her at home to help Mrs. Gradgrind in her domestic work. Dickens has beautifully contrasted both of them, Louisa and Sissy, in slightly ambivalent terms such as “No little Gradgrind had ever learnt the silly jingle” (Dickens 4). However, Sissy Jupe has obviously learned all these things in her circus life. As a daughter of the clown, she is left and has to compromise everything to make Gradgrind agree to keep her at her home. This contrast makes Louisa, a daughter of the fortune, imprisoned in the facts of Mr. Gradgrind. Actually, it is Sissy Jupe’s experience that makes her to stand apart from Louisa Gradgrind. This standing apart brings a fresh wave of feelings and passions in the readers.

Impact of Sissy Jupe

The second argument is about her impacts that she has at home and on the other characters. It comes in the shape that Louisa Gradgrind entirely starts loving her and alleges that her father’s utilitarian upbringing has brought her to her doom. She clearly tells her father that it is his education that has not done any good to her. Even Sissy makes her realize that she loves Louisa and that Louisa wants to know it too (247). This means that Sissy knows what love is and that Louisa, in contrast to her, does not know anything about such passions. However, she also sees that Jane, her sister, too, knows it better than her, as she has lived in the company of Sissy who has taught her what love is. She is quite happy and even more than Louisa, her real sister. Jane tells her that it is Sissy who has made her happy (243), so much better is her impact on Jane that it wins the hearts of Louisa. This may have awakened in Louisa a sort of loathsomeness for the hard and harsh rules and regulations of Mr. Gradgrind and increased her love for Sissy.

The other impact of Sissy Jupe is on the events of the novel. Sissy, though, is strictly told to stay in facts and rules of Mr. Gradgrind, starts spreading the impacts of her happiness and loveable nature in the atmosphere. In the midst of the hard and mechanized life, she is a representative of Victorian feminine quality. Her positive character traits come into play from the very start when she does not accuse her father of leaving her, saying, “You are gone away for my sake, I am sure” (10). This positivity stays with her at other times when she is with Louisa or even with Mr. Gradgrind. She has shone like a light when the moments are dark. Despite becoming a “girl number twenty” (11), she never ever makes realized Mr. Gradgrind of his faults how he treated her in the past. In fact, with the passing of time, she becomes a mature and confident girl in a way that she even saves Louisa from the likely ruin of Mrs. Sparsit’s bad intentions of linking her to Mr. Harthouse.

Sissy Jupe and Gradgrindian Philosophy

However, another interesting fact about her life is that whether she has learned something from Gradgrind house or not. This is very important as she has been taken to Gradgrind as a young girl, and she becomes quite mature and adult lady over there, having the courage of her convictions. Although she teaches Louisa much, she also learns many things like facts and other Gradgrindian philosophy of the utility of things. However, it is the act of teaching Louisa about fantasies that she has learned in her child that works wonders, and in turn Louisa, through her own example, teaches her how Gradgrindian philosophy destroys a person. What Sissy learns is that her childhood and upbringing and above all positive thinking is of more value than the utilitarian working of Gradgrind house. Both, Louisa and Sissy, learns kindheartedness form each other, Sissy acknowledges that Louisa knows too much “and I knew so little” (245). This means that she has the courage to acknowledge that she is deficient in something, and this is what she learns. Learning to have some deficiency is a way to progress, and she progresses in this connection.

Influence of Sissy Jupe

As the influence of her maturity is concerned, she has not only saved Louisa but has done a wonderful job of convincing Mr. Harthouse that he should leave Louisa and not slander her. She has demonstrated her confidence in facing him. He is rather impressed by the gentleness of her manners that he seems quite “defeated” (255), which means that she can manage things well, and this is her learning. In fact, her strength lies in her gentle behavior and positive attitude. It is not a sort of simple action, but an action full of confidence. Also, the question of whether it is her nature or nurture looms large on the horizon of her character. Leaving aside this debate, it is clear that she has the courage to be gentle and she has become gentle despite having learnt several things from the Gradgrinds for the first time. There are two other important actions that show her maturity and great heart. She saves Tom from arrest by sending him to the circus and arranging his departure from the country. Despite Mr. Gradgrind’s bad treatment to her, she does not exact any revenge; rather she shows him a better part of her character. The second episode is that of helping Rachel, the wife of Mr. Blackpool after his death. In both of these cases, she demonstrates that her kindness is matchless and limitless. However, it is very interesting if it is compared with Mr. Gradgirnd’s notion of the circus that a girl from circus helps his son and his daughter though he used to loathe the circus world and has never allowed his children to visit the circus. The bad influence of the circus that he has envisaged has come to his house in the shape of Sissy, and saves his entire household from the pernicious impacts of capitalism.

