david-ch

[david-ch]

Through black and white the colors of the humans are revealed: Schindler’s List

Schindler's List is an American historical period drama film directed and co-produced by Steven Spielberg and written by Steven Zaillian. In this film, the Holocaust is portrayed as the ultimate expression of the cruelty unleashed during World War II. However, Schindler's List takes another perspective to this historical event: the film presents a German protagonist that saved more than a thousand Polish Jewish lives.

 This humanization of the main character during the most intense part of the conflict enables the film to develop complex characters with a well-developed interactions between them. This allows the plot to reach deeper levels of interpretation, so the complexity of the film is enriched, but also more difficult to understand. So, the use of black and white in the shots can serve as a delimitation for the viewer. This way, the lack of bright, intense colors allows readers to concentrate in the plot, instead of minor details like notorious colors, like reds, that can attract attention due to its nature.

 It is important to mention that the principal photography took place in Kraków, Poland. Spielberg shot the film in black and white and approached it as a documentary. Also, the constant use of black and white shots are used in order to put on the spotlight certain details that would pass unnoticed without this visual resource. The treatment of the film as a documentary also creates an environment of seriousness all around the film: you are not watching an action movie or a fictional story, you are taking a look at one of the most tragic and devastating event in the human history.

[david-ch]

The human nature in its darkest hour.

The human nature is one of the most controversial concepts a person could ask. Philosophers have tried to answer what is the human nature since the creation of philosophy. On simple terms, thinkers have divided the human nature in two opposite concepts: good and evil. Some philosophers think that humans are good by nature, but the society corrupts them. Other state that the human nature is evil, selfish, and destructive, and the society is the entity that guides the people away from that primitive behavior. However, if we search through the history of mankind we notice that there are not isolated behaviors: the human nature works as a day, having its brightest days and its darkest nights. Elie Wiesel portraits an episode of human history that can be considered as the darkest night: The Holocaust.

 Night, the book written by Elie Wiesel, is a work about his experience in the Nazi concentration camps during World War II. Together with his father, Elie impregnates in the pages the horrors that he and his father suffered, as well as the psychological effects that this situation creates in his youthhood. Wiesel also talks about faith and how it is dissolve in the sea of violence and blood in which the Jews were trapped from 1939 to 1945.

 Night reflects this loss of faith in one simple sentence: The Death of God. This murder of the concept “God” is born of the disgust Wiesel had towards humanity: who can be so indifferent to know innocent people is being massacred and does not try anything to stop it? However, this blame to God also creates a contradiction: in order to blame God, you have to believe that he exists. With this, Night is not about the end of faith, but the beginning of it.  

[david-ch]

Night and Fog: a scar that not everyone wants to see.

Night and Fog is a 1955 documentary short film directed by the French film director Alain Resnais. It was made ten years after the liberation of Nazi concentration camps. Something important to mention is that the title is taken as a translate from the Nacht und Nebel, a program of abductions and disappearances decreed by the Nazis in 1941. The documentary uses shots of abandoned concentration camps, as well as real footage of Nazi soldiers and Jewish prisoners during the time the camps were “operating”.

The question here is: why did the Nazis film the deportation and extermination of the Jews? And what consequences did the Nazis expect from filming these events? I cannot answer these questions objectively, but it is probably that the Nazis filmed that events because they thought they were making history (and in a twisted way they did) so they had to recorded to be available for the future generations. The answer of the second question can be that Nazis expected that the films were used as propaganda and as an example of their military power. Whatever the reasons they may had to film the horrors of the Holocaust there is something true: it is an important piece in the history of humankind.

Being said that, Night and Fog works as a social and historical scar: the wound may be healed, but the scar is a reminder that a harm was suffered. Despite the film having a graphic nature this type of footage have an intrinsic importance, so it needs to be preserved and not forgotten; not because it is positive or an example to follow, but because it is a reminder of the harm that humans can do to each other, so we do not commit such horrible mistakes again. Also, by forgetting this historical moments we are not only erasing a part of our history as a specie, but also the memories of the victims that suffered this acts.

[david-ch]

Academic integrity: is it really important?

Academic integrity is a moral code that reflects the set of values that an academic institution tries to teach to its students, workers and, in a more general point of view, the way the institution wants to be seen and acknowledge by the society. It states the way anyone should use information in a fair, ethical way: this includes the prohibition and sanction of cheating and plagiarism. Academic integrity includes values like commitment, honesty, justice, respect, responsibility, and liberty. They are the base of the behavior that the academic integrity enhances.

