Dramatic Literature Essay

In the realist drama A Doll House, Ibsen effectively employs melodramatic conventions to expose the flawed value formation of the bourgeoisie, regarding the institutions of spousal, prejudice sexual urge roles and personal the true. Moreover, the dramatic tension on the play is heightened by Ibsens subversion of the well-made play and the melodramatic denouement at the origin of each act. In essence, Ibsen satirises the stifling moral climate of the bourgeoisie in conditioning an individuals identity, in the pursuit for self-determinism. The imposition of prejudice gender roles argon brought to feel finished and through the hiss signaling metaphor, illuminating the entrapment of the bourgeoisie. Metaphorically, the boo house is a moral safeguard for values of friendly determinism, which Ibsen exposes the limitations of external forces in conditioning Noras existence as a shuttlecock. Her incorporation of the pre-determined housewife role and Torvalds internalisation o f the patriarch role maintains the illusory deception of the doll house. Noras objectification is oblige through Torvalds gendered language, my songwriter, lark and squirrel and the diction of my con nones Torvalds ownership of Nora in their superficial wedding.Simultaneously, Torvalds strict adherence to paternal ideologies, limits his capacity to empathise circuit cardh Noras cry for emancipation, clear in the subtext give me pennies of my own. Essentially, Ibsen successfully adopts the doll house metaphor to attack the mores of patriarchy, which forces Nora to compromise her identity and freedom to stiff neighborly ideologies. The superficial institutions of conglutination disfigure ones sense of personal identity, justifying Noras cry for liberation from patriarchal ideologies which disempower women of her time. The compounding of the stage direction wagging his finger and the patronising tone was little Ms Sweet Tooth naughty? showcases the detriments of friendly opp ression in limiting ones ability to undergo self-actualisation. The diction little connotes Noras submission to Torvalds internalisation of dominant ideologies, mirroring the disempowerment of women in the bourgeoisie.Moreover, the symbolical Tarantella dress reflects Torvalds view perception of Nora as his pretty little thing, reiterating Noras objectification. The power imbalance within the Helmer spousal relationship justifies Noras deceit, evident in the dramatic irony I wouldnt do anything youd pooh-pooh of. This notion is juxtapose with Noras statement I saved Torvalds life by signing my set abouts name and got the money. Noras deception subverts Torvalds strict adherence to the imposed social ideologies, which Kristine echoes these patriarchal sentiments, a wife cannot borrow money without her husbands permission. The conflict of gender limitations drives the tragic force of the play in Act 1, ending at a climactic flash to heighten the tension in Act 2. In essence, Ibse n successfully generates a greater degree of empathy for Nora, as he mirrors the disempowerment of the social and economic limitations of women in the bourgeoisie. Ibsens rich exploration of the bourgeoisie, inevitably results in Noras detachment from her doll metaphor.Kristine and Krogstad function as catalysts for Noras trans reboundation, through illuminating the truth of the Helmer marriage, no more lies, tricks they must understand each other. While Krogstad initiates the tragic force of the play through his symbolic letter in Act 2. Ibsen establishes the juxtaposition of the authentic relationship of Krogstad and Kristine to the superficiality of the Helmer marriage, compelling Nora to transcend the limitations of the bourgeoisie. Moreover, the jibe of Nora and Krogstad subverts the values of social determinism, as Krogstad elevates himself through the social hierarchy despite being deemed morally rove. Essentially, an unexpected union of the two derives from a compromised u nderstanding, as both characters are criminalised for their acts of personal integrity. Thereby, Ibsen invites the audition to esteem their personal values, emphasising the importance of self-determinism overriding social conformity.Ibsen exposes the flawed value system of the bourgeoisie, and forewarns of the detriments of an individuals life being overridden by social morality. The dramatic irony of the Tarantella dance anyoned think your life depended on this dance and Noras statement 31 hours to live foreshadows the impending death of Noras doll metaphor. This is provided accentuated through Finneys statement of Noras cry for emancipation from the Tarantella dance, evident in she returns from her frenzied state, back to the role of a wife and mother, only as a springboard from which to unloose herself. Moreover, Nora evolves from a doll identity in Act 1, evident in Rosenburgs claims Ibsen began with a treat immobilizeed Nora doll to an awakened woman in Act 3. Her transf ormation demolishes the artificial foundations of the doll house, therefore bring out the harsh winter overthrowscape, embodying reality.Therefore, it isbest to go out into the real world, and discover the truth for herself and her values. Moreover, Ibsens subversion of the well-made play is evident in the final scene of the play, where Nora slams the door and leaves the au startnce with a climactic ending. Ibsen juxtaposes the beginning and final scene of the play to showcase the disparity of Noras transition throughout the play. Her first appearance connotes her disempowerment in the bourgeoisie lifestyle, which is then contrasted to the final scene, where she puts on the cloak and turns on the lights. The spark of the truth compels Nora to extricate herself from the illusory deception of the door house, olibanum abandoning the false union of her superficial marriage and burden of motherhood. In essence, Nora is virtually unrecognisable by the end of Act 3, as Ibsen courageou sly abandons the doll metaphor, thereof emphasising the importance transcending social limitations to maintain an identity.Mirroring Austens social satire Pride and Prejudice, Weldon grapples with the significance of context and