I want some notes and like apparently you shits prefer my face to anything i ever post so give me notes you fuckers
unacceptably low number of notes.
day’s been ruined
even that chad kroeger post got more notes
Explore the ways in which Harold Pinter and Graham Greene convey emotion in both “Betrayal” and “The End of The Affair” respectively
Two renowned works that adopt contrasting approaches to emotion are Harold Pinter’s ‘Betrayal’, and Grahame Greene’s ‘The End of The Affair’, in which the writers explore human feeling to impact their audiences and readers. Pinter’s play is set throughout the 1970s revolving around an affair and the subsequent betrayals of the 3 characters within – Jerry and Robert, a pair of publishers with a long term friendship and Emma, Robert’s wife, with whom Jerry sustains a 7 year affair. The play was published in 1979 – 2 years after the opening scene in the play is set. In general, it takes a reverse chronological structure – starting in spring 1977, moving through to winter 1968. Graham Greene’s “The End of the Affair” is a novel, published in 1951, set around Clapham Common during the blitz of World War II. It also takes a post-modernistic approach to structure – as it is written in the form of books, within one novel completely retrospectively. Both use completely different methods to reveal emotion; Pinter values continual use of pauses, whereas Greene uses a stream of consciousness to portray his protagonist’s emotions to the reader.
Although both works are in completely different forms, they convey the same themes – the most common of which being betrayal. Pinter’s work is a complex web of lies, which is revealed to the audience almost instantaneously, and as the play goes on – more and more betrayals are brought to light (the main affair from which the play is based is revealed to the audience in the very first scene – where Jerry and Emma are discussing when they had last met “in private”, later on light heartedly making a reference to the conversations they used to have during their encounter, “You remember the form. I ask about your husband, you ask about my wife”). Pinter’s main technique is to only show the key details; leaving the rest to the audience’s imagination. The effect of this is that audience takes home what they want from the play; they feel how they want to feel about the characters. A key example of this comes in scene two, where Jerry confronts Robert about the affair with Emma – and during a scene of immense power play, Robert admits to having “hit Emma once or twice” and how he “just felt like giving her a good bashing”. This can be seen from different perspectives – the audience can either see Robert as a “bastard” as Jerry described him, and take these blasé comments at face value – or as an alternative view, this can be seen as an act by Robert to provoke further reaction in Jerry, who has already had “his head in his hands” earlier in the scene. This would further the idea that the relationship between the two is the main feature of the play, rather than the actual affair – and is a stark comment on how poisonous and competitive the tie between the two is. By Pinter’s own admission, he is not a fan of using too many words, as he believes this is not true to real life; people are terrified of each other, and further scared of communication, so why in his plays should there be more dialogue than necessary? “…we communicate only too well in our silence.”[1]. In Pinter’s extensive use of the pause, he depicts the most valuable of character’s emotions through ambiguity; everything is within Pinter’s scripture – the audience however has to look deeper to see the emotions bleed through. This method of censorship contributes to Pinter’s handling of emotion by
This is a strong contrast to Greene’s main technique of revealing emotion in “The End of the Affair”. Within the first chapter, Greene states through Bendrix’s voice that “…this is a record of hate far more than love”. Here, Greene is presenting clear cut emotion to the reader, rather the opposite of the technique Pinter utilises in his writing. The effect of this is to set the reader up for what is to follow, which can only be described as a barrage of conflicted emotions, unrequited love (presented in a form of reverse dramatic irony; where the speaker in the book knows that the love is requited, but the reader does not until deep into the novel) and most significantly – betrayal.
Mention the key emotions felt/expressed (Surprisingly, betrayal. False betrayal and real betrayal. Lack of God in main characters despite both Greene and Pinter’s views on religion // Heartbreak and love) and similar themes in each (adultery, distrust etc), typical English approaches to emotion (suppression and how location and time setting influences dealing with feeling – also social context marks here! Both Pinter and Greene had affairs, Betrayal is pretty much autobiographical – write about the author’s way of expressing their own emotions through fiction).
Structure, and how linear/cyclic structures contribute to the progression and intensifying of emotion. (ask Gina what the fuck this even means) (I mean don’t be too mean you passed out drunk and she wrote a coursework plan for you I mean come on she’s the best – but seriously what the hell does this mean?!)
Pausing in Pinter and stream of thought in Greene (? I’m not sure, I’ve not read all of it – nope well done Gina, this is one of the main ways that the author’s convey/shelter emotions felt by the characters. Use critical analysis by Pinter on Pinter (check yr English folder moose I think the interview’s in there. It’s the whole words shelter nakedness. OH NO CHECK YR FACEBOOK INBOX APHRA SENT YOU A PICTURE OF IT), and how contrasting techniques offer different experiences of emotion to the reader/audience ( how are we left to imagine the characters feel/how can we see the events hurt the characters in their own thoughts).
Intertextuality? (not sure if relevant? Your choice)– note the mention of Yeats to draw up the audiences past experiences with emotional poetry – a shortcut in literature to instantly provide feelings readily accessible to the audience. Increases impact with brevity.
Note any quick criticisms of the texts (critics saying that Betrayal’s structure is ‘gimmicky’ [http://www.haroldpinter.org/plays/plays_betrayal5.shtml)] or Greene’s in – and briefly accept them as valid, but point the examiner in the direction of better aspects of the works, or counteract them with your opinions of the effectiveness of ‘flaws’.
Conclusion – reemphasise that both writers are very clever indeed, and that through different techniques, are able to handle emotion with skill and intellect. Point out the effects of each approach (eg. Audience’s imagination given opportunity to connect dots, or reader provided with first person viewpoint), and include some personal opinion as to which you prefer stylistically, with a little sentence of justification.
i lost 2 followers for “every hole is mine”
apparently every hole isn’t mine
and a further 2.
what is it with you people and holes?
on a major dick’ed ting innit bruv
braaaaaaaaaaaaaap
fucking metaphors as shit as the sex
trust, the metaphors are still better than the sex.
i’ve only been to starbucks twice.
the first time i was very drunk
and i asked for 3 things
a coffee, an ipod charger and a shoulder to cry on.
They only gave me one of those things, and it was shit.
