How Does Sheriff Create Tension In Act 2 In Journeys End? Analysis Free Writing Sample

How does Sheriff build tension in Act 2? Jodie Horton Sheriff creates a lot of tension in Act 2 in many different ways. He uses structure as a way to create tension including, stage directions, setting/staging and characters actions. Tension is initially built in scene 1 by the use of Sheriffs structure, the men are waiting in the trenches for six days with nothing to do, to the audience the real boredom of the trenches and the men would be exposed. The men talk about everyday things such as the bacon they are eating for breakfast “look down straight on it from above, sir, you can see the bit o’ lean quite clear. pg37 The start of the scene is boring but light hearted, it shows how the men have a sense of family between them, struggling to create a normality of everyday life. But however the structure and mood changes later on in the scene when Stanhope asks to censor Raleigh’s letter. “D’you understand an order? Give me that letter! ”pg 48. The structure of this scene creates a lot of tension, because the audience will be calm and peacefully watching the men go about their daily life’s but then the scene abruptly changes into Stanhope’s actions of fury.

It would be unexpected and shock the audience, creating tension and awkwardness. Sheriff also creates key tension in the plays stage directions, which would be seen on stage. During scene 1 when Stanhope kicks off about Raleigh’s letter Sheriff uses stage directions to intensify the tension. She uses words such as ‘stammering’ ‘nervously’ ‘astonished’ ‘trembling’ and ‘shouting’ before the lines of the characters. This gives a real sense of the emotions of the characters as in a play it is hard to show the thoughts of characters so this has to be done through action.

These actions create tension as it shows the conflict between Stanhope and Raleigh, and Raleigh being intimidated by Stanhope, which would be obvious to the audience through Raleigh’s stammering and nervousness. Also the staging of the play is important as it is constantly cramped, claustrophobic and dark. So when an argument does spring up between characters it can be escalated by the enclosed space, making the situation hard to avoid or easy to walk away from. So the tension isn’t ever really escaped but hangs around for a longer period of time that what it usually would.

In scene 2 Sheriff creates tension on stage between Stanhope and S-M. “Stanhope: then we advance and win the war S-M: [pretending to make a note] Win the War. Very good, sir. ” Pg 51 Sheriff has cleverly added the little stage direction to create tension. It is known that the attack id extremely risky and very likely to be fatal, it is unlikely for many men to survive. So when Stanhope is talking to S-M, S-M is almost sarcastic in his response to signify the hopelessness of this attack, pretending to make a note of winning the war to show the disbelief S-M has in Stanhope.

Then the tension is built up even more by Stanhope “But you understand exactly what I mean, sergeant major” pg 51. Death is never really addressed or spoken about during the play, it is always a subject that is ignored and covered over by the men to help them cope in the difficult situations. Stanhope openly bringing it up in this line brings in a lot of tension. Although the line is not direct and doesn’t speak about death very openly, it is one of the first points in the play that death between two characters is discussed.

Bringing in tension and sad emotion from the audience at how hopeless the men are going to be in this attack, and the futile loss of life it will involve. Jodie Horton Furthermore Sheriff creates tension in the conversation between Stanhope and the Colonel. There is a lot of pauses in between the spoken conversation about the attack. This makes the scene slow to watch on stage creating a lot of tension. Stanhope also talks in the short sentences to the colonel, which is surprising as the colonel is higher ranked than him “A surprise daylight raid under a smoke screen…” “Quite” pg 53.

The Colonel also stutters when Stanhope asks if he should go on the attack, the Colonel replies “ Oh, No, Stanhope. I-I can’t let you go. ”pg 53. This again brings back the hopelessness of the attack, the fact that the Colonel doesn’t want Stanhope to go on the raid shows that the raid is ridiculously dangerous and the Colonel doesn’t want to risk losing his best officer. As sheriff has wrote a play and not a novel, it is a challenge to expose the characters true feelings and emotions and this has to be done purely through their actions.

