English Literature - Atonement (Essay 2)

Authors Avatar

1,507 words, candidate number 5635

“Atonement offers us no heroes and no villains- only victims”

How far, and in what ways, does your reading of Atonement lead you to agree with this view?

Atonement conveys a dichotomous message. Ian McEwan – the reality, the tangible author – is supplemented by a deeper layer; his construct – the potentially unreliable narrator – Briony Tallis. Essentially, branding any of the enigmatic individuals offered to us in Atonement as ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ is impossible – and indeed unjust – simply because of the sheer amount of ambiguity and subjectivity involved – “there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so”. The select tendencies these individuals relay on the other hand is another matter; the notion of ‘victimhood’ must imply some malicious behaviour beforehand. Taking ‘villainy’, the Concise Oxford Dictionary, necessarily – though feebly – lists it as a derivative of ‘villain’; alluding to it as an individual’s moral essence. The Collins Dictionary, on the other hand, defines it as a “vicious behaviour or action”, supporting the notion that select ‘behaviour’ and themes are the ‘heroes’ and ‘villains’ of the novel.

For example, on the surface Briony is a ‘villain’ whose actions merely generate destruction and deprivation. Yet, the Observer gives the view that “the personal story – especially Briony’s childhood ‘failure to grasp the simple truth that other people are as real as you’, and her later struggle with remorse – is painfully strong”, encouraging the idea that she can be considered both a victim and villain in tandem. Select ‘villainous’ vices of Briony – predominantly naivety – are ultimately responsible for Robbie’s downfall. Contrarily, Briony assumes some distinctly ‘heroic’ roles throughout the novel; most noteworthy, her nursing occupation and the ‘redeeming’ atonement. Her ‘villainous’ temperament is inadvertent (and nonetheless a literary construction) that affects both her and the other characters in the novel. She is by no means an embodied villain.

Another notable argument for a specific character being a villain is that of Paul Marshall. Being an odious and “comically brooding” character, McEwan – or, indeed, the contemptuous Briony – portrays him as a stereotypical paedophile, appearing to ‘prey’ on Lola by means of confectionary and a charming façade. Taking into account the whole text, we can debate as to whether the perceived ‘malicious’ actions of Marshall following this scene were consensual or forced. Lola’s strive for maturity, her lack of action following the ‘rape’ scene, and their eventual matrimony definitely hints at the former. Presenting Marshall in this way McEwan, concurrent with the reader’s knowledge of Briony’s unreliable narration, is hinting that visual stereotypes are not necessarily accurate. The surface can be misleading, conforming to the literary state of Atonement as a whole.

Join now!

Associated with this idea of stereotypes are Briony’s thoughts in the opening pages of the novel; “beauty, she had discovered, occupied a narrow band. Ugliness, on the other hand, had infinite variation”. Here McEwan gives us a literal image, maybe relating to body size or broad facial features – ironic considering Marshall’s “scrunched up” face (which is, of course, still an indefinite notion). Lola appears to take a liking to Marshall’s unpleasant appearance, giving the reader varied interpretations; either Lola is a fool for falling into this paedophile’s ‘trap’ – Briony’s testament – or that ugliness is not necessarily a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a star student thought of this essay

The structure here is good. There is a strong introduction, engaging with key terms, and the conclusion doesn't simply repeat this but builds a strong insight and justified judgement. I feel this essay could benefit from more succinct signposts to paragraphs. This would enable a reader, and an examiner to distinguish what new points are being added. This candidate doesn't have the most concise style, so would benefit from a clearer argument. By doing this, the essay will become much more convincing as points are easier to follow. I would like to note that quotations from the book do not have to be placed in footnotes. Critical viewpoints from articles and journals, however, should be included as is done here. I'm not quite sure why this essay includes rhetorical questions, as this is completely out of place with the style set up here. You shouldn't be trying to build an emotive response from an essay, so I would advise you not to use rhetoric devices.

The analysis here is strong, but I would've liked to have seen more reference to McEwan's constructions. For example "For example, on the surface Briony is a ‘villain’" would come across better if it read "For example, McEwan presents Briony to be a 'villain' on the surface to show how it is not easy to judge". By looking at McEwan manipulating the presentation of his story, you naturally focus on the effect techniques have and why they are used. I liked how points were linked here, as it shows an argument is being built. Phrases such as "Relating back to false perception" aren't the most sophisticated, but the attempt is there. The discussion of class divide being villainous is very perceptive, and hits the assessment objective of looking at context of reception and production. Techniques such as prolepsis are well analysed, and there is always a sharp focus on how McEwan presents villainy or heroic acts.

This essay responds strongly to the task. I was particularly impressed with the way the introduction engages with the quote. This question is a perfect example of the necessity to pick apart the connotations and definitions of key words to build an argument. This essay does this well for the most part by looking at what villain, hero and victim mean. I'm not quite sure I like how they ended the introduction by stating the dictionary definition then disagrees with the argument set up. In my opinion, at A-Level you should be posing a clear and convincing argument from the beginning of your essay. Yes, you can evaluate weaker arguments and alternative interpretations, but these are best included in the analysis when you have the ability to use evidence to disregard them.