Category: Literary Criticism

Tone can be defined as the general character or attitude of a place, a piece of writing, a situation, etc. In literature, tone is the foundation of everything created; without it, there would be no mood, theme, characterization, or anything else involved in the makeup of a story. In the novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding, a group of boys are dropped on a tropical island during a time of war. With no adults left to guide them, the boys are forced to figure things out for themselves, some attempting to cling to what little civilization was left, while others had different and more disturbing things in mind. Even so, civilization crumbled and a primitive, dystopian world was born on the island.

Golding’s use of figurative language moves to create three distinct tones in the following scenes from the text: the hunting and killing of the sow, the interaction between Simon and the Lord of the Flies, and the tragic death of Piggy. First, Golding develops a very judgemental tone when describing the hunting and killing of the sow. This part of the novel commences when Jack splits off from the rest of the original group and creates a rather savage group of his own, his only goal being to hunt and kill for meat. The newly-established group ventures into the woods and pursues a sow, which they later on kill viciously and mercilessly, establishing a very malevolent mood. For instance, in chapter eight, Golding creates tone using figurative language when the text states that the “sow staggered her way ahead of them, bleeding and mad, and the hunters followed, wedded to her in lust, excited by the long chase and the dropped blood” (Golding 135). This quote from the text proves that the boys on the island are descending into savagery and becoming increasingly bloodthirsty.

The metaphor “wedded to her in lust” shows that they were consumed with a desire for the sow’s spilled blood and flesh, while the second part where it says that they were excited by the “dropped blood.” This proves that the boys were overcome with a thirst for hunting and killing; it marks the moment in which everything becomes primitively chaotic. The boys proceed to stab the dead sow’s head onto a stick to provide an offering to “the beast.” The text says that “the head remained there, dim-eyed, grinning faintly, blood-blackening between the teeth” (Golding 137). The head, which becomes a very prominent figure in the book, is personified to move the scene into a more ominous tone. These two quotes are important because they set the tone and mood for the remainder of the chapter and shows how the boys on the island are becoming barbaric and inordinate. The hunting and killing of the sow sets a judgmental tone for the rest of the chapter, which goes on to contribute to other chapter as well. Second, Golding develops a grim and farcical tone when describing Simon’s interaction with the “Lord of the Flies.” This part of the novel begins when Simon stumbles upon the dead sow’s head impaled by a stick. Simon is dehydrated and begins to have hallucinations, thus creating the vivid, alarming visions in which the sow’s head becomes the “Lord of the Flies.” For instance, in chapter eight, the text states that the “Lord of the Flies” had “hung on his stick and grinned” (Golding 138). This depiction of the “Lord of the Flies” shows that the sow head was mocking Simon when it says “and grinned.” This is because a grin can be described as smug and knowing.

The mockery hinted at in this quote brings forth the inner struggle that Simon faces and pokes at what he might face back home in England. The personification of the “Lord of the Flies” moves the tone into one of grimness. As the chapter continues, the “Lord of the Flies” says to Simon that it was “fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill” (Golding 143). This golden line sheds light on how “the beast” is found within rather than being a physical thing that you can conquer. This is important because it progresses the idea that the boys are becoming less and less civilized as the novel continues, and that the nature of evil resides within mankind itself. Together, these two quotes shows how important Simon and the “Lord of the Flies” are in progressing tone because there is many forms of figurative language used. The interaction between Simon and the “Lord of the Flies” sets a grim tone that leads to many other things in the book, including Simon’s death. Without Simon there to keep the peace, civilization deteriorated and led to the death of yet another character.

Finally, Golding develops a solemn, tragic tone when describing the death of Piggy. This scene begins when conflicts rise between the two opposing groups. Piggy attempts to use reasoning to persuade the savages, which then ultimately leads to his downfall when Roger gets sick of his words and sends a boulder spiraling towards him. For example, in chapter eleven near the end of the novel, the “sound of hatred beat at them, an incantation of hatred” (Golding 180). Here, the hatred is personified to make the emotion that is felt stronger. This is where the action and suspense begins to truly build, foreshadowing what comes later on in the chapter. The “monstrous red thing” bounded towards them until it “struck Piggy a glancing blow from chin to knee; the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist” (Golding 181). This is one of the most critical moments in the book because it marks the point where all civilization and morality ceases to exist. When Piggy is knocked back and falls forty feet to his death, a sense of morality and maturity is lost also.

