Category: Character

Why do Characters in Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men Have Power and How do They Use it?

Many characters in Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men are similar to modern superheroes, in terms of how they use their power to influence others: George like Loki, Slim like Ironman and Lennie like The Incredible Hulk. In Of Mice and Men, George is passionate about his goals and companion (Lennie) and is someone who likes to manipulate situations to work in his favour. Many workers on the ranch respect Slim because of his craftsmanship and advice-giving, and the workers take his word as if it were law. However, Lennie is dependent on George and brings hope to workers as easily as he destroys it. In Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men George, Slim and Lennie have relationships that provide them power which they use to influence others and the course of events.

Lennie’s dependence on George forces George to develop intellectual power which he uses to protect Lennie. To begin, George and Lennie’s relationship is one-sided. Lennie causes “‘trouble[,] [and] mess[,]’” he “‘can’t keep a job [and] […] do[es] bad things” and George “[has] to get [Lennie] out[,] […] shovin[g] all over the country’” (Steinbeck, 11). Lennie is unable to make sensible decisions for himself and has no one other than George to help him survive without being institutionalized. Lennie is dependent on George for survival, direction, decisions and income where George can only be dependent on Lennie for protection; therefore, their relationship is one-sided since most effort comes from George. George gains intellectual power from this one-sided relationship. One example of this is when the Boss wants to “‘know what [George’s] interest [in] [Lennie] is,’” George lies saying “‘[Lennie’s] [his] cousin […] [and] got kicked in the head by a horse when he was a kid’” (22). George lies and manipulates other workers to protect Lennie. His ability to adapt and overcome various situations is intellectual power. George uses his power to protect Lennie. For example, George lies to his coworkers about Lennie’s location after Lennie killed Curley’s wife; in fact, when Slim asked him “‘Where you think [Lennie] might of went[,]’” George’s response is “‘We (George and Lennie) come from [the] north so he would of went south’” (97). George uses his adaptability to lead his coworkers away from Lennie to save him from a painful death as Curley was going to “‘shoot for [Lennie’s] guts’” (97). George uses his intellectual power to influence the other workers’ hunt, changing the course of Lennie’s last minutes alive. In essence, George and Lennie’s one-sided relationship encourages George to gain intellectual power, which he uses to spare Lennie from a painful death.

Lennie puts trust in George and gives him intellectual power in the same way that the workers on the ranch put trust in Slim and provide him with social power, that he uses to influence the others and the course of events. The other workers put their trust in Slim. The other workers consider “[Slim’s] authority [to] [be] so great that his word [is] taken on any subject, be it politics or love” (33). The other workers ask him for reassurance, turn to him for help and decision making itself. The other workers give Slim the ability to change their emotions, beliefs, behaviour, actions, and attitude‒which are examples of Slim’s social power. Candy’s beliefs were changed by Slim, at first Candy tried to deter Carlson from shooting his dog saying “‘Maybe tomorra’” and “‘[Carslson] ain’t got no gun[,]’” but Carlson stood his ground, not changing his mind so Candy turns to Slim for help, reassurance and to appeal the final decision. And Slim “[gives] him (Candy) [no] [reversal]” and allows the execution of Candy’s dog (47). Another display of Slim’s power is how Curley and the Boss “w[ear] high-hee[l] boots and spurs” to “to prove [they] [are] not [labouring] m[e]n[,]” but Candy says that Slim “don’t need to wear no high-heeled boots” comparing Slim’s social power to the Boss’ or Curley’s (20, 28). Slim uses his social power to manipulate situations. Slim “smiled [and] […] knelt down beside Curley” and told Curley “‘I think you got your han[d] caught in a machine[,] [i]f you don’t tell nobody what happened, we ain’t going to’” (64). Slim makes sure that “‘[Curley] won’t tell’” the truth about how he hurt his hand, which influences the course of events (65). Because if Slim did not convince Curley, Curley would tell his father, the Boss, about the incident and get Lennie and George fired. In summary, the workers take Slims word as law, giving him social power, which he uses to keep men from being fired, give advice and appeal as the final authority in decision making on the ranch.

Where Slim uses social power to manipulate events, Lennie uses intellectual and physical power. Lennie’s relationship with George gives him intellectual power, which he uses to break social norms. Lennie also has physical power that he uses to influence others. George has a parent-like influence on Lennie. George’s opinion, demands, and actions mould Lennie’s opinions and actions. For example, George forces his opinion of Curley’s wife onto Lennie, saying “‘she’s a rattrap[,]’” and telling Lennie “‘to keep away from her[,]’” forcing Lennie to think she is a bad person (32). Or how when George demands Lennie to “‘keep away from Curley,’” but “‘if the son-of-a-bitch socks [him]‒let [Curley] have it[,]’” and Lennie’s actions later in the book mimic Georges instructions (30). George’s parent like influence gives Lennie intellectual power. Throughout the book, George raises Lennie with hope and the ability to chase his dreams of “‘liv[ing] off the fat [of] the lan[d]’” and “‘have[ing] rabbits’” to tend (14). Lennie’s hope gives him the power–intellectual power–to rise above mundane ways of thinking: originally, with hope, a dream and unbias views. Lennie also has physical power. Lennie “‘[busts] ever[y] bone in [Curleys] han[d]’” just by grabbing it, and “‘smack[s] [his] [puppy]’” lightly but his “‘[puppy] [still] [died]’” (64, 87). Lennie’s strength is an example of his physical power. Lennie uses both his intellectual and physical power to break social norms. Lennie uses his intellectual power to be unbias to race while talking to Crooks and briefly give him hope. Crooks finds “it [difficult] [to] conceal his pleasure with anger” while in the company Lennie makes and Crooks even offers “‘[his] hand to work for nothing’” on the ranch George, Lennie and Candy plan to buy (75, 76). Lennie raises Crook’s spirits and gives hope to him in a time when it seems impossible. Lennie uses his physical power to “br[eak] [Curley’s] [wife’s] neck[,]” which is not socially acceptable by the particular group on the ranch (91). In conclusion, George raises in an environment that helps Lennie rise to think above the mundane ways of thinking, which gives him intellectual power; as a result, Lennie breaks social norms by talking to Crooks and giving him hope. Lennie also has physical power, which he uses to inflict pain upon Curley and death upon Curley’s wife.

Others and the course of events are under the manipulation of George, Slim and Lennie’s power(s), which is a direct result of their relationships. George uses intellectual power, which he builds through years of protecting Lennie to save Lennie from a painful death by other workers on the ranch. Slim influences significant decisions made on the ranch‒like allowing the death of Candy’s dog‒using his social power which the other workers on the ranch give him. And Lennie gives hope to Crooks, breaks Curley’s wife’s neck and destroys Curley’s American dream (of being a boxer) using his physical power and/or intellectual power–which his companionship with George gives him. These characters can be compared to superheroes because of the way they use their powers. George uses his intellectual power, manipulation, in the same way Loki does, to make the current situation more in their favour. Where Slim uses his social power in the same way Iron man does, to call shots for their teams. And Lennie and The Incredible Hulk also use their power similarly, both use intellectual and physical power, intellectual when they are calm but seem to resort back to physical power when feeling threatened. Previous analogies to superheroes give insight into how George, Slim and Lennie use their power(s). Whereas superheroes use their power to help others, the characters in Of Mice and Men use their power to protect those they care about.

Work Cited

1. Steinbeck, John. Of Mice and Men. Penguin Books’. New York, 1993.

After its official publication in 1813, Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice managed to become one of the most popular and widespread works of English Literature. The novel unfolds the romantic story of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, which is now passed from generation to generation. Of course, the novel is to a great extend a straight-forward love story, but the value and the significance of this work goes far beyond that and transcends the boundaries of romance and love and deals with how people act in their interpersonal relationships based on how they see themselves and how the others see them.

In the beginning, the novel was written under the title “First Impressions”, but after some expansive work of Jane Austen, she decided to change it into “Pride and Prejudice”. Unluckily, there is nothing left from the original text written between 1796 and 1797, so we can hardly make any comparisons between the novel and its prototype.

