The Tragic Nature of True Love

Emily Bronte’s Wuthering Heights has proven to completely fit the definition of a tragic love story. The central romance in the story so far is between Catherine and Heathcliff; however, this soon becomes complicated by the presence of Edgar whom Catherine seems to fall in love with as well. Initially, her decision to become engaged to Edgar made me doubt her “true” love for Heathcliff. Was it true love or was it more of a cute childhood romance with no potential for a future? The novel had seemed to build up a soul-mate sort of relationship, but perhaps I was reading the work too literally. However, after pondering these questions about the nature of their relationship I soon realized that I was wrong in assuming that their love was anything short of sincere. The final reason for her to become engaged to Edgar was more so for her social reputation than for her love for Edgar. Perhaps her obsession with her social status was Catherine’s tragic flaw, or perhaps she never stopped to truly consider the repercussions that her actions would bear on Heathcliff; nonetheless, the engagement was a huge and permanent mistake. I believe that Bronte meant for Catherine and Heathcliff to be soul mates, who, because of a hasty decision, doomed themselves to suffer throughout the rest of their lives without one another. The final scene that they are together nearly brought me to tears as Heathcliff screamed and pleaded with Catherine to do anything but leave him alone while she lay on her deathbed. Their final interaction was the icing on the cake for me to prove that all along they were meant to be with one another, and despite the differences that the marriage between Catherine and Edgar created, Heathcliff would have taken her back in a heartbeat. Even though he has been away from her for a long time before returning to Wuthering Heights, and despite the fact that the both of them had married others and started new lives, it was clear that Heathcliff had been incapable of erasing Catherine from his memory. He may have had a wife, but she did not have any of his love. In fact, in his heart he held animosity towards Isabella and treated her cruelly and without a heart. Catherine may have had a husband, but there was still only one man to whom she had entrusted her heart long ago. The two of them were made for one another and like all tragic love stories, one of the two made an unfortunate error in not prioritizing their love. I don’t know how this story will end, but it is already clear that Heathcliff will carry the memory of Catherine with him until the end of the novel. Whether or not he will be capable of moving on is also going to be another factor in the plot development. I am anxious to read further and see how deeply this event will influence the later occurrences of the novel. (503)

Hamlet: To be or not to be (a jerk)?

During Act 3 (particularly in scene 1) Hamlet is very cruel and harsh in his improper treatment of Ophelia. When he first approaches her in this scene, they both appear to behave in a civil way towards one another and the reader almost believes that he or she will see a glimpse of the old and more stable Hamlet. However, he or she quickly sees that Hamlet is in no mood for niceties or formalities when he decides to take a different, more harsh, approach when dealing with Ophelia this time around. She reminds him of all of the beautiful gifts and things that he had done for her when they were in love, and he responds by going on to tell her that he never gave her anything, and that he “loved [her] not.” Although her response, “I was the more deceived” seems to indicate that she took this blow rather calmly, I think that it is a safe assumption that the actress on stage shows the hurt and heartbreak on her face and in her inflection. Although her response is not hysterical or weepy, she must be heart broken, as to be told that a previous relationship in fact meant nothing and was quite meaningless cannot possibly be taken without sadness. What makes Hamlet so heartless in the scene is his callous manner and sarcastic tone. His words are made all the more cutting by what I imagine is the actor playing Hamlet mocking Ophelia’s obvious pain by means of an “I could care less” attitude. He sees that she is hurting, and he “helps ease her pain” by telling her that all men, like himself, are “arrant knaves…believe none of us.” He then tells her that the best way to avoid all of the “proud, revengeful, and ambitious” men like himself is to quit altogether and simply join a nunnery. Obviously, this comment is not meant with serious connotation, he does not actually think that joining a nunnery would be the proper solution; on the contrary, it is a clearly caustic remark due to the bitterness and sarcasm that I believe are in his voice. After Hamlet departs, Ophelia remembers Hamlet as he once was (as a sane and normal man with whom she was in love) and curses his currently insane and unstable being. As the reader, I do believe that Hamlet previously had true and deep feelings for her; however, recent circumstances have brought him into a volatile state where his mental state is rapidly declining. He is becoming all the more paranoid and anxious and in the process, cruel and blunt. The supposed “nobility and sensitivity” which previously distinguished him are no longer evidenced by means of his moody and harsh behavior. His character is clearly one with many different faces, and by means of this interaction between the two former-lovers, one of these faces proves to be that of a vengeful and heartless heart breaker (504).

