Short Questions

(i) How did Oedipus save Thebes before becoming its king?
Ans. A Sphinx had been terrorizing Thebes for and undisclosed amount of time. It placed a great plague over Thebes and refused to remove it until
someone correctly answered its riddle. Many heroes attempted to answer the riddle, but each one was eaten alive after answering incorrectly. When
Oedipus answered the Sphinx, it killed itself.
(ii) What was the riddle posed by Sphinx to Oedipus?
Ans. The riddle posed by Sphinx to Oedipus was, "What goes on four feet in the morning, two feet at noon, and three feet in the evening?" When
Oedipus gave the correct answer, "man", the Sphinx threw itself off a cliff and died.
(iii) Why do the Thebans come to Oedipus?
Ans. A procession of priests, who are in turn surrounded by the impoverished and sorrowful citizens of Thebes comes to Oedipus. Thebes has been struck
by a plague, the citizens are dying, and no one knows how to put an end to it. Oedipus asks a priest why the citizens have gathered around the palace.
The priest responds that the city is dying and asks the king to save Thebes.
(iv) What do Thebans think of Oedipus as their king?
Ans. Thebans think that Oedipus is an intelligent and decent king who cares deeply for his people. When Thebes has been struck by a plague, they gather
around his palace so that Oedipus may save them from the calamity.
(v) Who is Creon?
Ans. Creon is the brother of queen Jocasta, the wife of King Laius as well as Oedipus. He goes to the oracle at Delphi to seek Apollo's advice in saving
Thebes from plague. He is accused by Oedipus of conspiring with Tiresias to take the crown from Oedipus. He becomes king in the end when Jocasta kills
herself and Oedipus blinds himself.
(vi) Why did Creon go to the Oracle?
Ans. He went to the Oracle at Delphi to seek Apollo's advice in saving Thebes from plague. He wanted to know the cause and remedy of the plague from
Apollo.
(vii) What message did Creon bring from Delphi Oracle?
Ans. Creon brought the message from Delphi Oracle that the gods had caused the plague in Thebes in response to the murder of Laius, the previous king
of Thebes. The gods had demanded that the murdered (the pollution of this land) should be killed or exiled. The plague would be lifted after the
completion of the task.
(viii) Who was Laius?
Ans. Laius was the king of Thebes before Oedipus. He was married to his distant cousin, Jocasta. Apollo's oracle played a leading role in his reign. When
Apollo warned that his son would kill him, Laius was determined that this was not to be. When his son, Oedipus, was born, Laius tied his feet together
and left him to die on a mountain. Many years later while on vacation, Laius was killed by Oedipus, who had survived.
(ix) Define Chorus.
Ans. Chorus is a group of singers who stand alongside or off stage from the principal performers in a dramatic or musical performance. In ancient Greece,
the chorus was originally a group of male singers and dancers who participated in religious festivals and dramatic performances by singing and
commenting on the deeds of the characters and interpreting the significance of the events within the play. The leader of the chorus was called Charogos.
(x) To which three gods does the Chorus pray for help?
Ans. The Chorus prays to the gods Appollo, Athena, and Artemis for help.
(xi) What is Creon's defense against the accusations against him?
Ans. Creon argues that it does not make sense that he would try to overthrow Oedipus. He already shares a large amount of the authority as part of the
de facto triumvirate made of Oedipus, Jocasta and himself. He thinks it would be silly to pursue through violence and hassle a crown when he already has
the power. As he lacks the ambition for that, he thinks the claims are unfounded.
(xii) Who is Choragos?
Ans. Choragos is the "leader" of the Chorus. He does most of the talking in the Chorus. The rest of the Chorus chants or repeats what he says, but he is
clearly the leader. He is the voice of reason. He introduces Tiresias and urges Oedipus to listen to him. He also urges other characters to avoid extremes,
to practice moderation, and see and hear the truth.
(xiii) Why did Oedipus and Laius confront?
Ans. There was a Delphic Oracle about Oedipus that he would grow up to kill his father and marry his mother. Oedipus and his father Laius confront to
initiate the fulfillment of the prophecy.
(xiv) Why did Oedipus kill Laius where the three roads meet?
Ans. Oedipus's killing of Laius was predestined. The three roads represents past, present and future. Oedipus was pushed along by the irreversible flow of
time. So he kills his father, Laius, at a place where three roads meet in the name of self-defense.
(xv) What was the prophecy about Oedipus?
Ans. The prophecy of Delphic Oracle about Oedipus was that he would grow up to kill his father and marry his mother.

