Our Previous Samples

Table of contents

1. Introduction
2. What is Daydreaming?
3. Bad VS Good Aspects
4. Functions of Daydreaming
5. Maladaptive Daydreaming
6. Conclusion

Introduction

Interest in dreams and imagination appeared from ancient times through the Middle Ages to the present era, and ancient philosophical scholars and modern psychologists differed in dealing with and studying them with ancient primitive interpretations and from there to modern scientific interpretations, while daydreams are considered psychological phenomena that can be practiced by everyone within reasonable limits without exaggeration, as it is a vast world that opens up new horizons for the individual on his unknown future visions. The main topic for this informative essay is daydreaming as we will understand the nature of this psychological process that allows individuals to live theirs thoughts that are distant or impossible to achieve.

What is Daydreaming?

Daydreaming is a state of consciousness that diverts attention away from the present external work and toward something personal and internal. A big research found that participants spent an average of 47 percent of their waking time daydreaming, indicating that this behavior is ubiquitous in everyday living. Fugue, daydreaming, spontaneous thought, and other terms have been used to describe this phenomena. The use of the term 'daydreams' is based on his academic efforts and is considered the scientific foundation stone for all current studies. The sheer quantity of terminology available in academia nowadays makes it hard to identify the common elements of a phenomena (fictitious in this example) and encourage collaborative efforts among scholars. Psychologists explain to them, imagination has common features that suit moderate dissociation and also has effects that vary on average. Some can be destructive and harmful, while others can be beneficial in some way.

Bad VS Good Aspects

in the current study it was discovered that the negatives of daydreaming outweigh the benefits of daydreaming because daydreaming negatively affects daily activities such as reading and studying as well as in a shocking way that affects the persons mood and psychological state daydreaming on reading achievement has received the most attention as an element of the test reading retention was tested during daydreaming interruptions and it was discovered that there is a limited attention in the material and a decline in the capacity to form models.

Disruption daydream or random daydream is another characteristic of individuals having disorder adhd, and it can be seen negatively as children with adhd have a much more challenging time concentrate on their environment and keeping aware of current tasks. According to studies, people report a lower degree of pleasure during daydreaming than when they are not. People have reported a same satisfaction level for work accomplishments and pleasant activities they are more inclined to consider about when it comes to effective daydreaming.

The key association connecting moods and daydream, due to observation, is that the second happens first, not the other way around. For example instances, Toni Nelson propse that some daydreams with overated imaginations are self- gratifying attempts at 'Wish fulfillment.' Back in the 1950s, some counseling therapists asked parents not to let their kids to daydream due to the possibility to fall into be mentally ill .

Despite the growing popularity of daydreams, positive side has not got as much focus. It is conceivable that the advantage of daydreaming is concealed from the public. For example, it might be claimed that the cost of pursuing a goal is larger than the benefit of daydreaming. It is difficult to know and record people's inner thoughts, such as secret wishes and ambitions. The possible benefits of daydreaming are connected to the development of abilities that allow people to integrate their daily events with their unique significance.

Functions of Daydreaming

Because daydream avoids external duties and its possibility are frequently concealed and ambiguous, it is useful to discover whether daydreaming is, and individuals spend a major amount of their waking hours.

A review on six current data supporting the active advantages of daydreaming describes some of the key expenses of daydreaming that are not connected to constant attention, heart reading, and other factors. Many psychologists have investigated and interpreted the primary purposes of daydreaming. Some of these critical functions are:

• Daydreaming increases creativity. The best thoughts are those that came from when we are not thinking. A UC Santa Barbara research instructed a comparison group to let their minds wander while attempting to complete a creative problem. The end result was outperformed the group that did not take the break by 41%. So, if you've been working on a subject in a really focused manner, it might be time to allow your thoughts to be free
• Daydreaming calms anxiety. A study conducted by Columbia University proves that allowing your mind to think about whatever it wants when you feel stressed by compressive thoughts will make you find peace and conclude the solutionnt.
• Daydreaming enhances your relation. You can envision being around partners the moments between you and them when there are not present which improves the length of the connections.
• Daydreaming increases your production. It is known that production is related to the active mind but it should not be active to the point of exhaustion if you take a break in wandering of mind you will be productive. Georgia Tech proved short breaks connected with daydream make you more refreshed and energized by charging you after fatigue from constant work.
• Daydreaming is a path to your goals. One of the motivators to reach your goal is to imagine you have reached the existence of a dream in itself, which is a motivator to reach the goals. Daydreams, no matter how reasonable or unreasonable they are, are what encourage a person to reach his goals. Oettingen said, “If you want to fulfill your wishes, start with daydreaming, then find your obstacle” and he devising a strategy to dream in a reasonable and realistic way, then imagine the best results, disadvantages, and what prevents ambition, and then develop a plan to exceed what prevents you to reach your goal.

Daydreaming appears if the brains default on activated mood when no other outer work is demanding its focusing according to a multiple studies the DMN is a set of spots in the brain that light up only when the brain is left in a idle condition only when daydream begins the parts in DMN in brain light up in succession in one study it was shown brain utilized up to 6080 percent energy while it was not actively engaged in any external job daydream in other words uses the equal of brain activity as another complicated outer efficacy daydream not the one way the brain uses energy via thinking the human brain consumes over 20 of the energy in the human body thus a two hour chess match may burn over 560 calories and reading for 30 minutes may burn around 42 calories. A brain scan showing the brain regions involved in the DMN. Image credit: John Graner, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center

Maladaptive Daydreaming

Excessive daydreaming is a sign of anxiety disorder and detachment from reality. Excessive daydreams are neither simple imagination nor simple visualization. To create the reality you want and change your beliefs, both imagination and visualisation are great and effective tools. Why? Because it helps you focus on what you want, it's not an escape or a breakup, it's about the moment or future that you want to reverse the excessive daydreaming that you run from to change the past and that's the difference. Do not confuse them, because the latter is - a person stuck in the past escaping - a temporary happiness that ends with sadness and disappointment when it returns to reality.

The reason may seem known now why a person does this, that is clear, because he does not want to see his reality, he is still in pain from the past, so he is in pain from the present as well, he feels helpless because he did not change it. But, do all those who escape from their reality use excessive daydreams? No, this is only one of dozens of escape mechanisms from reality.

So who exactly uses it? It is not only the person who escapes from his reality because he sees it as painful and insufficient, but also the person who feels that there is a mistake in his life, but those around him tell him that there is no mistake and that he should be thankful because others suffer more! Or who does not recognize his current situation because everyone around him lives with satisfaction except him!

Conclusion

Excessive daydreaming can be problematic and it could be a symptom of an underlying condition such as ADHD, depression or anxiety. It can also be associated with maladaptive daydreaming, which is a condition characterized by excessive, vivid and elaborate daydreams that can take up a significant amount of time and interfere with daily activities.

Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.

Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

Daydreaming is a common and normal form of spontaneous mental activity that can be both positive and negative. It can be a source of inspiration and creativity, and it can also help people to solve problems and make plans. However, excessive daydreaming can be problematic and it could be a symptom of an underlying condition such as ADHD, depression or anxiety. It's important to be aware of the balance and to seek professional help if it becomes a concern.

Introduction: With its unforgettable characters, unique love story and dazzling setting, F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby has been a popular source of inspiration for filmmakers since its publication in 1925. The six film adaptations of the novel to date vary considerably in their generally agreed upon degrees of success in interpreting Fitzgerald's work. Background: While some loss of meaning is inevitable in any translation from literature to film, this challenge is especially prominent in the adaptation of a work so driven by the powerful diction of Nick Carroway's narration. One such loss of meaning can be seen in the depiction of Nick's first visit to the Buchanan house for dinner in Jack Clayton's 1974 adaptation of the novel. Thesis statement: Fitzgerald's precise use of diction in describing the characters of Tom and Daisy Buchanan and in creating a motif of movement in this scene provides valuable insight into the relationship between Tom and Daisy in a way that Clayton's translation fails to do.