Conclusion

Furthermore, although Sissy Jupe seems a side character and acts or seems to act as a foil to Louisa, her influence on readers, too, is very impactful and striking. She seems to be living and loving character who comes to save the heroin when she needs such a person the most. She is full of jubilation and life. She is compassionate despite belonging to a low family. However, it seems that she has not only learned valuable lessons but also taught very mature and adult lessons to others. For Louisa, she has been a fresh wave of deliverance, who releases her from the clutches of harsh capitalistic mindset. She has taught Mr. Harthouse the lesson how to stick to morality when the situations are changing. Sissy Jupe is a representative of a good world where people love each other and feel compassion for each other. Positive thinking is the hallmark of Sissy Jupe that evinces through every act of her. She not only comes to help Tom and Louisa but also helps all others when the situation becomes gloomy such as Rachel. Moreover, if she is placed in contrast to Louisa, she seems more prominent and towering despite the fact that she is considered lowly due to her relation with the circus world.

Works Cited

Dickens, Charles. Hard Times. Feedbooks. Ebook. Online, 2014.

Relevant Questions about Sissy Jupe: A Paragon of Humanism in the Midst of Capitalism

1. How does Sissy Jupe’s character in “Hard Times” embody the values of humanism, and what qualities or actions set her apart from other characters who are influenced by the prevailing capitalist mindset in the story?
2. In what ways does Sissy Jupe’s compassion and empathy for others challenge the dehumanizing effects of industrial capitalism as depicted in the novel, and how do her interactions with other characters illustrate this contrast?
3. How does Sissy Jupe’s presence in the narrative serve as a commentary on the moral and ethical implications of a capitalist society, and what broader messages does her character convey about the importance of human connection and compassion in such a context?

Introduction to Sibling Relations in Frankenstein

Sibling relations in Frankenstein, a novel by Marry Shelly, show it as full of gregarious social relations with a tinge of a mild rivalry. In fact, the typical family setup started eroding during the Romantic Period where the roles of siblings changed with the change of sexual orientation, more education and liberalization of ideas.  Although relations between different siblings given in the novel seem genuine, sometimes these relations also touch the border of love that two opposite genders could have. As siblings often prove concerned for the welfare of each other, specifically sisters take care of brothers and brothers see sisters as their responsibilities, the novel also shows this amply. At the same time, nobody can live in complete solitude. If he discovers or finds something, he needs other siblings to share with and enjoy. If he suffers from some pain, he needs somebody else to share it. No outside of the family can share joys or provide comfort in pain. Siblings given by Mary Shelley in Frankenstein not only provide much needed love to each other, but also provide a mini society within a family to share joys and sorrows, while bringing harmony and balance in each other’s lives.

Brother-Sister Sibling Relations in Frankenstein

The brother-sister sibling relations is often fraught with love. The same happens in Frankenstein in all the brother-sister cases. Walton writes to his sister about whatever he sees and observes during his expedition. It is clear from his letters that Mrs. Saville has been worried about his adventures the reason that he writers her, “You will rejoice to hear that no disaster has accompanied the commencement of an enterprise which you have regarded with such evil forebodings” (Shelley 1). This clearly shows a sister’s love for her brother. Walton writers to his sister that he needs some friend who could show his concern for him, and be a friend in his loneliness which he finds in Victor. This is actually a love of a sibling for another sibling. He then tells her that his like his brother. Similarly, Victor’s siblings, Elizabeth who plays the role of his sister as well as wife when on deathbed, fulfills the duties of a sibling, as he looks upon at her, “to protect, love and cherish” (30). He cares and nurses her during illness. Same goes for his brother William whose death heralds terrible consequences of Victor’s experiment. He is greatly bereaved when his father writes him a letter of his death by the hands of monster. This is the need of love that he feels for him. This clearly shows that siblings love each other to make each other feel that there is somebody to take care of. That is the very reason that Victor thanks Walton for friendship but says, “Can any man be to me a Clerval was; or any women be another Elizabeth?” (262), which is an expression of love for sibling relations in Frankenstein.

First Cousin Sibling Relations in Frankenstein

Siblings also form first social relations during childhood. Victor does not agree to marry his adopted sister Elizabeth, until he is clarified by her, she demands his love and tells him about the will of his mother. Walton writes to his sister to keep in touch to have a social relations. He wants Victor to be his friend and brother only to have social relations. In fact, social relations with siblings make a person able to live in a society. Monster also longs to have some siblings, so that he could live a perfect life, as Mary says that the monster “gained knowledge, of brother, sister, and all the various relationships which bind one human being to another in mutual bonds” after he observes the poor family living a good life with their siblings Agatha and Felix (142). The same goes to Walton that he seeks social relation, as loneliness and alienation makes him feel estranged. That is why he passionately tells his sister about his friendship with Victor, showing sibling relations in Frankenstein.