The first point is, if the novel was still under its first title it would revolve only around a few characters such as Elisabeth and the fact that she finds Mr. Darcy very prideful, Darcy’s judgmental opinion about Elisabeth and Jane’s ‘superficial’ love with Bingley. Moreover, it probably be connected to David Hume’s notion of impressions and ideas. More specifically, by “impressions” he refers to the thoughts that come to our minds unintentionally and do not have a logical order. On the contrary, by “ideas” he refers to a simple copy, a reproduction of the spontaneous impression. And that was not quite the point. Pride and Prejudice connects to all the characters of the book and shows how each one perceives these two ideas. For example, Mr. Darcy is very prideful, as stated also in the book ‘his manners gave a disgust which turned the tide of popularity; for he was discovered to be proud’. When he first met Elisabeth, he was very prejudiced because of her family’s lower social class and insulted her by calling her ‘not handsome enough’. As the novel progresses, we find out that his arrogance comes through his upbringing. His father taught him that he should always be selfish and overbearing and to compare his worth with other people because he belongs to the upper class.

In the same kind of way acts Elisabeth, too. Even though she is a sophisticated, astute young lady, she is being very prejudiced about Darcy. That happens because in their first meeting Darcy had hurt her pride, because he told her that even though she is tolerable she is not handsome enough. And then Elisabeth said to her friend that she could easily forgive his pride if he had not mortified hers. Having this idea of Darcy, she later believes Wickham’s lies when he called Darcy unfair even though he did not had plentiful proof. Luckily, all these changes after talking to the housekeeper at Pemberley. However, they both grow through the story and what they have been through and realize that without pride and prejudice in their lives it is easier to understand other people better.

Other noteworthy examples of the novel are firstly Mrs. Bennet, who believes that only marrying a man with good fortune will guarantee her daughters’ pride. Secondly, there is Lady Catherine, Darcy’s aunt, who as an aristocrat does not accept any lower-class woman for her nephew as a wife and feels challenged by Elisabeth. Finally, there is also Mr. Collins, the epitome of pride, because he would do anything for it.

Another key point is that, it is very common and especially nowadays that publishers want to have the same dust wrapper for the novels written by the same author, because they believe that if the readers loved the first approach, they will probably love the second one. That is exactly what happened with Pride and Prejudice, but 19th century-style. After the great success of her first novel Sense and Sensibility, Austen’s publisher asked if they could remain in the same pattern of Noun-and-Noun and so she did.

Taking all the above into consideration, Pride and Prejudice is a novel that covers a wide range of topics, focusing on how first impressions can sometimes be wrong and how we should reconsider and reevaluate our decisions. But the main point is that all these come from the pride and prejudice that each one of us has inside of them and how they let them define their lives. It also connects marriage with pride and how that shows someone’s social status or the respect they deserve from others. So, I personally believe that following her publisher’s orders to change the title was the right decision to do.

Of Mice and Men ​was published in 1937. At this time it was the beginning of the end of the age of modernism in literature. Modernism focuses more on the progression of characters rather than religious, political, and social views like Victorian literature did. However, Steinbeck is thought to have been influenced by sexism and racism that were both heavily apparent in history during the time he was writing ​Of Mice and Men​.

The protagonist of ​Of Mice and Men are George Milton. Lennie Small is also a highly important character, but George is the one who is developed as a character throughout the novel. George is a quick-witted farmworker who is not displayed as a very kind-hearted person. However, he does love his best friend, Lennie, despite the way he treats him. Being best friends with a man like Lennie gives George hope and allows him to dream of the future. He loves the fact that he has someone to talk to and capitalizes on his companionship with Lennie. Although he does not appear to be a nice person he is deep down.

The antagonist in ​Of Mice and Men​ is Curley. Curley is a power seeker who lives by making the workers on his father’s farm miserable, especially Lennie and George. He is constantly angry and vindictive most likely because he knows he can not control his extremely flirty wife.

Lennie and George are two friends struggling to find jobs to earn money so they can someday own a farm together. George is intelligent however his best friend Lennie is extremely childish and has an odd yearning to pet things such as mice and women. This odd fetish-like behavior is normally what gets the two fired from jobs they are able to land. Finally, they find work at a farm and meet all the other workers. Curley is the boss’s son and his wife is very coquettish. One day Lennie is in the barn looking at a puppy he killed accidentally when Curley’s wife finds him. There he explains what happened and she lets him touch her hair. His strength leads to him pulling her hair too hard which aggravates her and he covers her mouth to keep her quiet. He also shakes her and breaks her neck killing her. When the rest of the workers find out they want to lynch him and George knows he has to find him first. He finds Lennie in the brush near a pond and kills his best friend to save him from being lynched.

Hope is a huge theme in Of Mice and Men. George and Lennie both believe they will one day be able to own a farm together and have a happy life. This hope is what keeps the two going and trying to find jobs that will help pay for their big plans.

Justice is also a huge theme prevalent in ​Of Mice and Men.​ The justice system on the ranch is its own set of rules. Slim is the one who tells everyone else the consequences of their actions in many scenarios. To George justice meant he had to kill his best friend because it was” the right thing to do” not because he wanted to or thought it was truly ethical.

Symbolism is commonly used in Steinbeck’s novel. The different characters for example all symbolize the greater population. Crooks for example symbolizes African Americans during the time the novel was written and how racism was a part of everyday life for them. Curley’s wife symbolizes the repression of women and the thought that they could not be equal to men. Rabbits are also highly symbolic. They represent false hope and the belief that anything is possible even when it’s not.

Symbolism is a recurring theme in John Steinbeck’s ​Of Mice and Men. The setting is also highly symbolic. The pool of water for example is where the story begins and ends. It is a safe place for them to meet without worrying about others. In the book, George says, “Lennie- if you just happen to get in trouble like you always done before, I want you to come right here an’ hide in the brush.” (pg. 15). This shows the amount of security this place holds for the two characters. It’s a place of safety and George feels it’s the only place Lennie will be safe. This is also somewhat ironic because it’s the place where George kills Lennie. He feels that killing Lennie is keeping him safe. The bunkhouse symbolizes a place of conflict and violence. It is where Curley punches Lennie in the face and as a result, Lennie shatters Curley’s fist in his hand. The dream farm is symbolic of the two men’s friendship. It’s what bonds them and keeps their relationship so strong. It is something for them to both look forward to together and gives them hope. Without the hope of this dream farm they have created in their minds their friendship would most likely not be so close and strong because George wouldn’t have a reason to take care of Lennie. Mice are also highly symbolic to the book. The fact that it is in the title is a clear hint that they are important to the outcome. The first mouse encountered in the story is a dead one that Lennie enjoys keeping in his pocket so he has something to pet and comforts him. This shows how Lennie doesn’t really take account for or care about death but more about his own comfort. This makes Lennie’s own death a little less hurtful because he was killed by his best friend in a non-violent way rather than angry men he barely knows.

“Lennie dabbled his big paw in the water and wiggled his fingers so the water arose in little splashes; rings widened across the pool to the other side and came back again. Lennie watched them go. ‘Look, George. Look what I did.’” (pg.3). This quote from ​Of Mice and Men​ is more important than one would first think it to be. Lennie’s hands are described as “paws” as if he were a bear. This symbolizes the fact that he is almost beast-like, which is ironic he is kind at heart and never means harm. Referring to his hands as paws implies the fact that he is just some massive creature who is ruthless and violent instead of a human being. There is also a second important meaning behind this quote. Lennie has a mental disability and because of this, he is unable to see the effect of his actions beforehand. In this scene, he is amazed by the ripples in the water he is creating by simply moving his finger. This is because he would have never thought something would come from his actions. His disability blinds him from the fact that every action has an effect on the world. This quote sets up all his confusion in the rest of the book. Like his finger in the water, his yearning to pet things has a consequence. He speaks of how his aunt used to give him mice as a child but then stopped because he always killed them. This is an effect he did not see coming. His careless actions also led to him and George losing their previous job because he grabbed a woman to feel her dress. Later he kills a puppy because he smacked it to keep it from biting him. Ultimately Lennie is killed by his best friend because of his actions. Lennie killed Curley’s wife by accidentally breaking her neck. This fact plays into his description of a violent animal and that he does see cause and effect in the real world.