All ties to the civilized, other world are lost, and it adds to the solemn tone and the shocked mood. The death of Piggy and the tone created from it serves as a motivating factor for the remainder of the novel. His final moments set a tragic and solemn tone for the rest of the novel, driving a wedge even further between the two sides. In conclusion, Golding creates a macabre, farcical, and solemn tone in the scenes where the hunting and killing of the sow occurs, where the interaction between Simon and the Lord of the Flies takes place, and where Piggy is struck down off of a cliff by Roger and dies. In chapter eight, the establishment of tone in the selected scenes begins when the hunting and the killing of the sow commences, setting a judgemental tone. As the chapter advances, the interaction between Simon and the “Lord of the Flies” is introduced, moving the tone into one of grimness and farcicality. The selected scenes end in chapter eleven when Piggy dies and the conch shatters, ending off on a very solemn tone and disbelieving tone. Golding’s use of figurative language develops tones that are crucial to progressing the story further. It is the tones that Golding uses that develops theme, mood, and characterization. It helps develop the idea that the evil comes from within rather than from a physical object, and that everyone has a beast residing within them; even you.

Romeo and Juliet is a tragic play written by the reigning poet of the sixteenth century by William Shakespeare. The play depicts a story of forbidden love from two opposing families, which ultimately results in catastrophe. Throughout the course of their romance, multiple forces influence the fates of these “star-crossed lovers”, contributing to their eventual deaths. Through violence, hatred, and intimacy, the everlasting question of Shakespeare’s work remains; who or what was responsible for the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet?

Friar Laurence’s role depicts the failure of a holy man and friend. He repetitively succumbed to the naïve children despite knowing that Romeo was vulnerable and superficial. “Is Rosaline, whom thou didst love so dear, so soon forsaken? Young men’s love then lies Not truly in their hearts, but their eyes.” (Act 2, Scene 3, Lines 2-4) If he had rejected Romeo’s request, being a respected man of religion who understood the impulses of youth, there would be no marriage, resulting in time to reason and develop a stronger connection. He had the power to steer the lovers in the correct direction, yet continually violated his morals. Friar Laurence understood that the love between Romeo and Juliet would only breed catastrophe; “These violent delights have violent ends, and in their triumph die,” (Act 2, Scene 6, Line 9-10) which questions the purpose of the actions he knew nothing positive would come off. He was ignorant and permissive, with disregard to the consequences of concocting the disastrous plan, causing Romeo not to receive the letter of Juliet’s death, while knowing the urgency of the situation. In the tomb, Friar Laurence flees, selfishly fearing himself instead of tending to suicidal Juliet. If Friar Laurence himself, who understood the legitimacy and details of the lovers’ relationship, can recognize his own contribution to their deaths, nobody can make a better judgment. “…and if aught in this miscarried by my fault, let my old life Be sacrificed, unto the rigor of severest law.” (Act 5, Scene 3, Line 265-268) Had Friar Laurence never agreed to marry Romeo and Juliet, give them misplaced hope, or organize the scheme, their entire relationship would differ, perhaps without their death.

The feud between the Capulets and Montagues created the perception that to betray was to die. Had Romeo and Juliet not been surrounded by predestined hatred for each other, their families would not object to the marriage. However, the lovers understood the value of loyalty, demonstrated by Capulet’s harsh demands; “Disobedient wretch! …get thee to church o’ Thursday, Or never after look me in the face…hang, beg, starve, die in the streets!” (Act 3, Scene 5, Line 160-163, 193) Understanding the treatment and influence of her alliance, Romeo and Juliet were driven to secrecy out of fear; “And the place death, considering who thou art. If any of my kinsmen find thee here.” (Act 2, Scene 2, Line 64-65.) No blood would have been spilled given the families had a peace which would prevent Romeo’s banishment and further complications, indicated in the quote; “Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean,” (Prologue, Line 4.) where the lack of civility resulted in death. Prince Escalus, a respected and virtuous man, refers to the families as ‘enemies’ and blames them for the death of Romeo and Juliet. The prince’s acknowledgment, an objective conclusion, validates the morality behind the parents’ role. As the families refused to accept the love between a Capulet and Montague, they lost them instead.

Romeo and Juliet were teenagers who were blinded by desire. They had planned marriage within hours of meeting each other. They had no regard for their families’ legacy or the relationship itself; they were eager and in love with the concept of love that fuelled their reckless decisions. Had they allowed the relationship to develop and reviewed their actions, instead of demanding more, they could explore their personalities and make a better judgment. Instead, they rushed into the relationship, recognizing the fact that they barely knew each other. “My ears have not drunk a hundred words of that tongue’s utterance, yet I know the sound.” (Scene 3, Act 2, Line 58-59.) Romeo and Juliet accepted the love they believed they deserved because they did not understand its true meaning. Had they not defied their parents, they would have lived in separate worlds. They are technically responsible for their own deaths as it was their own choice to kill themselves and follow the guidance of Friar Laurence. Confirming Juliet was dead or recognizing life without Romeo was worth living is part of their youthful impetuousness that compels them to fall hopelessly in love, so much so that they can’t live without each other.