Harmon, Balance and Sibling relations in Frankenstein

Relations of siblings, as described by Marry, in some cases, create harmony, balance and rhythm in the family life as well as individual life. When the monster sees the poor family, he hopes to join this family to see himself living happily in perfect harmony. However, the family leaves and his hopes end in smoke. He sees Agatha and Felix and thinks that, “their feelings were serene and peaceful, while mine became every day more tumultuous” (156). He wants to bring harmony to keep his feelings in check and serene. That is why he desires for siblings, or wants at least acceptance of his creator, Victor. It is also that Walton writes to his sister to bring harmony in his life, when he is away from his home. Victor, himself loses this harmony, when he comes to know that his brother is killed by the monster. This harmony is lost, as he states it that when he enters the graveyard to see their graves, and the leaves “were gently agitated by the wind” which shows a sort of restlessness in his heart lost by the death of his siblings (249). It means that Mary Shelley’s vision about sibling relations in Frankenstein is that they bring comfort, peace and above all harmony in one’s life.

Conclusion

In short, amid the confusions and ambiguities of shifting trends in relations and transformation of passions, Mary Shelley has cleared that the role of siblings in sibling relations in Frankenstein that is not only to provide much needed love in loneliness, but also to provide a small society in which they act their part, play their roles and provide love, social relations and harmony to each other. This is a balanced life that a person realizes after his interaction with his siblings. Mary Shelley wants to prove that if this balance is lost in the ambiguities as Victor has, this leads to creations such as the monster and relations such as Victor feels by the end of the novel. Therefore, her idea that siblings not only provide much needed love, but also relationship models and harmony is an example that she wants to set in her period by showing it in her novel, Frankenstein.

Works Cited

1. Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein. Free Planet Ebooks. n. d. Web. 18 Feb. 2022.

Relevant Questions Siblings Relations in Frankenstein

1. How do the relationships between Victor Frankenstein and his siblings, particularly his brother William and his adopted sister Elizabeth, shape the narrative and Victor’s character development? What role do these sibling bonds play in motivating or influencing Victor’s actions throughout the story?
2. The monster created by Victor Frankenstein longs for a companion and even demands that Victor create a female companion for him. How does the monster’s desire for a sibling-like relationship contrast with Victor’s earlier abandonment of him? How does this desire for companionship among characters underscore the theme of isolation and loneliness in the novel?
3. Elizabeth’s relationship with her adoptive family, particularly Victor, is central to the story. How does her bond with Victor differ from his relationships with his biological family members? How does her presence and her fate serve as a reflection of the broader themes of creation, responsibility, and the consequences of Victor’s actions?

Introduction to Disguise and Deception in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream

After reading the plays, Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, researchers, having examined the role and nature of the disguise of different Shakespearean characters, and have diverse opinions regarding the disguise as well as the responses of the contemporary Elizabethan audience. Although this disguise and deception is mostly in comedies, all of the tragedies also have these features common among them – a requirement of the time when women were not permitted to take part in theatrical performances and acting on the stages in Elizabethan England, and their roles were played by women in disguise. The literature review, given here, presents not only disguise and deception from the point of view of the writer, but also from the contemporary audience’s point of view. The selected researchers, in this connection, have expressed various opinions regarding why, how, and where disguise and deception were used by different characters in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream. They address the issue of the audiences’ response to (1) commonly accepted contemporary thought and belief about women’s performance, (2) theatrical impossibilities regarding the roles of women and future predictions about their independence, and (3) information for their audience about topical politics and giving them moral instructions.

Beliefs of Elizabethans

As far as the reactions of the contemporary audiences regarding their different thoughts and beliefs during Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream era are concerned, the pre-Shakespeare era was Puritan time, having no sense of gender, sex-equality or such other concepts, but where was awareness of the gender roles. In his essay, “Masculine Plots in Twelfth Night,” Goran V. Stanivukovic says that disguise is used to take control over women. It is because most of the narratives were presented from a masculine or patriarchal point of view where all actors were males, and women had little role to play or sometimes no role to play, as male members used to play female roles. It was actually a belief that women were too weak to perform such acts. He argues, “It is another instance of re-imagining masculinity in the romance” (123). Quoting Herbert as an analyst of spectators, Virgil Hutton states that the primary intention of Shakespeare was to see the reaction of the contemporary spectators to the performance of the male actors in female roles. Another point regarding beliefs was the presentation of fairies in disguise in, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, according to Hutton, “manifest the effort to bring the gods back to earth in an understandable and meaningful relationship with humans” (302). However, he states that this is a sort of a union that Hutton calls between man and nature or better to say a Homeric union, where gods or godly creatures are sent to the earth to help man. The issue is that these creatures were also represented by male characters as is clear from A Midsummer Night’s Dream. It shows that disguise and deception techniques were intended to hit the spectators of that time regarding their religious beliefs. It could be that this has been an attack on irrational thinking, as Hutton says that Shakespeare used the fragile human psyche to attack told beliefs or bring compliance to those ideas, perceptions, and beliefs. It was also a type of belief that women were not permitted to play the roles of women, which he attacked again and again through disguise and deception male actions adopted to play their roles in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream.

