The Difference Between Needing Marriage, and True Love
William Shakespeare’s, Much Ado About Nothing includes a character named Beatrice. She is a likeable character for many reasons, but she is a dynamic character. In the beginning of the play she is hesitant to get married. Then Benedick and Beatrice fall in love and get married by the end of the play. Their love was a tense shift throughout the play. It was like a game for Leonato, Don Pedro, Hero, and Claudio to try and get them together. I find Beatrice’s character my favorite so far from all the Shakespeare plays because I find her wit so entertaining. Sure there are other Shakespeare characters are witty, but I find Beatrice’s lines especially smart and funny. One of my favorite qualities that I like most about her is that she does not care what others have to say about her. She always speaks her mind, “Yes, faith, it is my cousin’s duty to make curtsy and say, ‘father, as it please you.’ But yet for all that, cousin, let him be a handsome fellow, or else make another curtsey and say, ‘Father as it please me’” (II.i.44-47). In this quote she is trying to tell Hero not to settle for just any man just to please her father; she should instead think about marrying a man that pleases her instead. This notion leads to the relationship between Beatrice and Benedick. At first I found it is strange how they are so hesitant to share their feelings for one another. Then I realized why after reading a couple quotes from social media that made sense about why they were so hesitant.
Love… I see it as a thing that you choose to do with the person you want; instead of needing it. When you need love is it true love, or are you simply trying to get something out of that relationship like Hero and Claudio? When you chose to love with no intensions needed all you want is that person and who they are, and it doesn’t matter what that person can or can’t give you. Beatrice and Benedick do not gain much falling in love except having each other. They pretty much stay in the same class, and neither one gets a higher title or wealth from eachother. I find Beatrice very smart and I am glad she gets a happy ending. She, after all, deserves it with her being an orphan; she can not live off her uncle or be Hero’s lady forever.
I think that playgoers should be drawn to Beatrice because she has an overall well being about her. She does not care much about what others have to say or think about her, and she also is not afraid to speak her mind. For instance, she knows what she wants, Benedick, “He that hath a beard is more than a youth, and he that hath no beard is less than a man; and he that is more than a youth is not for me, and he that is less than a man, I am not for him” (II.i.29-32). She is basically saying that she does and does not want Benedick. I think what she wants is him, but just not at the moment because she does not know if he wants her. And until she knows whether or not he wants her she will admit her love for him as well. Also, if he does not want her then she would gladly take the proverbial fate of old maids, “Therefore I will even take sixpence in earnest of the bearherd and lead his apes into hell” (II.i.32-34). I find her character witty, and wit could be argued as a sign of a strong and fast working mind. I first was told that wit is a sign of intelligence by my poetry teacher when she and I were having a conversation about how important reading is for every major, but is obviously more common in the liberal arts majors. She also told me that you can usually instantly tell when someone is intelligent by their wit because everyone is instantly drawn to people like that (Mary Canfield, February 2015). She also said that those are the kind of people you want to be around whether they are good or bad people. Just like those people or friends (maybe acquaintances), who you like to be around even though they are not the best and most kind hearted person, you still want to be around them; it’s because of that wit that they have that makes them so likeable no matter the kind of person they are. While reading Much Ado About Nothing, I saw all this in Beatrice, and decided if she was a real person, I would really like to be around her.
Another reason to like Beatrice is because she is not worried about marriage as most women were in this time period. This seems to be a feminist approach giving women, especially in the time period the play was written in, an option in their minds about marriage. How women do not need a man, especially be married to one they do not even like. Her character is trying to show the women in this time period to have pride in themselves and that they do not need a man to better themselves either. Being higher up in class by marriage does not make you better than anyone else it is your self being that determines that. Beatrice’s character helps women start thinking that it is worse to be married to a man they do not like than to be single, because why waste your time pretending the rest of your life instead of being truly happy with someone you truly love. This concept reminds me of today’s intellectual women, one quote on Facebook came up saying something like most highly intellectual women are usually not married because they fear their partner not being the right one or something along those lines. I noticed that that is exactly Beatrice and ever since I saw this quote I started to pay attention to my professors this semester, and not just the women professors but the men, too. I noticed that none of my professors are wed expect one, or at least openly said they were wed. I think that the only reason that my Spanish professor mentioned she was wed was because she recently got married. Besides her none of my other professors wear a wedding ring; however, one professor did mention she was divorced in her twenties, and the other woman professor and male professor mentioned they had kids but did not mention a significant other. However I do realize that there are other factors that can give valid reasons why someone does not wear their wedding ring, such as injury or grew out of the ring size.
So when I realized that it is possible that many intellectuals did not have a significant other due to the fact that they did not want to be married to the wrong person, I felt a sort of relief and I believe that is the perception Beatrice’s character is supposed to highlight. After the realization about intellectuals having a harder time with marriage, I saw another quote on Facebook about a month ago that I will always remember, “The smartest thing a woman can ever learn, is to never need a man”. This quote came up on my newsfeed around the time I read Much Ado About Nothing and I think it described Beatrice perfectly. However, I think this quote can go both ways toward men, which brings me to the discussion of Benedick.
I can see Beatrice and Benedick to be very similar. They do not really need each other, Beatrice is living in a very nice house with family, and Benedick has his highly ranked position with Don Pedro. So see neither Beatrice nor Benedick really needs another. They both have comfortable lives. This is why I believe that their love is a better and truer love thanm that of Hero and Claudio. Hero needs Claudio so she can be married to satisfy her father because Claudio has a title. Claudio also needs Hero because she has a lot of money. Since she is the only child of her father she will have a great amount for her dowry and inheritance. I think Hero and Claudio’s needs for each other exemplify how their love is not true. And this untrue love is explicit when Claudio believes that Hero is unfaithful based on Don John’s lie, without much doubt that the so-called proof could be a lie. What makes this love even less true is when Claudio believes that Hero is dead and visits her tomb. He is portrayed as almost robotic, as if saying what is on the epitaph just for Hero’s father instead of feeling the emotions he should be feeling after losing the woman he was supposedly in love with since he first saw her. Claudio even decided he wanted to marry her right at that moment; very unlike Beatrice and Benedick.
I think that the reason Beatrice and Benedick resisted love and marriage at first was because they are both very intelligent individuals and did not want to make a mistake on marrying the wrong person. The smartest thing a woman can do is not need a man, and this applies for men, too. I believe that the play is trying to show show the difference of Messina society with Hero and Claudio, and criticizing Messina society with the hopeful possibility that people can marry for love instead of mostly for selfish reasons like rank, title, money, etc.
Much Ado About Nothing has some very interesting concepts. First with the sign of wit that both Beatrice and Benedick share, it is a sign of intelligence. Even in the definition for wit, intelligence is a part of it. Their wit also explains why they were so hesitant to let one another know about their feelings toward each other. Most intelligent people are very hesitant about marrying, and it is mostly because they are scared to marry the wrong person. And this does make sense, because of the next concept of the difference of needing someone and truly falling in love. Hero and Claudio exemplify this because they marry each other clearly because they each get something out of the marriage. Hero gets a title and Claudio gets Hero’s wealth. Beatrice and Benedick, however, exemplify true love because they do not need anything from one another. When they marry, it is solely from love they chose to give. Benedick does not get much, if anything from Beatrice’s dowry, and sure Beatrice will maintain her title as a lady but obviously Benedick does not have much money like Count Claudio. And I wondered if maybe that is why Claudio chose Hero, a need to marry a rich girl; and Hero to marry Claudio for his title, they complete each other and have what the other does not in order to complete the Messina society thinking that titles and money is what matters, and what is highly looked upon. This way is not the right way to think about happiness. Happiness is not about titles and wealth, because if you spend your life married to someone you do not like a lot, you are going to have to spend the rest of your life with them, and is that happiness? This is the difference between marriage and truly falling in love because, on one hand you can choose to love a person you do not need anything from, and then on the other hand needing to selfishly marry someone to gain rank, title, or money. Which ever path one chooses to take is up to the kind of person they are, and most likely the intelligent witty people will take the true love path. After, of course, hesitating and taking the time to think whether their significant other is the right one for them.
William Shakespeare’s, Much Ado About Nothing includes a character named Beatrice. She is a likeable character for many reasons, but she is a dynamic character. In the beginning of the play she is hesitant to get married. Then Benedick and Beatrice fall in love and get married by the end of the play. Their love was a tense shift throughout the play. It was like a game for Leonato, Don Pedro, Hero, and Claudio to try and get them together. I find Beatrice’s character my favorite so far from all the Shakespeare plays because I find her wit so entertaining. Sure there are other Shakespeare characters are witty, but I find Beatrice’s lines especially smart and funny. One of my favorite qualities that I like most about her is that she does not care what others have to say about her. She always speaks her mind, “Yes, faith, it is my cousin’s duty to make curtsy and say, ‘father, as it please you.’ But yet for all that, cousin, let him be a handsome fellow, or else make another curtsey and say, ‘Father as it please me’” (II.i.44-47). In this quote she is trying to tell Hero not to settle for just any man just to please her father; she should instead think about marrying a man that pleases her instead. This notion leads to the relationship between Beatrice and Benedick. At first I found it is strange how they are so hesitant to share their feelings for one another. Then I realized why after reading a couple quotes from social media that made sense about why they were so hesitant.