But that is the boring, standard, old-fashioned way of explaining a concept: defining it. Let’s talk about something that really matters in a practical sense: it is important to us? Why should we care about academic integrity? The first question has a short answer with a long explaining: academic integrity is really important to us because it is based on the principle of justice. Some people might not understand that, and they think it’s just a work, either way, they (the authors) are not going to get paid if I cite it (the work) or not.

Well, if you are one of them, imagine the next situation: you spend your last three years of your life studying an ant colony for a class project: you did not go out on holidays because you had to observe the ants. At the end of the class period you must deliver your investigation, however, a classmate used your work without your permission in order to deliver his/her project, and he/she did not even mention you in the work. Your classmate and you get the same grade, but he/she did not have to do anything and your effort and time used is not appreciated. How would you feel about it?

Just as the example shows, Academic integrity is about giving credit to the authors of the works you are using as a respect of their effort and time employed, just as you want to be recognized by a work of your authorship.

[david-ch]

Lady Windermere’s Fan: the other side of the Victorian English society

Lady Windermere’s Fan is a comedy written by Oscar Wilde, an Irish-born writer. The story is about Lady Windermere, who suspects that her husband is cheating on her with with another woman. She confronts him with it, not only denying it, but inviting the other woman, Mrs. Erlynne, to his wife's birthday ball. Confused and furious by her husband's supposed unfaithfulness, Lady Windermere decides to leave her husband for another suitor, her friend Lord Darlington. After discovering what has happened, Mrs. Erlynne follows Lady Windermere and attempts to persuade her to return to her husband but, in the course of this, Mrs. Erlynne is discovered in a compromising position. This is when it is revealed Mrs. Erlynne is Lady Windermere's mother, who abandoned her family twenty years before the time the play is set. Mrs. Erlynne sacrifices herself and her reputation to save her daughter's marriage.

This play is a critic to the Victorian English society in which Oscar Wilde lived. Victorian Era was a period in which ethics and moral values were strict to follow in public, however, it is also known to be a time in which society broke that moral values in secret, and not so secret, ways. For example, sex before marriage was considered illegal, nonetheless, prostitution was common at that time. This hypocrisy is shown in Wilde’s play through several themes. One of the first themes that appeared is gossip. The play’s problems starts with a gossip. Although gossips were seen as a despicable action, it was frequent that rumors spread easily through that society, causing people to lose their reputation and/or their lovers.

Another theme that appeared quite smoothly, but not less important because of that, is the divorce. In Victorian society, women were not allowed to divorce. So, instead of that, they usually had to run away with their lovers to another place where their actions were untraceable. This was done so their reputation in that place wouldn’t be threaten. In other words, Oscar Wilde was inspired not by the fanciness of the English society, but for the enormous hypocrisy that existed in every part of the society of that time.

[david-ch]

A Midsummer Night's Dream: the  Shakespeare’s play in which everyone stays alive

A Midsummer Night's Dream is a play written by the English playwright William Shakespeare. Unlike many of his best known plays, A Midsummer Night's Dream is not a tragedy, such as The Jew of Malta, Hamlet, or Romeo and Juliet. Instead, Shakespeare write a comedy in which three different stories converge at one point: the love conflict between two couples in Athens, the representation of a play by craftsmen, and the conflict between the King and the Queen of Fairies. It is important to mention that this play uses the magic as the engine that will resolve all the conflicts presented. Despite being an old play, A Midsummer Night's Dream is not as hard to read as other Shakespeare’s plays. This is probably due to the constant use of humor to make the story more pleasant.

The vocabulary used in this play is pretty similar to the tragedies William Shakespeare wrote. However, the language is less “poetic”, instead, he (Shakespeare) gives the characters a different way of talking depending on which story the character belongs more. This gives a break to the reader (yes, the reader, because we are talking about this play as a Literary text, not as a play per se) from the poem-like language we are accustomed to read in almost every popular Shakespeare’s plays. Nonetheless,   the use of the theme of love as the engine of a play remains in both this case and in some of his tragedies, such as the well-known Romeo and Juliet.