Raleigh is a key character in showing us about Stanhope’s character. Raleigh represents the old life of Stanhope, and how badly Stanhope has been affected by the war. Raleigh’s often surprise and shock at Stanhope’s actions and bursts of rage or drunkenness, show use the true character change in Stanhope. Creating tension in the audience by symbolising the horrors of the war and the tolls it took on men, this would have been quite upsetting especially as the play was released not long after the war had ended, so the majority of the audience would have experienced he war and would know people who had lost their life in the war. Also Sheriff uses Osborne’s characters to bring home the worry about the raid. Osborne has always been the character to reassure, cheer up and look after the other men. He was like a father figure to the men and they called him ‘Uncle’. Near the end of Act 2 Osborne’s character changes slightly, he speaks in shorter sentences “Not Yet” “Maybe” “Yes” pg 64. This is very unlike Osborne’s character especially when speaking to Raleigh’s who he often wants to reassure and stay positive with.

This change is Osborne’s character is quite significant as he has lost hope and is almost certain that he is going to die during the attack. As such a positive caring and loving character has lost hope, it builds a lot of tension in the scene, as the audience would be questioning Osborne’s sudden character change, realising the dangers of the attack, the emotions the men bottles up and dealt with and the bravery they held.

Cultural Strengths As Moderators Of The Relationship Between Acculturation

Bettendorf, S. K. , &ump; Fischer, A. R. (2009). Cultural strengths as moderators of the relationship between acculturation to the mainstream U. S. Society and eating and body-related concerns among Mexican American women. Journal Of Counseling Psychology, 56(3), 430-440. doi:10. 1037/a0016382 Discusses how ethic identity, familism, and enculturation serve as protection from issues of acculturation to mainstream U. S. society, specifically eating and body related concerns faced by Mexican American women.

Results reveal that adherence to family values may serve as protection to the adverse effects of living in a society that promotes thinness as beauty. Findings highlight the importance of culture awareness in the prevention and treatment of disordered eating and suggest that it may be beneficial to work with the family, promoting interdependence and cohesion. In addition the authors point out that it may be empowering for the client to understand her eating and body concerns in the context of the her socio-political environment.

An important component of the therapeutic process is to help these women develop a critical view that will translate into a sense of empowerment. Results are limited by the fact that questionnaires used were developed mainly with European American samples and administered online. Cummins LH,Simmons AM,Zane NW. Eating disorders in Asian populations: A critique of current approaches to the study of culture, ethnicity, and eating disorders. Am J Orthopsychiatry 2005; 75: 553–574. Cummins et al. 2005) discuss the role of sociocultural factors in the etiology of eating disorders and argue for a need of increased awareness regarding different types of eating disorder symptoms other that Western symptom patterns. Drawing from a review of the research literature from 1973 to 2003, the authors describe links between culture, ethnicity and eating disorders in Asian populations and critically discuss the methods employed in the study of different ethnic groups. Areas for future research on the relationship between culturally based variables and eating disorders are identified.

I believe that the strength of this article is that the literature reviewed describes research conducted in countries of historical, cultural and religious diversity as well as different levels of exposure to Western values such as India, Pakistan, Japan and Hong Kong and Singapore. Additionally, the literature reviewed also covers groups of Asian ethnic origins residing in Westernized countries. Halliwell, E. , &ump; Harvey, M. (2006). Examination of a sociocultural model of disordered eating among male and female adolescents. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11(1359107), 235-48.

The authors use an adaptation of Stice’s (1994) socio-cultural model of disordered eating that includes social comparisons, self-reports of body mass index and perceived weight status and examine how these components affect this model. Data obtained from a sample of 250 girls and 275 boys, ages between 11-16, revealed that pressure to lose weight is linked to eating behavior, social comparison, internalization and body dissatisfaction. Social comparisons were strongly connected to body dissatisfaction for adolescents who considered them to be overweight.

There were considerable gender discrepancies, with girls being more affected by body dissatisfaction and pressure to lose weight. Although issues of appearance and attractiveness continue to be more central to the self-concept of females that that of males, the study reveals that models of eating behavior designed for girls can also be applied to explain problematic eating behavior of adolescent boys. Results indicate that the social comparison aspect is a worthwhile target for intervention, prevention and treatment initiatives. Kempa, M. L. , &ump; Thomas, A. (2000). Culturally Sensitive Assessment and Treatment of Eating Disorders.