Love… I see it as a thing that you choose to do with the person you want; instead of needing it. When you need love is it true love, or are you simply trying to get something out of that relationship like Hero and Claudio? When you chose to love with no intensions needed all you want is that person and who they are, and it doesn’t matter what that person can or can’t give you. Beatrice and Benedick do not gain much falling in love except having each other. They pretty much stay in the same class, and neither one gets a higher title or wealth from eachother. I find Beatrice very smart and I am glad she gets a happy ending. She, after all, deserves it with her being an orphan; she can not live off her uncle or be Hero’s lady forever.
I think that playgoers should be drawn to Beatrice because she has an overall well being about her. She does not care much about what others have to say or think about her, and she also is not afraid to speak her mind. For instance, she knows what she wants, Benedick, “He that hath a beard is more than a youth, and he that hath no beard is less than a man; and he that is more than a youth is not for me, and he that is less than a man, I am not for him” (II.i.29-32). She is basically saying that she does and does not want Benedick. I think what she wants is him, but just not at the moment because she does not know if he wants her. And until she knows whether or not he wants her she will admit her love for him as well. Also, if he does not want her then she would gladly take the proverbial fate of old maids, “Therefore I will even take sixpence in earnest of the bearherd and lead his apes into hell” (II.i.32-34). I find her character witty, and wit could be argued as a sign of a strong and fast working mind. I first was told that wit is a sign of intelligence by my poetry teacher when she and I were having a conversation about how important reading is for every major, but is obviously more common in the liberal arts majors. She also told me that you can usually instantly tell when someone is intelligent by their wit because everyone is instantly drawn to people like that (Mary Canfield, February 2015). She also said that those are the kind of people you want to be around whether they are good or bad people. Just like those people or friends (maybe acquaintances), who you like to be around even though they are not the best and most kind hearted person, you still want to be around them; it’s because of that wit that they have that makes them so likeable no matter the kind of person they are. While reading Much Ado About Nothing, I saw all this in Beatrice, and decided if she was a real person, I would really like to be around her.
Another reason to like Beatrice is because she is not worried about marriage as most women were in this time period. This seems to be a feminist approach giving women, especially in the time period the play was written in, an option in their minds about marriage. How women do not need a man, especially be married to one they do not even like. Her character is trying to show the women in this time period to have pride in themselves and that they do not need a man to better themselves either. Being higher up in class by marriage does not make you better than anyone else it is your self being that determines that. Beatrice’s character helps women start thinking that it is worse to be married to a man they do not like than to be single, because why waste your time pretending the rest of your life instead of being truly happy with someone you truly love. This concept reminds me of today’s intellectual women, one quote on Facebook came up saying something like most highly intellectual women are usually not married because they fear their partner not being the right one or something along those lines. I noticed that that is exactly Beatrice and ever since I saw this quote I started to pay attention to my professors this semester, and not just the women professors but the men, too. I noticed that none of my professors are wed expect one, or at least openly said they were wed. I think that the only reason that my Spanish professor mentioned she was wed was because she recently got married. Besides her none of my other professors wear a wedding ring; however, one professor did mention she was divorced in her twenties, and the other woman professor and male professor mentioned they had kids but did not mention a significant other. However I do realize that there are other factors that can give valid reasons why someone does not wear their wedding ring, such as injury or grew out of the ring size.
So when I realized that it is possible that many intellectuals did not have a significant other due to the fact that they did not want to be married to the wrong person, I felt a sort of relief and I believe that is the perception Beatrice’s character is supposed to highlight. After the realization about intellectuals having a harder time with marriage, I saw another quote on Facebook about a month ago that I will always remember, “The smartest thing a woman can ever learn, is to never need a man”. This quote came up on my newsfeed around the time I read Much Ado About Nothing and I think it described Beatrice perfectly. However, I think this quote can go both ways toward men, which brings me to the discussion of Benedick.
I can see Beatrice and Benedick to be very similar. They do not really need each other, Beatrice is living in a very nice house with family, and Benedick has his highly ranked position with Don Pedro. So see neither Beatrice nor Benedick really needs another. They both have comfortable lives. This is why I believe that their love is a better and truer love thanm that of Hero and Claudio. Hero needs Claudio so she can be married to satisfy her father because Claudio has a title. Claudio also needs Hero because she has a lot of money. Since she is the only child of her father she will have a great amount for her dowry and inheritance. I think Hero and Claudio’s needs for each other exemplify how their love is not true. And this untrue love is explicit when Claudio believes that Hero is unfaithful based on Don John’s lie, without much doubt that the so-called proof could be a lie. What makes this love even less true is when Claudio believes that Hero is dead and visits her tomb. He is portrayed as almost robotic, as if saying what is on the epitaph just for Hero’s father instead of feeling the emotions he should be feeling after losing the woman he was supposedly in love with since he first saw her. Claudio even decided he wanted to marry her right at that moment; very unlike Beatrice and Benedick.
I think that the reason Beatrice and Benedick resisted love and marriage at first was because they are both very intelligent individuals and did not want to make a mistake on marrying the wrong person. The smartest thing a woman can do is not need a man, and this applies for men, too. I believe that the play is trying to show show the difference of Messina society with Hero and Claudio, and criticizing Messina society with the hopeful possibility that people can marry for love instead of mostly for selfish reasons like rank, title, money, etc.
Much Ado About Nothing has some very interesting concepts. First with the sign of wit that both Beatrice and Benedick share, it is a sign of intelligence. Even in the definition for wit, intelligence is a part of it. Their wit also explains why they were so hesitant to let one another know about their feelings toward each other. Most intelligent people are very hesitant about marrying, and it is mostly because they are scared to marry the wrong person. And this does make sense, because of the next concept of the difference of needing someone and truly falling in love. Hero and Claudio exemplify this because they marry each other clearly because they each get something out of the marriage. Hero gets a title and Claudio gets Hero’s wealth. Beatrice and Benedick, however, exemplify true love because they do not need anything from one another. When they marry, it is solely from love they chose to give. Benedick does not get much, if anything from Beatrice’s dowry, and sure Beatrice will maintain her title as a lady but obviously Benedick does not have much money like Count Claudio. And I wondered if maybe that is why Claudio chose Hero, a need to marry a rich girl; and Hero to marry Claudio for his title, they complete each other and have what the other does not in order to complete the Messina society thinking that titles and money is what matters, and what is highly looked upon. This way is not the right way to think about happiness. Happiness is not about titles and wealth, because if you spend your life married to someone you do not like a lot, you are going to have to spend the rest of your life with them, and is that happiness? This is the difference between marriage and truly falling in love because, on one hand you can choose to love a person you do not need anything from, and then on the other hand needing to selfishly marry someone to gain rank, title, or money. Which ever path one chooses to take is up to the kind of person they are, and most likely the intelligent witty people will take the true love path. After, of course, hesitating and taking the time to think whether their significant other is the right one for them.
The Change in Perspective of True Beauty, Love, and Hate
Hi everyone! My name is Bianca Viannette Villarreal, and I am an English major with an emphasis in rhetoric and literature at Northern Arizona University. I am going to be completely honest with you – I do not usually LOVE starting to read new novels because I like to think of myself as more of a writer. I get way more excited when I am assigned a writing assignment opposed to a reading assignment. Though, once I get past the first chapter it is hard to put the book down because then it bothers me not knowing every detail of the story, besides reading makes you a better writer anyways. I had to read The Scarlet Letter in high school for my sophomore English class, and at first I was dreading it. It was definitely a challenge to read at first with the language and vocabulary that Hawthorne provided but, of course my English teacher helped us understand much more clearly what he meant in certain passages when we would ask her. My second time reading The Scarlet Letter was in my English American Fiction class in college, and at first I was like AWSOME I already read this book, thinking that this section of the class was going to be a breeze but of course the teacher challenges us. I know right what a meanie. No but seriously, she obviously knew most of us has already read the book, so our assignment was to focus on a character from the novel while reading it again, and this time I totally had a different outlook on this novel, a good one actually. My character was Hester Prynne; now, in the novel the problematic situation is that she is publicly shamed because she has committed adultery, and the only way the townspeople know that is because she has a daughter named Pearl. Another point that bothers the townspeople is that Hester does not admit who the father of her child is. While reading the novel again I began to realize how the author, Nathaniel Hawthorne, really makes it clear that everyone is absolutely jealous of Hester Prynne. Not only are they jealous but I also notice that Hawthorne makes it seem like the townspeople are also envious of her; and a discussion about this novel in my class led to a point to where love and hate are very similar, or even the same thing. I’ve always said that there was a fine line between love and hate ever since I read that from a quote on Facebook.
