& # 8217 ; s House Essay, Research Paper

Dramatic sarcasm depends on the audience s cognizing something that a character has non yet realized, or on one character s cognizing something that other characters do non cognize. It is a important literary tool used by writers, poets, and dramatists in some of the most celebrated narratives of all time told. Dramatic sarcasm can function many intents. It can construct suspense, exhilaration, and allows for a important flood tide. It makes the audience more involved in the narrative and in touch with the characters. Two illustrations of dramatic sarcasm can be found in Sophocles Oedipus the King and in Henrik Ibsen A Doll House. These are two drastically different narratives, yet both Oedipus the King and A Doll House integrated dramatic as a important portion of each narrative. The narrative of Oedipus is a well-known narrative. The supporter is the celebrated fabulous adult male who is destined to kill his ain male parent and get married his female parent. This is a Grecian myth known long before Sophocles dramatized it. This entails that the audience is already cognizant of the result. However, Oedipus is non. Oedipus does non cognize that he is the 1 responsible for the slaying of king Laius. Nor does he cognize that King Laius is his natural male parent. And he does non cognize that he has wed his female parent. This is common cognition to the audience, therefore the audience knows more than the supporter does. J. Michael Walton provinces in his overview of Oedipus the King that, The unusual construction of Oedipus the King gives one ground for it s staying popularity. All the important action has already taken topographic point before the drama begins ( 52 ) . In A Doll House, the dramatic sarcasm takes on a somewhat different signifier. In this narrative, non merely does the audience become cognizant of something that another character does non cognize, but other characters are cognizant of fortunes that another character does non cognize of. The chief character, Nora, borrowed money old ages ago under false pretensions. Her hubby, Torvald was deathly sick and needed to be moved to a heater clime for a clip. He was non cognizant of the badness of his unwellness. He was besides non cognizant that in order to do the trip, Nora forged her male parent s signature to take out a loan. Nora is cognizant of everything ; Torvald knows nil. He does non cognize that he was on the brink of decease. He does non cognize that his married woman illicitly took out a loan. And he is non cognizant of the influence that Krogstad has over his repute and his matrimony. Torvald is nescient of all of these fortunes. The most important instance of sarcasm is obvious in Oedipus because everyone but Oedipus is cognizant that the prognostication came true but there are more elusive intimations of sarcasm found in the narrative, besides. One such illustration is that Oedipus was destined to be the male monarch of Thebes no affair what. Oedipus ironically holds the place of king being that his birth father held the thrown before him. But Oed

ipus was given the thrown due to the fact that he killed Laius, the king and solved the oracle. Either way it was Oedipus thrown, but he did not know that (Walton, 54). Another case of irony occurs with the blind profit Teiresias. Teiresias attempted to warn Oedipus of the situation, but Oedipus dismissed him. It is ironic that Oedipus can only see the magnitude of the situation when he blinds himself, just as the profit Teiresias is blind (Wallton, 55). In A Doll House there is also different cases of irony within this one tale. We have already discussed the irony that Torvald is not aware of any of the circumstances that Nora is involved in, but everyone else is. Another case of irony can be found in Nora s actions themselves. Nora forged the signature and took out the illegal loan in order to save the man she loved. . . . [Nora] was living with the belief that an ideal husband like hers would, if the necessity arose, sacrifice his life to save her reputation (Goontelleke, 161). She was wrong and Torvald would not help her in her time of need. Nora was trying to save her marriage. It is ironic that in turn, it is this attempt to save her marriage that ruins her marriage in the end (Metzger, 60). What impact do these examples of dramatic irony have? In Oedipus, the audience knows that the prophecy will come true in the end. The audience knows that the man Oedipus is hunting for is himself. The greatest impact occurs when Oedipus vows to take revenge and exile the man responsible for causing problems in Thebes. Oedipus declares, . . . liberation from the disease would never come unless we learn without a doubt who murdered Laius- put them to death, or sent them to exile (Sophocles, 1296). The audience can see the irony and significance of this statement. This strong statement makes the conflict peak. A similar statement is made in A Doll House. Torvald states that someone who commits a crime such as fraud is not fit to raise children. He proclaims Forgery . . .I literally feel physically revolted when I m anywhere near such a person (Ibsen, 990-991). He makes this statement unaware that his wife has committed such a crime. Statements like these make the situations more intense. The audience becomes drawn in and keeps them on the edge of their seat, in anticipation of a conclusion. These statements intensify conflict. They are necessary for an effective story involving dramatic irony. Oedipus and A Doll House use dramatic irony in similar ways. They both incorporate dramatic irony to build up to the climax. In both of these stories, dramatic irony is used to make the audience more involved with the action of the play. Dramatic irony is a literary tool that is used in stories, plays, and poetry throughout the ages. Two effective examples of the usage of dramatic irony are evident in Henrik Ibsen s A Doll House and Sophocles Oedipus.