2002. Morally ambiguous characters --
characters whose behavior discourages readers from identifying them as purely
evil or purely good -- are at the heart of many works of literature. Choose a
novel or play in which a morally ambiguous character plays a pivotal role. Then
write an essay in which you explain how the character can be viewed as morally
ambiguous and why his or her moral ambiguity is significant to the work as a
whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
I
once read that 'Only crazy people see things in black and white'; in that case, there has to be ambiguity in every character ever written, no matter how seemingly onesided the character may be.
This seems to be the case in Edward Albee's play The American Dream, where a character named Mommy, whose major role in the play is to simply emasculate her husband and obsess over how 'well off' she is. Though, with all her bad
qualities, the reader never identifies her as 'evil' nor 'good', because,
through a litany of literary techniques, Albee was able to characterize Mommy
so that she comes to life, where, in her, resides both the good and bad of
humanity. Mommy in Albee's play functions as a contrasting figure representing the present state of society in comparison's to Grandma's traditional beliefs.
The American Dream showcases a classic dysfunctional American family, one where no one in the
household can have satisfaction, where the past plays not role in the present
and every moment could act independently from the moment before.
Mommy acts as the present society, obsessed about what is posh and glamorous, going so far as to differentiate between a hat that is wheat and beiged color because a 'wheat' colored hat would not seem so very fashionable. The truth of the matter was was that the hats were the same and she was easily persuaded by someone of supposedly higher class. Furthermore, Mommy goes out of her way to control Daddy and almost everything around her, including her son whom she killed because "it had eyes only for Daddy". Through and through, we see Mommy's character portrayed very negatively yet the reader hesitates to truly call her "evil." I think in this case, Mommy is meant to represent society as well as human nature, to represent ourselves taken to an extreme and to call her evil would be misunderstanding Albee's point. Mommy is not 'evil' or 'good' but a product of her environment, she was simply bred that way.
Through
his portrayal of Mommy, The American Dream is further heighten because it fits
into the imagery the playwrite has created; Grandma as the old American Dream,
the Young Man as the current American Dream and Mommy as the changing character
who picks and chooses which dream she wants. Albee is showing the reader what
could become because naturally, being humans, everyone is at one time or
another, childish and hateful, kind yet resentful and hopeful, all of which Mommy displays at one point or another (in varying degrees).
The American Dream is a novel depicting the changing American values and Mommy plays a center role in communicating Albee's message of showcasing the distance American values are putting against tradition.
The American Dream is a novel depicting the changing American values and Mommy plays a center role in communicating Albee's message of showcasing the distance American values are putting against tradition.
You have a sentence fragment in your opening paragraph. You also have a lot of unnecessary words in the first paragraph. Individually your paragraphs are well-written, however they fail to correspond to your thesis and the prompt. If Mommy is a contrast to Grandma, you need information about both characters. I would also omit the reference to the Young Man as he is irrelevant to your thesis. You also need to connect your evidence back to Mommy's ambiguity. Remember that you have to prove she is ambiguous before you write a paper based on that assumption. Don't forget the overall meaning. It appeared in your paragraph about wheat vs. beige, but you need more of it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, "good" vs. "evil"? I like that order better. More natural.
Okay. You should never argue in the first person, because it weakens the force of your argument. (No "I.") Your essay is also riddled with errors in usage. Beyond this, Lindsay gave you some good advice--revising accordingly would have been a good idea.
ReplyDelete