Othello Questions

Act 4
1.) Besides Iago's lies to Othello and the handkerchief Iago stages a conversation between he and Cassio about Cassio's mistress, Bianca. Othello however interprets this as Desdemona.
2.) The handkerchief is very important because it is the physical "proof" that Desdemona is cheating on Othello and one of the first clues that leads to Othello suspecting her. The handkerchief symbolizes Othello and Desdemona's love, the purity of their love (strawberries could symbolize innocence) , and betrayal. I find that Emilia's actions are far too convenient and may have been deliberate.
3.)Othello believes she is unfaithful and thinks that anyone who married him has some kind of flaw.(Also Emilia walks in as he's about to have a turn around).
5.) In their conversation Emilia is revealed to be more worldly and more aware of the problems between men and women. Desdemona is more pure and more devoted to her husband.
6.) A scene that has dramatic irony was when Desdemona says her sheets are her death bed, they actually do become her death bed in the next Act.
Act 5
1.) After Othello kills Desdemona and Emilia walks in the story is told. Emilia reveals that she found the handkerchief and gave it to Iago, who gave it to Cassio. She also relates Iago's deceitfulness and the purity of Desdemona, and then Iago is caught in the act. He really is revealed to be guilty when he attacked his own wife.
4.)Othello kills Desdemona because he cannot deal with the shame and humiliation that she "cheated" on him. He wants revenge on her and everyone she is involved with(Cassio), I don't think this is avenging other men she's hurt but kills her for himself.
5.)Othello's flaw was that he was trusting of everyone, which includes bad people. These people took advantage of Othello's love and used him.
6.) I think that the Othello's ending speech helps clear him of most of his crimes but not all of them. Just because he's really sorry he killed his wife doesn't mean that all the damage he'd done is gone.But I do think the speech restores some of his original glory and valiance that he possessed at the beginning of the play.

Othello

                     Othello is such a dramatic and suspenseful story that it makes me feel like I'm watching a soap opera. Not only does it have drama, but it also has elements of comedy (at least in my perspective). Which I think makes the story more likable than other tragedies. The tragic hero, Othello is a Moor in Italy. He is brave, noble and kind, but he is also very gullible. He trusts Iago so much that he believes that his own wife is cheating on him, based on hearsay. Sadly this happens very much in reality and I like that this is featured in the play. It makes the play and Othello more relatable. As Othello listens to more and more of Iago's lies he becomes more enraged and threatens to kill Desdemona. This shows the quick temperedness of men. I think Othello will actually kill Desdemona because this is a tragedy, someone has to die. Though if I had it my way it would be Iago who dies. I don't get why he has this obsession for Othello. Personally I think his excuses to hate Othello, such as him getting the job that Cassio supposedly deserved, highly unlikely adultery with his wife, or the fact that Othello is a Moor, are not adequate reasons to hate Othello. Iago is borderline sadistic and psychotic. I know he's a fictional character and instrumental to the plot but his hate for Othello is unnerving. The lengths he'd go to cause the fall of Othello. Making his wife his cronies (by the way he doesn't even seem to like her, so why is he so worked up if she cheated on him?) and double-crossing all his friends (Roderigo and Cassio). Does that not seem odd to anyone? I'm searching for some deep psychological motive and I can only come up with one (and please don't think I'm stupid or totally off on left field): that Iago is gay. That's all I have. Also there's some racial angst, almost all the characters refer to Othello not by his name but as "The Moor". All the other characters are called by their names but Othello is not. He’s known as his race or ethnicity like something sub-human. You don't see Othello calling everyone The Italian".

The Destiny of Oedipus

         I find the article written by Sigmund Freud about Oedipus the King fascinating. Not only does he break down the dynamics of the play but he also uses Oedipus' experience and relates it to the every man. He explains the psychological undercurrent that's in the play. Though I do not agree with the idea that as children we want to marry our mothers and fathers (Oedipus and Electra Complex) on some subconscious level I think the idea is interesting.I like that Freud doesn't focus on the metaphors and literary analysis (that tends to get boring after a while) , he applies a real life understanding to the play. Why the protagonist acted as he did and how everyday people can do the same because we are human beings with primal urges.