The whole time reading The Scarlet Letter again I was kind of thinking of the very famous movie Mean Girls and that Hester Prynne was in a way like Regina George. Katie, the new girl in school, hated Regina George but also admitted she was obsessed with her and could not stop talking about her even when she knew people were getting tired of listening to what she had to say about Regina. Hawthorne made it very clear in The Scarlet Letter that Hester was a pretty –no, a beautiful woman. My favorite description of her was “picturesque” (60 Hawthorne). This word I am very familiar with because I took an English course where we talked about Beautiful, Picturesque, and Sublime. These are words that were typically used to describe paintings. Beautiful paintings consisted of rounded objects, typically of nature, and light colors, such as hills for example. Sublime on the other hand was almost like a scary painting to where it was dark and had sharp visual objects of nature such as branches and thorns. Now, picturesque is in the middle the best way I can describe it is that it is beautiful with some flaws. To me the picturesque paintings were far more beautiful and amazing to look at than the paintings that were considered beautiful because, the picturesque paintings were more interesting with it’s complexity. I believe Hawthorne’s way of thinking is the same as mine, that picturesque –beauty with flaws –is true beauty, and the paintings that were considered beautiful are just plain and simple; and, flaws without beauty is sublime –scary. Which goes back to my point of how love and hate are the same –beauty is love, and sublime is hate, and picturesque is the idea that love and hate can be combined into one. Therefore, the townspeople love and hate Hester Prynne because she is picturesque. Hawthorne makes very clear the difference between Hester, and everyone else. The puritan townspeople, they were just beautiful, because they lived in a way were they had to be perfect, have no flaws, and were quite boring. This explains why the townspeople are jealous of Hester. What Hawthorne is trying to make the reader understand is that true beauty has flaws, because beauty is NOT flawless, beauty is picturesque.
Even from the beginning of the novel, Hawthorne puts Hester on a pedestal. He just gushes about her and totally bashes on the townspeople. For example, in chapter two “The Market Place” Hawthorne describes a woman as “the ugliest as well as the most pitiless of these self-constituted judges”. Yes, those were some harsh words but, the whole point of that description was to depict Hester’s beauty as rare. Another example in the novel where Hester was with her scarlet letter, Pearl was in her arms, and even under the bad circumstance she was still picturesque, beautiful with flaws, the scarlet A, the crying baby, and because of that –the women especially –were very jealous because it was noticed by all the townspeople that she, “appeared more lady like” and they “were astonished and even startled, to perceive how her beauty shone out” (58). Hester intimidates the plain and simple puritan women, and they hate her just as much as they envy her. Like in my example of the movie “Mean Girls”, the ugly woman tries to slander Hester by using words like “brazen hussy” when talking about her and her scarlet A in the Market Place (58). The woman already hated the fact that Hester was unordinary beautiful with her unordinary dark feature –her hair. Everyone had their eyes on her, and then the scarlet letter she wore on her breast was what really bothered the woman because that is what everyone’s eyes were drawn to. I guess because she never knew what it would be like to have all eyes on her. But despite the jealousy and hatred toward Hester, there was still envy.
I found it very unusual that Hester was not sentenced to death because I originally thought that in puritan times when a woman has committed heresy or adultery, they were put to death, which is why it led me to believe that they spared her life because she was so truly beautiful, and the men and women were all so envious. I truly believe that if Hester Prynne was not depicted as picturesque or even pretty, she would have lost her life and Pearl would have been sent to a nun’s convent or something. Another reason that I believe the townspeople were envious of her was because at first they expressed total hatred toward Hester that was depicted as jealousy but, by the end they did not treat her so bad, like the sin that she had done was forgotten and forgiven, and I depicted that as their envy of her. The townspeople were indifferent about her throughout the novel, they hated her and then did not hate her; they were jealous of her, but at the same time they envied her. A theme Nathaniel Hawthorn tries to make clear is that love and hate are one thing when it comes to picturesque because, beautiful is not plain and simple like the puritan townspeople, beautiful is picturesque –like Hester, pretty and flawed. I truly believe that Hawthorne’s message to women is to stop trying to be flawless because it is not as beautiful as we think, what makes us beautiful –is our flaws, that is true beauty. Picturesque is proof that love and hate are one because beauty and flaws were known as opposites just like love and hate used to be opposites.
Thank you for taking the time out of your day to listen to my podcast, I hope that listening in has changed your perspective on beauty, and my argument for the realization that love and hate are same. Have a great day!
Hi everyone! My name is Bianca Viannette Villarreal, and I am an English major with an emphasis in rhetoric and literature at Northern Arizona University. I am going to be completely honest with you – I do not usually LOVE starting to read new novels because I like to think of myself as more of a writer. I get way more excited when I am assigned a writing assignment opposed to a reading assignment. Though, once I get past the first chapter it is hard to put the book down because then it bothers me not knowing every detail of the story, besides reading makes you a better writer anyways. I had to read The Scarlet Letter in high school for my sophomore English class, and at first I was dreading it. It was definitely a challenge to read at first with the language and vocabulary that Hawthorne provided but, of course my English teacher helped us understand much more clearly what he meant in certain passages when we would ask her. My second time reading The Scarlet Letter was in my English American Fiction class in college, and at first I was like AWSOME I already read this book, thinking that this section of the class was going to be a breeze but of course the teacher challenges us. I know right what a meanie. No but seriously, she obviously knew most of us has already read the book, so our assignment was to focus on a character from the novel while reading it again, and this time I totally had a different outlook on this novel, a good one actually. My character was Hester Prynne; now, in the novel the problematic situation is that she is publicly shamed because she has committed adultery, and the only way the townspeople know that is because she has a daughter named Pearl. Another point that bothers the townspeople is that Hester does not admit who the father of her child is. While reading the novel again I began to realize how the author, Nathaniel Hawthorne, really makes it clear that everyone is absolutely jealous of Hester Prynne. Not only are they jealous but I also notice that Hawthorne makes it seem like the townspeople are also envious of her; and a discussion about this novel in my class led to a point to where love and hate are very similar, or even the same thing. I’ve always said that there was a fine line between love and hate ever since I read that from a quote on Facebook.
The whole time reading The Scarlet Letter again I was kind of thinking of the very famous movie Mean Girls and that Hester Prynne was in a way like Regina George. Katie, the new girl in school, hated Regina George but also admitted she was obsessed with her and could not stop talking about her even when she knew people were getting tired of listening to what she had to say about Regina. Hawthorne made it very clear in The Scarlet Letter that Hester was a pretty –no, a beautiful woman. My favorite description of her was “picturesque” (60 Hawthorne). This word I am very familiar with because I took an English course where we talked about Beautiful, Picturesque, and Sublime. These are words that were typically used to describe paintings. Beautiful paintings consisted of rounded objects, typically of nature, and light colors, such as hills for example. Sublime on the other hand was almost like a scary painting to where it was dark and had sharp visual objects of nature such as branches and thorns. Now, picturesque is in the middle the best way I can describe it is that it is beautiful with some flaws. To me the picturesque paintings were far more beautiful and amazing to look at than the paintings that were considered beautiful because, the picturesque paintings were more interesting with it’s complexity. I believe Hawthorne’s way of thinking is the same as mine, that picturesque –beauty with flaws –is true beauty, and the paintings that were considered beautiful are just plain and simple; and, flaws without beauty is sublime –scary. Which goes back to my point of how love and hate are the same –beauty is love, and sublime is hate, and picturesque is the idea that love and hate can be combined into one. Therefore, the townspeople love and hate Hester Prynne because she is picturesque. Hawthorne makes very clear the difference between Hester, and everyone else. The puritan townspeople, they were just beautiful, because they lived in a way were they had to be perfect, have no flaws, and were quite boring. This explains why the townspeople are jealous of Hester. What Hawthorne is trying to make the reader understand is that true beauty has flaws, because beauty is NOT flawless, beauty is picturesque.
Even from the beginning of the novel, Hawthorne puts Hester on a pedestal. He just gushes about her and totally bashes on the townspeople. For example, in chapter two “The Market Place” Hawthorne describes a woman as “the ugliest as well as the most pitiless of these self-constituted judges”. Yes, those were some harsh words but, the whole point of that description was to depict Hester’s beauty as rare. Another example in the novel where Hester was with her scarlet letter, Pearl was in her arms, and even under the bad circumstance she was still picturesque, beautiful with flaws, the scarlet A, the crying baby, and because of that –the women especially –were very jealous because it was noticed by all the townspeople that she, “appeared more lady like” and they “were astonished and even startled, to perceive how her beauty shone out” (58). Hester intimidates the plain and simple puritan women, and they hate her just as much as they envy her. Like in my example of the movie “Mean Girls”, the ugly woman tries to slander Hester by using words like “brazen hussy” when talking about her and her scarlet A in the Market Place (58). The woman already hated the fact that Hester was unordinary beautiful with her unordinary dark feature –her hair. Everyone had their eyes on her, and then the scarlet letter she wore on her breast was what really bothered the woman because that is what everyone’s eyes were drawn to. I guess because she never knew what it would be like to have all eyes on her. But despite the jealousy and hatred toward Hester, there was still envy.