Audience and Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream

It is, therefore, essential for the audience to be constantly on guard about the roles in disguises as well as about keeping their belief willingly suspended about fairies and other characters. The role of disguise in these seemingly impossible scenarios where fairies were to be represented by men rather gave free hand to Shakespeare. Peter Hayland argues that the “playwright reacted to the practical restrictions involved in the need for a change in or addition to a characters’ role by exploiting the theatrical possibilities” (82). Commenting on such roles assigned to males in his other article “Shakespeare’s Heroines: Disguise in the Romantic Comedies”, Peter Hayland further says that Shakespeare has been attracted to “girl-gap” device that means to use a girl for double roles. He calls it a representative of the audience on the stage, saying perhaps Shakespeare was the first to have used girls to “see the possibilities of a genuine distinction between primary and secondary personal to manipulate the distinction”, adding such characters can “speak the truth as a satirist or moralist”, making implicit warnings to the audience about acts performed in this way (28). However, this is done by winning the sympathy of the audience first and not by alienating them. The major function that he employs is for information and instructions of the audience, and not entertainment only.

Comparing Shakespeare’s use of disguise with Machiavelli’s Mathew Thomas Nilsson says;

“While Shakespeare employed a broader range of disguise devices in Twelfth Night than Machiavelli in The Mandrake Root, both Shakespeare and Machiavelli implemented “task-oriented,” means-to-an-end disguise devices into their plays” (Nilsson)”

In fact, there are several similarities as Nilsson argues saying that the major similarity is regarding the types of task-oriented devices, a technique used by the character. However, in Shakespeare, this disguise is broad, as its purpose is also entertainment and not only edification. In this connection, Nancy K. Hayles argues that this is actually a progression from the early plays to later plays in which he wants to use disguise as a “means to investigate, and eventually resolve, the disparity between appearance and reality” (115). This is clear from Hutton’s remarks also that Shakespeare wants to provide information to his audience first and then to entertain them by using disguises in his plays. Maurice Hunt says that Shakespeare has shown the concept of love and knowledge intertwined with knowledge or information. He says that disguise permits exposure of love in Twelfth Night, because the true nature of all the four characters Olivia, Malvolio, Viola, and Orsino is revealed. He argues that Orsino enjoys feminine beauty, while Cesario provides him an excuse for not recognizing the opposite (487). That is the very reason that Charles Casey has highlighted homosexual and heterosexual dynamics of characters and their gender changes in different disguises in his essay “Gender Trouble in Twelfth Night” (121).

Deception and Disguise in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream

Although the literature reviewed above regarding the role of deception and disguise in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream, is about orientating the audience about the contemporary beliefs, concepts, and thoughts, still a great care was taken by Shakespeare to keep the audience in sync with the message given through these techniques. Shakespeare, as a playwright had also to see theatrical impossibilities and warn the readers and the audiences of the future progression. There is not only entertainment but also information packed in different disguises the men played in the place of women, sometimes explicitly, because they had to be clear, while sometimes implicitly because the message was veiled in acting or language.

Works Cited

1. Charles, Casey. “Gender Trouble in Twelfth Night.” Theatre Journal 49 (1997): 121-141.
2. Hayland, Peter. “The Performance of Disguise.” Early Theatre 5.1 (2002). Web. 15 March 2016.
3. —————–.”Shakespeare’s Heroines: Disguise in the Romantic Comedies.” UCAL. n. d. Web. 15 March 2016.
4. Hayles, Nancy K. “Sexual Disguises in As You Like It and Twelfth Night.” Editor. Catherine M. S. Alexander. The Cambridge Shakespeare Library: Shakespeare criticism, Volume 2. Cambridge University Press. 2003. 115-128.
5. Hutton, Virgil. “A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Tragedy in Comic Disguise.” Studies in English Literature 25 (1985). Web. 15 March 2016.
6. Hunt, Maurice. “Love, Disguise and Knowledge in Twelfth Night.” CLA Journal 32 (1989): 484-493.
7. Nilsson, Matthew Thomas. “Machiavelli and Shakespeare: Disguise as a Means to an End.” Binghamton University. n. d. Web. 15 March 2016.
8. Stanivukovic, Goran V. “Masculine Plots in Twelfth Night.” Editor. James Schiffer. Twelfth Night: New Critical Essays. Routledge. New York. 2011. Print. 120-129.
9. Howard, Jean E. “Crossdressing, the Theatre and Gender Struggle in Early Modern England.” Shakespeare Quarterly 39 (1988): 418-440.