Important Questions of Christopher Marlow’s Doctor Faustus

28. Renaissance Elements in Dr. Faustus
25. Dr. Faustus as an over-reacher/ Faustus as Icarus
26. The real sin of Doctor Faustus
27. Dr. Faustus as a tragic Hero
6. Role of Hubris in "Oedipus Rex"
Is marlow’s Dr Fasturs Christian Tragedy , Give reasons
“ mighty-Line” complement the major themes in dr. Faustus?
Renaissance tragedy or medival moraility? Which description to be apt for morlowe’s play dr Faustus?
Discus the element of conflict in the dr Faustus
 Oedipus as a Tragic Hero
Oedipus, the main character of the drama, is a great king with ideal traits in his individual personality also; but he is tragic due to a tragic flaw in terms
of his moral disposition. That mixture makes us have the tragic experience of catharsis at the end of the drama when all the good of Oedipus is
'wasted' in his struggle against the bad.
In his struggle against the evil of his life, written by his fate, he invites the very doom he has always struggled to escape from.
The name of Oedipus, which means "swell foot" in Greek, comes from his swollen feet. Oedipus is that ill-fated tragic character whose parents had to
throw him away on the third day of his birth, because it was told that he would kill his father and marry his mother. He is that tragic man who was
unfortunately pitied by the shepherd who was supposed to throw him in the mountains of Kithairon. And instead of "dying that fortunate little
death", he was given to the shepherd of another king Polybos. He got that name and the terrible, tragic mark on his swollen feet because of the
skewer that his parents had used to pin his feet together before throwing him. And since he was destined to kill his father, he grew up in Corinth and
ran away from there, on hearing the rumors of his evil fate, precisely to come to Thebes, kill his father and marry his mother, without knowing that he
was running into the doom he thought he was escaping from.
King Oedipus can be taken as a typical hero of classical tragedies. Aristotle, the first philosopher to theorize the art of drama, obviously studied
Oedipus and based his observation about the qualities of a tragic hero upon the example of Oedipus. In Aristotle's conception, a tragic hero is a
distinguished person occupying a high position, living in prosperous circumstances and falling into misfortune because of an error in judgment.
Aristotle used the word "hamartia" to indicate the protagonist's tragic weakness. According to Aristotelian percepts about tragedy, a tragic hero
would be a man of noticeable qualities of behavior, intelligent and powerful, but by no means perfect. The fall of a totally saint like figure or a totally
depraved rogue would violate the moral expectation and the audience would think such fall design less, chaotic and unjustifiable. Oedipus is neither a
saint nor a rogue. Despite his qualities, he falls because of his mistakes. His position is indeed as frail as ours, and he fails like common men in one
sense, and such frailty of human position is what tragedy has to make us realize.
In terms of the Aristotelian theory of tragedy, Oedipus is a tragic hero because he is not perfect, but has tragic flaws. Aristotle points out that
Oedipus' tragic flaw is excessive pride (hubris) and self-righteousness. He also points out certain characteristics that determine as tragic hero. Using
Oedipus as an ideal model, Aristotle says that a tragic hero must be an important or influential man who commits an error in judgment, and who
must then suffer the consequences of his actions. The tragic hero must learn a lesson from his errors in judgment, his tragic flaw, and become an
example to the audience of what happens when great men fall from their high social or political position.
Oedipus is a great and good king. The opening scene shows Oedipus in his magnificence, as a king who is so concerned about the welfare of his
people. He addresses them as "my children" as behooved of the good kings of those times. He is a great man with respectable moral value and
personality. As a man, he is dedicated to fighting and avoiding evil. His quest for truth is in fact the cause of downfall, and that is one of the most
tragic things. As a king, he is an epitome itself. He loves his people. He gives his best to everything he does as a person and as a king. He is so worried
by the problem of plague that he hasn't been sleeping: indeed, he says that he is suffering for the whole city alone. He has been walking restlessly
instead of properly sleeping. He says that he will not talk to people through messengers and will not send messengers to them; he comes to them
himself. He is a king of excellence, command and esteem. The priest glorifies the king as a man "Surest in mortal ways and wisest in the ways of god".
He is a man who has become the king as much through the intelligence as through his power. It is he who solved the Sphinx's riddle and saved all
citizens from the monster. He has always become the ultimate and almost the only rescue and hope at the time of misfortune.
Oedipus is also a morally good personality, to a great extent. It is so good of him to try to avoid the unbearable fate that he hears of we see that
Oedipus is not only too confident in his own analysis and understanding of reality, he is also always afraid of doing wrong, He is adamant in his quest
for the truth and the welfare of the people. He surrenders to the power of fate at the end. He is of respectful towards the oracles, in the sense that he
has been afraid of what they have told him, and he does respect Teiresias before he is insulted by the apparently unjust and false charges against him.
But as a tragic character, Oedipus has his typical tragic flaw or "hamartia". Obviously pride is his hamartia. He is too proud and arrogant, and
presumes too much about his own understanding and his powers to control his life. But he can't control reality, chances, fate and time. He has a bad
temper and wrong judgment: the error of a tragic character is basically the "error of judgment" according to Aristotle. Oedipus wrongly judges his
situation. It may be debatable as to whether the murder of a life-threatening stranger and the marriage of a consort are crimes. But, due to his
presumption about his abilities, he has disobeyed the gods and his destiny. In his confidence upon what he knows and can do, he escapes from the
professed evil fate, he kills a man old enough to be his father, and he marries a woman old enough to be his mother, without even doubting his wits.
His defiance of his predestined fate would be, in the time of Sophocles, a great crime. At least, we can clearly understand that Sophocles seems to be
rather conservatively suggesting that the modem men of his time were wrong in trying to put too much emphasis on human potentials and powers of
Understanding, action and shaping of their own lives. Whatever our twenty-first evaluation of the actions of Oedipus, the evaluation of his own
creator Sophocles (and of the tellers of the myth in ancient times) is that it is morally wrong to fight against what fate has predetermined for us.
It seems that Oedipus could have avoided his ill-destiny if he had taken certain precautions. If he could promise of never laying a hand on a man and
marrying an aged woman, he would have done better. From a human and the more prudent point of view, it can be concluded that Oedipus falls
because he remains blind at many circumstances. In any case, he is a tragic character because he is humanly frail, morally intermediate, and good, but
not unflawed by a tragic weakness, and therefore identifiable to us and our own inescapable human condition even today. Sophocles tragic character
Oedipus is a unique tragic character that is entangled in the moral paradox of human life and reality. His life embodies the paradox of the human
situation in which such things as tragedies are not only inevitable but also inescapable.
Oedipus as a tragic character is heroic because of his struggle, pitiable because of his weakness before the forces of his destiny, and his tragedy
arouses fear in us, because he is in the same predicament (difficult situation) like us, though he was a great man otherwise. The irony of his fate is
that fate has done what it wanted to before he started actually believing in it. The tragedy of Oedipus is that of the realization of his failure. And the
tragedy of Oedipus is a tragedy of the human situation. His story tells us that man must do his best — but even then he cannot overcome the
inevitable!
from the group of dancers and singers who used to partake in the worship of various gods. According to Aristotle the Chorus

should be like one of the characters. Gradually the role of the Chorus became less and less important in classical tragedy, until in

Roman tragedy the speeches of the Chorus were supposed to be made in between the acts.

Chorus discharges some broad functions in all classical tragedies. The structure of a Greek tragedy is determined by the Chorus.

After the prologue, it is with the entry of the Chorus that a Greek tragedy begins. Various episodes are also marked off by choric

odes. The conclusion of a Greek tragedy occurs with the exode or the exit song of the Chorus. It is the function of the Chorus to

comment on actions and events. It also sometimes questions the characters. Its standard role is that of the moderator. At times it

represents the view-point of the common spectator and in some cases it represents the view-point of the dramatist himself.

The functions of the Chorus are very well performed in Oedipus Rex. In the very first ode the Chorus depicts the horror of the

plague and expresses an apprehension about the message from the oracle of Delphi. Other odes comment on the action that has

taken place after the last ode and build an atmosphere appropriate to that stage of the play. It plays the role of a peace-maker

between the king and Creon and succeeds in getting the king's pardon for the latter. After the exit of Teiresias it comments on the

terrible predictions which Teiresias has made but shows determination to support the king. Its most significant response is when

Oedipus and Jocasta have expressed irreverent thoughts against the oracles. At many other times also they reflect the dominant

mood and help to deepen it. When Oedipus imagines that he is the son of the goodness of luck, the Chorus, immediately sing that

their master, Oedipus, might be the son of Apollo.

In the fifth or last choric ode in Oedipus Rex, the Chorus reflects the dejection of Oedipus and says that all the generations of

moral man add up to nothing. This ode must not be regarded as reflecting the final mood and impression of the play, for the

impression is as much of the greatness of the human spirit as of the insignificance of man and the transitoriness of his happiness.

This ode must, therefore, be looked upon only as reflecting a final judgment of it. Oedipus remains forceful even in his downfall;

in a sense he is still heroic.

