Both Harold Pinter and Tennessee Williams depict vivid and intimidating oppositions in their characters Stanley Kowalski, Goldberg, and McCann. The oppositions in both A Streetcar Named Desire and The Birthday Party strive to assert their power over their victims, Blanche DuBois and Stanley Webber, through the emergence of their past into the present, represented in the plays. In A Streetcar Named Desire, greater knowledge of Blanche's past inflicted on her by Stanley K creates a lucid depiction of Blanche's inherent torment. On the other hand, Pinter provides no better insight into Stanley W's character from the interrogation of Goldberg and McCann, and instead creates ambiguity as to who Stanley W and the oppositions actually are. This confusion of identity, present in both plays, becomes clearer in Streetcar Named Desire through Stanley K's investigation, despite Stanley possessing increasingly direct language than Blanche, while Goldberg and McCann create more uncertainty in their heavy use of language. to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The oppositions in both The Birthday Party and A Streetcar Named Desire represent order, society, and justice, oppressing those who stray from social progress. Despite this similarity, Williams describes Stanley K as the leader of his cause, while Goldberg and McCann clearly serve a higher order. When Stanley K first meets Blanche, he asserts his “territory” (p.14), which illustrates him as primal and possessive, reluctant to give way to Blanche or compromise his power. Williams describes Stanley's exclusive leadership by presenting himself as the voice of Justice, representing “the Napoleonic code” (p.18), through which he gains possession of what is Blanche's or Stella's. This implies that Stanley believes his way of life is correct, but this superiority results in Blanche's oppression. Stella reflects on the consequences that Stanley's power has on Blanche, as she accuses him of having "abused [Blanche], and forced her to change" (p.81). In A Streetcar Named Desire it is clear that this oppression stems directly from Stanley's desperation for power and leadership, while in The Birthday Party, Stanley W's abuse appears to be the result of higher orders. This is revealed when Goldberg refers to Stanley W's interrogation as a "job" (p.29), where Stanley is the "subject" (p.30). This language is more distant and official, suggesting that Stanley, the “subject,” is just one of many victims. Pinter describes the existence of a powerful and oppressive state or group, as McCann states that Stanley "betrayed the organization" (p.48). The audience also gains a greater understanding of the size and power of this “organization,” defined by Goldberg as “our race” (p.52), suggesting that it potentially controls the entire society. This language also implies a superiority, which reflects that of the Nazis, where the quality of “race” is of the utmost importance. Those who do not contribute to this are discriminated against, removed from society. Both opposition groups see their way of life as relevant and correct and anyone who does not contribute to this as useless, to be changed or eradicated. Thus, both Stanley K and Goldberg and McCann reflect 1950s societies that do not admit difference, with their victims helpless and vulnerable to the change that leaves them behind. By suggesting that Goldberg and McCann are hitmen for a larger institution, Pinter potentially expresses hypocrisy inpost-war state that echoes the Nazi-fascist qualities that Britain fought against during the war. Yet Pinter shows attempts to disguise this, as the oppressors in The Birthday Party are traditionally the oppressed, the Jewish Goldbergs and the Irish McCanns. Perhaps with this Pinter is in fact alluding to the greatest terror of the State which is above Goldberg and McCann, the fear of forcing the oppressed to violence. On the other hand, while Stanley appears to act alone and is the epitome of masculinity, racial diversity, and realism, Williams instead reflects on the people-driven power that replaces the tradition that kept Blanche safe. There is also a contrast between the quality and quantity of language used by the oppositions in both plays. In A Streetcar Named Desire, Stanley K controls the plot with a simple but brutally forceful speech, even though Blanche has many extended and dramatic speeches. Compared to Blanche's exaggerated diatribes, Stanley K speaks with a direct aggression, derived from investigations “coming from the most reliable sources”. Williams structures Stanley's assault on Blanche; the clarity in stating “lie number one” gives greater emphasis to the truth he uses to bring Blanche down. Like the effect of the chaotic verbal assault in The Birthday Party, the direct truth behind Blanche's lies expressed by Stanley K reduces Blanche and her speech only to painful exclamations: “Stanley: Actually there were no wires at all! Bianca: Oh, oh! Stanley: There is no millionaire! And Mitch didn't come back with the roses because I know where he is – Blanche: Oh! Stanley: There is nothing damned but imagination! Blanche: Oh! In The Birthday Party, however, Stanley W loses the ability to speak due to the abundant and absurd speeches of Goldberg and McCann. Pinter's oppositions bombard Stanley with completely invented notions about him, these overwhelming