Group items tagged

Argument: The meaning of the word equal within Orwell's two texts allow different readings due to the exploitable ambiguities of its meaning Claim: If "equal" can mean something desirable and good, it can also in a primary sense mean no more than "identical" or "same." Evidence: "The concept of political equality no longer existed, and this secondary meaning had accordingly been purged out of the word equal.(6)" "Whereby "equal" starts to lose its libertarian meaning and comes to mean no more than "identical." The term "equal" may, at the beginning of Animal Farm, hold its revolutionary connotation intact, but by the end of the book it carries a drastically reduced and sinister meaning."

Argument: The article was proving that Farewell to Arms is a tragedy. It was not written with the same structure of a traditional tragedy, so it has been argued on weather or not it is. The critic claims that the novel is because of Catherine's death. Others say that her death was pointless and uncalled for, but the critic points out that her death was part of the tragic plot. Hemingway constructs a unique relationship between Catherine and Frederic so you have sympathy toward them so he can create a tragic emotion in the end. Evidence: "Hemingway has fashioned a new form of tragedy in which the hero acts not mistakenly but supremely well, and suffers a doom which is not directly caused by his actions at all. The belief that life is a tragedy, lip itself, has become the backbone for a new literary structure." (Merrill). "…in A Farewell to Arms, as in any tragic work, we are made to feel that the hero's doom is inevitable. If the reader doubts that Hemingway has achieved this sense of tragic inevitability, let him consider whether the book could have ended with the lovers' escape to Switzerland rather than Catherine's death." (Merrill). Thoughts: Hemingway created a different style that no one had ever tried before making it open for argument. Merrill provides the reader with a detailed background and analysis of A Farewell to Arms, which supports and proves his claim to be right. He gives insight into who Hemingway was, and why he wrote the novel in a nontraditional manner. By proving his understanding of the novel I was able to see connections to what he was saying and what happened in the story. I think that because his analysis was so in depth it was hard to find a way to disagree.

Literary Analysis #2 Argument: In his work analysis, Kellman argues about the difficulties that Indian/East Indian immigrants face in the course of their American lives. Most of the characters in Lahiri's novel were either born in the United States or immigrated at a young age. Kellman argues that through the transition, these characters have lost their Bengali roots. Kellman critiques the thoughts and actions between the main characters and their familes who have retained a strong hold on their Bengali roots and ideals. He depicts the clash of cultures and how Lahiri's charcters struggle to thrive in "Unaccustomed Earth." Evidence: "If her Indians are everywhere, they are at home nowhere"(Kellman). "Lahiri's characters strike their roots in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Washington State, corners of the earth unaccustomed to Bengalis. However, the transplantation does not produce the vigor Hawthorne expects in relocated tubers. Most of the characters in these pensive stories are transplants who never find a soil in which to thrive" (Kellman). "Her characters belong to generation 1.5; children of immigrants, they were either born in the United States or arrived too young to have formed an Indian identity" (Kellman). "Though dragged along on family visits to Calcutta, they lack an appetite for Indian foods, languages, and spouses" (Kellman). "For Lahiri's characters, the tension between Old World and New World identities is often embodied in the generation gap between parents who look back to India for models of behavior and of thought and of children who strive, however futilely, to pass for unhyphenated Americans" (Kellman). "Nevertheless, even those children who manage to attain worldly success are haunted by a sense of loss"(Kellman). "However, the problem for Lahiri's characters is only in part an unbridgeable chasm between cultures. She depicts a world in which to be human is to fail" (Kellman). Thoughts: Kellman present