Eating Disorders, 8(1), 17. This article examines the assessment, diagnoses and treatment of eating disorders in individuals from culturally distinct backgrounds. There is a thorough discussion of issues concerning the connections between ethnic identities, immigration and eating pathology. The authors offer a comprehensive overview of culturally bound symptoms, views and values of Caucasian, African, Native and Asian Americans and highlight the importance of incorporating and capitalizing on cultural values such as of the different groups when treating eating disorders (i. . African American’s strong spirituality, Native Americans emphasis on the importance of living with harmony with nature). It is pointed out that although the connection between eating disorders and the insidious Western unattainable and even racist (imagery promoting European features) beauty ideals is acknowledge, changes are not advocates strongly enough. This article will be very useful in the creation of my teaching package and is limited only by its’ exclusive focus on the USA. Mann, T. , &ump; Tomiyama, A. J. (2008, November-December).

Cultural factors in collegiate eating disorder pathology: when family culture clashes with individual culture. Journal of American College Health, 57(3), 309. This article examines the effects of family enmeshment on the development of eating pathology between two groups of female college students. Participants are given a questionnaire to determine their cultural value orientations, level of enmeshment and eating pathology. Results reveal that extreme family proximity is connected to eating disturbances in non-Asian American, culturally independent participants but not in Asian- American, culturally interdependent participants.

This study highlights the importance of taking cultural frameworks into account when investigating mental health issues among college students. However, the authors fail to take into account that participants from a culturally interdependent background may refrain from revealing information about eating disorders and may also be more susceptible to a need to be socially desirable. For these reasons, the validity of results may be compromised.

Mary E. Shuttlesworth and Deanne Zotter Disordered Eating in African American and Caucasian Women: The Role of Ethnic IdentityJournal of Black Studies September 2011 42: 906-922, first published on March 17, 2011 doi:10. 1177/0021934710396368 The impact of culture and ethnic identity in the development of maladaptive eating patterns are examined. A comparison is made between African American women and Caucasian women on disordered eating measures and results indicate that low levels of ethnic identity put African American women at risk by increasing the likelihood of binge eating behavior and bulimic pathology.

Conversely, for Caucasian women, high levels of ethnic identity seem to translate into higher levels of binge eating as well as generally maladaptive eating patterns. Implications for prevention and treatment are discussed. I choose this article because it has been publish this year. Furthermore, it touches the main point of my teaching package, which is about the impact Western ideals and drive for thinness has on the rest of world. However the usefulness of this study for my research is limited by the sample’s ethnic background and focus on the USA.

Simpson, K. (2002). Anorexia nervosa and culture. Journal Of Psychiatric &ump; Mental Health Nursing, 9(1), 65-71. This article describes how unrealistic standards of attractiveness set by Western society are internalized by women from a variety of cultural backgrounds and translated into fat-phobia and body dissatisfaction and then discusses alternative cultural influences for food refusal such as issues of control, acculturation, and religious asceticism.

The author claims that there is a need for culturally sensitive questionnaires and diagnostic criteria and suggests that the notion of anorexia as a culture bound syndrome is no longer valid as the illness as been identified in a number of non-western societies. A valid point is made about the importance to acknowledge that anorexia nervosa may exist without a fear of fatness and that there may be other cultural reasons for self-starvation. However, no concrete solution is suggested as how assessment can be conducted with non-white, non-western populations in order to avoid being confined by Western diagnosis criteria.

Marie Antoinette’s Downfall

START: Marie Antoinette was quickly appreciated and even admired at the court. She was a beautiful young lady who enjoyed the party-filled life of Versailles. The frivolous, high-spirited tomboy who arrived at Versailles at age 14 was quickly embraced by her subjects. Yet by the time of her execution 23 years later, she was reviled. Marie Antoinette was actually extremely popular with the people when she arrived in France. They liked how she looked, how kind she was and the charities she pursued. When she visited the opera and insist everyone applaud, the did so (a moment shown in the movie).

