Othello

Othello was written by William Shakespeare in 1604. The work very much resembles that of a Greek tragedy; it too, contains well-to-do characters that possess a “tragic flaw”, which dooms them to an unpleasant fate. While the tragic flaws we saw in Antigone were pride and stubbornness, the tragic flaws that arise in Othello are jealousy and envy. In class we learned the difference in the two. Jealousy is suspicion of what one’s partner does when they are not together. Envy, on the other hand, wants what someone else has. The two characters that display these tragic flaws are Othello and Iago.

Iago is the mastermind of the play. He is a manipulator. The audience knows this from the very beginning when Iago has a conversation with Rodrigo. Rodrigo states, “Thou toldst me thou didst hold him in thy hate” (Shakespeare 706). Iago explains how he wished to be the general’s lieutenant but how, instead, the Moor gave the position to Cassio (whom Iago felt was undeserving). “He, in good time, must his lieutenant be, and I…his Moorship’s ancient” (Shakespeare 707). This displays the envy Iago has of Cassio’s fortune. Therefore, he wants to destroy the man who got his position, and the man who gave it to him.

Othello has recently married Desdemona, who is much in love with him, but also much younger than him. Iago saw this as his opportunity to manipulate the Moor and drive him mad. He knew that the Moor thought himself undeserving: “Her eye must be fed; and what delight shall she have to look on the devil? When the blood is made dull with the act of sport, there should be, again to inflame it and to give satiety a fresh appetite, loveliness in favor, sympathy in years, manners, and beauties; all which the Moor is defective in” (Shakespeare 730). Iago preys on these hidden insecurities of Othello and plots to turn him into a jealous rage against the one thing he loves most.

We can see Othello’s transformation into jealousy throughout the text. First, Iago had to whisper words into Othello’s ear that would make him doubt, for example, “In Venice the do let God see the pranks they dare not show their husbands; their best conscience is not to leave’t undone, but keep’t unknown” (Shakespeare 749). He also states, “She did deceive her father, marrying you…” (Shakespeare 749). With these words, Iago starts to convince Othello that maybe Desdemona is not so worthy as he once thought. We find that Othello has truly turned to jealousy when he is hidden and watching Iago and Cassio converse. His suspicions drive him to put words into Cassio’s mouth and see things that are not really happening: “Now he tells how she plucked him into my chamber. O, I see that nose of yours, but not that dog I shall throw it to” (Shakespeare 766).

In the end, Othello’s jealousy drives him to believe in the “proof” Iago presents him with. If he had had a clear mind he might have not been so quick to accept the flakey evidence, but Iago’s artfulness deceived him. Othello’s jealousy resulted in him suffocating Desdemona to death, not believing her pleas of innocence, and Iago’s envy resulted in him killing his wife as well, and put him in Cassio’s hands to be dealt with. Just like in a Greek tragedy, noble characters fall due to their fatal flaws.

Antigone

We have all, most likely, had a time when we have disregarded some rule or regulation. This may or may not have resulted in a consequence. Thank goodness none of us live in a Greek tragedy, where it is custom that every wrong doer sees the hand of justice. The play “Antigone”, written by Sophocles in 441 B.C., fits the description of a Greek tragedy in that it contains characters of noble blood that also possess a “fatal flaw”, or “tragic flaw” that ultimately leads to their downfall. In this particular play, the tragic flaw/flaws are pride, and stubbornness.

Antigone was the niece of Creon, and sister to Eteocles and Polynices. She was determined to bury her brother, Polynices, although it had been forbidden by Creon who proclaimed Polynices a traitor. Although one might see her act of burying her brother so that he may be taken by the gods a generous deed, one may question if her motives were entirely selfless. “I’ll bury him myself. And even if I die in the act, that death will be a glory” (Sophocles 1278). One might wonder if Antigone simply wanted to do some glorious deed simply to satisfy her own pride. This is an appropriate question because, in the text, we notice that she was not as inconspicuous about her intentions as she could have been. The Sentry that brought her in explained the story to Creon, “…the hours dragged by until the sun stood dead above our heads…there we saw the girl...she burst into a long shattering wail…and she scoops up dry dust…soon as we saw we rushed her…” (Sophocles 1287-88). Not only was she out in broad daylight, but she was not quiet either.