The Chorus takes part in the dialogues also. When Oedipus consults them about ending the plague in the city, they express

disappointment that the oracle had not guided them about the identity of Laius' murderer. They also tell him what they know

about the murder of their previous king and its circumstances. When Creon, learning that the king has accused him of treason,
comes on the stage he talks to the Chorus, who tell him that the king's accusation was probably made in the heat of anger. Creon

asked if the king looked absolutely serious while making the charge and they rightly say that it is not for them to look into the

eyes of his master when he speaks. When Oedipus has almost passed a sentence upon Creon, Jocasta arrives on the scene and

first talks to the Chorus. They request her to settle the difference between the two men. They are worried when they see Jocasta

going into the palace in a very dejected mood, and they give expression to their apprehension. Oedipus asks them about the

shepherd who gave the infant to the Corinthian, they answer that his queen would be able to answer the question better. They

sympathize with Oedipus when they see him after he has blinded himself. It is clear, thus, that the Chorus never takes a direct

hand in the action. It does not consist only of spectators but influences the action in various subtle ways.

The contribution of the Chorus in Oedipus Rex is considerable. They link the play with common humanity. In some sense they

are often in the position of the ideal spectator. They fill in the gaps in the action when no other character is there on the stage.

They add to it the element of melody which must have been one of the attractions of Greek tragedy. They provide an appropriate

shift between the titanic, heroic figure of Oedipus and the mass of common humanity represented by the two shepherds in

Oedipus Res. The tragedy of Oedipus and its relevance to common life is very well stressed by the Chorus in its exit ode or

exode.

Oedipus Rex: Tragic Irony

The famous phrase, "The motive-hunting of motiveless Malignity," occurs in anote Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote in his copy of Shakespeare, as he waspreparing a series of lectures delivered in

the winter of 1818-1819. The noteconcerns the end of Act 1, Scene 3 of Othello in which Iago takes leave of Roderigo, saying,"Go to, farewell. Put money enough in your purse,"and then delivers

the soliloquy beginning"Thus do I ever make my fool my purse."Here is Coleridge's note:The triumph! again, put money after the effect has been fully produced.--The lastSpeech, the motive-

hunting of motiveless Malignity--how awful! In itself fiendish--while yet he was allowed to bear the divine image, too fiendish for his own steadyView.--A being next to Devil--only not quite

Devil--& this Shakespeare hasattempted-- executed--without disgust, without Scandal!-- (Lectures 1808-1819On Literature 2: 315)

Coleridge's phrase is often taken to mean that Iago has no real motive and doesevil only because he is evil. This is not far from what Coleridge meant, but healmost certainly wasn't using the

word “motive" in the same way as it's now used.We use it to mean “an emotion, desire, physiological need, or similar impulse thatacts as an incitement to action" ("Motive"). This definition

equates “motive" and“impulse"; Coleridge, however, thought the two quite different. He makes thisdistinction in an entry he wrote for Omniana, a collection of sayings assembledby his friend

Robert Southey and published in 1812. Here is what Coleridgewrote:119. Motives and Impulses.“It is a matter of infinite difficulty, but fortunately of comparative indifference, todetermine what

a man's motive may have been for this or that particular action.Rather seek to learn what his objects in general are!--What does he habituallywish? habitually pursue?--and thence deduce his

impulses, which are commonlythe true efficient causes of men's conduct; and without which the motive itself would not have become a motive. Let a haunch of venison represent the motive,and

the keen appetite of health and exercise the impulse: then place the same or some more favourite dish, before the same man, sick, dyspeptic, and stomach-worn, and we may then weigh the

comparative influences of motives andimpulses. Without the perception of this truth, it is impossible to understand thecharacter of Iago, who is represented as now assigning one, and then

another,and again a third, motive for his conduct, all alike the mere fictions of his ownrestless nature, distempered by a keen sense of his intellectual superiority, andhaunted by the love of
exerting power, on those especially who are his superiorsin practical and moral excellence. Yet how many among our modern critics haveattributed to the profound author this, the appropriate

inconsistency of thecharacter itself!” (Shorter Works and Fragments 1: 310)Thus Coleridge asserts that Iago's motives (in our sense) were his “keen senseof his intellectual superiority" and his

“love of exerting power." And so Iago'smalignity is “motiveless" because his motives (in Coleridge's sense) -- beingpassed over for promotion, his suspicion that Othello is having an affair with

hiswife, and the suspicion that Cassio is also having an affair with Emilia -- aremerely rationalizations

Oedipus Rex: Character is Destiny

“Oedipus Rex” is a tragedy of fate. The crucial events in the play have been pre-determined by fate or the gods. Man seems helpless facing the circumstanceswhich mould his

destiny. King Laius was told that his own son by Jocasta wouldkill him. Laius did everything possible to prevent such a disaster. Once Jocastagave birth to a son, Laius had him

chained and handed him over to a trustworthyservant with strict orders that the child be exposed on. Mt. Cithaeron and allowedto perish. But the servant, out of compassion,

handed over the child to aCorinthian shepherd who passed him on to the Corinthian King. The child grewup as the son of the King and Queen of Corinth and later killed his true

father,Laius, in complete ignorance. Apollo’s oracle was fulfilled even though Laius andJocasta took the extreme step to escape the fate foretold by the oracle.Oedipus had also to

submit to the destiny which Apollo's oracle pronounced for him. He learnt from the oracle that he would kill his own father and marry his ownmother. He, too, tried his utmost

to avert a terrible fate and fled from Corinth. Hiswanderings took him to Thebes, where people were facing a great misfortune.King Laius had been killed and the city was in the

grip of the Sphinx, who wascausing a lot of destruction because nobody was able to solve her riddle.Oedipus solved the riddle and put an end to the monster. Oedipus was

joyfullyreceived by Theban people as their King and was given Laius’s widow as hiswife. Thus, in complete ignorance of the identity of his parents, he killed hisfather and

married his mother. He performed these disastrous acts not onlyunknowingly, but as a result of his efforts to escape the cruel fate which theoracle at had communicated to

him.It is evident that the occurrences which bring about the tragedy in the life of Laius, Oedipus, and Jocasta are the work of that mysterious supernatural power called fate or

destiny or be given the name of Apollo. This supernatural power had pre-determined certain tragic events and even informed the human beings inadvance. These human beings

take whatever measures, to avert those events;and yet things turn out exactly as they had been foretold by the oracles. Oedipushas done nothing at all to deserve the fate which

overtakes him. Nor do Laiusand Jocasta deserve the fate they meet. According to Aristotle the tragic hero is a prosperous man who falls intomisfortune due to some serious

defect or hamartia. No doubt that Oedipus is anable ruler, a father of his people, a great administrator and an outstandingintellect. His chief care is not for himself but for the

people of the State. Thepeople look upon him as their savior and worshipped him. He is also a religiousman in the orthodox sense. That such a man should meet the sad fate

isunbearably painful to us.Oedipus is not, however, a perfect man or a perfect King. He does suffer from ahamartia or a defect of character. He is hot-tempered, rash, hasty in

judgments,easily provoked and somewhat arbitrary. Though in the beginning his attitudetowards Teiresias is one of reverence, he quickly loses his temper and speaks tothe

prophet in an insulting manner accusing both him and Creon of treason and showing a blind suspicion towards friends. His position and authority seem to beleading him to

become a tyrant. Creon has to remind him that the city does notbelong to him alone. Even when blinded he draws the reproach:“Do not crave to be master in everything always.”

