Common Theme in Dollhouse, My Mistress Eyes and Beauty - Literature review Example

Common Theme in Dollhouse, My Mistress Eyes and Beauty Generally, human character and behavior are unpredictable because the same undergoes change according to the difference in situations. To be specific, one cannot expect an individual to behave same in different situations because emotionality can alter human character and behavior. When this idea is superimposed into the context of the differences between appearance and reality, one can see that appearance may not reveal real behavior or reality. Besides, renowned writers are aware of the differences between appearance and reality, and they make use of the same to unleash their literary craftsmanship. Thesis statement: The compare/contrast study on the theme appearance and reality in the works (A Dolls House, My Mistress’ Eyes, and Beauty (by Ibsen, Shakespeare, and Jane Martin, respectively), proves that appearance is unreliable because the main characters in the play A Doll’s House undergoes growth and change throughout the play (their appearance is different from their real character), the speaker’s words in the sonnet My Mistress Eyes proves that his mistress’s appearance is entirely different from her real character, and the female characters in the play Beauty transform from egotism to empathy. This section is broadly divided as: The growth and change of the main characters A Doll’s House, The differences between the mistress’s appearance and real character in My Mistress Eyes, and The transformation of the female characters in the play Beauty. The growth and change of the main characters in the play A Doll’s House First of all, the main characters in the play named as A Doll’s House appear to be different from their real character. For instance, the female protagonist named as Nora Helmer is portrayed in the opening of the play as an ideal wife, trying to cover up the problems within her private domain. She does not try to create trouble within her husband’s public domain because she considers that she can solve the problems. But in the end, it reveals that her contribution to her family is not valued by her husband and he considers her as a liar and worthless individual because she did not try to communicate with him. Still, Nora does not try to yield her identity in front of her husband. Instead, she takes a firm decision, the decision to desert her husband and to leave her family. In the play by Ibsen, the female character named as Nora replied back to her husband that, “I have other duties just as sacred” (108). To be specific, this character is portrayed in the beginning as a weak individual. But the growth of her feminine energy results in the change in her attitude and behavior. So, it is evident that her appearance in the opening is different from her real character. Similarly, her husband (say, Torvald) is portrayed in the play as an efficient bank employee, trying to support his family. But in the end, he proves to be a selfish individual, who used to consider his family as a medium to make himself happy. He does not provide importance to his wife as an individual. Instead, he considers his wife as slave destined to look after his family. When he realizes that his wife forged her father’s signature to save her husband, he was not ready to pardon her. Instead, he tries to blame her and further adds that he is going to desert her. This proves that Torvald was portrayed as a worthy individual, but his real character is revealed in the end. On the other side, the other main characters like Dr. Rank and Christine Linde are portrayed as dependents. In the opening, Dr. Rank is portrayed as a physically weak individual. But in the end, this character plays a major role in solving the problems faced by Nora’s family. To be specific, Dr. Rank’s appearance in the opening of the play fills the viewer’s minds with negative feeling on his character. But his real character proves that he is ever ready to support Nora’s family. Similarly, Christine Linde is portrayed as a worthless woman without any job. But she considers Nora’s family as her own family and her real character is entirely different form her primary appearance in the play. Similarly, Nils Krogstad’s character tries to create sympathy in Nora’s mind because he projects himself as the victim of forgery. Gradually, his crookedness is revealed because he tries to manipulate Nora. Besides, his broken relationship with Linde and his status as a single parent are enough to create sympathy in the minds of the viewers. But is real motive is to cover up his treachery and to gain promotion. Here, the viewers become stunned because he is the real villain in the play. In short, it is evident that the appearance of the main characters in the play is entirely different from their real character. The differences between the mistress’s appearance and real character in My Mistress Eyes One can see that the main sonnets by Shakespeare deal with different themes within human life, like love, moral aspects of life etc. Within this scenario, the Sonnet 130, generally known as My Mistress Eyes, deal with the portrayal of his mistress, without any exaggeration. In the sonnet by Shakespeare, the speaker opined that, “My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;” (935). To be specific, the sonneteer is aware of the fact that comparison of his mistress with natural things proves that natural beauty is beyond human description. Besides, the sonneteer’s attempt to approach the theme with realistic outlook helps the individual reader to perceive the speaker’s approach towards his mistress. For instance, the speaker knows that flattery cannot help him to portray the real beauty of his mistress. Instead, the sonneteer makes use of the speaker as a tool to mock at the traditional mode of comparison within the genre of sonnet. In addition, the speaker’s attempt to compare his mistress’s beauty with natural objects proves that natural beauty is beyond human beauty. When a person looks through the eyes of a lover, that person may feel that the lover is most beautiful. On the other side, reality is different from appearance. Comparing the mistress in the Sonnet 130 with the main characters in the A Doll’s House, one can easily identify that both the works support the fact that appearance and reality are different. For instance, the main characters in the play are symbolic of the rapid change in human character. On the other side, the sonneteer does not try to follow the conventional mode of composing sonnets. Instead, the sonneteer tries to mock at conventionality because he knows exaggeration cannot change his mistress’s physical appearance. In addition, the sonneteer makes use of the speaker as his mouthpiece