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.

The most important death in The Things They Carried

The only death mentioned after the Vietnam War is Norman Bowker’s. Whereas Tim adjusted to life after the war relatively well and without much struggle, Bowker fails to confront the guilt he carries over the death of Kiowa. Although Bowker was not directly involved in Kiowa’s death, internal conflicts within the character show how difficult the burden of being associated with someone’s death is. Because of the timing of this story and its unique structure, Norman Bowker’s death has a significant role in conveying O’Brien’s message on the topics of storytelling, guilt, and how war effects everyday people.

Although Kiowa’s death serves as a climax for these set of stories, Bowker’s stories serve as a better method for O’Brien to convey his topic of storytelling. During the war, the platoon as a collective shared the loss of Kiowa and every individual felt guilty of being associated with his death. After the war, however, Bowker is left alone with his thoughts, does not have anyone to confide in, and resorts to driving endlessly around the lake. Throughout these drives, Bowker attempts to clarify and relieve some of the guilt inside him by imagining conversations with his father and ex-girlfriend. These feigned conversations do not help him and Bowker resorts to asking O’Brien to write what had happened in the field. He hopes that recounting the events surrounding Kiowa’s death will alleviate some of the fears and emptiness, but the narrative suggests that without a personal talk where he can tell somebody what he feels from the heart, Bowker’s status will not get any better.

The unique structure of the story, where past and present events weave together through interrelated objects in the setting, helps to convey the helplessness of Bowker’s situation. He cannot get to the focus of his problems, only touching it on the surface and driving along its circumference. The repetitiveness of his drive and what he sees along the path around the lake reflects the monotonous emptiness that Bowker feels after the war. He is looking for something meaningful, but cannot find anything remotely assuring. He even goes to say that perhaps he died with Kiowa in that field, and I would say he is correct in this assumption. The lake correlates with the heart of his problems, but Bowker is empty and too afraid to confront the truth about what happened in Vietnam. Without the power to confront the guilt and face the truth, the character driving around the lake is merely an exoskeleton and the real Norman Bowker had actually sunk into the field under the mortar fire.