Many forces defied the love between Romeo and Juliet. Their secrecy, employed by the feud and guidance of Friar Laurence, bred the catastrophe of their deaths. Shakespeare’s work communicates the themes of love, fate, and conflict in a world where loving a Montague is a crime. Under different circumstances, the events of their tragedy would significantly differ. Though they were doomed from the beginning, in death, it was their love that survived, without which there would be no tragedy.

How does Medea defy Ancient Athenian expectations of tragedy and its presentation of women?

In Medea, the protagonist of the same name is cast aside by her husband, the hero Jason, for another woman. In the play, Medea has no say in any of her husband’s actions, as she is a woman in a male-dominated Greece, and she is a foreigner in the kingdom Corinth. Medea is a horribly flawed character and Euripides, with this play, revolutionized Revenge Tragedies by allowing Medea getaway with her murderous acts without any repercussions. Medea criticizes the male-dominated society at the time, with a radical anti-heroine protagonist who is sympathised by the audience. Medea’s pursuit of revenge is shown throughout the play, and Medea is a testimony of the outcomes of a person’s desire for revenge. Euripedes often criticised the oppression of the role of women. This leads me to the question: how does Medea defy Ancient Athenian expectation of tragedy and its presentation of women?

In ancient Greece, women had little to no rights compared to their male counterparts. They were unable to vote, to own land or to inherit it. Women’s purpose was to stay at home and bear children. Although in Greek Mythology, some major gods are women, revered for their intelligence, honour, and female fertility in agriculture. However, in the male-dominated literature, women are portrayed as problematic, and their role is to derail the plans of the male heroes. In Greek literature, women are often portrayed either as being ruled by passion and wild emotions, such as Medea, or completely submissive and loyal to their husband, like Penelope in Homer’s Odyssey. Greek tragedies in literature were used didactically, as a way to teach the audience a valuable moral lesson, and they also reflected the Athenian life, attitudes and values. The plots were drawn from existing myths. With Medea, Euripedes challenged the expectations of a tragedy as his story was not focused on the protagonist of the already existing myth of Jason and the Argonauts. Instead, it is focused on the point of view and narrative of Medea, previously a side character. And its didactic nature is more implicit than other Athenian Tragedies at the time, as the play shows how the protagonist commits the worst crimes possible: familicide, the murder of one’s family. And, even more surprisingly, gets away with it, saved by Helios’ chariot. Euripedes also defies the Ancient Athenian expectations

In Greek tragedies, the action is centred around the protagonist, a tragic hero. A tragic hero is a noble and great man; however, he is also a man of misfortune, because of a tragic flaw (hamartia), that leads them to violate moral codes and break the natural law, an error in judgement that is not realized until it is too late (hubris). The tragic hero experiences a reversal of fate (a peripeteia). The tragic hero also experiences a punishment from the gods he angered or disrespected (nemesis). And leading to the resolution of the play the tragic hero recognizes their true identity and the true nature of their situation. Throughout all of this, the audience feels pity for the fallen hero (catharsis).

Euripedes defies the set elements of a Tragedy in his play Medea, as the protagonist defies the role of women in plays, and defies the archetypal hero in previous Athenian plays at the time. Medea is neither a man nor a righteous person. She follows the archetypal attributes of a tragic hero: noble birth, supernatural capabilities, the reputation of being an unmatched warrior and a vast traveller; as she is the demi-god princess of Colchis, a barbarian land at the edge of the Greek world, she is a great sorceress who helped Jason complete his task of retrieving the Golden Fleece, and travelled with him to Iolcus and finally to Corinth. However. Medea is not a tragic heroine because Medea’s hubris was not an error, it was planned with the sole purpose and motivation of revenge. Medea challenges Ancient Athenian expectations of a tragedy.

There are some differences that we can notice between the movies and book “Lord of the Flies”. The reason that there are differences is because the book is written by William Golding’s while the movie is made by Harry Hook’s so that’s why we can recognize some differences , but that doesn’t mean that we don’t have similarities between those two. In my opinion book had more details and was very easy to understand also the plot of the book had better event because they shared the same name but they didn’t share the same plot.

In the very beginning i saw that the book starts with the plain falling to the island when while ine the movie we see the scene directly to the Island.When the plane crashed to the Island in the book we start with Ralph and Piggy but in the movie it starts with all of the boys from the group. . After the boys fall in the island in the movie the pilot asked for some water meanwhile in book he was dead. Later when boys started presenting I noticed while I was reading at Litnutts they are 5-6 years old but in the movie they were older.

Later is this thing about the signal fire which was made by the boys because it was an order from Ralph. He made this because he thought that if a ship comes near their Island they cant notice them so they should make smoke on top of the mountain so they made fire.AS we know this plan failed and it was Jac’s fault because he was distracted killing a pig. But the difference is that there passed a plane by the Island not the ship that they were waiting for but still they didn’t saw any smoke because of Jac.

