Othello Essay Example for Free

Othello Essay In the play of â€Å"Othello†, Shakespeare skillfully uses the opposition of light and darkness to express the ironic conflict of race and Othello’s internal conflict propelled by his sense of otherness and jealousy. By doing so, Shakespeare challenges the audience’s traditional associations of light and darkness. He also allows us to see the how internal conflict could lead to one’s complete destruction. Shakespeare uses the opposition of light and darkness to express the racial conflict in â€Å"Othello†. Literally, light and darkness can be represented as white and black. The time period during which the play is set has an Elizabethan audience who made general associations with these two colours. White was generally associated with fairness and nobility; whereas black was usually assigned to negative connotations such as evil and corruption. However in this play, Iago and Othello are portrayed inversely against this traditional generalization. Othello has a black physical appearance but inside, he’s a fair and noble hero at the beginning of the play. This is supported when the Duke of Venice comforts Brabantio about the marriage of Othello and Desdemona by saying that â€Å"Your son-in-law is far more fair than black†. In contrast of Othello, Iago is a white man in the Venetian society with an absolute black soul. He plots against Othello throughout the play for his own benefits and to satisfy his professional jealousy. In his revenge plan, Iago remarks that Othello â€Å"will as tenderly be led by th’nose/ As asses are†. Iago’s duplicity is also proved by his confession to Roderigo. He states he belongs to the kind of people who â€Å"trimmed in forms and visages of duty. Keep yet their hearts attending on themselves†. Through the traditional associations around light and darkness as well as black and white, Shakespeare shows us the ironic contrast between Othello and Iago, while the black-skinned Othello is pure and the white- skinned Iago is corrupt, a Machiavellian, a personality type, someone who was not true to their word, and it’s the one that the Elizabethan audience feared. In this manner, Shakespeare challenged the general ideas of the Elizabethan society which ranked black people racially to be lower. Shakespeare also allows us to consider the representation of appearance versus reality. What we see with our own eyes is not always the truth, so it’s not necessary for anyone to have racial bias. Shakespeare also employs the opposition of light and darkness to express Othello’s internal conflict. Figuratively, light can be associated with love and honesty, whilst darkness can be used to represent suspicion and jealousy. Throughout the play, Othello always views himself honourable, as the light, and so is his love for Desdemona, which is also associated with light. However, after Iago has manipulated him into believing Desdemona is unfaithful, he starts to suspect his wife’s fidelity, â€Å"I think my wife be honest, and think she is not†. His solution to his internal conflict is to kill Desdemona. But the metaphor â€Å"put out the light, and then put out the light† suggests that he still doubts whether his wife is truly unfaithful or not, as he refers to Desdemona as the light. Ultimately, he regrets his commitment of killing Desdemona by referring to her as a â€Å"pearl† and himself â€Å"the base Judean† who throws it away. Yet in his final speech, Othello presents to the audience his insistence that he is â€Å"not easily jealous†. This brings us, the audience, to see the tragedy of the play, the power that Iago wielded, and the great loss of love. Through the use of the opposition of light and darkness, Shakespeare expresses how Othello has kept switching his belief and judgment from rightness to falseness. The fact that Othello is a black man being in a white world is vital. His sense of feeling himself as â€Å"other† exacerbates his insecurity. This dark side of Othello’s character as a result causes him to lose self-control and commit a series of irrational actions. We witness his shift away from his original lightness. Shakespeare therefore shows us that the Moor has become internally darkened through his internal conflict in terms of feeling jealous and his sense of otherness. In conclusion, Shakespeare uses the opposition of light and darkness to show us the racial conflict in the Elizabethan society and the internal conflict of Othello. He inverts Iago, a white man, as evil, and Othello, a black good man who does wrong because of Iago. Shakespeare therefore challenges the Elizabethan audience’s traditional associations of black and white. â€Å"Othello† is the play that allows us to connect with Othello’s action. We are shown how people can complete an absolute destruction when they are caught by their internal conflict, just as the noble Othello has been darkened by his sense of insecurity and jealousy.

Essay --

Over the last 30 years, videos games have become very desirable for people of all ages, genders, and race. With the rapid growth of technology these games have become very life like and some seem as if your actually there in person. The rapid growth has made the video industry into a multi-billon dollar industry and this has created much controversy among the people because the games are becoming very realistic, but also more violent. Since the creation of violent video games there have been constant disputes to whether these games will increase violence in the player. Nevertheless, there have been researches done to try and understand the correlation between video games and violence. These researches haven’t only showed that the violent games don’t transfer violence to the players, but they actually help players. With the rise of technology people have begin to drift away from connecting in person and have adapt to this change by speaking or communicating threw something electronics. With games like call of duty and many others, players are able to communicate with many others, th...