Purpose: The primary literary critiques that the authors target is: the setting of the novel, the characteristics of Lennie and George, followed by multiple themes of the book. The story Of Mice and Men takes place in a town called "Soledad" which translated into English means solitude or loneliness. The setting is quite clever considering that all but two characters in the novel face a lifestyle of solitude; ironically, the two that don't suffer loneliness are the main subjects of the story. Lennie and George represent a committed companionship, which in many ways, complete and compliment one another. According to Howard Levant, "The good life is impossible because humanity is flawed" however throughout the entire novel the strong duo, Lennie and George, express a high level of dedication to reach their ultimate goal, which leads to the theme of the story, commitment. Evidence: "One of the themes of Of Mice and Men is that men fear loneliness, that they need someone to be with and to talk to who will offer understanding and companionship."(Pizer) "The dream of the farm merely symbolizes their deep mutual commitment, a commitment that is immediately sensed by the other characters in the novel."(Owens) "Lennie has been seen as representing "the frail nature of primeval innocence" and as the id to George's ego or the body to George's brain."(Owens) ""Ain't many guys travel around together.... I don't know why. Maybe everybody in the whole damn world is scared of each other." (Steinbeck) Reflection: The evidence is nicely organized along with carefully placed throughout the article. Louis Owens and Harold Bloom used several affective quotes from the novel itself to help support their ideas in response to past criticisms of the book. The authors did not simply claim past criticisms as incorrect however used sufficient evidence to reinforce their own thoughts as true. I did not notice any bias present in the article but only a well-organized analys

Throughout this literary critique, the speaker targets the similarities between Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights with that of a Bulwer-Lytton novel, particularly the romantic setting and the character of Heathcliff. Overall the argument is very logical in the way that the author, Donald Stone, describes and portrays each of his points. The structure is set up to be more of a description of Wuthering Heights in its entirety; primarily the depiction of Heathcliff as "satanic and anarchic" and how he is judged through a moral spectrum. The critique is organized in two large paragraphs, which tend to drag on and makes it very dry to read. This organizational structure can be sort of distracting and in a sense never-ending. Which overall can weaken his argument due to disinterest among the audience. A majority of the evidence that Stone uses throughout his critique are simply just quotes from both of the books. In certain situations the quotes fit in to what he is saying, but they do not justify his argument. Instead the quotes act like "fluff" and are used just to make the point seem more convincing, when in the end its slowly deterring the audience from the actual meaning. Overall, there is not enough evidence to support Stone's argument because he flourishes off of one point and does not bring in any other perspectives. Stone's final conclusion is how Emily Bronte used the same ideas of Bulwer-Lytton, and in the end was the one who came out on top with a classical piece of literature, although the ideas and characteristics were ultimately the same. He claims that Wuthering Heights is "not the great romantic exception among English novels," particularly because he believes the origins were stolen. Throughout his entire argument it is hard to depict any source of bias, that is, until you reach the concluding paragraph. In his concluding paragraph it becomes evident that he holds a certain bias for Bulwer-Lytton. It is apparent that Stone believes Bul

Argument: The character's process of maturing creates the motivating force of the novel. Evidence: Each story has one narrator whom all have an idealized view of the world. All three stories mentioned play on the imagery of darkness. Own Thoughts: Galloway has indeed made an interesting observation from reading Conrad's works. She does a great job staying on topic along with tying the three novels together. Quotes: "These contrasting doubles all "pull" on the narrators; the narrators are either attracted by certain positive qualities or repelled by their double's lack of "moral restraint" or both." "All three stories deal with a process of maturing that involves the loss of youthful illusions, a process usually precipitated by an actual "trial" that challenges the protagonist's professional skills as well as his assumptions about his identity and sanity."

Joseph Heller is seen as a modernistic author, in the sense that he uses a chronological plot that is deliberately irrational. "It is only fitting that a novel which deals with an apparently absurd and confused world should be written in an apparently absurd and confused style." The characters in Catch 22 have a feeling that what is happening to them has happened in the past to others. Catch 22 according to the book follows the idea that "They have a right to anything we can't stop them from doing." There was only one catch: "[it] specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind." However, his second release "Something happened" is "described to [have] created a darkened, demonic, perhaps partly hallucinated fictive portrait of contemporary America." One of his most notable achievements is his ability to connect the reader to the protagonist, simultaneously heightening their own self awareness. Civil Disobedience by Thoreau may not directly connect to this ideology, but in general it touches bases with the idea that one should become aware of the right in society and when faced with "wrong" laws disobey in a civil manner.