THEME!!!!!!!!

     A theme that I can apply to Oedipus The King is that humans can never escape their fate and when they try to disaster or tragedy can be the only outcome.

Oedipus The King Questions

1.) Although Tiresias does not out right accuse Oedipus of killing his father , he heavily implies it through his reluctance to tell Oedipus and his warnings. I think that the realization is neither a defect or stupidity, the drama and mystery had to enfold as if an actual person was finding this out. (it also adds to the tension).

3.) Yes I agree with the interpretation but I do not find him completely blameless (he did kill a man and is prideful). 

5.) I do not think that Jocasta is a flat character, she seems to have a little complexity but could have given more depth. When she tries to persuade Oedipus when he tries to learn about his parents after she realizes it's him shows complexity, perhaps she would have kept it a secret and lived with the knowledge. And when she commits suicide after Oedipus realize who they really are and what they've done shows complexity, she feels great shame that can only be solved in death.

6.) Dramatic irony is knowing something that the characters of a play or novel do not know, like secrets or their fate. Dramatic irony in the play is that Laius tried to get Oedipus killed and inadvertently started the prophecy? Another instance of irony is that Oedipus thinks he's avoided the prophecy, but we the reader knows he hasn't. This makes the play more tragic because we know that for all Oedipus tries to avoid the prophecy he can't escape his fate of doom.

7.) Not having the scenes in the drama makes the reader or audience imagine for themselves how the gruesome scenes played out , so it's an advantage. A disadvantage is that it leaves the audience wanting and does not create a finished affect (in my opinion).

8.) Oedipus states that "Nothing he could see could give him joy" (1425), the gouging of his eyes may be atonement for his sin(he was metaphorically blind and now he is physically blind). His surgical instruments are his own hands and might show his free will, his desire to hurt or punish himself.

9.) I feel pity because Oedipus couldn't escape his harsh fate, and besides his hubris I feel that the end of his life was cruel.

11.) I feel that the gods are cruel and besides saying prophecies have no real or substantial role in the lives of their followers.I think the play shows reverence to the gods because it show cases their power and their affect in human lives.(albeit it is shown to make one fear them that is a sort of reverence. Also, if the gods hadn't said the prophecy to humans and let Laius raise Oedipus properly as his own son would the prophecy even come true?)

12.) To me the play ends in total doom , Oedipus' wife committed suicide, he's maimed himself, and his daughters will never be accepted in society due to the reasons of their birth.  

Oedipus Rex

               Oedipus, the King of Thebes, is a very prideful man. After saving Thebes he becomes the ruler and doesn't rule very well. By the time the tragedy starts his kingdom is in horrible condition. He thinks a curse is upon the land, but I think that if he took things into his own hands and actually ruled (because who chooses their king because he defeated a monster? that doesn't mean he can lead a nation.) he would get better results. But then again Oedipus' society heavily believed in the forces of nature like the gods. So it’s odd that when he sends for Tiresias and hears his fragmented prophesy he doesn't want to hear it. A lot of foreshadowing indicates that he's the guy who killed the former king, and I think it is very foolish of him to decree all these curses when he doesn't know who the culprit is. He's practically digging his own grave. And for some reason he knows it's not himself, even though there is a slight chance because he has killed someone before. The hamaratia is that he killed his dad, but also that he proclaimed this grand curse in front of his people. This may be due to his tragic flaw of pride and impulsiveness in my opinion. This definitely has pathos appeal because you kind of sort of like the character, or feel sorry for him, but you know that all these bad things are going to happen to him. Sort of like Romeo and Juliet. The tragedy may have a karthsis moment at the end when Oedipus can finally absolve himself of the crime he committed all those years ago. I don't think I would happy towards the end of the play, the whole thing is about a man who couldn't escape a fate determined by others and doomed to suffer. That in itself, is something dismal.