She was on display for everyone to see and people watched her and wrote numerous accounts of her grace, her charm, her beauty. Marie Antoinette did initially have the love of the French people, but eventually the glitz, glamor, and charm of Marie Antoinette wore off and the beautiful young woman became a person of hate to the French people. What happened to make the people of France hate Marie Antoinette? Why did she lose her popularity and become public enemy number one? Why did she eventually lose her life through the guillotine? MARRIAGE: This marriage joined two individuals with different ambitions and personality.

The palace was a lone place for Antoinette (Fraser, 2001). Louis left Antoinette in the palace alone and she could do what she wanted. Apparently, she began spending colossal sums of money as a way of amusement on unnecessary things and luxuries. She went on gambling with the money losing millions in a game. Being left alone in the palace may have prompted her into compulsive shopping and spending. However, it can be perceived otherwise when her mother claims that Antoinette was not doing anything useful at Versailles. We could easily tell that this was the nature of Antoinette’s character and personality.

She only lacked the opportunity so to speak; thus be termed as a self-absorbed spendthrift. Marie Antoinette was lonely and heartbroken. She had to endure the strict French court rituals and protocol, people talking behind her back, and a husband who did not want to consummate their marriage. She was so pretty and sweet, but did not feel confident or comfortable around the royal family. People in the royal family such as the Mesdames, the sisters of the King of France constantly talked behind her back and tried to use her in schemes and Marie Antoinette had a poor relationship with the king’s favorite and mistress, Madame du Barry. Life was not happy for the Dauphine of France. Marie Antoinette was lonely due the lack of affection by her husband, the protocol of the strict court, and people taking behind her back. She was constantly being reprimanded in letters by her mother who wanted her to consummate the marriage and warning her that her home country’s happiness and success depended on Marie Antoinette’s new life in her married country. As a result, Marie Antoinette began to spend and live lavishly. She became the center of fashion in France with extravagant gowns and hairstyles, gambled excessively, and threw expensive parties.

Gambling was not an uncommon way to pass the time. Marie Antoinette built up her own circle of friends who would spend nights gambling and talking and certainly drinking. Louis XVI was not very into this kind of lifestyle, but that didn’t mean that he did not spend money. Everyone who lived in the palace at Versailles spent what we would all consider an exorbitant amount of money on clothes. However, her relationship with her husband was the subject of much sarcasm. The couple didn’t have any children and the people of Paris found this suspicious.

LONELY/BORED: Partying and money are shown as the only salvation for the circumstances befalling Antoinette. With partying and spending Antoinette is able to deal with her emotional difficulties. All the same, it worked to her disadvantage. Her name has been tarnished the more. All cannot be blamed on her but her character and way of doing things may have made the situation worse than it would have been. Marie Antoinette was either a self-absorbed spendthrift bankrupting the nation, or a victim of both personal and historical circumstances beyond her control as perceived from different angles.

Being a daughter of the holy Roman Emperor and marriage arranged for her, one would say that what befell her was not her choice. Gambling (she was bored to tears in Versailles and felt the need for distractions and fun. ? Organizing too many balls, feasts, opera’s and other parties. ? Spending too much money on clothing, headdresses, interior design etc. that were en vogue at the moment (though, throughout her entire reign, she was the only queen of France that had spent less than any other queen of France before her.

All the former queens had spent much more! ) One of the first things to remember about Marie Antoinette is that for most of her life she was bored. Keeping company with hedonists group as a way of steeling away from boredom made her spend a lot on bountiful parties (Weber, 2006). Marie Antoinette had the bad reputation of partying a lot, spending huge amount of money in casino games and having affairs with other men. Marie was well-known to have spent wildly as a young queen before tempering things as she matured.

DIAMON NECKLACE AFFAIR: Probably the biggest cause of criticism was what is called the “Diamond Necklace Affair. ” In short, Antoinette had a noble necklace offered to be made for her out of diamonds. When she accepted and then found that the necklace was a fake, she became very angry at the con artists, Jeanne de la Motte and Cardinal de Rohan. In the end, Jeanne de la Motte was convicted, but sadly, Cardinal de Rohan was acquitted. In 1785, the “Marie Antoinette diamond necklace” affaire spread all over the country. Marie Antoinette was victim of a scam.

