Through the Tunnel Essay Example for Free

Through the Tunnel Essay Doris Lessing is a British writer who has a background of upbringing in various Afro-Asian countries like Persia and Rhodesia. But she is living in Britain since 1949. She has written extensively about the racial and also has taken into account the feminist themes like male-female relationship and female identity and freedom in contemporary Western society. There an autobiographical element in â€Å"Through the Tunnel† and she describes her own experiences in it. Symbolism is an important literary element that she utilizes in a subtle way to covey her themes. Through the Tunnel symbolizes her own adolescent experience at recognizing her difference with the world where she resides and the world she belongs to and the passage through the channel of identity crisis. The two areas of coast safe beach and dangerous beach Jerry looks at when he arrives at the coastline symbolize the two different worlds. Like Lessing he resides at a place where he has no solace. He connects his mother to that crowded beach due to the fact she has no identity of her own and is lost among the crowd. Lessing reflects her own image in the form of Jerry as her own parents especially her mother lost her true identity and remained a part of the world where they resided i.e. Persia and Rhodesia. They neither became a part of that society nor their own. â€Å"Jerry’s struggle is that of an individual trying to find his place in the world† (Sobeloff, 1997) Her mother helps him in this regard although she is concerned about him but she thinks that â€Å"Of course hes old enough to be safe without me.† (Lessing)   So she decides to let him go by saying; â€Å"Are you tired of the usual beach, Jerry? Would you like to go somewhere else?†Ã¢â‚¬  (Lessing) The Safe beach is a place that Lessing belongs too. Jerry feels a sense of independence and security while playing on that safe beach. That somewhere else is the place where he craves to go for. For Lessing that place is England i.e. her maternal ancestral home. Although she resided among the native African and felt their pathos and miseries but like Jerry, she â€Å"kept his distance at a stones throw.† (Lessing) Because she was different racially, linguistically and culturally. As â€Å"all of them burned smooth dark brown, and speaking a language he did not understand.† (Lessing) Lessing and Jerry were different from them. The difference was not deep and based on hatred as â€Å"They shouted cheerful greetings at him†. (Lessing) Sobeloff says that â€Å"while there is no overt â€Å"color bar† guiding the interactions between Jerry and the older boys† (Sobeloff, 1997) but it was psychological. So Lessing felts the pains of Africans but psychologically she was an English being. The passage through the tunnel is an effort for one’s own identity and freedom. Lessing has to go through the suffering of this identity but she took it as challenge like jerry. Passage through this identity tunnel was marked with pathos and miseries but she never gave up. Whenever a child hankers after such an adventurous journey, there are friends, relative and parents who counsel and help in these issues but for Jerry there is no one to provide answer to his questions and to relieve him. Same was the case with Lessing. She struggled all alone for her identity and there was no help of any sort available to her. Hanford has beautifully summed up this challenge in her life; â€Å"Lessings life has been a challenge to her belief that people cannot resist the currents of their time, as she fought against the biological and cultural imperatives that fated her to sink without a murmur into marriage and motherhood.† (Hanford, 1995) Jerry toiled day ad night to pass that tunnel; â€Å"That day and the next, Jerry exercised his lungs as if everything, the whole of his life, all that he would become, depended upon it. And again his nose bled at night, and his mother insisted on his coming with her the next day.† (Lessing) Lessing went through the same toil and effort to remove the chasm between herself and her true identity. Because the beach where she was residing â€Å"It was not [her] beach.† (Lessing) Finally she won her fight and But unlike Jerry she â€Å"gave in at once.† (Lessing) Helleron clearly depicts the inner satisfaction of Lessing by saying that â€Å"When Jerry finally achieves his goal, there is no fanfare, no applause, just a quiet celebration within himself knowing that he succeeded.† (Helleron, 1997) References Hanford, Jan. Biography. A Readers Guide to The Golden Notebook Under My Skin, Harper Perennial, 1995. Holleran, Karen.† Through the Tunnel: The Search for Identity and Acceptance†.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Short Stories for Students, Gale Research, 1997. Lessing, Doris. The Habit of Loving. London:   MacGibbon Kee, 1957   Sobeloff, Judy. Short Stories for Students, Gale Research, 1997.