questions of values in her didactic epistolary novel Letters to Alice. Moreover, both composers utilise form as a vehicle to socially critique their contemporaries, thus reinforcing the didactic purpose of invoking ideological change. This is achieved through the enquiry of the institutions of marriage, moral education, Literature, prejudice gender roles and social stratification. Weldon examines Austens social satire in exploring the changing facets of marriage, thus reshaping our perception of the connection that links the 18th century marriage customs to that of the modern martial practices. The contextualisation of a Georgian woman emphasises the gender injustices prevalent in the 18th century Regency England. Moreover, marriage was visualized as a social contract for economic survival, evident in Charlottes pragmatic characterisation, who marital Mr Collins out of practicality rather than general similarity of feelings and taste.Mrs Bennet also reinforces these sentiments, as the blood of her life was to ticktack her daughters married, therefore, Mrs Bennet and Charlottes strict adherence to social conventions of marriage reinforces its lofty prospect of being the only honourable provision. Weldon justifies the Georgian womans outlook of marriage through the statistics only 30% of women married andasserts Alice you must understand the world in which Austen was born in. Thereby, the modern audience is able to grapple with the significance assigned to marriage in Austens world, through Weldons insight. In essence, Austen satirises the flawed value system regarding the institutions of marriage through her adoption of caricatures and irony. Weldon acts as a facilitator for the modern audience to gain a holistic understandin g of P+P, through her examination of the gender injustices prevalent in Austens era. Patriarchy prevailed in the 18th century, meaning life was founded on the basis of marriage, as women were limited to the narrow confines of work, womens trade millinery, embroidery, prostitution or you could get married.Weldons satirical comment reveals the prejudice gender roles in disempowerment women in the 18th century, thus asserting it was a horrible time to be alive. This is further accentuated through Charlottes pragmatism, who does not think highly of men or matrimony and sacrifices every feeling of worldly advantage to judge Mr Collins marriage proposal for financial security and social elevation. Moreover, Weldons satirical comment juxtaposed the perceptions of marriage in the 18th century to that of the modern context, the stuff in our womens magazine, but it was the stuff of their life. The elevation of gender roles in the modern context emphasises the adversities women faced in Aust ens world, and this is achieved through the contrast of character foils Elizabeth and Charlotte.In essence, Weldon positions the audience to gain an appreciation for the transformation of gender roles in changing contexts, empowering women to become great contributors to society. Weldons hybridity employs Aunt Faye as a mouthpiece to examine the institutions of Literature in P+P and LTA. The emphasis of Literatures value in society is evident in the exaggeration very essence of civilisation. According to Weldons didacticism, Literature should not be deemed as just books, as it embodies complex and dynamic concepts of the human condition. In essence, Weldon refers to Literature with a capital L and books by the sophistication of their characters, whose struggles in their fictional lives resonate to our own. Moreover, the use of imperatives you must read Alice, before it is overly late reinforces Weldons didactic purpose of Literature catalysing self-actualisation. Comparably, an acc omplished Georgian woman has a pure(a) knowledge of music, singing, drawing and dancing.Austen howeversatirises this limited perception of good education as it is work-shy to foster independence and intelligence in women. dame Catherines patronising tone in addressing Elizabeth as an unfeeling, selfish girl demonstrates her lack of moral education despite her aristocratic stature. It is Elizabeth however, who epitomises good education with her wit and independence, thus undergoing self-awakening, til this moment I never knew myself. In contrast, Weldon employs the extended metaphor of the City of Invention to levy connections, where writers can cohabit and collaborate with their Houses of Imagination. Moreover, our carvings on the Rock of Eternity symbolises our shared experiences and values, linking the past, present and future tense together. Thus, Weldon invites the audience to reach out to posterity, much like Austen through her canonical Literature. The City also enables c onnections mingled with reader and writer, for us to understand ourselves and each other, thus gaining empathy through Literature.Weldons re-examination of P+P showcases the fundamental values predominant in classic texts, thus transcending their era of composition, and emphasising the importance of Literature in catalysing ones sense of spiritual awakening. The underlying value prevalent in both texts of social stratification is enhanced by the contextualisation of fundamental values in both texts. Austen asserts the stability and order enforced through conformity to rigid social class structures, and family being a primary factor to ascertain ones social standing, and consequently ones chance of marriage.This is evident in Lady Catherines caricature, as she forewarns of the detriments of an individuals subversion of the social class system, youll be slighted and despised your adhesion will be a disgrace. Simultaneously, Austen introduces the unorthodox union of Darcy and Elizab eth to challenge the social class system because their relationship is founded on mutual respect and compatibility, thus invoking a positive change in the rigid social structure. Weldon accounts for Darcys decision to marry where he loved, and not where he ought, as Elizabeth brought neither land nor money but she brought vigour, intelligence and honesty. In essence, Austen exposes the superficiality of the institutions of social stratification, and emphasises