All this shows that Oedipus is not a man of a flawless character, not completelyfree from faults, not an embodiment of all the virtues. His pride in his own wisdomis one of his

glaring faults. His success in solving the riddle of the Sphinx further developed his inherent feeling of pride. There is in him a failure of piety even.Under the influence of Jocasta,

he grows sceptical of the oracles. Thus there is inhim a lack of true wisdom which took him on the verge of becoming an impioustyrant.If Oedipus had not been hot-tempered, he

might not have got entangled in a fighton the road and might have not been guilty of murdering his father. Similarly, if hehad been a little more cautious, he might have

hesitated to marry a woman oldenough to be his mother. After all there was no compulsion either in the fight or inhis marriage. Both his acts may thus be attributed to his own

defects of character. All at once it has to be accepted that the decree of the oracles wereinescapable. Even if Oedipus had taken the precautions, the prophecy was to befulfilled.

The oracle’s prediction was unconditional; it did not say that if Oedipusdid such and such a thing he would kill his father and marry his mother. Theoracle simply said that

Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother. Whatthe oracle said, was bound to happen.
If Oedipus is the innocent victim of inescapable doom, he would be a merepuppet and the play becomes a tragedy of destiny which denies human freedom.Sophocles does not

want to regard Oedipus as a puppet; there is reason tobelieve that Oedipus has been portrayed largely as a free agent. The attendant inthe play insistently describes Oedipus’

self-blinding as voluntary anddistinguishes it from his involuntary murder of his father and marriage with hismother. Oedipus’ actions were fate-bound, but everything that he

does, he doesas a free agent – his condemnation of Teiresias and Creon, his conversation withJocasta to reveal the facts, his pursuing his investigation despite the efforts of

Jocasta and the Theban shepherd to stop him, and so on. Oedipus, freelychoosing a series of actions, led to his own ruin. Oedipus could have left theplague to take its course but

his pity over the sufferings of his people forced himto consult the oracle. He could have left the murder of Laius uninvestigated, buthis love of justice obliged him to inquire. He

need not have forced the truth fromthe reluctant Theban shepherd but he could not rest content with a lie. Teiresias,Jocasta, the Theban shepherd each tried to stop Oedipus,

but he wasdetermined to solve the problem of his own parentage. The direct cause of hisruin is not fate; no oracle said that he must discover the truth. Still less does thecause of

his ruin lie in his own weakness. His own strength and courage, hisloyalty to Thebes and his love of truth causes his ruin. All this shows him a free agent.In spite of the facts that

Oedipus is a free agent in most of his actions, still themost tragic events of his life – his murder of his father and his marriage with hismother – had inevitably to happen. Here

the responsibility of fate cannot bedenied. The real tragedy lies in the discovery of truth, which is due to his owntraits. If he had not discovered the truth, he would have

continued to live in astate of blissful ignorance and there would have been no tragedy and nosuffering. But the parricide and the incest were pre-ordained and for these fate

isresponsible.

Oedipus Rex: Hamartia

According to Aristotle, a tragic hero is a distinguished person occupying a high position or having a high status in life and in very

prosperous circumstances falling into misfortune on account of a "hamartia" or some defect of character. He should be good or

fine man though not perfect. There is nothing to arouse the feelings of pity or fear in seeing a bad character pass from prosperity

into misfortune while the ruin of a man who represents near-perfection in the moral sense is repugnant and horrible. The tragic

hero is neither a moral paragon nor a scoundrel. He should be true to type, and consistent or true to himself. Aristotle would

attribute disaster or catastrophe in a tragedy to an error rather than a deliberate crime.

The main requirements of Aristotle in regard to the tragic hero are thus (1) high social standing, (2) moral excellence or

goodness, and (3) some fault of character, or error committed by the hero in ignorance. Oedipus answers to all these

requirements. Oedipus is a man of royal birth; he is brought up by a King and a Queen and he himself afterwards becomes a King

and marries a Queen. He is thus a man of social eminence and possessing excellent qualities of character, though his is by no

means perfect. We cannot say that his misfortune is due to any defect in his character, though his defects do produce the

impression that such a man must pay for his defects. It would be wrong to say that he is a puppet in the hands of fate. Within

certain limits he is a free agent, though it must be recognized that the prophecy of the oracle would yet have been fulfilled.
Oedipus is a good king, a great well wisher of his people, a man of integrity, an honest and great administrator and an outstanding

intellect. He is a pious man who believes in oracles, respects the bonds of family, and hates impurity. His belief in the prophecies

of gods is the very basis of the whole play. The suppliant people approach him almost as a god and he is honoured as a saviour.

When Creon reveals the cause of the city's suffering, Oedipus declares his resolve to track down the criminal and he utters a

terrible curse upon him. We can say that Oedipus is almost an ideal King. He also shows himself as a devoted husband and a

loving father. He shows due consideration for the opinions and feelings of Jocasta and he lavishes all his affection on his

daughters. His relations with the Chorus are also very cordial and he shows all due courtesy to them. In short both as a man and

as a king Oedipus is worthy of high respect.

However, Oedipus has his faults. He is hot-tempered, hasty in his judgment, proud of his intelligence, and random in his

decisions. He quickly loses his temper when he finds the prophet reluctant to reveal the things that he knows. He jumps to the

conclusion that Teiresias and Creon have hatched a conspiracy against him. This attitude of distrust towards the prophet is in

sharp contrast to Oedipus's genuine piety. Oedipus belongs to the world of politics and human standards rather than to the divine

order of the world. His piety fails also later on when, under the influence of Jocasta, he becomes somewhat skeptical regarding

the oracle.

An outstanding feature of Oedipus's character is an inherent feeling of pride in his own wisdom. Because of this arrogance,

Oedipus certainly alienates some of our sympathy. When self-confidence takes the form of pride, haughtiness, arrogance or

insolence, it becomes disgusting and obnoxious. His attitude of intolerance towards both Teiresias and Creon and his highly

offensive and insulting words to both of them create in us the impression that he is paving the way for his own downfall. Of

course, Oedipus has already committed the crimes which make him a sinner in the eyes of the god, in his own eyes, and in the

eyes of other people. But the tragedy lay in discovery that he is guilty of them. If the crimes had remained unknown there would

hardly have been any tragedy. Tragedy comes with the fact for discovery both for Jocasta and himself.

It would be a flaw in the logic to say that Oedipus suffers because of his sin of pride, but his pride is not the direct cause of his

tragedy. He tried to avoid the fulfillment of the prophecies made by oracle. He killed his father and married his mother. His

tragedy is a tragedy of error. If he had been a little more careful, things would have taken a different shape. He might have

avoided the quarrel on the road if he had not been so proud or hot-tempered; and he might have refused to marry a woman old

enough if he had not been blinded by the pride of his intelligence in solving the riddle of the Sphinx. But, then, the prophecies of
the oracle would have been fulfilled in some other way, because nothing could have been prevented their fulfillment. Pride has

little to do with Oedipus's killing his father and marrying his mother.