Rampant Violent Crime Essay

Since my opponent didn’t give any arguments, I’ll first my arguments: 1.Violence was always there. It’s not a new invention. Since the beginning of time, there has been violence. The first murder is mentioned in the bible. Much before there was even electricity. 2.If the violence you see on television causes you to act violently, each and every one of us (since most of us watch TV) would have been violent 3.Those who act violently are people which are naturally violent. The proof of that is that animals act violently too. animals do not watch TV. They act violently since they are naturally violent creatures. see more:solutions to crime People don’t like to look to themselves when we think about our faults so we turn to a inanimate Scapegoat. While Television has violent programs, it is our decision whether or not to act on what we see or what we allow our children to watch. To blame tv is irresponsible, not taking responsibility to yourself. Virtually everyone in our society watches television, yet we don’t have rampant violent crime rates. Violence existed long before the television and violent crime rates have actually dropped over time. That alone should invalidate any claim of a direct causal relationship. Unless you want to suggest that violence would be virtually non-existent if we had no entertainment, in which case you’re being intentionally obtuse. What television show people have been watching for the last thousands of years? People have been killing people and committing crimes since the beginning of time. I ask an opponent to find one source linking TV to violence directly. Societies with TY’s and societies without TV’s have crime. Television was the scapegoat formed by the old thesis before the antithesis could roll it over. There is no distinction between right and wrong anymore. I see kids crying in the grocery store all the time, and their parents give them candy. For crying! They associate bad behavior with getting what they want. People who are used to getting what they want will become more aggressive. Teaching right from wrong early on will help with the situation, but it first lies with the parenting. After that, the school system needs to pick up on it. Television is entertainment. And it’s not the same with video games where people can argue that video games might make dumb kids think it’s ok to kill people. Most TV shows that have violence show what a bad thing it is, like the guilt and pain that can come from crime. Television has less connection to violence than paintball does to writer’s block. It is the things the people watch on television that influences them. If they watch an action movie and it doesnt have much friction (the bad guy being caught) the viewers might think â€Å"I could do this!† and get an idea of violent actions. In conclusion,it all depends on the show or movie somebody watches and that type of person. Television cannot cause any actions. Yes, we are influenced by our media. But I’ve watched plenty of action-packed gory movies about fights and violence and never had the urge. Part of it is parents, part of it is schooling and local environment. Violence has existed long before the media and although the scope of it has changed, the causes could never be attributed to media. I can’t agree with my opponent that Television is the leading cause of violence in today’s society. Since my opponent didn’t give any arguments, I’ll first my arguments: 1. Violence was always there. It’s not a new invention. Since the beginning of time, there has been violence. The first murder is mentioned in the bible. Much before there was even electricity. 2. If the violence you see on television causes you to act violently, each and every one of us (since most of us watch TV) would have been violent 3. Those who act violently are people which are naturally violent. The proof of that is that animals act violently too. animals do not watch TV. They act violently since they are naturally violent creatures.

The Play Lysistrata And Othello - 1765 Words

When reading Lysistrata and Ajax I noticed that there are some differences and similarities in both plays, first I would like to start off with Lysistrata. In Lysistrata we can see that in Lysistrata it talks about marriage and sex how it is affected by war , it demonstrates the perspective what the women go through when the men are away. It demonstrates the anger and frustration the wives have towards their husbands when they are gone, they refuse to have sex with their husbands until they agree to sign a peace treaty in order to stop the war. Ajax demonstrates the struggles with decisions of suicide, we see the difficult decision of what is right and wrong. It demonstrates the effects of PTSD. Ajax shows us a person who used to†¦show more content†¦This has said to bring the character conflict with their gods and community or someone who’s representing an opposing will. I believe that both of these stories are giving the same message about war. War is not easy and, even today we see the struggles that not only the solider goes through but the soldiers’ wife and the family. If we really think about it, a solider is deployed at weeks, months, maybe even years at a time. They see things that we cannot even begin to comprehend, they experience things we cannot imagine. It is very hard to get over these things that happen. These two plays do an excellent job at demonstrating the effects on both sides of a marriage. However, I believe that they are not saying the same thing. Lysistrata, tends to demonstrate the importance behind the emotions of women whereas Ajax focuses more on the emotions of men . We see the conflict that arises in both of these stories, and we can easily tell the difference between the two, we tend to notice the importance of how Lysistrata and the other women are withholding sexual intercourse with their husbands until they have agreed to sign this peace treaty allowing the war to stop and they get their husbands back. I read one particular section of Lysistrata, it was the part when Lysistrata was with all the women and they taking the oath all together. Lysistrata, wanted to make sure that these women took the oath for one thing, but also knew what it meant and that