Topic sentence: In the reader's introduction to the character of Tom Buchanan in this scene of the novel, Nick's repetitive use of words associated with size, power and aggression in describing him creates a clear characterization of Tom as a dominant force. Evidence & citing: Words such as “enormously” (11), “sturdy” (12), “hulking” (16) and “boom” (13) provide a powerful image of the physical power Tom holds, as do descriptions of his stance, as he is said to be “standing with his legs apart” (12) and “leaning aggressively forward” (12). The description of his stance as aggressive seems to add a negative connotation to this power, as do the characterization of his body as “cruel” (12) and “defiant” (12). Commentary: This negative description of Tom's strength and power contribute to the characterization of Tom as dominant, a word Nick uses in describing Tom on page 12 and a topic that Tom brings up himself in the discussion of his desire to “control” and “beat” the non-white races (17). It is not difficult for the reader to connect this sense of power and dominance to Tom's control over Daisy, something that proves key in the climax of the novel. While the actor cast to play Tom in Clayton's adaptation is indeed large and strong, the sense of his cruel aggression and inferred dominance over Daisy is lost without Nick's descriptive narration.

Topic sentence: Equally as important as the language used in conveying the dominance of Tom's character is that used to define the vacancy of Daisy's character. The use of the color white in describing Daisy is a motif present throughout the entirety of the novel, including several times in this scene. While this could be seen as a suggestion innocence and purity, as is also implied by her floral name, a closer examination of this seen provides a second interpretation of the meaning of this characteristic color, that which in reality is not a color at all but rather the absence of color. Evidence & citing: While Nick repetitively employs descriptions of Daisy as “charming” (13), “lovely” (14), and “exciting” (14) to convey a very positive and alluring image of her in the beginning of the scene, as the passage progresses this image is replaced by words such as “absence” (16), “insincerity” (21), and “trick” (21). This leads to the second interpretation of the color white, as denoting not innocence but rather emptiness. Commentary: The reader begins to see Daisy's charming and exciting demeanor as a facade, an act put on by a “beautiful little fool” (21). As a blank palette, forming herself to please others, Daisy is easily controlled by the dominant Tom, as well as society's insistence that she remain him. Again, without Nick's narration this foreshadowing suggestion of Daisy's true character is completely lost in the 1974 film, and Daisy is left portrayed as nothing more than charming and perhaps foolish.

Topic sentence: The final key element in the characterization of Tom and Daisy's relationship in the Buchanan dinner-party scene that is lost in Clayton's translation from text to picture is the motif of movement, created once again by Fitzgerald's precise descriptive abilities. Evidence & citing: While the first description of the couple cites them as having “drifted . . . unrestfully” (11) for the past year, a quotation included as a voice-over in the Clayton film adaptation, it is revealed several lines later that it is Tom that Nick truly believes will “drift on forever” (11). Tom's association with movement and unease, alluded to again by the usage of the word “restlessly” (12,14) twice in describing his movements, seems to hint at Tom's restlessness in his relationship with Daisy. This turmoil is further symbolized in the turbulent description of the Buchanan house, with its curtains “twisting” and “rippl[ing]” with a “whip and snap” (13). In contrast, Daisy is found on “the only completely stationary object in the room” as if she were “anchored” there (13). Everything around Daisy seems to be moving, the curtains, her dress, even her “turbulent emotions” (20), yet she is “paralyzed” (13). While Daisy's quote regarding her paralyzation is included in Clayton's film, without the rest of the motion motif it seems to lose all significance. Commentary: What this motif ultimately serves to do in this scene in the novel is to once again highlight Daisy's inability to act of her own free will, her paralyzation. Instead she is anchored to Tom, moving along with him wherever he restlessly drifts.

Conclusion paragraph: Fitzgerald's use of language in the scene of Nick's first visit to the Buchanan household provides a great deal of insight into Tom and Daisy's relationship, insight that is lost in Jack Clayton's 1974 film adaptation of the novel. The dynamic presented in this scene of the novel is key understanding the climax and resolution of the story, in which Daisy ultimately decides to stay with Tom rather than leaving him for Gatsby, her true love. While viewers of Clayton's film may be surprised by this decision, readers of Fitzgerald's novel know that Daisy, lacking any sort of personal agency, has no choice but to follow what Tom and society expect of her.

Introduction

Should follow an “upside down” triangle format, meaning, the writer should start off broad and introduce the text and author or topic being discussed, and then get more specific to the thesis statement.

Background

Provides a foundational overview, outlining the historical context and introducing keyinformation that will be further explored in the essay, setting the stage for the argument to follow.

Thesis statement

Cornerstone of the essay, presenting the central argument that will be elaborated upon and supported with evidence and analysis throughout the rest of the paper.

Topic sentence

The topic sentence serves as the main point or focus of a paragraph in an essay, summarizing the key idea that will be discussed in that paragraph.

Evidence & citing

The body of each paragraph builds an argument in support of the topic sentence, citing information from sources as evidence.

Commentary

After each piece of evidence is provided, the author should explain HOW and WHY the evidence supports the claim.

Conclusion paragraph

Should follow a right side up triangle format, meaning, specifics should be mentioned first such as restating the thesis, and then get more broad aboutthe topic at hand. Lastly, leave the reader with something to think about and ponder once they are done reading.

Thai Lottery is a prominent practice of gambling which is officially legalized by the government of Thailand. Thailand is a Southeast Asian country; the country that’s famous for its beautiful beaches, historical places, and temples. In Thailand, only two gambling kinds that are legal, first and most well-known is the Thai lottery and the second one is horse racing. Thai lottery was first launched in 1974. On every 1st and 15th of each month, Thai lottery result comes out and Even though of rare winning ratio, Thai lottery played by a massive number of peoples.

Thai people have a very curious and attention-grabbing way to choose a number for Thai lottery; they believe that every mishap brings a fortune. So they prefer to select the number of a highway that may famous for road accidents, a crashed car number, and a date on which a tragic event occurred.

Thai Government Lottery has some age restrictions; participant must be 20 years or younger, any person can get participate even if he/she is a foreigner but must have Valid Visa and passport to claim his/her reward.

In Thailand, you can see the Thai lottery vendors near supermarkets, shopping malls, and streets as well. You can get a ticket only at 40 Baht, but you have to buy a pair of tickets as it is required, both tickets are the same picture of each other. But in some regions, these vendors charge a profit and you have to pay a rise for these lottery tickets.

Once Thai Lottery Result announced and luckily you won the prize, you can claim your winning reward; claims can be done in GLO offices in Thailand. Prizes that are lesser then 20000 Baht can be claimed by Vendors, Prizes goes up from 20000 Baht ought to be claimed though GLO offices. Practice for appealing a Reward necessitates certain paper work, Fill out some forms, and fill Ticket’s back side, provide Thai ID and VISA or Passport for outlanders. Thai Government imposes particular tariff on the winning amount.

Results are announced a couple of time in a month, Thai lottery result consists of 6 digits, which should be matched with lottery tickets. The interesting thing is when you won a lottery you will be rewarded with a double prize.

Thai lottery tickets can be bought from government offices, each ticket consist of 6 numbers, each ticket comes in pair, and you cannot buy a single ticket as it is not allowed. Tickets are developed with high class techniques, two special kind of thread is poured in paper which can be only seen under the ultra violet light, Tickets are made up of super fine paper, with water mark of Bird named “Wayupak” in Thai.