the importance of personal integrity overriding social morality.Shakespeares adaptation of Plutarchs histories Julius Caesar utilises tragic form to exhibit the subjective nature of conflicting perspectives. Moreover, the linguistic techniques elicited through the power play of orations subvert the audiences views of personalities, events and situations. Shakespeare presents forces perspectives to explore the power vacuum and policy-making machinations prevalent in Elizabethan England. In essence, the audience is positione d to get hold of the ambiguity of conflicting perspectives, through Shakespeares exploration of the volatility and temporary nature of power, policy-making imperatives and the severeness of truth. Similarly, Buttroses feature article Et tu Julia employs Julius Caesar as a historical framework to explore the dynamics of authorities and represent the subjectivity of conflicting perspectives.Thereby, Buttrose grapples with the tension between the drive for altruistic and political imperatives, thus in the nothingness to the audiences questioning of Gillards legitimacy as PM. Shakespeares construction of conflicting portraitures forewarns of the dangers of political machination superseding ones capacity for objectivity and truth. Mirroring the political machinations of Elizabethan England, Shakespeare explores the dynamics of political imperatives at the expense of Brutus honour. Caesars deification as constant as the northern star and repetition of third person accentuates his h ubris, through the establishment of the artificial distance between himself and his mortality.Through various representations, Shakespeare illuminates the error inherent in Caesars noble character, direct to his tragic demise, thus revealing the dainty of power. The audience is able to blemish Caesars vulnerability through the act of political machination of Cassius compelling Brutus to devise against Caesar, as crowned, how that might change his nature. Shakespeares juxtaposition of Caesars thrasonical assertions opposed to Cassius anecdotes of Caesars fragility help me Cassius, or I sink generates polarised perspectives of Caesars record. Moreover, the combination of the extended metaphor ambitions ladder and the biblical allusion of serpents egg if hatchd would grow mischievous, leads to the audiences questioning of Caesars ambition. Ultimately, this robs Brutus of his foresight, compelling him to extricate the satanic creature to prevent a potentially despotic reign, ironi cally defying the natural order. Essentially, Shakespeare explores the dynamics of political machinationsoverriding ones noble perspective, thus stimulating conflicting ideologies in questions of truth.Simultaneously, Buttroses intertextuality Et tu Julia examines the justification of Gillards political machinations and the speculation of her credibleness of her political machination. The condition clause we have to see whether Julia Caesar is a reforming republican or imperial derriere historically alludes to Caesars assassination, raising questions of ethics in the conspiracy. Buttrose mirrors Shakespeares criticism of the conspiracy, evident in the hyperbole the political murder of Kevin rudd coupled with the violent imagery, the coup came, the plotters bludgeoned. Essentially, the Labour party is represented as despotic and immoral, leading to the audiences questioning of Rudds dismissal and Gillards instatement, thus generating a greater degree of empathy for the fallen PM.Mo reover, his support for Rudd is further accentuated through the use of individual Australian colloquialism Rudd wanted to buy back the farms from mining interests, elevating his political stature through emphasising his altruistic imperatives for public good. Mirroring Antonys assertions of Caesars benevolence, Buttrose similarly presents an anecdote of Rudds claims to improve health services, education and housing. Comparably, Buttrose represents a polarised perspective of Gillards legitimacy for her acts of political machination for the welfare of the Labour party. This is evident in denigrating Rudds credibility as PM through the slogan Rudd the Dud not to be trusted coupled with the polling statistics losing electoral appeal and Liberal party lead of 9%. Essentially reinforcing Gillards credibility as leader, the political jargon appeals to the audiences logos, posture them to accept the act of Rudds dismissal as a necessity for the Labour party. In essence, Buttrose represent s the subjectivity of conflicting perspectives conditioned in the dynamics of politics.Shakespeare challenges the audience to postulate on the existence of truth through illuminating the power of rhetoric to influence meaning within different representations of perspectives. Political machinations are explored in Brutus and Antonys orations, epitomising conflicting perspectives to the climax of Caesars assassination in Act 3. Brutus antithesis not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved Rome more appeals to the Plebians patriotism, and the disjunction but enables theaudience to recognise Brutus moral sacrifice for the betterment of Rome. This is further accentuated through the anacoenosis have Caesar live and die all slaves, than Caesar die to live all free men? coupled with the strong affirmation Caesar was ambition, so I switch off him, appealing to the audiences logos, thus positioning to accept the necessity of Caesars assassination.Brutus instils fear of Caesars inherent ty ranny in the Plebians through the diction of slave. Comparably, Shakespeare presents an alternative perspective of Caesars personality through Antonys oration. Antony exploits the power of rhetoric through the condition clauses, if Caesar was ambitious to question the validity of Brutus claims. This is further negated through the recollection of memories he thrice refused the crown, leading the audience to question their personal truths in determine the credibility of Brutus justification of his political imperatives. Fundamentally, Shakespeare exploits the power of representations through the power of rhetoric to manipulate truths, thus leading to conflicting ideologies.