Abuse of Power in the Books The Tempest, Waiting for Godot and Billy Budd, Sailor - Essay Example

Abuse of Power Abuse of power in the books “The Tempest”, “Waiting for Godot” and “Billy Budd, Sailor” Introduction Abuse of power is a common phenomenon in the society. It manifests itself when a person who has the responsibility over others decides to use the power they possess to manipulate the juniors. Abuse of power can take place from very small units of authority such as home to the national level. There are various reasons that trigger the power abusers to do it. The desire to be noticed is among the reasons. The novels “The Tempest”, “Waiting for Godot” and “Billy Budd, Sailor” addresses the aspect of the abuse of power in different perspectives. The document below analyzes how the abuse of power has been presented in these books. Discussion “The Tempest” In the book, the “The Tempest” by Shak espeare, control and power are the dominant themes. Most of the novel’s characters are locked in the struggle for their freedom’s power struggle as well as island’s control. These aspects led to a number of characters both evil and good to abuse power they had at some point. The theme of power presents itself all through the pay in various situations via the relationships of various characters. Nearly every play’s scene portrays either implicitly or explicitly a relationship between a figure with power and a figure that is that power’s subject.1 The abuse of power in represented in the play’s first scene. It exists when the boatswain is relating with the passengers who were on board. It has been clearly indicated that the passengers were noble men. The boatswain, however, irrespective of the fact that he is of lower social class than the passengers is giving harsh directives commanding the passengers to be silent and not to trouble them. It was evident that when danger features the social power is of not much relevance. However, the boatswain missed a point by addressing the passengers with such a rude and authoritative voice. They would have understood him if he had explained to them politely. This indicates that he failed to use the power that was bestowed on him correctly. In other words, he abused his power as a boatswain.2 Prospero is another character in the play whose relationships with all the other play’s characters states something about power. His relationship with Caliban presents a great level of abuse of power. His relationship with Caliban is introduced as Prospero is calling Caliban while referring him as poisonous saves who has been got by the devil. He adds by referring him to have been got by the devil upon his wicked dam. Prospero is just showing Caliban that he has power over him. He also despised him by referring him as a slave, and he was bound to fetching fuel as his duty. He also indicated that unequal. He called him a “hag seed” and also a tortoise.2 The relationship between Prospero and Caliban presents a very high degree of abuse of power. It is true he could be the master while Caliban is his slave. The fact that he had power over Caliban, however, did not give him power to abuse him terming him as a devil as well as he was born a devil. He also indicated that his nature/nurture could never stick. This indicates that Prospero used the power that he had to abuse the rights of Caliban. The exact definition of this act is an abuse of power. The people in power are supposed to lead, guide and influence their juniors. Whenever they act in a manner that is violating the rights of their juniors, they are automatically abusing the power they have. This hence implies that Prospero abused power. The relationship between Prospero and Ariel is similar to that of him and Caliban. Ariel held power with all the spirit when it came to serving Prospero as he was carrying out commands. Ariel is depicted in the play possessing a sycophantic character. He used to refer to Prospero as the great master, all hail and always indicated that he had featured before him to answer him counting it as a great pleasure. This indicates that Prospero had impacted fear on Ariel such that he used to view him as a God. From his response to Prospero’s calling it is evident that Ariel was fearful of Prospero rather than being respectful. This is another indicator of abuse of power.3 The aspect of injustice is another level power abuse. The aspect of justice has been highlighted in the play. This is manifested in Act I-ii. Ariel revealed his desire for liberty. Ariel claimed that Prospero had promised to bait him for only a year. He noted that he was supposed to be freed. Prospero responded to his plea by reminding him the pain that he was passing through prior to his baiting. The servitude of Ariel was may be justified by threats of Prospero to Ariel. He threatened him by telling him that if he would continue to murmur he would rend an oak and a peg knee in the knotty entrails. Ariel continued to serve Prospero out of fear only, but his liberty was denied. Prospero granted Ariel freedom from one control only to be bound to another. Although he was later given justice, it was after a great struggle. This act is unjustifiable. There was no valid reason for Prospero to free Ariel from one control to come and bind him. This is just injustice, and since the main reason for doing this was the power he had, he was just abusing the power he had. “Waiting for Godot” “Waiting for