During the time period Tennessee Williams, author of the play A Streetcar Named Desire, lived in, men were typically portrayed as leaders of the household. Through Williams' usage of dialogue, specific descriptions of each characters, as well as sound, he illustrates to readers of today's society how differently a man and woman coexisted in the mid-1900s, compared to today. Through the eyes of a topical/historical theorist, who stresses the relationships between the story and the time period it takes place, the distinction between today's society and that of five decades past, can be observed with depth and precision. Stanley Kowalski, a main character in A Streetcar Named Desire, is a common man who is simple, straight forward and brutally honest. He treats his wife with no respect, for she does not deserve it because she is a woman. To him, her duties are to obey his commands and tolerate his intolerable actions. If she chooses to disobey or challenge his orders, it is then his duty to abuse her physically if he deems it necessary. He insincerely apologizes for it afterwards, and expects his wife to learn from her mistakes and to continue with her duties as though he did nothing wrong. During this time period, domestic violence is not uncommon and is widely accepted as a means in obtaining a desired behavior from one's wife. Stanley is clearly aware of this. After an attack, his wife states to her sister, "He was as good as a lamb when I came back and he's really very, very ashamed of himself (Williams, 2309). Due to human nature, he does show that he feels sorry for his wife, in order to make sure she doesn't get any ideas to leave. Stanley is unaware of this, but the fact that he fears his wife's departure is an insecurity we will never admit to (psychological/psychoanalytic approach). Stella, Stanley's wife in the play, is a passive woman. She is displayed this way through how she responds to the people and situations around her. When she is beaten by Stanley, she understands that his drunkenness takes hold of him and he has no control over his actions. She knows he never means her harm and his intentions are good.
social problems may affect us in the future as it up to us as the new
As women's studies programs have proliferated throughout American universities, feminist "re-readings" of certain classic authors have provided us with the most nonsensical interpretations of these authors' texts. A case in point is that of Kathleen Margaret Lant's interpretation of Tennessee Williams' A Streetcar Named Desire in her essay entitled "A Streetcar Named Misogyny." Throughout the essay, she continually misreads Williams' intention, which of course causes her to misunderstand the play itself. Claiming that the play "has proved vexing to audiences, directors, actors, readers, and critics" (Lant 227), she fails to see that it is she herself who finds the play vexing, because it does not fit nicely into the warped feminist structure she would try to impose upon it.
The White Citizens Council was formed and led opposition to school desegregation allover the South. The Citizens Council called for economic coercion of blacks who favored integrated schools, such as firing them from jobs, and the creation of
The United States in the 1950s was quite different from the modern world we live in. There was a time where it was against the law for an African American to ride in the front of a bus or to be in the same school as a white child. Thankfully today our world is more accepting than that and we have the Civil Rights movement to thank for that. The Civil Rights Movement and its participants are responsible for shaping the country we now see today.
During early times men were regarded as superior to women. In Tennessee William’s play, “A Streetcar Named Desire”, Stanley Kowalski, the work’s imposing antagonist, thrives on power. He embodies the traits found in a world of old fashioned ideals where men were meant to be dominant figures. This is evident in Stanley’s relationship with Stella, his behavior towards Blanche, and his attitude towards women in general. He enjoys judging women and playing with their feelings as well.
Johnson: Savior of the Civil Rights Movement? The Civil Rights Movement and President Johnson are closely linked in history. Though there were many other faces to the Civil Rights Movement, Johnson’s was one of the most publicly viewed and instrumental in its passing. It was Johnson who carried the weight and responsibility of the issue after the assassination of JFK, and it was he who would sign it.
The 1960’s were a time of freedom, deliverance, developing and molding for African-American people all over the United States. The Civil Rights Movement consisted of black people in the south fighting for equal rights. Although, years earlier by law Africans were considered free from slavery but that wasn’t enough they wanted to be treated equal as well. Many black people were fed up with the segregation laws such as giving up their seats on a public bus to a white woman, man, or child. They didn’t want separate bathrooms and water fountains and they wanted to be able to eat in a restaurant and sit wherever they wanted to and be served just like any other person.
