Through Sister Aloysius's contradictions and ambiguous motives, John Patrick Shanley demonstrates that the audience can’t know what she is thinking. Therefore, his play, Doubt: A Parable implies that humans are contradictory and mysterious by their very nature. Throughout the play, Sister Aloysius contradicts herself in her statements, demonstrating that an audience can’t know what she is thinking. When she first brings up the subject of Donald Muller, Aloysius tells Father Flynn that they “must neither hide Donald Muller, nor put him forward,” in other words, they must treat him differently from the other students (Shanley 30). Yet, when Flynn mentions that he was giving Muller special protections, she insists that Muller “must be held to the same …show more content…
Aloysius has doubts about Father Flynn, yet her motive for prosecuting him remains ambiguous. Sister James accuses Aloysius of one possible motive, bias against Flynn: “You don’t like it that he uses a ballpoint pen. […] You don’t like it that he likes ‘Frosty the Snowman’! And you’re letting that convince you of something terrible, just terrible!”(35). James believes that Aloysius is prejudiced against Father Flynn because of his disregard for her traditional values. Aloysius makes her hatred of ballpoint pens clear to Sister James by telling her that “the students really should only be learning script with true fountain pens”(9). Sister Aloysius believes her way, the fountain pen, is superior to Father Flynn's way, the ballpoint pen. In a similar sense, she tells Flynn directly that “[Frosty the Snowman] should be banned from the airwaves”(29). Again, Aloysius views Flynn’s methods as inferior. As Sister James fears, Aloysius could be letting her distaste for Father Flynn cloud her judgement. This could be her motive for accusing Flynn of something terrible, but the audience can’t be
In the play Doubt, by John Patrick Shanly, Sister Aloysius is treating Father Flynn unfairly. Sister Aloysius is the principal of St. Nichols School, who is suspicious and always doubt everyone, especially Father Flynn. She thinks that Father Flynn is guilty, but has no proof. Sister Aloysius doesn’t like Father Flynn in the school and his ideas. She treats him unfairly. Sister Aloysius treats Father Flynn unfairly when she still accuses Father Flynn of giving the altar wine to Donald Muller after Father Flynn tells her the truth. She treats him unfairly by forcing him to request the transfer without proving if Father Flynn is guilty or not and also makes him resign by lying about his past.
A reputation can be so well established that if one person in power does a wrongdoing people will not believe it. For example when Mrs. Muller says, “Let me ask you something. You honestly think that priest gave Donald that wine to drink?” (47). Donald’s mother is questioning sister Aloysius because she does not believe Father Flynn would do something like that. He has a reputation of being a great priest and his reputation is better than Sister Aloysius’. Mrs. Muller states, “You’re not going against no man in a robe and win, Sister. He’s got the position.” (47). Just by Father Flynn being a male he has a higher reputation than a nun, which he knows and can accumulate for his actions. In the hierarchy of the Church, the head male priest is the most dominant. Therefore, nobody questions what he is doing; he has a reputation of being this influential priest who gives great sermons. He knows that he has the power to do what he wants and has his fellow Monsignor and other men in the ...
Most people have had some sort of conflict affect their lives at least once. That conflict could alter a person’s views of the world around them. In the play Doubt by John Patrick Shanley, conflict is used to grasp the reader’s emotions and cause the reader to rethink their preconceived notions about the characters in the play. Doubt takes place in 1964 in St. Nicholas, which is a school and Catholic Church in New York. The play focuses on a priest named Father Brendan Flynn and a nun named Sister Aloysius Beauvier. The conflict highlighted in this play is between these two characters. After Father Flynn starts taking an African American student under his wing, named Donald Muller, Sister Aloysius suspects Father Flynn is up to no good. She
“I thought that I had worked it all out in the book, “ she says. “But seeing this play has had a cathartic effect.” The skeletons no doubt, are out of the closet.”
