Indirect Methods of Characterization - Essay Example

A Study in Characterization A Study in Characterization Characterization refers to the way in which a chooses to portray his fictional characters. This essay will study the methods used by two great playwrights, Euripides and George Bernard Shaw to portray the characters of Medea and Eliza Doolittle in their respective plays, Medea and Pygmalion. The forms used to represent these two characters will be compared and contrasted with regard to the genre, use of language and the themes in which context the characters were created. Medea and Eliza are fully fleshed, well-rounded characters. This is because; both writers have given them numerous personality traits that make them distinct as well as plausible. Euripides and Shaw bring out these traits by allowing the characters to express their feelings, giving them social status which goes a long way in defining them as individuals and exploring their sensitivity. In this regard both writers have used direct as well as indirect methods of characterization. Euripides uses the technique of exposition to give an insight into Medea’s character and to provide a history of her background thus far. The nurse delivers this introduction and at the very onset, we are able to divine her personality and a glimmer of the devastation she is capable of wreaking on those who unwisely cross her. According to the nurse, “Her mind thinks in extremes… She’ll not put up with being treated badly”, she is a creature of violent passions and has committed horrifying acts in the name of love, but now her ardent love has soured and “She’s a dangerous woman” (Euripides, 2006)1. Thus his Medea creates a powerful impression even before she comes on stage. Euripides uses the essential tool of drama – dialogue, to allow Medea to express her feelings and plans for revenge. Thus the audience manages to get first-hand information about her inner-most thoughts and emotional state. Further he allows her actions to speak for themselves. It is Medea’s ability to act on schemes devised by a mind twisted by the suffering inflicted on her person that makes her particularly dangerous. Euripides makes her character convincing by revealing suitable provocation that goads her onto such dastardly excesses like murdering her own children. Euripides uses indirect characterization as well in his portrayal of Medea. The other characters react to her personality, thereby offering fresh insight into her character. For example there is a scene where Creon exiles her out of fear for the safety of his family. He tells her, “… you’re a clever woman, very experienced in evil ways;” (Euripides, 2006)2. And as it turns out his mistrust of Medea is far from misplaced. The nurse is another character he uses to good effect in his description of Medea. The nurse blames Medea’s royal upbringing for the unhappiness and misery that is her lot. Having been raised to be a Queen, she is used to following the dictates of her will, even when it is fuelled by tempestuous passion and an all-encompassing rage. There is ambiguity in Medea’s decision to kill her children and her motive in doing so remains a grey area open for debate, Euripides lets the audience make their own deductions based on their interpretation of her complex character. Shaw in his portrayal of Eliza uses direct characterization as well. He uses well placed stage directions and derives twin benefits from their usage. These directions indicate the appearance of the character at various stages in the script as well as her actions and expressions in reaction to other characters. Thus we learn, “She is not at all an attractive person. She is perhaps eighteen, perhaps twenty, hardly older” and in yet another scene, “Eliza’s beauty becomes murderous” (Shaw, 1999)3 in reaction to Higgins, the protagonist’s inadvertent provocation. The stage directions are also extremely useful to the actor performing the character in understanding as well as developing it on-stage. He also uses dialogue to allow the character to express personal feelings as well as conflict. Shaw develops his character and allows it to evolve as the script progresses by means of interaction among the other characters. Their reactions to and opinions about each other as per the social class they belong to, reveals a lot about each one of them. Eliza and Higgins- her Galatea to his Pygmalion bounce off each other, highlighting new facets to their personalities. Eliza’s feelings for Higgins show some ambiguity and Shaw allows the audience to draw their own conclusions in this regard on the basis of their knowledge of her character and actions. Euripides and Shaw have created dynamic characters. They are not the passive playthings of fate or circumstances. It is their actions and initiative which paves the way for the remarkable journey they undertake. Medea refuses to accept her husband’s infidelity lying down. She raves and rants and kicks up so much dust, that the wary Creon feels it would be better to banish her from his kingdom, rather than face the consequences of her wrath. The loathed but once-loved Jason also tells her, “…you’re exiled for your stupid chatter” and “harsh temper.”(Euripides, 2006)4. A chance remark that Eliza takes to heart and decides to act upon is responsible for changing the course of her life. Her eventual transformation is set in motion when she presumptuously turns up at Higgins door and says, “I’m come to have lessons, I am. And to pay for em too: make no mistake” (Shaw, 1999)5. Medea and Eliza shape the action not the other way round. Medea and Pygmalion are inspired from Greek mythology, however the treatment of the subject matter varies because they belong to two entirely different genres, the former is a tragedy of the highest water, while the latter is a high comedy. Therefore the creators of Medea and Eliza have taken the requirements of the genre into account in the presentation of their characters. In keeping with the tradition of tragedy, Euripides has endowed Medea with dominant traits that can be turned towards good or distort itself to perform acts of unspeakable evil. He shows Medea’s metamorphosis from an abandoned and emotionally battered victim to an avenging fury in the throes of hateful bloodlust. Through his terrible character, Euripides represents with exquisite profundity the eternal battle between the