I found it very unusual that Hester was not sentenced to death because I originally thought that in puritan times when a woman has committed heresy or adultery, they were put to death, which is why it led me to believe that they spared her life because she was so truly beautiful, and the men and women were all so envious. I truly believe that if Hester Prynne was not depicted as picturesque or even pretty, she would have lost her life and Pearl would have been sent to a nun’s convent or something. Another reason that I believe the townspeople were envious of her was because at first they expressed total hatred toward Hester that was depicted as jealousy but, by the end they did not treat her so bad, like the sin that she had done was forgotten and forgiven, and I depicted that as their envy of her. The townspeople were indifferent about her throughout the novel, they hated her and then did not hate her; they were jealous of her, but at the same time they envied her. A theme Nathaniel Hawthorn tries to make clear is that love and hate are one thing when it comes to picturesque because, beautiful is not plain and simple like the puritan townspeople, beautiful is picturesque –like Hester, pretty and flawed. I truly believe that Hawthorne’s message to women is to stop trying to be flawless because it is not as beautiful as we think, what makes us beautiful –is our flaws, that is true beauty. Picturesque is proof that love and hate are one because beauty and flaws were known as opposites just like love and hate used to be opposites.
Thank you for taking the time out of your day to listen to my podcast, I hope that listening in has changed your perspective on beauty, and my argument for the realization that love and hate are same. Have a great day!
The Power of Rare Beauty
The novel The Scarlet Letter written by Nathaniel Hawthorn tells a story about a woman, Hester Prynne who was shamed in her town for committing adultery. Though she is no prostitute, it was shameful for her to have a child without a known father. Though the language in the novel is usually negative when it comes to talking to or about Hester, the Hawthorne describes her as a very good looking woman no matter her situation in the novel. This beauty that Hester possesses is not only described by the author but also noticed by the townspeople. Hawthorne makes it noticeable to the reader that the townspeople are jealous of Hester for her beauty, and the one mistake she makes, everyone quickly goes against her because they are full of hateful jealousy.
Hawthorne purposely gushes about the character plenty of times in the beginning to really have us remember and only see her as a very beautiful woman. He emphasizes that in the beginning by trying to demote or undermine the people around her in the story, for example, “the ugliest as well as the most pitiless of these self-constituted judges”… “ugliest” is a very strong word and to make Hester’s depicted beauty be seemingly rare especially when he uses words to describe Hester, such as “Picturesque” (56, 60). Even in bad circumstances, Hawthorne gives Hester’s character in the story a praise, and in a way puts her on a pedestal in the beginning of the novel. For instance, in chapter two, he describes a moment in the Market Place where Hester “appeared more lady like… were astonished and even startled, to perceive how her beauty shone out” (58, Hawthorne). Hester was kind of angelic like.
Hester’s beauty was intimidating to others in the novel and created a sense of jealousy that was expressed into hatred. For example, the townspeople were surprised when they noticed how beautiful she still looked and the same woman who was described as “ugly” spoke these words, “but did ever a woman, before this brazen hussy contrive such a way of showing it” (58). The scarlet letter on Hester’s bosom is what especially had the people’s attention on her; which, is why the lady who was described as “ugly” noted that Hester was a “brazen hussy” and added, “such a way of showing it” because she noticed that everyone was looking at the scarlet letter, that just so happened to be on Hester’s bosom, and that bothersome to her.
Though Hester Prynne lived a life of shame trying to keep the name of her daughter’s father a secret, she had no need of shame for who she was on the outside. She was able to get by literally with her looks because in most cases in those times, women who were charged with heresy and even adultery were usually sentenced to death; which, is Hester Prynne’s story is so astonishing. What is the novel’s lesson or message to women… wait for a man to be a man and finally admit his fault because he can no longer carry the guilt? Can women only be saved from a man if they are beautiful, or are loved?
The novel The Scarlet Letter written by Nathaniel Hawthorn tells a story about a woman, Hester Prynne who was shamed in her town for committing adultery. Though she is no prostitute, it was shameful for her to have a child without a known father. Though the language in the novel is usually negative when it comes to talking to or about Hester, the Hawthorne describes her as a very good looking woman no matter her situation in the novel. This beauty that Hester possesses is not only described by the author but also noticed by the townspeople. Hawthorne makes it noticeable to the reader that the townspeople are jealous of Hester for her beauty, and the one mistake she makes, everyone quickly goes against her because they are full of hateful jealousy.
Hawthorne purposely gushes about the character plenty of times in the beginning to really have us remember and only see her as a very beautiful woman. He emphasizes that in the beginning by trying to demote or undermine the people around her in the story, for example, “the ugliest as well as the most pitiless of these self-constituted judges”… “ugliest” is a very strong word and to make Hester’s depicted beauty be seemingly rare especially when he uses words to describe Hester, such as “Picturesque” (56, 60). Even in bad circumstances, Hawthorne gives Hester’s character in the story a praise, and in a way puts her on a pedestal in the beginning of the novel. For instance, in chapter two, he describes a moment in the Market Place where Hester “appeared more lady like… were astonished and even startled, to perceive how her beauty shone out” (58, Hawthorne). Hester was kind of angelic like.
Hester’s beauty was intimidating to others in the novel and created a sense of jealousy that was expressed into hatred. For example, the townspeople were surprised when they noticed how beautiful she still looked and the same woman who was described as “ugly” spoke these words, “but did ever a woman, before this brazen hussy contrive such a way of showing it” (58). The scarlet letter on Hester’s bosom is what especially had the people’s attention on her; which, is why the lady who was described as “ugly” noted that Hester was a “brazen hussy” and added, “such a way of showing it” because she noticed that everyone was looking at the scarlet letter, that just so happened to be on Hester’s bosom, and that bothersome to her.
Though Hester Prynne lived a life of shame trying to keep the name of her daughter’s father a secret, she had no need of shame for who she was on the outside. She was able to get by literally with her looks because in most cases in those times, women who were charged with heresy and even adultery were usually sentenced to death; which, is Hester Prynne’s story is so astonishing. What is the novel’s lesson or message to women… wait for a man to be a man and finally admit his fault because he can no longer carry the guilt? Can women only be saved from a man if they are beautiful, or are loved?
The Discussion of the Words “new”, “fat”, and the Significance of a Clock
There is always something new in the fashion world whether it is a new type of jeans trending or a whole way of dressing, like today the most popular way of dressing is Bohemian Chic. Music also will always change in many different ways. Just like fashion, music has style, and the style that is in right now will not be the same for very long. For example, a style could be one from an artist, first it was all about Katy Perry, then Ariana Grange was in style, after her it was Iggy Azalea, and now it is The Weekend who is very popular. Science research is also what will always change, and something new now will be old in a month or even sometimes a week. Like predicting the recent total lunar eclipse to now learning about a new chip that stores data permanently.
In the 1980’s history was making a comeback, and how it, “was the same as the historical criticism that had been practiced in the 1930’s and 1940’s”, I instantly thought well, history does repeat itself (The New Historicism, p. 414). Using the word “new” is useful in determining the historical criticism of today from the old historical criticism. The New Historicist are said to be much less fact and event oriented than the historical critics, because they “wonder whether the truth about what really happened can ever be purely and objectively known” (414). This made sense to me because in history, Kings, Queens, and Popes would be able to make their own history. For example, they would sometimes leave out some details or events of wars, plagues, or personal stuff to make themselves look better. In the show Reign, Queen Catherine, a member of the historical Medici family had a line that said she would erase a part of history from the books. (I wont say exactly what because it is a great show and you should see it for yourself).
In the short story by Edgar Allan Poe “The Masque of the Red Death” the Prince Prospero holds a ball for his one thousand friends in court in refuge from the plague. There are seven colored rooms and the seventh room no one really wants to go into. For good reason, too –all the other rooms were decorated in specific colors like purple, blue, orange, etc., but the seventh room is decorated in all black with scarlet window panes. Not to mention that there’s a clock in there that sounds every hour and there is a moment in silence each time the clock does so. I finally realized that the clock was like a timer. It felt like it was a count down until midnight or something; then as I read on I noticed it was a timer for death. During the masquerade, there’s someone that comes in a black robe with blood splatter on it with a mask of a sick person who was contracted with the plague. The Prince found it as an insult and wanted to hang him, not knowing that figure was the plague itself.