In conclusion, besides having the “Shakespearian” essence, if we can call it like that, A Midsummer Night's Dream is a unique play among its author texts. This is not only because it is a comedy, which is pretty weird since we have not a single joke in Shakespeare’s tragedies, but because of the use of some rhetorical devices that are not found in other plays of its author.

 SPOILER:

Shakespeare did not kill his characters at the end of the play. And I do not know if I am the only one who thinks this, but that was pretty weird to me.

[david-ch]

Can you understand the machine without seeing its gears? Character analysis.

One cannot fully understand how a system works, like a machine, if you do not analyze the several compounds that it has. For example, a steam machine that does not have water in its boiler is totally useless because an important part of the mechanism is missing. This analysis of the parts of an object or system allows us to comprehend how the things works and the importance that it has within the functioning. Although many examples of the performance of machines can be describe to ensure the mentioned sentence, this type of analysis can also be applied, and it is applied, in many fields others than physics or engineer.

In the specific case of Literature, this analysis has its own name: character analysis. Character analysis allows us to comprehend better the literary work by inspecting the physical and psychological characteristics a fictional character has, as well as its role and its importance for the work. By using character analysis, it becomes possible to figure out why an author decides to make character with specific features, enabling the readers to know the reasons why he/she wrote that written work.

In the case of “The Jew of Malta” by Christopher Marlowe, character analysis helps us to understand in an efficient way the play. At first sight, this play does not have much to tell that has not been seen before in other works: a story about a Jew that loose his money unfairly and wants revenge for it. However, if you look at it (”The Jew of Malta”) closely, you can notice two significant characteristics that are not common in other kind-of-similar texts: the first, and the easiest to notice, is that no character gets what they desire. The second characteristic, whose analysis belongs to character analysis, is that there are no heroes nor villains in the play: there are just people who fights for what they want/need.

In conclusion, character analysis can be described as a tool used to make a deeper analysis of a text or, in this case, a play. Like the gears in a machine, character analysis allows us to examine methodically one of the most important parts of the play: the characters (Really? If the name of this analysis is “character analysis” is obviously going to talk about the characters). But more important, it allows us to know how the play is structured and what is the importance of some characters for the plot and the development of the themes.

[david-ch]

Marlowe vs. Shakespeare

Christopher (Kit) Marlowe was an English playwright, poet and translator of the Elizabethan era. According to his baptism, he was born in February 26th, 1564. If this date sounds you sort of similar with someone else, you are probably right. This is the same year another well-known man was born: William Shakespeare. If the coincidences that they were born in the same year and they are Englishmen is not enough, both worked as poets and playwrights, and not ordinary ones, but they are considered the best of the English literature.

In fact, the reason because Shakespeare had no real competition in his time was that Kit Marlowe was murdered at the young age of twenty-nine years old. But if we want to say who is a better playwright we must compare and contrast their works. William Shakespeare is one of the most-known playwrights of all times and around the world; his intelligent use of several rhetorical devices and the development of complex characters allowed him to be recognized by several authors of different eras. On the other hand, Marlowe is well known in the United Kingdom, but not much far from there. However, it is important to mention that both writers had a similar writing style as they worked with the Elizabethan tragedy.

Nonetheless, they have some subtle, but relevant differences. The most notorious was that Kit Marlowe was an atheist while William Shakespeare was Anglican and his family (Shakespeare’s) was presumably catholic. This contrast can explain why Shakespeare was so popular, while Marlowe was forgotten for some years after his death. The religious side is important as matter because one was protected by the English Crown while the other gains the hate of the Anglican Church.

Another point is that, besides their differences, Shakespeare had a respect for Marlowe’s works to the point that many historians and researchers believed that Kit inspired Shakespeare. An example of this is “The Merchant of Venice”, a play that Shakespeare wrote as a reference to “The Jew of Malta”, by Marlowe. So, if we want to say which is better, the answer is Shakespeare, but not because he was really a better writer than Marlowe, but because Kit was murder at a young age, so he couldn´t show his full potential.

[david-ch]

Art or Trash: Postmodernism

Postmodernism is a relatively new philosophy that can be difficult to define, because it states nothing can have only one definition. It also states that there is no such thing as an absolute truth. In other words, people that supports Postmodernism believe that truth is relative, so a situation can have multiple truths, and none of them have to be wrong. Postmodernism usually criticize complex themes like nationalism, politics, religion, war and moral.

