Nel And Sula

Only two characters, Nel and Shadrack, maintain a static interpretation of Sula’s birthmark, revealing their alienation from society at large. Nel’s unchanging perception of Sula’s birthmark as a stemmed rose highlights her own need for consistency.

Their attraction toward each other grows stronger every year, eventually becoming so strong that they become one. "Their friendship was so close; they themselves had difficulty distinguishing one's thoughts from the others" (83). The positive and the negative melts together, making a perfect neutral that becomes impossible to separate or determine what's positive and what's negative. Throughout the book we see Sula and Nel as one, as do the people who know them. Even Eva at some point says to Nel, "You. Sula. What's the difference?" (168). Eva makes a reference to the perfect example of Sula and Nel being one, the time when Chicken Little drowns in the river. At that point, it seems that Sula and Nel swap personalities. Very unlike her, Sula panics and breaks down crying when she accidentally lets go of Chicken Little's hand, while Nel suddenly becomes the more collected one, calming down her other half.

The climax of the story is when Nel finally confronts Sula. Each girl carried demons, guilt, and frustration over their lives and their choices. Nel finally vents her anger and pain and asks for an explanation from Sula. Nel's " thighs were truly empty and dead too, and it was Sula who had taken the life from them" (Morrison pg. 110-111). After leaving Eva at the home, Nel is so upset that she heads to Sula's grave. She sadly thinks about how none of the townspeople mourned her death. Nel calls out for Sula and it is then she finally forgives her for cheating with Jude. She starts crying, for the first time in years. Nel finally finds peace by grieving for Sula. When reading that part I think it was then that she realized it was Sula who she was missing & not Jude. When reading the story I couldn’t help but feel mixed emotions for Sula. It was a combination of sadness for all

(29; 28) Most important of all the changes the train trip provides, though, is Nel’s newfound “strength to cultivate a friend in spite of her mother.” (29) This strength opens the door for Sula to change her life.

Despite being presented as opposites of good and evil, Nel and Sula are actually quite similar, as both Nel and Sula posses the traits that defined the other, effectively blurring the lines between good and evil. As young girls, Nel pushed herself to become friends with Sula in the first place as “Nel, who regarded the oppressive neatness of her home with dread, felt comfortable in t with Sula, who loved it and would sit on the red-velvet sofa for ten to twenty minutes at a time… As for Nel, she preferred Sula’s wooly house”(29). As a child, Nel yearned to be free and independent, and to be her own individual self separate from who her mother expects her to be. Sula however already lives this life of living in a non-traditional home and

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are foils to Hamlet. The two are introduced as friends to Hamlet. But also they are like messengers for the king. Hamlet learns of their

The relationship first starts to take a turn for the worst when Sula accidentally kills a local boy named Chicken Little, by throwing him into the river. The town never finds out who is responsible for his death, mostly due to the girls silence. Though Nel played no roll in Chicken Little?s death, she stands by Sula and tells no one about what she saw that day at the river. At his funeral, ?[the two] held hands and knew that only the held hands and knew that only the coffin would lie in the earth, the bubbly laughter and the press of fingers in the palm would stay aboveground forever? (Morrison 66). Nel?s silence in support of Sula is the first instance when Sula takes advantage of Nel, relying on her in order to survive.

During this time of their separation, the strength of their friendship appears evident. They both long to still be friends, to talk again. However, Nel sees this event as a true betrayal of friendship from Sula, while Sula sees what happened as casual and not a big deal.

After her marriage, Nel becomes a conventional, settled down woman. Her life when Sula is not around is much like her life in the “oppressive neatness”(Morrison 29) in her mother’s house. She loses her true unique self after Sula is gone. She realizes this when Sula comes back to Medallion. “Nel felt new, soft and new. It had been the longest time since she had had a rib-scraping

The novel Sula, is a work which contrasts the lives of its two main characters Nel and Sula. They appear, on the surface, to be the epidemy of binary opposites but this is in actuality their underlying bond. The differences in their personalities complement one another in a way that forges an almost unbreakable alliance. Sula is compulsive and uncontrollable while her counterpart, Nel, is sensible and principled. To prove Nel human by subscribing to the theory that a human is one who possess both good and bad traits, one must only look at how she interacts with Sula, here both negative and positive traits are evident.Nel’s "good" traits obviously come to the forefront when looking at her character. One might say this is a result

For Sula, there is no "other" against which she can then define herself. Having rejected her community and her family, she wanders, trying somehow to define who she is. Sula turns to Shadrack, the local madman, at first because she worries that he saw what happened to Chicken Little, but then because his words truly do comfort her.

Because of the sexual confidence Hannah Peace has, Sula must disguise her difference, just like her grandmother Eva had too. Eva’s drastic measures were repeated by Sula an act of survival and denial of powerlessness and vulnerability. Nel and Sula are regularly picked on by the same group of boys, causing Sula to take matter into her own hands. At one point, Sula takes out a knife and cuts off part of her finger saying, “ ‘If I can do that to myself, what you suppose I’ll do to you?’ ” (54-55). This severe act if Sula’s moment of self-recognition of her connection to her grandmother Eva. Here, Sula realizes that she has to fight against her own vulnerability, and establish her identity, hereby following her grandmother Eva’s example. Though this moment shows Sula’s inner strength, it can never disguise her enough of being different from the rest of her community. Just as Eva and Hannah, Sula continues the unpreventable, mature line of breaking past the typical gender roles of the time. Eva’s overly independent attitude and removal from caring and mothering a daughter correctly, leaves her daughters with unlearned, societal caretaking skills. This results in Sula’s highly inappropriate and unnecessary act of clumsy caretaking within her relationship with Nel. Yet, it is understandable because Sula has never been taught normal and conventional means for problem solving. The denial of motherly love from

Lastly, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead teaches the message of knowing your identity. What were Rosencrantz and Guildenstern missing, above all else? It’s not remembering the past; they could have just worried about the future. It’s not decision making; they could have gotten along fine just following someone else’s lead. It works for most people. What they were really missing was their identities. Neither Rosencrantz nor Guildenstern had fully developed a sense of self. Neither really did anything that made them distinct from the other. In essence, they were the same, and interchangeable. This was made clear throughout the duration of the play, because of several small details. When the two were greeted by people, they often got their names confused. The

I never forget a face” (82). While humorous, it is important to note that the players (who, save Alfred, are always regarded as simply: players) lose their individuality to the point of literally taking on the appearance of somebody else---Rosencrantz in this case. The final implication of their knowledge and even encouragement of fate in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern 's life is when Guildenstern asks, “What are we supposed to do?” and the player responds “This,” followed by laying down, implying death. The players are so connected to the concept of fate and it “playing” out that they may even be a part of the motif that fate is in the play.

Within Shakespeare’s Hamlet resides a strong theme of illusion and reality shown in the attention that is drawn to the seeming and being within the characters. The play itself is about acting because not only are actors required to act out the parts that are written, but also the characters themselves are acting. They put on a facade just as an actor assumes a role on the stage (Bloom 11). Rosencrantz and Guildenstern seem to be concerned friends. Instead, they are simply acting as such because they are charged by the king to find the origin of Hamlet’s peculiar behavior. Gertrude seems to be the dutiful queen that married Claudius for the benefit of the kingdom itself while she has simply failed to grieve her husband, dishonored his memory by marring so soon after