Another short story by Poe that had a masquerade was “Hop-Frog.” This story is about a dwarf named Hop-Frog. He was named “Hop- Frog” because he walked differently, he was crippled since he was young. He worked for the king because, in those times a king had a jester and a dwarf to make fun of, or to entertain him. Hop-Frog had a lady friend who was also a little person, and she was very beautiful. During the masquerade the king forcefully made Hop-Frog drink wine and hesitated, the king got upset and his lady friend tried to persuade the king not to harm him. The king was so angry he threw the rest of the wine to the lady friends face, and Hop-Frog was very angered by this, and eventually got his revenge. At first I was thinking that the king was just a very cruel person and I predicted that the story was going to be something about the king and his seven “fat” councilors getting karma and being turned into frogs; mostly because there was so much repetition of the word “fat”. Even in the beginning it was said that the king and his councilors were “oily” and “fat”. Frogs could be “oily” because they are slimy, and I have never seen a skinny frog, have you? However, being turned into frogs was not at all what happened. Then as I finished reading the short story I started thinking that maybe there was something wrong with the king because being tied up, covered in tar, and hoisted up in the air all for the sake of a joke… has me question his sanity.
There is always something new in the fashion world whether it is a new type of jeans trending or a whole way of dressing, like today the most popular way of dressing is Bohemian Chic. Music also will always change in many different ways. Just like fashion, music has style, and the style that is in right now will not be the same for very long. For example, a style could be one from an artist, first it was all about Katy Perry, then Ariana Grange was in style, after her it was Iggy Azalea, and now it is The Weekend who is very popular. Science research is also what will always change, and something new now will be old in a month or even sometimes a week. Like predicting the recent total lunar eclipse to now learning about a new chip that stores data permanently.
In the 1980’s history was making a comeback, and how it, “was the same as the historical criticism that had been practiced in the 1930’s and 1940’s”, I instantly thought well, history does repeat itself (The New Historicism, p. 414). Using the word “new” is useful in determining the historical criticism of today from the old historical criticism. The New Historicist are said to be much less fact and event oriented than the historical critics, because they “wonder whether the truth about what really happened can ever be purely and objectively known” (414). This made sense to me because in history, Kings, Queens, and Popes would be able to make their own history. For example, they would sometimes leave out some details or events of wars, plagues, or personal stuff to make themselves look better. In the show Reign, Queen Catherine, a member of the historical Medici family had a line that said she would erase a part of history from the books. (I wont say exactly what because it is a great show and you should see it for yourself).
In the short story by Edgar Allan Poe “The Masque of the Red Death” the Prince Prospero holds a ball for his one thousand friends in court in refuge from the plague. There are seven colored rooms and the seventh room no one really wants to go into. For good reason, too –all the other rooms were decorated in specific colors like purple, blue, orange, etc., but the seventh room is decorated in all black with scarlet window panes. Not to mention that there’s a clock in there that sounds every hour and there is a moment in silence each time the clock does so. I finally realized that the clock was like a timer. It felt like it was a count down until midnight or something; then as I read on I noticed it was a timer for death. During the masquerade, there’s someone that comes in a black robe with blood splatter on it with a mask of a sick person who was contracted with the plague. The Prince found it as an insult and wanted to hang him, not knowing that figure was the plague itself.
Another short story by Poe that had a masquerade was “Hop-Frog.” This story is about a dwarf named Hop-Frog. He was named “Hop- Frog” because he walked differently, he was crippled since he was young. He worked for the king because, in those times a king had a jester and a dwarf to make fun of, or to entertain him. Hop-Frog had a lady friend who was also a little person, and she was very beautiful. During the masquerade the king forcefully made Hop-Frog drink wine and hesitated, the king got upset and his lady friend tried to persuade the king not to harm him. The king was so angry he threw the rest of the wine to the lady friends face, and Hop-Frog was very angered by this, and eventually got his revenge. At first I was thinking that the king was just a very cruel person and I predicted that the story was going to be something about the king and his seven “fat” councilors getting karma and being turned into frogs; mostly because there was so much repetition of the word “fat”. Even in the beginning it was said that the king and his councilors were “oily” and “fat”. Frogs could be “oily” because they are slimy, and I have never seen a skinny frog, have you? However, being turned into frogs was not at all what happened. Then as I finished reading the short story I started thinking that maybe there was something wrong with the king because being tied up, covered in tar, and hoisted up in the air all for the sake of a joke… has me question his sanity.
Incest, Incompetent Love, and Self-representation
Edgar Allan Poe’s short story “Berenicë” is about a man who says that his “baptismal name is Egaeus,” and his cousin is Berenicë (13). They are supposed to be getting married, but then something weird happens. In a moment in the story Egaeus is in the library and notices Berenicë’s smile… her teeth. He claims “to God” that he has “never beheld them”, when she leaves the library, his thoughts about her teeth grow stronger, and he becomes obsessed “The teeth! –the teeth!” (18) he cannot stop thinking of them for days. He then is told that Berenicë dies, and finds himself at the library again “newly awaken from a confused and exciting dream” and next to him was a burning lamp and a box. A servant then goes to Egaeus and tells him that “of a violated grave” whom is still alive! (20). The servant points to Egaeus’s clothes that are muddy and indented with human nails. He eventually looks in the box that is next to him… and found “thirty-two small, white, and ivory-looking substances” (20). First of all, for some reason I thought that the speaker was a female at first. I thought the story was going to be about a woman who was jealous of her cousin and killed her. It was not until page 17 when Egaeus said that he “spoke to her about marriage” is when I realized Egaeus was a male cousin. When I realized this I put two-and-two together of why Egaeus was mentally off. I thought that it is a good possibility he is a product of incestuous parents himself. There are many problems with incest and some of those problems are defects of the children. The children of incestuous parents may have a physical defect, but they may also in some cases have mental defects. Lastly on a side note, I wanted to comment on how right after reading “Berenicë” I noticed how Berenicë rhymed with teeth… just say it I your head–Berenicë; teeth.
In the short story “Morella” also by Edgar Allan Poe, the speaker marries a woman named Morella, and she is very intelligent and scholarly, “her powers of mind were gigantic” (21). After sometime he notices her aging and realizes that she is losing her beauty, and he wishes for her death. Her death comes soon enough when she dies in childbirth; she gives birth to a daughter who very soon resembles Morella. Frightened by this, the father tries to take away any possible evil by baptizing his daughter. The father never gave his daughter a name but when the priest asks for a name for the child he “whispered within the ears of the holy man the syllables –Morella” (25). Morella then speaks “I am here!” and dies (25). When the speaker/father carries Morella to the tomb where her mother is, his wife is not there, “and I laughed with a long and bitter laugh as I found no traces of the first…where I laid the second –Morella” (25). I found it humorous how the speaker had a second chance but did not take it. His first chance was with his wife Morella, the woman whose intelligence excited him. And as she grew older he started to lose interest in her, just like how he loved his daughter “more fervent than I had believed it possible” then lost interest in her when she started getting older and looking more and more like her mother. It seemed to me like love was problematic for the speaker. Especially because of the fact of how he could be so in love with his wife and daughter one minute and the next want them dead. I think he wanted his daughter dead and that is why he finally named her Morella. I think he hoped she would die while being re-bourn (baptism) just like how his wife died while giving birth to their daughter. I feel like the daughter was the second chance he could have gotten with his wife by giving their daughter the love that the wife should have had. There is a difference between infatuation and love, and the speaker does not know what love is and could not truly love… even for his own daughter.
Feminist and Gender Criticism gained academic legitimacy in the 1980’s; it is one of the most “influential developments in the field of literary studies” (372). In this section of “A Case Study in Contemporary Criticism” feminist argued that autobiographies are gendered as “‘masculinist’ genre” saying that women and men’s lives differ. Leigh Gilmore thought of a theory of women’s “self-representation”, a woman’s autobiography (376). Gilmore’s book Atuobiographics: A Feminist Theory of Self-Representation was published in 1994 and is known to separate “the heyday of feminist criticism and the rise of gender studies” (376). I find this theory very interesting because I am all for gender studies and feminism, but sometimes I do find it a little ridiculous of the things some feminist try to prove or change. When I first read this theory I thought it was a bit far fetched, but as I started to read more about it, the theory started growing on me. I like the idea of “self-representation” because it is true, men and women do live different lives. Even though we women are trying to make ourselves equal to men, there is a limit to how much equality we can reach. Equality in pay, and in law I am all for, but Gilmore had a point about the difference in lifestyles, and I respect the theory because I think it is a good point.
Edgar Allan Poe’s short story “Berenicë” is about a man who says that his “baptismal name is Egaeus,” and his cousin is Berenicë (13). They are supposed to be getting married, but then something weird happens. In a moment in the story Egaeus is in the library and notices Berenicë’s smile… her teeth. He claims “to God” that he has “never beheld them”, when she leaves the library, his thoughts about her teeth grow stronger, and he becomes obsessed “The teeth! –the teeth!” (18) he cannot stop thinking of them for days. He then is told that Berenicë dies, and finds himself at the library again “newly awaken from a confused and exciting dream” and next to him was a burning lamp and a box. A servant then goes to Egaeus and tells him that “of a violated grave” whom is still alive! (20). The servant points to Egaeus’s clothes that are muddy and indented with human nails. He eventually looks in the box that is next to him… and found “thirty-two small, white, and ivory-looking substances” (20). First of all, for some reason I thought that the speaker was a female at first. I thought the story was going to be about a woman who was jealous of her cousin and killed her. It was not until page 17 when Egaeus said that he “spoke to her about marriage” is when I realized Egaeus was a male cousin. When I realized this I put two-and-two together of why Egaeus was mentally off. I thought that it is a good possibility he is a product of incestuous parents himself. There are many problems with incest and some of those problems are defects of the children. The children of incestuous parents may have a physical defect, but they may also in some cases have mental defects. Lastly on a side note, I wanted to comment on how right after reading “Berenicë” I noticed how Berenicë rhymed with teeth… just say it I your head–Berenicë; teeth.