At the time when they complained about seeing the beast the novel and book explains in the different way, in the novel as we read we can see that Sam and Eric saw the beast but watching the movie we notice that the ones that saw the beast was one of littluns.In the novel the author explains how Simon starts talking to Lord of the Flies different from the movie Simon doesn’t talk to Lord of the Flies.

There are a lot of differences that we can see between novel and movie but both of them share with us the same story. I would prefer reading the book because of the details and informations that we see are more understandable and enjoyable.

Set in Ancient Greece, Euripides’ harrowing play Medea explores the conflict between Medea and the patriarchy amidst the breakdown of marriage. Medea can be viewed as a victim of Jason and the patriarchy due to the injustice she faces as both a woman and an outsider. However, it is Medea who proves that she is much more than a ‘betrayed wife’ and shows that despite the injustice she faces, she is a capable and strong character. Furthermore, Medea’s heinous and immoral actions suggest that she is ultimately not just a victim, but also a powerful sorceress. Euripides employs the Chorus to function as an ideal spectator and respond in the way the dramatist desires. The playwright conveys the ideal reaction to the drama through the moral positioning of the Chorus, which allows the audience to react in the desired fashion. As the play progresses, the Chorus’ loyalties change throughout as the drama unfolds and subsequently their their predisposition towards female empowerment initially shown through the sympathising with Medea transforms to judgment and horror.

Euripides portrays Medea as an injured character at the hands of the Ancient Greek patriarchy due to her status as a woman and a foreigner. Medea, spurred by the infidelity of Jason and his reproach of her, is urged towards heinous crimes. In taking the bed of the princess without the consent of his wife, Medea feels as though Jason has circumvented her, fuelled by a base desire, his ‘old ties of affection giv[ing] way to new.’ Medea, previously upholding her duties of protecting her husband, is unduly deceived by her husband. She claims she has been treated unfairly by the ‘unfeeling monster’ Jason, ‘subject[ing] one’s own family to ill-treatment.’ It is this distrust that drives Medea to commit such felonious and disgusting acts. Therefore this ‘poor fool’ Jason, serves as ‘the foulest of traitors’, in his own demise, impelling Medea to seek vengeance, in order to ‘rain… many blows justly on the head of Jason.’ Euripides expresses that it is Jason’s hubris in that he does not expect Medea to retaliate that leads to his downfall. This further illustrates a true representation of how Medea is portrayed in the play.

In staying consistent with the function of the Chorus, Euripides employs the Chorus as a voice to set the standard what what he believes was socially acceptable at that time. The Chorus themselves display strong morals and opinions regarding the way a person to acts, often mirroring the expected social standard at that time. Through conveying his ore message of sophrosyne through the Chorus concluding phrases such as “why do you surrender to the anger that crushes your heart,” the Chorus mirrors the playwright’s belief in providing a benefit to the Greek society- moderation. Furthermore, Euripides directs his progressive feminist ideals through the Chorus’ opinion hence inviting the audience to be more sympathetic towards the struggles of women.

Medea proves to be a strong woman despite the injustices she faces. From the onset, it is revealed who captured the Golden Fleece and in doing so lighting the torch of Jason’s success, demonstrating her capability as a woman. Euripides depicts her as intelligent and it is this cleverness that leads to her being shunned in a male-dominated society; ‘my reputation yet again! Many times it has been my ruin’. Euripides affirms that Medea’s visceral pain is the window to her identity as the barbarian who will not keep her emotions wrapped up just as expected by the Ancient Greek civilisation. The disconnect of her name and identity further underscores her fragmented sense of place. There is no doubt that Euripides manipulates the audience to view Medea from a sympathetic lens of a woman suffering injustice at the hands of a self centred patriarchal husband. The “is it natural for womenfolk to feel anger against a husband” results in Jason’s ignorance of Medea’s suffering, further delineating his incapacity to feel and connect with his emotions in a meaningful manner.

The fundamental use of the Chorus is Medea is to enunciate the values and beliefs that were present in Greece at that period present the significance of the playwright key message of sophrosyne.

The question I chose for this essay was “Is Macbeth powerless in meeting his downfall or are there other circumstances and outside forces that contribute to his fate?”. The author or playwright of Macbeth’s play was William Shakespeare and was one of the most well-known writers of all time. The play introduces us to Macbeth, who gets told about prophecies of him being king in the future. He then becomes hungry for power and decides to let his ambition take over him. Macbeth was powerless when he met his downfall and there are reasons as to why he was such as the roles of the witches and the impact of their prophecies, Lady Macbeth’s influence over him, and his own ambitions.

The witches and their prophecies

Macbeth’s prophecy to be king wasn’t the only thing that was said by the witches. In fact, the witches also told Banquo that his son, Fleance, will also become king. This, of course, led to Macbeth’s downfall.

