Arthur Miller ‘s drama The Crucible and George Orwell ‘s satirical novel Nineteen Eighty Four ( 1949 ) dig into the ambivalent nature of belonging, portraying it as a construct affected by internal and external factors. The belonging experience is unstable and dependent on circumstance as persons may see a sense of individuality despite being alienated from the wider community. In add-on, external factors such as establishments and governments may implement conformance from persons to aline with the ruling beliefs and values.
Both texts show that an person can hold a coincident sense of personal belonging and social disaffection therefore supplying a deeper apprehension into the complexness of this construct and experience. In The Crucible, Proctor is characterised as strongly opinionated and a carrier of moral strength. His controversial action in retreating his confession despite cognition of capital penalty draws sympathy from the audience for his brave attempts in defying comformity shown in his perennial exclaimings ; ‘Because it is my name! Because I can non hold another in my life! ‘ This emphasises Proctor ‘s inexorable tone and the symbolic value of honor which he places on his name, leting him to continue his individuality and intent in his battle against inhibitory authorization. His moral determination to be an honorable adult male allows him to belong to his ain values and this is reflected by his 3rd individual observation about himself ‘For now I think I see some shred of goodness in John Proctor ‘ . Yet it is this independent behavior which causes his disaffection, shown by Danforth ‘s menace ; ‘you will turn out your psyche ‘s whiteness or you can non populate in a Christian state ‘ . The high mode linguistic communication of ‘ can non ‘ farther reinforces how belonging can be indefinitely limited if one were to dispute the constitutions of society.
Correspondingly in 1984, Winston ‘s disaffection amidst a oppressive society is conveyed in the metaphor ‘he felt as though he were rolling in the woods of the sea underside. This dystopian novel follows the totalitarian government of the Party, where citizens are controlled by ‘Big Brother ‘ , a powerful societal front man. As a consequence of this banishment, Winston attempts to set up his individualism by defying the Party, like Proctor ‘s rebellion of declining to subscribe his name. Winston ‘s sexual relationship with Julia is an act of calculated self-exclusion and ‘a blow struck against the party. It was a political act ‘ . Orwell ‘s specifc enunciation ‘political ‘ efficaciously overturns the personal nature of their sexual brotherhood in portraying it as a strategical rebellion.
Mona Lisa Smile follows the supporter Catherine Watson, a free believing art professor who condemns the stiff social boundaries and therefore instructors 1950s Wellesley misss to dispute their traditional functions. Watson ‘s individualism is established in the gap voiceover ‘She did n’t come to Wellesley to suit in ; she came to do a difference ‘ . Her personal belonging to her ain values supersedes her demand to conform to society and therefore when she resigns ; there is abundant natural lighting on the stopping point up shooting of her face, proposing self enlightenment and assurance.
Therefore both texts explore that an person ‘s divergence from the wider community can supply them with personal belonging.
Widening on the thought of personal belonging, both texts show that this experience is transeunt and is susceptible to alter which leads to the via media of one ‘s individuality. In The Crucible, Hale experiences an inexorable disintegration of religion towards the tribunal upon gaining the false veracity of the accusals and Salem ‘s corruptness. He remarks that ab initio he ‘came into this small town like a bridegroom to his beloved ‘ with the simileof the bridegroom here symbolic of his old connexion to Salem. His high mode articulation ‘I may close my scruples to it no more-private retribution is working through this testimony! ‘ reflects his rage and finding to recommend for what he believes is morally right. However this is contrasted to his eventual succumbing to society ‘s commands shown in his dejected tone ‘aˆ¦cleave to no religion when religion brings blood ‘ as he urgently urges the accused to squeal. Yet the audience comes to admit that this does non let him to belong once more as he becomes more guilt ridden about his lip service in carrying good Christians to lie. Similarly in 1984, Orwell delves into the unstable nature of belonging and how obstructions can impede one ‘s individuality. This is epitomised by the coop of rats in room 101 in the novel ‘s denouement. It is such confrontation that tilts Winston ‘s mental stableness and causes his blinded conformance with society ‘s oppressive ways. The anaphora in ‘he confessed to the assasination of Party membersaˆ¦he confessed that he had been a spyaˆ¦he confessedaˆ¦ ‘ illustrates Winston ‘s complete conformity to the point where he is deluded into doing false confessions. As a consequence, Winston forgos interpersonal belonging in his treachery of Julia, by deviating the incrimination in his emphatic supplications ; ‘Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia! ‘ This reveals the loss of one ‘s scruples and trueness when the experience of belonging beomes hard. By the terminal of the novel, Winston ‘s blinded conformance is shown in ‘he had won the triumph over himself. He loved Big Brother’.The sarcasm in Winston ‘s credence by society at the cost of his individualism and humanity warns readers that belonging can be manipulated at the cost of one ‘s individuality.