Thoughts about Antigone

Immediately after finishing the piece of writing, I felt as though Antigone herself was the epitome of a tragic heroine. After all, her obvious blunder was to defy Creon’s decree that her brother should not be allowed a proper burial, and her lapse of judgment in burying him anyways brought about her ultimate downfall. However, as I sat down to write this blog I began to rethink my initial analysis. In a strange and twisted way, was not Antigone’s story that of victory? By committing the “crime,” she was taken away and locked in a vault where she ultimately killed herself, but more importantly, her actions indirectly led to the downfall of Creon’s entire life.

At first, Creon is hateful, proud, and emotionless. He mocks Antigone’s morals and he scoffs at her beliefs that God will punish Creon in the end. Despite his son Haimon’s love for Antigone, Creon becomes so caught up in his power that he sentences her to death for what he considers, “double insolence, breaking the given laws and boasting of it.” What Creon sees as boasting, Antigone believes to be justification. She sees nothing wrong with what she has done in attempting to properly bury her brother, as morally, it is the right thing to do. Whether or not Creon is thinking with his heart or his wounded ego is apparent when he disregards his son’s feelings in order to punish the girl who dared talk back to the king.

Creon believes that he will benefit from Antigone’s exile, but after an ominous prophecy from Teiresias warning him of the consequences to ensue his rash treatment of the girl, Creon begins to doubt his actions. Earlier, he had believed that what he wanted the most was her death; however, in retrospect, Creon is better able to realize that he had acted harshly and that he should try to undo the damage in order to prevent the prophecy from coming true. When he goes to free the prisoner-girl, he sees that she has already commit suicide. What he had once hoped for now causes his family’s demise. Haimon is so deeply hurt by the loss of the his one true love that he kills himself, and upon hearing about his suicide, his mother Eurydice becomes so struck with grief that she too kills herself. When Creon realizes what he has caused he finally admits his folly when he says, “I alone am guilty…I have been rash and foolish. I have killed my son and my wife...Fate has brought all my pride to a thought of dust.”

So, all in all, it seems that he who had commit the greatest blunder, which caused his ultimate downfall, was in fact Creon and not Antigone. In her death, she brought about the death of Creon’s reign, family, and life. Had he only been less obsessed with pride and his power, then perhaps he could have avoided the awful end to his world. This brings me to my final thought of the blog: Creon is the tragic hero in this piece of work as his inability to think with his heart causes the blood to spew from the heart’s of those that he cherished the most (536).

The Inevitable Heartbreak

I am now, and shan’t be ashamed to be,

But free from fret and care,

I wish to wander the seven seas,

And skip along the sunken sod with feet bare,

To touch the sky, to taste the sun,

I dream these wonders to be true,

Held away from the lucid light by none,

Restrained by no one, not even you---

You showed me stars,

From you I learnt love,

These moments forever ours,

I’ll remember you when I gaze above;

But I must leave you now,

You must let go, you must learn how.

The Fear of the Unknown

Douglas Kerr's article, "Three Ways of Going Wrong: Kipling, Conrad, Coetzee” highlights nearly every important similarity between both Conrad’s Heart of Darkness and Coetzee’s Waiting for the Barbarians; however, he fails to touch upon the prevalent theme illustrated in both novels: the fear of the unknown. When I first read Heart of Darkness, I felt that the term “savage,” used to characterize the inhabitants of Africa, was overtly racist and politically incorrect. In fact, one of the most obvious and recurrent themes in Conrad’s book is how darkness is the abyss of evil while light is the pure savior. This too can also be applied to race, as the text may be commenting on how the people with dark skin are inherently inferior while the lighter white-skinned people are born superior. Still, while the terminology in Heart of Darkness is undeniably offensive, after reading Waiting for the Barbarians, I soon realized that this root of this derogatory language was not race after all. In fact, this same sense of superiority amongst a more advanced people is evident in Waiting for the Barbarians as well, but unlike a white society discriminating against a black one, it is a powerful Empire being hateful towards the peaceful people who live just outside of the boundaries. Much like how the less advanced and less power-hungry peoples of Africa are deemed “savages,” the nomads and fishermen who inhabit the land outside of the Empire are termed “barbarians.” What is it that these savages and barbarians have done to be insulted, hated, tortured, and ultimately, treated no better than wild beasts? It all boils down to an more “civilized” society’s belief that they are the best by nature, and therefore, are meant to exert this destined dominance; however, there is also an underlying fear that the peoples and customs that which they are incapable of understanding could ultimately be the cause of their downfall. Now why is it that a people with a greater spectrum of education and civilization are so afraid of the unknown? The problem is that because they cannot make sense of these people or their ways, they are unable to methodically analyze their actions, and therefore, must always be in suspicion. The ultimate travesty for them would be if anything got in the way of them and their power. And so, they must always be sure that they keep the barbarians and savages in check, and in doing so, they can flex their muscles to the world. In the end, power is everything, and cowering in fear of the unknown could potentially compromise that power (434).