forces of good and evil. It is as if he expects the audience to watch her actions from the realms of a higher plane. Shaw also wished his audience to become acquainted with the need for social and moral reform and he used Eliza’s character to depict the evils of a rigid class system. Thus he has given Eliza the qualities of intelligence, spirit, pride and a touching dignity in direct contrast to the superficiality of genteel ladies. In a manner of speaking, he uses Eliza’s character to poke fun at the foibles and artifice of high society. Language and its use is an important component of both plays in the presentation of character. Euripides employed the art of rhetoric in the development of his character, Medea. Her impassioned monologues reveal the depth of her intense, inner turmoil. Words alone are used to convey the entire gamut of her emotions, particularly her unsettling ability to concoct fiendish schemes, with cold calculation and deliberation, moments after a passionate outburst which would have seen her spewing venom and balefully calling down the wrath of heaven on those who have wronged her so grievously. Euripides was considered unconventional and criticized for the manner in which he used language in his plays. For example, the haughty and majestic Medea despite her royal upbringing speaks in the tongue of the common man. This departure from tradition may be accounted for by his desire to portray Medea with a degree of realism. She is a spellbinding creation of such terrible beauty as to make her other-worldly and far-removed from mere mortals. By making her speak the language of the masses, she is brought closer to them and she evokes pity and horror alternatively. Euripides also uses language to create a sombre and dark mood, which is a suitable backdrop for the cataclysmic events that will follow in the wake of her monstrous anger and desire for revenge. Phonetics being the essence of Pygmalion, language is an integral part of the play. Consequently Shaw pays painstaking attention to diction. Eliza’s Lisson-Grove dialect serves to define the kind of person she is. It is this accent of hers which is likely to ensure that she spends the rest of her life in the gutters according to Higgins. His mother puts it even more succinctly towards the end of her transformation into a refined lady, “She’s a triumph of your art and of her dressmaker’s; but if you suppose for a moment that she doesn’t give herself away in every sentence she utters, you must be perfectly cracked about her”(Shaw, 1999)6. Shaw uses language and liberally sprinkled epigrams to illuminate the script and provide the dry wit and humour that distinguishes it as a high comedy. Finally the themes that influenced the creation of the characters will be discussed. The themes constitute the scabbard out of which the characters were drawn. Passion, pride and rage are the main themes in Medea, and of course the revenge motif is a recurrent feature in the play. Medea embodies these themes as her character is a volatile mixture of these destructive emotions. Euripides uses the chorus, to bring out the themes and their purpose in relation to Medea. Euripides through Medea voices the injustices suffered by women. She laments, “Of all things with life and understanding, we women are the most unfortunate” (Euripides, 2006)7. In her opening speech to the women of Corinth, Medea describes the hardships and cruelty experienced by women. Bitter resentment coats her words and the other women identify with her and sympathize wholeheartedly. In the events that follow, Euripides uses Medea as an example to predict the consequences of such bitter hostility, which is the result of unabated suffering. Through Medea he points out that while women may not be a force to be reckoned with on the battlefield, they make formidable adversaries as they are unmatched in subtlety, cunning, ruthlessness and intelligence. These very traits in Medea unleash the forces of destruction and brutality. As Medea sums it up, “in other things a woman may be timid – in watching battles or seeing steel, but when she’s hurt in love, her marriage violated, there’s no heart more desperate for blood than hers” (Euripides, 2006)8. Class is the major theme in Pygmalion. It is birth, more often than individual merits or demerits that determines a person’s station in life. As a socialist Shaw found this state of affairs abysmal. Thus Eliza Doolittle was born out of his dissatisfaction and he uses satire and wit as a means of bringing out reform. The stormy relationship between the sexes is another theme. Eliza and Mrs. Higgins though they have precious little in common in terms of class, social status, and just about anything you can think off, bond over Higgins’ shoddy treatment of Eliza. Higgins and Eliza reflect the antagonistic nature of the relationship between the sexes. Eliza’s violent protests at Higgins’ suggestion that she make a suitable match, reflects Shaw’s view on marriage as a sort of glorified barter system. In conclusion it may be said that Medea and Eliza are magnificent creations. Medea pitiful in her lamentation over lost love and terrifying in her relentless quest for vengeance is a powerful, awe-inspiring character, a towering figure in the annals of literature. Likewise Eliza with her impetuosity, sauciness, and spunk coupled her little peculiarities and foibles is a lovable character, endearing and hilarious. Therefore it may be said that Euripides and Shaw have shown consummate skill in selecting methods to portray their characters as Medea and Eliza are a triumph of the art that is characterization. Notes 1 See Euripides (2006), lines 1- 58 for the nurse’s exposition. According to legend, she helped Jason get the Golden Fleece and murdered her own brother in order to escape. She was also responsible for the murder of Pelias. 2 See Euripides (2006), lines 331 -332. 3 See Shaw (1999), Act I and Act IV. 4 See Euripides (2006), lines 525 – 530. 5 See Shaw (1999), Act II, line 22. 6 See Shaw (1999), Act III, line 160. 7 See Euripides (2006), lines 263 – 264. 8 See Euripides (2006), lines 303 – 307. References Johnston, I. transltr. Euripides. (2006) Medea. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from http://www.malaspina.edu/~johnstoi/euripides/medea.htm Shaw, B. (1999) Pygmalion. Retrieved July 27, 2006, from http://www.bartleby.com/br/138.html Read More