On each draw the photo printed on ticket gets changed with new ones each time, it could be a unusual event’s resemble, could be a special soul which may have birthday on that Thai lottery result day or anything.

One more step is executed to distinguish between the original tickets to bogus ones that is a special chemical varnish, for the surety of genuine ticket you can check it by dipping the ticket in a bleach solution, original ticket will react with bleach and produce dyes on paper but the fake ones shows nothing.

In Raymond Carver’s short story “Beginners,” the use of alcohol is the most apparent and important image and helps show the characters’ true feelings about their love life. Through the characters’ consumption of alcohol, we are able to see their eventual confusion and simplification of the meaning of true love.

Carver begins the story with the characters having a full bottle of gin, symbolizing their full understanding of their views of the meaning of love. Herb explains that his view of love is spiritual love, and nothing less, which initially brings them onto the subject of love (Carver 1). While Terri explains her past abusive relationship and how it was Carl’s way of showing his love, the group becomes uncomfortable and continues drinking. Terri seems sure of herself when she explains that true love is expressed physically and asks the group, “What do you do with love like that?” (2).The conversation eventually drifts, giving Nick and Laura the opportunity to explain their “perfect” relationship. At this moment, Laura believes that she has found true love in Nick. After “putting on a show” for the group by showing their affection, Herb announces, “Let’s have a toast. I want to propose a toast. A toast to love. True love” (5). At this moment the group is content and believes that they are all in love and satisfied. “There was suddenly a feeling of ease and generosity around the table, of friendship and comfort. We could have been anywhere. We raised our glasses again and grinned at each other like children who had agreed on something for once” (6). Nick, the narrator, explains the atmosphere of the room as warm and light, as they all agree on what they believe true love is.

As the story continues, the characters constantly raise their glasses and start to become more confused about their impressions of love as the alcohol takes effect. Herb is the one to bring back the topic of love and his views on Terri’s past relationship with Carl even though the group seems to be uncomfortable. “I don’t have to be drunk to say what’s on my mind, do I? I’m not drunk. We’re just talking, right?” Herb said. Then his voice changed. “But if I want to get drunk I will, God damn it. I can do anything I want today” (7). He explains that the group and he don’t really know anything about love. “It ought to make us all feel ashamed when we talk like we know what we were talking about, when we talk about love” (7), Herb informs the group. The group continues drinking the gin, causing more anger and confusion to arise. After Herb tells the long tale of Anna and Henry, it seems as though Herbs views about there only being spiritual love have strengthened. The story leaves Herb feeling depressed, leaving the reader believing that he is afraid he will never find the kind of love that Anna and Henry have. As Herb leaves to freshen up, Terri finishes the gin and begins weeping due to the fact that Herb is depressed. She begins reminiscing about Carl, “She picked up her glass. ‘Here’s to you guys,’ she said. ‘Here’s to all of us.’ She drained the glass, and the ice clicked against her teeth. ‘Carl, too,’ she said, and put her glass back on the table. ‘Poor Carl’” (18).

While Terri is weeping, the reader can see that Nick, too, is drunk, and we begin to see more of the truth in his relationship with Laura. “Slowly and with an effort, I turned to look at her” (19). We don’t quite know what his view of “true love” is, although he seems to believe his relationship with Laura is very close. “Laura raised her eyes to mine then. Her look was penetrating, and my heart slowed. She gazed into my eyes for what seemed a long time, and then she nodded. That’s all she did, the only sign she gave, but it was enough” (19). This moment between Nick and Laura seems to show Laura’s true feelings. She began the story blushing while she talked about Nick’s and her relationship, but evolved to her giving him a simple head nod, showing Laura’s uncertainty about their relationship.

Alcohol is a key element in this story for showing the eventual confusion of the characters’ views on love. They begin the story sober and seemingly satisfied with their relationships but, as they become more intoxicated, the characters become more unsure of themselves and their partners. Laura seems to become more confused about the status of her relationship with Nick as the story goes on, although Nick appears to be head-over-heels while he knows their relationship is fragile. Herb believes that love is based on a spiritual connection, and becomes depressed from the lack of spiritual love in his life. While Herb is depressed about his lack of spiritual love, Terri is depressed by the lack of physical love in her relationship. She believes that Carl’s way of love was the “climax” of true love. Carver ends the story when the sun sets and the characters run out of gin, symbolising the empiness and lack of love in their lives.

There are countless disparities between the society of Gilead and 1980s America. In The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, the citizens of this dystopian totalitarian state have unconventional reactions to life, death, sex, and violence. When we are first introduced to Offred, our protagonist describes for us her current setting. She is in a gymnasium of sorts but has a unique emotional reaction to her surroundings. “We yearned for the future…” says Offred (3). “It was in the air; and it was still in the air, an afterthought, as we tried to sleep…” (4) This first glimpse into Gilead is extremely revealing in regards to how our society has changed. Something so simple as a university gymnasium has become so sentimental, a palimpsest of what was once Cambridge, Massachusetts in the wonderful nation that no longer is.

One major aspect of Gileadean society that differs greatly from ours is the way the citizens view life and death. In Gilead, public executions are commonplace, and seeing the dead on display is something Handmaids experience daily. “It’s the bags over their heads that are the worst, worse than the faces themselves would be” Offred thinks as she sees dead men hanging from what they call the Wall (32). “The heads are zeros… What I feel towards them is blankness. What I feel is that I must not feel.” (32-33) This could be contrasted to our society where viewing the dead is something seldom seen beyond the world of television and movies. If you were out running daily errands like Offred and saw this, the last thing you would feel would be nothingness. It would be shocking and terrifying to us today but the theocratic dictatorship of The Handmaid’s Tale has desensitized its citizens to the macabre.

The Handmaids’ views on death are also twisted to mean something else to the living. Suicide has been completely eradicated by the Marthas. They have removed any tool that could be used to orchestrate a suicide; be it glass, rope, or even a hook. There are no knives and nowhere to jump so the Handmaids are doomed to live. Offred develops delusions of grandeur in regards to death; in the end, death can be considered a success if she cannot conceive a child. This attitude is revealed when Offred reminisces about an old library with a mural painted on the walls.

Victory is on one side of the inner doorway, leading them on, and death is on the other… The men on the side of Death are still alive. They’re going to heaven. Death is a beautiful woman with wings and one breast almost bare; or is that Victory? I can’t remember (166).

This shows Offred’s corruption by society because in the past, when the mural was painted, of course the woman depicted was Victory.

Offred also personifies the Gileadean convolution of ideas regarding sex and violence. For her, sex is a job, her only meaning for existence. The Handmaids are glorified concubines and if they do not conceive a child quickly enough, they are deemed “Unwomen” and exiled to the colonies. The concept of being an “Unwoman” is introduced to the Handmaids by Aunt Lydia who indoctrinates them with a fear of promiscuity and sexuality. The aunts would sit the new Handmaids down and force them to watch violent pornography, trying to make them realize the error of their past lives. This A Clockwork Orange-esque scene speaks volumes to the lengths The Sons of Jacob went through to brainwash women and create in them new beliefs regarding their own sexuality.

These ideas become apparent when Offred is put in a sexually charged situation with her commander. After one of their scandalous games of Scrabble, he asks her for something new. “I want you to kiss me,” he says (139). Offred physically reacts to the situation like any other girl with a crush would; she leans in and awkwardly satisfies the demanding man, though her thoughts stray from the traditional feelings of attraction.

I think about how I could approach the Commander, to kiss him, here alone, and take off his jacket, as if to allow or invite something further, some approach to true love, and put my arms around him and slip the lever out from the sleeve and drive the sharp end into him suddenly, between his ribs. I think about the blood coming out of him, hot as soup, sexual, over my hands (139-140).