The personality of George at the beginning of the book is extremely different compared to the personality of George at the end of the book. Although he is mean to Lennie multiple times George truly does care for Lennie and that is the one thing that does not change throughout the story. In the beginning, George is extremely hopeful of his future with Lennie. He truly allows himself to believe that they will own a farm with ten acres of land and rabbits that Lennie will be able to look after. He uses this belief and his friendly love towards Lennie to motivate his life. Despite the fact that Lennie keeps causing them to lose jobs and they are broke, George remains hopeful and never stops speaking of their futures together. He even allows for candy to come in on their plans because it’ll mean that the chances of it actually happening are greater. Candy reminds the men that the chances of them actually being able to obtain the farm are very unlikely. George will not give up though he still says he believes it’ll happen for them. He believes until the end. When Lennie kills Curley’s wife every plan George ever had and every ounce of hope dies with her. He is then forced by his own beliefs to kill his best friend. He does so in a mercy killing because he thinks it’s the right thing to do. He does so to keep him from being lynched because it coming from him would have been better in his eyes. George lost his best friend and with it lost all hope of the future. Lennie was the source of all his hope. He lived for being able to take care of him and promise him a happy future where everything would work out as they had imagined. When Lennie dies George realized how stupid he had been forever thinking he’d have a chance of getting that farm. The very last sentence of the book is, “ Now what the hell ya suppose is eatin’ them two guys?” (pg 107). The thing “eatin’” George was the loss of not only his truest companion but his plans and hope for his future.

I highly recommend you read John Steinbeck’s ​Of Mice and Men.​ It is a great read that is both emotional and thrilling. It really makes the reader think deeper i to the symbolism the author used and what each individual character represents in the world. Steinbeck does an amazing job of not sugar coating life during the times he wrote this. He does well by making the readers realize that the American Dream, although different from everyone, is a hopeless dream. He also points out the injustices of the times through racism and the inequality of women. Through the lives of his characters, he shows real-world poverty, social injustices, human intolerance, and violence. Steinback uses many examples within the novel to point out the racism and the wrongs in society, in the book Crook says, “ Cause I’m black. They play cards in there, but I can’t play because I’m black. They say I stink.” (pg. 68). His character development is also very interesting. The way he develops the protagonist, George, and makes him completely switch his beliefs is something I really didn’t expect. Steinbeck shows his characters as they are and never anything different. There is no implying but instead just straightforwardness. This is very nice to see in a novel because instead of having to decipher what every paragraph means you truly understand what is going on because he’s telling you all you need to know. There is a lot of symbolism but it is very easy to pick up on and makes the story that much more interesting to read. In conclusion, I think you would enjoy this book very much. It is definitely worth taking the time to read.

Emily Brontë, in full Emily Jane Brontë, false name Bell, (imagined July thirty,in eighteen and eighteen, Thornton, Yorkshire, England—kicked the pail December nineteen, in eighteen and forty-eight, Haworth, Yorkshire), English creator and craftsman who made anyway one novel, Wuthering Heights (eighteen and forty-seven), a particularly inventive work of excitement and detest set on the Yorkshire fields. Emily was possibly the best of the three Brontë sisters, anyway an unbelievable record is to an extraordinary degree little, for she was calm and spared and left no correspondence of interest, and her single novel clouds instead of settles the conundrum of her significant nearness. In her novel, there are overwhelming storytellers: Lockwood and Nely. There are others; in part thirty, for example, Zillah expect oversee over the record, anyway it is single brisk. The encompassing record, this is the story in which the fundamental story is exhorted, is displayed with the guide of Mr. Lockwood. We perceive from his remarks to the peruser, and his dialogs with change characters, that he has rented Thrushcross Grange looking out isolation after a failed estimation. Regardless of the truth that the arrangement suggests that Lockwood is making the substance we are scrutinizing, gigantic territories of the record are shown as in spite of the fact that they arrive clearly from some other character – Ellen ‘Nelly’ Dean.

She, as we no doubt am mindful from her own one of a kind measurements, turn into a worker inside the Earnshaw claim family observing that right off the bat and served the family at both novel and Thrushcross Grange. under no circumstances like Lockwood, she incorporates solidly as a person inside the story, however likewise pulls in on others’ records of exercises where she ended up missing.

In spite of reality that they fill in on the grounds that the obvious storytellers, others are consolidated sooner or later of the radical —the characters — who painting a portion or two, giving comprehension into both man or lady and plot headway. Catherine does now not convey direct to the perusers (aside from in noted exchange), anyway through her magazine, she depicts basic parts of the teenagers she and Heathcliff shared at the fields and the treatment they were offered owing to Joseph and Hindley. the overall population of the voices weave by and large to give a choral story. before everything, they manage Lockwood, taking note of his demand, anyway they address perusers, in addition, giving severa points of view of the tangled presences of the inhabitants of Thrushcross Grange and Wuthering Heights.

She appears to demonstrate objective observers, looking to enable the story to legitimize itself with genuine confirmation. Objective recognitions by utilizing outcasts may obviously not be ruined with the guide of having a prompt association; unfortunately, a closer test of these evidently objective storytellers reveals their predisposition.For occurrence, Lockwood’s record engages perusers to start the story while the incredible dominant part of the intrigue is starting at now finished. regardless of the way that the essential story is being told in flashback, having Lockwood interface with Heathcliff and the others at Wuthering Heights expedient removes his objectivity. What he records in his magazine isn’t in every case precisely what he’s being educated by Nelly however his memories and illustration of Nelly’s story. In like way, her story direct incorporates the peruser and associates with them in the intrigue. while saying the past, she will predict future occasions, which builds expectation, on this way associating with perusers significantly more. at any rate, her incorporation is troublesome because of the reality she is dubious in her games: on occasion choosing Edgar over Heathcliff (and the elective way around), and occasionally working with Cathy in the meantime as at unmistakable occasions misdirecting Cathy’s fact. anyway, she is an extensive attracting storyteller, so perusers immediately her inadequacies.

At last, each Lockwood and Nelly are genuinely facilitators, engaging perusers to go into the universe of Wuthering Heights. All perusers know more than anybody storyteller, and in this mannerare empowered as they analyze.

An uncommonly stunning part of the book’s writer structure approach is the record style she uses even as moving forward and backward between the two characters of Nelly Dean and Lockwood.The novel is a story educated through passerby cash owed, first through Lockwood, trailed by utilizing Nelly. Lockwood’s obligation is shaping the gadget of the radical even as Nelly offers the musings boggling depict of the individual presences of the expansive wide assortment of characters having been accessible direct. But, every character has a trade feeling and style.

He writes in an educated conceptual vernacular, with entangled sentences, longer articulations, articulations of Latin or Greek commencement. Nearby the book, his form ends up being progressively prevalent.

Towards the start of insolvency fifteenth, Lockwood says that he will continue with the story in Nelly’s expressions, without interruptions, as he envisions that he couldn’t improve her design, and depicts her as a ‘reasonable storyteller’.

Nelly as storyteller, as man or lady. Nelly is the house keeper of Thrushcross Grange, as she has been sooner than in Wuthering Heights, and in addition the nursemaid of the Earns haws, Heath slope and Cathy Linton. Thusly, she is a passerby first character part essential storyteller of Wuthering Heights. Her story style is inside and out unmistakable from Lockwood’s; straightforward and easygoing tongue, shorter articulations; more obvious, anyway now not under any situation more noteworthy terrible. it is distinctlyfactor by method for point, engaging and sooner than protracted interface with the perusers’ thought. As she plays out the critical greater part of her record, it has an awesome vitality and quickness. She is through all cash owed bearing on something that happened hours sooner. through trade the intrigue appears to grow energetically, no longer re-made by the storyteller; and the characters seem like an expanding number of striking, the majority of the more legitimate. We feel closer to the characters, and furthermore you viably neglect the obfuscated record edges to inside the beguiling plot. He writes in a learned unique vernacular, with convoluted sentences, longer articulations, articulations of Latin or Greek origin. Along the book, his design is by all accounts an expanding number of cutting edge.