If Oedipus had not relentlessly pursued his investigations, he might have been spared the shock of discovery. Something in him

drives him forward on the road to discovery. After Teiresias has first refused to tell him anything and then uttered some

frightening prophecies. Oedipus is discouraged by Jocasta to continue his investigations. But he pays no heed to her philosophy

of living at random. She makes another effort to stop his investigations when she has herself realized the truth, but again she

failed. The Theban shepherd too tries, but in vain. It is this insistence on the truth that leads to the discovery in which lies the

tragedy. We may interrupt this insistence on the truth as a form of pride, the pride of intellect, or the pride of knowing everything.

The link of cause and effect is unmistakable between Oedipus's pride of intellect and Oedipus's discovery for his sins. But there is

no strong link between his pride and the actual committing of his sins because the sins would have been committed in any case, if

the oracle was to be fulfilled. The oracle did say that Oedipus would be guilty of those crimes but no oracle said that Oedipus

must discover the truth.

Oedipus is thus an authentic tragic hero in the Aristotelian sense because his tragedy is as much due to his own initiatives in

discovering the truth as to external circumstances. To the modern mind, a high social position is not necessary for the tragic hero

nor do they recognize the validity of oracles too.

In Oedipus we see the helplessness of man in the face of the circumstances and his essential greatness. The manner in which

Oedipus blinds himself after realizing his guilt and in which he endures his punishment raise him high in our esteem. The spirit of

Oedipus remains unconquered even in his defeat and that is the essential fact about a tragic hero.
Oedipus Rex: Catharsis
According to Aristotle tragedy should arouse the feeling of pity and terror – pityfor the hero’s tragic fate and terror at the sight of the dreadful suffering befallingparticularly the

hero. By arousing pity and terror, a tragedy aims at the catharsisof these and similar other emotions and cures these feelings which always existin our hearts. A tragedy, hence,

affords emotional relief and the spectators rise atits end with a feeling of pleasure. This, according to Aristotle, is the aestheticfunction of tragedy. Through catharsis the

emotions are reduced to a healthy andbalanced proportion. Besides pity and fear an audience also experiencescontempt, hatred, delight, indignation, and admiration. Still, these

emotions areless important or less intense. Pity and fear are the dominant emotions and theyare intensely produced.Tragedy, by means of pity, fear and other emotions also

provides exercise andnourishment for the emotional side of human nature. It also satisfies our love of beauty and of truth, of truth to life and truth about life. Experience, and

moreexperience, is a natural human craving. Tragedy leads to an enrichment of our experience of human life. It may teach us to live more wisely and widen theboundaries of our

experience of life. Tragedy shows the eternal contradictionbetween human weakness and human courage, human stupidity and humangreatness, human frailty and human
strength. Tragedy gives us pleasure byexhibiting human endurance and perseverance in the face of calamities anddisasters.Pity and fear are the dominating feelings produced by

the play “Oedipus Rex”. Apart from catharsis of these feelings, the play deepens our experience of human life and enhances our understanding of human nature and

humanpsychology. The prologue produces in us pity and fear, pity for the sufferingpopulation of Thebes and fear of future misfortunes which might befall the

people. The Priest, describing the state of affairs, refers to a tide of death fromwhich there is no escape, death in the fields and pastures, in the wombs of women, death caused by

the plague which grips the city. Oedipus givesexpression to his feeling of sympathy, telling the Priest that his heart is burdenedby the suffering of all the people. The entry-song

of the Chorus following theprologue heightens the feelings of pity and fear. The Chorus says:“With fear my heart is riven, fear of what shall be told. Fear is upon us.”Oedipus’

proclamation of his resolve to track down the murderer of Laius bringssome relief to us. But the curse, which Oedipus utters upon the unknown criminaland upon those who

may be sheltering him, also terrifies us by its fierceness.The scene in which Oedipus clashes with Teiresias contributes to the feelings of pity and terror, the prophecy of Teiresias

is frightening because it relates toOedipus. Teiresias speaks to Oedipus in alarming tones, describing him in aveiled manner as “husband of the woman who bore him, father-

killer and father-supplanter” and accusing him openly of being a murderer.In the scene with Creon, the feeling of terror is much less, arising mainly fromOedipus’ sentence of

death against the innocent Creon which is soon withdrawn.The tension reappears with Oedipus’ suspicion on hearing from Jocasta thatLaius was killed where three roads met.

Oedipus’ account of his arrival at Thebesarouses the feeling of terror by its reference to the prophecy which he receivedfrom the oracle, but both terror and pity subside when

Jocasta tries to assureOedipus that prophecies deserve no attention. The song of the Chorus harshlyrebuking the proud tyrant revives some of the terror in our minds, but it

againsubsides at the arrival of the Corinthian after hearing whom Jocasta mocks at theoracles. The drama now continues at a rather low key till first Jocasta and thenOedipus

find themselves confronted with the true facts of the situations. With thediscovery of true facts, both the feelings of pity and fear reach their climax, withOedipus lamenting his

sinful acts of killing his father and marrying his mother.But the feelings of pity and fear do not end here. The song of the Chorusimmediately following the discovery arouses our

deepest sympathy at Oedipus’sad fate. The Chorus extends the scope of its observations to include allmankind:“All the generations of mortal man add up to nothing.”Then

comes the messenger from the palace and he gives a terrible account of the manner in which Jocasta hanged herself and Oedipus blinded himself. Themessenger concluded his

account with the remark that the royal household istoday overwhelmed by “calamity, death, ruin, tears and shame”. Theconversation of the Chorus with Oedipus who is not

blind is also extremelymoving. Oedipus speaks of his physical and mental agony and the Chorus triesto console him. Oedipus describes himself as:

“…… shedder of father’s blood, husband of mother, Godless and child of shame,begetter of brother-sons”.The feeling of deep grief by Oedipus is experienced by the audience with

anequal intensity. The scene of Oedipus’ meeting with his daughters is also verytouching. His daughters, laments Oedipus, will have to wander homeless andhusbandless. He

appeals to Creon in moving words to look after them.The feeling of pity and fear has been continuously experienced from the veryopening scene of the play. Other feelings

aroused in our hearts were irritationwith Oedipus at his ill-treatment of Teiresias, anger against Teiresias for hisobstinacy and insolence, admiration for Creon for his

moderation and loyalty,liking for Jocasta for her devotion to Oedipus, admiration for Oedipus for hisrelentless pursuits of truth and so on. But the feelings of relief, delight

andpleasure have also been aroused in us. These feelings are the result partly of thefelicity of the language employed and the music of poetry, but mainly the result of the

spectacle of human greatness which we have witnessed side by side with thespectacle of human misery. The sins of Oedipus were committed unknowingly; infact Oedipus did his
utmost to avert the disaster. Oedipus is, therefore,essentially an innocent man, despite his sin of pride and tyranny. Jocasta too isinnocent, in spite of her sin of scepticism. There

is no villainy to be condemned inthe play. The essential goodness of Oedipus, Jocasta and Creon is highlypleasing to us. But even more pleasing though at the same time

saddening is thespectacle of human endurance seen in Jocasta and Oedipus inflicting uponthemselves a punishment that is awful and terrible. In the closing scene, the

blindOedipus rises truly to heroic heights, displaying an indomitable spirit. Blind andhelpless though he now is, and extremely ashamed of his parricide andincestuous

experience as he is, he yet shows an invulnerable mind and it is thiswhich has a sustaining, cheering, uplifting and exhilarating effect upon us.Jocasta’s fate underlines that of