Though she admits these feelings were an afterthought, they still perfectly illustrate the conditioning Offred went though before assuming her role as a Handmaid. She can no longer feel a purely sexual urge towards anyone; not even a man she has sworn to procreate with, a man who makes her feel free, a man she may love. She now feels sex and violence go hand in hand; it can end with death, and a gruesome one at that.

These major aspects of society that are so contradictory to reality portray Atwood’s concerns for our political and social future. The views the members of Gileadean society adopt concerning life, death, sex, and violence are very contrary. Margaret Atwood did a phenomenal job creating a futuristic society that has made Americans cringe and yearn for change, especially for women.

Throughout the Early Modern Period and the birth of a time of greater thinking, creating, and most importantly writing; many scholars and authors created pieces of writing soaked with human emotions. Setting its readers and audiences up to his or her own understanding and perception of those emotions played throughout their writings and play writes. While at the same time, writers held audiences at the mercy of their own portrayal of said emotions. More specifically, the Early Modern Period was a time where the very mindset of mankind was being shaped and manipulated in a way. Through writing and art, poems and plays, mankind was being taught how to perceive and understand certain emotions through culture. Love and death are two of the most well known emotions to be written out during this time period, throughout this paper, I will be bringing a connection between the two to light and discuss just how important of a role each played individually in Early Modern writing. Both were huge aspects of emotion when it came to writing during this time period, and my goal is to draw a connection between the two and how each emotion played out in writing during this time. Throughout this paper I will be using Shakespeare’s famous Romeo and Juliet play as a source of example to highlight the meaning of love and death during this time period, and how the two have a connection not only within this play, but in writing in general during this time period.

There are a number of strong emotions when it comes to the human psyche, love being one of the strongest in humanities arsenal. Love, a very volatile emotion, was a very common theme throughout the Early Modern Period as many historic writers and play writes took advantage of utilizing this emotion. The famous play Romeo and Juliet is no different when it comes to this common theme. Throughout the play it is quite apparent love is at the forefront when it comes to any other theme or focal point. Throughout the play itself love is over exaggerated, trumps every other emotion, and throughout the play turns even violent. The play starts off by establishing there are, “Two households, both alike in dignity, From ancient grudge break to new mutiny. - A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life;” (Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, 1-5, Prologue) Before the play even begins it is already established there is a forbidden love between two members of opposing households, and their love is so strong that only death can end their connection. Throughout the entirety of the play love is not something that is static or just there, the emotion itself seems to have life, being propelled by the characters themselves. Enter Romeo in the beginning of the play talking to his kinsman Benvolio about his love for Rosaline. Romeo exclaims, “Alas, that love, whose view is muffled still, Should without eyes see pathways to his will.” (Shakespeare, 176-177, Act 1) During Romeo’s banter about his love for Rosaline with Benvolio, he arguably brings up two clichés about love during the time of Shakespeare. Those clichés being “love is blind,” and “love will always find a way.”

We as the audience will also discover, compared to Romeo’s love with Juliet, his love with Rosaline is not matured or even nearly as emotional. As later throughout the play Romeo’s love to Juliet has much more life and meaning expressed by his words. When Romeo and Juliet finally meet, it showcases another cliché of “love at first sight.” As the two star-crossed lovers, who’s love is something otherwise worldly or love being controlled by god or some higher power, meet Juliet is struck the reality of Romeo’s house allegiance. In a small rant she exclaims, “My only love sprung from my only hate! Too early seen unknown, and known too late! Prodigious brith of love it is to me, That I must love a loathed enemy.” (Shakespeare, 152-155, Act 1) Juliet is hit with the gravest news about her love, which is the fact she has fallen in love with a man who is her sworn enemy, the only man she is not allowed to marry. Reinstating the fact that even though she loves him, the two may never been allowed to marry or love one another because of their respected households, both are still enemies. However, the language and word choice throughout the play points to the fact that two opposite things will never be apart forever, especially if love is involved. Juliets’ plea about her love brings up a common theme seen throughout the play, things seem to happen far too early. For example Juliet says “Too early seen unknown, and known too late,” exclaiming the fact she has met her Romeo too early in her young life, and things might have been different if she had only met him later in her life. Continuing off the the theme of things throughout the play occurring too early, in the end of the play Romeo and Juliet’s love is only destroyed by time. As Romeo kills himself only moments before Juliet’s slumber ends. If time was on their side, the two star-crossed lovers could have been together forever. In Romeo and Juliet and many other plays during this time, love was a force that in a way, transcends everything else. In the case of Romeo and Juliet, their love is a force stronger and more powerful than anything else, in a way a force seen godlike. When Romeo sneaks into Juliets walled garden of the Capulet house, Romeo proclaims, “With love’s light wings, did I o’erperch these walls, For stony limits cannot hold love out.” (Shakespeare, 71-72, Act 2) In this scene Juliet is wondering just how Romeo was able to get into the walled garden, he argues that because of his love for her, he has no bounds and nothing not even walls will be able to stop him. As his love gave him the ability to grow “light wings,” giving him the ability to overcome these stony walls, which can be argued can be a metaphor to any other humanly obstacle to get in the way of these two's love.

It is quite apparent the weight love holds throughout this play, as Romeo and Juliet are in a way used as pawns to showcase the power of love as portrayed by Shakespeare himself. Shakespeare and many other writers and play writes used love as a common theme, as it seemed to drag the audience in. Love however, was not the only common theme during this time period. Death was another popular theme writers used, and Romeo and Juliet is no different as love and death seem to be intertwined.

From the very beginning of this story, not only is love declared, but an imminent death is as well. In the prologue it is written, “A pair of star-crossed lovers take their life; - Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife, The fearful passage of their death-marked love” (Shakespeare, 6-8, Prologue) Right off the bat it is quite apparent Romeo and Juliet who are inseparable due to their grandeur love for one another, both are also stricken with a certain inseparable death. At the same time, the prologue also exclaims their death will bring about the end of their parents strife. Meaning, the very thing keeping their love apart, their household allegiance, will ironically end due to their death. Like many writers during this time period, Shakespeare uses death throughout this play as a way to move things along in a way. Of course these deaths cause problems for the two star-crossed lovers, and throughout the play both of premonitions of their timely death. When Mercutio comes to his untimely end by the hand of Tybalt, he tells Romeo, “A plague o’ both your houses! They have made worms’ meat of me.” (Shakespeare, 111-112, Act 3) In some of his final moments Mercutio curses both houses, in a sense creating a huge roadblock when it came for the two star-crossed lovers to end up together smoothly. Enraged by his Mercutio’s death, Romeo duels Tybalt and ends up slaying him, and thus being banished by the prince. As a result, this death and banishment results in many more problems down the line for our dear Romeo and Juliet, as banishment might as well have represented death in itself for Romeo. Thus we as an audience come to the conclusion of the play, the death of both lovers. Romeo, after returning to fair Verona believes Juliet is dead, exclaims that dying would be better than loosing his love, “The doors of breath, seal with a righteous kiss, A dateless bargain to engrossing death.” (Shakespeare, 114-115, Act 4) And kills himself out of grief. Moments later, Juliet awakes to see her dear Romeo dead, and stricken with her own grief, takes Romeo’s dagger and kills herself, “Then I’ll be brief. O, happy dagger, This is thy sheath. There rust, and let me die.” (Shakespeare, 174-175, Act 4) As it seems fate would have it, love and death in this story were two things intertwined. Thus no matter how powerful love may have seemed throughout this story, death still prevailed and gave these two star-crossed lovers an untimely death.

Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.

Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

In conclusion, Romeo and Juliet is play that has a far deeper meaning than just a tragic love story. The play itself is a testimony to the common themes of the time of Shakespeare, love, death, hope, and despair. It is no surprise Romeo and Juliet has stayed such a famous play for decades, as it will be one of the worlds most famous plays for many more years to come. The play does a wonderful job of showcasing the importance of love and death, and how both play a role in not only the lives of our dear Romeo and Juliet, but in the real world as well.

In Shakespeare’s Othello, Othello is presented as a man of stature and distinction, so much so that others oft precede his name with the word “valiant” (1.3.50). He is someone who, despite prejudices attached to his skin, is found worthy of love from the fair Desdemona due to the merit of his service to the Venetian government. He himself reiterates this in his defense of his marriage, saying, “I must be found. /My parts, my title, and my perfect soul/ shall manifest me rightly (1.2.30-32),” and he is ultimately accepted by the authority of Desdemona’s father and the Duke of Venice. From the beginning, Shakespeare establishes the importance that duty plays in Othello’s world. His devotion to the Venetian state is rewarded with the devotion of his wife and those that serve him. However, by the end of the play, Othello finds his life and reputation destroyed as a result of the skillful calculations of his duplicitous officer, Iago. The unfolding of Iago’s plan arouses confusion and conflict within all the characters, forcing them to mitigate between what they feel and their sense of duty in their respective roles and showing the consequences of deception—whether veiled or perceived. In Othello duty and love are invariably intertwined, and as the tragedy plays out, Shakespeare demonstrates love’s ability to pervert conceptions of duty.

The character perhaps most steadfast in her sense of duty is Desdemona. In her first lines in the play, Desdemona addresses the split sense of duty she faces between her father and her new husband. She says to her father, “My noble father,/ I do perceive here a divided duty./ To you I am bound for life and education/… you are the lord of duty/… But here’s my husband. And so much duty as my mother showed/ To you, preferring you before her father” (1.3.181-190). Using her mother as an example, Desdemona takes on the womanly duty of devoting herself fully to her husband. From the beginning of the play, Desdemona is extolled as the embodiment of feminine ideals. Brabantio, bragging of his daughter’s virtues, describes her as “A maiden never bold” (1.3.97). Despite her initial quandary between her duty as a daughter and new wifely duty, she is decisive and remains steadfast to this pledge until her death. The reader can trace her devotion from the beginning of her marital bliss in her desire to go to battle in order to stay beside her husband, all the way until its ultimate demise. Though she is innocent of wrongdoing, once he succumbs to the suspicion bred by Iago, Othello becomes increasingly cruel to his wife. However, after he repeatedly accuses her of betraying him with Cassio and cruelly labels her a whore, Desdemona arguably becomes more determined to stay dutiful to her husband, saying to Iago and Emilia: “And ever will—though he do shake me off/ To beggarly divorcement—love him dearly,/ Comfort forswear me! Unkindness may do much,/ And his unkindness may defeat my life,/ But never taint my love” (4.2.162-166). This response demonstrates that Desdemona’s love for her husband has distorted her sense of duty to the degree that she is willing to die for it. Furthermore, after being humiliated by her husband who strikes her in front of visiting dignitaries, she is comforted by Emilia who speaks out against the inequalities between men and women. Desdemona only responds by saying that she hopes to use women who speak out against their husbands as an example of how not to act (4.3.61-82). But rather than being rewarded, in the end, Desdemona is arguably punished for her unwavering love and sense of duty as the object of her tireless devotion becomes her eventual murderer. Desdemona is a character that is seemingly bound by the love she has for the male figures in her life. The only instance of her defending herself against the wishes of the men in her life is when she stands up for her marriage to Othello and transfers her allegiance from her father to her husband. It is this quality that ultimately clouds her sense of the worth of her own life—so much so that to the very end, in the final moments before her death, she still addresses Othello as “my lord” (5.2.88). Unlike Desdemona, Emilia’s sense of duty is much less tied to any man in her life. Emilia even makes a strong statement against the type of blind female devotion practiced by Desdemona as she says, “Let husbands know/ Their wives have sense like them. They see and smell/ And have their palates both for sweet and sour, As husbands have,” essentially saying that women have no greater responsibility than men to remain dutiful (4.3.70-74). Instead, as she is almost always at her side, Emilia focuses her devotion largely on Desdemona over her husband. However, despite her contentious relationship with Iago and his mistreatment of her, even Emilia experiences love’s ability to cloud one’s sense of duty. While being in love clouds Desdemona, Emilia is clouded by her desire to receive it. When she finds Desdemona’s handkerchief, she decides to bring it to Iago, dismissing her suspicions by saying, “What he will do with it/ Heaven knows, not I./ I nothing but to please his fantasy” (3.3.306-308). Emilia’s desire to receive love from her husband diverts her from her duty to her mistress, and results in her providing Iago with the final piece needed to carry out his scheme. This not only costs the life of her mistress, but also her own.

Meanwhile, through the character of Iago, Shakespeare demonstrates how actions are affected in the absence of duty or love. Ironically, Iago is the first character in Othello to bring forth the concept of duty, and in doing so, his duplicitous nature is revealed early on. After bitterly laying out his grievances over Othello’s authority and promotion of Cassio over himself, Roderigo replies that he would quit if he were in Iago’s position. However, Iago responds by revealing his true motives, saying, “I follow him to serve my turn upon him” (1.1.44). Iago’s belief that Othello has slighted him has obliterated any sense of duty and manifested instead in vengeance. In fact, he goes on to disparage those who, in his eyes, are blinded by their sense of duty to others, and instead extolls those who are self serving. He tells Roderigo, “Others there are/ Who, trimmed in forms of visages of duty, / keep yet their hearts attending on themselves/ And, throwing but shows of service on their lords, Do well thrive by them” (1.1.52-56). Iago expresses the belief that a feigned sense of duty can be used to his own benefit. As he tells Roderigo, “In following him, I follow but myself” (1.1.60). Iago is beholden only to himself, but he unequivocally understands the significant role that duty holds in Othello’s life and is able to use this knowledge to his advantage.

Iago effectively plants doubt in Othello over Desdemona’s devotion to him through the guise of a dutiful servant with only the interests of his master in mind. As Othello catches on to his contrived suspicions towards Cassio, Iago masterfully evokes his sense of duty towards Othello in order to use his master’s misplaced trust against him by assuring him with phrases such as “My lord you know I love you” and “I am bound to every act of duty” (3.3.123,139). In addition to betraying his duty to Othello, Iago also easily casts off any sense of loyalty to his wife Emilia—so much so that he does not hesitate to kill her when she exposes his true motives to all after Desdemona’s death. Unlike Othello, Emilia, and Dedemona for whom love plays a central role in their judgments, Iago shows little understanding of love. This is demonstrated not only in the heinous culminating act of him killing his wife, but subtly throughout the play in the way that he crudely talks about sex and disparages women in general. This is apparent early in the play when he informs Brabantio that Desdemona and Othello have married, telling him, “I am one, sir, that comes to tell you your daughter/ and the Moor are now making the beast with two/ backs” (1.1.112-114). In these lines, Iago perverts an act of love between a man and wife into something bestial and iniquitous. Iago’s inability to understand love exacerbates his ability to cast of his sense of duty and carry out his wickedness seemingly without hesitation. In Othello Desdemona is most affected by the emotions of love and devotion, and also suffers the most tragic end. Blinded by her love for her husband, she is relentless in her sense of duty to an ultimately deadly degree. The reality of the danger of unbounded love is mirrored by her husband’s words after he realizes his grave mistake. He describes himself as “one that loved not wisely, but too well” (5.2.362). Meanwhile, it is the absence of love that allows Iago to so freely cast off his sense of duty to Othello for the sake of vengeance and self-interest. Though he is sentenced to punishment at the hands of Cassio, Desdemona is betrayed by her love, and Emilia and Othello die with the guilt of Desdemona’s death. Iago is a man with little to loose, and thus arguably faces the least tragic ending. Thus, it seems as if this tragic end serves as a warning against the folly of blind love and devotion. In a tale full of deception, it is ultimately self-delusion that proves most toxic.

