Effective Use of Dialogue in The Sacrifice of Isaac
In the Brome version of The Sacrifice of Isaac, the suspense created by the emotionally charged dialogue is likely what kept the audience's attention. While it is incredibly likely that the audience knew the entire story, the emotional flavor of the dialogue, such as Abraham's innocent expressions of his love of and thankfulness for Isaac at the beginning of the play, is bound to evoke a certain concern for the characters which dims the audience's foreknowledge of the tale's happy ending. It is much the same principle that modern television scriptwriters use to hold viewers' attention through a series; the main characters, who can't die because they are needed for next week's episode, are somehow threatened, and, in the end, are saved by the magic of plot twists and cool kung-fu. But, while you are watching these shows, despite the fact you know these characters won't be killed off, your gut twists every time an arrow whizzes past Xena or Batman narrowly avoids the Joker's evil poison gas. It seems that the medieval playwright was just as adept at making his audience forget that they know the end of the story, but this one does it through his characters' dialogue.
Abraham: As Isaac here, my owyn swete son.
I have diverse children moo,
The which I love not halffe so well.
This fayer swet child, he schereys me soo .
Now cum on, Isaac, my owyn swet child;.
Cume on, swete child. I love thee best
Of all the children that I ever begat.
It appears that this opening speech by Abraham is designed to induce the audience to think ahead to God's demand, by offering them a view of Abraham's love for Isaac, and Isaac's fitness as a son. ...
... middle of paper ...
...ng through with the sacrifice.
It becomes quite apparent that the modern scriptwriter does not have exclusive rights to the use of enrapturing dialogue in the creation of gripping scenes. In fact, it may be argued that the medieval playwright was more reliant on dialogue to interest the audience because he needed to write a play that would be engaging on a limited and often primitive set. In just reading this play, I became attuned to the reactions of an audience viewing the play; I believe this attests to the playwright's effective use of language, particularly dialogue, since there are few stage directions, in his composition of The Sacrifice of Isaac.
Works Cited
Ackerman, R. W. Backgrounds to Medieval English Literature. New York: Random House, 1966.
Robertson, D. W., ed. The Literature of Medieval England. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970.
Sargent, Michael G. “Mystical Writings and Dramatic Texts in Late Medieval England.” Religion & Literature , Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer, 2005), pp. 77-98
Joseph, Bertram. Rev. of The Twelfth Night of Shakespeare’s Audience, by John W. Draper. Review of English Studies 3.10 (1952): 170-71. Print.
Lately, it would be difficult to find a person who speaks in the elaborate way that nearly all of Shakespeare’s characters do; we do not describe “fortune” as “outrageous” or describe our obstacles as “slings and arrows,” neither in an outward soliloquy or even in our heads. Lately, people do not declare their goals in the grandiose fashion that members of royal family of Thebes proclaim their opposing intentions: Antigone’s to honor her brother and Kreon’s to uphold his decree. Lately, people do not all speak in one unified dialect, especially not one that belongs specifically to the British upper class; Jack and Algernon’s dialogue is virtually identical, excepting content. Unlike the indistinguishably grandiose, elaborate, fancy way characters speak in Shakespeare’s plays, Antigone, The Importance of Being Earnest, and other plays written before the turn of the twentieth century, more recently written plays contain dialogue that is more unique to its speaker. This unique dialogue indicates a change in the sort of characters which drama focuses on which came with a newly developed openness to those who are different from us. Moving away from recounting tales of nobility, royalty or deities brought the lives of a common, heterogeneous populace to the stage and, with these everyday stories, more varied speech patterns.
An editor who is given the task to edit any play written by William Shakespeare has a sizeable task to fulfill. The main objective in editing is to both make the play more understandable with altered language and also to give one's own perspective on how the editor wants to project the play on stage. I chose page 142 of Act 5, Scene 2 in Freeman's Othello because this page has become the springboard of the climactic turning point in the play. My personal decisions to alter certain lines and words on page 142 are made to give a new light and a fresh point of view on how I feel that particular scene is to be perceived. Because these plays have been altered a numerous amount of times over the centuries, it is important for one to be able to edit and project their perspectives for themselves.
With a soliloquy, the playwright creates both suspense and dramatic irony. The audience, in contrast to the characters in the play, gets a closer look into Iago’s motives and reasoning.
William Shakespeare’s dramatic and poetic techniques and his use of hyperbole are used to describe the characters emotions and weaknesses. The use of dramatic irony is used to create personal conflict. This is done throughout the play to describe the characters concerns and their situations.
The archetypal tragedy of two star-crossed lovers, separated by familial hate, is a recurring theme, which never fails to capture the minds of the audience. It is only at great cost, through the death of the central characters that these feuding families finally find peace. This is an intriguing idea, one antithetical. I have chosen to analyze both Shakespeare 's Romeo and Juliet and Laurent 's West Side Story. The purpose of this essay is showing how the spoken language is utilized in these different plays to meet differing objectives. The chosen scenes to further aid comparison and contrast are the balcony scenes.
