personal traits. The circumstance wherein the doer does the action also needs to be considered 1973:53. In morality, some things are also good in nature in the sense
that they are based on natural human needs to be healthy and survive. Hence, some naturally good deeds include sleeping, eating, drinking, and preserving one’s
health, while some naturally evil things include pain, injury, and death. Morality focuses on the rightness or wrongness of the reason behind one’s action.
Related to moral and morality, an example is as follow. We are taught not to tell lies; that lies are not good. This is referred as moral, our guideline to choose an
act. Since lying is not morally good, we are expected not to do it. When we decide not to lie, we have our reason—the morality conscience, which can be either right
or wrong, good or bad. When dealing with morality conscience, some things need to be consider, as
stated by Gonsalves 1986:55. Firstly, that morality conscience does not deal with theoretical questions of right or wrong in general, but with the practical question,
which can be situational. For example, it is not “Why is lying wrong”, but “If I do the thing I am thinking, will I be lying?”
Titus and Keeton add another aspect of morality, the society. It is to say that moral is related closely to society. “An act that is right enriches and strengthens the
life of the group. An act that is wrong is one that has proved to be socially harmful or less beneficial than its alternatives” 1973:93. Thus, morality refers to a
judgment about an individual as a human being.
3. Relation between Literature and Moral
Literary works are related to the real world. The characters in a literary work represent those in the real world, and thus, their actions are also a representation of
human’s deeds in the real life. This way, literature contains moral teachings which can be derived from the actions of the characters and the effects of their actions on
themselves and the society. This is in line with what is stated by Guerin in his book, A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature, that the function of literature is
to teach morality and to probe philosophical issues 1979:29. As a means to teach morality, literary works give an illustration and teachings
about the rightness and wrongness of actions engaged by the characters along the storyline, as elaborated by Gardner in On Moral Fiction, that literature as an art is
essentially and primarily moral that is life-giving moral in its process of creation and moral in what it says 1978:15.
4. Theory of Alienation
David Karp and William C. Yoels said that everyone has their own role- taking in attempting a successful communication in everyday life. A person, in
order to establish proper understanding between himself and the society, needs to build a sufficient role-taking, as quoted below:
The process through which we act in awareness of others and continually adjust our own behaviors in accordance with the way they are acting depends
on our distinctively human ability to role-take. In order to infer correctly the intentions, motives, and goals of others, and therefore to predict their future
behaviors, we must put ourselves in their place and attempt to view situation as they do 1986:61.
Failing to act proper role-taking in society may cause someone to live in a sense of being alienated.
Alienation is formerly defined as merely a work-related phenomenon, as described by Mandel and Novack:
The cause of existing alienation are rooted in capitalism which was born and bred in the dispossession of the working masses from the means of production
and the consequent alienation of wage labor 1970:7.
However, this concept has developed into a broader connotation. Alienation is not only the gap between man’s existence and the result of this existence, instead, it is
the issue which includes the feeling of loneliness and isolation, frustration, and lack of satisfaction in life Karp and Yoels, 1986:286.
Melvin Seeman, in addition, defines alienation as the gap between personal expectations and rewards in modern society context. He also measures the degrees
of alienation can possibly be undergone by certain individual as powerlessness, meaningless, normlessness, social isolation, cultural isolation, and self-isolation
1959:783. a.
Adolescent Alienation Ralph Turner argues that young person is connoted to a “nonperson status”—
they have the power to new freedom and expectations, yet are burdened by the fact that this capability can hardly be recognized by the entire society qtd.in Karp and
Yoels, 1986:286. Hence, teenagers may feel anxious about their social skills and physical appearance and thus, can be isolated from their own identity, parents,
teachers, and peer groups. Although the sense of adolescent alienation is a common
part of human development, it can designate psychological and pathological problems to concern.
b. Parental Alienation DR. Richard A. Warshak in his journal entitled “What is Parental
Alienation?” 2013 defines the term as the state of a child being alienated from a parent. This is a common effect of divorce to the children. Divorced couples—
although not necessarily all—have a tendency of alienating the children from the “leaving” parent. Hence, it is not only the time apart which separates the children
from one parent who is leaving the house after divorce, but also the shared thoughts of the “staying” parent toward the “leaving” one.
Children undergoing the sense of parental alienation, according to Edward Kruk, Ph. D in “The Impact of Parental Alienation on Children” 2013 can be
alienated from either one or both parents, although most of them tend to have a sense of rejection toward the targeted parent.
This kind of post-divorce phenomenon is coined in http:www.healthline.com as parental alienation—the post-divorce effect where
one of the divorcees start to be more dominant than another and commonly attempt to influence the children to hate the previous partner. It causes the “staying” parent
to have the tendency of alienating the child from the “leaving” parent. This isolating attempt can be done by separating the child from the “leaving” parent physically—
doesn’t give any permission for the child to meet the parent, living at the place far from the “leaving” parent, or by alienating the child from the “leaving” parent by
telling negative thoughts about the person. It is also stated that broken-home