Stanley, his speech and ability to process information gained from confusion. Unlike A Streetcar Named Desire, where Blanche still tries to protect herself after Stanley K's interrogation, Stanley W is soon completely defeated. His speech soon fades after this verbal onslaught of gibberish: “Stanley: Which wife? Goldberg: What did you do with your wife? McCann: He killed his wife! Goldberg: Why did you kill your wife? Stanley: Which wife? McCann: How did he kill her? Goldberg: How did you kill her? McCann: He choked her. Goldberg: With arsenic.” This is similar to the discourse between opposition and victim in A Streetcar Named Desire, but Stanley W is destroyed by the absurdity of Goldberg and McCann's attack, rather than the truth that ruins Blanche. Therefore, it is clear that each playwright illustrates the power of opposing forces in rendering their victims defenseless. Williams focuses on the cruelty and power of truth in the face of Blanche's imagination and fantasy, while Pinter shows the deep desperation of knowing nothing in Stanley's confusion and collapse due to Goldberg and McCann's chaotic and absurd questions. Blanche's background in Stanley K's interrogation makes the reader feel a greater understanding of both of them intrinsically, but with Goldberg and McCann, despite their vocal presence and pursuit, the audience doesn't understand who they are. Williams exposes insight into Blanche's character through Stanley's discoveries about her, but also through Blanche's behavior when she is around different people. When he is alone, the audience becomes aware of his childlike innocence, when with Mitch, his past and why he hides from it are exposed, and when with Stanley K, the audience perceives the facade he puts on to protect himself. Ultimately, as Blanche is further destroyedfrom Stanley K's interrogation of the plot progression, his inner torment is further revealed. By comparison, there is no better take on the Stanley W character than Goldberg and McCann's pursuit in The Birthday Party. They only create more confusion about who Stanley is and what his past contains. Through this, Pinter encourages a more traumatizing evaluation of Stanley, the audience's fear increases because he could have potentially done something horrible or nothing at all. Yet Stanley's sense of fear at the beginning shows his inability to deal with change or in fact suggests that he is actually running away from something: “they won't come. Someone is taking the Michael. It's a false alarm. A false alarm." As a result, Pinter suggests the individual's inability to even trust himself, along with the sense of threat triggered by something new or different. Oppositions also do not reveal anything about themselves during the interrogation, even their names are uncertain, Goldberg is Nat, “Simey” and “Benny”. The validity of Goldberg's stereotypically Jewish past is also questionable, as he uses the same description : “'Simey!' My old mother would shout, "Hurry before it gets cold." And there on the table what would I see? The best piece of gefilte fish you could wish to find on a plate" - for his wife, just replacing the food item with a different one, typically Jewish. This unrealistic repetition implies a sense of forced character within Goldberg, leaving the audience with no knowledge of who he really is, let alone the ability to trust him of the opposition, Stanley K, through his interrogation of Blanche. It is mainly an insecurity related to the lack of identity, which is also briefly glimpsed in the character of Goldberg Stanley K struggles with his lack of knowledge of Blanche's past , and also with how Blanche's presence unbalances his powerful identity, as he sees her as a threat to his way of life. As a result, he is depicted as desperately accumulating "evidence" to create the Blanche he appears weaker than him, strengthening his identity as a powerful man. Pinter also conveys that Goldberg is affected by the loss of identity, which becomes evident when he is portrayed as a victim of his own verbal assault. In his nonsensical speeches, taking phrases from songs, the Bible and World War I propaganda, he becomes uncertain about who he really is, emerging "(vacant), (desperate), (lost)". Pinter gives the impression that Goldberg has cobbled together a personality from all these fragments of society, but gets lost within them. Perhaps he is revealing a brief disillusionment in being just one of many, serving the state, individually insignificant. It's in this momentary breakdown that the audience is able to glimpse a small part of Goldberg's character, and that's him not sure who. it is. It is through this paradox that Pinter highlights our inability to know anything. Therefore it is clear that as oppositions, both Stanley K and Goldberg have power over other characters but struggle to maintain it over themselves. This lack of individuality is perhaps also shown in Goldberg's sentimentality. While he's not sure any of this is true, Goldberg finds comfort in remembering a time before he worked the way he does now. Through this and both Goldberg and McCann represent stereotypical figures, in religion and origin, who both embody tradition, in contrast to Stanley K. Stanley is the epitome of change in America, representing the diversity of New Orleans. Compared to Blanche's traditional way of living as beautiful.