Oedipus. So does the great song of the Choruson the laws which are “enthroned above”. The song and in particular thedenunciation of the tyrant are relevant to Oedipus and

Jocasta. The song beginswith a prayer for purity and reverence, clearly an answer to Oedipus’ andJocasta's doubts about the oracles. It ends with an even more

emphaticexpression of fear of what will happen if the truth of the divine oracles is denied.Between the first and the last stanzas the Chorus describes the man who is bornof

hybris, such hybris as is displayed by the King and the Queen. The descriptionfollows to a large extent the conventional picture of the tyrant, mentioning hispride, greed and

irreverence. Not every feature fits the character of Oedipus, nor should we expect that. The Chorus fears that he who behaves with presumption,pride and self-confidence will

turn tyrannical and impious, and they foresee thatZeus, the true King of the world will punish the sins of the mortal King. If he doesnot do so, all religion will become

meaningless, and all will be lost.

Q-1 What are the distinct qualities of Marlowe as a

dramatist?
The period of Marlowe's dramatic activity comprises six brief years, from 1587 to 1593. Yet during those six years he
wrote six splended plays- all reflecting the lust for empire, the lust for lucre, the lust for knowledge, the lust for
beauty- these from the background as well as the mainspring of each play.

Tamburlaine was Marlowe's first powerful trumpet-blast, Historically the play was literally epoch-making. Its
boldness in conception and style immediately set a fashion, Tamburlain (1587) encouraged Marlowe to " pen his
Second Part". Tamburlain is the story of Scythian shepherd who dreams of world conquest and achieve his aspiration
magnificiently.

Tamburlaine brought Marlowe into fame, but his highest achievement in drama is his Second play, Doctor Faustus.
The story is that of Faustus a scholar who sells his soul to the Devil in his eagerness, for the acquisition of universal
knowledge. It is a play of vast conflict, fearful failure, intense feeling, stirring emotion; it is a play whose central idea
is that of loss. Over and above Dr Faustus is Marlowe's highest achievement.

The first great thing done by Marlowe was to break away from the medieval conception of tragedy, as in medieval
drama tragedy was the thing of Princes only. It dealt with the rise and fall of the Kings or royal personalities. Over and
above long sensatuous speeches, lack of action, talkative ghosts and horrible scenes of gruesome murders, were very
much there. As a young man of twenty-three he came forward with the aim to redeem the drama from its past futility.
With it English tragic drama was for the first time dignified with high passion and poetry.

Infact the play Dr Faustus is structurally very weak and cannot be overlook Levin's comments on the structural
weakness of the play:

"Examined more technically the play has a strong beginning and even a stronger end but its middle section,
whether we abridge it or bombast it out, is unquestionably weak"

Marlowe has rightly been called the 'Morning Star' of the great Elizabethan drama. And as a morning star of
Elizabethan drama. He was really 'the Columbus of the new literary world. We may conclude the remarks of Schelling:

"Marlowe gave the drama passion and poetry; and poetry was his most precious gift. Shakespeare would not have
been Shakespeare if Marlowe had never written or lived. He might not have been altogether the Shakespeare we
know."
At the very outset of Dr Faustus we note that Marlowe belonged to the age of Renaissance. Infact, Marlowe was too
much under the influence of the Renaissance conception of greatness as taught by the great Machiavelli.

All his four plays from his pen were indeed exemplary of the tragic art in dramatic poetry. It was passion, vigour and
poetry that the populance thirsted for. And these were exactly the gifts that Marlowe brought to the drama.

We may begin by quoting Swinburne's very just and relevant remarks regarding Marlowe:
"Before him there was neither genuine blank verse nor a genuine tragedy in our language. After his arrival the way
was prepared, the paths were made straight, for Shakespeare.

Marlowe was one who loved by the gods. Hardly twenty-nine years did he lived. When he was invited to join the
chorus of the inheritors of unfulfilled renown. Had he lived longer he would surely have achieved greater name and
fame and proved himself to be a serious rival of Shakespeare.

Symbols in “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen

Question: ( 1 ): Describe the symbols you have found in “A Doll’s House” by Henrik
Ibsen.

Answer: “A Doll’s House” is the play written by Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian

playwright. Here in the play, the playwright uses various symbols which usually
something concrete – an object, a place, a character, an action – that suggests for
something abstract and universal. He uses them to convey his expected meaning to his
readers. Here in the play, the major symbols he uses are: a doll’s house, macaroons,
Christmas tree, bird, squirrel, tarantella, the bond, the letter, Doctor Rank, Mrs. Linde,
money and so on.

“A Doll’s House” depicts a woman’s emancipation from the proprietary rights a

husband claims to have over his wife. The title of the play is very significant. While
playing, children make the dolls perform social roles over which the lifeless dolls have
no control. A parallel is suggested by the title and by several speeches in Insen’s play
between the life and that is represented in the house and the false life of a doll’s house.
In fact, the word ‘doll’ refers to a woman who has no mind or will of her own. A doll’s
house, therefore, means a house where there lives such a woman. Nora Helmer is almost
always treated like a doll both by her father and husband. Before her marriage, she is
treated like a baby-doll by her father and after she is married off to Torvald, she receives
the same treatment from her husband too. Thus she has stayed like a doll in a doll’s
house. They always play with her just like a child plays with his toys for fun and
amusement.

Macaroons are the cookies that show her childish tendencies, such as sneaking
unhealthy food. It also shows the side of her that she hides from her husband, or her
concealed self.

Christmas tree is another symbol of concealing in the play. Nora wants to hide the
Christmas tree from her children, showing secrecy. She also does not want them to see it
before it has been decorated, symbolising the contrast between realistic and idealistic,
which is a common theme throughout the play.

"Hide the Christmas Tree carefully, Helen.

 Be sure the children do not see it till this evening, when it is dressed."

Nora Helmer’s husband calls her by several names as songbird, squirrel and
skylark. These nicknames are representative of Nora’s false image she portrays. She is
shown as a mindless woman who innocently lives her life according to her husband and
wastes her time on frivolous things.

Tarantella is a type of dance that symbolises Nora’s change from an innocent

woman (the bird) to more of a devious character. It shows the transformation into her
true self, which is not a transformation that her husband enjoys. She becomes more
independent in thoughts and actions at this point and is attempting to conceal the fact
that she went behind her husband’s back in order to get a loan. She is spinning a "web of
lies".

The bond symbolises the secrets Nora keeps from her husband, and is the basis
for much of the conflict in the story. It is seen as a thing of evil, and seems to bring out
the worst traits in each character, such as Nora’s lies, Torvald’s self-involvement (for he
worries only about what it will do to his career), and Krogstad’s vengefulness.

