Hi I need help. I have a module A assessment coming up and I have my essay written but it's 600 words over the limit
so could someone please read it and help me cut out some words. I also don't know if I have answered the question effectively so some feedback on that would be great too please! Thanks
The question is: Evaluate the worth of a comparative study of Shakepseare’s play, The Tempest, and Atwood’s novel, Hagseed, in engaging us in their textual conversation about vengeance, power and imprisonment.
A comparative study provides composers with the means of surpassing the contextual limitations of the original text to create an appropriation that resonates with contemporary audiences. Shakespeare’s classical work of literature, a 1623 play, The Tempest, explores the human condition with a focus on how the individual reacts to a traumatic event coupled with the recognition that forgiveness and reconciliation provide a pathway to personal happiness. Margaret Atwood, in her 2016 novel Hag-Seed, reimagines the central ideas of Shakespeare, yet her textual conversation garners the interest of a contemporary audience as her contextual details mirror the social milieu of her readers. This exemplifies the substantial worth of a comparative study as it provides the audience with a developed response to the notions of vengeance, power and imprisonment. Both texts are unified in their endorsement of humanist values in order to explore how one can respond positively to an act of betrayal, rather than through a vengeful agenda. However, TT and HS are incongruous in their representation of grief, as Atwood extends the focus of her novel to include the damaging impacts of grief, such as psychological imprisonment, whereas Shakespeare is limited in his discussion of the factors that elicit emotions of grief. Thus, a comparative of both studies is highly valuable as societal contexts are transient and therefore audience appeals vary. Despite these changes in context and its consequential influence on personal values, over time, human nature will remain similar and therefore responses to a loss of power, resulting in a desire for vengeance despite this leading to self-imprisonment, will always characterise human behaviour.
A loss of power can lead an individual to become driven on enacting vengeance, which can develop an immoral attitude towards others in society. Connections exist between TT and HS in terms of their similar concerns of the actions undertaken by people who are driven to reclaim power through vengeance. Shakespeare’s initial exploration of the notion of vengeance enables Atwood to extend and reframe aspects of this idea and thus enhance her contextual concerns in relation to the changing values in contemporary society. This highlights the importance of a comparative study in challenging the audience about relevant issues in their context in regards to how they would respond to an act of betrayal. Prospero’s response to betrayal reflects his hubris as his fixation on achieving revenge reflects his desire to reclaim power and control. Prospero tries to regain this through holding both Ariel and Caliban captive in his assumption as ruler of the island. Prospero’s use of possessive language in his declaration, “it was mine art…that made gape the pine and let thee out,” illustrates how he positions himself as morally superior to Sycorax’s magic. This consolidates his control over Ariel through words. Similarly, Caliban’s imprisonment by Prospero mirrors his 16th century context that witnessed the European age of exploration deeming Indigenous cultures as inferior. Shakespeare linguistically reflects colonial values that equate minorities as possessions when he refers to Ariel and Caliban as his “poisonous slave” and “hag-seed”. In contrast, Atwood’s multicultural context means that she no longer marginalises the Indigenous person as, hyperbolically, “everyone wants to play Caliban and Ariel”, thus adhering to the interests of a modern audience. However, Felix’s focus on the adage/aphorism that “revenge is a dish best eaten cold” aligns his predilection for revenge with Prospero. Felix’s desire to reclaim his status of power within the theatre leads him to utilises 8Handz’s technological mastery to trap Tony and Sal with spyware and the effects of hallucinogenic drugs, rather than the magic used by Ariel in The Tempest. The audience are thus positioned to perceive Felix’s use of 8Handz as a vehicle for revenge as not laudatory. This further alludes to Atwood’s reimagining of the tools used to achieve revenge in her 21st century context that is imbued with technology. However, Felix’s intent focus on achieving revenge differs to Prospero as he is using extortion to achieve his agenda meaning that he does not seriously consider absolution, contrary to what he announces. Furthermore, he only learns to forgive himself but not his enemies in contrast to Prospero who forgives his usurpers. This is reinforced by the fact that he keeps the memory stick where the footage is stored in case it “might prove crucial at some future time”. Atwood thus aligns with Shakespeare’s use of a revenge plot in his play that evokes revenge tragedy and turns it into tragicomedy without violent death. Although TT restores Prospero to his dukedom and Atwood conveys how Felix’s successful vengeance plot resulted in a restoration to his position within the Makeshewig Theatre festival, it is a restoration in name only for Felix as “he’ll work behind the scenes. He’ll break his staff, he’ll drown his book.” This intertextual link resonates with Prospero’s relinquishment of hubris as, by the end of the play he epitomises Renaissance Christian Humanist thought by deciding “the rarer action is in virtue than in vengeance”. This further demonstrates that his happiness is contingent upon his forgiveness of his enemies and thus settles for atonement rather than avenging his experience of betrayal. Thus, a comparative study ultimately enables the audience to understand the worth in the resonant and dissonant aspects of TT and HS as Atwood develops the conversation about the importance of relinquishing a desire for power and control to maintain humanist values of moderation, forgiveness and compassion, whilst differentiating the values that Felix exhibits at the end of the novel.
