The significance of pauses in music

Beethoven was a master of developing short, musical phrases into elaborate, complete ideas. In his Thirty-two variations in C minor, Beethoven takes a seemingly simple twelve measure passage and develops an entire twelve-minute piece, with thirty-two variations stemming from that little musical phrase. Each of these variations by themselves are hard to grasp without that central theme, so a true interpreter of Beethoven will stress the pauses between each variation to allow the audience a better understanding of how Beethoven translated the simple twelve-measure phrase into several wonderfully unique and diverse musical ideas.

And like the pauses in Beethoven’s variations, pauses in our daily lives offer a chance for us to gather our thoughts, free ourselves from the constant flow of time and our struggles against it. In Jennifer Egan’s A Visit from the Goon Squad, Allison Baker notices that her brother, a slightly autistic thirteen-year-old, understands more than many adults in certain things. One of these things may have been evident in his fascination with pauses in rock music, and in the way Drew, Lincoln’s father, had no idea how to handle this behavior. What is obvious to us is that Drew had already experienced diverse aspects of life (the variations of that simple, central theme), and Lincoln is almost as innocent as one can get. He has not yet experienced true, burning emotion, has not occupied a significant position in society, nor is capable of thinking at the capabilities of someone who is not autistic. What Lincoln possesses, however, is a fervent desire to understand and love his family, which may be why he is so attracted to the mysterious powers of pauses in rock songs. During these moments of silence, Lincoln is free of any restrictions placed on him due to time, and with the constant noises of movement broken, time becomes a useless factor for him. His father no longer stresses about his work as a doctor, his mother stops her annoying habits, and his sister is not working on her slide journal. This freedom allows him to be an almost omniscient being- unrestricted by time, looking through a different perspective, and earning a deeper meaning of the world in the process.

But as all pauses go, the song must begin again. With it comes a feeling that time is moving, a hectic constancy that nags at the back of our minds. Even the people who appreciate music most are wary of the fact that the song must end eventually, following its course of time. As we enjoy the music, we know that at some point it will end, and there is nothing we can do to stop that- and Lincoln’s elongated pauses serve only to delay that time. Without those pauses, however, we can lose ourselves in the mess of the world, have no time to truly experience the pureness that we have in the recluse of ourselves. Perhaps Lincoln is like the Grandma from Edward Albee’s The Sandbox: when the violin stops, and she is left alone to the inner silence of her thoughts, it is only then that she can express herself clearly, engage with the greater force outside of the scene, and understand her situation within the world.

The objectivity and permanence of art in The Goldfinch

For a multitude of music lovers who enjoy the classical genre, one of the most agonizing truths rests in the fact that many of the famous composers in history will never again play their most notable works in a live concert. Beethoven’s final moments on the stage already ended two hundred years ago, and Frederic Chopin’s young death prevented many patrons of his time from hearing his fingers glide across the piano, let alone audiences in the twenty-first century. But much like The Goldfinch and Fabritius, past musical genius’ talents live on, surrounded by an aura of permanence and grandeur. And as Theo notices, the fact that many famous works become accessible only as reproductions does not take anything away from the artist’s accomplishments or the value of the piece itself. In that sense, a live performance of Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro by a local orchestra would only serve to cultivate the piece – once written, that piece of music or art has lasting yet varied impact on the changing culture of different eras.

Because Theo touches multiple lives around him in various ways, he himself is like a piece of art, another copy of The Goldfinch. And as time progresses, the spirit of the art lives around Theo and consumes him until the subject of painting and reality have switched places – Theo is now the one in chains, while the goldfinch’s shackles have been broken, allowing it to spread its wings of influence and affect the lives of thousands of others. This obsession with the art and its bird stems not only from the coincidental placing of two similar characters in the museum bombing, but also from the sense of security and balance that Theo receives in the presence of the painting. As he realizes throughout his unpredictable journey into maturity, Theo is an antithesis to the painting itself. His life as a human will be short-lived compared to the life of The Goldfinch, and people will marvel at the painting for years while Theo’s existence may only affect those closest to him. Even so, permanence and objectivity do not indicate that the goldfinch itself is restricted only within its frames. The power the little bird yields to call out to individuals may demonstrate that the spirit of Fabritius is alive and constantly evolving – even through replications, people like Welty were touched deeply to realize the capacity they hold for construing meaning in art.