And the letter symbolizes Nora’s vulnerability and is a cause of panic toward the
end of the play. Once it is discovered it will expose Nora’s deceit to her husband and put
their family in jeopardy.

Doctor Rank is the character that symbolises fate in the play. He speaks
frequently of the sickness in society and seems to have a pessimistic view of the world.
He is dying and must meet the fate he has been dealt, since fate cannot be altered and
only accepted. Mrs. Linde is Nora Helmer’s friend who shows contrast to Nora and
represents the coming of age of women.

Money symbolises the shallowness of this society, since much of the play revolves
around it. Many of the characters lives seem to depend on money in order to fulfill their
needs.

To sum up, it can be said from the elaborate discussion above that the symbols
the playwright employed in his play “A Doll’s House” are really excellent. They have
heightened the emotional effect of various situations in the play.

Character of Nora Helmer in the play “A

Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen
Question: (2) : Draw a character sketch of Nora Helmer in the play “A Doll’s House”
by Henrik Ibsen.

Answer: Nora Helmer is an excellent creation of Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian

playwright and theater director. In the play “A Doll’s House”, she is one of the major
characters. From the beginning to the end of the play, she keeps on changing radically.
She develops and changes from a doll to an independent woman. She is portrayed in her
relations with her Torvald Helmer, children, Krogstad, Doctor Rank, the old Nurse and
Christine Linde. In the beginning of the play, she was happy but towards the end of the
play, she becomes serious and somber leaving her husband’s house to face the future of
uncertainty.

Nora Helmer is seen at the beginning behaving like a conventional wife. She fully
responses to Torvald's terms of endearment when he calls her a ‘little skylark’, a
‘squirrel’, a ‘little singing bird’, ‘darling little wife’ and so on. She is an accommodating
wife but her husband instead of protecting her after knowing about secret becomes
indignant. This surprises her. After the incident, she realises that her husband treats her
as a doll in the house. Even her father compels her to adopt her father’s views and
opinions. Her father also treats her as a doll in the play. Such treatment is inflicting to
her as she says:

“You and father have done me a great wrong.

It is your fault that my life has come to nothing.” (Page: 164, A-3)

Nora is a very loving and affectionate mother who loves her children even though
the old Nurse mostly looks after them and is largely responsible for their upbringing. In
the happy domestic scene of the play, the children show great pleasure in the company
of their mother and Nora is shown as supremely happy in playing with them. When it
seems to her that she is going to leave her children behind, she asks the old Nurse if she
would like to look after them as dutifully as she is doing now. Thus, she is quite
concerned about the welfare and happiness of her children but it is quite surprising to
us that she ultimately leaves them. Her desertion of the children is something of which
we cannot approve but her own state of mind at that time is such as she finds no
alternative but to leave them.

Her friendship with Mrs. Linde is amiable, helpful and healthy. They share each
other’s miseries. At one stage when Mrs. Linde asks Nora to help her to get a job, Nora
requests her husband to arrange a job for her. On the other hand, she has a very friendly
relationship with Dr. Rank who secretly loves her and wants to commit suicide if he does
not get her leaving all his property for her but Nora honestly maintains a respectable
distance for the purity of her relationship.

She is more practical than many other women in the Victorian Age and even than
her husband, Torvald Helmer. However, it is not an easy task for a woman to borrow
money but she alone takes the risk of managing the money for him to recover her
husband from illness. She is dead against reaching the news to her husband but it is Mr.
Krogstad, an opportunist, informs Torvald of it by a letter. After a perusal of the letter,
he becomes very enraged. He calls her ‘the unfathomable hideousness of it all’. She is
excessively hurt at the loveless comment. At that time, the realisation of her captivity
maddens her. She always believes that Torvald can sacrifice anything for her sake but
now she understands that his love for her was artificial. This is for the first time she, like
a mature woman, rediscovers her and decides to leave him and her children and raises a
voice of protest against inflicting male-domination. She complains with excessive grief:
 “You have never loved me.
You only thought it amusing to be in love with me.” (Page: 163, A-3)

In fine, it is clear that Nora Helmer is a realistic character. Her faults show that
she is a real being. In fact the whole portrayal of this woman is splendidly handled. She
is not a figment of the fancy but a real woman. In her protest against her husband’s
possessive attitude towards her, she symbolises the feminine revolt against male
domination. She is a modern woman, an independent and free woman who maintains
her self-respect at a very high cost. She is an awakened woman with her awareness for
her feminine rights as an individual. She represents a revolt against the slavery of
woman by man.

The Wild Duck: Symbolism

Symbolism means a veiled or oblique mode of communication.' A play may have deeper meaning which is understood
only by interpreting the deeper significance of the words and phrases used.

In "The Wild Duck" Ibsen made use of symbolism on an elaborate scale than in his earlier plays. The chief symbol in this
play is the wild duck. The play dependant on and held together by a symbol as if the wild duck were a magnet and all the
characters are iron filings held together by the centripetal force. For the first time in Ibsenian drama, the symbol is a
physical reality or near enough to it to suggest an actual presence.

Though the wild duck is not the only symbol in the play yet it is an all-important symbol. The wild duck symbolizes the
kind of life which Hjalmar, his father and Hedvig is leading and besides, it symbolizes Ibsen's own life at the time he
wrote this play. All this symbolizes is the hub and heart of the play.

Mr. Werle while hunting saw a wild duck and shot it. The wounded duck dived down into the sea and tangled to the weeds
to never come up again. Mr. Werle's clever dog dived after the wounded wild duck and brought it up again.

In Act III, Gregers finds that the wild duck has a damaged wing and is a little lame in one foot. These wounds are
symbolic. Gregers tells Hjalmar that Hjalmar has, like a wild duck, dived down and taken firm hold of the sea-weeds.
What Gregers means is that Hjalmar is hiding himself from the reality of life like the wild duck. Gregers knows that Gina
had been seduced by Mr. Werle before her marriage to Hjalmar. Gregers feels sorry that Hjalmar is still ignorant about
Gina's past. The wild duck thus symbolizes Hjalmar's life of ignorance while Mr. Werle's clever dog symbolizes Gregers
who has resolved to awaken Hjalmar to the reality that he is leading an incomplete life for he is ignorant of Gina' past. In
this respect also the lame wild duck symbolizes Hjalmar's incomplete life.

The wild duck symbolizes Hedvig too. The wild duck, wounded by Mr. Werle while enjoying the sport of shooting bird, is
an alien in the garret. Hedvig too is an alien in this household and is a product of Mr. Werle's sport of flirting with Gina.
Like the wild duck, Hedvig too is leading anarrow and limited life because she has no ambition to see the world and
mainly because she has weak eyesight and would soon become blind. Her approachingblindness symbolizes her
approaching death.

The wild duck symbolizes Old Ekdal's life also. When he was living at Hoidal, he was as free as the wild duck was before
it had been shot at by Mr. Werle. And now he is living in a stuffy and congested city shut in by four walls like the wild
duck, away from the natural life.

