Character Sketch of Lady Macbeth

Lady Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s most famous and frightening female characters. When we first see her, she is already plotting Duncan’s murder, and she is stronger, more ruthless, and more ambitious than her husband. She seems fully aware of this and knows that she will have to push Macbeth into committing murder. At one point, she wishes that she were not a woman so that she could do it herself.

This theme of the relationship between gender and power is key to Lady Macbeth’s character: her husband implies that she is a masculine soul inhabiting a female body, which seems to link masculinity to ambition and violence. Shakespeare, however, seems to use her, and the witches, to undercut Macbeth’s idea that “undaunted mettle should compose / Nothing but males” (1.7.73–74). These crafty women use female methods of achieving power—that is, manipulation—to further their supposedly male ambitions. Women, the play implies, can be as ambitious and cruel as men, yet social constraints deny them the means to pursue these ambitions on their own.

Characters Lady Macbeth

Lady Macbeth is one of Shakespeare’s most famous and frightening female characters. When we first see her, she is already plotting Duncan’s murder, and she is stronger, more ruthless, and more ambitious than her husband. She seems fully aware of this and knows that she will have to push Macbeth into committing murder. At one point, she wishes that she were not a woman so that she could do it herself.

This theme of the relationship between gender and power is key to Lady Macbeth’s character: her husband implies that she is a masculine soul inhabiting a female body, which seems to link masculinity to ambition and violence. Shakespeare, however, seems to use her, and the witches, to undercut Macbeth’s idea that “undaunted mettle should compose / Nothing but males” . These crafty women use female methods of achieving power—that is, manipulation—to further their supposedly male ambitions. Women, the play implies, can be as ambitious and cruel as men, yet social constraints deny them the means to pursue these ambitions on their own.

Lady Macbeth manipulates her husband with remarkable effectiveness, overriding all his objections; when he hesitates to murder, she repeatedly questions his manhood until he feels that he must commit murder to prove himself. Lady Macbeth’s remarkable strength of will persists through the murder of the king—it is she who steadies her husband’s nerves immediately after the crime has been perpetrated.

Afterward, however, Lady Macbeth begins a slow slide into madness—just as ambition affects her more strongly than Macbeth before the crime, so does guilt plague her more strongly afterward. By the close of the play, she has been reduced to sleepwalking through the castle, desperately trying to wash away an invisible bloodstain. Once the sense of guilt comes home to roost, Lady Macbeth’s sensitivity becomes a weakness, and she is unable to cope. Significantly, she (apparently) kills herself, signalling her total inability to deal with the legacy of their crimes.

Lady Macbeth is possibly Shakespeare’s most famous and vivid female character. Everyone, whether they have read or seen the Macbeth play, has a view of her. She is generally depicted in the popular mind as the epitome of evil, and images of her appear over and over again in several cultures. She is usually portrayed in pictures as something like a Disney character, a cross between Cruella DeVille and the wicked stepmother in Snow White.

Although she has some of the most bloodthirsty lines in Shakespeare she is not quite Cruella De Ville or the wicked stepmother. The response she gets from the male characters suggests that she is a young, sexually attractive woman and, indeed, in her effort to influence Macbeth, she uses every method at her disposal, including the employment of her sexual charms.

She is usually depicted as a strong, tough woman and, in her drive to induce Macbeth to murder King Duncan, she appears to be that, but, having succeeded, it does not take long for her to crumble and break down, destroyed by guilt, and she ends up committing suicide.

Shakespeare does not have any evil characters. What he has are ordinary human beings, like you and me, placed in situations that challenge and test them. Some of them, like Iago in Othello, have personality defects, but that’s rare in Shakespeare and it’s not the case with Lady Mcbeth.

The challenges that Shakespeare presents his characters with generates different responses from different people. Lady Macbeth’s challenge is that she discovers that her husband has been tempted by an encounter with three witches to do something about their prediction that he will become king. She knows that the king would have to die for that to happen. When she gets a message that King Duncan plans to spend the night with them at Glamys Castle it seems to confirm the thought that they would have to kill him and that this was their once in a lifetime opportunity. That’s the situation into which she has been thrust.

She is as ambitious as Macbeth but she knows that for all his bravery in battle, all his soldierly and diplomatic qualities, he is basically much too soft –“too full of the milk of human kindness” – to take advantage of the opportunity. She makes up her mind to make him do it.

