Comparative Essay Oedipus and Cherry Orchard Exposition
Belen
Valeria Petronave
Literature
22/6
Comparative Essay 3
Most Greek Tragedies consist in a three act play in which the exposition, the climax and the resolution are combined in acts. Aristotle referred to these as the beginning, the middle and the end. However, nowadays, in modern dramatic plays, there are five acts; each represent an element: act one (the exposition), act two (the rising action), act three (the climax), act four (falling action), and finally, act five (the resolution). Both Henrik Ibsen and Sophocles followed Greek tragedies formats but they used different methods. Ibsen used the traditional three acts. And Sophocles divided his play in the beginning, the middle and the end, merging them in a single act. Although both playwrights followed Aristotle’s’ format, their exposition was presented in a different way. Ibsen’s exposition was written in the plot, while Sophocles’ exposition was the backstory to “Oedipus the king”.
“A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen, was written in 1879, a time where Shakespeare’s five-act plays were played all over the world and a time were most plays followed the modern dramatic five-act structure. Ibsen decided to go against the current structure and followed Aristotle’s three act structure with “A Doll’s House”. In the first act, Ibsen presents the protagonist, Nora Helmer, a loving wife who’s preparing herself for Christmas festivities, and also brings Torvald Helmer to scene, Nora’s husband, a man of power. With both on stage he presents to the audience their relationship. He contrasts how in love they seem to be with each other by demonstrating Torvalds’s constant need to control Nora. The action starts with the arrival of Mrs. Lindie. As the high school friends, Nora and Mrs. Lindie have a conversation about their lives, this leads to the reveal that Nora was not as naive as she was portrayed to be, instead. She had gotten money from someone to pay for her husband’s health. Something at that time was seen as a complete insult to the man of the house “... a wife cannot borrow without her husband’s consent” (Ibsen). Ibsen uses dialogue through his exposition to explain the setting and the relationship the characters have. He also uses dialogue to explain the back story. During the conversation with Mrs. Lindie, the audience finds out that Torvald had been sick and that the Helmer’s had lived a year in Italy. The action continues to rise and hits the climax as Ibsen presents more characters, Doctor Rank and Krogstad. The first act ends in the climax. The man Nora had asked for money is now asking for the favor back. In the second act, Ibsen demonstrates, in a very lucid way, Nora’s attitude towards Torvald. She dances around as a little girl, demeaning herself for him as he calls her pet names. The pet names stand for the stereotypes that women had in that time. Women were seen only as house wives, and men thought that they’re only concern was spending and looking pretty. Ibsen shows the steortypes with dialogue and body movement “NORA dances more and more wildly.” (ibsen 48) In the third act, the resolution, Torvald finds out the truth, how his own “…little Nora” (Ibsen 11) had deceived him, and Nora finally sees the true Torvald. The manipulative, egocentric man he was. The curtain closes as Nora decides to leave her family behind to start a new life, alone.
On the other hand, Sophocles combines the exposition, the climax and the resolution in a one act play “Oedipus The King”. This play was written in Greece for the festival of the Greek god Dunynasus, 430 B.C. The play begins with Oedipus, the king of Thebes, being begged by his citizens to end the plague that had been destroying the city. He sends his brother in law, Creon to get help from the oracle to learn what to do. The oracle states that to end the plague he must find Lois’s killer, his wife’s former husband and Thebe’s former king. Oedipus calls Tiresias, a prophet, to reveal Laius’ killer, Tiresias accuses him, Oedipus, of killing his wife’s former husband. Oedipus offended orders him to leave. Here in the play Sophocles uses dramatic irony to convey his information. What Oedipus doesn’t know the audience does. The audience already knew Oedipus’ story. Oedipus was the son of Jocasta and Laius. His wife was also his mother. At his birth the gods read his oracle, and stated that his fate was to kill his father and marry his mother. Laius horrified sends his own son to be killed in the woods. But the messenger wasn’t able to do so. The baby ended up in hands of a loving family, one who Oedipus didn’t know wasn’t his own. When Oedipus, as a grown man, is read his oracle he escapes his family to avoid his destiny. He flees to Thebes. In the journey he is attacked by some men and kills one of them. Continuing his trip he rans into a plague, and the only way to end it was to solve a riddle. If you did so, you would marry the queen. Oedipus solves the riddle and marries the queen of Thebes, Jocasta. His destiny became true, but he did not know it. Throughout the first half of the play, Oedipus does not know his destiny had become true. But the Audience does. Sophocles written exposition in the play lasts for less than twenty lines but this is because the audience already knew the story behind his plot. As soon as the prophet reveled that it was Oedipus who killed Laius, the exposition ended and the action started to rise, leading to the climax, the full reveal of Oedipus’ destiny, and ending with the outcome, Jocasta’s suicide and Oedipus’ blindness.