Towards the begin of bankruptcy fifteenth, Lockwood says that he will proceed with the tale in Nelly’s phrases, with out intrusions, as he imagines that he could not beautify her fashion, and portrays her as a ‘affordable storyteller’.

Nelly as storyteller, as man or woman. Nelly is the maid of Thrushcross Grange, as she has been earlier than in Wuthering Heights, and moreover the nursemaid of the Earns haws, Heath precipice and Cathy Linton. Along those lines, she is an onlooker first character member primary storyteller of Wuthering Heights. Her tale style is altogether distinct from Lockwood’s; simple and casual dialect, shorter expressions; less subtle, however now not under any circumstance greater awful. It is distinctlyfactor by way of point, appealing and earlier than lengthy connect to the perusers’ consideration. As she performs the significant majority of her account, it has a mind boggling energy and instantaneousness. She is via all money owed bearing on some thing that happened hours earlier. via exchange the interest seems to develop unreservedly, no longer re-made by the storyteller; and the characters appear like an increasing number of striking, all of the more proper. We feel nearer to the characters, and also you efficaciously overlook the muddled account edges to inside the charming plot. He writes in an knowledgeable abstract dialect, with complicated sentences, longer expressions, expressions of Latin or Greek inception. Along the book, his fashion seems to be an increasing number of advanced.

Closer to the begin of bankruptcy fifteenth, Lockwood says that he’s going to proceed with the tale in her words, with out intrusions, as he imagines that he couldn’t decorate her style, and portrays her as a ‘affordable storyteller’. She as storyteller, as individual. She is the maid of Thrushcross Grange, as she has been earlier than in Wuthering Heights, and moreover the nursemaid of the Earnshaws, Heath precipice and Cathy Linton.

Alongside those traces, Nelly is an onlooker first character member number one storyteller of Wuthering Heights. Her story style is altogether extraordinary from Lockwood’s; simple and casualdialect, shorter expressions; much less refined, but now not beneath any situation more lousy. it is exceptionally point through point, attractive and before long connect to the perusers’ attention. As she plays the full-size majority of her account, it has a mind boggling power and instantaneousness. She is by means of all bills referring to some thing that came about hours previous. thru change the interest seems to grow unreservedly, not re-made by means of the storyteller; and the characters appear to be an increasing number of placing, all the more proper. We sense nearer to the characters, and you correctly overlook the muddled account edges to percent within the fascinating plot.

Despite the reality that Lockwood and Nelly fill in because the conspicuous storytellers, others are combined for the duration of the radical — Heathcliff, Isabella, Cathy, even Zillah — who portray a segment or , giving expertise into both person and plot development. Catherine does not speakstraightforwardly to the perusers (except for in mentioned change), but her journal, she describes essential parts of the adolescents she and Heathcliff shared at the fields and the remedythey got because of Joseph and Hindley. most of the people of the voices weave together to offer a choral story. at the start, they deal with Lockwood, noting his request, but they deal with perusers, moreover, giving numerous views of the tangled existences of the occupants of Thrushcross Grange and Wuthering Heights.

Brontë seems to reveal goal spectators, looking to allow the tale to justify itself with actualevidence. target perceptions by pariahs might apparently not be spoiled by means of having a directaffiliation; tragically, a more in-depth exam of these two seemingly target storytellers uncovers their predisposition.

As an instance, Lockwood’s account empowers perusers to begin the tale whilst the large majority of the pastime is as of now completed. no matter the truth that the primary story is being informedin flashback, having Lockwood interface with Heathcliff and the others at Wuthering Heights quickdislodges his objectivity. What he records in his journal isn’t precisely what he is being instructed byNelly yet his memories and elucidation of Nelly’s tale. In like manner, Nelly’s story straightforwardly includes the peruser and connects with them in the interest. at the same time as announcing the beyond, she will be able to foretell destiny activities, which constructs anticipation, on this wayconnecting with perusers substantially extra. anyhow, her inclusion is hard due to the fact she is tricky in her activities: once in a while selecting Edgar over Heathcliff (and the other way around), and from time to time operating with Cathy while at distinct activities deceiving Cathy’s reality. anyhow, she is a enormous drawing in storyteller, so perusers promptly pardon her deficiencies.

At ultimate, both Lockwood and Nelly are clearly facilitators, empowering perusers to enter the universe of Wuthering Heights. All perusers know greater than any person storyteller, and on thismanner are enabled as they examine. In spite of the truth that Lockwood and Nelly fill in as the conspicuous storytellers, others are blended at some stage in the novel — Heathcliff, Isabella, Cathy, even Zillah — who painting a phaseor two, giving know-how into each person and plot development. Catherine does no longercommunicate straightforwardly to the perusers (with the exception of in noted change), but thruher journal, she describes critical elements of the kids she and Heathcliff shared at the fields and the treatment they got because of Joseph and Hindley. the general public of the voices weave collectively to present a choral tale. at the beginning, they cope with Lockwood, noting his request, but they cope with perusers, moreover, giving numerous perspectives of the tangled existences of the occupants of Thrushcross Grange and Wuthering Heights.

The book’s writer seems to expose goal spectators, trying to allow the story to justify itself with real proof. target perceptions by means of pariahs would apparently now not be spoiled with the aid of having a right away affiliation; tragically, a better examination of those apparently goal storytellers uncovers their predisposition. For example, Lockwood’s account empowers perusers to begin the tale when the good sizedmajority of the pastime is as of now completed. regardless of the reality that the primary tale is being advised in flashback, having Lockwood interface with Heathcliff and the others at the novel quickly dislodges his objectivity. What he statistics in his journal is not exactly what he’sbeing informed by way of Nelly yet his recollections and elucidation of Nelly’s story. In like way, Nelly’s story straightforwardly consists of the peruser and connects with them inside the pastime. while pronouncing the past, she can foretell destiny activities, which constructs anticipation, on thismanner connecting with perusers appreciably more. anyhow, her inclusion is tricky due to the fact she is tricky in her activities: now and again selecting Edgar over Heathcliff (and the other mannerround), and now and again working with Cathy even as at one-of-a-kind events deceiving Cathy’s certainty.She is a sizable drawing in storyteller, so perusers promptly pardon her deficiencies.

At closing, both Lockwood and Nelly are simply facilitators, empowering perusers to go into the universe of the novel. All perusers recognize more than any individual storyteller, and in this manner are enabled as they study. As each of the storytellers in the novel are characters in the story, we are handling first-man or woman storytellers. that implies we need to think about whether or not these characters are strong.

In Fahrenheit 451 Captain Beatty describes education as useless unless it is teaching someone something that they actually need. The people in their society no longer have use for English, math, and other subjects so he sees it as useless to know them. This is proven when he says, “Why to learn anything saves pressing buttons, pulling switches, fitting nuts and bolts?” (Bradbury 54). This proves his point of view of education is very different from what we learn and is, I think, not virtuous. I feel that learning is crucial to the development and is what helps make your personality. On page 55, Beatty talks about how learning makes people unhappy and rather knowing all is what makes people feel smart. While I do not agree with what he thinks should be taught, I do think that there is some truth to this statement. In our society, students strive to get good grades because that is what pleases them. They often become unhappy when they receive bad grades and stress about the work required to get good grades. Students feel happy and accomplished when they “know all” that is required for them to know in order to get an A. This relates greatly to what Beatty was saying, students are happy when they feel they know all and are frustrated when in the learning process.

After his conversation with Beatty, Montag begins to think about things differently about his recent thoughts. He tells Mildred that he’s got to know what is in the books, and says, “ I’m so mad and I don’t know why. I feel like I’m putting on weight. I feel fat” (Bradbury 62). I think by saying he feels fat he means that he is feeling guilty for thinking and acting outside the social norm. He is saying that he feels as though his thoughts are weighing down his mind. His questions about books and society are consuming his mind and after his conversation with Beatty, he finally feels like he should do something about his questions. All throughout part one of the story we see a struggle with Montag and his inner problems and thoughts at the end of part one, however, we see him finally doing something about the issue.