In the short story “Morella” also by Edgar Allan Poe, the speaker marries a woman named Morella, and she is very intelligent and scholarly, “her powers of mind were gigantic” (21). After sometime he notices her aging and realizes that she is losing her beauty, and he wishes for her death. Her death comes soon enough when she dies in childbirth; she gives birth to a daughter who very soon resembles Morella. Frightened by this, the father tries to take away any possible evil by baptizing his daughter. The father never gave his daughter a name but when the priest asks for a name for the child he “whispered within the ears of the holy man the syllables –Morella” (25). Morella then speaks “I am here!” and dies (25). When the speaker/father carries Morella to the tomb where her mother is, his wife is not there, “and I laughed with a long and bitter laugh as I found no traces of the first…where I laid the second –Morella” (25). I found it humorous how the speaker had a second chance but did not take it. His first chance was with his wife Morella, the woman whose intelligence excited him. And as she grew older he started to lose interest in her, just like how he loved his daughter “more fervent than I had believed it possible” then lost interest in her when she started getting older and looking more and more like her mother. It seemed to me like love was problematic for the speaker. Especially because of the fact of how he could be so in love with his wife and daughter one minute and the next want them dead. I think he wanted his daughter dead and that is why he finally named her Morella. I think he hoped she would die while being re-bourn (baptism) just like how his wife died while giving birth to their daughter. I feel like the daughter was the second chance he could have gotten with his wife by giving their daughter the love that the wife should have had. There is a difference between infatuation and love, and the speaker does not know what love is and could not truly love… even for his own daughter.
Feminist and Gender Criticism gained academic legitimacy in the 1980’s; it is one of the most “influential developments in the field of literary studies” (372). In this section of “A Case Study in Contemporary Criticism” feminist argued that autobiographies are gendered as “‘masculinist’ genre” saying that women and men’s lives differ. Leigh Gilmore thought of a theory of women’s “self-representation”, a woman’s autobiography (376). Gilmore’s book Atuobiographics: A Feminist Theory of Self-Representation was published in 1994 and is known to separate “the heyday of feminist criticism and the rise of gender studies” (376). I find this theory very interesting because I am all for gender studies and feminism, but sometimes I do find it a little ridiculous of the things some feminist try to prove or change. When I first read this theory I thought it was a bit far fetched, but as I started to read more about it, the theory started growing on me. I like the idea of “self-representation” because it is true, men and women do live different lives. Even though we women are trying to make ourselves equal to men, there is a limit to how much equality we can reach. Equality in pay, and in law I am all for, but Gilmore had a point about the difference in lifestyles, and I respect the theory because I think it is a good point.
Jean Muir; and The Kind of Woman You Need to Be to Get to Where You Want to Be
In the novel Behind a Mask by Louisa May Alcott, Jean Muir is a very seductive woman compared to the time period this novel is set in; which is past the middle of the eighteen-hundreds. She is a young woman from Scotland who was very sick and right after she was released from the hospital she started working for the Coventry family. She is a pale, and flirtatious woman that gets the attention from all the men in the novel so far. Her character shows how the ideals of female beauty and attractiveness in this time period is greatly appreciated by the opposite sex, and also gives women more opportunities than women who are not necessarily as gorgeous. This is true because people are far nicer to women who are pretty and young. Old ugly women are more perceived as witches. For example, in the television show Reign Queen Katherine de Medici had an affair with a man who was not the King, and the baby ended up having a birthmark on her face that ran in her father’s family. Queen Katherine tried to remove the birthmark but instead deformed her child’s face. She ended up not claiming the child letting the child roam around the castle as long as she was not seen. The child’s name is Clarissa and she did not have a clue that her mother was the Queen or even that the princes and princesses were her half brothers and sisters. Eventually the Clarissa and the royal family were separated and she was living her life outside the castle roaming around France. She was then going to be hanged for witchcraft by the townspeople, and when the King’s deputy asked how they proved she was a witch, one the the men said, “Well look at her face” (The Royals, season 2). Because of this fact that everyone is nicer to younger and pretty women, there is no way Jean would been able to achieve her “triumph” if she did not lie about her looks. It surprised me that Alcott did not punish Jean even though her intentions were wrong and conniving.
I think Alcott’s reason for not punishing this character is to show the readers that ambition, control, and power can be achieved by any woman, pretty or not. I think the author wanted us to feel bad about jean’s “triumph”, but then wanted us to ask ourselves, why. Why do we feel not that great that jean gets the Coventry family’s estate, is it because she lied about her looks, or was it because she used her false beauty to do it. Would we have felt the same if Jean was naturally pretty without the fake hair and teeth, like it was a love story as in the novel Pride and Prejudice with Jane and Mr. Darcy? Jane was a more sentimental than Mr. Darcy; however, in Behind a Mask it was almost the opposite. It was more the men that were more sentimental about romance then Jean was. I think this is because men are actually the ones that fall in love faster than women. I remember in my math class my sophomore year I took Quantitative Reasoning and we had to do a project and find out some statistics. I came upon an article that catched my eye, and long story short I came upon statistics that said about ninety percent of males fall in love faster than women. Prior to reading these statistics I thought that it was hard for males to fall in love, when actually it was the opposite. I mostly thought that it was women that fall in love faster and harder because that is what is perceived not only in books, but even in media today. Most teen romantic comedies are about a girl that has a crush on a guy, for instance the movie “Aquamarine”. Aquamarine is a mermaid that ran, well, swam away from home because her father, and where she came from did not believe in love. Although she does because she says that she saw it once. So to prove to her father that there is love, she would have to make someone fall in love with her in three days. She lays eyes on one the hottest guys in the beach and he automatically likes her and thinks she’s, “hot”. However in the end of the movie when the three days are up she asks the guy, Raymond if he loves her and he responds that he likes her a lot but “love” would need to take more time especially since they only met three days ago. Because of this perception that women are more typically seen as vulnerable to sentiment and romance is why Alcott wrote her novella so that the men are equally susceptible to shed light on the fact that vulnerability of sentiment and romance go both ways. That women and men are equal in that way, even though men and women were not equal politically in that time period.
Though women were not nearly equal to men in the mid to late eighteen- hundreds, this story still suggests that women do have a great amount of power. This power comes from their ambition, and how passionately they are of what they want. Jean is so easily able to manipulate those around her because she knows what she wants so badly that she puts her mind to it, and it becomes second nature, or at least not difficult to cause damage as long as she gets what she is striving for. Another example from the television show Reign is Queen Katherine, she is known to be a very powerful woman because when a woman wants something, she knows how to get it even if it involves risks. Whether or not you are very set on your goal, lying or manipulating people or family around you to get to your “triumph” will not make you feel bad as long as you get what you want. Women seek power, we like power because it is control, whether it is control over men, a man, your man, or even your life, we like power because it makes us feel safe. Maybe that is all that Jean was doing, securing her life. Doesn’t matte to her how she did it or who she hurt, but that she succeeded; survival of the fittest.
In the novel Behind a Mask by Louisa May Alcott, Jean Muir is a very seductive woman compared to the time period this novel is set in; which is past the middle of the eighteen-hundreds. She is a young woman from Scotland who was very sick and right after she was released from the hospital she started working for the Coventry family. She is a pale, and flirtatious woman that gets the attention from all the men in the novel so far. Her character shows how the ideals of female beauty and attractiveness in this time period is greatly appreciated by the opposite sex, and also gives women more opportunities than women who are not necessarily as gorgeous. This is true because people are far nicer to women who are pretty and young. Old ugly women are more perceived as witches. For example, in the television show Reign Queen Katherine de Medici had an affair with a man who was not the King, and the baby ended up having a birthmark on her face that ran in her father’s family. Queen Katherine tried to remove the birthmark but instead deformed her child’s face. She ended up not claiming the child letting the child roam around the castle as long as she was not seen. The child’s name is Clarissa and she did not have a clue that her mother was the Queen or even that the princes and princesses were her half brothers and sisters. Eventually the Clarissa and the royal family were separated and she was living her life outside the castle roaming around France. She was then going to be hanged for witchcraft by the townspeople, and when the King’s deputy asked how they proved she was a witch, one the the men said, “Well look at her face” (The Royals, season 2). Because of this fact that everyone is nicer to younger and pretty women, there is no way Jean would been able to achieve her “triumph” if she did not lie about her looks. It surprised me that Alcott did not punish Jean even though her intentions were wrong and conniving.
