An author’s first ingredient in making a good play or short story is their characters. Characters are essential to the ending result in a successful story. All different authors choose to characterize their characters using many different techniques. Sophocles and Susan Glaspell are two great examples of characterization in plays that have been captivating to readers. Both authors have the similar technique where as they would insinuate their main characters to be important and crucial to the story yet, in the long run, the small meaningless characters end up having the biggest impact on the story itself. Such examples of their work are “Kind Oedipus” from Sophocles and “Trifles” from Susan Glaspell.
Even though Sophocles was living in a different time and wrote “King Oedipus” in 429 B.C. his style of writing has always been recognized. Sophocles chose to make the readers assume that the main character in “King Oedipus” is King Oedipus, as well as other main characters. No one expects the smallest characters such as the messenger and the herdsman to play such important roles in “King Oedipus.” “King Oedipus” involves numerous characters where the reader’s would classify to themselves which character is essential to the story an
. . .
Some readers would think that the time difference between both plays would change the way authors write; yet Sophocles and Glaspell proved readers wrong. Readers were proven wrong because Glaspell’s works of Literature proves her technique of characterization quite similar to of Sophocles. A women’s job is to stay in the kitchen and never intervene with a man’s position. Both writers have the same style of characterization unimportant characters into main characters. Glaspell made the men such important roles in the beginning of the play, such as the County Attorney and the Sheriff, yet the men were the fooled ones. Peters proves that looks can be deceiving. “Trifles” is taken place as a murder mystery and the “main characters” were the men who were suppose to solve the mystery. In ending result, readers are realizing never to assume that meaningless characters have no impact in stories. The women playing the role as the useless characters end up having more information about the mystery then the men. As the play goes on, the author constructs conflict and readers assume that in order to solve conflicts, the “main characters” will be crucial at this point. Glaspell’s “Trifles” contradicted the whole social role where as the readers would assume women were useless characters. In result to Sophocles brilliance, the puzzle is slowly put together by unexpected characters such as the messenger and the herdsman, who was never given a specific name, unlike the other characters in the story. During Glaspell’s period of time, readers must realize that women played a small role in society.
Approximate Word count =
840
Approximate Pages =
3 (250 words per page double spaced)
Simply subscribe to view this paper, and 100,000 others.
| CREDIT CARD |
ONLINE CHECK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JOIN BY PHONE
|
|
|