The Problem of Moral Agency in Shakespeares Hamlet Essay -- GCSE Cour

The Problem of Moral Agency in Hamlet  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   In order to be a moral agent, a person has to have a good sense of self, they have to know exactly who they are and how they must act according to the decisions they make. In Hamlet, the moral task at hand is revenge for the murder of Hamlet the elder. The murdered King's son, also of the same name, must be the one to avenge the murder. Before Prince Hamlet finds out the true story behind his father's death, he has his mother's "incestuous" remarriage to his uncle Claudius (who is now the King of Denmark) on his mind. Long after Hamlet learns the truth, he still does nothing. Hamlet is unable to act even though he has decided to seek revenge. One reason he does not act is because he cannot get past the fact that his mother is not, in his mind, adequately mourning old Hamlet's death. The second reason the Prince has problems with moral agency is because he does not really decide why he is planning to seek revenge on Claudius. His task is twofold, h e wants to avenge the murder of his father and he wants his mother to reveal her guilt about her hasty and incestuous marriage. Finally, Hamlet does not truly know who he is, and what he is to do until the very last act of Hamlet. This essay aims to explore why Prince Hamlet has trouble becoming a moral agent. When we first encounter Hamlet, his concerns are about his mother's remarriage to his uncle Claudius so soon after his father has died. The Prince is angry because Gertrude is not adequately mourning old Hamlet's death, and due to the insistence of Claudius that Hamlet consider him his father and king: O God, a beast that wants discourse of reason Would have mourn'd longer-- married with my uncle, My fathe... .... When Hamlet is doomed to die, he goes through with his revenge, but not for his father, nor for his mother-- The Prince finally kills the King when he finds out that it he, Claudius, who is responsible for the poisonous foil. This final reason to kill Claudius is most important of all. Works Cited Calderwood, James L.. To Be and Not To Be: Negation and Metadrama in Hamlet. --New York: Columbia University Press, 1983. Shakespeare, William. All's Well That Ends Well. --In: The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. --Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1974; pp.504-541. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. --In: The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. --Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1974; pp. 1141-1186. Tirrell, Lynne. "Storytelling and Moral Agency."   --In: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. --V.48, Spring 1990; pp.115-126.

