Review of Related Studies
of wine-making and party. This finding is motivated by the parallel characteristics of the two Gods to those of
Summer and Smoke’s characters. As Pryor puts it,
Dionysus, the god of the irrational and lack of control a person who is Dionesiac in the extreme is insane, since the rational has no part in the
definition of the Dionesiac, symbolizes emotions, spontaneity, and inebriation, but also creativity. Apollo, the sun god, personifies logic,
order, precision, conscious planning, and indirect rather than direct experience. Apollonian tend to be judges and lawyers, and in the extreme
can be cruelly inhuman and rigid Pryor, 26 August 2014.
Therefore, John who is depicted as the cavalier hedonistic character indeed resembles Dionysus whose tendency is to act based on his impulse and thus
spontaneity. Meanwhile, Alma who is a very disciplined and high-strung spinster indeed shares the same qualities of Apollo since he is noted as one with “inhuman
and rigid” tendency.
In his further elaboration, Pryor also notes the contrast opposition between the two characters in t
he play as he refers to Alma‟s, “…self-conscious mannerisms and excessiv
e propriety” which is in contrast with “the carefree, uninhibited John” Pryor, 26 August 2014.
Other than pointing out the parallelism between the two Greek Gods and the two characters and the distinction between the two characters, Pryor also
introduces writer with three symbols used in the play, i.e. smoke and water lily in Chinese Lagoon. He states that sm
oke is “a sign of death, of the soul leaving the body”, while in his exposition on water lily in Chinese lagoon he notes that “this
image of this flower carries with it a reference to interior activity and to self- realization”, however, in the end of the play, it “can also refer to transmigration of
soul” as Alma experiences a metamorphosis from Apollonian to Dionesiac self Pryor, 26 August 2014.
The difference from the previous studies is that the three previous studies and this study apply different approach in analyzing the drama text. While the first
study uses psychological approach based on Sigmund Freud‟s theory and the second applies formalistic theory while the third paper uses comparative strategy
in its exposition, this study will apply structuralism theory. While there are many theories included in structuralism, this study will focus on one particular theory,
i.e. Saussurian binary opposition. The reason for applying this theory of Saussure‟s is since this study is aimed at revealing the narrative structure of
Summer and Smoke, as writer believes, is constructed based on binary opposition.
Other than a difference, the two previous studies and this study also have a similarity other than the apparent fact that these three studies have Tennessee
William‟s Summer and Smoke as their object of study. The similarity is in the very same steps applied in these three studies as they will start with the
characters‟ identification and analysis in attaining the primary end of their studies. Thus, the three aforementioned studies are very useful for this study in terms of
providing more profound and extensive perspectives on character analysis done from different point of view while the third study, Pryor‟s paper, also provides the
three symbols used in the play. What make this study different from the others are then, the writer will analyze the characters through the symbols employed in the
play.
The last review is on a study using binary opposition as its interpretive strategy. The study, t
itled “Binary Oppositions in Paradise Lost: A Structuralist Reading Strategy
”, is one of the journal compiled and written by Guo Chun An. In his study, he tells that
In the reading process, it is common for the reader to think in binary terms, spot fundamental binary oppositions in a particular text, integrate them to
form a framework, and decipher the meaning of the text suggested by such a structural system Chun An, 1995: 59.
In his findings, Chun An identifies two major binary oppositions, i.e. first is between God and Satan and second is between Adam and Eve and thus he
correlates the two binary oppositions into parallelism. In the first binary opposition between God and Satan, Chun An points out the distinct nature of the
two entities in which God is benevolent and kind, Satan is malevolent and evil. Therefore, the two are opposites of each other because of their palpably distinctive
nature. In his further elaboration on this first opposition, Chun An also introduces many other significant polarities generated from this foremost binary opposition,
such as goodevil, heavenhell, light darkness, reason irrationality and lovehate Chun An, 1995: 64.
In the second binary opposition of Adam and Eve, Chun An argues that this binary opposition is “the extended political arena of Satans treason against
Gods order” 1995: 64. By this, he notes that while Adam represents God, Eve becomes the manifestation of Satan itself. This argument lies in the main fact that
in “Paradise Lost”, Adam is created in God‟s image while Eve is created from
Adam‟s rib and Adam‟s image of God. Thus, while Adam is the copy of God, Eve
is only the “copy of the copy” emphasizing Eve‟s farther disparity towards God‟s image Chun An, 1995: 73.
In his attempt to draw a conclusion from his study, Chun An makes correlation between the first binary opposition to the second. He notes the
interrelation of the first and the second binary opposition which makes it easier for reader to keep trac
t of “the epic subject matter”. He points out Eve‟s qualities resembling those of Satan‟s, i.e. darkness, evil, sin, narcissist obsession,
corruption and transgression Chun An, 1995:73. With this parallelism, he explains that it is because of the similar qualities between Eve and Satan share
that “Adam labels Eve as a repugnant serpent”. That is because once God transforms Satan into a hissing snake. He further exposes that it is not a
coincidence that Eve plays the role of Satan that brings Adam into his first sin. That is because Eve indeed is the representative of Satan Chun An, 1995: 73.
From this last study, a reading strategy by the use of a binary opposition is revealed. It is clear from this study that the discovery of binary opposition within
a literary work brings significant attribution of meaning in the text. Not only that, by finding binary opposition which acts as the underlying framework of a text, it
is easier for reader to account for possible arguments and points or to validate a theme
or as he puts it “master concept” of a work. That‟s why finding binary opposition in a literary work as its underlying framework becomes one of the
most practical interpretive strategy.