Relevant Questions about Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Disguise and Deception

1. How do the themes of disguise and deception contribute to the comedic elements in Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream? What role do mistaken identities and hidden truths play in creating humor and confusion in these plays?
2. In “Twelfth Night,” Viola disguises herself as Cesario, and in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” Puck uses magic to create deception among the characters. How do these instances of disguise and deception impact the romantic relationships and love triangles in both plays? What insights do they provide about the nature of love and attraction?
3. Shakespeare often uses disguise and deception as a means to explore social norms and gender roles. How does the theme of disguise challenge traditional gender roles and expectations in “Twelfth Night”? Similarly, in “A Midsummer Night’s Dream,” how does the use of magic and deception blur the lines between reality and fantasy, highlighting the idea of the irrational and unpredictable nature of love?

Introduction to”Ruth and the Hijackers”

Language, identity and cultural mores are three important aspects of the culture of a colony in postcolonial studies such as in “Ruth and the Hijackers”. Colonization, argues Ngugi, robs a person of language and ultimately culture of a person, for language carries “the entire body of values,” which are lost with the loss of language (05). In the same way, identity is destroyed when nationalism and imperialism lock horns, and alterity comes into play due to deeper typological domination of the imperialistic episteme where race plays an integral part (Suleri 11-12). In the midst of this struggle of language and identity, cultural mores, the major product of both cultures, takes hold of the situations very often. The story of Ruth, an American national, living in the Lahore cantonment area shows these important traits of postcolonial literature. However, one more thing that strikes the reader and makes him rather baffled is the resistance of the local cultural representatives, and the pliant nature of Ruth, the imperial representative, in “Ruth and the Hijackers”.

Language and Culture in “Ruth and the Hijackers”

As far as the impact of language on a culture and values is concerned, “Ruth and the Hijackers” shows this through Raj Roy and the elite class ladies who are engaged in various activities in clubs that Ruth visits. The language ordinarily spoken in clubs and at every other social spot is that of the colonial power.  It has become a habit for the Pakistanis to have a “penchant for calling people with initials” and even an inspector of the ISI was speaking English that Ruth says was better than she expected. “He spoke better English, “she says (Sidhwa 68) but then comes the very interesting moment that does not need elaboration. Billo has taken up English as her second language from her “memsahib” (59, 68, 69). She does not speak English but tells her employer, Ruth, what to do when a man enters their home, or what not to do in such circumstances. This adoption of the language of the master, however, is not being used to “dismantle the house of the masters” in the Lordian phrase (01). Rather, it is being used to feel proud at as well as for identity formation.

Identity in “Ruth and the Hijackers”

Where identity is concerned, Ruth also makes it clear to Raj Roy at the very start of the story as well as to ISI boy, Junaid Akhtar, that she is from America at the attitude of both of them changes. This is her first attempt at identity formation. However, conversely, Junaid, though, is a bit insolent, tries his best to adopt the language of his last masters and uses it to dislodge Ruth’s identity but still stops short of using the Lordian argument (01). However, the use of the English language makes it clear that this language is merely vehicle of information or to impress the new master, Ruth.  The excuse for this impressing upon the new master is the presence of “an Indian woman” that is anathema to the Pakistani psyche at that time (Sidhwa 68). However, it gets very interesting that the identity that Junaid tries to form evaporates ine thin air as soon as Billo uses the same language to confront him with an entrenched cultural more (69). This confrontation of the imperial language to represent the local cultural more is interesting, as it ultimately saves the new master from embarrassment.

Hybridity and “Ruth and the Hijackers”

The important point of cultural more is that they depict the hybridity; a fine amalgamation of the local tradition of not letting the men enter homes when the owner of the home is not at home. This, Ruth, as a foreigner, does not know. However, Billo is very well aware, and though her linguistic ability does not surpass Ruth, but her knowledge of this specific cultural more saves her landlady. That is why Ruth has a good “appreciation of Billo’s overbearing and meddling ways” (Sidhwa 74). She knows that it is her unawareness of the cultural mores that could cost her dearly in a situation where a paranoid security man is hellbent on making her look like an accused. This hybridity that Bhabha has stated as the state of “ambivalence” has tendency towards an imperialistic attitude, the reason that her Americanness has been graced by the person in power, the retired general. The most interesting is Ruth’s attitude in the story “Ruth and the Hijackers.”

Conclusion

This attitude of the imperial representative to the new imperceptible and invisible colony is imperio-spora . This term implies depicting the colonial attitude of the representative of the new imperialism as somewhat ambivalent that is not domineering and respectful to the local cultural more until it protects. Ruth saves herself through Billo but with the tool provided by Ruth; the language. It, however, is another thing that Ruth has to accept the authority of the apparatus of the state but has to leave her colonial authority in the shape of language; the remains of the old British Raj which she sees very much in the Lahore cantonment. In other words, “Ruth and the Hijackers” amply shows postcoloniality through language, identity, and cultural more.