In William Shakespeare's final play, The Tempest, the playwright intertwines love and magic, creating one of play's the major themes. Prospero, the protagonist, uses magic to plan the events of this comedy. The first act of magic is the tempest and the subsequent shipwreck in Act I, scene i. The victims wash up on the shore of Prospero and Miranda's island. Of the survivors, Ferdinand, Prince of Naples, wanders aimlessly around the island by himself until Ariel, a magical spirit, guides him to Miranda. As planned, they fall in love at first sight; from that point on their relationship is seemingly perfect. However, the inexperience of Miranda combined with Ferdinand's fragile state of mind, raises questions about their infatuation. The audience can assume one of two things: the first, that their love is real, or the second, that their love is simply the result of Prospero's magic. Based on evidence in the script, one can conclude that the love between Ferdinand and Miranda is not an act of fate, but rather the result of Prospero's magic.

From the beginning of Ferdinand and Miranda's relationship, all aspects of their love are too perfect. Ariel's music, "with its sweet air" (I.ii.448), leads Ferdinand to Miranda. The songs of the magical spirit enhance the aura of love and seal their relationship with a sense of perfection. Miranda's first words to Ferdinand allow him to recognize her language as his own, "My language! Heavens!" (I.ii.488). Their common tongue permits them to communicate their emotions with ease. "At first sight/ They have changed eyes," (I.ii.503-504) offering themselves as slaves to one another. Prospero's magic makes their love an easy task, and seemingly too perfect. As an obstacle, he believes he should "uneasy make" (I.ii.517) their rapidly progressing, adolescent love. However, Ferdinand, performing menial laborious tasks, enjoys every moment, given his undying devotion to Miranda. Together, the mood, the language, and the dedication justify an unconditionally perfect love typically not based on reality. "Real" love, usually has more depth that has been developed through conflict and resolution. In its very perfection, the love of Ferdinand and Miranda seems solely driven by Prospero's magic.

Both the suddenness of their love and their naïveté further suggests a magical basis for their love. Ferdinand is the third man that Miranda has ever seen, "the first/ That e'er (she) sighed for" (I.ii.509-10). "Nor have I seen/ More that I may call men than you, good friend,/ and my dear father" (III.ii.59-61), Miranda asserts to Ferdinand. She has lived a sheltered life, not knowing "One of (her) sex; no woman's face" (III.i.57-8) and knowing only two men: her goodly father, and Caliban. Caliban is immoral and represents the "animal nature" that Prospero has sheltered her from until now. She has never experienced love or lust making her more susceptible to act on sudden impulses. Ferdinand, on the other hand, has "liked several women, never any/ With so fun soul (as Miranda's)" (III.i.51). However, he has a similar state of mind to Miranda's. He speaks of his "drown'd father" (I.ii.459), who he believes to have died in the tempest. Both Miranda and Ferdinand are equally naïve, contributing a great deal to their relationship. To Miranda, Ferdinand is a "thing divine" (I.ii.747). Miranda is Ferdinand's escape from grieving for his father. She replaces his sorrow with happiness. Prospero uses his magic to orchestrate their love; letting them feel things they have never felt before.

Although it is clear that Prospero's magic is the major controlling force in their relationship, there is a possibility that fate works in duality with magic. Although the magic is his own creation, Prospero never seems to be satisfied. An example of Prospero's dissatisfaction is in Act I, scene ii, when Prospero is disgruntled by the extent of his daughter's new love. While his magic began the infatuation, it seems that fate takes over, diminishing the power of his magic. Critics over the centuries have argued that there is a devious side to Prospero. But, what if there is more to it? What if there is the possibility that fate works in a duality with magic? This assumption would explain not only Prospero's personality changes, but also the inexhaustible twists in the storyline. It may be that fate does in fact take part in the plot, only to be masked by Prospero's magic.

William Shakespeare often presents the convention of "love at first sight" in his works. In The Tempest, he warns the audience of the illusory nature of this type of love. Although Miranda and Ferdinand's love seems perfect, it sparks conflict as it does for Miranda and Prospero. Accidentally, Miranda breaks the promise with her father that she would not speak to Ferdinand. But, she is taken over by the magic of the love, controlling her actions. Both characters have focused on nothing but one another; they have no concern for anyone or anything. Because of Prospero's magic, Miranda and Ferdinand, although in love, are complete strangers. They are simply two naïve adolescents under a spell, acting on impulses.

Plato's Symposium is not only a discourse on the subject of love, it is a tribute to Socrates and his way of life, and the entire course of the discussion is guided by the ultimate objective of presenting Socrates as the representation of love itself. Though this is done slowly and indirectly through a series of steps, Plato eventually makes clear his admiration of Socrates' way of life. This can then be compared not only to Socrates' method of convincing the others that his view of love is correct, but also to the process of the ascent of love. All the speeches are instrumental in the presentation of Socrates: the first few, though superficial and trivial in content, are important for the process of which they are a part; Diotima's speech is important because it establishes the basis for Socrates' representation of love; and lastly, Alcibiades' speech serves to complete the comparison.

The text begins as a series of speeches mainly about the benefits of love, but soon shifts to discussion on what exactly love is. All of the interlocutors express their thoughts on love in turn, and each attempts to do this in a manner that is flattering to himself and to his lifestyle. Drawing from personal beliefs and experiences, each man, ranging in profession from comedian to politician, proffers his opinion. Their views on love vary as much as their lifestyles, and hence, there is disagreement as to what exactly the accurate definition of love is. As each man speaks, he rebuts certain parts of the previous speaker's argument and builds upon certain other parts; the concept of love becomes increasingly broad and abstract. Dissent among the men, however, allows the reader both to view the progression and evolution of the meaning of love and to see the connection between this process and the process of love itself. According to Diotima, the process of love is by necessity, slow and careful, therefore the discovery of the meaning of love also must allow for the close examination and disproval of the erroneous beliefs of the opening speakers.

Plato uses the various speakers not only to present contrasting views, but also to create a process whereby these men are seeking knowledge. This process is paralleled by Diotima's description of love as a process?a continual search for beauty and wisdom, and an ascension of the soul. Her concept of love stands in stark contrast to that of all the others. She describes it principally as a desire to possess good things eternally. This desire necessitates the concomitant desire for immortality. When asked what it is that love wants, Diotima responds, "Reproduction and birth in beauty" (206E, 53). She continues, saying, "...Reproduction goes on forever; it is what mortals have in place of immortality. A lover must desire immortality along with the good, if what we agreed earlier was right, that Love wants to possess the good forever. It follows that Love must desire immortality" (206E-207A, 54). One cannot possess something forever unless one is immortal?that much is obvious. For humans though, immortality can only be achieved through reproduction. There is both physical and mental reproduction though, and one can be pregnant in both body and soul. One can live on not only through children, but also, more significantly, through lasting ideas. Here, Diotima builds on Pausanias' idea of "heavenly" and "common" love, attributing physical offspring to "common" love and intellectual or spiritual offspring as "heavenly" love.