And she is right about his lack of resolve – they talk it over and he tells her that he just can’t do it. She goes into high gear and virtually holds his hand through it. One of her strongest qualities is persistence and she shows it here. Macbeth hesitates, equivocates and falters but she holds firm. She argues the case, she mocks him, bringing his manhood into question, she appeals to his sense of loyalty to her, she takes him to bed, and she finally prevails.

Macbeth kills Duncan in his sleep and from that moment their marriage begins to fall apart. They each fall into their own guilt-trip and hardly speak to each other. As king, Macbeth fears his political enemies and embarks on a reign of terror while Lady Macbeth stays in bed, unable to sleep, having nightmares when she does manage it. While walking and talking in her sleep she gives the game away about what they have done and sinks into a moral, physical and spiritual collapse. When Macbeth is on his last legs, with the rebels closing in, he gets the message that she’s dead. At that point, he says he doesn’t have time to think about it. “She should have died hereafter,” he says. Their partnership in this murderous enterprise has destroyed their marriage.

The promise of strength that we see in her at the beginning of the play is an illusion. What we are seeing is naked ambition and a willingness to act on it without having the resources to deal with the consequences. We see how guilt can eat up your soul and destroy you. We see how hollow ambition is, both in her journey and Macbeth’s.

Lady Macbeth is even more ambitious and ruthless than her husband. As soon as an opportunity to gain power presents itself, she has a plan in mind. She uses her influence to persuade Macbeth that they are taking the right course of action and even takes part in the crime herself.

For a while she is able to suppress her actions but eventually she becomes unable to deal with the guilt of what she has done. She becomes unable to sleep, and mentally unstable, eventually dying in tragic circumstances.

Lady Macbeth is, perhaps, even more determined than her husband. She can only be Queen if he becomes King so when he hesitates she displays enough ambition for both of them. Once she has worked out a plan, nothing will turn her from that course until her ambition is fulfilled.Glamis thou art, and Cawdor, and shalt be / What thou art promised; yet do I fear thy nature, / It is too full o'th milk of human kindness / To catch the nearest way. Thou wouldst be great, / Art not without ambition, but without / The illness should attend it. (Act 1 Scene 5)Lady Macbeth's determination to succeed is clear here. She is insistent that Macbeth will become King ('shalt be what thou art promised') However, she recognises that he is 'too full o'th milk of human kindness' and that this could stand in their way. It is interesting that she describes the necessary ruthless streak as an 'illness'. This suggests that even at this stage she knows what she is doing is wrong.

Cunning

To the outside world, Lady Macbeth seems like the ideal supportive wife but this is part of her ability to be deceptive. When Macbeth expresses doubts, she uses every trick she can think of to make sure he carries out their plan to murder Duncan. When he hesitates, she is there to urge Macbeth on.All our service, / In every point twice done and then done double, / Were poor and single business to contend / Against those honours deep and broad wherewith / Your majesty loads our house. (Act 1 Scene 6)Lady Macbeth welcomes Duncan to her home and flatters him so that he will not suspect a thing. She almost overdoes it when she exaggerates 'In every point twice done and then done double'. The word 'double' also links Lady Macbeth to the evil of the witches - they use the word repeatedly in one of their spells.

Conscience-stricken

Lady Macbeth seems to go from being someone with no conscience at all to someone who is overwhelmed by feelings of guilt. She cannot bear to think of what she has done and eventually dies alone and unmourned even by her husband.Out, damned spot! Out, I say! One, two. Why then 'tis time to do't. Hell is murky. Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and afeard? What need we fear? Who knows it, when none can call our power to account? Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him? (Act 5 Scene 1)As the guilt-stricken Lady Macbeth sleepwalks, she remembers all the evil things she and her husband have done and tries to wash imaginary blood from her hands (Out, damned spot: out, I say!). In particular, she recalls the night of Duncan's murder and the part she played in persuading her husband to act. She is also aware that she will be going to hell for her sins.

The Metaphysical Poetry

Hello, I am Emisha Ravani. Writing this blog for thinking activity for Metaphysical Poetry. 