Works Cited

1. Bhabha, Homi K. “”Signs Taken for Wonders” — Hybridity and Resistance. The Postcolonial Web. http://www.postcolonialweb.org/poldiscourse/bhabha/bhabha4.html. Accessed on 17 April 2018.
2. Lorde, Audre. “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.” UCLA. n. d. http://bixby.ucla.edu/journal_club/Lorde_s2.pdf. Accessed on 17 Apr. 2018.
3. Suleri, Sara. The Rhetoric of English India. University of Chicago Press: Chicago. 1992.
4. Wa Thiong’ O’ Ngugi. Decolonizing the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. East African Publishers, 1992.

Relevant Questions about”Ruth and the Hijackers” by Bapsi Sidhwa

1. How does “Ruth and the Hijackers” by Bapsi Sidhwa explore the postcolonial identity and the impact of colonialism on its characters and setting?
2. In what ways does the novel, “Ruth and the Hijackers,” reflect or challenge traditional postcolonial literary themes, such as cultural hybridity, resistance, or the legacy of colonialism?
3. Can you discuss the role of gender and power dynamics in “Ruth and the Hijackers” and how they intersect with postcolonial themes in the story?

You may read more on Short Essays below:

• Bei Dao: Theme of Survival and Use of Free Style
• “The Shout” by Simon Armitage
• “Because I could not Stop for Death”: Analysis

Introduction to Racism in Othello

Othello, the most innocent tragedy where deus ex machina does not appear, has become perhaps the most controversial in terms of racial discrimination and prejudice as shown through this analysis about racism in Othello. Even the most modern performances and readings of Othello have elicited such responses where race and its associated features are given a prominent place. Writing on the performance of Othello in America, Kevin Young has discussed the question of racial hatred, racial prejudice and the performance of Othello. However, he has used a very pointed argument saying “Othello was a handy sobriquet when white Americans needed a metaphor for b**ck criminal behavior (41). This shows that racial hatred is deep-seated in the very psyche of white people, for Young has listed various newspaper reviews of the performance of Othello to come to the conclusion that, in fact, it is the white supremacy in America that has created this version of meanings regarding Shakespeare and his creation, Othello. In fact, racism in Othello has various dimensions including the Othellophilia and alienation and isolation as its psychological impacts. 

Racism in Othello: Difference

Othello and its modern performances and readings have elicited diverse responses. If compared to two diverse responses, Martin Okrin says that South African and European visions differ regarding racism in Othello. He alleges that this is purely a Eurocentric concept and in the case of Othello, it is even English Eurocentric that Elizabethan audiences in English used to experience racism and attributes b**ckness with “barbarous, treacherous, libidinous, and jealous” (167) behavioral qualities. That is why Iago uses racial slurs against Othello in the early scenes such as “the Moor” (I. i. 57) which is used against the aliens and then “the thick lips” (I.i. 66) which is specifically used against the b**ck men. Both of these terms show barbarity that is associated with Moorish people and then libidinous attribute that is associated with sexual dominance. He even uses “an old b**ck race” (I. i. 88), which shows prejudicial behavior existing in English and English audiences at that time. In other words, Martin Okrin’s point is correct that this is an English Eurocentric view about racism. However, this is specifically associated with the b**ck color, another perspective of Othello that is still prevalent.

Racism in Othello: Color

B**ck color is associated with various bad behavioral traits but first, this b**ckness is considered the foundation of bad behavioral traits as Kader Mutlu has argued in his paper that in Othello, “the portrait of race and being b**ck can be seen more explicitly (136). He is of the view that the hatred in the heart of Iago is due to b**ckness. However, the marriage of Othello to Desdemona, a white woman, further intensifies this hatred, leading him to utter entirely racial slurs as pointed out earlier (136). In other words, he means that this inter-racial marriage that has caused Iago to feel jealousy and hence weaves plots against Othello, leading to his downfall. It means that inter-racial marriage is another perspective of racism in Othello.

Racism in Othello as Othellophilia

A very interesting point has cropped up in the book of Celia Dialeader which she has penned down on racism with reference to Othellophilia or “Othello Myth” saying that it means love or marriage between a b**ck man and b**ck woman. In her review of the book, Christy Desmety has praised Celia Dialeader saying that this is the first time that Celia Dialeader has raised this point with reference to inter-racial marriages (281). She argues that Celia means that such marriages in canonical narratives involve white women with b**ck men. In other words, she states that this inter-racial sexual interest and ensuing social prejudice is less with men than with white women. She has, in fact, singled out white women and their perception of b**ck men and the projection of their sexuality (281). It is very interesting that she has drawn rather a positive point of racial attraction rather than racial prejudice; nevertheless, it is associated with racism. However, the negative point of alienation has been ignored by her.