As Hobie states, “you see one painting, I see another.” The permanence and anchor-like presence of The Goldfinch effectively shouts at onlookers to help the poor bird in chains. Though just an object at best, the painting helps convey the meaning of nature and the futility of humans to decipher what meaning life holds for them. An inanimate object such as a piece of art or music lives on simply due to the fact that people will be fascinated by some aspect of that art. And as long as an appreciation for culture thrives in humans, those works have the potential to live forever. What Theo realizes, moreover, is that humans are in multiple aspects pieces of art themselves. So instead of conforming to social standards in following a strict code of expectations, Theo allows frees himself and strives to become a character that may live on far beyond the short life span allotted for individuals.

 

The relationship of power and education in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf

Many believe that getting a good education correlates positively with success in later social and financial life. Edward Albee seemingly disagrees. Through his portrayal of two faculty members and their wives at the fictional New Carthage University, Albee implies that there may be something inherently wrong in the pursuit of higher education for personal gains. With George struggling for supremacy in the history department and Nick eager to please Martha for better faculty positions, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf depicts a grisly power struggle prevalent in the modern professional world.

The expectation from society often seems to be that higher levels of education equate to higher levels of sophistication and wisdom. In Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf, however, the roles of student and teacher reverse, with faculty members of New Carthage University acting as if they were children and resorting to heavy drinking to hide the ugly realities of their personal lives. George, as a history professor, would likely give off the impression of a hearty and warm man to most of the audience at the start of the play. As the play progresses, however, that warm and benign image of George transfigures itself into a senile picture as George reveals more of his unpleasant qualities. 

Along similar lines, Nick attempts to be polite and reserved through the opening act, but later becomes corrupted by the tempting smell of power. Though he is young, Nick realizes opportunities when they come and takes his chance to achieve a position that George never had the potential to reach. This transformation of George and Nick from benign to malignant not only serves to demonstrate that people hide their inner ugliness with superficial images, but also highlights what may appear to be an inevitable end for people who wish to continue their education for immoral reasons.

The relationship between education and the quest for power is evident even in the name of the university. The irony that George teaches history at a school called “New Carthage University” further represents that he, in his search for personal validation, is inherently chasing a failed cause. Though the institution may have the lures of being a prospective environment for successful people, Albee hints that much like the historical city of Carthage, the university itself is under constant pressure and will eventually succumb to a greater power. Though in the historical context Carthage was conquered by the Romans, New Carthage University looks to be “conquered” by its own power-hungry constituents. With the faculty’s favorite game being “musical beds” and George and Martha having trouble separating personal insecurities from their professional lives, New Carthage University simply portrays the decline of another institution – a failing representative of many schools in the perspective of the modern professional world.

The importance of names in Song of Solomon

Psychological studies done on social groups have proven that humans are naturally inept at recognizing the correct names to a person they meet. Perhaps this flaw in human character is a reason that Toni Morrison attached unique names to her characters in Song of Solomon. Guitar, Milkman, and First Corinthians, for example, are all unconventional for significant characters, yet these particular names strike a certain identity for the readers.

Morrison uses unique names not only to distinguish the characters, but also to reflect their uniqueness and flaws. When readers are first exposed to Pilate during her encounter with Milkman, she seems to be a strong, guiding maternal figure – a stark contrast to her Biblical namesake, who condemned Jesus to be crucified. The irony, however, fails to uphold the morality of Pilate’s character after the death of Hagar. For much like Pontius Pilate, Pilate seeks to avoid personal blame for Hagar’s death, even though she has acquiesced to Hagar’s every needs and allowed Hagar to be exposed to superficial relationships at an early age.

Along with Pilate, names such as “Guitar” help the readers reflect on the character’s struggles and identify thematic topics such as the individual’s quest for identity. The image of a guitar brings to mind a fretted instrument wired with strings, designed to be plucked in order to achieve a certain sound. And just like a guitar, Guitar is capable of producing sweet music – being a companion and constant source of friendship. Yet also like a guitar, Guitar is hollow inside. He may appear to uphold moral values and support his friends, but without a solid grasp of his own identity, he exposes the inner emptiness and becomes easily dissuaded and disillusioned into joining a dangerous group such as the Seven Days. Furthermore, Guitar is the only character named after an inanimate object, symbolizing his status as a character that is often used by others for their own needs. Without a presence or identity that he can identify as his own, Guitar seems always out of tune, going so far as to attempting to kill his best friend in his struggle for individual inspiration.