Captain Beatty tells Montag that happiness and fun are the only things that people care about and that those two things are the only way people can be truly happy. He very strongly suggests to Montag the simple idea, “ignorance is bliss.” However, this idea is proved to be wrong in the story. Throughout part one Bradbury hints at people’s unhappiness many times. After Mildred’s suicide attempt when the worker men are pumping her blood and stomach, they say to Montag, “Hell! We get these cases nine or ten a night” (Bradbury 13). Beatty also explains that most firemen get the “itch” to know what’s in the thousands of books they burn without really knowing why. This goes to show that Montag is not the only one who experiences negative thoughts about his society and his way of thinking. People in society are obviously not happy if they are continuously attempting suicide or yearning to read a book. Montag specifically feels this way because he has the fireman’s itch and has befriended Clarisse. Through talking to Clarisse he learns to think about things and question things, this leads to him deciding that he is not happy. He begins to question more about his out-of-the-norm behaviors and feels even worse about himself until Beatty lectures him. Beatty’s ideas about happiness do not work for Montag at the time of the lecture because he has already thought and been social and seen someone die for their books, he does not understand Beatty’s view at this point because of the amount of thought he has put into the topic.

Clarisse is very different from the rest of society, she is social, intelligent, studies, and questions things. The firemen and Beatty are scared of her because of these traits. They think that she could pose a threat because of the fact that she thinks about things outside of the box. Clarisse is the opposite of what their society is going for and that scares them. This is proven when Beatty tells Montag, “The girl? She was a time bomb. The family had been feeding her subconscious, I’m sure, from what I saw of her school record” (Bradbury 57). The quote shows that they were scared of her mind, they say that the family was feeding her mind and that they had been watching her just because of this. Montag says that he doesn’t like himself or the firemen because he realizes that he is trying too hard to fit in and that the way he is acting isn’t really himself. He doesn’t like the other firemen because he feels that they are against standing out and are the reason that people are not allowed to read or think or do anything using their brains for a good cause. Montag realizes that he is a part of all this and hates himself and the others for doing it. After Montag expresses his hatred towards the firemen and himself he says, “And I thought maybe it would be best if the firemen themselves were burnt” (Bradbury 64). I think that he suggests this because he is feeling so guilty for all they have done to people and he doesn’t even know why. He is beginning to think that there is not a reason for the burning of books and diminishing of thought.

The quote that Montag reads out loud is from the book Gulliver’s Travels, which is about rebellion. Fahrenheit has a lot of rebellion in it at the time that this quote is delivered. Bradbury chose it because it relates to Montag in that he is rebelling against his society. He is going against their wishes and rules. Montag had been stockpiling books for a year and has been constantly thinking about them. It is ironic that he is a fireman, who burns books and still does such a thing. The quote is significant because it foreshadows that something even more rebellious could happen in the next few parts of the story. It also tells us how much Montag values his books without having read them. The egg quote references the king in Gulliver’s Travels telling the citizens to crack their eggs the small way rather than the large, this angered citizen and they rebel against, continuing to crack their eggs how they wish. Montag considers death with his books like the people considered death over the egg.

If the Iliad is concerning strength, the Odyssey is concerning cunningness. This distinction becomes apparent within the initial lines of the epic. Whereas the Iliad poem tells the story of Achilles, the strongest hero within the Greek army, the Odyssey focuses on a “man of twists and turns” (1.1). A mythical being will have extraordinary strength, as he demonstrates in Book 21 by being the sole man who will string the bow. However, he depends rather more on the mind than muscle, which his encounters showcase. He is aware that he cannot overpower Polyphemus, for instance, and that, albeit he was ready to do this, he wouldn’t be ready to budge the boulder from the door. He, therefore, schemes around his disadvantage in strength by exploiting Polyphemus’s stupidity. The novel, The Odyssey, by Homer is a popular classic that is part of the curriculum for many high school and college English classes. Book 19 of The Odyssey covers the meeting of Odysseus and Penelope. In several respects, this encounter is that the climax of the best dramatic intensity within the entire story and at the terrible heart of the scene the dream. Penelope dreams of the twenty geese that are suddenly slaughtered by a mountain eagle. Penelope is the wife of the hero Odysseus. Together, they had one son, Telemachus. Homer’s Odyssey tells the story of how, during her husband’s long absence after the Trojan War, many chieftains of Ithaca and nearby islands become her suitors. Upon Odysseus’ return, he disgusts himself as a beggar and Penelope relates the dream to him.

The iconic dream that Penelope has relates to Odysseus. Odysseus is disguised as a guest in her house. The dream represents the return of her husband, Odysseus, and is prophetic because it also refers to the way that Odysseus will slay the suitors who gather in a mass around his wife. Note how Penelope describes the dream: “Twenty geese I have in the house that come forth from the water and eat wheat, and my heart warms with joy as I watch them. But forth from the mountain there came a great eagle with crooked beak and broke all their necks and killed them; and they lay strewn in a heap in the halls, while he was borne aloft to the bright sky.”

In The Odyssey of Homer, sleep is a way to point out completely different aspects of the book and of specific characters, likewise. For instance, sleep is employed in several things involving Odysseus as a transition between one section of the story and another. Sleep is usually coupled with inattentiveness and is a few things that can’t be avoided though it should yield negative consequences (i.e. once Odysseus falls asleep at the helm of his ship and consequently, his unwatched men cause bad luck, causation him “off the map” of his far-famed world). Sleep, and, specifically, dreams, issue greatly into the psyche of Penelope, Odysseus’ long-suffering better half. Her dreams in sleep, as told to others by her, offers Odysseus an honest, nonetheless confusing read into her subconscious.

A dream of Penelope’s that lends itself to interpretation is, of course, her dream of the twenty beloved geese. She tells this dream to the disguised “beggar” Odysseus, narrating the distress she felt once she saw the twenty geese heaped-up inside the hall, their necks were broken by the enormous eagle. She says: “Still in my dreams, I wept and wailed” (pg, 397, Book XIX), showing what quantity it offended her to visualize these geese dead. Nonetheless, the eagle, who is self-proclaimed as her husband, says these geese were her suitors which she had seen what was to be: the return of her husband and therefore the end of the suitors. Still, this dream doesn’t comfort her. Thus, what will it mean for Penelope to be unhappy once the “suitor” geese are slain by the “eagle” husband? Wouldn’t she rejoice rather than lament? One would suppose thus, nonetheless her words to the disguised Odysseus and her actions lead one to believe various things concerning what her true thoughts are on this dream.

Penelope tells the disguised Odysseus that she doesn’t suppose the dream is true, that her husband won’t come back home: “Yet my strange dream did not- I think- come out of the gate of horn,” she says, speaking of the gate which dreams come out that foretell what will truthfully come, “for if it had, it would have made my son and me rejoice” (pg 398, Book XIX) Outwardly, she says that she doesn’t believe her dream is true as the result of it failed to bring her happiness. However, her actions after this dream tell one thing greatly different. When telling the disguised Odysseus that she doesn’t believe her dreams, she then states that she has set she’s going to have a contest between the suitors, that “the man most deft, whose hands will string the bow, then shoot through all those ax heads with one arrow-he are going to be the one with whom I’ll go…” (pg. 398, Book XIX). Penelope has devised this wily and not possible exploit (except for Odysseus, of course) that the suitors don’t have any probability of accomplishing. Therefore, if she says that she has given up hope of Odysseus’ come, why would she create her suitors attempt such an impossible task, and consequently delay her re-marriage? The explanation lies in this: she has clearly not given up hope that her husband remains alive, and notwithstanding she tells others that she has given up hope, her subconscious shows this can be not true. If she really thought Odysseus was dead, she wouldn’t have created this elaborate and not possible contest.

