How Does Shakespeare 's King Lear And Alejandro Gonzalez 's Birdman Use Literary And Film Techniques

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, is a timeless play which continues to remain relevant across all generations due to its presentation of ideas that are fundamental to humanity. The play highlights aspects that relate to the society of not only Elizabethan England but also that of our modern society. Hamlet, as a character, considers ideas from outside his time and is somewhat relatable to modern day man. By drawing from ideas of archetypes and the human psyche, it reveals that Hamlet relates deeply to the elements of humanity.

William Shakespeare and Alejandro G Iñárritu discuss the consequences of aging, by suggesting that instability rather than wisdom comes with age. Shakespeare’s protagonist, King Lear, is an elderly king who is neither wise nor respected. He decided to divide his kingdom on the basis of flattery; he is searching for affirmation from his subjects and grows impatient at the lack of respect from his daughters. Shakespeare uses repetition of imagery of old men displaying childlike qualities to convey this, for instance, Goneril, Lear’s oldest daughter, says ‘old fools [Lear] are babes again, and must be used with checks as flatteries’. Iñárritu’s protagonist Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), the retired superhero Birdman, obsesses with perfecting

Throughout history, class distributions have constantly been a serious issue. Many compositions today display social disparity; however, to recognize it, one needs to look through the proper lens. Literary critical lenses help to understand a work from a different angle which leads to a further interpretation of the composition. There are many lenses and aspects in literature, and one of them is the Marxist Theory. Also known as the Conflict Theory, this idea asserts that class struggle is a powerful divider in society. Although it is a social idea, this concept also relates to literature. In his play Hamlet, William Shakespeare demonstrates class struggles. Looking at this composition through the lens of the Marxist Theory, one uncovers that the dominant ones suppress and exploits the others seeking to display their superiority.

“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles“ (Marx 15). The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx displays different ideas between the clashing social stances during his time. These thoughts highlight the several issues with the overbearing upper class showcasing the difference between social status and their given power in society. Similarly, the Marxist lens displays how the nobles gaining control of the social, economical, and political aspects of a society affect the lower class. William Shakespeare's Hamlet emphasizes division of social classes and unquenchable desire to obtain power through self- benefiting manipulation and misuse of authority.

Shakespeare’s King Lear and Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus are two examples of early modern texts, one a tragedy and the other a morality play respectively, which deal with the theme of power at the crux of its narrative. Between both texts it is evident that different characters utilize their power or authority differently – some ‘unwisely’ whilst some ‘maliciously’. In either case, the use of power progresses the plays and drives the majority of main characters.

Othello by William Shakespeare raises the issue of how rampant beliefs and attitudes in a society can cause a person to question their sense of self. In a society where racial equality is near non-existent, Othello, a black skinned foreigner in the Venetian society, is constantly reminded of his status as an outsider. Othello, however, is not depicted in a stereotypical manner and despite occupying a highly respected position he is often confronted with blatant racism throughout the play. The prevailing attitudes and beliefs of Venetian society towards Othello are exploited by Iago in order to manipulate Othello’s self confidence and emotional state.

Exerting the type of power that is influenced by malicious intentions can cause one to make decisions that are not beneficial to others. A Midsummer Night’s Dream is written within a time period and setting that favors men instead of woman. In other words, men have all the authority to control the events that occur in their own lives as well as the lives of others whom are considered insignificant. The plot displays the catalysts that ignite many characters’ desire for control that is misused by higher status people. Shakespeare’s use of characterization demonstrates how the wanting of control causes the characters to act irrationally through the misuse of power. Shakespeare’s use of setting, plot and characterization causes the ordeals

Today I am going to talk about three characters from Shakespeare’s plays namely, Othello from the play of the same name, Shylock from the Merchant of Venice and Cleopatra from Antony and Cleopatra and try to show that what bring about the tragedies in their lives is contrary to what is generally thought. And my contention is that all these three characters suffer because of their being alienated in the society, albeit for different reasons- Othello for his race, Shylock for his religion and Cleopatra for her gender.