Macbeth: “Speak, if you can: what are you?” Witch 1: “All hail, Macbeth! hail to thee, thane of Glamis!” Witch 2: “All hail, Macbeth, hail to thee, thane of Cawdor!” Witch 3: “All hail, Macbeth, thou shalt be king hereafter!”. Witch 1: “Lesser than Macbeth, and greater.” Witch 2: “Not so happy, yet much happier.” Witch 3: “Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none: So, all hail, Macbeth and Banquo!”.

The witches explain that Macbeth would be the thane of Cawdor then afterward, king. But they also tell Banquo his prophecy, which was to be lesser than him but Greater, not so happy, but much happier, and his future sons would be kings. Banquo was told to be lesser but greater, meaning he is powerless but he would be greater in the end when he has his revenge on him. Banquo wasn’t happy when he found out Macbeth murdered to be king but was happy knowing his son would have vengeance on him and be king. This whole prophecy for Banquo was one of the most crucial parts of the story and is the reason why Macbeth failed in the end. But however, there was another influence other than the witch’s prophecy that drove him to do the bloody deeds in order to claim himself asking.

Lady Macbeth’s influence

Lady Macbeth’s influence was another reason to why Macbeth failed to dominate as a king. Lady Macbeth was portrayed as a manipulative and malicious character and was the one who came up with entire plans to make him king even when he didn’t fully commit to making the prophecies true. She was the one who made him drug the guards and murder Duncan. After that incident, her plan had worked when she went back to place the daggers on the guards to frame them for the murder, which Macbeth was too scared to do. However, her influence was more than just mere plotting. She used many methods to be able to convince him of the murders. At first, she questions his manhood and would pressure him to commit the vile acts. “When you durst do it, then you were a man”. This does work on Macbeth for a bit, but it still doesn’t fully convince him. She then uses guilt to push him into the act. She says: “How tender it is to love the babe that milks me / I would, while it was smiling in my face / I have pluck’d my nipple from his boneless gums / And dashed the brains out, had I sworn as you / Have done to this”. This statement basically means that if she also felt how he was feeling, then she wouldn’t try and ignore what she would tell him. This does work and it helped convince Macbeth to plot more seriously. This was why Lady Macbeth was one of the main causes for his ambitions to committing the deeds in order to become king.

Macbeth’s own ambitiousness

Macbeth’s lust for power and his ambition to be king was the main cause of his downfall. His ambitiousness continued to grow throughout the play which showed his evil side and what he was willing to do in order to become king. After hearing the witch’s prophecy, “All hail Macbeth, thou art shalt be king hereafter”, he was left to wrestle with his consciousness and that was when his ambitions started to take over. His ambitions continued to grow with the influence of Lady Macbeth. She persuades him by using guilt against him. She would also proceed to call him a coward, which further convinced him into committing the murders. His desire to remain as king brings out his evil side within him and his ambition would cause wrath to anyone who would stand in his path, including his best friend. “Come seeling night/scarf up the tender eye of pitiful day and with thy bloody and invisible hand cancel and tear to pieces the great bond which keeps me pale”, this quote signifies that Macbeth’s ambitiousness had already taken over at this point and he is wishing that the night will come for Banquo’s assassination so that his fears will be washed away and he will stay as king. Macbeth’s desire to stay king had caused him to murder his best friend. His ambition had taken over him fully by this stage and was the final factor contributing to his death.

Conclusion

Macbeth’s actions in the play all contributed to his tragic death at the end. There were three main reasons as to why he had failed and died towards the end of the play. The first reason was because of the prophecies told by the witches. The prophecy that was given to him which was that he will be king in the future, and the prophecy given to Banquo that his children would be future kings. This was why Macbeth failed at the end because it was told Banquo’s son would be king in the future, so Macbeth had to be killed in order for his son to take his rightful place on the throne and avenge his father’s death. The second reason was Lady Macbeth’s influence. She persuaded him to commit the crimes by using guilt and questioning his manhood by calling him a coward. As a result of this, he had failed because of her excessive persuasiveness towards him, which led to his ambition taking over him. The final reason was his own ambitiousness. His ambition started growing when the witches told him his prophecy. It didn’t fully take over until his soul mate convinced him to do the murderous acts. Afterward, he was fully taken over and would kill anyone that stood in his way, which led to his downfall. All of these reasons are why he was powerless on meeting his downfall because he let his ambition take over him and he was unable to live with the guiltiness of his own actions.

Euripides highlights the idea that manipulation comes from ones great ambition to seek a vengeance. Medea has the most extreme desire to accomplish her revenge on Jason after he ‘betrayed [Medea] and his own children for a princess’ bed.’ Euripides makes good use of foreshadowing to make it clear to the audience of Medea’s extreme and passionate desire to accomplish her revenge “It’s clear that this anger of hers will grow; soon enough her grief like a gathering cloud will be kindled by it and burst in storm.’ Medea ultimately stops at nothing and manipulates anyone in the way of her path in seeking her revenge, thus she deceives Creon by contorting his values and making him question his role as a loving father ‘For myself I do not mind if I go into exile,’ Medea lies. ‘It is the children being in trouble that I mind.’ Medea plays Creon’s emotions, telling him that as a father he needs to have some sympathy for a mother trying to give and provide her children with comfort.

