Eddie Carbone in Arthur Miller's A View From The Bridge Essay

In this essay, I will take a gander at the play of Romeo and Juliet. I will examine how Shakespeare has utilized dialect in the play for symbolic impact. I will also see how Shakespeare has displayed love and the path in which Romeo and Juliet converse with each other, I might choose whether their affection was genuine and discuss their parents differentiating perspectives and conclusions. I will likewise remark on the play's pertinence today and perceive how Shakespeare has utilized dramatic devices and structures to improve the discussion between the youthful lovers. All throughout the play, there is a consistent theme of love and destiny, I will be dissecting this subject and show how it influences Romeo and Juliet.

The use of emotive impact is significant in moving the audience into feeling a dramatic feeling of mixed emotions that convey within particular scenes. During the public revelations of Shelia and Bridie's secrets in Act 2, Bridie mentions “that isn’t the truth…she went to the Jap's to a Japanese guard and sold herself for him for tablets”. The contrast between Bridie’s loud angry tone and silence of Sheila proved that. This was very effective in resolving the tension in the play, as the silence aroused a great sense of drama, This quote is an example of Misto’s use of emotive power over the audience, it also contrasts the themes of pity and admiration of both Bridie and Sheila; they are influenced into feeling pity and admiration. Misto’s use of emotive power moves the audience into feeling sadness, pity and admiration that women have endured so much suffering however they are brave enough to tell the whole world of their horrific experiences.

William Shakespeare is the world’s pre-eminent dramatist whose plays range from tragedies to tragic comedies, etc. His general style of writing is often comparable to several of his contemporaries, like Romeo and Juliet is based on Arthur Brooke’s narrative poem, “The tragical history of Romeo and Juliet”. But Shakespeare’s works express a different range of human experience where his characters command the sympathy of audiences and also are complex as well as human in nature. Shakespeare makes the protagonist’s character development central to the plot.

Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet discusses the many challenges the ‘star crossed lovers’ face. It is their own deceptive actions that ultimately lead them to their untimely end. However Romeo and Juliet are forced to be deceptive due to their fate and misfortune, the ongoing feud in Verona, and the misleading guidance they receive from others; which also contribute to their deaths. Romeo and Juliet focuses on the theme of love and hate, this theme is interweaved throughout the play.

Many, if not all, plays are written to evoke thoughts from people in the audience. Through their scripts, authors deliver messages about their opinions on various issues ranging from gender roles to class ranks. These messages are developed to provoke thoughts and questions from people who experience performances. In the play Rome Sweet Rome, the Q Brothers Collective use both new and old theatrical techniques to make parallels between the Roman and United States governments by addressing issues involving women’s roles in society, class rank, and homosexuality. The play uses methods both similar and different to other classic plays to deliver a message that is relatable to issues in today’s world. This message is enhanced through the use of acting styles, set design, costumes, music, and lighting.

The differences in styles of language truly brings alive the plays' various characters, from the lowliest drawer to the noblest knight. The playwright's audience would have been composed of a similarly diverse spectrum of society, from the groundlings at the foot of the stage, to the members of the court in attendance, and these disparate members of the audience might very well have come away from the plays with different interpretations of

The focus of this paper will be to compare and contrast the works of two playwrights. The works that will be considered are Molière’s The Would-Be Gentleman and Beaumarchais’s The Marriage of Figaro. Both considered comedies, Moliere’s is a short play that tells the tale of Monsieur Jourdain, a tradesman who desires to become a gentleman. Beaumarchais’s play, second in the Figaro trilogy, follows the series of event prior to Figaro’s wedding. Figaro and his companions scheme to ensure that his marriage occurs smoothly. Furthermore, the plays are dated 100 years apart from each other, and they deal with the representation of social hierarchy, social mobility, and gender roles in various ways. With that in mind, they become good sources to compare and contrast the changes in society that occurred within those 100 years. This paper will compare both plays to examine how Molière further endorses the social values and ideas of his time, while Beaumarchais’s presents a shift in attitude towards those values and challenges them.