Jeanne De La Motte Valois pretended to be the queen and by stealing her identity, she stole a huge amount of money from the Cardinal de Rohan. The queen was not directly involved in that scandal but her image was discredited. Marie Antoinette was then nicknamed “Madame Deficit” by the people of France. She tried to clear her bad reputation by promoting the image of a caring mother, which she obviously was, but this wasn’t enough to calm the angry protesters. In 1785-86 the affair of the Diamond Necklace revealed the depth of the hatred which her own follies and the calumnies of her enemies had aroused against her.

The public held her responsible for the bankrupt state of the country; The queen’s lack of popularity was evident from the start, and continued to mount, as her life was almost continually embroiled in scandal. The Diamond Necklace Affair is a perfect example of how the queen’s indiscretions and infidelities undercut the authority of the monarch. Cardinal de Rohan bought the Queen a large diamond necklace, supposedly in return for sexual favors. Although the real events surrounding the diamond necklace are not fully known, the affair caused many of the public to dub her the “Austrian Whore. Countless pamphlets were published, spreading malicious rumors about the queen. Many pornographic drawings depicting the queen with numerous lovers, both male and female were circulated. Often, it was jealous courtiers who would instigate the material for these publications. Because it became her downfall. The whole affair did not include her at all, but she was impersonated by an actress (who was actually a prostitute who looked a lot like her) and the French had already heard such ridiculous rumours about their queen that this sham seemed believable.

The French wanted to believe in the wickedness of Marie Antoinette, even though she was perfectly innocent. FRANCE’S ECONOMY + POLITICS: France was already almost bankrupt when Marie Antoinette stepped in the picture, and because the French needed someone to blame it all on, and she was Austrian, she was the perfect victim. The people tried to make all of France believe that she had no concern for her people, spending money on wigs and dresses and throwing wild parties while the population was starving and desperate.

The French Court had a reputation for extravagant luxury long before Marie Antoinette joined it in 1770 as a young bride. France was, of course, the home of fashion and style. All Europe wanted to look French. By 1774, as Queen of France Marie Antoinette was expected to continue that great tradition and be the first lady of fashion, at once both leading fashion and representing French fashion designers and creators. It was the expense though of her wardrobe which became just one more reason to dislike her among the revolutionaries. The French Revolution was the downfall of the pretty and pleasure loving Queen of France.

This charming queen may have worn a huge smile on her face, threw lavish parties, and was always wearing the latest fashions, but the smile she wore hid pain and sadness, feelings that were there long before the French Revolution. Other claims paradoxically state that Antoinette’s entry into France was followed by bad omen. She is portrayed as a rejected wife, girl and a reason why the nation has no money (Fraser, 2001). Generally, whether Marie Antoinette was a self-absorbed spendthrift bankrupting the nation, or a victim of both personal and historical circumstances beyond her control is a conclusion that cannot be jumped into.

The turn out of events are partly in support and partly in disagreement that Antoinette’s behavior is as a result of both personal and historical circumstances she could not manage (Weber, 2006). On the contrary, these circumstances were not a reason enough for her to behave that way. Her in-born character betrayed her. Therefore it is possible that Antoinette was naturally a squanderer although the scenario could have been facilitated by the issues in her life. ? Making fun of etiquette rules (she hated all the rules and sensitive ego’s that were involved in accomplishing them.

She refused to wear her corset for quite a while, rode donkeys, had male-pants made for herself because she refused to ride horses with 2 legs on one side (she wanted to ride the male way because that felt better and she could go faster) broke the etiquette rules so a lot of people got offended etc. Marie Antoinette, (1755–1793), queen of France as the wife of Louis XVI. Born on November 2, 1755, she was a daughter of Maria Theresa of Austria. She married Louis in 1770, four years before he ascended to the throne. Marie Antoinette enjoyed great popularity at first.