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF METAPHYSICAL POETRY

• A group of poets emerged in the 16th century pioneered by John Donne

• Any tradition can not stay as it is so far. With passing of time it collapse. Ex. Film

• Metaphysical poetry is conscious attempt

• People crave for novelty

• They try to fetch image far from which never noticed

• ' અતિભોતિક પદ્ય' gujarati meaning of metaphysical

• Simply pray with your heart not need to be show off - Herbert

• Their poetry give the mental exercise to men. 

 A group of poet emerged in the second half of the 16th century whose poetry is identified as the metaphysical poetry. It was Dr. Samuel Johnson- A classicist of the age, who named poetry of John Donne and his school, As the metaphysical poetry. Johnson used these term while writting about the life of Abraham Cowley in his biographical work with the tittle"THE LIVES OF ENGLISH POETS" Dr. Johnson wanted to criticise the poetry of donne and his followers by using the term "metaphysical poetry". But with the passing of time the same term became the term of 'Appraisal' for their poetry. Dr. Johnson has passed on one remarkable comment stating that the poetry of metaphysical poets stood a trayal of "their finger but failed in trayal of the ears" Dr. Johnson wants to states that there is no music and rhythm in their poetry. 

                 Metaphysical poetry talks about deep things. It talks about soul, love, religion, reality etc. You can never be sure about what is coming your way while reading a metaphysical poem. There can be unusual philosophies and comparisons that will make you think and ponder.The most important characteristics of metaphysical poetry is “undissociated sensibility” (the combination of feeling and thoughts).

                   Even though it talks about serious stuff, it talks about it in a humorous way. The tone is sometimes light. It can be harsh sometimes too. The purpose is to present a new idea and make the reader think.

                    Another characteristic of such poetry is that it is unclear. Because it provides such complicated themes, the idea of metaphysical poems is somewhat not definite. It is different for every person. It depends on the perception and experiences of the reader. Every person will take something different out of the same poem based on their beliefs and understanding.

                 Metaphysical poetry is also short. It uses brief words and conveys a lot of ideas in just a small number of words. There are many maxims in this type of poetry too. John Donne introduced sayings into metaphysical poetry.

                  The unusual comparison of things in poetry is one of its unique and most interesting characteristics. All the metaphysicals have ability for unusual witty comparison , juxtaposition, and imagery. These unusual comparison are metaphysical conceits. As Donne in Twicknam Garden uses expression “spider love” that is contrary to the expectations of the readers. In the same poem, Donne also compares a lovers tears to wine of love that is unusual use of juxtaposition. Conceit compares very dissimilar things. For example bright smoke, calling lovers as two points of compass, taking soul as dew drop, etc.

                      The metaphysical poetry is brain-sprung, not heart-felt. It is intellectual and witty. According to Grierson, the two chief characteristics of metaphysical poetry are paradoxical ratiocination and passionate feelings. As Donne opens his poem “The indifferent” with a line with a paradoxical comment. “I can love both fair and brown”

Other unique feature of this poetry is Platonic Love. The word is taken after Plato. Platonic love is a non-romantic love. There is no lust or need of physical contact. It is spiritual love and is mostly for God.

                             Another feature of the metaphysical poetry is its fantastic lyrics style. As A. C. Word said: “The metaphysical style is a combination of two elements, the fantastic form and style, and the incongruous in matter manner”. The versification of the metaphysical poetry is also coarse and jerky like its diction. The main intention of the metaphysicals was to startle the readers. They deliberately avoided conventional poetic style to bring something new to the readers. Their style was not conventional and the versification contrast with much of the Elizabethan writers.It arouses some extreme level of thoughts and feelings in the readers by asking life-altering questions.

The  Metaphysical Poem: 'The Flea'

Original poem:

Mark but this flea, and mark in this,   

How little that which thou deniest me is;   

It sucked me first, and now sucks thee,

And in this flea our two bloods mingled be;   

Thou know’st that this cannot be said

A sin, nor shame, nor loss of maidenhead,

    Yet this enjoys before it woo,

    And pampered swells with one blood made of two,

    And this, alas, is more than we would do.

Oh stay, three lives in one flea spare,

Where we almost, nay more than married are.   

This flea is you and I, and this

Our marriage bed, and marriage temple is;   

Though parents grudge, and you, w'are met,   

And cloistered in these living walls of jet.

    Though use make you apt to kill me,

    Let not to that, self-murder added be,

    And sacrilege, three sins in killing three.