Socrates' rejection of Alcibiades' offer relates directly to this principle. As the representation of the more elevated, heavenly love, Socrates seeks to reproduce through ideas, and rejects the physical aspects of common love. What Alcibiades in effect is asking for, is his lower love for Socrates' higher love-- "'gold in exchange for bronze'" (219A, 70). Socrates though, sees the inequality of such an exchange saying, "You [Alcibiades] can see in me a beauty that is beyond description and makes your own remarkable good looks pale in comparison. But is this then a fair exchange...?" (218E, 70). Alcibiades, however, demonstrates a love for Socrates that is of a higher level than the mere physical love, which is what he himself has to offer. Alcibiades loves Socrates not only for his wisdom, but also because he believes that Socrates can make him a better person through the reproduction of his beautiful ideas. Alcibiades is therefore seeking not only wisdom, but also more importantly, immortality. If Socrates were to accept Alcibiades offer though, he would not be living up to the image of the heavenly love. This then necessitates that he reject Alcibiades' offer. Alcibiades' attempt to seduce Socrates though, is his expression of love?his attempt to achieve immortality.

In order to gain this immortality though, one must reach the highest level of love. Diotima describes the process of attaining this level, saying:

One always goes upwards for the sake of this Beauty, starting out from beautiful things and using them like rising stairs: from one body to two and from two to all beautiful bodies, then from beautiful bodies to beautiful customs, and from customs to learning beautiful things, and from these lessons he arrives in the end at this lesson, which is learning of this very Beauty, so that in the end he comes to know just what it is to be beautiful... When he looks at Beauty in the only way that Beauty can be seen?only then will it become possible for him to give birth not to images of virtue (because he's in touch with no images), but to true virtue (because he's in touch with the true Beauty). The love of the gods belongs to anyone who has given birth to true virtue and nourished it, and if any human being could be immortal, it would be he.

-- Symposium, 211C-212B, 59-60

Because love's ultimate goal is immortality, Diotima describes it as a process, whereby one's appreciation and desire for beauty ascend from merely that of the physical to the intellectual and finally to the mystical. Only upon scaling the final level of love, however, is one able to become immortal, and this level can only be scaled if one moves away from the base love of the physical to a love of the sharing, or reproduction, of ideas. This is exactly what Alcibiades attempts to do in pursuing Socrates. Before this one cannot experience the essence of beauty, but rather, only see images of it. Only after experiencing true beauty, beauty that cannot be seen with the eyes, can any other true beauty be reproduced. This then is immortality.

Because love desires good things such as immortality, beauty, and wisdom, and because people do not desire that which they already have, Diotima reasons that love is none of those things. This once again relates love to the lover and Socrates, rather than the beloved, as previous speakers had done. In the arguments presented by Phaedrus, Pausanias, and Eryximachus, love was entirely good and beautiful; it was representative of the beloved. Diotima, however, asserts that love is neither beautiful nor wise nor immortal. Love, in all aspects, instead lies between the two ends of the spectrum, and is in constant pursuit of these traits. This therefore, likens it to the lover, and therefore, Socrates.

Socrates ultimately proves to be the exemplar of love. He is, in every manner, as love should be. As love, he seeks immortality, beauty, and wisdom, but is in possession of none of these. This necessitates that he speak through Diotima, because in this manner, she is the one in possession of the knowledge and not he himself. As a philosopher, however, he seeks this wisdom, which is also a form of beauty. Similarly, he must reject Alcibiades' physical offer because he seeks immortality through the reproduction of his ideas; this is true love and true beauty?the only path to immortality. Finally, just as Diotima describes love as a "...messenger who [shuttles] back and forth between [god and mortal]... [rounding] out the whole and [binding] fast the all to all" (203A, 47), so Socrates also acts as a sort of transit between Diotima and the interlocutors at the symposium. He conveys her wisdom and knowledge concerning love, and in doing so, reproduces the immortal ideas. In the end, love is synonymous with Socrates, and immortality with philosophy and reproduction of beautiful thoughts.

In Twelfth Night, it is love’s revolutionary potential to inspire awareness, question authority, and disrupt the anti-comic balance that makes love so powerful allows it to be such an agent of change. Robert Maslen, in Shakespeare and Comedy, describes this as love’s “energy”, comparing love to comedy in terms of their shared links with irrationality, disorder, and the bridging of social barriers – all concepts inherently dangerous to the values of the “old age” in which these characters seem to be entrenched. Viola’s relationship with Orsino, and the realization of mutual love after her identity is revealed, epitomizes this sense of love as, like comedy, something unruly and irrational but possessing great power for facilitating growth and change. Yet before the revelation of Viola’s true identity and the play’s resolution, she and Orsino have only one scene onstage together in which the audience is allowed a glimpse into their relationship and the powerful bond between them. Because of this, the audience’s understanding of the relationship between Viola (“Cesario”) and Orsino rests heavily upon II.4, making the scene vital in order to discern the nature of the bond between the pair.

Love, in Shakespearean comedy, is often the key force driving the play to its “comic” resolution. Using Frye’s three-stage model, one can argue that love in these plays is necessary to transform the “anti-comic” society of the first stage, and the attitudes of those who inhabit it, and bring the play to a harmonious ending. A comic resolution generally includes marriages among the characters, representing the creation of harmony in an ideal union between lovers. In the early Acts of Twelfth Night, the anti-comic mood is inherent in the very actions and mindsets of the inhabitants of Illyria. Olivia’s excessive mourning for her father and brother, as well as Orsino’s self-indulgent woe over his “high fantastical”, imagined love for Olivia (I.1.15, Twelfth Night) are both indicative of self-deception and lack of awareness of the feelings of others. Both these mindsets, as well as the rigid conservatism of Olivia’s Puritan steward, Malvolio, can also be interpreted as evidence of the characters’ adherence to values of an old world of rigid traditions and conventional ideas. Orsino’s praise of the song of love in II.4 alludes to this conservatism, as he describes the song as “old and antique…dallies with the innocence of love,/Like the old age” , connecting a traditional past with his own sorrow.

The presence of the bond between the Duke and his page, which will lay the foundation for Orsino to love Cesario as a woman when “he” turns out to be Viola and for the audience to accept this change in sentiment, is emphasized in the scene through particular features of narrative technique, language and stagecraft.

Possibly the most distinctive feature of the scene is the tone of balanced tension which Shakespeare creates by offsetting the contrary emotional responses of the audience toward the two different characters. Orsino’s complete lack of awareness as to either the gender of his confidant or the strength of her feelings for him is laughable, as is his affectedness in savoring his “lovesick” condition. Early in the scene, the irony of the exchanges between Orsino and Viola only serve to increase how ridiculous Orsino looks in his oblivion.

ORSINO Thou dost speak masterly.

My life upon’t, young though thou art, thine eye

Hath stayed upon some favor that it loves.

Hath it not, boy?

VIOLA A little, by your favor.

ORSINO What kind of woman is’t?

VIOLA Of your complexion.

ORSINO She is not worth thee then. What years, i’ faith?

VIOLA About your years, my lord

Orsino’s appropriately comic ignorance, however, only serves to make Viola’s pain more palatable. The audience inevitably feels great sympathy for her, as her consciousness of the irrationality and apparent hopelessness of her situation is matched only by Orsino’s corresponding lack of awareness. The exchanges between Viola and Orsino offer a tantalizing morsel of hope to both the audience and their heroine. Combined with the audience’s expectations of genre and the convenient dramatic irony of Sebastian’s presence on Illyria, this hope foreshadows a happy resolution. At the same time, Viola’s ignorance of the very facts that would lessen her sorrow only deepens the audience’s sympathy for her. This delicate blend of the absurdly comic and pitiably pathetic ensures that the audience is held in emotional suspension until the play’s resolution – an appropriate state, perhaps, as it is only mutual love which can bring about comic harmony.

