Othello depends on his identity as a soldier to glorify himself in the public’s memory,

No longer having a means of proving his manhood or honor in a public setting such as the court or the battlefield, Othello begins to feel uneasy with his footing in a private setting, the bedroom. Iago capitalizes on this uneasiness, calling Othello’s epileptic fit in Act IV, scene i, “[a] passion most unsuiting such a man.”

Once the Turks are drowned—by natural rather than military might

While Desdemona is used to better “accommodation,” she nevertheless accompanies her husband to Cyprus (I.iii.236)

The characters cannot be islands, the play seems to say: self-isolation as an act of self-preservation leads ultimately to self-destruction. Such self-isolation leads to the deaths of Roderigo, Iago, Othello, and even Emilia.

Cyprus faces little threat from external forces. Once Othello, Iago, Desdemona, Emilia, and Roderigo have come to Cyprus, they have nothing to do but prey upon one another

The object poisons sight. / Let it be hid” (V.ii.373–375). The action of the play depends heavily on characters not seeing things:

Desdemona: she has the power to see him for what he is in a way that even Othello himself cannot.

The imagery of the monstrous and diabolical takes over where the imagery of animals can go no further, presenting the jealousy-crazed characters not simply as brutish, but as grotesque, deformed, and demonic.

Assessment criteria

Whoever compounds any like it or whoever puts any of it on an outsider shall be cut off from his people.’” The Lord said to Moses, “Take sweet spices, stacte, and onycha, and galbanum, sweet spices with pure frankincense (of each shall there be an equal part), and make an incense blended as by the perfumer, seasoned with salt, pure and holy. You shall beat some of it very small, and put part of it before the testimony in the tent of meeting where I shall meet with you. It shall be most holy for you. And the incense that you shall make according to its composition, you shall not make for yourselves. It shall be for you holy to the Lord.

But thanks be to God, who in Christ always leads us in triumphal procession, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things? For we are not, like so many, peddlers of God's word, but as men of sincerity, as commissioned by God, in the sight of God we speak in Christ.

The poem effectively fluctuates between the color white's symbolism of calm and the intruding tulip's red representation of business. However, these two themes soon collide.

The product may need to subsequently be isolated from the host and purified in order to generate sufficient yield

To circumvent the potential ambiguity between metanarration and metafiction, she employs the term metanarrative exclusively with regard to self-reflexive statements referring to the discourse and its constructedness and limits the term metafiction to self-reflexive utterances about the inventedness of the story (i.e. to Wolf’s explicit metafiction). By introducing the category of non-narrational self-reflexivity (i.e. Wolf’s implicit metafiction), which comprises, e.g. mise-en-abyme or metaleptic plot configurations,

These functions range from authenticating and empathy-inducing functions (→ Narrative Empathy), which are fully compatible with mimetic aesthetic illusion, to parodic and anti-illusionistic types of metanarrative interventions.

This differentiation is based on the assumption that an accumulation of metanarrative commentaries contributes to foregrounding the narrative act and to creating the illusion of being addressed by a personalized voice or a “teller” (Fludernik 1996: 278). As in Tristram Shandy, the plethora of metanarrative often enhances the “mimesis of narrating” (Nünning 2001).

Metanarrative reflections can be restricted to auto-referential comments on the narrator’s own act of narrating, they can thematize the narrative style of other authors and texts, or they can refer to the process of narration in general.

Firstly, the term metafiction is so widely used in English for all sorts of anti-illusionistic techniques that forms of metanarration are generally subsumed under this umbrella.

The first dimension refers to the level of narration on which the speaker engaged in metafictional reflections can be situated. Metafictional comments can be explicitly uttered by a character of the narrated world or by the narrator when reflecting on the fictional nature of the text (mode of telling). Alternatively, they can be conveyed implicitly through formal means, e.g. through contradictory and highly implausible elements which disrupt the mimetic illusion (mode of showing). According to the second criterion, contextual relation, various forms of metafiction can be distinguished depending on whether they appear in a central or marginal position and how deeply they are entangled with the narrated story. Using Wolf’s third criterion, contents value, one can differentiate between various forms of explicit metafiction depending on whether metafiction refers to the “fictio or the fictum status” of a passage, whether it contains comments on the entire text or only on parts of it, and whether the commentary refers to the text itself, to literature in general, or to another text.

Metafiction describes the capacity of fiction to reflect on its own status as fiction and thus refers to all self-reflexive utterances which thematize the fictionality (in the sense of imaginary reference and/or constructedness) of narrative.

In contrast to metafiction, which can only appear in the context of fiction, types of metanarration can also be found in many non-fictional narrative genres and media. Metanarrative passages need not destroy aesthetic illusion

Since such self-reflexive comments can be defined according to their reference to the act of narration, they make the reader (→ Reader) realize that what s/he is dealing with is a narrative.

all comments which address aspects of narration in a self-reflexive manner as well as the narrator’s references (→ Narrator) to his or her communication with the narratee on the discourse level can be subsumed under the term “metanarration.”

The functions of metafiction range from undermining aesthetic illusion to poetological self-reflection, commenting on aesthetic procedures, the celebration of the act of narrating, and playful exploration of the possibilities and limits of fiction.