De France, Marie. Lanval The Norton Anthology of English Literature: The Middle Ages. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt. New York: New York, 2006.
Did you know that in the year 1980 the legal drinking age was only 18? In 1987 there was a law passed that said in order to drink legally and to buy alcohol a person had to be 21. At the age of 18 people are allowed to buy tobacco, vote, get married without parental consent, and even join the armed forces, so why can’t some one who is 18 by alcohol. This is a question I have; I believe that the legal drinking age should be 18. Dr. Ruth Engs, a professor of Applied Heath Sciences at Indiana University, agrees with me also. She states, “the legal drinking age should be lowered to about 18 or 19 and young adults should be allowed to drink in controlled environments.” (Engs) These controlled places include restaurants, taverns, pubs, and official school and university functions.
Until the middle of the seventeenth century, soliloquies in European drama represented speeches by characters and did not represent the thoughts of characters. When neoclassical canons of taste replaced Renaissance canons, it became “unnatural” for a character to talk to himself or herself, and dramatists began to employ a new kind of soliloquy that represented thought…The highest purpose of this new kind of soliloquy was to represent the innermost thoughts of a character. (1)
Burning the flag is a symbol of despising the United States. In a dissenting opinion by Rehnquist, he writes, “ The American, then, throughout more than 200 years of our history, has come to be the visible symbol embodying our Nation” (Source E). Rehnquist shows great respect in the American flag because it has been in America’s history for so long. He makes his point by defending that the flag symbolizes the United States. In Todd Lindberg’s editorial, he states, “ On the other hand, the flag is not the freedom itself but it is the symbol” (Source I). Nevertheless, Todd Lindberg also claims, “ First, the flag is the flag; the only reason to accord its special status that it is, in fact the singular national symbol” (Source I). The American flag is just special because it is the national symbol, but if it did not have that title it is just an ordinary piece of cloth. No one would care if that cloth was burned because it does not have any special meaning. Also, the editorial from Los Angeles Times claims, “There has been no epidemic of flag-burning since the Supreme Court ruled in 1989 that destruction of Old Glory as a protest was symbolic speech protected by the 1st Amendment has” (Source F). Therefore, the people’s fear of flag desecration is proven to be false.
Shakespeare thus leaves his audience to fabricate their own perception with serving only minor stage directions. They are then left with Hamlet’s lingering words, actions, and the reactions to predisposed whether Hamlet’s madness is actually feigned or legitimate. Nevertheless, The evidence does not actually define Shakespeare’s character, Hamlet. To relate, modern audiences must do their research to become accustomed to the way of thinking done by people of the Renaissance. All in all, Hamlet’s true soundness is left up to the people of today’s
Aristotle, as a world famous philosopher, gives a clear definition of tragedy in his influential masterpiece Poetics, a well-known Greek technical handbook of literary criticism. In Aristotle’s words, a tragedy is “an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude, language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play, the form of action, not of narrative, through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation of these emotions”(Aristotle 12). He believes that a tragedy should be serious and complete in appropriate and pleasurable language; the plot of tragedy should be dramatic, whose incidents will arouse pity and fear, and finally accomplish a catharsis of emotions. His theory of tragedy has been exerting great influence on the tragedy theories in the past two thousand years. Shakespeare, as the greatest dramatist in western literature, also learnt from this theory. Hamlet is one of the most influential tragedies written by Shakespeare. The play vividly focuses on the theme of moral corruption, treachery, revenge, and incest. This essay will first analyze Shakespeare’s Hamlet under Aristotle’s tragedy theory. Then this essay will express personal opinion on Aristotle’s tragedy theory. The purpose of this essay is to help the reader better understand Aristotle’s theory of tragedy and Shakespeare’s masterpiece Hamlet.
I strongly support the flag protection amendment. “The flag is a symbol of our great nation and all that we stand for. No other American symbol has been as universally honored or has bestowed such honor as the flag”(Flag Alliance, Inc. 1), says Rep. William Lipinski of Illinois. Those who destroy the flag, or view it as just a design on a piece of cloth lack the understanding of our nations(AP) history, and take their American citizenship for granted. They burn the flag only to get attention, or because they are angry with the government, and see it as a way of getting back at them. My solution to these people who are aggravated with our government is to move somewhere else. Try living in China or Cuba, and see if you agree with the way they run their government. When you burn the flag you break the chains that holds you together in unity with the rest of the nation. (This is a pretty extreme metaphor. You need to clearly establish why the desecration of the flag is so damaging. Also, look at your solution. It is also extreme. Will you effectively convince people who don't agree with you by being so extreme? Some drama and emotion is good. But remember that your audience will expect you to show open-mindedness as well.)
Nevo, Ruth. “Acts III and IV: Problems of Text and Staging.” Modern Critical Interpretations: William Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 1986. 53. Print.