Impacts of Racism in Othello

Racism and racial hatred or prejudice cause the subject to feel various psychological issues including but not limited to alienation. Alpaslan Toker has termed this as “racial alienation” (33) with reference to Othello after deducing it from various theoretical studies regarding Othello. He has concluded that alienation, in fact, is a “mode of experience in which the person experiences himself as an alien” (33). Commenting on it further, he further says that a person suffering from such alienation often becomes estranged from his own personality (33). In other words, he means that Othello is feeling alienation in the Venetian society which makes him “estranged from himself” (33). However, Toker refers to Roderigo’s words against Othello to prove his argument that his an outsider and is considered of “here and everywhere” (qtd. Toker 33). Touching on the systematic study of the Orient as Orientalism, he concludes that though different interpretations of Othello exist, “the question of race is at the heart of the play” (36). However, he has not concluded that even racism has a multiplicity of perspectives which has made Othello as memorable and controversial as Hamlet is.

Conclusion

Briefly stating, it could be concluded this racism has not been compartmentalized vis-à-vis its associated behavioral traits of the racial victims or the attraction of the white women. Even the modern-day interpretations are so much diverse that they have also the tinge of the same old English Eurocentric vision as Kevin Young has written in his review of Othello in America. Celia Dialeader’s Othellophilia has taken another direction that is about the white women and racism in Othello, a markedly different but significantly positive point. However, the rest of the psychological issues such as alienation and subsequent estrangement of the victim itself point to the strangulation of Desdemona by Othello and his own final suicide. In fact, he wins positivity through marrying Desdemona but could not contain his own self-estrangement which makes him an assassin as well as a murderer. Finally, the prevalent racism in Venice forces him to end his own life.

Works Cited

1. Desmet, Christy. “Racism, Misogyny, and the ‘Othello’ Myth: Inter-Racial Couples from Shakespeare to Spike Lee.” Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England, vol. 20, Jan. 2007, pp. 281–284. EBSCOhost, url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=26650487&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
2. Mutlu, Kader. “Racism in Othello.” Journal of History, Culture and Art Research, vol. 2, no. 2. Jun. 2013. DOI: 10.7596/taksad.v2i2.243.
3. Orkin, Martin. “Othello and the ‘Plain Face’ Of Racism.” Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 2, 1987, pp. 166–188. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2870559.
4. Toker, Alpaslan. “Othello: Alien in Venice.” Journal of Academic Studies, vol. 15, no. 60, Feb. 2014, pp. 29–51. EBSCOhost, url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=95380257&site=ehost-live&scope=site.
5. Young, Kevin. “Not Just B**ck or White.” Canadian Musician, vol. 39, no. 4, July 2018, pp. 49–56. EBSCOhost, url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=131039605&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

Relevant Questions about Racism in Othello

1. How does Othello’s experience with racism in the play influence his actions and decisions, and what impact does it have on the unfolding of the plot?
2. In what ways does Iago exploit racial stereotypes and prejudice to manipulate characters and advance his schemes in Othello?
3. How does Shakespeare’s portrayal of racism in Othello reflect the societal attitudes and biases of the time in which the play was written, and what insights does it offer into the broader issue of racism?

You may read more on Short Essays below:

• The Odyssey and The Iliad: Fundamental Values
• Characters in The Odyssey Symbolizing Western Values
• Common People in The Prince by Machiavelli
• “The Albatross” and “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”

Introduction to Phaedra’s Speech

Phaedra, a masterpiece character by Racine, creates multidimensional emotions among her readers which include pity as well as fear, love and sympathy, pardon as well as the element of remorse and horror due to Phaedra’s speech.  In every scene, she changes herself very quickly. She transforms from a mother who hates to a mother who extremely loves. Then suddenly, she is transformed into a queen who feels remorseful. Such great changes really put the readers in an amazing situation as and when they observe her changing character. Both kinds of feelings such as sympathy and horror are attached to Phaedra of Racine as are found in Seneca. Her final speech, to a great extent, atones for her evil acts; it also does not lessen the intensity of the crime she has carried out. It has lowered the graph of hatred which rose higher due to her crime in the different parts of the drama. She knows about her acts and hence feels regret. She also thinks that perhaps she may have been cursed for that and it could be an important thing in anyone’s character and role. Racine’s intention is to demonstrate through Phaedra’s speech that man is no longer a greate figure and that he is very much successful.

Phaedra’s Speech and Its Purpose

In fact, there is a possibility that Racine might have thought well before giving this speech, however, it happened to be the king himself who instigated her or Racine might have herself thought of atoning for his character in order for the tragedy to become so touching and poignant. In the last scene, the king looks at his son’s ruins “ But he is dead; accept your victim; / Rightly or wrongly slain, let your heart leap: / For joy” (Phaedra, Act V Scene VII Lines 3-5).  It inspires her to say what was real and hence she says before him, “ Theseus, I cannot hear you and keep silence: / I must repair the wrong that he has suffer’d— / Your son was innocent.” (Act V Scene VII Lines 24-26). Phaedra’s speech shows her open admission that she was not able to win the confidence of the lord king who thought her to be trustworthy and disapproved his son instead. He said about him himself, “ And it was on your word that I condemn’d him! “ (Act V Scene VII line 28).