The universality of grief and psychological imprisonment can be both self-destructive and cause one to inflict this similar emotional damage onto others. The nature of grief and trauma has been deconstructed and examined by Atwood in order to resonate with contemporary audiences, thus highlighting the significance of a comparative study, as she is extending Shakespeare’s discussion of the negative impacts of emotional imprisonment. Atwood’s characterisation of Miranda’s presence in the narrative is a distinct point of difference from Shakespeare’s The Tempest, and focusses on the idea of the universal nature of grief in an instructive manner. This dissonance highlights the importance of a comparative study as it elicits greater audience sympathy as contemporary society familiarise themselves with delusional thinking. Atwood consequently extends the textual conversation to examine the psychological imprisonment that ensues from unresolved grief with Felix’s inner monologue, “Miranda… mornings are not her time …Idiot, he tells himself. How long will you keep yourself on this intravenous drip?” Atwood’s use of introspection and medical jargon enable the audience to recognise how debilitating Felix’s emotional imprisonment is. Furthermore, Atwood’s depiction of Felix both aligns and extends Shakespeare’s characterization of Prospero as Felix is portrayed as more vulnerable and feeling a great sense of victimhood. This is enhanced through the narrative form of the text, which allows for consistent exposure to Felix’s feelings, motivations and psychology with his rhetorical questioning, “what to do with so much sorrow?” after the death of his wife and daughter. In contrast, the representation of Prospero differs from Felix as contemporary audiences are unable to generate significant levels of sympathy for Prospero due to the emotional pain he inflicts upon others due to his excessive desire for revenge. This is highlighted in Alonso’s fearful anthropomorphic description of the island after the harpy’s speech “the winds did sing it to me, and the thunder, that deep and dreadful organ pipe, pronounced The name of Prosper” The audience are consequently invited to UNDERSTAND/CONSIDER the horror of Prospero’s plan to create the storm to metaphorically “knit up” his enemies in the island that has degraded Alonso’s sanity and perpetuated his grief. His desperate tone further reveals he is willing to commit suicide in order to join his son, Ferdinand, whom is deemed lost as per Prospero’s VINDICTIVE plan. His lamenting in rhyming couplets, “I'll seek him deeper than e'er plummet sounded. And with him there lie mudded” bestows his decision with a sense of finality, accentuating the overwhelmingly emotional impact of Prospero’s fixation on his vengeful agenda. Through this, the audience is instead encouraged to feel empathetic for Alonso, and thus condemn Prospero’s unchecked desire to reclaim power and control through ruthless behaviour as a result of his own physical imprisonment on the island and his emotional imprisonment due to betrayal. A comparative study of these two texts is thus vital as it prompts the audience to understand the variety of factors that can contribute to emotional imprisonment and the importance of finding a means of releasing oneself. This is portrayed through Felix’s ability to release the illusion of Miranda, metaphorically suggesting he is emotionally freeing his mind from its state of imprisonment. This is illustrated when he questions himself “what has he been thinking – keeping her tethered to him all this time?” and says to her “to the elements be free. And, finally, she is.” Therefore, the destructive nature of emotional imprisonment that is subtly explored by Shakespeare is enlarged through Atwood’s novel Hag-Seed, where she provokes the audience to understand the importance of resolving grief.
Therefore, the resonances in regards to both Prospero and Felix’s response to being usurped enable the audience to understand how Atwood’s texts is didactically emphasising the importance of Shakespeare in contemporary society. However, through the dissonances, which are evident in her extending the discussion of the debilitating impacts of grief in contributing to emotional imprisonment, encourage the audience to recognise that Atwood is developing the textual conversation, thus providing a high level of worth of a comparative study. Consequently, the discussion of vengeance, power and imprisonment in TT and HS engage the audience as Atwood’s novel adapts elements of Shakespeare’s play to appeal to her contemporary societal context, which remains relatable to a modern day audience.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Topic: Module A Assessment Help (Read 4645 times)