Apart from internal influences such as personal finding, composers depict that belonging can be influenced by external factors such as establishments and inhibitory governments. Mary Warren ‘s autumn in the tribunal from finding to continue the truth, to siding with the bulk and impeaching Proctor of lying is representative of the compressing effects of society ‘s oppresion. The audience realise that her conformance is derived from fright of requital as shown in her repeat to Proctor in ; ‘I can non, they ‘ll turn on meaˆ¦I can non, I can non! ” Her extremely emphatic linguistic communication reinforces how the imperative to belong has basically clouded Mary ‘s moral judgement and this highlights the influential impact of curtailing governments. This thought is farther underlined by Danforth, a representation of the theocracy, who makes it clear that ‘a individual is either with the tribunal or he must be counted against it, there is no route between ‘ . The metaphor of the route and the ultimatum in this statement symbolizes the deficiency of picks for one ‘s conformance with society. Likewise in 1984, O’Brien inside informations the dystopic image of a hereafter under the interior party in the confronting metaphor ‘a boot stomping on a human face-for of all time ‘ . The elan causes the reader to hesitate and visualize this barbarous image, fixing them for the dramatic impact of the two simple words-‘for of all time ‘ . O’Brien ‘s duologue to Winston besides reflects implemented belonging, through the apposition of ‘obey ‘ and ‘love ‘ : ‘It is non plenty to obey him: you must love him ‘ . The repeat and high mode linguistic communication here reflects the imperative to belong both in private and publically which further emphasizes the extent of the subjugation. By commanding linguistic communication, the Oceania society seeks to command idea and enforce belonging to society. The mottos ‘War is Peace ‘ , ‘Freedom is Slavery ‘ and ‘Ignorance is Strength ‘ are contradictions to the reader, oxymorons, yet to Oceanians they are beliefs of religion and implemented belonging is greatly enhanced by the credence of these mottos.
MONA LISA SMILE
‘Mona Lisa Smile ‘ , follows the supporter Catherine Watson, a latitudinarian art professor who condemns the stiff social boundaries and therefore teaches 50 ‘s Wellesley misss to oppugn their traditional social functions.
Watson ‘s individualism is apparent in the gap voiceover ; ‘ ( she ) did n’t come to Wellesley to suit in, she came to do a difference ‘ . Her finding to remain true to her individuality even in face of losing her learning station reinforces her strong sense of personal belonging and therefore similar to Proctor, Watson is besides characterised with moral strength. Her assurance in her values and beliefs is clearly brooding in the last scene as she resigns from Wellesley college as bright natural lighting on the stopping point up of her face suggests self enlightenment.
Initially Watson ‘s pupil, Elizabeth Warren is depicted as ego righteous and conservative who strongly advocates for the imposts of Wellesley. This is reflected by her costuming of typical traditional 1950 ‘s dress manner of high waisted skirts in add-on to her tightly pinned coil. However her belonging to these values bit by bit slices as she learns of her hubby ‘s criminal conversation and under the influence of her broad instructor Catherine Watson, she tells her female parent ; ‘I filed for divorce this morningaˆ¦I am traveling to jurisprudence school ‘ . Her confident tone reflects her assuarance and assurance in her determination, and this brave act signifies a alteration in her initial sense of belonging. However in contrast to ‘The Crucible ‘ and ‘1984 ‘ , Warren does non compromise her individuality, alternatively she rediscovers her independency and desire for rational chases.
Wellesley College is a conservative adult females ‘s college with a esteemed repute for academic excellence yet it is a stiff environment where success is measured by domestic achievements. This is established to the audience when one of the instructors provinces ; ‘a adult female ‘s success is dependent on how good you marry’.The unequivocal linguistic communication employed emphasises the inflexibleness of the values and the fixed outlooks for Wellesley adult females. In add-on, the myocardial infarction en scene of the school edifice is really stiff and therefore jarring lines are depicted as opposed to round lines so to reenforce the contricting boundaries set by this community.