The latter part of the Civil Rights Movement was characterized by action and change as it was no longer centralized in the South or only fought for by black individuals. Rather, northerners were active in achieving black equality and the white community was campaigning for integration. Although many lost their lives in this struggle, their valiancy did not go unrewarded and soon enough African Americans were able to vote, work, study, and simply eat lunch beside white individuals.
Stanley does not take notice of his wife’s concern, but instead continues on his original course, asserting his own destiny, without any thought to the effect it may have on those around him. This taking blood at any cost to those around him is foreshadowed in scene one, with the packet of met which he forces upon his wife. It is through actions such as these that Stanley asserts power, symbolic of the male dominance throughout patriarchal society. He also gains a s...
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” This was a speech by Martin Luther King Jr. Even one hundred years after slavery was banned, African Americans were still being treated unfairly. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the most famous leaders of the Civil Rights movement in the 1960’s. The Civil Rights movement was a movement of African Americans who felt that they were not being treated equally. There were also many other famous leaders and inspirations during the Civil Rights Movement. This movement was very important to the freedom of African Americans.
The ideology of male dominance has existed since the beginning of mankind. In the play A Streetcar Named Desire, by Tennessee Williams, it is especially apparent that Stanley, who is a working class man, feels the need to assert and reassert this principle of power constantly. Williams makes clear, through the character of Stanley, that the yearning for others’ recognition of their power and capability is the motive behind men’s masculine inclinations.
Stanley (Stella's husband) represents a theme of realism in the play; he is shown as a primitive, masculine character that is irresistible to Stella and on some levels even to his "opponent" Stella's sister Blanche.
The first scene of the play (pg. 14) Stanley has just thrown a piece of meat up to Stella as he turns the corner heading for the bowling ally. He makes no motion to stop, run up the stairs and explain to his wife what’s going on, similar to what would occur in an equal relationship. Instead he continues down the street like a boy with no responsibilities. Stella yells, “Where are you going,” and then asks if she could come to watch, he agrees but doesn’t stop to wait for her. This scene demonstrates how Stella follows Stanley along, and serves him according to what he wishes to do and when he wants to do it.
Historically, the Civil Rights Movement was a time during the 1950’s and 60’s to eliminate segregation and gain equal rights. Looking back on all the events, and dynamic figures it produced, this description is very vague. In order to fully understand the Civil Rights Movement, you have to go back to its origin. Most people believe that Rosa Parks began the whole civil rights movement. She did in fact propel the Civil Rights Movement to unprecedented heights but, its origin began in 1954 with Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka. Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka was the cornerstone for change in American History as a whole. Even before our nation birthed the controversial ruling on May 17, 1954 that stated separate educational facilities were inherently unequal, there was Plessy vs. Ferguson in 1896 that argued by declaring that state laws establish separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. Some may argue that Plessy vs. Ferguson is in fact backdrop for the Civil Rights Movement, but I disagree. Plessy vs. Ferguson was ahead of it’s time so to speak. “Separate but equal” thinking remained the body of teachings in America until it was later reputed by Brown vs. Board of Education. In 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat, and prompted The Montgomery Bus Boycott led by one of the most pivotal leaders of the American Civil Rights Movement, Martin Luther King Jr. After the gruesome death of Emmett Till in 1955 in which the main suspects were acquitted of beating, shooting, and throwing the fourteen year old African American boy in the Tallahatchie River, for “whistling at a white woman”, this country was well overdo for change.
After reading the history of the civil rights movement, I was very surprised that not all blacks agreed and supported King. Many felt that non-violence was not the answer and equal rights was not possible because of the laws at that time. The black community was divided in many ways because Elder Michaux and Dr. King were both highly respected leaders, but had different ways of thinking. Many blacks criticized King because they thought he was a “glory seeker”. He did use the media to his advantage and many did not like his approach. They said “he brought too much attention to himself” and not the issue at hand.