Skip to main content

In "The Lady or the Tiger" how does the character of the princess dominate the story, overshadowing the character of the colorful king? How does...

The king believes the trial by arena (or choice of the doors) is perfect justice. An accused man determines his own guilt or innocence with one simple decision. Either he chooses the tiger and is promptly killed, or he chooses the lady and is married. The king was quite happy with himself over this administration of justice. Its fairness could not be argued. The accused carried the burden of determining his own fate: 


He could open either door he pleased; he was subject to no guidance or influence but that of the aforementioned impartial and incorruptible chance.



When the princess's lover is accused, however, the king's justice is corrupted. Because this "hot-blooded, semi-barbaric" princess was pleased and happy with her lover, she was particularly interested in his fate. Thus, she asserts her power and gains dominance over her father's arena of justice by discovering the secret of the doors. What had once been an exercise solely based on luck, has now been distorted. Her father's justice is rendered totally subjective, rather than the objective system whereby the accused made his own choice. She becomes the most powerful person in the kingdom, more powerful than even the king.


But, what was her choice? Did she show mercy on her lover and let him fall into the hands of the young lady who was despised by the princess, or did she let him perish in the jaws of the tiger, simply because she could not stand knowing that he had married another? Even though the princess assumes dominance of the doors, it is impossible to know her final decision. Some may argue that true love won out and the door on the right, which the princess pointed to, held the lady. Others may cite her "semi-barbaric" idealism in proving that the lover's fate was death by tiger. Critics have debated the issue for decades.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the meaning of "juggling fiends" in Macbeth?

Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a... Macbeth is beginning to realize that the three witches have been deceiving him since he first encountered them. Like jugglers, they have kept changing their forecasts in order create confusion. This is particularly apparent when the Second Apparition they raise in Act IV,   Scene 1 tells him that no man of woman born can overcome him in hand-to-hand battle--and then Macbeth finds himself confronted by the one man he has been avoiding out of a sense of guilt, and that man tells him: Despair thy charm. And let the angel whom thou still hast serve...
Post a Comment
Read more

What are some external and internal conflicts that Montag has in Fahrenheit 451?

 Montag, the protagonist of Fahrenheit 451, faces both external and internal conflicts throughout the novel. Some examples of these conflicts are: External Conflicts: Conflict with the society: Montag lives in a society that prohibits books and critical thinking. He faces opposition from the government and the people who enforce this law. Montag struggles to come to terms with the fact that his society is based on censorship and control. Conflict with his wife: Montag's wife, Mildred, is completely absorbed in the shallow and meaningless entertainment provided by the government. Montag's growing dissatisfaction with his marriage adds to his external conflict. Conflict with the fire captain: Montag's superior, Captain Beatty, is the personification of the oppressive regime that Montag is fighting against. Montag's struggle against Beatty represents his external conflict with the government. Internal Conflicts: Conflict with his own beliefs: Montag, at the beginning of th...
Post a Comment
Read more

In A People's History of the United States, why does Howard Zinn feel that Wilson made a flimsy argument for entering World War I?

"War is the health of the state," the radical writer Randolph Bourne said, in the midst of the First World War. Indeed, as the nations of Europe went to war in 1914, the governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled, and young men died in frightful numbers on the battlefields-often for a hundred yards of land, a line of trenches. -- Chapter 14, Page 350, A People's History of the United States Howard Zinn outlines his arguments for why World War I was fought in the opening paragraph of Chapter 14 (referenced above). The nationalism that was created by the Great War benefited the elite political and financial leadership of the various countries involved. Socialism, which was gaining momentum in Europe, as was class struggle, took a backseat to mobilizing for war. Zinn believes that World War I was fought for the gain of the industrial capitalists of Europe in a competition for capital and resources. He states that humanity itself was punished by t...
Post a Comment
Read more