Love...Or Lack Thereof in Waiting for the Barbarians

After reading the first four sections of Waiting for the Barbarians, I can only think of one word to describe my state of mind: confused. The concept of love, or lack thereof, in the novel completely baffles me. At first, it seemed as though the narrator only wanted to help the beggar “barbarian” woman because of his guilty conscience. However, things became strange when he started caressing her feet and later, bathing her. He seemed to care about her enough to not simply keep her around for the sexual pleasures; in fact, he does not even have sex with her until months of knowing her. Still, he rejects her when she wants to make love and instead sneaks off in the nights to have sex with a prostitute. If he is truly in love with this barbarian woman, why is it that he can hardly picture her in a sexual way? Also, I was dumbfounded by her desire to make love to him. At first, I assumed that she simply wanted to know that she was good enough for him; however, later events in the reading prove this theory to be false. If the knowledge of being wanted was all that she was after, she surely would not have snuck into his bed naked and finally had sex with him. If she was so keen to be with him, one would assume that she also cared deeply for him, perhaps even loved him. This is clearly not the case, as when she is given the opportunity to either return to her barbarian peoples or to stay with the narrator, she chooses to leave him. Why is it that she wanted to have sex with the old, and judging by the descriptions throughout the novel, unattractive man when she had no reason to do so? If she was truly just with him because there was nowhere else to be, wouldn’t she savor the opportunity to not be sexually exploited? I am unsure as to how the two feel about one another, but I think it is safe to say that the relationship leaves the reader with several questions that will hopefully be answered as the novel continues (366).

Brief Summary of Edward W. Said’s “Two Visions in Heart of Darkness”

Imperialism

- In the nineteenth century, the world’s greatest powers all wanted to become the strongest and largest empires, thus causing much of the world to be dominated by them.

- This is the concept of imperialism, and Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is all about Europe’s brutal mission to colonize the “dark” world.

- The common theme recurring throughout the novel is that the Europeans were constantly trying to exert their imperial power over those in the darkness, also known as Africa.

Conrad through Said’s Eyes

- Conrad is set apart from the other Europeans of his time because he was aware of and critical of his actions. These self-conscious views are expressed through Marlow’s narrative.

- In Conrad’s time, freedom was for the whites, while oppression and a lack of independence was for those considered inferior.

- Because Conrad lived in the time of widespread imperialism, he could only imagine the world ruled by a few European powers.

- Conrad’s critique of imperialism is illustrated through Marlow’s narrative.

- Marlow’s story begins and ends with the darkness; Conrad’s story is therefore a circular one.

- The narrators in Heart of Darkness do not have the same views or opinions of average British citizens of the time period.

- What makes the narrators different is the fact that they actually think deeply about the concept of imperialism and how long it will last instead of passively accepting it.

- Conrad realized that the darkness had the potential to be colonized but also that it had to be recognized as independent.

- Like Conrad, both Marlow and Kurtz acknowledge the darkness, allowing them to understand that the darkness is its own country despite imperialism.

- Still, like Conrad, Marlow and Kurtz live during a time when the only thing they knew was imperialism; therefore, they are unable to know what the next logical step should be.

- In our times, we recognize that the next step would have been to recognize that the Africans, in fact, were resisting imperialism and hoping to one day rid themselves of the European power.

- Because Conrad was incapable of imagining a world without imperialism, he was unable to picture the natives ruling themselves. According to Said, this is Conrad’s “tragic limitation” (428.)

The “Two Visions” in Heart of Darkness

- The first argument is that although the Western powers left their colonies and “withdrew” from Africa and Asia, they still retained rule over the markets, morals, and education in these places.

- This creates the picture of the darkness being incapable of being redeemed because of its inferiority.

- This argument leads to a lot of objection and criticism.

- The second argument claims that imperialism was simply something of that time and that place, not something that would continue even in the post-colonial world.

- This theory also says that imperialism, like everything else in the human world, had its moment of popularity that would eventually pass, like everything else in life.

- This argument is more commonly accepted. (518)