 

 

The role of Sir William in Mrs. Dalloway

As a student interested in studying for a career in the medical profession, the scene where the Smiths visit Sir William Bradshaw disturbed me. He seems benignant and likeable at first, but once we become exposed to the doctor’s methods of dealing with his patients, he turns malevolent and ugly. Because he hides a different character inside his amiable outer skin, Sir William exemplifies the worst case scenario for patients – a doctor who became interested in his profession only for the social position and wealth. Sir William had worked hard throughout his life just to bask in the respect and admiration given to the position of his profession, not to uphold the ethics of good service.

With this in mind, characterizing Sir William as an inherently immoral character is not a view that comes entirely out of context. Prescribing isolated rest in the countryside for every patient who is supposedly “out of proportion” does not appear to be an action to be taken by a professional doctor, let alone someone so renowned in London for understanding the human soul. Furthermore, Sir William exploits those who are ignorant of medical practices and charges hefty fees for his services, which are merely business affairs where every mentally ill patient is converted to fit the model of keeping perfect proportions. And not only has his method of conversion taken over his patients, it has also taken over people around him, as Lady Bradshaw – once carefree and happy – had unknowingly submitted to the power-grubbing views of her husband some time before the event s of Mrs. Dalloway.

The superficiality of Sir William’s every action mirrors Miss Kilman’s and helps draw the parallel between Septimus and Clarissa. Much like Sir William, Miss Kilman hides ill-natured feelings under the superficial coating of her pious outer shell, and attempts to convert Elizabeth to fit her own views of society. Though Miss Kilman’s position could be an unfortunate case of receiving the wrong end of the societal potluck, she is as immoral as Sir William in trying to mold Elizabeth to fit her own views of the world, not allowing Elizabeth any freedom to interpret and experience society for herself. Once liberated from Miss Kilman, Elizabeth at once experiences the world in a different way, able to note the beauty and sound of the world as she boards the omnibus. Clarissa cannot clearly point out what makes her dislike Miss Kilman so much, but she senses some immorality in her, mirroring the hatred that Septimus has in sensing the immorality of Sir William’s practices.

By characterizing Sir William as such a manipulative and greedy person, Virginia Woolf was not attempting to undermine the medical profession. Instead, she was pointing out the faults of society in putting faith in such an erroneous figure as Sir William on the basis of one thing: position. This idea of society putting such emphasis on position and power is what Virginia Woolf attempted to warn readers about through her portrayal of Sir William. Many leaders recognize this fault in society and try to take advantage of people who refuse to look beyond the superficiality of their leading figure (a.k.a. the Donald Trump campaign).  To succeed in the modern world is to hold a respectable position, and when others fail to look deeper into a person’s actual character, they may be subject to conversion as well.

Extraordinary indifference in The Stranger

In flipping a coin ten times, most of us will predict the ratio of heads to tails to come out to fifty-fifty. Statistically, however, repeated trials of ten coin tosses will not result in five heads and five tails for most of the trials. Even an outcome of ten heads and zero tails may not be as statistically far-fetched as we think. The renowned mathematician Bernoulli summarized this phenomenon in his Law of Large Numbers, a theory which states that a seemingly unpredictable outcome – such as flipping a coin – will develop a highly predictable pattern after large amounts of trials. If a coin was flipped millions of times, for example, the ratio of heads to tails will come out to be the very predictable outcome of fifty-fifty.

Albert Camus’s The Stranger paints such a portrait of our existence in the universe. Up close, every person seems as unpredictable and distinct as an individual coin toss. Within a whole, however, everyone becomes a part of one boring, predictable unit. And without meaning to, we assimilate ourselves into society, forming our consciousness around societal values and expectations. By simply living in this way, we unconsciously become a part of the Law of Large Numbers, merely another trial contributing to the fifty-fifty ratio. Meursault has come to a realization of this, stating that he had fit into the mold of the predictable, ambitious young man as a student but later realized that nothing matters in the end. He is truly aware of his own fate and place in the universe, unlike the billions of masses too busy to look around and think of their own futility of existence.

