Is Stanley Kowalski simply a tragic villain?
A Streetcar Named Desire, written by Tennessee Williams in 1947 is a play that is perceived with the variance between a man and his sister-in-law. Stanley Kowalski immediately captures the attention of the audience through Williams’ excellent portrayal of the intensely strong willed character, furthermore Williams forms Stanley into an exceedingly masculine character who will always have his way or no way and makes his opinions vey clear to those around him “why don’t you women go up and sit with Eunice” this declaration from Stanley shows that he his very sexist, this was very typical of men’s attitudes to women in the 1940’s because the patriarchal society at the time meant that men wanted control over women, as men felt they were far superior to women, because of this Stanley has more of a hubris persona as his actions and ambitions led to the protagonist of the play having a harmartia. A tragic villain is a character, normally an antagonist that does not truly intend to be a villain. So in Stanley’s case, Stanley can be alleged as an tragic villain as he is violent towards to Stella, for paradigm hitting her and using animalistic behaviour towards other women, which was an example of a stereotypical male in the 1940’s as they wanted to be in have supremacy over women, conversely he is being aggressive because he is aggravated by the fact that Blanche is living with the couple and inspiring trouble between them. At the start it is very translucent that Stanley does not have anything in opposition to Blanche for instance when the twosome first meet Stanley is very interested in Blanche’s past “what do you teach, Blanche?” This indicates that Stanley is very intrigued by her sister-in-laws past and wants to get to know her; this shows he is not a tragic villain at this phase of the play as he has not yet shown signs of being an antagonistic. Conversely, on the other hand Stanley is teasing Blanche by taking his shirt off, this shows his ambidextrous side “Do you mind if I make myself comfortable? (He starts to remove his shirt). This confirms that even though he asked her if he could take it off he had already started to take it off before she answered the question. This also confirms that Blanche is not incongruous as she use to work in laurel where prostitution was a common trade and Blanche was also involved in the prostitution industry. This could foreshadow future events as the connotations of a prostitute as she is very flirtatious toward Mitch “voulez- vous couchez avec moi ce soir? Vous ne comprenez pas? Ah, quell dommage!” Blanche is manipulating Mitch and playing mind games with Mitch’s intelligence, this is an exemplar why Stanley is a tragic villain because he wants Blanche to abscond because she is tarnishing his family and friends with duplicitous behaviour especially towards Stella “sister and I in desperate situation” this is ambidextrous for many reasons for example she has no money (’65 cents’) and in addition Stella is exceedingly contented with the affiliation with Stanley especially as they had sexual intercourse earlier on in scene 4. All the same they are also expecting a baby in the upcoming future; this could foreshadow future events as Stanley doesn’t want Blanche to be involved with the upbringing of the baby. The features of a tragedy that is included here is the fatal flaw as the fact that Blanche has no money which leads to her hamartia because she cannot help get away because of her financial issues. An example of peripateia was when Stanley confronted Blanche about her facade; resulting in Blanche breaking down and therefore Stanley took advantage of her vulnerability which result in the audiences pathos starting to sympathize with Blanche because she had no potency to fight back, conversely the audiences pathos towards Stanley would be miscellaneous as some of the audience would sympathize with Stanley since he is trying to protect his...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document