Actual production Essay

The costumes worn by most other characters were further emphasis of the puritan simplicity and attitude that the actors on stage exhibited. â€Å"I felt it was incredibly important that the costumes weren’t too mimsy. Quite often an approach to this play is to go down the puritanical route which is very clean, quite anal and tightly corseted.†. A prime example of this was Elizabeth Proctor, who wore a very plain and tradition grey dress; which in her part was very effective considering the plain and simple manner in which she was presented. Another interesting fact was that both Proctor and Giles were dressed in leather working garments unlike the rest of the onstage characters. This seemed to create a subtle effect that seemed to single them out from everyone else, which was very successful given that both of them shared the common attribute of being two of primary characters who possessed the ‘moral authority’ of the storyline (the other one being Rebecca). One aspect of this production that I genuinely loved was the sheer emphasis of the ‘dramatic irony’ in the storyline. The prime example of this was at the very end of Act One, where the suspicion had reached a maximum and the time had come to try to get to the bottom of things and the interrogation began â€Å"(grasping Abigail) Abigail, it may be that your cousin is dying. Did you call the devil last night?† (p35). This part was the first area which added fuel to the ‘dramatic irony factor’. While Hale was saying these words, he seemed to grasp Abigail in a somewhat ridiculous fashion; as if he was implying something that was almost sexual. Abigail was always presented in this play as a flirtatious character with the typical characteristics of a temptress. â€Å"Give me a word John. A soft word (her concentrated desire destroys his smile)† (p17). However, despite her success in enticing the characters on stage, she was not in any way sexually attractive to any members of the audience. This instantly caused the members of the audience to feel frustrated and ridiculed by the actions of the characters, hence – instantly creating a disapproving impression of Abigail. Most importantly however, it served the function of creating a disagreement between the main characters and the audience and thus distances the spectators from the stage. This in addition to the use of setting mentioned earlier made the audience feel like the ones on the outside. By making us feel like the outsiders, we were almost able to see through the inside. Since generally, outsiders are able to perceive and see through what insiders are too blind and unable to see. Therefore, we all knew exactly what was going on behind the twisted and evil plots of Abigail, while the characters on stage cannot. Ironically enough, this is exactly what Arthur Miller wanted. As mentioned before, we were seeing through his eyes and metaphorically, this was like him seeing through the inhumane regime of McCarthyism while the common citizens of the US were unable to comprehend such things. After the unusual gestures that Hale used, Tituba soon entered the scene. Suddenly, it seemed almost out of nowhere, Abigail appeared to just randomly accuse Tituba of the crimes she herself had probably been guilty of. â€Å"She made me do it! She made Betty do it!† (p35). Even though this type of reaction towards Tituba’s entrance to the scene was already in the stage directions, it was enhanced further by the way Abigail was acted by Sinà ¯Ã‚ ¿Ã‚ ½ad Matthews. While she spoke those words, she seemed to choke and stutter through her speech. The audience, who already formed a negative impression of Abigail were obviously highly suspicious of what she was doing and at this point, I felt that she simply was making it up as she went along. I was personally very surprised by the tremendously over exaggerated manner that the actors responded. It created a sense of frustration for the audience when Hale suddenly responded to Abigail’s accusations in the exaggerated way that he did â€Å"Woman, have you enlisted these children for the devil?† (p36). Because Hale was presented so dramatically, it was irritating to see just how gullible and foolish he and other members of the town were. As the scene progressed, the time eventually came where Tituba ‘confessed’ to the charges of witchcraft that were inflicted upon her. â€Å"He say Mr Parris must be kill! Mr Parris no goodly man, and he bid me rise out of my bed and cut your throat!† (p38). As a 21st century audience, we were instantly aware that there was no way that Tituba was telling the truth. While she confessed, Tituba was presented as a frenzied, out-of-control type of character. The way that she overstated her speech made the audience feel that this was like an anticlimax to the huge build-up beforehand (i.e. the constant persuasion Hale used). Once again, Hale’s gullible reaction created a very frustrating feeling for the members of the audience. Eventually, the two ended up on stage in a ridiculous pose that made the audience cringe in disbelief. As ludicrous as the acting was, it created a very positive effect in highlighting the sheer dramatic irony of the play and this was definitely one of the best features of the book that this production managed to achieve. This however also created a somewhat negative effect. Since the dramatic irony was emphasised in a less serious tone, the following event lost the frightening factor to it that Arthur Miller may have wanted to portray. â€Å"I know that its paranoid centre is still pumping out the same darkly attractive warning that it did in the fifties†. I must admit, while reading the text in the very last lines of the first Act â€Å"I saw George Jacobs with the devil, I saw Goody Howe with the devil†¦ etc† (p39-40), I genuinely found the text quite frightening considering how gullible everyone in Salem seemed to be; the idea of all these people possibly being hanged was chilling. However in the actual production of the play, Betty, Abigail and the rest of the cast moved forward towards the front of the platform while it was being pulled back. Their hands were raised in the air while they continued to speak the names of those they accused and they were eventually blanked out from the stage, which appeared almost comedic. On the other hand, the whole striking fear effect is probably not as applicable to the modern day audience as it may have been to an audience of 1953. Arthur Miller’s primary intention for using the fear factor was to relate it to idea that McCarthyism was something to be afraid of. Yet in 2004, McCarthyism is no longer as significant, hence the fear factor within the play was probably eradicated in order to strengthen the effects of other factors.

List of the Most Conservative Congressmen