Postmodernist people think that many issues in the world are caused by the rigid and outdated political and economic system that rules the globe: that Capitalism causes an inevitable social stratification based on economic resources; that Christianism is a philosophy that has influenced the dictation of morals in the Western World, etc. One thing that is important to mention is that Postmodernism is usually centered in themes that are considered as Western.

When it comes to art, Postmodernism can be both heaven and hell: the lack of boundaries allows the authors and artist to fully develop their works as they want. If there are no aesthetic canons, the words beautiful and ugly lose their meaning: the art is now more subjective that it was before. However, this total freedom can lead to a degeneration of the concept of art. If everything can be consider as art, what differentiates something that is a masterpiece from objects of daily life? Although this may sound awkward, the truth is that this problem is already here: there are some postmodern artists that the only thing they do is to pick up and object and give it a “deep” meaning.

In conclusion, Postmodernism has allowed the development of unique pieces of art by erasing the standard models that once ruled this field, nonetheless, this freedom has also allowed the introduction of merely trash in modern art museums, “art” that is based only on the meaning that it’s “author” gave it.

[david-ch]

Buenísima Sociedad: a humoristic social satire

“Buenísima Sociedad” is a play written by the Spanish playwright Alfonso del Paso. This play is a satire of the high-class society, demonstrating in a very explicit way that some people that belongs to this social class tends to be happy when, in reality, they have a miserable life. This theater play was the one that my classmates and I had to put on scene on May 16th, having a month in order to learn the dialogs, get sponsors and practice the acting. In this work, I was the treasurer, so, I decided that it would be better for the play and for myself to have a register of the money that was being spent along this time.

While my other classmates were doing their job, I noticed that, besides doing a scholar play, this work was way more difficult than we imagined. At first, very few people were interested in the play. However, as the time passed, we got involved in doing well our job, resulting in an adaption of the play that was, at least in my opinion, a very good team work. There were a few issues, but we managed to solve it in time. Nonetheless, we still have a problem that is going to be difficult to solve: we still do not have enough money if we managed to get to the finals. I do not really think that this circumstance is going to be a huge problem, but it is true that is a pebble in the shoe.

From this activity, I learned that working along with many people is sometimes troublesome, but, if you and your partners can work well along, the result from the effort of everyone is gratifying. Also, I observe that this type of activity allows you to interact with persons that, in normal circumstances, you might not even talk with.

[david-ch]

Semiotics: another way to see the world.

We are always receiving a lot of messages from many different sources: TV, radio, printed and digital advertisements, etc. Many of this messages are very explicit: we know what they are trying to tell us. However, some messages are hidden to the conscious mind, so they usually are processed by the unconscious and subconscious brain. The second type of message requires more effort than the first one in order to understand it in a conscious way. This implicit messages are often hidden in sounds, colors, patterns, and non-verbal communication. If we want to understand this implicit messages, we have to use special tools so we can analyze them in a logical, efficient way.

One of the most efficient tool, and probably the most known, is semiotics. With semiotics, we can analyze almost any type of information that carries a message: it can be used in poems, literary works, paintings, advertisements, commercials, etc. Semiotics is based on signs, which are anything that can be interpreted by a person. Signs are the fundamental part of anything that carries a meaning. In order to study signs, semiotic studies are based on three main parts: pragmatic, semantic, and syntactic. With this three parts, semiotics analyze not only what the message is, but also how is the message delivered and which tools does the information use to have a meaning. It also analyzes what is the purpose of using certain signs to have a specific meaning.

When we use semiotics, we can understand better the meaning of a message: it gives us a wider point of view of the world that surrounds us. With semiotics, we can see far beyond the superficial comprehension of a message. We use both senses and reason to give sense to what the external factors are trying to tell us.

[david-ch]

A forgotten genius: John Donne

When people talk about geniuses, the first images that comes to their mind are about logical-thinking subjects, like science and math. Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Isaac Newton, and Stephen Hawking are some of the most remarkable geniuses in this type of knowledge. However, we also know about people that can be considerate geniuses in some other areas: in music, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven, and Johann Sebastian Bach are some of the greatest exponents; in Literature, Edgar Allan Poe, William Shakespeare, Jules Verne, and Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra are some examples of geniuses.