Argument: Nancy Boland, as well as I do, believes that each character, in The Heart is a Lonely Hunter, represent something different towards the main character, Singer. She also states that each character suffers something different and they suffer delusion, but each character is different from one another. Nancy also argues, "Segregation, isolation and inclusion are not conditions of the past alone, they are in our present and they will be in our future." Evidence: "They each create a different idol in Singer. For Mick, he is a man who feels similarly about music as she does. For Doctor Copeland, he is the only white man who understands his passion to achieve justice for black people. Blout finds that Singer is just as deeply concerned about socialism as he is and for Biff, he represents all that Biff sees in himself; a quiet, shrewd spectator of the human state." "There is hope. The character of John Singer also reminds us that there are kind, generous people out there, lending an ear to fellow human beings when they are most afraid of going unheard." Thoughts: Before reading this review, I planned on finding out what each character meant in the book and I was having a hard time figuring that out on my own; but after reading this, each character's explanation made more sense, when comparing them to Singer. Boland believes that every person needs to be heard in this world and that everybody should have that one person that they confide in with everything. I think that this statement is both true, and false. I believe that it is true because, for example, I confide in my best friend with all of my secrets and whenever I have a problem, I know that she will always be there when I need her; but then again, I don't tell her every single detail in my life just so I can keep something's to myself. Also, some people aren't that open to others and they don't have somebody that they confide in so they keep everything bottled up. Some people just have different ways of "

Argument: The argument is The Pearl is a realistic book that does not have happy endings or sugar coats the realistic part, its just a fictional story with true meaning to it. In each book he writes he shows a different interpretation on life and how it really was at the time period. Evidence: "Perhaps such a basically fantastic, sentimental story does not warrant such strong condemnation; but The Pearl has been widely used as an introduction to fiction, and it provides the kind of introduction that is a disservice both to its author--who wrote much better, controlled works--and to fiction itself by failing to suggest the tough-minded complexity of the greatest examples of the art." (French). "The story that Steinbeck reports hearing is a perfect, self-contained parable that can be read in a variety of ways--it provides consolation for the unsuccessful, a pat on the back for those who choose freedom over wealth, and a scourging of the guilt of those who have suffered for choosing to serve Mammon." (French) "To stress the symbolic importance of these events, Steinbeck heavy-handedly relates each to one of three songs--of the Family, the Enemy, and the Pearl (capitals Steinbeck's)--that Kino keeps hearing in his head." (French) Thoughts: Like most of Steinbeck's books he shows the true meaning of what life was. I think the best authors are the ones who speak there minds and share there opinions in there books. It beings out the character of them. I believe that French (the author of the article) really described and illustrated the way the book effected people and how john Steinbeck is a realist. Steinbeck explains that each and every problem we face every day comes with its pros and cons. Kino had to make a decision with is daily life. I believe wrong he wasn't able to fulfill his dream bring his family on the right track but he made a run at it and most people at that time it was hard to live the dream you always wanted and Steinbeck made a good poi

Argument: The feministic bildungsroman that establishes itself throughout the novel seems to be contradictory towards the Christian commitments of the young Jane Eyre. It argues that the character St. John symbolized the patriarchal religious system, which was in the end rejected by Jane. Furthermore, this rejection defies the expectations of marriage at the time and symbolizes a more feminist emphasis. Evidence: This point is suggested primarily throughout the closing passage of the novel. The rhetoric of this may seem to be slightly confusing, because it basically challenges the feministic viewpoint that was built in the novel. The final paragraph casts a light over St. John and all of his endeavors throughout the novel, Lamonaca states, "Classic feminist readings have tended to view St. John as one-dimensional patriarchal villain; accordingly, Jane rejects not only her pious cousin, but also the Christian worldview he represents." Further explication in the novel is shown in the rejection of St. John, for "Jane effectively resists Rochester's and St. John's attempts to possess her spirit as well as her body." This further promotes the protagonist's struggle against male control, and a lockdown patriarchal marriage. The contradiction in the closing statements however "leaves open the possibility that Jane, despite her efforts, has failed to reconcile the conflicting demands of domesticity and faith." Thoughts: I think that Charlotte Bronte basically wanted to make a clear cut statement against the patriarchal and male run events in her society. However, as the writing came to a close she didn't want to make it seem as if the novel was meant to be an anti-Christian sentiment. So she was able to subdue the super strong feministic thoughts and instead decided to create a conclusion that makes the patriarchal society still seem to have some notoriety when in reality she may have believed different. The fact that Jane chose to marry out of societyâ€