Antigone, however, is not the only character in the play that displays these flaws; her uncle, Creon, does as well. We see a display of pride and stubbornness from Creon when he resolves that she must die because “…she overrode the edicts we made public. But once she’d done it – the insolence twice over – to glory in it, laughing, mocking us to our face with what she’d done” (Sophocles 1289). His pride causes him to move to make an example out of her, so that no one would think they could challenge his authority and get away with it, even though his orders to not bury Polynices defiled the gods. His pride told him that his will was above the gods, and his stubbornness led to tragedy.

Antigone was walled up, and left to die in this tomb. Her fiancé, Creon’s son found her dead, and took his own life. When Creon found this out he cried, “Ohhh, so senseless, so insane…my crimes, my stubborn, deadly – look at us, the killer, the killed, father and son, the same blood – the misery!” (Sophocles 1311-12). Not only did his son die, but upon hearing of her son’s death, Creon’s wife took her own life as well. Creon then admitted, “And the guilt is all mine…I killed you, I, god help me, I admit it all!” (Sophocles 1313).

The pride and stubbornness (the tragic flaws) of these characters led to their ultimate demise. The chorus echoes this in the closing lines of the play: “The mighty words of the proud are paid in full with mighty blows of fate, and at long last those blows will teach us wisdom” (Sophocles 1314).

A Doll House

Henrick Ibsen’s “A Doll House” includes a family whose feelings are left up to interpretation of the reader. One of the questions readers often ask themselves about the play is if Torvald is in love with Nora, and if Nora is in love with Torvald.

To gain the answers to these questions, one must first identify what their ideas of love in a marriage are. My own ideals include respect, thoughtfulness, and appreciation.

Based on my ideas about love and marriage, I have come to the conclusion that Nora was in love with Torvald in the 1^st Act, but not in the 3^rd, and he was never in love with her. What led me to these opinions was an examination of the text and the actions of the characters.

 In act 1, Torvald is observed to treat Nora like a child. “Surely my sweet tooth (Nora) hasn’t been running riot in town today, has she (Ibsen, 861)?” “My sweet tooth really didn’t make a little detour through the confectioners (Ibsen, 861)?” The fact that Torvald monitors Nora’s intake of sweets presents us with the idea that he does not expect her to be able to make decisions for herself – that she needs him to guide her. This situation, to me, shows a lack of respect on Torvald’s part.

In a later conversation with Mrs. Linde, Nora also states “You’re just like the others. You all think I’m incapable of anything serious” (Ibsen, 865). Again, pointing out that there is a lack of respect. In this conversation, though, Nora also sheds light on her love for Torvald. She convinces Mrs. Linde that she is capable of handling serious matters when she confesses that she had borrowed money in order for her and her husband to move south to save his life. “Papa didn’t give us a pin. I was the one who raised the money” (Ibsen, 866). We find out that she borrowed the money from Krogstad with a forged signature from her father, who had died two days prior to her signing the paper. The fact that Nora was willing to enter into such a dangerous venture on behalf of her husband so that he might live is proof of her love for him.

While Nora may have loved her husband, it is clear in the 3^rd act that he does not truly love her. When Torvald thought Krogstad was going to expose the situation he was infuriated with Nora. “Now you’ve wrecked all my happiness – ruined my whole future… can you see now what you’ve done to me?!” (Ibsen, 904). He doesn’t acknowledge, or appreciate Nora’s attempt to save his life, he only reprimands her. He even threatens that she will never see her children again that they may not be inflicted with her lying nature. It is not until he reads the end of the letter and realizes that Krogstad was taking no such action that he changes his mind and compliments Nora for loving him so.

The series of events that occur in the play reveal the differences in feelings that Nora and Torvald have for one another. While Nora cares for, admires, and respects Torvald, Torvald seems to view Nora as incompetent, and a form of entertainment. When the time came for Nora to prove her love, she did. But, when the time came for Torvald to prove his devotion to Nora, he failed. This absence of true love, or a “real marriage” resulted in Nora’s departure.