Medea also plays on Creon’s misogyny, knowing that although he is terrified of her, if she plays the role of the weak, helpless woman, he will be more easily bent to her will. Additionally, Medea’s great fury and determination leads her on a destructive path where she stops at nothing and burns anyone in her path to get what she wants. Medea pretends to apologize to Jason and sends her children along with the poisoned robe and crown as a gift to Glauce ‘I’ll send her gifts, the finest in the world: a finely woven dress and a crown of beaten gold, the boys will take them.’ Therefore, Medea uses her own shallowness against Jason, his unwarranted pride and his need for domination. She is playing the fawning and obedient lady, to the delight and pleasure of her husband, and Jason’s blindness to all of this is what allows Medea to fully deceive and manipulate everyone to her will. Euripides asserts that although using manipulation as way to achieve ones revenge will most often result in a struggle for acceptance.

Euripides demonstrates the multiple different ways in which manipulation comes about as a result of the unequal gender roles in this patriarchal society. Medea takes place in a male-dominated society, a society that allows Jason and Creon to casually and brutally cast Medea aside. However, Medea makes use of her role as a powerless women and uses it to convince Creon to let her stay in Corinth one more day so she can carry out her revenge plan on Jason. Medea says to Creon, “Oh, I am ruined, utterly ruined! Oh, misery’ In this moment Medea is victimizing herself as a woman that has been betrayed by the one and only man that should be loyal to her, her husband. Furthermore, Medea abandons the gender stereotypes in society through exhibiting both male and female characteristics. At times, she has been able to separate herself from her motherly impulses and execute actions that society has not seen women able to do, allowing her to deceive others by doing what they’d least expect. This is seen through Euripides use of animal imagery and the way that multiple different characters perceive her, Jason describes Medea as having a ‘nature more savage than Tuscan Scylla’s.’ and essentially highlights her difference to how women were typically viewed in society. Instead of being characterised as meek and nurturing, she is painted by Euripides as a ‘lioness who takes the lives of children.’ Overall, Medea’s ability to break down the gender roles in society displays her willingness and power to manipulate others around her, she defies all the odds of what people think she should be and thus allows her to brutally manipulate everyone without them having any idea of her next move against them. Medea symbolises a smart woman stuck in a world of men. In the end, throughout her fight for vengeance, her cunning ways became her ultimate weapon against others. Therefore, Euripides asserts that the greatest power rests, without a doubt, in intelligence.

Euripides utilizes the theme of power and dominance to assert how manipulation is played out against multiple characters. Medea, being a mighty powerful sorcerous, uses her powers to get her way and ultimately plays on the fear of those around her. First of all, Medea plays to Creon’s pity, and to the old king’s costly underestimation of the sorceress. Medea uses her divinity and the power she holds from the gods to persuade Creon to let her stay in Corinth one more day and completely manipulates him by convincing him of her good intentions ‘you sound harmless, but in your heart I am terrified you are plotting some evil.’ Medea’s power and the way in which she manipulates others is symbolically displayed through Euripides use of the poisoned crown, symbolizing the ultimate power and high regard in society. Medea uses the crown to execute the first phase of her revenge against those who have wronged her “the golden coronet resting on her head released a wondrous stream of devouring fire.’ this once again asserts Medea’s strength and dominance as a women in a male dominated society. Furthermore, Medea manipulates others by instilling fear in those around her to essentially get her own way. The nurse describes her as ‘no ordinary women’ and that ‘no one who makes an enemy of her will win an easy victory.’ this asserts to the audience the power Medea has over those around her and that even those loyal to her are fearful of ‘[the] cloud she will ignite as her fury grows.’ This further exemplifies her ability to manipulate anyone onto her side, thus she wins both the chorus and the nurses sympathy ‘quote (look in book)’. Euripides is trying to demonstrate that the misuse of extreme and dangerous power will generally result in the loss of that power.

In conclusion, Euripides idea that there are many characters who use manipulation and deceit to get their own way, although Medea was much more cunning and brutal in her approach, resulting in success and victory for her. Euripides exemplifies this idea through the ways in which manipulation comes as a result of unequal gender roles in a patriarchal society, how manipulation is executed through ones true desire and determination to seek a vengeance, the way others are able to manipulate through the use of great divinity and power and how manipulation most often occurs after some major form of betrayal. Ultimately Euripides is emphasizing that playing on the weaknesses of others and connecting with them on a personal level will most likely come with a celebratory triumph.

In the prologue of “Romeo and Juliet”, we are already given a glimpse of the ending of the play and what is to come. It states: “A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life…” and the mention of the word ‘star-crossed’ implies that Romeo and Juliet’s fates are written in the stars and they cannot truly control their destinies. The description which follows “The fearful passage of their death marked love” implies that the fate is adverse and the outcome is tragic: death. Even before the story has started, the audience already knows the fate of the lovers.