An outsider is described as a person not belonging to a particular group’ as defined in the Oxford Dictionary.’ The Outsiders’ was published by S.E. Hinton. It was set in Tulsa, Oklahoma in the 1960s. It’s about the rivalry between the two major youth groups. Their life is split into two major groups by money which is the Socs (Short for Socials) and the Greasers. The Socs live on the Wide, where they lead a better life with everything they want, and the Greasers Ponyboy is a greaser, a term that refers to the young men on the poor, on the east side of town, they usually have nothing but anger and jealousy. Some people choose to be an outsider, while others have no choice. Whether or not an individual chooses to be an outsider, they must adapt to what happens when you are unlike everyone else in the group. There are a number of characters in the novel that could be considered outsiders, such as Ponyboy Curtis and Dally Winston.

The story narrator, Ponyboy, is always at odds with the people around him. Whether in advanced classes at school and surrounded by Socs, or the only nature-loving, sensitive greaser hanging around on the east side. Ponyboy is always different from the people he’s with. He always feels lost. He has no family to depend on after losing them to a car wreck. He tries his utmost to combat his depression by distracting himself with as many things as he can. He reads incessantly, blogs, and smokes cigarettes. All of these three behaviors were accepted by his older brother, Darry, who has become Pony’s legal guardian after his parents died.

Darry had to take on the responsibilities that come along with being a parent. As a result, he chose to sacrifice college and work as a roofer to help support the family. Although he grew up on the Eastside and amongst greasers, he always aspired for more and never felt quite at home there. In chapter 8, Ponyboys explains “…the only reason Darry couldn’t be a Soc was us. The gang. Me and Soda. Darry was too smart to be a greaser.” While Darry was always yearning for a better life, Dallas Winston accepted who he was and embraced the greaser lifestyle.

Dallas Winston, or Dally, is a stone’s cold thug. In and out of jail since the age of ten, Dally has seen it all. Forced to grow up at a young age, he has learned that the best way to survive is to think as little as possible, a concept he’s always trying to teach the majority of the greasers. After being rejected by so many people all his life, Dally believes that he’s the only person he’s ever had. He decided to be an outsider. This decision ultimately leads to his death, when he decides that his only escape from his loneliness is to die. Unlike Ponyboy and Darry, who one day figure out how to escape the greaser lifestyle, Dally never got out.

Being an ‘outsider’ can mean different things to different people, but one thing is certain: being outspoken is always accompanied by challenges. One may be forced outspoken like Darry, naturally, find himself out there like Pony, or choose a life like Dallas Winston. Many people are better adapted to a lonely life than others. At the end of the day, the book does a good job of showing the audience that even outsiders deserve a right to fair treatment, and some may even be heroes in disguise.

“I saved your life, and every Greek knows it”(Page 16)

Medea is a historic character in literature who has been idolised as a strong female character and is sympathised with to a large extent for aeons, and is hence one of the reasons for which the text has endured to see the light of the modern era. Medea also surprisingly highlights many themes that are relevant to the present. The play revolves around the female character Medea, who is considered an outcast of Ancient Greece just because she is a foreigner from the land Colchis, moreover she is a woman, and is even spited for being intellectual, as it was uncommon for women to be decision makers at the time. However while studying this play it became evident that through the use of tone, setting, dialogues and other dramatic techniques. Medea is characterised in a way that the audience can’t help but sympathise with her despite her extreme ways of getting revenge. This Essay will hence analyse and understand the various ways in which Euripides characterizes Medea to make her appear more sympathetic to the greek Audience.

Medea appears distraught and helpless from the very beginning of the play as she is portrayed as a woman who has been betrayed by her husband, Jason in a foreign land. Her husband Jason abandons her for the young princess of Corinth. Medea feels deceived as she had abandoned and severed ties with her family just to aid Jason’s quest for the Golden Fleece. This included her committing fratricide as she kills her own brother to help Jason escape her father’s wrath. She even commits regicide as she helps Jason get his promised throne on Iolcus by tricking Pelias’ own daughters to kill him. Medea hence “in kindness to (Jason), made enemies Of others whom there was no need to have injured” (Page 16). All of which she did just to gain Jason’s favour as she was smitten by love. However as soon as Jason finds himself as the hero of Greece, their passionate love comes to an abrupt end, as Jason decides to wed Glauce, the young Corinthian princess, claiming it is to further his political alliances. Medea feels humiliated,scorned and abandoned in a foreign land with her two boys, who are proof of their once wistful love. All of which the Chorus reciprocates with their sympathy towards Medea in their speeches “Upon him who betrayed both her bed and her marriage. wronged!” (Page 8). The audience feels deeper for Medea when she is unlawfully banished from Corinth by King Creon, who fears that Medea’s wrath can cause mortal harm to his daughter and Jason.

The chorus plays an important role as it follows Medea on her journey throughout the play. The chorus consists of typical Corinthian women and they comment on Medea’s actions and her decisions as they express their explicit opinions to the audience, without altering the course of the play. Their opinions and comments help the audience view the feminine distress that Medea experiences as a foreigner. This can be seen as the chorus supports Medea’s decision to exact revenge on Jason “This I will promise. You are in the right, Medea in paying your husband back.” In Ancient Greece when male dominance was prevalent, making the audience think of a female character to be independent and assertive, would be difficult. Euripedes hence resorts to the chorus to express Medea’s reasons for her actions. “Once she is wronged in the matters of love, No other soul can hold so many thoughts of blood” (Page 9). Thus it can be deduced that Medea as a woman had to endure the hypocrisy of the men of her time just to ensure that she gets justice for the misgivings faced by her. The use of the chorus also depicts a united front to the audience which helps convey Medea’s opinion to the audience and hence drawing the audience to sympathise with Medea.

While Euripides introduces Jason, he characterises both the characters of Jason and Medea as the audience gets to discern the true barbaric nature of Jason’s love as he dares to instigate and provoke Medea’s rage by not accrediting her to his success despite her crucial role in his quest as he rudely articulates: “My view is that Cypris was alone responsible of men and gods for the preserving of my life” (Page 17). Jason’s fickle and volatile nature becomes clear to the audience as he shows no regard to Medea’s familial losses and sacrifices for his love. He even fails to acknowledge the passionate love he once shared with Medea.Their children are clearly the product of their ardent and romantic relationship that had once blossomed. However Jason disregards his past and any emotional understanding to “hanker for (his) virginal bride”(Page 20). Whereas there is a sharp contrast in the character of Medea who has always fought for their relationship, but is now however being forced to fight for her own justice despite being constantly wronged by Jason’s lustful actions. This allows the audience to see Medea’s perspective and understand her reasons for committing the crimes she is nefariously judged for.

However it also becomes evident that Medea’s revenge crosses a path of no return. The chorus expresses its outrage at Medea’s actions and are shocked by her rash and impulsive decisions. “By your knees, I beg you do not Be the murderess of your babes!” (Page 27). It seems like madness as Medea murders her own children with pity and fear as she consoles herself “Do not hang back from doing this fearful and necessary wrong ”(Page 40). It becomes clear that she as a mother loves her kids without a doubt, but cannot face the dire humiliation of living her life as an inferior women after Jason wrongs her. Moreover mentally she believes that her vengeance is necessary for the loss of her married love and believes that by killing her children she is preventing her children being “slain by another hand less kindly to them”(Page 40). Her rage and melancholic state is hence amplified by Euripides so as to be reciprocated by the audience. Medea’s faith in Jason clearly ceases to exist and she definitely does not trust anyone else in Greece, this can be seen by the theme of Xenophobia that is painted across the play. This only can augment how Medea is made to appear more sympathetic to the Greek audience.