Although we might think that geniuses are usually famous in their subjects, this tends to be far beyond the truth. The reality is that many of the geniuses, no matter which subject they developed, are forgotten as the time passed by. Some of them are later remembered by someone, allowing them another opportunity to be recognized by the society. If this situation does not happen, they remain in the shadows an indefinite amount of time. One example of a genius that was forgotten many years, and was later “rediscovered” is the English poet John Donne.

John Donne is considerate one of the greatest writers of English prose, nevertheless, he was only acknowledged with this title until the 20th century. He was born in 1572 and died in 1631, sharing a historical context with William Shakespeare. As a genius of prose, John Donne was still important for some thirty years after his death, inspiriting other English poets of that time. Notwithstanding, during the 18th century and most part of the 19th century, he was little read for being considered inept and crude.  It was not until the 20th century that Donne’s poetry was rehabilitated. Critics like T. S. Elliot and William Butler Yeats discovered in Donne’s poetry the rare, but beautiful, artistic fusion of intellect and passion.

John Donne wrote poetry that was, and still is, very uncomfortable for some people: eroticism, critics to the religion, and critics about the meaning of human existence, to mention some of them. However, we cannot deny that, despite he is not a poet for everyone, he is a genius of poetry that deserves to be remembered in the collective memory of the society, just as all of the geniuses that still remains in the shadows of the time.

[david-ch]

The base of the essay: the evidence

When we are talking about something and we want to give our opinion, we usually just talk about what we think. Sometimes, we forget to include evidence that support our ideas. In a normal conversation, evidence is not always necessary because we do not want to argue with other people, we just want to express our thoughts. However, when we are talking in a debate or writing an essay, that is a whole different story. In this case, we are going to focus specifically on the importance that the evidence has when you are writing an essay.

When you are redacting a writing, such as an essay, in which you have to defend an ideological stance, you have to support your ideas with clear, focused evidence. The evidence in an essay have several advantages for both writer and reader. For the author, it brings more credibility and professionalism to his/her work. It also allows the writer to create a logical text by following a defined writing structure. On the other hand, for the reader, the evidence helps the reader to understand better the ideology of the author of the essay: his/her ideas are well-reasoned, they are not only empty words. Also, it enables the reader to think for himself/herself about what the author has written and in which situations the reader’s ideas match with the writer’s ones.

Evidence has a significant relevance as an essential part of an essay because it is the base in which you support the words you write. As you support better your thoughts with solid evidence, the essay becomes a good quality work. This allows you to express your opinion in a reasoned, logical, elegant form. Even if you only want to write your ideas, supporting them with evidence is a good way to show that your reasoning is logical and totally valid.

[david-ch]

A timeless story: Othello

“The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice,” also known as “Othello,” is one of the most famous plays of the English playwright William Shakespeare. Along with Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and Macbeth, Othello is one of the tragedies that everybody knows about its plot, even if they have not read the play yet. It is a literary work that has transcend time without losing its essence, allowing it to stay in the collective memory of the modern society. Most people do not think about it, but, what makes Othello so special to not be forgotten?

For many, the answer is simple: it was written by William Shakespeare. Although this might be true at some point, because Shakespeare is a writer that is recognized worldwide, we have to make a deeper analysis if we want to know the real reason. Othello is not only about jealousy and betrayal, but also about reflecting the failings of the human nature through the thoughts and actions of its characters. Each one of the characters represents a part of the human nature: love, insecurity, jealousy, betrayal, loyalty, etc. With this said, we can assume that Othello is not only about a story of the Seventeenth century; it is portrait of the society itself.

Also, Othello is considerate true Literature because it can transmits feelings, ideas, and sends an ethical message to the reader, all of this in an artistic form. The language used in the play tries to emulate the social and historical context of its characters, being sometimes too rude. However, the characteristic aesthetic of Shakespeare’s writing style is always present along the work. With all this said, we can conclude that The Tragedy of Othello is a timeless and universal play: as long as the human nature does not change, the play will have something to say about our society, about us.

[david-ch]

The theatre and the language

In modern days, we are accustomed to read poetry in a language that is familiar with our daily vocabulary. Sometimes, poetry is written that way because the writer is a contemporary author. However, when you read an ancient poem in its original language, you will probably notice that it is written in a very different manner. This happens because the language is always evolving and, through many years, it can change in such a way that it can be difficult to fully understand the text. This same issue can be applied to another art: the theatre. In this context, should the work be translated to a modern language to be understandable for most people or the original language should be remained?

