"The Elephant Man"

“The Elephant Man” is a playwright that was written by Bernard Pomerance. This play was written about a true story and a real person, John Merrick. John Merrick is a young man that has a terrible, crippling disease that changed his life from the beginning. In the beginning of this play, John is part of a traveling circus. In this circus, John is advertised as part elephant and part man. He has to expose himself for others to view and gawk at for money. He was able to do this for a place to live and have someone to care for him.

            When the circus travels to Belgium, the police say that he is indecent for others to view. When this happens, Ross sends him away. The police that take him find a card that was given to him by Dr. Treves that works at London hospital. Dr. Treves takes John Merrick in and begins to study his anatomy. He hopes to help John be as normal as possible. He tells John that he can live at the hospital and call it “home.” While Merrick stays at the hospital, he is introduced to many of the highest people in the land. As we read the play, we find the Merrick is actually very intelligent and religious. While he is in the hospital, Merrick builds a model of St. Phillips. This helps him pass time while he is alone. He is also visited by an actress named Mrs. Kendal. She actually grows fond of Merrick and visits him often. She understands his want to be normal and to see a beautiful woman naked, so she reveals herself to him. As soon as this happens, Treves walks in and demands her to leave. This I think is the most tragic part of Merrick’s life. Mrs. Kendal saw John as a real person and had intriguing conversations with him. This made the last times of his life more lonely and sad. In the end Treves realizes that he was wrong to make her leave, but he does not have her come back because he claims he doesn’t want her to be there when Merrick dies. Merrick lives out the rest of his life at the hospital until he dies from his head falling backward in his sleep, crushing his air way.

            I believe that Merrick was lucky in a way to live safely in the hospital, but I think that Treves begins to act the same way that Ross, the circus director, treated Merrick. He tries to tell him what he can and cannot do. Treves claims that he is protecting him from being seen and humiliated by viewers and gawkers, but he shows his photos to everyone and invites others to come and meet him (see him and the affects of his crippling disease). This playwright was very eye-opening to me. It helped me to see how others with mental and physical disabilities may feel because others stare and gawk at them every day. I think this play was also educational about the beliefs, debates, and life that took place during the time period that Merrick had lived. I think this play touches more people because it relates to the life of a real person. I encourage others to read this playwright and look deeper into what you read. Consider feelings and research the time period to get a better understanding of the play.

"Trifles"

            “Trifles” is a play that was written by Susan Glaspell. This play is mainly about the murder of Mr. Wright. The men in this play are trying to look for obvious hints to the fact that Mrs. Wright murdered her husband. In the beginning of the play, Mr. Hale tells the Court
Attorney what he observed the day that he arrived at the home to find that Mr. Wright was murdered. The women, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, try defending Mrs. Wright. As they investigate the crime scene, which is Mr. and Mrs. Wright’s home, the men just look for obvious things that would make Mrs. Wright a bad wife. An example that the men find would be her bad housekeeping and the women observe her bad sewing. The women look for more sentimental reasons for why Mrs. Wright would murder Mr. Wright.

            I believe the most important part of this play is the bird that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters find. First they find an empty bird cage, and then they find that the hinge is broken on the bird cage. Then they find the bird dead in a box, its neck was wrung.  Then women begin to try to come to a conclusion of why its neck had been wrung. As the readers, we have to observe that previously in the play the women were speaking about Mr. and Mrs. Wright not having children and being lonely. We have to relate to the fact that Mr. Wright didn’t want children because they were noisy. The bird could be noisy as well. Did Mr. Wright kill the bird? If Mr. Wright killed the bird, did Mrs. Wright kill him for killing her only loving companion? In the beginning of the play it is stated that Mr. Wright was not a drunk but he was quiet and not much company. We get the idea that Mrs. Wright would be mad that the bird was killed because Mrs. Peters relates to her feelings when a boy killed one of her kittens when she was just a young girl.

            The women come to the conclusion that Mrs. Wright liked the bird very much because she was going to bury it in a pretty box. The women are not certain about who killed the bird or Mr. Wright, but they have an idea that it was Mrs. Wright. Even though they think it was Mrs. Wright that committed the crime, they think that she should not be punished for it because of the life that she had to live with Mr. Wright. They decided to hide the evidence because they knew it was the violent evidence that the men were looking for to prove Mrs. Wright committed this horrible crime. The men think that since Mrs. Peters is the wife of the sheriff, she is married to the law.

            I think that the women in the play are not doing this to make themselves feel better. I believe that they think that they could have kept this from happening by visiting Mrs. Wright more often. If they visited more often, they would have knew the situation and kept her company. If Mrs. Wright felt part of the women society, maybe she would have gotten out more and wouldn’t have only had a bird as a companion, leaving her alone when Mr. Wright killed it.

The Fish

                The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop is a poem with great irony. In the beginning of the poem, the speaker has caught a “tremendous fish” that she speaks of to be victorious. The catch to this is that she speaks how ugly the fish looks and in lines 5 that “He didn’t fight.”  I found this to be very strange.

                In the first part of this poem the speaker caught a big fish, but he is not fighting as he hangs off the boat with a hook in his mouth. The next part says that he didn’t fight at all. To describe his weight and the way that he looks, the fish is described by saying “He hung a grunting weight.” The poem then says that the fish is “battered and venerable”.  The skin on this huge fish “hung in strips like ancient wall-paper.” This helps the reader see how beat up and old this huge fish is.

                Bishop describes the fish in even more detail by saying that “he was speckled with barnacles, fine rosettes of lime.” This poor fish is described to be old and beat up and is even “infested with tiny white sea-lice.”

                The speaker then states that she is thinking of the white flesh, bones, and his entrails as if she is planning to eat this fish. After thinking all of these things, she looks into the eyes of the fish. She describes his eyes as bigger than her but did not return her stare. She then begins to “admire his sullen face.” Then she sees his lower lip. The writer states that in his lip “hung five old pieces of fish-line.”  The writer begins to describe how all of these lines and hooks have grown into the fish’s huge mouth.  One thing that contradicted the beginning of this poem is line 61 that says “like medals with their ribbons.” In this sentence the writer is referring to all of the hooks that he got away from and lines he broke. He used to be such a trophy because he had broke all of those lines that were so much bigger than the speaker’s fishing line.

                At the end of this poem you can then realize that the speaker has seen the beauty of this fish. In the beginning of this poem, the speaker relates to the fish as ugly and raged, but now the speaker sees how strong and rewarding this nice fish had been through the years of his youth. She begins to see that all of those flaws that she saw are just trophy scars that prove how magnificent he used to be. The speaker has realized all of this and has decided to let the fish live out the rest of his great life being this strong warrior.

                The biggest irony of this story is how the opinion of the speaker changes. At the beginning of the story, we expect the speaker to keep this fish and take this ugly fish home to eat but she does not. At the end of the poem, the speaker decides to let this great fish go free.

Bishop, Elizabeth. "The Fish." Making Literature Matter: An Anthology for Readers and Writers. By John Schilb and John Clifford. Fourth Edition ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2009. 830-832. Print.