Comparison between Shakespeare and Pinter - 1439 Words

Comparison between Shakespeare and Pinter Both extracts are obviously dramatic texts, although the differences between Shakespeare and Pinter are considerable. Set in 1592, Shakespeare’s Richard III focuses on the epic story of a man striving to be king at any cost. By contrast, Pinter’s post-modernist concerns highlighted through this ‘kitchen sink drama’ focuses on the claustrophic oppressive domestic world of an ordinary family. Shakespeare’s Jacobean reflection is equally as intriguing as Pinter’s view of society in 1965. Both Shakespeare and Pinter address love as a ploy in order to gain power. Pinter initially portrays the female character being dominated by her brother-in-law. He states, â€Å"I tend to get desensitized,† beginning†¦show more content†¦Likewise, the glass used by Ruth which can be said to be more feminine also holds a great deal of power. Ruth uses the glass as a domineering weapon, she states â€Å"Hav e a sip. Go on. Have a sip from my glass,† which leaves Lenny â€Å"still.† Thus Pinter cleverly uses the object to portray the alteration of authority. This is reminiscent of Edward Albee’s â€Å"Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf† who uses the concept of the protagonists son to alternate the power between the couple and accentuate the passion between them. Shakespeare’s uses poetic language to emphasis the rhetorical tone of the play in comparison to Pinter’s naturalistic dialogue. For example Shakespeare uses the conceit of the eyes introduced by Anne: â€Å"Thou dost infect mine eyes.† Although Richard alters this into a romantic flourish and claims that â€Å"thine eyes, sweet lady, have infected mine,† alluding to the idea that she has in fact infected him in love. This extended metaphor is continued â€Å"For now they will kill me with a living death† further illustrating that as his passions are unrequited: him loving and waiting for her for the rest of his life will be as though he is dying. This hyperbolic language is also depicted in the first scenes of Romeo and Juliet. Romeo states, â€Å"When the devout religion of mine eye// Maintains such falsehood, then turn tears to fires.† Shakespeare uses exaggerated language to portray Romeo’s naivety towards love. He uses hyperbolic in Richard III to enliven theShow MoreRelatedLiterature and Language10588 Words   |  43 PagesChapter 9 Language and Literature There is a very close relationship between language and literature. The part of linguistics that studies the language of literature is termed LITERARY STYLISTICS. It focuses on the study of linguistic features related to literary style. 9.1 Theoretical background Our pursuit of style, the most elusive and fascinating phenomenon, has been enhanced by the constant studies of generations of scholars, â€Å"Style†, the phenomenon, has been recognized sinceRead Morewisdom,humor and faith19596 Words   |  79 PagesTable of Contents (with links) Walter G. Moss 1 Table of Contents (with links) 1 Wisdom, Perspective, and Values 2 Humor’s Contribution to Wisdom 4 Humor and Wisdom in Europe: Some Highlights 5 Renaissance Humor: Erasmus, Rabelais, Cervantes, Shakespeare 5 Two European Russians: Anton Chekhov and Vladimir Soloviev 9 Reflections on Humor from Nietzsche to the Theatre of the Absurd 12 Humor and Wisdom in the United States: Lincoln, Beecher, Twain, Sandburg, and Buchwald 17 From The Times (of London)Read MoreAN ANALYSIS PAPER ON ANTON CHEKHOV’S THE SEAGULL AND THE CHERRY ORCHARD12092 Words   |  49 PagesComic Relief 3.1.1.2 Cliff-hanger Endings 3.1.2 Modern Playwrights and Western Short Story Authors 3.2 Influence on Samuel Beckett 3.2.1 Three Sisters and Waiting for Godot 3.2.2 Dreaming for Ideal Life 3.2.3 Inaction and Passivity 3.3 Comparison to Henry James 3.3.1 Varying Cultural. Political, and Social Standpoints 3.3.2 Ideologem of Loss 3.3.3 Relation of Russian and American Literature 4. Questions for Analysis 4.1 How do the literary works teach about morality? 4.2 WhatRead MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pagesapplication and consideration of how managment practice is formed and shaped by ideas and concepts. The authors have brought their wealth of experience and understanding and provided the field with an imaginative resource to address the dynamics between theory and practice. Dr Susanne Tietze, Bradford University, UK The key to success for managers is not only to be result oriented but also to be wise in their decision making. This requires that they have a deeper than superficial understanding of