Relationship Between Female Friendships And Their Influence On Martial Ties Essay

This can be seen through a comparison of parallel protagonists Palamon and Ferdinand, as well as parallel antagonists Arcite and Caliban. Their many similarities reveal an insight to each author’s view of love and how it is gained. Palamon and Ferdinand are men of the heart who do not have the girl initially, nor do they claim her. Instead, they wish the best for her and are willing to work for and serve her, regardless of the outcome. In contrast, Arcite and Caliban are men of the physical who take the woman they love by force and physically serve her in order to fulfill their prideful desires, completely disregarding the wishes of their beloved. Strikingly, all four of these men are of noble birth, and all four willingly lower themselves from a position of power to a position of service in order to gain a woman’s love; however, only the men who also serve her selflessly succeed in winning her love. Both men of the heart end up “getting the girl” in the metaphorical sense, although it takes time and they must be patient. In contrast, the men who have the girl initially –Arcite and Caliban – begin by taking her by force and have her in the literal sense, but lose her in the end. All of these elements show that Chaucer and Shakespeare believe the selfless and humble approach to be the most effective way to gain

What is a relationship? Is it a sharing of understanding and trials with another human being, a connection between a man and a woman emotionally and sexually, or could it be, just simply, a compassion or love intertwined between two souls? These aspects of relationship and more are illustrated in Shakespeare’s famous tragedy Macbeth. The way Macbeth and Lady Macbeth’s relationship changes drastically throughout the play is an example of how fragile a relationship really is. With one word or action a relationship can erode itself away. This play is a perfect example of a promising relationship that messes with a power greater than themselves and in the end falls into a hopeless swamp with no way out, nowhere to turn.

This essay is an exploration of the play Much Ado About Nothing, and the gender roles involved in the deceit and trickery that transpire and develop throughout the story. As gender is one of the main themes in the plot, identifying the expected gender roles of the characters, and how the contrast between characters highlights these expected roles. In Shakespeare 's time, known as the Elizabethan Era, men and women’s roles and expectations were starkly different. Elizabethan women, no matter what social class, were inferior to men. A female’s role in the family was to get married so they could increase their family 's wealth and power and to produce heirs. Men, on the other hand, had all of the power within a household. Males were expected

Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet – popularly considered by many to be the quintessential love story of all time – is a play that we are all familiar with in one way or another. Whether it be through the plethora of portrayals, adaptations and performances that exist or through your own reading of the play, chances are you have been acquainted with this tale of “tragic love” at some point in your life. Through this universal familiarity an odd occurrence can be noted, one of almost canonical reverence for the themes commonly believed to be central to the plot. The most widely believed theme of Romeo and Juliet is that of the ideal love unable to exist under the harsh social and political strains of this world. Out of this idea emerge two

In this essay, I will be examining Shakespeare’s treatment of relationships in Romeo and Juliet. As a poet and playwright, he wrote 154 sonnets, 2 long narrative poems and 38 plays, one of his most famous plays being Romeo and Juliet. There are many different types of relationships between characters, and these are essential to the play. The prologue tells us that the play is about two star-crossed lovers from two feuding families, the Montagues and Capulets. There is hatred between these two families, this explains this, ‘Thou villain Capulet’. This quote suggests because of the hate between their families, the lovers are doomed from the start.

Centuries ago in Elizabethan England there were many traditions about marriage and the treatment of women. One strong tradition of these times was the practice of marriage between races. Interracial marriages were considered extremely taboo. (High Beam). In this era marriages were arranged by the parents with strong help from the local church. The individuals had little choice as to who they would marry. (Elizabethan England Life). Yet another example of these traditions was the respectable treatment of women. While the husband was in charge of his wife, as was the father, the husband were expected to treat the women right (Elizbethi). In spurning all of these traditions, Shakespeare demonstrates a view of marriage far different from that

Shakespeare understood that with young love came rebellion, (which upon Juliet’s marriage to Paris being advanced ahead of time), made the lovers more determined to defy their scorning families and the chain of being. Had their families ceased their feud and with time, let their children get to personally know each other, their young love might’ve extended into true love. Shakespeare presents the complexities and faults with young love in the play with rebellion and time as catalysts in their downfall, suggesting a negative view of the human nature.

Marriage is presented in Shakespeare?s play The Taming of the Shrew, in a complex manner allowing readers to view the play literally as a brutal taming or ironically as a subversive manifesto. Yet, Shakespeare intends to present marriage to be full of mutual love where neither male nor female dominate but compliment each other thriving together in a loved filled relationship. The portrayal of a deep understanding, which exists in an analogical relationship and the gentle transformation, which occurs in marriage, clearly outlines marriage in the play to be a celebration of a mutual love relationship within the patriarchal foundations of society.

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.

Most of the major characters in Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night experience some form of love or marriage. Whether it’s unrequited like with Antonio and Malvolio, or it is something seemingly unattainable like with Duke Orsino. Regardless, it is clear that love is prevalent as one of the central themes Shakespeare seems to emphasize in Twelfth Night. With that, we see him communicate different interpretations and feelings regarding the subject. He does this with the medium of melodramatic characters. In this essay, I will elaborate on the opinions of love that Shakespeare communicates through one of the leading characters:

The theme for honour and fidelity apply for both men and women in Shakespeare’s play ‘much ado about nothing’. Honour and fidelity is represented very differently for men and women as it would have been for the people in Elizabethan times. In this first section of the essay, I will be exploring double standards and Shakespeare’s awareness of the double standards between sexes and his feminist approach, the differences of honour and fidelity for men and women and upper class and lower class comparisons.

In Henry IV Part 1, Shakespeare introduces two relationships that seem to be polar opposites of each other, the married couple, Hotspur and Lady Percy and the newly wedded couple, Mortimer and Lady Mortimer. Even though Lady Percy and Lady Mortimer did not have key roles in the play they were significant to the portrayal of their male counterparts and Shakespeare’s portrayal of misogyny in the late 16th century. In the Elizabethan era, women were considered second class citizens, and weren’t allowed the same rights as men, and that misogynistic behavior resulted in many unhappy marriages. In Shakespeare’s play, Mortimer and Lady Mortimer are the only characters with a happy relationship because they don’t exhibit the same sexist attitude as the other characters; while Hotspur and Lady Percy’s relationship is an example of how England’s misogynistic attitude resulted in an unhappy marriage.

William Shakespeare’s, ‘Romeo and Juliet’ provides an insight of the experience of women in an Elizabethan society. The play was written in the late 1600’s, and is about two feuding families whose children fall in love. Their love leads to marriage, however, Juliet’s decision to marry Romeo was against her father’s will, this made life even harder for her, as in the 1600’s a women did not have the privilege to choose her husband. This decision was made by her father only. Moreover, she was not allowed to refuse to get married as this meant being disowned by her family. This shows us the unjustness that occurred in the Elizabethan period. Therefore, this

The 1500’s play focuses more on marriage, as like teenage dating in this modern era, for the play’s intended audience, it was marriage that the Elizabethan era society was preoccupied on, and was something they felt they “had to do”. The difference between relationships and marriage is shown

By examining Shakespeare’s treatment of familial ties in his plays The Life and Death of King John and The Winter’s Tale, we can see how his attitudes and opinions towards family relationships evolved. In King John (written between 1594 and 1596), Shakespeare adopts what was then a fairly conventional attitude towards family relationships: his characters never question the highly patriarchal family hierarchy. They also assume that the majority of wives will be unfaithful, simply because they are female—however, they take the charge of adultery rather lightly. By contrast, in The Winter’s Tale (written between 1610 and 1611), he adopts a much more progressive, feminist view of family