I think Alcott’s reason for not punishing this character is to show the readers that ambition, control, and power can be achieved by any woman, pretty or not. I think the author wanted us to feel bad about jean’s “triumph”, but then wanted us to ask ourselves, why. Why do we feel not that great that jean gets the Coventry family’s estate, is it because she lied about her looks, or was it because she used her false beauty to do it. Would we have felt the same if Jean was naturally pretty without the fake hair and teeth, like it was a love story as in the novel Pride and Prejudice with Jane and Mr. Darcy? Jane was a more sentimental than Mr. Darcy; however, in Behind a Mask it was almost the opposite. It was more the men that were more sentimental about romance then Jean was. I think this is because men are actually the ones that fall in love faster than women. I remember in my math class my sophomore year I took Quantitative Reasoning and we had to do a project and find out some statistics. I came upon an article that catched my eye, and long story short I came upon statistics that said about ninety percent of males fall in love faster than women. Prior to reading these statistics I thought that it was hard for males to fall in love, when actually it was the opposite. I mostly thought that it was women that fall in love faster and harder because that is what is perceived not only in books, but even in media today. Most teen romantic comedies are about a girl that has a crush on a guy, for instance the movie “Aquamarine”. Aquamarine is a mermaid that ran, well, swam away from home because her father, and where she came from did not believe in love. Although she does because she says that she saw it once. So to prove to her father that there is love, she would have to make someone fall in love with her in three days. She lays eyes on one the hottest guys in the beach and he automatically likes her and thinks she’s, “hot”. However in the end of the movie when the three days are up she asks the guy, Raymond if he loves her and he responds that he likes her a lot but “love” would need to take more time especially since they only met three days ago. Because of this perception that women are more typically seen as vulnerable to sentiment and romance is why Alcott wrote her novella so that the men are equally susceptible to shed light on the fact that vulnerability of sentiment and romance go both ways. That women and men are equal in that way, even though men and women were not equal politically in that time period.
Though women were not nearly equal to men in the mid to late eighteen- hundreds, this story still suggests that women do have a great amount of power. This power comes from their ambition, and how passionately they are of what they want. Jean is so easily able to manipulate those around her because she knows what she wants so badly that she puts her mind to it, and it becomes second nature, or at least not difficult to cause damage as long as she gets what she is striving for. Another example from the television show Reign is Queen Katherine, she is known to be a very powerful woman because when a woman wants something, she knows how to get it even if it involves risks. Whether or not you are very set on your goal, lying or manipulating people or family around you to get to your “triumph” will not make you feel bad as long as you get what you want. Women seek power, we like power because it is control, whether it is control over men, a man, your man, or even your life, we like power because it makes us feel safe. Maybe that is all that Jean was doing, securing her life. Doesn’t matte to her how she did it or who she hurt, but that she succeeded; survival of the fittest.
Marriage and Female Friendships Today, and in Wharton’s Time Period
Being a member of upper-class society is so important to the character Lily from the novel House of Mirth because, it’s the only way a woman can have a good life in those times; if she marries into upper-class. She needs this because she is poor herself and like she says in chapter one, “We are expected to be pretty and well-dressed till we drop—and if we can’t keep it up alone, we have to go into partnership” (10). Lily also has to play it right, and what I mean by “it” is the game. The game of life for a woman in that time period. It is mentioned in the beginning of the novel that Lily refused or “threw away” a couple of proposals already (8). She mentions that is normal and that you are never supposed to marry the first guy that you see or that comes to you first. She is a very smart lady, she knows she is poor, and needs to marry into good money because she is “very expensive” (page 8). And personally I am the same way, but without the marriage thing. I am not the wealthiest person, so I get by with what I can, but I do love nice things that is why I am trying to pursue a path for my career that will allow me to have my nice expensive things. That at least to me is my goal for the future, good career; and by that I mean something I do not mind getting up to do everyday, and something that has a good paying salary, which is what Lily is trying to do in her situation; the only difference is that in her time period women could not do that on their own but through marriage. If I was a woman in that time period, I would be something like Lily, taking my time picking a husband finding the right one that benefits the most for me. She is doing that by not marrying one of the first few guys that offers her a marriage proposal, but deciding whether or not those men can give her the kind of life that she wants, and I truly admire her for that.
Marriage in this novel I would consider it one major element: business. Marriage is a contract and I see that saying being mentioned a lot today, but I could also believe that it was a strong saying even in Wharton’s time period. A contract is exactly what a marriage is if you really look at it. It’s a fifty-fifty share everything with the same person for your whole life, well at least in Wharton’s time period it was, today not so much divorce has skyrocketed. Though the values of marriage have changed through out the years, marriage itself has not. It was a contract and it still is a contract whether from death do you part or divorce, marriage is like a business deal. When you get into a marriage in Wharton’s time you are in it for whatever the man has or doesn’t have, and yes the woman might have a dowry but not all. When you get married now you are supposed to be more in it for the love because of the whole women have rights thing (but not totally equal to men in some areas like work and salary pay). Divorce, however, is still part of the contract of marriage, at least divorce in today’s day in age because in Wharton’s time you were usually married for life. Divorce is settled usually by the prenuptials agreed by the wedding couple before they get married, which I think is a brilliant idea today because most women have their own income today. I also view marriage as a contract basically saying, her are the guidelines of our marriage and if you break them there will be consequences. When I say that it kind of reminds me of the Godfather, where marriage is like the mob; which by the way is all business too. It’s like once you get in it’s hard to get out (kind of like how marriage was in Wharton’s time period), unless you get killed (in reference to divorce in today’s time period), or die (til death to us part in both time periods). Marriage is the same today as it was in Wharton’s time, just like how female friendship are still the same.
Female friendships in this novel are just as similar as they are in today’s society. Women have friends but only when you are in trouble or are going through something bad is when you realize who your true friends are by the few friends if any are still by your side. Women are very friendly, even to those they do not like very much, that is why I think it is hard for women to tell who are their real friends and who are their enemies. It all comes down to the saying keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Many women are usually very jealous and naturally controlling. So when a woman is jealous she will go through lengths to get revenge or get back at that person—maybe even remove the person from the picture at all. I really find women to be jealous because even in this day in age women and girls are friendly to everyone, and then can sometimes talk about a girl/woman that they were just talking to, and insult them behind their backs. There are too many real life examples that I can use from my real life experience, but do not want to say them publically, so instead I will quote from the very famous film Mean Girls. The most popular girl in school/mean girl stopped and commented a girl passing by the hall way on how much she liked her skirt, then when the girl walks away Regina turns to Caty, “Oh my God that is the fucking ugliest thing I’ve ever seen” (Mean Girls, 2004). Many women are two faced, however there are also some exceptions. Though we are not meant to like every single person on this Earth, and were brought up to be respectful that does not mean that you are two faced. What is being two faced is pretending to be someone’s friend when all you want to do is hurt them or not care about their well being at all. Many true friendships begin when you do not like the person at first and are mean to each other, but then when there is a common interest things can go from hating one another to befriending each other. For example in the movie Legally Blonde with Reese Weatherspoon, her character Elle goes through the hard effort to get into Harvard to be with her ex boyfriend Warner that dumped her, then she comes to find out that he is engaged to his high school girlfriend Vivian. The two girls instantly hate each other, but then become friends after Vivian finally sees that Warner is not worth marriage and also when she apologizes to Elle for misunderstanding what happened between Elle and a law professor. Marriage, status, and friendship for women have not changed much and these subjects are still similar today as they were in Wharton’s time. Marriage is not needed anymore for women to be comfortable in life because we can do it ourselves now, they only thing marriage holds now is an image. Wanting to have a high status is still the same today—everyone wants to be rich to buy all the things they want and not just need, and will do just about anything to it. Just like in female friendships today, some women can be your friend to only hurt you.
Being a member of upper-class society is so important to the character Lily from the novel House of Mirth because, it’s the only way a woman can have a good life in those times; if she marries into upper-class. She needs this because she is poor herself and like she says in chapter one, “We are expected to be pretty and well-dressed till we drop—and if we can’t keep it up alone, we have to go into partnership” (10). Lily also has to play it right, and what I mean by “it” is the game. The game of life for a woman in that time period. It is mentioned in the beginning of the novel that Lily refused or “threw away” a couple of proposals already (8). She mentions that is normal and that you are never supposed to marry the first guy that you see or that comes to you first. She is a very smart lady, she knows she is poor, and needs to marry into good money because she is “very expensive” (page 8). And personally I am the same way, but without the marriage thing. I am not the wealthiest person, so I get by with what I can, but I do love nice things that is why I am trying to pursue a path for my career that will allow me to have my nice expensive things. That at least to me is my goal for the future, good career; and by that I mean something I do not mind getting up to do everyday, and something that has a good paying salary, which is what Lily is trying to do in her situation; the only difference is that in her time period women could not do that on their own but through marriage. If I was a woman in that time period, I would be something like Lily, taking my time picking a husband finding the right one that benefits the most for me. She is doing that by not marrying one of the first few guys that offers her a marriage proposal, but deciding whether or not those men can give her the kind of life that she wants, and I truly admire her for that.
