Anagnorisis..a critical discovery or a tragic epiphany?

     In Macbeth's case, I think it's safe to say he experienced a tragic epiphany. As he draws his sword and fights for all one is worth, Macbeth feels he is invincible thanks to the Witches prophesy. They planted a thought in his head that "no man born of woman" would be able to harm him. His ignorance is highlighted as he lets this information be the indicator for every decision he makes from that moment on.

     Anagnorisis is best defined as a critical discovery or a tragic epiphany. The word "critical" in this case definitely has a negative connotation behind it. The critical discovery that a character may go through could also be considered a grave discovery. Anagnorisis, on the other hand, is when a character recognizes that the situation he has found himself in has the potential to become disastrous. The unfortunate epiphany, or grave discovery, Macbeth is forced to come to terms with is that he is not as invincible as he had originally thought. Macbeth experiences anagnorisis when Macduff declares that he was not born of woman, but "untimely ripped" from his mother's womb... Yikes. Didn't see that one coming did you, Macbeth?


     Death seems inevitable at this point for our long lost hero, the thane of Cawdor. He lost his way the minute he ran into the Witches. As they spilled the prophesy to Macbeth, he listened with both ears fixated on the few details that declared him to be king one day. Throughout the entire play Macbeth seems to be stuck in a daze. He is so preoccupied with becoming King that he begins to believe he is invincible. He hears the few statements that declare his glory, and ignores all the other. This daze that Macbeth is stuck in is what makes this anagnorisis so defined.

     The discovery, or anagnorisis, that Macbeth experiences has a great impact on the play as a whole. This discovery emphasizes the lesson to be taught throughout the play. Ignorance is shown not to be bliss in Macbeth's case. The audience constantly finds themselves hitting their hands to their heads when Macbeth continues to overlook the blatant signs of ultimate destruction; and a quick one at that. The audience watches as Macbeth, himself, finally begins to understand that he is in a disastrous situation. It becomes obvious that he knew deep down, that the Witches prophesy was too good to be true. The brisk realization of ultimate destruction is destruction from several different angles. Not only is the destruction of his power inevitable, but so is his royalty, as well as himself.

      I think it is safe to say that with ignorance comes anagnorisis. If one was wise enough to listen and learn from situations that occur throughout ones life, that person would be more likely to avoid the unfortunate experience of critical discovery. Macbeth's character is shown to make ignorant decisions throughout the entire play. From letting his wife boss him around, to killing King Duncan with his bare hands, to killing Macduff's family, Macbeth was bound to reach a point of anagnorisis. If only he had realized sooner....maybe he could have kept his head.

Hamartia...Accidental wrongdoing, or just plain ignorance?

     The term hamartia is best known as "missing the mark", but it's meaning goes so much further than that. In movies and novels the author does a great job at making it clear when the main character has gone a bit too far. We are sitting in our chairs shaking our heads at the obvious mistake the character has made, or we are biting our nails because we know what tragic end that a certain moment is going to lead our character on a downward spiral. The important thing about hamartia is that it is not just one precise moment within the story. Often times there are several small acts of "missing the mark" that eventually leads to a big missing of the mark and causes the character to head towards the inevitable downfall.
   
     Hamartia can be both subtle, or not so subtle to it's audience members. Shakespeare is known for his incredible tragedies and stories that force his audiences to consider jumping out of their seats to grab the character by the head and physically shake some sense into them. This is so in the case of Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, A Midsummer Night's Dream, as well as Julius Caesar. I'd like to focus in on the story of Julius Caesar and highlight just a few of the obvious acts of hamartia performed by the plays tragic hero, Brutus.

     Brutus, from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, is an important character who most definitely performs acts of hamartia. Throughout the history of literature, with power comes envy, jealousy, and mad schemes to shift the power from one person to another. This is exactly so in the case of Brutus. From the beginning of Julius Caesar, Shakespeare demonstrates Brutus's desire for the power that is supposedly meant for Julius. Brutus completes many covetous acts in which the audience can undermine as "missing the mark."

     Brutus seems infantile when he allows little things to persuade him towards inhumane acts. For example, when Brutus found letters in his room he lets this convince him that he needs to dispose of Caesar as the ruler of Rome. What makes the readers shake their heads at this point is that it is so blatantly obvious that these letters have been planted in his room. Brutus allows himself to get easily caught up in the conspiracy against Caesar and gives up the the idea that perhaps Caesar could be a good leader of Rome.

Another time that Brutus performs an act of hamartia is when he decides to speak at Caesar's funeral. Brutus claims to have loved Caesar, but can one who is willing to kill a friend, possibly love that friend? Brutus pushes too far when he declares he loved Caesar. Brutus continues to make a fool of himself when he declares that his love for Rome is greater than anything else. This is the point in the story when the audience realizes there is no hope for Brutus. I don't know about you, but I would not want to live under the power of someone who is willing to kill someone he "loved" just to gain power.... This seems like some obvious hamartia in my eyes.