Being a foreigner in Greece Medea is not only sympathised with by the chorus, but also by the lower class of the Greek society. The Nurse and the tutor who were considered inferior in the Greek hierarchical system, sympathise with Medea’s plight. Medea is referred to as a “poor creature”(Page 2). This is ironic as Medea is the character who musters the courage to betray her family for Jason’s love, and even being a crucial part of his success on the quest. Yet she finds herself with a man who dishonours her. Medea’s forign presence in Greece is at the start of the play identified by the chorus as “Colchis’ wretched daughter”.(Page 5).Medea is criticised at every step for her sorrow and is expected to behave as a proper woman of Greece. This is even reiterated by Jason in the final moments of the play as he insults her : “brought you to a Greek house, you, an evil thing”(Page 42). Through the play Medea is criticised for being a woman and for being a foreigner and isn’t allowed to even grieve quietly, as she immediately faces banishment upon her heartbreak. By doing so Euripides also brings out the issues of Xenophobia and gender inequality faced by Medea in the play which also explains why the character of Medea is one to commiserate with.

Euripides hence uses the plot, dialogue and social setting to create an atmosphere of chaos and distress for the character of Medea. The characterisation in Medea also brings out different perspectives for the Greek audience to understand the struggles of women in Greece. By doing so Euripides imbues in the play the realisation and existence of social problems existing in a society and brings these problems out by depicting the character of Medea as a female in despair who breaks every norm that is not expected of a typical graceus woman. This is done by portraying her circumstances and opinions of characters on her situation, thus evoking a sense of Sympathy for the character of Medea in the play despite the crimes she commits for revenge. There is no Greek woman who would have dared such deeds(Page 43)

BIBILIOGRAPHY

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMzHcQPCII4
2. https://www.ancient.eu/article/927/women-in-ancient-greece/
3. https://www.thesaurus.com/
4. https://www.rwaag.org/medea

In this Greek tragedy, Euripides crafts a tale that centres around the complexities of Medea’s character: her cleverness, sorcery, murderous tendencies, and her status as a foreigner. Euripides takes these traits and elevates them to new heights in his play. The playwright puts Medea’s otherness on full display in his text, granting complexity to this characteristic of Medea; she is not only a foreigner because of her birthplace, but also because she destroyed said home, leaving her untethered to the land of her ancestors.

The Other is a complex and multifaceted concept: it comprises the foreign, the exotic, the unknown, the feared. The Other is also essential for self-definition: as the Greeks ascribe certain traits to barbarians, they are implying certain things about themselves. Barbarians are savage; the Greeks are not. Barbarians are superstitious; the Greeks are rational.

Medea falls under the category of an “extreme Other”. Extreme Others are not only outsiders in their society, being female, but they also transgress the established boundaries which keep masculine and feminine apart. Medea exhibit masculine ways of speaking, using rhetorical, logical arguments in her defence, and often perform acts of bloody violence. She uses feminine tools at first to try and get her way (manipulation, subterfuge, trickery, poison), but in the end she resorts to masculine means to destroy Jason by killing her children. Medea is the most threatening of the extreme Others as she is a barbarian, sexually active woman who is renowned for her ability as a witch who can control natural elements (in the form of potions and poisons) and who has the support of her grandfather Helios in all her endeavours. This implies that she is able to control her mercurial emotional qualities which traditionally separate the feminine from the masculine. These qualities are non-threatening as they prevent women from being a threat to masculine physical and rational power, but at the same time they are dangerous due to their volatile nature which is inexplicable to the dominant males.

Medea’s betrayal to her homeland/ Medea’s history

Medea’s foreignness is emphasized from the start of the play through the Nurses’ voice which reminds us that Medea comes from a distant and exotic land. This speech is the first instance of characterizing Medea based on past events; a narrative construction that Euripides uses to establish Medea’s Otherness.

The geographical gulf that separates Greek from ‘barbarian’ is emphasized in the Nurse’s opening words, where she speaks of the passage of the Argo through the Symplegades. “If the Argo’s hull never had winged out through the grey-blue jaws of rock and on towards Colchis!…Then neither would Medea, my mistress, ever have set sail for the walled town of Iolcus, mad with love for Jason.” The Argo had to physically leave its shores and go through a tumultuous journey to reach Medea. This act of departing one’s homeland to follow adventure to far-off places furthers the association of Medea as a foreigner. The playwright has thus developed a core attribute of Medea’s mythological persona—her status as outsider—by locating her origins at the far (and hazy) limits of the Greek world.

Euripides represents Medea’s foreignness by her physical separation from her homeland and lack thereof. The names of the cities, Colchis and Iolchus, reaffirm the separation between the two kingdoms, emphasizing the otherness of Medea’s native Colchis. Jason, through his quest, removes her from her homeland and brings her to a new, inherently Greek land, Iolchus. The passage continues to reference her birthplace, and thus lack of a current place to call home, “have come with Jason and her children to live here in Corinth; where, coming as an exile, she has earned the citizen’s welcome.” Here, Euripides states Medea is an ‘exile”, meaning she has travelled far from where she once called home and cannot return. The playwright places a distinct emphasis on distance, both literal and figurative, as Medea is physically removed from her homeland, cutting her off completely from Colchis, and thus her family and culture. This passage quickly establishes and reinforces Medea’s foreigner status.

Intriguingly, Medea criticizes herself when she delivers an incredibly self-aware account of her story and her status. Pg25,30.39 She is acutely aware of both her perception in the confines of the play and how the audience, Ancient Greek citizens, perceives her at this point in her mythological history. This is an elaborate and effective narrative construction on the part of Euripides, who was undoubtedly aware of the nuances and intricacies of Medea’s past and deploys that information into his work, effectively characterizing Medea by utilizing her past history. This use of Medea’s history as a way to construct the present action of Medea a characterization of her as a foreigner or as someone in exile.

Other references to Medea’s outsider status in the text highlight her foreign nature: “Above all, a foreigner must not resist the general will, but be compliant with the city’s wish- though I do not mean to praise or to excuse the citizen who is self-willed and lacks civility.” 69 Here, Medea’s foreign status once again defines her. The citizens of Corinth are unable to see Medea as anyone other than a barbarian foreigner who wreaks havoc across the foreign soil she inhabits. This quote takes the Corinthian’s xenophobia towards Medea a step further, stating that Medea lacks “civility.” Medea is not only a foreign entity, but she lacks even the basic manners and human skills to survive in the great society of Corinth. This Corinthian attitude implies that her past, her homeland and her background, was uncivilized, barbaric, and savage in nature: an accumulation of traits depicting how the citizens of Corinth truly see Medea.

Fear of Medea due to her “foreignness”

Other characters in the play repeatedly stress the fear they have of Medea: “Who knows what she will undertake before this rage is spent?“; “we fear her harm to those inside”; “Well, I see no reason at all to hide the fact that I’m afraid for my daughter, of what you might do to her, what deadly harm, as you have all the means- your cleverness, your skill in evil arts, and certainly the record shows what you can do.” 77 78 79 In this last quote, Creon speaks to Medea as he threatens to exile her from Corinth. He is explicit in his fear of Medea, regarding the likelihood of his daughter, the new bride of Jason, as the next target of Medea’s wrath. This passage exemplifies the fear that Creon, and the whole of Corinth, has of Medea based on occurring before the events portrayed in the tragedy; there is no action, vocal or physical, that transpires within the play to suggest anything violent on the part of Medea. References to Medea’s violence always recall acts that happened previous to the action of the play. The fear that Creon so rightly feels toward Medea is not based on anything unfolding onstage currently, but rather, this fear is due to her well-known past. Euripides uses Medea’s past, her violent and murderous acts specifically, to create the omnipresent fear that circles her in the play This fear thus characterizes this “current” version of Medea as a violent person, someone to be wary of. Yet, this “current” representation is based on acts and events that happened before the play, meaning this current Medea has not voiced or acted on such tendencies yet. If the past was not referenced and this fear not built on her previous actions, this Medea would not have any reason to be seen as villainous or a woman to be feared. By the same token, without the past and the fear it generates, the audience would be unable to recognize this Medea.

Until line 874, the declaration of the impending murders against her children, Medea has done nothing explicitly violent, malicious, or given any indication of her magical ability. Yet, there is a fear that penetrates the play regarding Medea; she has done nothing in the play to warrant that fear, but her past is made up of more than enough evidence to hold against her.