In the preface to “Doubt: a Parable,” John Patrick Shanley describes a significant factor to consider when reading his play: “I’ve set my story in 1964, when not just me, but the whole world seemed to be going through some kind of vast puberty” (Shanley viii). During that period in time, America experienced vast growth across all areas of life- from the home, to schools, to politics. Even the Catholic Church seemed to be embrace this time of change with the new attitudes developed from the Second Vatican Council. The Church set out to break from the old, rigid structures of the past and take on a more relatable and approachable presence for its surrounding community. In spite of welcoming these radical changes, a big part of the old order within the Church structure was more than firmly rooted and, to this date, has not undergone much change- the Catholic Church has continued to operate under a strict patriarchal hierarchy. In Shanley’s play, Sister Aloysius holds a position of power being the principal of St. Nicholas School, but within the church structure, that power is relinquished to the men based upon the mere detail that she is a woman. When Sister Aloysius encounters a predicament that she doubts will be dealt with appropriately under the established patriarchal hierarchy, she is driven to go beyond the limits of the structure in order to prove her suspicions right, trespassing against herself and her convictions in the process.
...onnects his audience to the characters and although the play is written for the Elizabethan era, it remains pertinent by invoking the notion of human nature. He implements themes of love, anger, and impulsiveness and demonstrates the influence these emotions have on human behavior. It is evident that because human nature is constant, people have and will continue to be affected by these emotions.
In the parable Doubt, the controversial topics presented by John Patrick Shanley sparked differing views that the reader was torn between..It introduced a storyline revolved around a nun accusing a pastor of partaking in inappropriate engagement amongst the alter boys. Si...
Shakespeare’s tragedy, King Lear, portrays many important misconceptions which result in a long sequence of tragic events. The foundation of the story revolves around two characters, King Lear and Gloucester, and concentrates on their common flaw, the inability to read truth in other characters. For example, the king condemns his own daughter after he clearly misreads the truth behind her “dower,”(1.1.107) or honesty. Later, Gloucester passes judgment on his son Edgar based on a letter in which he “shall not need spectacles”(1.2.35) to read. While these two characters continue to misread people’s words, advisors around them repeatedly give hints to their misinterpretations, which pave the road for possible reconciliation. The realization of their mistakes, however, occurs after tragedy is inevitable.
Othello, Hamlet, and Henry IV, Part 1 explore these concepts in various ways. Shakespeare’s plays show that people are not black and white. They react and act differently to situations. Their motives can either be transparent or ambiguous. Their masks may hide the truth for a time, but reality has a way of coming back around. The complexity of humans seemed to greatly intrigue Shakespeare, yet with characters like Iago, Hamlet, and Hal, Shakespeare realized that he could never fully figure out the human puzzle; so he created his own puzzles of the will, motive, and
The differences between the movie doubt and the play have significant differences that would influence ones opinion about certain characters and situations in the story. Though the differences are few one would agree that at least one of these differences are game changers or at the very least they get you thinking and having doubts of your own.
In The Parable several characters are presented to the reader. Each one has their own behavioral characteristics which one may or my not approve of. The two characters whose behaviors I most approve of are Lee Pai and Hernando. The characters whose behaviors I do not approve of are Sven and John. There are several reasons why I approve of the behaviors of Lee Pai and Hernando and do not approve of the behaviors of Sven and John. All of these reasons I have based on my interpretation of the story, The Parable.
... and ambiguity. Shakespeare uses the ironies found in the play so that we will remember his play's limits. It cannot produce an ideal, nor can we as an audience.
...ne else in the play the power of language to alter reality, and the issues of conscious or unconscious deceit.
It is easy to accept one character’s version of reality as true and Woolf periodically warns us, through the confusion of her characters...
This essay will discuss the part that illusion and reality plays in developing and illuminating the theme of Shakespeare's The Tempest. This pair of opposites will be contrasted to show what they represent in the context of the play. Further, the characters associated with these terms, and how the association becomes meaningful in the play, will be discussed.