Death And The Maiden Characters

This sample essay on Death And The Maiden Characters provides important aspects of the issue and arguments for and against as well as the needed facts. Read on this essay’s introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.

The character of Gerardo Escobar plays a very significant role in Ariel Dorfman’s play “Death and the Maiden”, as he alone stands as the representative of irresoluteness and indecisiveness within the play’s theme of impunity. His wife Paulina, having been physically abused and raped many years ago, is now convinced that a recent visitor by the name of Roberto Miranda is the culprit behind her scarring episode.

The remainder of the play is spent with these same three characters engaged in a seemingly futile debate over the Doctor’s fate. Gerardo Escobar’s quavering opinion throughout all of this raises the question of whether he is in effect a good husband. In order to answer this question, we must first analyze the character’s personality as a whole.

The character of Gerardo is a character that, overall, has a very moralistic outlook on the situation at hand. He strongly believes that his newly found justice commission will right the wrongs of the previous dictatorship; subsequently, he himself feels the need to play the role of a mediator, and feels compelled to convince Paulina to avoid the temptation of immediate retribution: “Yes. If he’s guilty, more reason to set him free…Imagine what would happen if everyone acted like you did. You satisfy your own personal passion” p.

Get quality help now

Bella Hamilton

Verified

Proficient in: Character

5 (234)

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

26.

Gerardo’s new justice commission only has the jurisdiction to investigate and solve crimes where the victim has died or gone missing. This strongly reflects onto the current situation at hand; Paulina is a victim who has lived through the crime, and similar to his justice commission, Gerardo cannot offer any real help to Paulina’s efforts to convict Dr. Miranda. When commenting on the limits of his newly founded justice commission:

What Does Gerardo Mean

Paulina: Find out what happened. Find out everything. Promise me that you’ll find everything that…

Gerardo: Everything. Everything we can. We’ll go as far as we…As we’re…

Paulina: Allowed.

Gerardo: Limited, let’s say we’re limited. (p. 6)

These few lines foreshadow the limited amount of power and lack of ability to make decisions that Gerardo will pertain throughout the remainder of the play. Though the character of Gerardo may consider himself to be carrying out the most morally correct actions towards ending the conflict, it is, as with most if not all moral debates, for the reader to decide. The same applies to the question of whether Gerardo is a good husband or not. On one hand, he is, debatably, pertaining to the most humane and moral judgment – to bring justice to this man through means of a fair and unbiased justice system. But on the other hand, one could consider his feelings of “morality” as nothing more than a hesitation to take any action against this criminal.

This fact leads the reader to believe that the character of Gerardo is indeed a weak man, and consequently not a good husband. One could even go so far as saying that Gerardo is as weak a man as Dr. Miranda himself; he would rather believe Dr. Miranda – a person he had met merely a day ago – than believe his wife, to whom he had been married for many years. When talking to Dr. Miranda about a plan to free him from captivity, Gerardo discredits his wife: “No she isn’t [part of the commission], who gives a fuck what she thinks” p. 34. He even goes so far as to try to deceive his wife by suggesting to Roberto that he make up a story which coincides with Paulina’s claims just to appease to her demands: “Humor her, placate her, so he feels that we – that you, are willing to cooperate…Indulge her, make her believe that you [have confessed]” p. 31.

Gerardo’s correction of his referral to Roberto as “we” only strengthens this idea that he clearly does not believe in his wife’s judgments. Ultimately however, Gerardo’s greatest display of his weakness is in his lack of ability to be decisive. Essentially, by believing Paulina, it would mean that Gerardo would actually have to take action in the affair. Gerardo could be described as a cunctator, as he attempts to rationalize his wife’s strong convictions so that it has as little to do with his personal life, and his public facade as possible.

With this in mind, a character comparable to Gerardo would be the character of Hamlet, whose character is constantly at turmoil within himself as whether to believe the ghost of his father (possibly comparable to Paulina) or to choose the less extreme path and avoid the justified retribution (possibly comparable to Roberto). Gerardo cannot accept the evident truth: if Roberto is indeed guilty, then he has little chance of dissuading Paulina from killing him, and by kidnapping him they have compromised any potential legal case against him; either way, it would seem as though they must kill him to save their own lives, however Gerardo is not strong enough to accept this. Overall, Roberto’s final confession does not manifest from Gerardo’s vacillations; it is Paulina’s decisive actions which bring justice to the criminal.

The final reason why I would consider the character of Gerardo as being a bad husband is because of his seemingly condescending nature towards his wife, Paulina. At the start of the play, Gerardo asks whether Paulina approves of him being appointed as leader of the newly founded justice commission:

Gerardo: I haven’t decided yet if I should…

Paulina: You’ve decided.

Gerardo: I said I’d answer tomorrow, that I felt extremely honored but that I needed…time to think it over…first you have to say yes.

Throughout these several lines, Paulina is obviously suspicious as to why Gerardo would postpone the President’s request simply to ask for his wife’s approval: “You’ve already made your decision, Gerardo, you know you have…why pretend that [you need my approval]” p. 4. Gerardo’s condescending nature becomes clear when merely three pages later, we learn that he has in fact agreed to the President’s request without Paulina’s approval: “Yes. I told him I’d do it. Yes. Before asking you” p. 7. From this episode we learn that Gerardo openly pretends to acknowledge Paulina as a significant determinant of his decisions, when even his own wife can perceive that she is not. Another instance of Gerardo’s condescending tone towards Paulina is when he discovers that Roberto is being held as a hostage.

Paulina attempts to explain the reasons why she believes that this man is guilty, however Gerardo simply dismisses her clarifications by replying: “You’re sick” p. 16. Moments later, when requesting that Paulina surrender her gun to him, Gerardo speaks down to her as though speaking to a child: “…give me that gun…While you point it at me, there is no possible dialogue” p. 16. Soon after, Paulina comments on her husband’s over-controlling and patronizing treatment of her: “When are you going to stop telling me what I can and can’t do. ‘You can’t do this, you can do that, you can’t do this’” p. 17. This depicts that, even outside of this peculiar episode, Gerardo is still quite overbearing as a husband, and that despite Paulina’s scarring experience being many years ago, Gerardo still treats her as if she cannot treat herself.

Overall, it is disputable whether or not the character of Gerardo is a respectable husband, as we the audience never truly witness the relationship between the couple outside of these bizarre circumstances. Nonetheless, we do ascertain from these events that Gerardo does not truly hold much faith or confidence in his wife, which illustrates that their matrimony cannot claim much merit to itself.