Cruel and sudden, hast thou since

Purpled thy nail, in blood of innocence?   

Wherein could this flea guilty be,

Except in that drop which it sucked from thee?   

Yet thou triumph’st, and say'st that thou   

Find’st not thy self, nor me the weaker now;

    ’Tis true; then learn how false, fears be:

    Just so much honor, when thou yield’st to me,

    Will waste, as this flea’s death took life from thee.

Explaination as a Metaphysical Poem:

The Flea (1633), written by John Donne is a short metaphysical poem that deals with the poet’s addressing his beloved about their sexual union with the help of the insect flea. It gives an insight into the sexual intimacy and challenges the contemporary Reformation where Donne seems to be playful with his explicit sexual imagery and language. Donne uses aspects of conceits , wits , unification of sensibility, puns and others as a metaphysical element in the poem.

The poem uses metaphysical conceits where the body of the flea is exaggerated and stretched to give a meaning out of it. When the flea bites his mistress and him then their blood is mingled inside the body of the flea. It is further stretched where the body of the flea is compared to the wedding chapels and their sexual consummation or marriage bed. Here, Donne is using a conceit to express the body of the flea as their sexual union where both the analogies contradicts to one another yet it is stretched to give a meaning out of it.

The poet uses his wits and intellect to justify and expound his arguments in the poem. He uses his wit by stating that his mistress should not kill the flea since they can be one and united in the body of the flea even if their parents disapprove of their relationship. He tells his mistress that they are safe within the body of the flea and killing the flea itself will add to her list of sins including the three sins which will come out of killing the flea. The three sins include the sin of killing the flea, the betrayal of their marriage as well dishonoring her chastity. Here, Donne uses his wit to justify his argument rhetorically and are calculated precisely to make his argument justifiable to his mistress.

The poem embodies the idea of unification of sensibility. It is when the poem has a balanced proportion of wit and emotions at the same time. The poem has the aspects of writer’s wit and the emotions. The emotions arises out of his love for his mistress and seduction whereas the wits arises out his arguments and justification to his mistress. The poem blends the equal proportion of wits and emotions and hence the unification of sensibility is deposited.

Lastly, the poem seems to address subtly the Christian references which would give an ironical overview for the Renaissance readers. It seems that Donne is aware of the contemporary Reformation status where discipline and chastity are being introduced in the society but he seems to input it in his writing yet is playful about it. He compares his sexual union as the “marriage temple” where the “temple” is the Church. Indeed, it is a Christian reference but he seems to address in an ironical way. It is a pun where he is showing to the readers about the importance of chastity and discipline in the poetic style but he is showing different aspects in his thematic style. He address that the idea of chastity that is embodied in the body of the flea where killing it would establish three sins. These three sins refer to the dishonor of the Holy Trinity itself. Donne is playful here and he is suggesting his beloved not to kill the flea since she would lose as much honor as the flea took away her blood.

 

The Rover

Hello, I am Emisha Ravani. Writing this blog for the text ' The Rover' . For I'm going to discuss Angellica's character. Consider the financial negotiations which one makes before marrying a prospective bride the same as prostitution. 

In late seventeenth-century London, Aphra Behn was the first woman to earn her living as a writer. As a playwright, she wrote plays that reflected historical and cultural aspects of the Restoration from a female perspective. In 1677, she penned one of her most notable plays, The Rover; or The Banished Cavaliers. Behn’s play debuted during the height of the Restoration period, which for theater meant more female agency on the stage because women were allowed to take on female roles for the first time. Behn places the action of her play in Spanish Naples, just before Lent in the midst of carnival, which is a setting fit for emphasizing the urge to break free from societal constraints. Through the stories of Florinda, Hellena, and Angellica, Behn integrates strong elements of feminism and libertinism by focusing on issues of marriage, self-identity and representation. Each of these character types represents a different aspect of a woman’s struggle to define herself during the Restoration.