How Brecht achieves producing this state of consciousness is more subtle and elegant than the previous technique of having actors walk out with blatant placards to remind the audience that they are watching a play. One of the marks of Brecht’s epic theater is his alienation effect, or “a representation which allows [the audience] to recognize its subject, but at the same time makes it seem unfamiliar” (Brecht 1948, 8).

The effort and the input are sometimes not deserved or appropriate with reward in the future. In this play, the use of violent and brutal language helps the playwright and the characters to reveal people’s effort to achieve things that are not so much important or needed. That form of language is used to heighten the tension and create the impression that whatever is at stake is crucial, whereas in reality they are talking about love and marriage based on cheating and cunning. Shakespeare manages to reveal the hypocritical nature of the society where people will fight and defend their positions only to end up losing everything or having not gained anything in the first place. The use of brutal language is also tactical in the sense that Shakespeare is able to attract attention of the audience while convey his message of a brutal, insensitive

Though often times in the world one may get caught up in the secrets and rumours about them or those around them, it is these secrets and rumours that shape a human being’s character and relationships with those around them. In the Shakespearean tragedy, Romeo and Juliet, the effects that secrets have on characters’ relationships shape the play, yet more specifically, it is the literal secrets regarding relationships that shape such relationships, which, in turn, shapes the play. Different relationships as outlined thoroughly in the play are not only a result of the secrets themselves, but the location in which these certain secrets are initially portrayed.

This week’s Lecture was focused on the third play in the four comedies book named “The Merchant of Venice”. This play was known for being controversial but also very interesting play that captured the attention of the viewers. Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice” is set in Renaissance Venice, with a few scenes in a town called Belmont. The setting is important – Venice was one of the wealthiest towns in Europe, as it was right on the sea, with excellent shipping facilities for trading with the east. During this time, there was a large population of Jew’s in Europe, although 16th-century Venice was more tolerant of foreigners than Elizabethan England, Jews in Venice were confined to ghettos at the time Shakespeare wrote “The Merchant of Venice”. If a person compares “The Merchant of Venice”, to the other Shakespeare’s plays that have been covered in this class already and also to the ones that have not be covered yet, such as “As You Like It” or “Much Ado About Nothing”, some common features can be found throughout each of these plays. Some of the common features are: Multiple plots, Dual settings, Games/Trials/Practical Jokes/Music, Love Vs. Friendships/Multiple Marriages, Different types of relationships and a comic villain. Each of these features will be explained in greater details.

     The next person that Eddie meets is his Sargent from the war. He tells Eddie about how he, the Sargent, died, and how that enabled the rest of the company to survive. He told Eddie that it had been him who had shot him, in order to save his life. Eddie had become convinced that he saw someone in a burning building, and to prevent Eddie from going in there and losing his life, the Sargent shot him in the leg.

"Nowadays the plays' meaning is usually blurred by the fact that the actor plays to the audiences hearts. The figures portrayed are foisted on the audience and are falsified in the process. Contrary to present custom they ought to be presented quite coldly, classically and objectively. For they are not matter for empathy; they are there to be understood and politely added

“Julius Caesar”, a play by William Shakespeare, constantly is unclear about who is in the right and provokes ambiguity, yet sometimes, it evokes deep pathos and divides the audience into two parts based on the audience’s personality. There were many choices to be made in the text; most of the important one’s , such as Caesar’s, are decisions that can swing in both directions. This also applies to the first scene of Caesar’s triumph. On the contrary, the moving speeches of Brutus and Antony at Caesar’s funeral will divide the audience into two. Without emotions, most events are ambiguous, but as sentiments allow the text to connect more personally with the audience, a rift is created within it.

The Shakespearean play featuring a man being stabbed 23 times to death, “Julius Caesar,” is quite unique in many perspectives, because unlike most plays, this play has a plot that deals with controversial events, leaving the bulk of the readers in a state of ambiguity and division. The scene where Julius Caesar was stabbed is ambiguous, because it is a good thing for the people, but the way he was murdered is much too brutal. Whether or not Brutus should have joined the conspiracy to kill Caesar divides the audience, since it is unclear if it was beneficial or detrimental to the people of Rome. The audience is also divided on their perception of Caesar, due to his actions that could be interpreted as both arrogance or confidence. These three points demonstrate that the play’s flexible plot line opens itself up for the audiences’ own interpretation.