Gradually, however, members of the royal court turned against her, as she ignored her French advisors and continued to depend on Austrian relatives for guidance. Also, her extravagant behavior and apparent unconcern for the welfare of the people brought their hatred upon her. According to legend, she responded to news that the people had no bread by saying, Let them eat cake. They actually had to wait 8 years for the first royal baby to be born. The Hameau has long been at the heart of criticism of Marie-Antoinette, much of which was fabricated in the service of an increasingly revolutionary agenda.

For instance, she never dressed up as a shepherdess or a milkmaid, though that story has been repeated for generations, even by reputable historians. This legend helped characterize the Hameau as a sort of mean-spirited mockery of peasant life, the royal equivalent of blackface. Another rumor was that the interiors at theHameau were encrusted in jewels and other over-the-top extravagances. In 1789, a revolutionary committee came to inspect the Queen’s domain for evidence of irresponsible overspending, and were surprised by the relative modesty they found.

Its creation, however, unexpectedly caused another uproar when the actual price of the Hameau was inflated by her critics. Queen consort of Louis XVI of France. The daughter of Emperor Francis I and Maria Theresa, she was married in 1770 to the French dauphin. After he became king (1774), she was criticized for her extravagance and frivolous circle of court favourites. She was unjustly implicated in the Affair of the Diamond Necklace (1786), which discredited the monarchy. After the French Revolution began, she influenced Louis to resist attempts by the National Assembly to restrict the royal prerogative.

She became the target of agitators, who attributed to her the celebrated remark, after being told the people had no bread, Let them eat cake! She tried to save the crown by negotiating secretly with monarchist factions and with her brother, Emperor Leopold II. News of her intrigues further enraged the French and led to the overthrow of the monarchy (1792). After a year in prison, she was tried and guillotined in 1793. She was the queen of France at the outbreak of the French Revolution. In 1770 she was married to the French Dauphin, who 4 years later ascended the throne as Louis XVI.

The personalities of the two rulers were very different while Louis XVI was phlegmatic and withdrawn, Marie Antoinette was strong, but care free. Raised at one court and married into another at fourteen. Also when she was born she had already been promised for marriage. She became the symbol for everything that was wrong with the country and a good deal of the hatred which was directed at the royalty as a whole found its way to direct hatred for the Queen. Her appearance and manners, which were carefully cultivated to be proper and noble, began to appear haughty.

People thought that Marie Antoinette was laughing at them and looking down on them while spending the country into ruin. A combination of spending too much as royal living accorded, going into debt by aiding the American Revolution, and excluding the poor voices from government (in addition to other nuances – sorry for the basic version) led the people to think that maybe kings weren’t the best way to go. Louis was not a forceful personality and often had trouble making decisions, which didn’t help matters. An Austrian princess, Marie Antoinette (1755-1793) was never popular with the French public.

She was often accused of putting Austrian interests ahead of those of her husband’s kingdom. Her unpopularity was increased by her extravagant spending, which was often unfairly connected with the grave financial difficulties that beset France in the 1780s. This uncertain position put her in danger in the revolutionary period. Marie Antoinette grew very unpopular. The financial state of France was a mess and many blamed the pleasure loving queen. She was also involved in Diamond Necklace Affair where she was portrayed in an extremely negative light.

Contrary to popular belief, Marie Antoinette never said the famed line “Let them eat cake. “, but she still was the most unpopular person in France for her extravagant ways in the past. Marie Antoinette tried to better herself presenting an image as a devoted mother to the public and played a role in politics, but it was not enough. Marie Antoinette would forever be unpopular to the French people. On October 16, 1793, Marie-Antoinette was beheaded. It was on this day that France lost one of its most controversial figures. She was a key figure in turning the anger and frustration of the French people into revolution.

Whether one despised or respected Queen Marie-Antoinette, her role will be argued about for many centuries. Marie Antoinette is one of the most glittering queens and females of our time. Beautiful, controversial, glamorous, hated, misunderstood, and tragic, this doomed queen is so fascinating. What was she really like? An extravagant queen who only cared for herself and pleasure or a lonely and sad young woman in an unfriendly country? It is quite possible she was both and even more. Antonia Fraser. Marie Antoinette: The Journey History Channel website, http://www. history. com/topics/french-revolution

error: Content is protected !!