Marriage in this novel I would consider it one major element: business. Marriage is a contract and I see that saying being mentioned a lot today, but I could also believe that it was a strong saying even in Wharton’s time period. A contract is exactly what a marriage is if you really look at it. It’s a fifty-fifty share everything with the same person for your whole life, well at least in Wharton’s time period it was, today not so much divorce has skyrocketed. Though the values of marriage have changed through out the years, marriage itself has not. It was a contract and it still is a contract whether from death do you part or divorce, marriage is like a business deal. When you get into a marriage in Wharton’s time you are in it for whatever the man has or doesn’t have, and yes the woman might have a dowry but not all. When you get married now you are supposed to be more in it for the love because of the whole women have rights thing (but not totally equal to men in some areas like work and salary pay). Divorce, however, is still part of the contract of marriage, at least divorce in today’s day in age because in Wharton’s time you were usually married for life. Divorce is settled usually by the prenuptials agreed by the wedding couple before they get married, which I think is a brilliant idea today because most women have their own income today. I also view marriage as a contract basically saying, her are the guidelines of our marriage and if you break them there will be consequences. When I say that it kind of reminds me of the Godfather, where marriage is like the mob; which by the way is all business too. It’s like once you get in it’s hard to get out (kind of like how marriage was in Wharton’s time period), unless you get killed (in reference to divorce in today’s time period), or die (til death to us part in both time periods). Marriage is the same today as it was in Wharton’s time, just like how female friendship are still the same.
Female friendships in this novel are just as similar as they are in today’s society. Women have friends but only when you are in trouble or are going through something bad is when you realize who your true friends are by the few friends if any are still by your side. Women are very friendly, even to those they do not like very much, that is why I think it is hard for women to tell who are their real friends and who are their enemies. It all comes down to the saying keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Many women are usually very jealous and naturally controlling. So when a woman is jealous she will go through lengths to get revenge or get back at that person—maybe even remove the person from the picture at all. I really find women to be jealous because even in this day in age women and girls are friendly to everyone, and then can sometimes talk about a girl/woman that they were just talking to, and insult them behind their backs. There are too many real life examples that I can use from my real life experience, but do not want to say them publically, so instead I will quote from the very famous film Mean Girls. The most popular girl in school/mean girl stopped and commented a girl passing by the hall way on how much she liked her skirt, then when the girl walks away Regina turns to Caty, “Oh my God that is the fucking ugliest thing I’ve ever seen” (Mean Girls, 2004). Many women are two faced, however there are also some exceptions. Though we are not meant to like every single person on this Earth, and were brought up to be respectful that does not mean that you are two faced. What is being two faced is pretending to be someone’s friend when all you want to do is hurt them or not care about their well being at all. Many true friendships begin when you do not like the person at first and are mean to each other, but then when there is a common interest things can go from hating one another to befriending each other. For example in the movie Legally Blonde with Reese Weatherspoon, her character Elle goes through the hard effort to get into Harvard to be with her ex boyfriend Warner that dumped her, then she comes to find out that he is engaged to his high school girlfriend Vivian. The two girls instantly hate each other, but then become friends after Vivian finally sees that Warner is not worth marriage and also when she apologizes to Elle for misunderstanding what happened between Elle and a law professor. Marriage, status, and friendship for women have not changed much and these subjects are still similar today as they were in Wharton’s time. Marriage is not needed anymore for women to be comfortable in life because we can do it ourselves now, they only thing marriage holds now is an image. Wanting to have a high status is still the same today—everyone wants to be rich to buy all the things they want and not just need, and will do just about anything to it. Just like in female friendships today, some women can be your friend to only hurt you.
The Difference of Dorothy from The Wiz and The Wizard of Oz, and a Theme I Noticed from The Wiz
Dorothy is said to resemble the good American, a simple populist character from the heartland, but I feel she also represents weakness that turns into strength—change. I remember in the beginning of the both films, The Wiz and The Wizard of Oz Dorothy is at first portrayed timid and gentile. In the Beginning of The Wiz Dorothy is a very shy girl and cannot relate to her family, her Aunt Em wants her to start living on her own because she has not explored the world or even New York passed 125th street. Then throughout The Wiz she starts gaining strength, for instance, she steps up and gets the Scarecrow down from his post despite what the crows say in The Wiz. I feel like if I saw the crows bullying the Scarecrow like that I would do the same; however the scenario is different in The Wizard of Oz. Though Dorothy is courageous having the guts to go into the crops looking for what is calling for help, knowing myself I would probably second think about looking in the crop field seeing what is wrong instead of instantly going in like Dorothy did in The Wizard of Oz. Realistically I think anyone would second think going in the crop field because first of all you would be in a very unfamiliar place that is so different than home. I would have to think whether or not it is safe for me. I also feel like meeting the Scarecrow scene in the Wizard of Oz shows that Dorothy is very naïve trusting very easily not thinking that any harm can come to her. Dorothy’s change in The Wizard of Oz is noticed not until way later in the movie, opposed to the Dorothy in The Wiz. I do not notice a change in her character until she throws the water on the Wicked Witch of the West. Even at that moment she did not mean to kill her, but her intentions were to let the witch know she has had enough of her.
A theme of Oz is that the things that the characters wish for—a brain for the Scarecrow, a heart for the Tin Man, and courage for the Lion—are all characteristics that they already have, and the story show that they possess the traits they believe they are missing from the very beginning. In The Wiz the Scarecrow says he has no brain but yet keeps reciting quotes from philosophers like Confucius and Cicero—he can read therefore has a brain. Then the Tin Man claims he has no heart, but then starts crying when he thinks that the Lion, and Dorothy could be dead. He started crying, therefore he felt something because he has a heart. The Lion says he has no courage, but then becomes the rescuer when everyone else gets locked out from a gate. He runs back to unlock the gate, then continues to save all of them from the troubles they faced after being unlocked from the gate. Lastly, Dorothy had the capability to go home from the very beginning with the shoes’ ability. Lastly I feel like The Wiz had way more themes than The Wizard of Oz because in the beginning of the movie there is a crow scene where they make the Scarecrow believe he cannot come down from his post, when in actuality he can. This is a theme to where if you believe you cannot do something, you won’t be able to until you believe you can. Everything you do you need to have self motivation and self confidence, or else you will be in the same place forever miserable.
Dorothy is said to resemble the good American, a simple populist character from the heartland, but I feel she also represents weakness that turns into strength—change. I remember in the beginning of the both films, The Wiz and The Wizard of Oz Dorothy is at first portrayed timid and gentile. In the Beginning of The Wiz Dorothy is a very shy girl and cannot relate to her family, her Aunt Em wants her to start living on her own because she has not explored the world or even New York passed 125th street. Then throughout The Wiz she starts gaining strength, for instance, she steps up and gets the Scarecrow down from his post despite what the crows say in The Wiz. I feel like if I saw the crows bullying the Scarecrow like that I would do the same; however the scenario is different in The Wizard of Oz. Though Dorothy is courageous having the guts to go into the crops looking for what is calling for help, knowing myself I would probably second think about looking in the crop field seeing what is wrong instead of instantly going in like Dorothy did in The Wizard of Oz. Realistically I think anyone would second think going in the crop field because first of all you would be in a very unfamiliar place that is so different than home. I would have to think whether or not it is safe for me. I also feel like meeting the Scarecrow scene in the Wizard of Oz shows that Dorothy is very naïve trusting very easily not thinking that any harm can come to her. Dorothy’s change in The Wizard of Oz is noticed not until way later in the movie, opposed to the Dorothy in The Wiz. I do not notice a change in her character until she throws the water on the Wicked Witch of the West. Even at that moment she did not mean to kill her, but her intentions were to let the witch know she has had enough of her.
A theme of Oz is that the things that the characters wish for—a brain for the Scarecrow, a heart for the Tin Man, and courage for the Lion—are all characteristics that they already have, and the story show that they possess the traits they believe they are missing from the very beginning. In The Wiz the Scarecrow says he has no brain but yet keeps reciting quotes from philosophers like Confucius and Cicero—he can read therefore has a brain. Then the Tin Man claims he has no heart, but then starts crying when he thinks that the Lion, and Dorothy could be dead. He started crying, therefore he felt something because he has a heart. The Lion says he has no courage, but then becomes the rescuer when everyone else gets locked out from a gate. He runs back to unlock the gate, then continues to save all of them from the troubles they faced after being unlocked from the gate. Lastly, Dorothy had the capability to go home from the very beginning with the shoes’ ability. Lastly I feel like The Wiz had way more themes than The Wizard of Oz because in the beginning of the movie there is a crow scene where they make the Scarecrow believe he cannot come down from his post, when in actuality he can. This is a theme to where if you believe you cannot do something, you won’t be able to until you believe you can. Everything you do you need to have self motivation and self confidence, or else you will be in the same place forever miserable.