Florinda’s character encompasses the Restoration woman’s struggle to gain agency in marriage. Before arriving at carnival, Florinda is trapped in the midst of a battle between following her own desire and the desires of her family. She wants to marry the English colonel Belvile, but must obey the patriarchal orders of her father and brother to marry who they see fit for her. In Katherine Quinsey’s book Broken Boundaries: Women & Feminism in Restoration Drama, Peggy Thompson points out that during the time that Behn wrote, male relatives often negotiated marriage contracts for the women in their family, but did so “not to protect their wards’ autonomy and property, but to enhance familial and dynastic interests” (Quinsey 73). In Florinda’s case, these interests would lead her to marry a rich elderly man named Don Vinciento. In a conversation with her brother Don Pedro during the opening scene, Florinda claims that she hates Don Vinciento, despite the fact that her brother says he could provide a good life for her in his “ancient villa belonging to the family of Vincentios these five hundred years,” (1.1.113-114). However, the prospect of marrying a man for property and stature is not appealing to Florinda, and she goes on to compare the tradition of arranged marriage to slavery, calling it an “ill custom” (1.1.77).

This “ill custom” was not generally espoused during the Restoration. In Susan Staves’ article, “Behn, Women, and Society”, she describes how prior to the challenges of the Civil Wars, the Church of England taught that children had a “religious obligation to honour and obey their parents” (13). But during the Restoration, the church clergy and “most decent people” felt that while the daughter was still obligated to listen to her parents in terms of a suitor, she should still have the ability to choose who she wanted to marry (13). This shift in perspective gave women a sense of agency in who they chose to marry, which is important to Florinda’s character because it allows her to break free of her social limitations. In her conversation with Don Pedro, Florinda rejects the patriarchal order of marriage and then ventures off to carnival with her sister Hellena, defying her brother once again as he had just ordered her not to go.

With Florinda’s sister Hellena, Behn exposes the struggle of self-identification, specifically in terms of faith. Hellena has been set on the path to become a nun, and as she ventures off to carnival with her sister, the masquerade is a tool for her to free herself from societal restraints and experience real love. As noted earlier, the Church of England was very influential during the Restoration. Behn incorporated religion into The Rover, but she presented a critical view of church customs by portraying such strong libertine ideals from a devout character like Hellena. In the first scene Hellena tells Florinda that she would like to see her and Belvile together because she hopes he has “some mad companion or other that will spoil [her] devotion” (1.1.42-43). She is enraptured with the idea and confesses to her sister that she thinks it is “very pretty to sigh, and sing, and blush…and long to wish to see a man” (1.1.13-14). Throughout the action at carnival, Hellena is determined not to return home and become what is expected of her. This illustrates the libertinism that goes against the patriarchal order ingrained in her religious devotion.

Hellena’s libertine values are very apparent when she meets Wilmore. Their courtship begins immediately and she tells him that vowing to die a maid is “foolish” (1.2.179). Wilmore and Hellena are both looking for an escape at carnival. When he arrives on shore, Wilmore tells the cavaliers that his “business ashore was only to enjoy [him]self a little this carnival” (1.2.77-78) hinting that he is looking for female companionship to occupy his time on the island.  Hellena’s feelings of oppression, curiosity and yearning for male companionship connect the libertine elements of these two characters together. In her article, Staves discusses how a central problem for Behn “was to work out the sharply different consequences of libertinism for women” (19). While Wilmore, the libertine man, thrives on sexual conquest and fails to yield anything constant outside of the moment, Hellena, the libertine woman, experiences her feelings as “proof that she is desirable” while also threatening her sense of identity (20). This contrast is evident in the plot since Wilmore has sexual desire for Hellena as well as the fair courtesan, Angellica Bianca.

Despite their increasing agency in choosing a marriage partner, women in the Restoration were nonetheless valued as commodities. Angellica Bianca is an example of this as her struggles stemmed from social perspectives of value within the marketplace. The Staves article mentions that Behn was intrigued by the “’value’ of women in her society and experiment[ed] with dividing and isolating elements of conventional female value” (21). In her profession, Angellica usually takes on the dominant role in choosing a mate. “Nothing but gold shall charm my heart” (2.1.164), she proclaims after hearing about the cavaliers seeking to purchase her for the 1,000 crown price tag. The amount that the men are willing to pay represents her value and elevates her idea of self worth.