It is possible that the wild duck, consciously or unconsciously, also reflects Ibsen's own life when he wrote this play. Ibsen
own world does not seems to be very different from Ekdals garret. Both Hjalmar and Gregers signify different aspects of
Ibsen: on one hand the evader of reality, and in contrast, an idealist who bothers mankind with his claims of the ideal
because he has a sick conscience.

The dark menagerie in the Ekdal's house symbolizes the thick forest where Old Ekdal used to hunt wild animals. It is a
symbol of protective fantasy for Old Ekdal. This is an illusion which Old Ekdal has built up for himself. This is "the
saving lie" which keeps him alive.

Ibsen has superbly employed the symbol of light. The impact of light in the garret is different in the daylight and in the
moonlight. Taking garret as human life, the daylight as reality and the moonlight as illusion, we can conclude that the life
looks beautiful and relaxed in moonlight which is an illusion of life. Whereas, the reality, the daylight has totally opposite
impact on the garret. Reality makes the things clear which tortures the life making it dull and miserable. It means illusions
make our life sustain in a better way than the reality.

In Act II, Old Ekdal says:

"…Because the forest, you know … the forest … the forest … !"

Old Ekdal's splitting, breaking speech is also symbolic. It symbolizes the incomplete and damaged life of Old Ekdal. It
also reflects the impact of forests on his life. This is why he, in another speech, says:

"The forests avenge themselves".

Old Ekdal's lieutenant's uniform is also symbolic. He is not entitled any more to wear it but he puts it on to recall the days
when he was a lieutenant. He lives in a world of illusion, created by himself, in which he finds sufficient satisfaction.

In Act II, Gregers says:

"If I had the choice, I should like most of all to be a clever dog".

Gregers saying himself a clever dog is also symbolic. He thinks himself to be a great savior and a great 'help' for the Ekdal
family and is on his mission to take the Ekdals from ignorance to the light. But this absurd insight leads them to the
disastrous consequences. In Act III, Hedvig says that the clock in the menagerie is still and doesn't go anymore. It is
symbolic as it is concerned with the wild duck. Time has no value for the wild duck because his life has confined to this
menagerie. There is also a picture about the Death of a girl. This death is symbolic to the approaching death of Hedvig.
Hedvig says:

"I think that's awful".

There are some other aspects of symbolism in the play. For instance, alcohol for Molvik is symbolic because it is an
illusion for him which gives him a kind of escape from his dull life. Art of photography is symbolic. It is an image of
reality but not the true reality. Here Ibsen is giving an importance to the necessity of illusive life. Hjalmar's proposed
invention is symbolizing 'a saving lie' for him. This is a hope for Hjalmar towards a better future for him.
Characters in the play are also symbolic representing average human beings and illusion for them is an important thing on
which their whole life is built. The house of Ekdals symbolizes the whole society which needs a saving lie.

There are also Christian symbols in the play. Gina and Hjalmar symbolize Eve and Adam living in their Paradise and
whose comfort is disturbed by the intrusion of the devil, the Gregers. They have to face a hope lose in the shape of the
death of Hedvig. The thirteenth person at the party is also a Christian symbol. Judas was thirteenth who betrayed Christ
and here Gregers is playing the role of Judas. The Christmas tree is symbolic from Christian point of view.

We can conclude that Ibsen has beautifully employed the device of symbolism to make sure the necessity of illusion in the
life of average human beings. In Act III, Gregers says:
"The wild duck is the most important of all the things in there".
No doubt that the wild duck is the most important symbol in the play which makes the play one of the great plays of Ibsen.

Dr.Faustus Character Analysis

Smart Is as smart will
Faustus is super-smart. thus good that he will best anybody of his educational colleagues in dialogue, thus good that he becomes self-important, "swoll'n with crafty, of a self-
conceit" (Prologue.19). and that is wherever all the difficulty begins. See, character thinks he is aware of higher than the thousand years'-worth of students United Nations
agency have gone before him and been content to devote their lives to philosophy, medicine, theology, or the law. He thinks those disciplines area unit wholly useless.

Why? as a result of he thinks they can not do something for him, or a minimum of, nothing like what magic will do. And magic will do plenty. that is sweet as a result of
additionally to being self-important, character is additionally power-hungry. He makes it clear that he longs to find out magic as a result of "a sound magician could be a
demigod" (1.1.60). will that sound spookily familiar? It ought to. Lucifer, himself, fell from heaven as a result of in his pride he, too, wished to be a god.

You'd suppose character would learn from previous Lucy's mistake, huh?

The Loss of Lofty Goals

That said, perhaps character may halfway redeem himself if he used his magic to try and do one thing worthy, like, say, saving lives or saving souls. however instead, he uses it
primarily to lazily amuse himself and, most despicably, to play mean tricks on peasants and courtiers like poor Benvolio.

What character chooses to try and do along with his powers once he sells his soul to achieve them could be a bit anticlimactic considering that he had planned to "resolve ME of
all ambiguities," learn "strange philosophy," and "the secrets of all foreign kings," and even to become the king of his land (1.1.78, 84, 85). we do not fathom you, however
Shmoop extremely wished to be resolved of all ambiguities. That sounds awe-inspiring.

But no sooner has character gained his awe-inspiring powers than his lofty ambitions fade into one thing far more, well, boring. Why he loses those ambitions could be a little bit
of a mystery. it would be AN example of the previous maxim that "absolute power corrupts completely," except that during this case, absolute power seems to corrupt not simply
the person United Nations agency possesses it, however conjointly the goals that prompted him to induce that power within the 1st place. This whole demi-god factor could be a
mussy business.

The Guy we tend to like to Hate

So he is proud, he is self-important, and he is generally over a trifle mean-spirited. Why within the world area unit we tend to reading regarding this guy, then? Sure, his accord
with the devil looks to possess been actuated mostly by a need for wealth and power. however the text conjointly suggests that one thing else may be occurring. perhaps Faust
thought he ne'er had an opportunity at heaven to start with.

Think about it. As character contemplates theology, evil spirit guides his reading of the Bible in order that he concludes that "we should sin / then consequently die"—i.e., visit
hell (1.1.43-44). Throughout the play, character mopes over this question, invariably terminal (with the assistance of that unhealthy Angel on his shoulder), that he is got no shot
at salvation. he is doomed from the outset, or a minimum of thus he is LED to believe.

All the wealth within the World

Unfortunately, though, character may not be as good as he thinks. He ne'er quite manages to suppose all the means through the question of whether or not or not he contains a
probability at a price tag to heaven. he is invariably distracted by his devils transfer some new delight.

In the end, character "didst love the world"—in different words, material things—more than non secular things (5.2.101). His pride and need for power prompt him to sign his
soul over to the devil. Once that is done, his inability to dropping of all the awe-inspiring stuff his devils bring him prevents him from ever repenting. He is, plainly, weak. For
that reason, we tend to pity character. He comes thus near heaven such a lot of times, at the same time as he misses it by a mile.