The final act of translations has been criticised for lacking dramatic power and for ending the play in confusion. Do you agree?
Extracts from this document...
Introduction
The final act of translations has been criticised for lacking dramatic power and for ending the play in confusion. Do you agree? The final act of Translations is an act in which Yolland ends up as missing, so creating a number of stories as to the circumstances of his disappearance. The final act of Translations can indeed be criticised for lacking dramatic power, as throughout the act there is no particular build up of tension that leads to one significant event. It can be seen that what happens to Yolland is fairly predictable; therefore the dramatic power is not present. The act can also be seen as ending in confusion as there is no definitive point that tells us exactly what each character goes on to do. But despite this, the statement may be questioned as was it Brian Friel's purpose to do this? Perhaps by ending the play with a lack of dramatic power and in confusion, he has left the rest of the play and the events leading on from it down to the imagination of the reader. ...read more.
Middle
a lack of physical dramatic power, such as a fight taking place or someone being killed within the narration of the play. Throughout act three, characters emotions run high, and dramatic power can be seen as being expressed through their emotions. An example can be seen with Sarah mumbling her regret for not being able to speak more fluently. 'I'm sorry...I'm sorry... I'm so sorry, Manus...' This use of few words repeating themselves, and the use of a. ellipsis symbolises her not being able to fully express her feelings fully through language as her linguistic talent is limited. The act has also been criticised for ending in confusion, and this may be down to many points which emerge throughout Act three. The final act ends with an ellipsis, in that Hugh ends with, '...would come forth from Lybia's downfall...' If this final speech had ended with a full stop, then perhaps this would have signified the end of an era or the end of a build up to events. ...read more.
Conclusion
However, this may also have been purposeful by Friel to let audiences use their imaginations and minds to create an ending to the play. Another way of interpreting this is by saying that Brian Friel has not ended the play in that much confusion, as by taking information from the history books, and by using our own knowledge, it is clear as to what happens to Ireland following on from the end of the play. Ireland does go on to be taken over completely by England, and all the place names are changed form Irish to English. Therefore, it can also be argued that the play does end in confusion but only to a certain extent as we (as readers) at least know the fate of Ireland. Therefore, the points that Brian Friel ends act three in confusion and with a lack of dramatic power can be agreed upon but can also be argued against as Brian Friel may have ended in such a way for a purpose, that being to allow the reader to use their imagination in creating the end of a 'story.' Alexandra Corbet-Milward Miss Scanlon LXX Tudor ...read more.
The above preview is unformatted text
This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Brian Friel section.
Found what you're looking for?
- Start learning 29% faster today
- 150,000+ documents available
- Just £6.99 a month