It is ultimately fate that sparks love between Romeo and Juliet and also fate that brings them to their untimely deaths. Romeo and Juliet were perfectly matched, but the chances that they were from feuding families, one being a Capulet and the other a Montague were incredibly slim. It is fate that Romeo and Juliet wear a mask to the ball otherwise Juliet might not have so quickly fallen in love with him. Only after realizing who the other is their exclamations are “My life is my foe’s debt!” and “My only love sprung from my only hate!” Juliet has the right idea during her balcony soliloquy when she remarks “What’s in a name? That we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet…”

Again, fate plays a part in the attendance of the Montague boys at the Capulet party. It is yet another coincidence of fate that the servant of the Capulets is illiterate and is asked to invite only people on the list. Because of his illiteracy, the servant is forced to ask two strangers to translate the list of names and out of so many, the two people just happened to be Romeo and Benvolio. Even Romeo feels a premonition and fate toying with him as he says, “I fear too early… for my mind misgives some consequence yet hanging in the stars Shall bitterly begin its fearful date with the night’s revels.” However, despite this premonition, fate propels him to attend the ball. If this had not happened, Romeo and Juliet would not have met each other and the events that followed would not have occurred.

In the marriage of Romeo and Juliet, Friar Lawrence exclaims, “Wisely and slow, those stumble that run fast.” This quotation reflects the consequences of a hasty marriage but despite this, the Friar still agrees to marry Romeo and Juliet so early, without notifying their parents. The marriage was indeed partly the Friar’s fault because he was already aware of the rashness of love (especially that of Romeo and Rosaline). “Is Rosaline, that thou’st did love so dear so soon forsaken? Then young men’s love lies not in their hearts, but in their eyes.” Nevertheless, as a holy man, Friar Lawrence agrees and attempts to make the marriage create peace over rancor for the Capulet and Montague families. This event was not pre-determined by fate, but surely if the following or preceding events that were attributed to fate didn’t happen then early marriage would not have been a problem. It is only because of the domino effect that each event adds to the inevitable outcome that fate produces.

Not long after the secret marriage ceremony, Tybalt provokes a fight with Romeo but Romeo is indeed sensible enough to withdraw as he is aware that Tybalt is Juliet’s cousin and he has made a vow of marriage only one day ago. However, after Mercutio duels with Tybalt, he cries out “A plague on both your families!”, also a premonition of the outcome; losses for both the Capulets and Montagues. Romeo is then so angry at Mercutio’s death that he slays Tybalt and cries out “O I am fortune’s fool!”. Surely these events have all occurred through the power of fate.

The most intriguing part of a Greek tragedy is the involvement of a tragic hero, which consistently draws in a greater group of spectators and excites their feelings. A tragic hero is an honorable or imperial character whose pain is brought about by his own misinterpretation, and his experience consistently makes the audience feel dread and sympathy. Medea is a play composed by Euripides and represents the story of a unique tragic heroine. In this play, Medea is deceived by her husband, Jason, who chooses to wed the princess of Corinth. Subsequent to finding out about this dreadful affair, Medea is resolved to seek retribution: she kills the princess, the king, and even her children to hurt Jason. Medea’s tragic imperfections, including rashness, an extremely passionate nature, and hubris, are reflected while the retribution happens; therefore making Medea a tragic heroine.

The carelessness of Medea’s words and actions cause the outcast of her and her children. Towards the beginning of this play, it is not unusual to see Medea revile her enemies, and her own delicate family. Her words, ‘let them die, the accursed children of a hateful mother, with their father, and let the whole house disappear’, clearly show her rushed temper as well as her anger towards the princess and her husband. Another model, which uncovers her carelessness, is that she wishes to see Jason and his new wife and the whole house savagely wrecked. These words eventually are overheard by Creon, ruler of Corinth. To guarantee the security of his daughter, he chooses to banish Medea and her children from his region. The banishment from Corinth triggers Medea’s malicious arrangement and starts her defeat.

Medea’s extremely passionate nature is another factor of her predicament. Her enthusiastic nature can be followed to a period before she lives in Corinth, where she causes numerous catastrophes and accumulates her transgressions. Her issue is demonstrated when she whines she has nowhere to go. She says, ‘now where do I turn? To my homeland and my father’s house, which I betrayed for you? Or to those poor daughters of Pelias? Wouldn’t they receive me nicely in the house where I killed their father?’. Medea has her own method of reasoning for committing manslaughter: she begins to look all starry eyed at Jason and encourages him to get the Golden Fleece for his uncle. In order to escape effectively, Medea executes her brother, hacks the body, and dissipates the pieces into the sea. When they finally reach Iolcus, Pelias denies Jason’s majesty, so Media deceives the two princesses to execute their father. Her passionate characteristic drives her to kill such a significant number of individuals unethically. Therefore, what she encounters afterwards is a discipline to her crime. Yielding such a great amount for Jason, Medea is deceived, so her indignation is sensible. After she is allowed to remain for one more day, she is resolved to ‘display the corpses of three of her enemies’. Medea and Jason profoundly, despises him deeply, and her inordinate passionate nature drives her to revenge.