Power inevitably instills vanity in those who hold it, and thus, chaos and negligence in government cannot be avoided. However, despite this corruption in leadership, civilization can continue to function with morality from where it is least expected. The lowly Dogberry and watchmen provide the evidence that enables everyone to have a happy ending, and Hal, whom everyone regarded as a total disgrace, heroically saves the king from death. Without this unanticipated honor though, society does fall to tragedy as seen in the demise of nearly every character in the greedy, power hungry world of King Lear. Therefore, because of this great importance of unexpected integrity, everyone, regardless of class, holds a responsibility to act with the dignity that once solely belonged to the privileged. While typically, only those who hold no power understand society’s problems and live virtuously, these people, though lacking in status, actually hold the most honor and power to influence positive

The pursuit of individual recognition in the form of power and authority remains intrinsic in texts despite the change in contexts. This is evident in William Shakespeare’s 16th century play, King Richard III and Al Pacino’s 19th century docu-drama, Looking for Richard. Both texts explore that the pursuit of individual recognition can be initiated by an individual’s flaw in character caused by the corruption of their sense of morality in order to gain power. This is depicted through the malicious and treacherous nature of the central character, Richard in both texts. There are central ideas conveyed in these texts, including the nature of authority, the acquisition of power and the significant impact determinism plays in one’s decisions and actions. However, due to the difference in cultural context, Pacino reshapes these values to make Shakespeare accessible to a modern day audience. As a result, Pacino sequentially follows the plot of King Richard III in order to emphasise the relevance of Shakespeare’s plays in a modern society. Pacino addresses this through an emphasis on film techniques instead of dramatic techniques. Therefore, it is evident that the comparative study of these texts allows the responder to appreciate the connection between contexts and values, allowing the responder to reflect upon their own society’s concerns.

The corruption of society in George Orwell’s 1984 and William Shakespeare’s Hamlet results both in the loss of innocence and the destruction of sanity. Winston from 1984 stood his grounds throughout the book, but the society standards and rules created by Big Brother soon consume him. Similarly, the entire Kingdom of Denmark bombarded Hamlet with betrayal amongst his own family and loved ones such that drove him into madness. This madness spread through both books in revenge of what the corrupted society has done to the character’s lives.

In 'King Lear' this is through the demonstration of succession from one ruler to another. While in 'Birdman' this is through the aging of the actors and their retirements. In 'Birdman' this comes to a head when Riggan feels disrespect towards himself after Mike tells him in "they don't know you, your work. They know the guy from the bird suit." This ultimately adds flame to the fire and Riggan becomes even more desperate to prove to the world that he is something. With Mike understanding "this is how we do things." Shakespeare shows this but ultimately shows that this is futile as seen when Edmund tries to succeed his father Gloucester's influence despite being his illegitimate son and Edgar being the rightful successor. This ultimately makes Edmund more desperate for power and results in a dispute that can only be resolved in a duel. Though at the end of the play admits his actions were wrong and "The wheel is come full circle" (A5, S2, 203). This shows that life is really futile and while what we experience may be considered exclusive to ourselves, the reality is how life is just one large cyclic

King Lear, a tragedy by William Shakespeare, is about the delegation of power from the old generation to the young, new generation. Furthermore, the play demonstrates problems that can arise from a transfer made too early, from one generation to the next. A Thousand Acres is a modern retelling of King Lear, that is similar to King Lear, but it is not an exact word for word copy. The overall plot has been retained from King Lear, but some of the minor details have been changed to provide an intriguing new take on the same story. One such change is the fact the story goes from a third person view in King Lear, mostly following King Lear, to a first person narrative from the perspective of Ginny in A Thousand Acres. Ginny is the modern day version for Goneril’s character. King Lear and A Thousand Acres may take place in two different time periods; they both offer comments on the status of women, family relationships, and the natural order of things. The two time periods may be different, one modern day and the other set in the past, however the ideas presented are not that different on a whole. Both works presented share the same common thematic and universal elements throughout.

King Lear is frequently regarded as one of Shakespeare’s masterpieces, and its tragic scope touches almost all facets of the human condition: from the familial tensions between parents and children to the immoral desires of power, from the follies of pride to the false projections of glory. However, one theme rings true throughout the play, and that very theme is boundless suffering, accentuated by the gruesome depictions of suffering our protagonists experience . There is no natural (nor “poetic”) justice depicted in this pre-Judeo-Christian world Shakespeare presents, as the relatively virtuous individuals (Kent, Gloucester, and Cordelia) in this

King Lear by William Shakespeare tells the tragedy of Lear, King of England, who slowly, throughout the course of the play becomes mad and eventually dies. There have been many film adaptations of the play all of which try and remain as close to the original play; however, none appear to keep the same meaning of Shakespeare’s text more than director Richard Eyre’s film version of King Lear (1997). Shakespeare focuses in on each character’s flaws and their contributions to the consequences at the end of the play and although Eyre does the same in his film, he adds minor actions and scenes to the play to give characters of the play a light