Under Milk Wood Character Analysis

The characters in Under Milk Wood compared to the characters in My dinner with Andre are incredibly flat. Under Milk Wood possess many characters, the book is fast paced and the reader does not have much detail or insight into the characters. In Under Milk Wood, there are descriptions of the characters but not much depth to them, we can see this through the quote, “In Butcher Beynon’s, Gossamer Beynon, daughter, school teacher, dreaming deep, daintily ferrets under a fluttering hummock of chickens” (Thomas 14). The reader is given some detail about Gossamer Beynon but do not get to understand her character in a deeper sense other than her characteristics. According to Amanda Wrigley she describes the play as “fleetingly, yet the ‘ear-catching’ inventiveness of

Dylan Thomas’ language means that characterization (of a universal rather than particular kind) is nevertheless readily established, resulting in a richly layered work” (Wrigley 1). Thomas creates characters that are superficial with little depth emphasize the deeper layers. In contrast, My Dinner with Andre there are arguably three characters, Wally, Andre and the Waiter.

Wally and Andrew are round characters, there thoughts are exposed and undergo development throughout the course of the work. If we specifically look at Wally, he is not two-dimensional character, his character is developed slowly through the book. He is quiet and pensive in the first half of the book not saying much but then his character starts to blossom and develop. In Philosophical Films online review, the reviewer mentions Wally’s presence throughout the play, “by the third act, Wally finally begins to speak up and offers some criticisms of Andre's views; though I understand the purpose of the mounting tension released at this point” (Philosophical Films 3). We can see this on page 60, Wally states, “I agree with you, but I’m always trying to figure out how to describe just in what way they’re strange. Why would you say they’re strange?” (Gregory & Shawn 60). After this quote, Wally character is developed, he offers more opinions and is an active participant in the conversation. Thomas uses flat characters because he is trying to get the reader to focus on the context not the characters superficial

nature. Wallace and Andre want the reader to deeply think about what Andre and Wally are going through, so offering round characters emphasizes on the development to help produce the idea that Wally is not just a superficial character but his dialogue adds meaning. All of these authors use their type of character so the audience can analyze the layers further.