Angellica’s role reflects a need for representation and agency for women during the Restoration. She wears no mask, unlike Florinda and Hellena when they go to carnival, and has a reputation outside of carnival based on her profession. Staves insightfully describes her character type as “Behn’s version of a maximally desirable woman [who] simultaneously possesses beauty, the power to evoke desire in men, wealth, and wit” (21). Unlike Florinda and Hellena, who seek to gain independence, Angellica’s conflict is between the powerlessness of love and maintaining control of a powerful commodity. In the second act, the cavaliers gaze at Angellica’s picture and discuss the contracted price. Words such as “stock” (2.1.21) and “quality” (2.1.60) are used. When Wilmore meets with Angellica’s woman in the second scene, he proposes that he split the cost with his friends and each would share an equal portion of her time (2.2.48-56). Though this is a blatant insult to her profession, Angellica is intrigued and implores Wilmore to continue his pursuit. She claims that she has never been in love before (2.2.123) but she falls for Wilmore, who argues that placing a price on sexual pleasure is a “sin” (2.2.15). With the argument of conventional morality on her mind, she in turn gives him her power by breaking the rules of her profession, allowing him to be with her at the cost of his love alone (2.2.155-65). Like Florinda and Hellena, Angellica broke the rules of her society for love, but the end result did not help her position in the marketplace.

Though each of these women was a valuable social commodity in their respective situations, Florinda began with no sense of agency, and the power shift in her patriarchal environment gave her more agency to choose who she would marry. Hellena began with the same level of agency as her sister, being forced into a life as a nun, but the shift in power allowed her to take on a new identity with a man which in turn gave her more agency in her devotion. Angellica, on the other hand lost power by falling in love. It left her vulnerable and decreased her level of agency which lowered her social value and self-worth.

Through Florinda, Hellena, and Angellica, Behn was able to bring to life some of the ideals of the Restoration while also critiquing popular movements within the era. Each of these characters endures a social struggle that fits into a bigger picture for the time. Marriage, self-identity and social representation are all topics that women of the Restoration were faced with and characterized what it meant to be a woman during that time. Behn’s execution of these elements makes The Rover a critical part of the history of Restoration Theater. 

Even though I’ve previously discussed this I thought that it was just as relevent when going over “The Rover” for a second time.

Whilst reading “The Rover”; or “The banished Cavaliers” I was intrigued by the character Angellica Bianca.  There were points throughout the play where I felt sorry for the circumstances she found herself in as it was probably not her first choice to enter into the profession of a whore.  So my question is: is she a good or bad character? To be more specific, does she vountarily or knowingly commit the acts she does or is she caught in a life that is not meant for her?  The following will explore these questions and attempt to come to a conclusion.

Women in seventeenth century Europe had few options in terms of marriage and courtship. They could not initiate relations with men, often their father and/ or their brother would decide whom they would marry. Once a rich and respectable suitor was found a dowry payment was invested in the hope of an advantageous marriage. The youngest of daughters were often sent to convents in an attempt to reduce expenses, while at the same time remaining religious and contributing to the church. Yet, in poorer families, prostitution was an inevitable choice of life for some young women. Although, we do not know the background of our courtesan we can almost assume she has come from a poor background. It is with this thought in mind that we must analyze Angelica; yet not with a bias view.

The socio-historic context of this play was at a time when there was a sexual reawakening after years of Puritan rule. This second ‘renaissance’ of sex therefore made prostitution a reliable business for any woman who had not come from a well to do background. Angellica is not a common whore though, in the play she is a very beautiful and famous courtesan:

‘How wondrous fair she is’

Being of this position she can therefore exercise her ability to seduce men and gain financial benefit. One such example of her underlying power over the men in this play is when Willmore and Antonio start a fight and it is her who breaks them up by ‘commanding them to stop’. This is particularly important to the play as a whole as she is the only female in this play who has any power in a seemingly evident patriarchal society further emphasizing its unusualness. Yet it is here that her real power stops. She has beauty, men adore her sexuality and she can command them like dogs but as the play progresses we get to see more and more of how she is a victim and how she is only a body for men to conquer.

The men straight away see her as a product they could buy and depersonalize. Belvile shows great concern to her ‘price’, blunt refers to her as a ‘commodity’ and Willmore speaks of his need to ‘purchase’ her beauty. Although Angellica makes clear the workings of the market place for her body; curiosity feeds her credit and price. Her credit is balanced upon the continued titillation of the men’s desire, through the displaying of her pictures. This shows her dependence on this financial system and her clever manipulation of it. She is wanton of men who have power and wealth; she clearly thinks Pedro will adjust her status for the better and remarks

“a slave that can add little to the triumph of the conqueror”

We see this again for Antonio another man of influence:

“tis for him, Don Antonio the viceroys son, that I have spread my nets.”