Marked For Greatness

     Thomas C. Foster begins chapter 21, Marked for Greatness, by pointing out the importance of symbolism. A previous chapter, chapter 12, discussed symbolism in detail. In that chapter I was able to understand how wide of a range symbolism can pull from. An example Foster used to open chapter 21 was the idea of scoliosis. If an author goes out of his way to give a character scoliosis, there is most likely a reason, right? To give a character a defect, so to say, is not a simple task. Any detail an author gives about a character in chapter 2 he must remember in chapter 32 as well. By giving a character a scar, or a wound, the author is immediately pointing out that this character is different from the rest of the world. This should be our first clue towards the fact that he's probably marked for some sort of greatness. Why else would this random person have a random fact about him worth mentioning?
     It is important to keep in mind that scars or physical defects are not the only things that can be used to mark a character for greatness. In the novel, The Bean Trees, for example, the main character has witnessed a tragic incident that has scarred her for the rest of her life. Taylor, the main character, feels connected to a peer of hers named Newt, because she feels neither of them fit in. Newt's father died while Taylor and Newt were both in high school due to a tractor tire that exploded while the father was using it. Ever since that day Taylor has been frightened by tires. As she reaches the age that she can go out on her own, she decides to search for a new home. Somewhere along the way, a baby has been abandoned and Taylor ends up taking care of the little girl, whom she later names Turtle. Taylor notices that Turtle has been abused as a baby and decides to take care of Turtle and nurse her back to health. With this little information I have mentioned, we are immediately able to spot different things that leave Taylor as "marked for greatness." First of all, she is scared of tires but still decides to go on a road trip in her car to search for a new home. One day she was driving and her tire busted out of no where. She decides to pull over at a tire shop in Taylorville where she meets a lovely lady named Mattie. Mattie helps Taylor raise Turtle and also provides Taylor with a job at the tire shop. The fact that she was scared of tires but was able to get past that fear and help raise a baby is incredible. This implies that perhaps she will be able to help Turtle move on from being abused as a baby. Straight from the beginning we are able to see Taylor is marked for greatness through the story of Newt and his father. Every event in The Bean Trees could be marked down as symbolism for one reason or another. Thomas Foster did a great job of explaining how an author uses symbolism for marking a character with greatness.

Now, Where Have I Seen Her Before?

     The concept in this chapter can be astonishing for many people. After thinking about it for a while, however, I understand the reality of Foster's idea. He writes that all literature stems back from other literature. In fact, every story we've read has been told before. At first glance this seems to be an insult to authors everywhere. I could understand why people would think that Foster is merely saying no one has been original for centuries, but that is not so. His concept throughout this chapter is that every story has it's own twists and ideas of course, but the underlying story has come from other literature.  The thought that "stories grow out of other stories" and "poems out of other poems" is an intense thought. Foster simply means that once an author has made a connection between the new piece of literature they are working on and an old piece of literature the story automatically becomes more alive and deeper in meaning.
     Let's take "The Sun Also Rises" by Earnest Hemingway for example. Where have we seen a love story in which the two that are clearly meant to be together can't seem to make it work, before? Well the first thing any one should think of would be the incredible story of Romeo and Juliet. Of course these two stories have many differences but they have the same underlying story. "The Sun Also Rises" has Brett, a beautiful lady who has several different men falling for her and Mike, her fiancé for most of the novel. Is this recognizable? Wasn't Juliet supposed to marry someone other than her true love, Romeo? At the end of "The Sun Also Rises" Brett calls her good friend Jack, who is desperately in love with her (but know he has no chance) and Brett speaks how they could be so great together. Jack simply replies by saying wouldn't that be nice. Clearly, they would be perfect together but Brett can't get past one small defect Jack has. This is where the story differs from Shakespear's story; Romeo and Juliet can't be together because of a family feud whereas Brett can't get past her selfishness and accept Jack as he is. This is when we realize that although they may be different, they are quite similar as well.
     This is just one example of how literature is all one big story. Foster wants the reader to understand that once we recognize where we have seen the story before, the more we are able to  connect with it. 

Every Trip is a Quest

     Every book has a story in it. I find that the most intriguing books are those that are unexpected and spontaneous. Different events occur throughout each novel and as the events connect we begin to see a story come together. At some point we are able to understand how each unexpected event connects with one another. As soon as we understand why the events that are happening are happening, we soon recognize the quest that the character has been on. The first chapter in "How to Read Literature Like a Professor" describes the idea of the quest that our characters must take.
     Thomas C. Foster explains that the reason for a quest is always for self knowledge. Now, at first this didn't make sense to me considering there are some very different novels out there with very different story lines. So how could Amir from "The Kite Runner" have the same quest for self knowledge as George and Lennie from "Of Mice and Men"? On the edge of both of these stories they seem completely different. George and Lennie hope for land and search for jobs that will help them succeed with that dream, whereas Amir is simply living his life with his father and eventually tries to adopt his old friend's son. They seem completely different. If we look closely enough, however, we realize all three characters are dealing with friendship. Amir's friend, Hassan, has passed away and his son needs someone to live with, while George ends up killing Lennie out of mercy. Although these situations are quite different, we realize that underneath the surface both Amir and George are helping a friend, and they have both accepted what needs to be done. This acceptance is part of the self knowledge that Foster has spoken of. Even though every story is different, we see the resemblance in the quest for self knowledge.
     Another main point that I understood from this chapter was how the original quest is not usually the same as the final quest. Things change throughout the novel and different events occur that change the final quest. Take Kite Runner for example; Amir is working up towards the Kite contest but as it ends he starts a quest to make Hassan get kicked out of the house. Later he wishes to be married and once he is married he goes to find Hassan's son after he learns that Hassan and his wife have passed away leaving their son an orphan. The whole story was not about the one kite contest. The story progressed and Amir's final quest was to help Sohrab, Hassan's son, get to America and live happily with Amir and his wife. What is great about Amir helping Sohrab escape an abusive orphanage is that Amir once witnessed Hassan being abused and did nothing about it. This is when we realize that Amir's overall quest was to learn how to handle knowing of abuse and taking action to help, rather than sit back and watch it happen. Amir has gained self knowledge by the end of the novel.