How may one define ‘the other’? It is an exceptionally vague term. Does it refer to race, gender, nationality, religious views, clothing style, hair colour? The answer is quiet simple; it is what we don’t know. The ‘other’ way of behaving, living, feeling and dressing- just to name a few. In the today’s modern world the pressure to conform is at its highest yet. One is constantly bombarded by media portrayals of what is ‘correct’ and ‘accepted’. (However, the last time I checked having twelve abs is not correct- but that is just my opinion.) The mere idea of straying outside these social rules of appearance and behaviour results in condemnation; think of the endless amounts of trash tabloids that line the newspaper stand recanting tales of some ‘celebrity’ who dared to gain weight or, God forbid, wear an unsuitable outfit. Therefore it is apparent, not just in today’s society, the fear and resentment of being ‘the other’. It is an exceptionally broad term; it does not just refer to one’s social standing, but also the way one is viewed by different groups. ‘The other’ side of one’s personality for example. In the three texts I have studied, Titus Andronicus [TA] by William Shakespeare, Iphigenia at Aulis [IAA] by Euripides and The Tragedy of Mariam [TOM] by Elizabeth Cary I shall study and review the attitudes presented towards ‘the other’, the outsiders and those considered to be different.
The most obvious cause of being cast as an outsider is nationality. In TA we see signs of prejudice towards The Goths because they are of different race. Likewise towards Aron the Moor because of his skin colour. This parallels with the subtle references to Silleus’ outsider qualities in TOM. As Silleus is Arabic as opposed to Judean, he too is considered different. During the fight scene (2:4) Constabarus warns him not to “disgrace... our sacred laws” or to “deprave... our nation.”[1]Personally, I feel that Constabarus is not using the possessive adjective ‘our’ in order to...