Exploring Character Dichotomy in Anna Todd's After Good Versus Bad
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30996/uncollcs.v3i1.4675Abstract
This research explores the dichotomy of characters in Anna Todd’s After through the lens of binary opposition as proposed by Lois Tyson and the deconstruction approach by Jacques Derrida. The study focuses on the clear demarcation between good and bad characters, epitomized by Tessa Young and Hardin Scott, respectively. Using Tyson’s framework, the binary oppositions within the narrative are identified and analyzed, revealing how these oppositions structure the reader’s understanding of the characters. Derrida’s deconstruction theory is then applied to challenge and destabilize these fixed oppositions, offering a nuanced interpretation of the characters’ complexities. The findings indicate that while Tessa Young is predominantly portrayed as the embodiment of goodness, and Hardin Scott as the epitome of badness, a deeper analysis reveals underlying complexities and contradictions in their characterizations. This study contributes to a richer understanding of character development and thematic depth in contemporary literature. However, through the application of Derrida's deconstruction, the research concludes that these binary oppositions are not absolute. The complex interplay between Tessa and Hardin challenges the rigidity of their characterizations, demonstrating that the boundaries between “good” and “bad” are fluid and subject to reinterpretation.
Keywords: after, binary opposition, deconstruction, dichotomy, good and bad.
References
Aprilia, C., & Arianto, T. (2021). Binary Oppositions as the Result of Deconstruction Analysis in the Goldfinch Novel by Donna Tartt. JURNAL BASIS, 8(1), 65-74.
Aritonang, B. R. H. (2022). Binary Opposition in Fast as The Wind Novel by Nat Gould. Linguistika Kultura: Jurnal Linguistik Sastra Berdimensi Cultural Studies, 11(2), 80-86.
Derrida, J. (1967). Writing and difference (A. Bass, Trans.) London.
Derrida, J. (1978). Jacques Derrida: Writing and Difference. Trans. Alan Bass. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Derrida, J. (1981). Dissemination. Translated by Barbara Johnson. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Forster, E. M. (1927). Aspects of the Novel. Harcourt, Brace & Company.
Icheku, V. (2011). Understanding ethics and ethical decision-making. Xlibris Corporation. United Kingdom: Xlibris Corporation.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Sikirivwa, M. K. (2015). Deconstruction theory and its background. Journal of English Literature and Culture, 3(7), 212.
Silalahi, U. (2018). Metodologi analisis data dan interpretasi hasil untuk penelitian sosial kuantitatif.
Silverman, D. (2013). Doing qualitative research (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. Simpson, R. W. (1982). Good and Bad. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 12(1), 101-117. Tangney, J. P. (1991). Moral affect: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of personality and social psychology, 61(4), 598.
Todd, A. (2014). After (Vol. 1). Simon and Schuster.
Tyson, L. (2006). Critical theory today: A user-friendly guide. New York: Routledge.
Wang, R., & Tian, Y. (2016). Between Good and Evil: Deconstructive Interpretation of “Noon Wine.” English Language Teaching, 9(11), 80-84.
Yankah, E. N. (2003). Good guys and bad guys: Punishing character, equality and the irrelevance of moral character to criminal punishment. Cardozo L. Rev., 25, 1019.
Yulita, M. Y. (2022). Personality Analysis of The Main Characters in Tere Liye's Novel Pulang, Through Literature Psychology Approach. Jurnal Riset Ilmu Pendidikan, 2(4), 290-295.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Mutiara Stefani Putri Weking, Tri Pramesti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