Godot” is a play by Samuel Beckett. It has expressed the aspect of the abuse of power in a number of ways. In the plays plot, the relationship between Pozzo and Lucky reveals the power abuse aspect perfectly. The play leaves Lucky having a leash around his neck which tends to be held by Pozzo. The relationship between these two characters talks more about domination and violation of the rights of Lucky. The play reveals Lucky being driven by Pozzo by the means of a rope. He is also revealed by whipped by Pozzo at some point in the play’s plot. In other words, Lucky is being revealed as a horse that is pulling a carriage of Pozzo. However, this horse is operating in a relationship that is undesirable, domineering and cruel. Lucky, however, is revealed having a strange sycophant.4 Every reader of this play has the right of asking him or herself the main reason as to why Pozzo would not make Lucky comfortable. It is evident that he had right to be kept comfortable while else Pozzo had power to keep Lucky comfortable. He regarded Lucky he was short of slaves. This miserable condition does not seem to trigger Lucky to obtain the desire of changing. It is unclear whether he was happy about it or he was not miserable enough. The relationship between these two characters continues from that phase to another. Pozzo is revealed as blind the day that followed. The rope was still present, but it had been made significantly shorter. These characters in this new condition bring the unclear condition of who was the leader of the other. Pozzo is still holding the rope hence leading lucky with the rope at his neck as usual although it had been now made shorter. For the first time, however, Pozzo is depending on Lucky for directions. Lucky is revealed in the plot depending on Pozzo as usual. However, he relies on Pozzo in emotional aspect rather that the physical aspect. The plot reveals Lucky falling dropping everything including Pozzo. It was not possible for Pozzo to arise by himself until he called for help. Estragon, however, came to their rescue. Pozzo, however, decided to resume his dominance over Lucky in familiar way.5 Lucky then woke up. His normal condition had been restored. He was not expected to feel equal to his master irrespective of his condition. The trend resumed with Pozzo yelling to Lucky commanding him to get up. However, he referred him like a pig. The relationship between Pozzo and Lucky, as it has been described above, shows a very high degree of power abuse. Lucky was being treated like an animal but not a human being. He was moving being tied by his neck like a sheep. The fact that Pozzo was Lucky’s master, his actions over him could not be justified. Treating a human being as an animal is a high degree of violation of human rights.5 Lucky, however, shows a great level of sycophancy and submissiveness. He continued following his master even after he became blind. This indicates that he was just fearing him but not respecting. Fear of the master indicates that the master is using the power he has to threaten them or imparting fear to his or her juniors. This can be defined as one way of abuse of power. He is also using abusive language to his slave. He not only calls him pig but treats him as a real pig through tying him by his neck. The fact that he is the master does not give him any right to abuse Lucky or treat him like an animal. This implies that, Pizzo was using the power he had contrary to the way he was supposed to use. In other words, he is misusing or abusing the power that he had. Vladimir and Estragon are other characters that have featured in the play. Their relationship resembles that of Pozzo and Lucky. Domination and submission are eminent characters that feature in their relationship. Among these two characters, Vladimir is perceived as the stronger of the two. The film depicts him suggesting that they ought to play it the way Pozzo and Lucky do. Although their domination and submission aspect is not as consistent as Lucky’s and Pozzo’s, it is available. The discussion of Pozzo and Lucky above has revealed how the relationship between those two characters brought the aspect of the abuse of power. This implies that Ladimir’s and Estragon’s relationship brought out the issue of power abuse.6 The slave usually comes to the master to assist him. There should, therefore, a sort of respect both from the master and from the slave. However, if the respect turns around to become fear, the master is not treating the slave the way he is ought to. Dominance comes with superiority while submissiveness is a product of inferiority. The superiority aspect comes as a result of the master using excessive power over the servant or rubbishing him. Since Estragon is revealed submissive to Vladimir while Vladimir dominates him, power is abused in their relationship.6 “Billy Budd, Sailor” “Billy Budd, Sailor” is an artwork by Herman Melville. It entails both the political vision and the moral battles. The work concentrates more of Billy Bud who ended up being killed via public hanging. The story’s central point of interest was the capital punishment and its history. The film brings about a group of men that were picked for their strength and youth to carry out difficult and dangerous job. This is one aspect of power abuse that is depicted in the film. If the work is difficult and dangerous, it means that it was not fit to be carried out by the human