Love, Happiness, and Other Antonyms The Role of Women in Marriage - Literature Essay Samples

Throughout the course of history, marriage as an institution has changed drastically, weaving in and out of various phases and forms. What began as a purely reproductive relationship evolved into an emotional companionship. Or has it? Does marriage equal happiness? Is happiness love, or vice versa? What is a woman without a man? Author Simone de Beauvoir both asks and works to answer the age-old question of love, happiness, marriage, and perhaps concludes the inability of the three. Using the text â€Å"Second Sex†, the play Medea, and the film White Material, it can be concluded that marriage is, perhaps, nothing more than a word. In Beauvoir’s piece â€Å"Second Sex†, she makes a distinct differentiation between love and happiness and between the roles of the male and the female in a marriage. Happiness, according to Beauvoir, is what is â€Å"promised† to the bride: a calm, repetitive â€Å"equilibrium† from which she cannot yes does not wish to escape. She is meant to be the â€Å"manager†, remaining within the walls of her home, constructing for herself a life of happiness. Thus, we can conclude that the woman does not love her life as a wife, but it makes her happy. She has â€Å"no choice but to build a stable life where the present, prolonging the past, escapes the threats of tomorrow, that is, precisely to create a happiness.† The woman is stuck in this perpetual â€Å"immanence†, a word Beauvoir uses to contrast the male duty of â€Å"transcendence.† She claims woman’s existence is only validated by man. This idea of security through marriage is evaluated and verified by the play Medea. Medea’s entire life unravels when she is left by Jason for another, younger, woman. She claims she was the perfect wife: â€Å"I even bore you sons just to be discarded for a new bride. Had you been childless, this craving for another bedmate might have been forgiven† (60). Here, Medea confirms Beauvoir’s stance that a woman is only valuable when a man gives her value: in this instance, her fertility is what gives her position as wife meaning. Yet it still is not enough for Jason, who, as the male, is meant to â€Å"prosper† – according to Beauvoir, to â€Å"produce, fight, create, progress.† The Nurse claims that Medea is â€Å"Jason’s perfect foil, being in marriage that saving thing: a wife who does not go against her man† (1). Medea, as Beauvoir would put it, is queen of the hive â€Å"within her domain†, relying on her husband for sig nificance. In the film White Material, main character Maria Vial is divorced from her husband yet married, in a way, to her plantation. The plantation itself is owned by her ex-father-in-law yet she still works as a manager. As Beauvoir states, the woman is meant to fulfill this exact position: â€Å"within the walls of her home she will be in charge of managing, she will enclose the world; she will perpetuate the human existence into the future.† Therefore, the woman is meant to oversee, but never to own; in Maria’s case, she perceived the plantation to be hers yet never truly owned it, evident, clearly, when it was sold to the Mayor by her father-in-law. Maria refuses to give up her life on the plantation, where everything is regular and routine. She cannot bear the thought of leaving her home and returning to France. To both characters, marriage, whether to a person or a thing, is their salvation. For Medea her marriage is her security; later in the play, she begs the king Aegeus for help. She says, â€Å"Aegeus, I beg you†¦by these knees I clasp†¦let me come to Athens, shelter me, accept me in your home† (123). She is helpless without her husband. In the film we see Maria’s mental state deteriorate quickly in the final few scenes, resulting in the murder of her ex-father-in-law. She ends up alone, her family deceased, her plantation bought out, and her general validity of existence extinguished. In the film, the Mayor offers a solution to Maria: why not go to France? Why not leave the stresses behind and go to France? Yet she refuses, claiming she could not â€Å"show courage in France.† Likewise, the chorus in Medea provides a voice of guidance, ensuring Medea that a husband leaving his wife is nothing out of the ordinary: â€Å"If your husband has gone to adore a new bride in his bed, why, this has often happened before. Do not harrow your soul. For Zeus will succor your cause. What use to lessen your life with grief for a lost lord?† (123). The chorus, however, has no effect on Medea. Though they tell her not to fret over such a common occurrence, she quickly has them swayed to her side. So we must ask, why is the desire for marriage so strong? In the time of Medea, marriage was the ultimate partnership, yet it was unsanctified. Marriages rarely equated to fidelity and even more uncommonly meant happiness or love. Medea was meant to produce sons for Jason. In the film, Maria’s divorce from her husband leaves them estranged. Maria and her ex-husband handle the plantation differently. Likewise, they handle their son differently; Andre worries about Manuel while Maria laughs off his sporadic and concerning behavior. It seems that the general separation from male figures leaves the female characters weaker and more helpless than they would have been with them. Marriage is barely a state of being for these women, but rather, a rite of passage, an action, or a duty. It is a necessity. In their moments of solitary desperation, they might have been saved by the institution of marriage. Or, perhaps, just the promise of companionship from anyone could have saved the women from their detrimental isolation. Works Cited Beauvoir, Simone De. The Second Sex. New York: Knopf, 1953. Print. Euripides, and Rex Warner. Medea. New York: Dover Publications, 1993. Print. White Material. Dir. Claire Denis. By Marie NDiaye. Prod. Pascale Caucheteux. Perf. Isabelle Huppert, Christopher Lambert. Why Not Films, 2009. Film.

Poverty and Pollution - Free Essay Example

Poverty and Pollution The assertion Pollution is the price of progress is supported some scholars that outlines different reasons as evidence. Evidently, some scholars identify the poor as the individuals that pay the price of the pollution for their progress. In the first stance, developing countries where poverty is rampant incur low costs and thus dumping polluting industries in these nations helps in the reducing the high costs of dealing with effects of pollution in developed countries. Instead of having a region recording high increase in pollution, the polluting agents should be redirected to clean because the concept helps in managing the high costs of pollution. The last statement that supports the assertion is the fact that people value their environment and consider keeping it clean relative to the rise in their incomes. Evidently, the fall in costs is noticeable when pollution rates fall due to the shift of the dirty from affluent to the affluent nations. A close examination of the ideas used to support the assertion that the poor should pay the price of their progress through increased pollution reveals that the economically, the ideology works and helps in economic improvement. However, it is apparent that the assertion offers economic benefits while the tradeoff ignores the moral issues evident in the decision to redirect pollution to the poor countries and regions. According to the human rights, all human beings have the right to life and this means the right to a healthy environment. Apparently, redirecting pollution to the poor is a wrong against humanity and it is punishable by law. Economic progress and development are noted as two close concepts are mutually, interdependent. Considering the economic value of a nations goods and services increases, the activities and the commitment of the nations workforce to produce quality and large quantities determine the positive economic progress. When relating economic progress which is on an upward trend, it is then true to assert that economic development rises, Therefore, the two concepts of the economy are mutually dependent. Using this relationship, it is evident that for developing countries to experience economic development, people in polluted regions cannot be relocated because most of the activities they engage in result in the pollution. For instance, the residents of Valley of Death in Brazil depend on their daily activities to earn and cater to their needs. However, the same activities that they value because of the employment opportunities available. One significant aspect of life is that one cannot relocate the individuals because they will lose their jobs and source of income. Therefore, instead of using the region as entirely for industrial services, it is significant to leave the individuals to sustain their living standards through the job opportunities that they polluting individuals offer. Therefore, pollution becomes a minor aspect while the jobs remain as the significant factors as they help in sustaining the living of the poor individuals in the polluted region. Using this example, the residents of the Valley of Death portray that the economic progress of the region influences economic development because the workforce has helped in the development of Brazils overall economy. In this way, economic growth overlooks some aspects that are dangerous to the community such as pollution. A polluted environment is a good place for the current residents because they manage to get money for improving their living standards.