to communicate with the readers. This is evident in the sonneteer’s negative approach towards creating false impression on beauty. From a different angle of view, the sonneteer’s change in view point is unpredictable because the sonnets composed during that time usually dealt with the idolization of love and beauty by comparing the same with nature. On the other side, the main characters in play undergo rapid transformation because the playwright aims to use them for social criticism. To be specific, the playwright is totally against idolizing femininity by entrapping female folk within their private domains. Still, both the works provide ample importance to the exposition of the fact that real character is different from appearance. For instance, the speaker depends upon natural objects to prove that nature is beyond his mistress’s beauty. The speaker declares that natural objects/things like sun, coral, snow, flowers etc are beyond physical beauty. To be specific, natural beauty is immortal and physical beauty is a temporary status. Besides, both the playwright and the sonneteer tries to go beyond the limits of conventionality because they know that conventional mode of storytelling within literature is based upon exaggeration, and totally ignores reality in human life. This realization is the essence of novelty behind the attempt to expose the basic differences between appearance and real character among the main characters in both the works. The transformation of the female characters in the play Beauty The playwright makes use of the female characters in the play Beauty to prove that human character is unpredictable because the transformation of the main female characters from egotism to empathy proves the same. In the play, both the main female characters (say, Carla as well as Bethany) are not ready to accept reality because they feel dissatisfaction within their private and public domains. For instance, the character named as Carla is portrayed as a ‘beauty queen’, who is aware of her beauty. Still, she knows that her beauty is less valued because she lacks intelligence. On the other side, the character named as Bethany is with comparatively less beauty and physical attractiveness. Still, she overcomes this problem by making use of her intelligence as a tool to have upward mobility within her public domain. But both the characters feel that they need to have the qualities that they do not possess. This results in jealousy and related problems among these characters. One can see that satisfaction is related to human attitude towards life. Jeffrey Ullom stated that, “Regardless of the debate over authorship, Jory continued to support Martin’s maturation as a playwright, as she turned away from monologues and quirky humor and began to explore social issues with resounding success” (115). If the main characters in the play were ready to feel satisfied with their qualities and abilities, the problem between them may not happen. Comparing the play Beauty with the other play and the sonnet, one can see that the main female characters are not aware of their qualities and abilities. Besides, reality haunts them and they try to have easy escapade from the same by contaminating their own minds. When they lose their qualities and abilities with the help of a supernatural element, they realize that discontentment cannot help them to be successful. This realization helps them to accept reality because imitation cannot help an individual to be successful. Similarly, the main female character in the other play named as A Dolls House know that change is essential because the same can help her to enjoy freedom within her private domain. Besides, the speaker in the sonnet named as My Mistress’ Eyes realizes that physical beauty is a temporary status in human life and it is foolish to compare the same with natural objects. On the other side, the female characters’ behavior in the play transform from egotism to empathy because change in view on life forces these characters to undergo gradual transformation. From a different angle of view, the themes of the works are related to growth and change, appearance and real character, and transformation from egotism to empathy. One may consider that these themes are entirely different. But in real sense, the underlying theme of the differences between physical appearance and revelation of real character is inherent in all these literary works. For instance, the growth and change of the female characters in the play named as A Dolls House proves that the viewers are forced to change their initial impression on these characters because the playwright allows his female characters to undergo growth and change. To be specific, these characters prove that growth and change are essential in human life. Similarly, the speaker in the sonnet named as My Mistress’ Eyes feels that physical beauty or the appearance of his mistress cannot reveal her and real character. For instance, physical beauty does not symbolize the mistress’ real character. On the other side, the playwright makes use of the main characters in the other play (say, Beauty) to prove that growth and change can transform human character from transformation from egotism to empathy. So, one can see the works (plays and sonnet) are symbolic of the basic differences between appearance and reality. Summing, one can see that the playwrights (Ibsen and Jane Martin) and the sonneteer (Shakespeare) depends upon their works to prove that one must not judge other based upon appearance because time can reveal the real character. The main characters in the play prove that human approach towards different incidents can influence human character. Some people may be ready to suffer anything, but some other cannot do so and they will react. Similarly, the speaker in the sonnet knows that judgment based upon physical attractiveness cannot reveal an individual’s real character. On the other side, the main female characters in the play prove that imitation cannot help an individual to gain qualities and abilities. Besides, it is better to accept reality and move forward without making any grievance on one’s inability because grievance cannot change reality. In short, it is evident that the main themes of the works are interconnected because the writers are trying to prove that assessment based upon appearance cannot reveal real character because real character is entirely different from physical appearance in general. Works Cited Ibsen, Henrik. A Dolls House. Rockville: Arc Manor LLC, 2009. Print. Shakespeare, William. The plays and poems of William Shakspeare. London: E. Fleischer, 1833. Print. Ullom, Jeffrey. The Humana Festival: The History of New Plays at Actors Theatre of Louisville. U.S.: SIU Press, 2008. Print. Read More