beings. The condition of these men, however, could have driven the youths to the job. However, the person who was in power was typically abusing the power he had since he was endangering the lives of these individuals not caring about the nature of work.7 It is the responsibility of the person in power to make sure that his or her juniors are working in an environment that is safe for them. However, if this person decides to subject people to a certain task knowing very well it is dangerous and difficult; he is typically misusing these individuals. Misusing of another person is typically abuse of power. Billy was a very efficient in his duties making no offense to any person. His efficiency created impressment while another member witnessed a gangplank punishment. On this day, one after-guards man youth was whipped severely as a result of absenteeism from his post. No one has power to beat another human being no matter the mistake committed. There are other ways which could have been used to punish this youth rather than whipping. This is more or less abuse of power because the person in power feels he has power over this person to do whatever he wishes.7 Billy is depicted horrified by this action and resolved never to involve himself in trouble. However, this was not possible because his sea bag as improperly stowed. In other words, Billy’s hammock arranged this sea bag wrongly. These matters were under the control Claggart, who controlled the gun deck corporals. Although, the reason behind the wrong arrangement is unclear, this is an abuse of power. The hammock is responsible for arranging the sea bag the way it is supposed to. Failure to perform his mandate the way they are supposed to is abusing the responsibility and power given to him.8 The Bellipotent’s captain was known as Captain Edward Fairfax Vere, who was also referred to as Starry Vere. Vere ended up picking up John Claggart as the new voyage’s master-at-arms. No matter how Billy Bud tried to keep himself away from trouble by working efficiently, he found it impossible. He was forced to go and enquire from a wise Old Danish man, Dansker, the reason he could not manage to put his hammock properly. It came to his consent that it was because of Claggart since he did not like him. Billy could not, however, comprehend the reason Claggart did not like him.8 After days passed, Billy is revealed below the deck while the ship lurches. This caused him to spill soup when Claggart was walking by. Claggart just cracked the joke about it making all men laugh Billy inclusive. He, however, changed drastically and became slightly mad with Billy. The possible reason Claggart hated Billy was jealousy. The main reason for jealousy is his likability and his attractive appearance. Claggart had a great animosity against Billy. He ended considering soup spillage as a sign of disrespect. It is sad to see the assumption Claggart is making. He never considered the reason that led to soup spillage, but he considered oil spillage.8 This is a perfect example, of abuse of power. He decided to overlook the challenge that faced Billy and considered to victimize him with disrespectfulness. Claggart resolved to employ a squeak. He was to report every doing of Billy. Squeak was clever and understood that Claggart disliked Billy. He, therefore, exaggerated everything Billy added. As time passed, Claggart sent an afterguard to go and ask Billy to assist in mutiny. He responded furiously to it dismissing it. However, when Claggart was asked by Vere, who was behind the mutiny, he named Billy. Out of anger, Billy ended up knocking Claggart on his head and killed him. Billy was, liable to be hanged as a result of killing Claggart. However, the main question is why Claggart ended up being killed. From this one can understand how he used his power as their senior.9 The relationship between Claggart and Billy reveals a high level of power abuse. Claggart was supposed to be offering guidance and helping him so that he can work efficiently. However, he is busy making Billy’s work unbearable. He was just concerned with how Billy will not be able to perform so that he can victimize him. He also went a step further and allocated a person to trail and report on Billy’s activities. His tricks succeed eventually, and he manages to convince the captain that Billy was planning the mutiny. Although both died under different circumstances, we can clearly see a high degree of power abuse. Claggart was using his power to convict Billy a junior person rather than discharge the mandates he is supposed to cater for. This is mere power abuse. Conclusion Abuse of power is a vice by itself. It has the potential of causing the death of some people. Billy and Claggart died as a result of abuse of power. This shows that abuse of power should be dealt with comprehensively in the society. The discussion has highlighted a number of aspects that can trigger power abuse. However, abuse of power should not be condoned at all in the society. It has the potential of imparting adverse effects on the members of the society. There should laws and orders in each social set up for dealing with abuse of power. Bibliography Beckett, Samuel. 1982. Waiting for Godot: tragicomedy in 2 acts. New York: Grove Press. Melville, Herman. 2013. Billy budd. New York: Tor. Shakespeare, William, and Chauncey Brewster Tinker. 1918. The tempest. New Haven: Yale University Press. Read More