By becoming sentient of this futility of existence, Meursault transforms himself into an outlier. He is the rare case in which the coin lands on its edge. Though this case is still technically a coin flip, it is excluded from the other trials because it cannot be categorized into a head or a tail. Meursault is peculiar and rare because he does not belong into any general category that society has put up for itself. He knows that he did something because he simply did it, and there is no deeper reason behind any of it. Things are the way they are because they simply exist in that way, and efforts to explain it are all in vain. Once a man understands his insignificance, he has a full grasp of his “fate,” thus becoming superior to the consciousness of existence.

The use of blindness in King Lear

Although he seems reasonable and loving, Gloucester is at first irrationally biased toward Edmund. Similarly, Lear makes the illogical decision to divide his kingdom, which eventually leads to his own madness and death. These two characters symbolize the foolishness present in everyone when we become blind to the truth around us, a state of mind that may lead to severe consequences and broken relationships. Only after Gloucester and Lear suffer physical and mental traumas do they realize the fault of their previous ways, but they perceive their errors after the impact of their actions has settled in, a time too late to correct the effects of their actions on themselves and their loved ones.

Gloucester’s physical blindness and Lear’s mental blindness in madness enable them to become the reviewer of their own actions. When trapped within themselves and forced to reflect on what they have done wrong, these two characters come to a realization of who actually loves them and who had been merely putting on a display to appease them. And through their epiphanies, Shakespeare emphasizes the power of our own minds and how we can filter the truth out from the myriad of false promises and deceits present in our environments. Although not many of us will have our eyes gouged out or mentally degraded to the point of madness, the consciousness to decipher a beneficial relationship from a harmful one is present in everyone.

Much like Edward Albee’s The Sandbox, where Grandma can only clearly think in the absence of music, Shakespeare illustrates for Gloucester and Lear the clarity of their thinking in the absence of their sight and mind. Through their blindness, Shakespeare warns his audience to be wary of their surroundings and to keep in mind the aspects of life that really matters. Especially during Shakespeare’s era, when revolutionary scientific and intellectual ideas expanded the horizons for new possibilities, this message would have been especially relevant. As London transformed into a bustling metropolis, it promised material benefits and better quality of living, but for many, at the cost of their personal and loving relationships. Even today, as people become blinded from the truth in their search for wealth and elevated socioeconomic status, they may forget about others that truly love them, rather choosing to surround themselves with people only too greedy to take advantage of their prospects. By embodying these vulnerable attitudes in Gloucester and Lear, Shakespeare effectively points out the flaws present in people of all ages – the tendency to blind themselves to materials over affectionate love.

Briony’s guilt in Ian McEwan’s Atonement

Briony has not changed. Even at eighteen or seventy-seven years of age, she continues to live in her perfect little self-encapsulated world where everything happens just the way she desires. Because of her perfectionist attitude, Briony does not let go of childish dreams even as she matures into a well-known novelist, and is left to her imaginations to distort what happened for her own satisfaction. Although The Trials of Arabella, Robbie’s story in France, and Briony’s own experiences at the hospital are some stories that she uses in an attempt to atone for her actions, Briony cannot be purged of her past – a fact she recognizes herself when she states that there exists “no atonement for God, or novelists.”

Briony’s reluctance to face up to her own sins reveal how much she wants to revert back to her childhood, a care-free time when she was excused of misbehaving by a simple wave of a supervisor’s hand. Despite convincing herself that she has entered into the realm of adulthood after witnessing the events at the fountain, Briony does not truly grasp the idea of claiming responsibility for her own actions. Accusing Robbie against her better judgement, walking back to the hospital instead of heading to Cecilia’s house, and avoiding contact with the Marshalls at the museum all indicate Briony’s reluctance to confront her actions. Having been burdened with the responsibility of facing her past misdoings, the only method of alleviating her guilt is through writing.