Behn ultimately suggests that sexual slavery is both the inevitable conclusion and choice for women like Angellica.

Yet she faces sadness and anger as the play draws to an end, she is played false by the rover that is Willmore. He has played her falsely and given her a real impression that he wants her deeply.

“By heaven, bright creature, I would not for the world, thy fame were half so fair as is thy face”

But as we know Willmore scouts out Hellena his ‘gypsy’ and attempts to bed her right in front of Angellica

“Come then, for a beginning, show me thy dear face”

It is only at the finale that we see the desperate Angellica almost kill Willmore out of love.

Therefore in conclusion these two statements work together to explain our courtesan. She unknowingly controls men and has a false heart and claims only gold shall charm it. In contrast she is a victim of circumstance and is never really loved for who she is, but for what she is.

'Hard Times' - theme of Utilitarianism

Hello, I am Emisha Ravani. Writing this blog for the answer of the text 'Hard times'. Wherein I'm going to discuss the theme of Utilitarianism. 



Now we will see this term how has been used in the text. 

Utilitarianism is the assumption that human beings act in a way that highlights their own self-interest. It is based on factuality and leaves little room for imagination. Dickens provides three vivid examples of this utilitarian logic in Hard Times. The first; Mr. Thomas Gradgrind, one of the main characters in the book, was the principal of a school in Coketown.

He was a firm believer in utilitarianism and instilled this philosophy into the students at the school from a very young age, as well as his own children. Mr. Josiah Bounderby was also a practitioner of utilitarianism but was more interested in the profit that stemmed from it. At the other end of the perspective, a group of circus members, who are the total opposite of utilitarians, are added by Dickens to provide a sharp contrast from the ideas of Mr. Bounderby and Mr. Gradgrind.

Thomas Gradgrind Sr., a father of five children, has lived his life by the book and never strayed from his philosophy that life is nothing more than facts and statistics. He has successfully incorporated this belief into the school system of Coketown and has tried his best to do so with his own children.

The educators see children as easy targets just waiting to be filled with information. They did not consider, however, the children’s need for fiction, poetry, and other fine arts that are used to expand children’s minds, all of which are essential today in order to produce well-rounded human beings through the educational process.

One has to wonder how different the story would be if Gradgrind did not run the school. How can you give a utilitarian man such as Gradgrind such power over a town? I do like how Dickens structures the book to make one ask obvious questions such as these.

Dickens does not tell us much about the success of the other students of the school besides Bitzer, who is fairly successful on paper but does not have the capacity as a person to deal with life’s everyday struggles. Gradgrinds two oldest children, Tom and Louisa, are examples of how this utilitarian method failed miserably.

These children were never given the opportunity to think for themselves, experience fun things in life, or even use their imaginations. True, they are smart people in the factual sense but do not have the street smarts to survive. Tom is a young man who, so fed up with his father’s strictness and repetition, revolts against him and leaves home to work in Mr. Bounderby’s bank.

Tom, now out from under his father’s wing, begins to drink and gamble heavily. Eventually, to get out of a deep gambling debt, he robs a bank and is forced to flee the area. When Bitzer realizes that Tom has robbed the bank and catches him, Mr. Gradgrind begs him to let Tom go, reminding him of all of the hard work that was put on him while at the school.

Ironically Bitzer, using the tools of factuality that he had learned in Gradgrinds school, replies that the school was paid for, but it is now over and he owes nothing more. I think this is extremely funny how, at a time of need, Gradgrind’s educational theory has backfired in his face. I think Dickens put this irony in as a comical device but also to show how ineffective the utilitarian method of teaching is.

Louisa, unlike Tom, does get along with her father. She even agrees to marry Mr. Bounderby, even though she does not love him, in order to please her father. She stays in the marriage with Bounderby and goes about life normally and factually until she is faced with a dilemma and panics. Mr. James Harthouse, a young, good-looking guy, is attracted to Louisa and deceivingly draws her attraction to him.

She does not know what to do since she has never had feelings of her own before. Her father never gave her the opportunity to think for herself, or even love someone. This is why Louisa goes frantic and ends up crying in her father’s lap.