Impact of Phaedra’s Speech on Her Persona

 Her character increases its attraction among the readers when Phaedra’s speech exposes her. She controls her feelings all the time.  When Oenone comes with a plan, she does not at once go for executing it, Phaedra often does not do that, rather she gets ready to do that.  In the last speech, it is clear what she wants to say “Moments to me are precious; hear me, Theseus “ (Act V Scene VII line 30) proving that she wants herself to be heard about her true nature. If we compare emotions, it shows Hippolytus’ character as well as inner self via self-confession because she says, “ Twas I who cast an eye of lawless passion” (Act V Scene VII line 31)  compared to “chaste and dutiful Hippolytus” (Act V Scene VII line 32) explicates her complete understanding about what she is doing. This admission of crimes shows that her conversation does not create wrong perception among the readers as were shown in the previous acts. Basically, this makes her morally good as she is about to die but tries to withstand the enticement and temptations which she had to confront. There are some other powers which also work to bring about her destruction “ Heav’n in my bosom kindled baleful fire” (Act V Scene VII line 32) In fact she means to say that she has not done that but the fate has done that and the gods have brought about her condemnation.  In the words of Lear, she is to a greater extent “sinned against the sinner”. She, in other words looks to be gods’, destiny’s and genetics’ curse. The first outside force is “heaven” while the second is “my weakness” (Act V Scene VII line 37) that inspired Oenone, her government to exploit and manipulate her, and this was very late when she came to know because she blamed Oenone that “ She took, and hasten’d to accuse him first” (Act V Scene VII line 39). She does not lack courage to disclose her intention of committing suicide before taking action on it and approached him to let him know the reason of the things which occured and how far his son proved to be someone different quite different in from his preconceived picture. Her words show how courageous she is:

 “I resolved to die

In a more lingering way, confessing first      

My penitence to you.” (Act V Scene VII lines 43-45)

There is the third power working behind the scene. It is the force of her defiled legacy and she seems to be condemned to function in a way which displays her character a bit whimsical which is more money oriented but she controls herself when she comes to know about her conduct. The reality is that her attendant provokes her to do what she may not do while being alone. She even leveled a charge against Oenone who quickly accepted death to get rid of death which she talked about in her speech and also her grace and grandeur which caused several heroes and heroine to ruins.

Phaedra’s Speech and Her Psychological State

The present speech discusses her psychological state which may indicate her delicate and fragile nature, though we see an element of fate working behind as well. In the newspapers, we often find such stories where the real characters are helpless before their passions. As far as she is concerned her case is different. She makes a confession and makes an effort to check herself. This control and confession in fact ultimately indicates her ill psychological condition. She prepares to follow the scheme given by Oenone with a little hesitation. It could have averted the tragedy while the tragedy would have become more touching if everyone taking part in the tragedy had died in front of the king.

Conclusion

At the end, it seems that a kind of mental infliction is there in which she suffers. The reason perhaps is that she grows in her bosom a love that is not allowed but considered a sin. Nevertheless, her last speech does show that she hesitated and was reluctant in carrying out this act to the end and even she was hesitant in making this thing public. It was Oenone, her confidant who asked her to do what she should have avoided. Therefore, we see that her feeble mind was influenced by the outer forces and therefore she brought about her own destruction and the destruction of her family. The story, though, has a mythological perspective, the purpose of Racine through Phaedra’s speech seems to present her as a woman icon who has a humane nature and a kind heart and at the same time having frailty as is attributed by Shakespeare discussed in Hamlet, a masterpiece in which Hamlet calls women as frail creatures.

Works Cited

1. Racine, Jean. Phædra. Translated by Robert Bruce Boswell. Vol. XXVI, Part 3. The Harvard Classics. New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1909–14; Bartleby.com, 2001. www.bartleby.com/26/3/.

Relevant Questions about Phaedra’s Speech in Phaedra by Recine

1. How does Phaedra’s confession speech advance the plot and reveal her inner turmoil in the play “Phaedra”?
2. What internal conflicts and moral dilemmas does Phaedra’s speech highlight, and how do they shape her character’s development?
3. What literary techniques and rhetorical devices are employed in Phaedra’s speech to convey her emotions and add depth to the narrative in “Phaedra” by Euripides?

You may read more on Short Essays below:

• Racism in Othello by Shakespeare
• Ruth and the Hijackers by Bapsi Sidhwa: Postcoloniality
• Twelfth Night and A Midsummer Night’s Dream: Disguise and Deception
• Sibling Relations in Frankenstein