Murdering of her children

Theme of otherness and gender are further emphasised by Jason at the end of the play. Jason talks about how he chose Medea instead of a Greek woman: ‘not a woman in Greece…marry you” and he describes her personality as ‘a nature more savage than Tuscan Scylla’s’. After she has killed her sons, a devastated Jason tells her that no Greek woman could have done such a thing (1339-1340). The implication of Jason’s statement is that it is Medea’s ‘otherness’ as a ‘barbarian’ that allows her to commit such a crime.

Other theatrical moments highlight Medea’s foreign character. Regarding Medea’s children, the nurse claims, “I have seen her turn a savage look their way, and my heart quailed.” 68 Euripides characterizes Medea as a “savage”, implicating that because she is a foreigner, she is also a savage, a barbarian, bordering on an inhuman level. This line hints at Medea’s foreign, violent nature and foreshadows the actual violence she enacts against her children later in the play.

The image of a murdering mother both interests and disturbs its audience. A mother who kills her own children exists far outside of normality, inverting the nurturing, caring, childrearing woman into a monstrous witch who takes her child’s life. Motherhood equates to granting life, so when a mother takes that child’s life, it completely inverts and perverts the expectations of both mothers and women, turning Medea into a spectacle.

In Euripides’ play, the betrayal of her husband Jason, who is taking the daughter of the King of Corinth as his new wife in order to raise his station, is unacceptable to Medea. Twice, she is compared to beasts so as to emphasize the savage and animalistic aspects of her barbarian nature. Her eyes are described as “glinting at her children like a bull’s” and “she darts on her servants/ the wild glance of a lioness with young” Rage is focussed on her children and Jason.

‘You’re a clever woman, skilled in many evil arts’

Acknowledges medeas intelligence.

However, instead of admiring that trait, they fear it as they are unfamiliar with it

Her intelligence is associated with evil arts.

Could creon have been more benevolent?

Conclusion

Medea is a barbarian, woman and a sorceress hence she seems to epitomize several Greek figures of otherness at the same time. Medea defines herself as a foreigner and barbarian. Consequently, her position as an alien ostracizes her to the point that Jason considers the debt her owes her for saving him whilst in Colchis repaid by bringing her to Greece “by saving me you…whim of the mighty” this quote highlights the idea that the barbarians are considered to lack rules and regulations.

Medea’s marginalization is emphasized by her isolation, as she is “a desolate woman. No relative at all”. Women in Greece needed a male relative as their guardian and as an alien in Corinth, Medea also needs her husband as a sponsor, which is why his rejection put her in a very delicate situation. She is particularly isolated because, prior to the action of the play, she killed her brother and betrayed her father and her country in order to help Jason in his quest for the golden fleece. Medea’s fratricide and infanticide appear more horrific than her other murders as they violate “an important component of the Greeks own self-identity” namely “the importance attributed to philia, the friendship which bound different individuals, families and states together” However, in Euripides’ play, one can find several murders committed by Greek characters that breach this constitutive element of Hellenic identity, therefore levelling the difference that supposedly exist between Greeks and barbarians.

The Alchemist imparts the experience of a young shepherd child named Santiago who is capable of finding a fortune past anything he would ever envision. On the way of his experience the child makes sense of how to check out his heart and to seek after his dreams. Through his journey he meets different individuals, for example, the Gypsy women, the Englishmen, and the Crystal Merchant that help him find his very own tad bit legend and push him into moving advances to following his fantasies.

In the start of the novel he meets the tramp woman who just appears for a couple sections in the book, anyway she totally makes it worth her time and vitality. All that she does is disentangle Santiago’s immediate dream about lost fortune at the pyramids, uncovering to him that he will find lost fortune at the pyramids. The drifter woman fits into the novel by giving Santiago a little push, helping him to have confidence in his dreams. She moreover shows to him that it will cost him to land at the fortune, which he adapts over and over out on the town. The wanderer ladies states, “And dreams are the language of God. When he speaks our language, I can interpret what he has said. But if he speaks in the language of the soul, it is only you who can understand.” (1.48). Santiago gains from the lady that fantasies are a kind of correspondence, likewise that the segments dreams into “our language” and “the language of the soul.” It creates the impression that everyone has their own individual language of the soul, which God uses to uncover to them a riddle, yet it’s also possible to dream in a total language that others can get it. She impacted Santiago to pursue his fantasies, and how to comprehend what his fantasies are letting him know, yet it didn’t just influence him it influenced the peruses and gave them and knowledge of what dreams truly are. She additionally referenced in the novel that, “It’s the simple things in life that are the most extraordinary; only wise men are able to understand them. And since I am not wise, I have had to learn other arts, such as the reading of palms.” (1.65). This lesson is about shrewdness and information the drifter woman wasn’t such a better than average understudy of other insightful powers that were expected to remain with the pearl ball approach. Her hint that the simplest things are the most exceptional exhibits to us that even Santiago’s immediate dream is going to take a huge amount of doing before it works out true to form. This impacts future choices since when you have a fantasy that you need to accomplish it will require some investment and exertion before it really starts meeting up.

The Englishman and Santiago share a guarantee to seeking after their own legends, they immediately become companions. The man likewise challenges Santiago with his learned person, information centered way to deal with life. He shows Santiago the estimation of book learning and acquaints him with significant ideas in speculative chemistry, for example, the master work. Be that as it may, he should likewise gain from Santiago the significance of experience and fellowship. Santiago watches and gains from his condition. Be that as it may, the Englishman gains from books, and invests the majority of his energy ”submerged” in them. At the point when they attempt to switch jobs for a period, the Englishman experiences difficulty gaining from viewing different individuals around them. He tells Santiago, “It was my fear of failure that first kept me from attempting the Master Work. Now, I’m beginning to what I could have started ten years ago. But I’m happy at least that I didn’t wait twenty years” (2.298). He’s teaching Santiago that way he’s going isn’t the one and only one; as long as you pursue the signs, you also can accomplish your Personal Legend, but also teachers the reader that you don’t always have to follow one exact path to find who you are and what you’re meant to do. One night the Englishman expresses to Santiago that “when you want something with all your heart, you’re close to the Soul of the World and the universe will help you get it” (78). He is teaching the young shepherd boy that the world will only help you achieve your personal legend only if you want it bad enough. This can be used in the readers in everyday life use because it motivates them to push farther into trying rather than not trying at all because if you want something bad enough the world will be in your favor and give you a little extra help.

The precious Crystal merchant fills in as a significant companion to Santiago during Santiago’s time in Tangier, yet he additionally works as a preventative instance of somebody who has turned out to be self-satisfied and surrendered the quest for his Personal Legend.The merchant has his own fantasies, however he is reluctant to effectively take care of them, and it is for a senseless explanation. He’s anxious about the possibility that that on the off chance that he understands his fantasy, he will have no spurring motivation to continue living he states ”Because it’s the thought of Mecca that keeps me alive. That’s what helps me face these days that are all the same, these mute crystals on the shelves, and lunch and dinner at that same horrible café. I’m afraid that if my dream is realized, I’ll have no reason to go on living” (54). The young boy learns that you need to express yourself beyond your comfort zone and not be afraid of changes which also helps the reader learn how to be comfortable with all the sacrifices that they will have to do. The merchant also states that ‘You would have to have been born an Arab to understand,’ he answered. ‘But in your language it would be something like, ‘It is written.” (2.47-49) The precious stone trader isn’t generally into Santiago’s developments to his business, yet he feels that predetermination has carried the kid to his shop and there’s no halting the progressions to come. The occasions are composed and he’s not amazing enough to eradicate them with this Santiago learns about fate and free will it is linked to him finding his personal legend. He learned the reason behind accomplishing one’s Personal Legend is that everybody has one, yet not every person takes the necessary steps to satisfy it. With the goal for somebody to satisfy their Personal Legend (predetermination or destiny) the individual in question must work for it which teaches the reader that you have to work in order for things to fall in place.

These four characters extremely impacted Santiago into following his dreams each and every single one of them gave him a little motivation on why he should keep moving forward and continue striving for his dreams.The characters connect with him on a deeper level than the others did. They help him get out of his comfort zone and taught him valuable lessons that allowed him to find himself and his purpose.