She has always been told what to do and what is ‘right’, and now even her father is stumped. For the first time in the whole novel, Mr. Gradgrind strays from the utilitarian philosophy and shows compassion for his daughter and her feelings. One must think that he is beginning to doubt his philosophy after seeing it backfire in his face more than once.

Josiah Bounderby is another prime example of utilitarianism. He is one of the wealthiest people in Coketown; owning a bank and a factory, but is not really a likable person. His utilitarian philosophy is similar to Gradgrinds in the sense that factuality is the single most important virtue that one could possess.

Mr. Bounderby maintained throughout the story his utilitarian views, which basically stated that nothing else is important besides profit. Being the owner of both a factory and a bank, Bounderby employs many workers, yet seems to offer them no respect at all. He refers to the factory workers as “Hands,” because that is all they are to him. Bounderby often states that workers are all looking for “venison, turtle soup, and a golden spoon,” while all they really want is decent working conditions and fair wages for their work.

He is not concerned about his employees as human beings, but how much their hands can produce during the workday, resulting in money in his pocket. When one of his workers, Stephen Blackpool came to Bounderby’s house asking for advice about his bad marriage, he was treated as inferior just because of his social status. Dickens portrayed the scene as one in which Blackpool was on a level five steps below Bounderby and his associates because he was a lowly worker who was obviously much less educated than them.

It almost seemed like they would not even take him seriously because he was such. Blackpool was told that he could not divorce his wife because it would be against the laws of England. Later in the book, Bounderby divorces his wife. This shows that wealth played a large role in determining the social classes that people were in and the privileges they had.

This was definitely unfair but the social classes were structured in a way that allowed those who had money to look down upon those who were less fortunate. Generally, those who were not well-educated did not have any money, while the well-educated ones such as Bounderby and Gradgrind were wealthy. The people who knew the factual information, (utilitarians) were successful, while those who did not were reduced to working in the factories of the utilitarians.

Dickens paints a vivid picture of this inequality between social classes and shows he does not care much for it. It is fairly easy to see that Dickens holds contempt for Bounderby and the utilitarian philosophy he carries. The book details the philosophy, then shows how miserably it failed. How much different would their lives be if the town was not run by utilitarians?

Dickens cleverly added circus people as a contrast to the utilitarian approach to life. The circus people could be called the total opposite of utilitarianism. If one element of the book stands out in my mind, it would be this one.

The circus people are simple, open-minded human beings whose goal in life is to make people laugh. Dickens portrays them as a step up from the “Hands” but still close to the bottom in the social structure. These people are hated by Gradgrind, Bounderby and other utilitarians because they represent everything that is shunned in utilitarianism such as love, imagination, and humor.

Sissy Jupe, the daughter of a circus man, was taken in by the Gradgrinds to live in their home. She is representative of the circus people with her innocence and free-will, qualities that are lacking in the lives of the people around her. Just by her presence, her goodness rubs off on the people around her, although it is too late for most of them.

Even after numerous attempts to force utilitarianism into her by Mr. Gradgrind and his school, she is still the fun-loving girl that she always was because she grew up living with “normal” people who thought for themselves and loved each other. She influenced these qualities on the youngest Gradgrind daughter Jane, who led a much more enjoyable and fulfilling life than her older sister Louisa because of those influences.

Jane is not spoken of much until the end of the book but I like the way Dickens showed the effects of the utilitarian lifestyle as opposed to the non-utilitarian lifestyle. The utilitarians ultimately ended with a great downfall because their narrow-minds could not endure the pressures that life can impose on oneself.

The people that did not fall victim to the utilitarian trap were able to live their lives happily and freely, able to love, laugh, and use their imagination; which is the way life ought to be lived. Dickens obviously had a definitive opinion of the way life should be lived and did an excellent job of depicting it.

His method was somewhat indirect in the sense that he worked backward to get his point across but turned out to be very effective as the story progressed. Most of the story revolved around utilitarianism and the study of cold hard facts, but when the character flaws began to surface as a result of this philosophy, Dickens is quick to emphasize them.

One actually sees the main character of the book and firm supporter of utilitarianism, Mr. Thomas Gradgrind, experience the faults of his practice and begin to stray from it. Now, after watching his life fall apart, maybe he wishes he were in the circus.

Utilitarianism explaination