Although we are talking about the same idiom, many languages have changed dramatically through history. One clear example of that is English. Modern English is a result of mixing many languages: ancient German, Latin, African Languages, Indian tongues, etc. Due to that, English has changed a lot through time. Othello, by William Shakespeare, can be used as an evidence of this transformation in language. In the original writing, Shakespeare used a lot of words and phrases that are not common nowadays. The modern theatre script was translated in order to be more understandable. This can be seen as something positive, right?

Well… this translation not always works effectively. Many times, when you translate a literary work, some rhetorical devices have to be sacrificed to get a good translation. In theatre, translations causes two mainly variations on stage: Some words and phrases are changed and, less popular but not less important, the pronunciation is also modified. Due to this, the artistic language can be affected severally. In other words, it can change entirely the way a play gives a message.

In conclusion, translations of literary works can be useful if the language is too difficult to comprehend; however, if you can understand the text without any translation, it is best to read the original writing because that way you can truly appreciate the art and effort that the author puts on its work.

[david-ch]

No Exit: the make-up remover of the social relationships.

“Hell is other people.” That is probably the most famous phrase of the play No Exit. Although is a short announcement, it reflects perfectly the ideology of Jean-Paul Sartre, its author. His ideas fit perfectly in Existentialism. This philosophy is centered in finding the meaning of life. In this sense, existentialism analyses the existence and   the way humans find themselves existing in the world. As an individualist philosophy, existentialists support the idea that a person first recognize his/her existence and then he/she tries to change their essence or nature in order to live in society.

Existentialism surged in the 20th century during World War II. It is the response for the deep feels caused by the Great Depression and World War I. Many authors support the existentialist point of view, including Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Sartre and Camus. However, Sartre stands out for being the one that popularized existentialism internationally.  Like other existentialist thinkers, Sartre deduced that the society makes miserable the existence of a person.

No Exit is an example of Sartre’s ideas. In the play, there are three persons in a room that cannot be open by them. This room is the hell itself. The characters are dead and, due to their sins, they have to stay forever in that room. There are no flames nor torturer. However, each character is tortured psychologically by his/her partners. Even without making a noise, the mere presence of other people torments the characters. In the end, Inez, Garcin, and Estelle (the characters) realized that the real torture is being with other person: hell is other people.

The play infers that the society is unnatural. The characters only think for their own desires, showing the self-centered nature of the human mind. In the beginning, Garcin and Estelle try to be polite and be nice with the other “residents.” But as time passed by, their true nature is exposed as they become more egocentric and hostile with each other. This change in their behavior is a reflection about the social hypocrisy. A hypocrisy that everyone hates, but everyone use it in the daily social activities. A hypocrisy that promotes the peace among people at the expense of individual happiness.

[david-ch]

If something is not perfect, then it is useless?

Formalism is a useful tool that allow us to interpret a literary piece of art. We can use it to analyze the structure of a poem, for example, in order to understand why the author wrote that piece in that particular manner. Formalism has a great advantage that other methods do not even contemplate: the way the message is transmitted in Literature is as important as the message itself. However, this does not mean that this method can describe everything of a writing.

One example of the disadvantage that has Formalism is that it does not take into account the historical context of the author, or his/her biography. Unlike historical criticism, the only thing that in Formalism matters it’s the structure. This gives us few to none elements that can help us to understand better the literary piece we are reading. Nevertheless, some formalist analyst said that this kind of issues are not necessary to comprehend Literature because the art “talks by itself.”

Another problem we have with Formalism is that not all Literature works are easy to analyze with this method. If you are analyzing a poem, Formalism can be use relatively readily, but if you try to use this same method in a novel with more pages than the bible itself, well, you are probably going to work for a long time. In other writings, the issue is not the length of the work, but the way it is written. For example, essays usually have to follow a standardized structure, so the author is not totally free to write as he/she wants to. This reduces the importance of the most critical tool used in Formalism: the structure.

Although Formalism cannot explain everything about a writing, it provides us a considerable help when we analyze the art of writing. No literary theory can explain entirely a piece. Because of this, if we want to comprehend Literature the best we can, we must use several literary theories in order to fill the holes each theory has. It is useless and childish to blame each one (literary theories) for not being perfect.