Not only does Viola exhibit the kind of conscious understanding of her own feelings and situation that is persistently lacking in Olivia and Orsino, but she is able to rationally accept her inability to change either her feelings or her situation and the pain that this inability may cause her.

VIOLA But if she cannot love you, sir?

ORSINO I cannot be so answer’d.

VIOLA Sooth, but you must.

Say that some lady, as perhaps there is.

Hath for your love a great pang of heart

As you have for Olivia: you cannot love her;

You tell her so; must she not be answered?

What is perhaps most pathetically endearing about Viola in this example is her own belief that Orsino cannot love her. She seeks to prevent him from being hurt in the only context she understands – that of her own apparently bleak situation. While Orsino thinks he is entitled to Olivia’s love because of his persistence (and therefore what he would consider his passion), Viola understands the reality, and pain, of unrequited love. She knows first-hand that love is not rational in any way, and it matters not to the emotion (or perhaps the personified deity of “where Love is throned” 23) whether or not love is mutual, or how resolute the unwanted suitor may be in his or her ways. Olivia cannot love the Duke; though she “were better love a dream” , she is infatuated with Viola’s male persona. Despite the indicated resolution, the audience is still able to feel fear and sympathy for Viola’s state of enclosed sorrow.

Ironically, for all her insight, Viola too is shown to be blind in love, for she does not see, as the audience does, that Orsino’s love for Olivia is “giddy and unfirm” , and that he is more in love with the concept of love than with the woman herself. In her previous scene, the audience learns that Viola believes Orsino’s love is much like her own, as she says “My master loves her Olivia dearly,/And I (poor monster) fond as much on him.” The experience of loving someone who does not return the sentiment is universally painful and powerful, and yet Viola’s honest sensibility and wit in discussing the subject with the man she loves shows remarkable resilience and an objective, almost naïve acceptance of a complex emotional situation, heightening the audience’s sympathies and the tense emotional suspension which can only be resolved through the comic force of love.

Such an understanding of the irrationality of love yet again fits in with both Frye’s structure of Shakespearean comedy, and with Maslen’s description of love as a comedic “energy”. Although love is undeniably a powerful force of change in Twelfth Night, it is not the concealed grief of Viola which is active in crossing the barriers of gender, closed mindsets and convention in her relationship with Orsino. The passions which the characters of Viola, Orsino and Olivia cling to at this time in the play enforce a climate of disorder and confusion, one which seems to concur with Frye’s model. The love Viola has for Orsino is illogical because he believes that she is a boy, yet, ironically, the only way that she can express her true feelings and self is through Cesario’s confessions to Orsino and the closeness of a homosocial relationship between two men. Only in this situation of confusion can a love such as that which Orsino and Viola develop be realized. The scene in Act II is therefore crucial, not just to establish the closeness which has developed between the two characters, but also to establish this sense of disorder – the necessary first stage.

Not only is Orsino still intoxicated at this point with the idea of wooing Olivia, but the descriptions with which he and Viola describe constant love are very different; there is a sense that although the two certainly connect on a certain level, it is Orsino’s own mindset and perception of an artificial, mythical love that keep him from fully connecting with Viola, even more so than the perceived gender issues. The wry irony created by the audience’s knowledge of Viola’s disguise – consider in particular the jests about “What kind of woman isn’t?” – as well as the tension between the audience’s conflicting feelings of sympathy and amusement, have great effect in adding to the sense of disorder, further underlined by the adjacent scenes of misrule in the plot against Malvolio. One of the most significant emblems of anarchy is that of the objectivity of truth which Viola embodies in her disguise. Through this falsity, she is able to show her true feelings, as if her love itself were a blend of truth and imagination, like the loves of Orsino and Olivia. Only in this environment of confused gender, identity and genre can this love be conveyed. Joseph H. Summers suggests that it is only through disorder that love can create change and growth, because in “a completely rational world, Shakespeare never tires of pointing out, what we know as love could not exist. We have never seen such a world.”

Yet within the scene, this “lady” with “great pang of heart” will indeed be answered. It is Orsino’s hint of sympathy for the story of her “sister” that suggests a deeper capacity for true emotion than his pretentious descriptions of love have indicated. The scene marks the first time in the play the Duke shows real sympathy for the suffering of someone other than himself, although he is unaware that it is actually Viola with whom he is sympathizing. Almost unbeknownst to one another, the interaction between Viola and Orsino as they discuss a love that transcends gender suggests that a bond has formed between them that is inherently separate from both their relationship as master and servant and the passion which Viola feels for Orsino as a man. This growing bond proves more powerful than the old myths of love to which the Duke adheres, and the result is a connection of the mind between emotional equals.

In addition to the element of dramatic irony created by the audience’s knowledge of Sebastian’s arrival in Illyria, deeper layers of dramatic irony emphasize Viola and Orsino’s bond despite the apparent impossibility of Viola’s situation. While Viola rationally accepts her plight and describes her feminine self – the one that could live as Orsino’s wife, yet can take no action due to her present situation – as “Patience on a monument…with a green and yellow melancholy” , the bond growing between Orsino and ‘Cesario’ is one facilitated by the ease of an equal masculine relationship, without the formality and pretension of a courtship. The irony is that such a relationship would not have been possible had she been free to be his wife – that is, free to be a woman.

Shakespeare’s use of shared and split pentameter for Orsino and Viola, so that the characters literally finish each others sentences in a union of lyric verse, further suggests the connection:

VIOLA Ay, but I know –

ORSINO What dost thou know??

VIOLA Too well what love women to men may owe…

The effect is that of a duet, with love formally expressed as the connection grows and as Orsino becomes increasingly absorbed in Viola’s story.

From the early lines of the scene, Orsino distinguishes Viola from his retinue as particularly favored. The audience is already told in Act I, Scene iii that “he hath known you but three days and already you are no stranger” , and in , Viola is again visually aligned with Orsino onstage as he separates her from the rest of his retinue with the command of “Come hither, boy”, leaving him and her in one another’s company for the rest of the scene. In particular, Orsino wants his page to share in his experience of the song, a medium which he uses in order to further indulge his romantic sorrows. It is Viola, however, who can truly understand the meaning of constant, impossible love; for her it “gives a very echo to the seat / Where Love is throned.”

Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.

Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.

Depicting the relationship (and lack thereof) between Viola and Orsino in such depth and intensity, the scene I have discussed is one of the most powerful in the play. It is particularly effective in its method of using language and narrative techniques to portray the bond between the two characters as well as the barriers which separate them. The love Viola feels for her master is illogical and irrepressible, but it exemplifies the qualities of love as a powerful force in Shakespearean comedy, clearly displaying the revolutionary “energy” which Maslen assigns to it. The mutual bond between the two characters is similarly powerful, representing a connection of common sympathy and emotional exchange which transcends barriers of convention and perceptions of reality. More than any other section of the play, this scene excels at conveying the precarious potential for love to evoke both pain and happiness, and demonstrates that love, like comedy, can ultimately serve as catalyst for transformation, thereby creating harmony out of chaos.

Bibliography

1. William Shakespeare. Signet Classic: Twelfth Night. Penguin Books Ltd. New York 1986.
2. Stanley Wells (Ed.) Twelfth Night Critical Essays. Garland Publishing, INC. New York 1986.
3. Joseph H. Summers. The Masks of Twelfth Night. University of Kansas City Review, XXII. Kansas City 1955.
4. Michael Billington (Ed.) RSC Director’s Shakespeare, Twelfth Night. Nick Hern Books. London 1990.
5. T. Hawkes. “Comedy, Orality and Duplicity: Twelfth Night.” Shakespeare’s Comedies. Ed. Gary Waller. London, New York. Longman 1991. 168-174