The similarities between The Trials of Arabella and later stories only serve to cover the truth behind what has really happened. Robbie never made it back to England, and Cecilia was bombed before she could address any lingering feelings about her love. The typical war situation of the star-crossed lovers with the soldier at war and his expectant nurse follows a similar situation in Briony’s first play, which depicts a typical rebellious princess meeting the charming prince that culminates in a happy ending. This romantic ending, however, never happened and Briony uses her story to divert her thoughts from the truth. By telling these stories and relating them to real events, Briony shows us how we can give voice to our stories so that something fabricated from memory could be equally, if not more powerful and exciting than real life stories. After all, Briony discovers early on that “the imagination is a source of secrets.” 

Exploration of reality in The Glass Menagerie

In her last scene with Tom, Amanda claims that he “lives in a dream” and “manufactures illusions.” This statement not only contradicts her own behavior but also serves as the most important thematic topic explored in Tennessee Williams’s The Glass Menagerie. We find reality an idea difficult to grasp and truths about the world, society, and ourselves can be better conveyed through a work of illusion than a work focusing on objective regurgitation of actual events. In this way, the topics of reality and finding truth in The Glass Menagerie parallels the topics explored in Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried. Stories told with the heavy influence of our memories serve to bring out important events and relations, giving us messages about reality that may not be found in real life.

When Tom, in his first soliloquy, states that instead of giving us “illusion that has the appearance of truth” he will attempt to deliver the truth disguised in an illusion, we realize that a large part of what happens in the play is stretched or completely fabricated from Tom’s memory. Members of the audience have to keep this in mind as the play continues, because most of the interaction between characters outside of Tom’s must have been made up. In the last scene, for example, there is no way for Tom to know exactly what happened between Jim and Laura. But he nevertheless shows the audience what he believes to have happened. In reality, Laura could have been harshly rejected, or awkward silence might have been the only thing passing through the living room while Tom and Amanda were working in the kitchenette. Through his interpretations we see the love that Tom has for his sister and his attempts to protect her image of fragile beauty by giving us his version of the memory.

Because the play stems from Tom’s memory, unrealistic elements such as lighting and music add to the tone. The sentimental tone that surrounds scenes concerning Laura further shows the importance Tom puts on her. When highlighting her character, Tom shows the uniqueness and contrast Laura has against her surroundings. During an era where mass conformity surrounded the lower-middle class and stripped them of their individualism, Tom shapes Laura to be the glass figure that shines against the bland wall of social regularity. Although Laura herself is discontent with her social life, Tom conveys the message that she is special and stands for good, individual qualities present in everyone.

An analysis on the ending of A Doll House: happy or not?

As a dynamic character, Nora transitions from a typical obedient housewife to a determined woman who realizes that she has the potential to be more than Helmer’s “little song-bird.” This sudden change from a character who sees only the superficial joys in life to a complex character capable of distinguishing the morality of her relationship with her family marks an optimistic ending that reinforces Henrik Ibsen’s ideas regarding feminism. By looking deeper into the meaninglessness of Helmer’s affections towards her, Nora plays the protagonist who truly finds what she wants to be: a member of the family who can be trusted with serious matters thought to be reserved only for men.

We can see from the beginning of the play that the relationship between Nora and Torvald is a superficial one. Nora hides little secrets from her husband, yet he continues to call her loving names, oblivious to even Nora’s forgery of the signature. The lack of communication forces Nora to conceal her secrets to herself, and she is so sheltered that she does not realize the gravity of her actions until Krogstad reveals the implications. The contrast between Nora’s competency with her relationship and her realization of her potential marks a turnaround in her character and symbolizes a positive moral change in her behavior.

The ending scene of Krogstad and Mrs. Linde further adds to the overall happy ending, as they learn to put aside their past conflicting views of their relationship and agree to start a new one for both of their respective benefits. The change in Krogstad from a morally indifferent villain to a hero who finds his happiness adds to the ending as positive emotions trump the moral confusion detailed through the rest of the play. Even for Helmer, whose wife abandons his family, the ending is positive. His transition from a strict follower of morality to a selfish man who cares more about his reputation than his family reinforces how the ending plays out for each character. Despite the loss of his wife, the relief that he feels from Krogstad’s second letter dominates the initial sadness that he feels from the departure of his wife. Because Helmer is a character whose overall happiness lies in surface prosperity and his public appearance, he can get another woman to fill the gap of Nora and continue his superficial happy life.