Hubris causes Medea to experience the ill effects of agony from loss of family and loneliness. She believes herself to be more scholarly than others, and her pride can be unobtrusively uncovered in numerous segments. For instance, she says, ‘I won’t have spoken to him or touched him with my hands, but he’s become so foolish that, although he could have ruined my plans and cast me from this land, he allowed me to stay this day, in which I shall display the corpse of three of enemies’, Medea believes Creon to be inept, yet Creon lets her stay due to his compassion rather than foolishness. Additionally, she trusts her insight can wipe out her adversaries, and it appears she never utilizes her knowledge in a good way. At a certain point Medea says she has ‘little knowledge, some are filled with jealousy, others think me secretive, and crazy’. Here Medea shows the reader that she is discriminated against other people because she is smart, which is without a doubt true. However, she certainly does not oust these prejudices when she utilizes her insight and knowledge to kill such a large number of individuals, and the majority of them are related. In addition to this, Medea carried out the crime of infanticide in order to hurt Jason, while her own clarification is to shield her children from ‘more hostile hand’. It displays her pride because she would prefer to be corrupt than let her children be hurt by someone else.

Taking everything into account, Medea’s excessive passionate nature, carelessness, and hubris makes her a tragic heroine. These individual characteristics that lead to her downfall additionally makes her more relatable and impressive. Medea is the tragic hero, even though she no longer has heroism left in her at the end of the story. The audience can sympathize with Medea because there is no doubt that she is hurting and grieving. When she murders her children is when she finally lost everything she loved. Even though she became the heroine to Jason and his crew, she ended up becoming a tragic hero because now she has nothing.

The audience for this poem could be identified as people of all ages, making decisions are a part of everyone’s lives. Due to trends being so easily followed in today’s society, if a reader were to come across this poem the trend would be taking the road that is more traveled. The poem is very relatable to many people in today’s society because it is very common now for people to do what everyone is doing. The author created a clear, precise poem making every line flow with one another, and having a theme that is very easy to tell. In this society, it would not take much for a reader to understand this because everything is put very well together. The author does a great job of being descriptive in this poem. Frost said in the poem, The Road Not Taken, “to where it bent in the undergrowth, Then took the other, just as fair” (Frost,5-6), indicates to the reader that, when settling on a life-changing choice, it is difficult to see where that choice will lead. This leads the metaphor to be switched on. Life offers two decisions, both are legitimate yet the results could be immensely different.

In the poem, the author uses symbolism, setting, and tone to convey the theme of how making important choices can dictate an individual’s life. For the setting for this poem, it could be interpreted as in the fall because of the first line in the poem, “Two roads diverged in a yellow wood”, (Frost, 1). Another way this line could be intercepted is that some things are changing or may not be going as hoped. For some people fall can be seen as a change in a bad way, and how the season of fall could represent the speaker in the poem is the speaker is getting to that point in an age where there isn’t much time left and is looking back in life. In the poem, the fork in the road would be classified as a metaphor for the choices that were made throughout the poem. The tone of this poem would be reflective and nostalgic because the narrator is thinking back on the choice he made and is nostalgic about the path he did not take. Frost said in the poem “The Road Not Taken” “I shall be telling this with a sigh” (Frost 16), moving forward with the rest of life, the speaker will always tell this story with a sigh of regret. This quote made it easier for readers to figure out the tone, so the author did a good job of expressing his feelings throughout the poem. This relates to people having to make important decisions and reflecting on the consequences of the decisions. The road in the poem symbolizes the journey of life, and when the speakers reach the fork in the road splitting into two paths symbolizes a choice. In the poem, the speaker describes the forest as a “yellow wood”. Yellow can be viewed as a middle color, something in the middle of and uncertain of itself. This sets the disposition of uncertainty that describes the language of the poem.

This poem is an incredible example of how significant a choice can be. It also shows how troublesome making a choice can be. Most of these important choices can be hard to make because there has to be a sacrifice involved. Individuals simply trust and believe the first choice is the right choice, similar to the speaker picking the road less traveled first. Robert Frost, ‘The Road Not Taken’ is progressively symbolic of a decision an individual must make in their lives in an attempt to predict the result before arriving at the end than it is about picking the right way in the woods. Throughout the poem, frost is making it known life is a series of choices. A portion of these choices may, at the moment, may be thought of as not important, while others could be thought of as exceptionally huge. The poem works magnificently to symbolize choice through the two roads.