A thousand Splendid Suns is about women being abused by the men. Many people have read this book but Cheryl Reed saw it as "nearly impossible for a novel a work of fantasy and fabrication to deliver a formidable blow, a pounding of the senses, a reeling so staggering that we are convinced the characters and their dilemmas are genuine" (Reed). The two stories are similar but different at the same time because of the different women and different time periods. Reed goes onto explain that the two stories are about such young women being married off to much older women, while these men have multiple wives. An example of this is would be, "The man who saves her, who digs her from the rubble, is 60ish Rasheed, a shoe salesman, who has a penchant for young girls. His wife, Mariam, was given to him when she was only 15" (Reed). Mariam's mother dies in a hanging and she is married off by her dad. However, they are married to men much older than them and have to deal with the beatings and abuse. Although before they may be married off many things could happen to them. For example when Rasheed wives try to escape and get caught their punishment is brutal. "Rasheed's dissimilar wives team up to offer each other support from the beatings and the verbal lashings. They plan a risky escape but when that fails, the powerlessness of their plight couldn't be more palpable: Strangers turn them in to the authorities, and police officers shrug their shoulders at the likelihood that Rasheed may kill them for causing dishonor" (Reed). However, as punishment for trying to escape from a life of torture, they are brutally beat. Seems all they want is freedom but to get that they have to escape. Reed describes this the best "While The Kite Runner was the story of redemption, of male friendship and the bond between fathers and sons, Suns is a multigenerational story with a larger cast of characters, spanning 45 years and told from the dual perspectives of two powerless women

Argument: The idea of Doublethink allows totalitarian regimes to keep their iron grip on power without degrading its people and exposing them to thoughts which might cause them to question the regime control. Thus these types of governemnts should keep a "reality control" on its people Claim: Knowledge of Doublethink in such regimes as totalitarian ones, can lead to an instability amongst the citizens and ultimately lead to a failed state. Support: "Doublethink was a form of trained, willful blindness to contradictions in a system of beliefs. In the case of Winston Smith, Orwell's protagonist, it meant being able to work at the Ministry of Truth deleting uncomfortable facts from public records, and then believing in the new history which he himself had written" "Doublethink's self-deception allowed the Party to maintain both huge goals and realistic expectations: 'If one is to rule, and to continue ruling, one must be able to dislocate the sense of reality. For the secret of rulership is to combine a belief in one's own infallibility with the power to learn from past mistakes'" "Doublethink has grown to be synonymous with relieving cognitive dissonance by simply ignoring the contradiction between two worldviews"

Carolyn Williams author of the literary criticism "Trying to do without God" in the Color Purple by Alice Walker criticizes how the main character Celie turns away from God and begins to write to Nettie, her sister. When Celie stops, writing to God it seems as if she felt betrayed by him because apparently God did not like poor colored women. Based on what Williams wrote, Celie felt as if God was like all other men, liars and cheaters. Celie began to refer to God because her stepfather always told her not to tell anyone but God because it would her mother. I think that is where Celie felt betrayed, because she probably imagined God as her stepfather since back then, society did not have enough knowledge about religion. When Celie found love, her personality changed because before she was lonely and empty inside. Now that she has a man on her side, her world completely changed because she has a sense of wholeness and she managed to recognize God once more. Williams included a small passage from the story and it said "Man corrupt everything" meaning that men feel like they can do whatever they want and they will get it and I think that is why Williams targeted the "trying to do without God". Alice Walker compared men to a God and that is why Celie stopped because she had, had terrible experiences with men like her stepfather. I would say that Williams criticized Walker because she tried to exclude God, and Williams believes that in order for something to happen people must acknowledge God in their lives.

As a long time viewer of the work of Beckett, Hall brings a sense of credibility to the article due to his long standing relationship with all Beckett's productions. Of them, as he implies, Waiting for Godot was the most challenging of then to figure out. With only a blank stage, a tree, and two characters, so much of the production was left up to the opinions of the audience. In Hall's own opinion, this single play is what shaped the way modern theater is thought of, as something that does not ever need to confine to what may have been put forth by the greatest minds in theater. Hall, even being such an admirer for so long, was actually the only producer willing to put the work into the major theaters of the western society. For so long the production was only put forth in a small Paris theater, and Hall was the only man willing to put his own neck on the line to show the world what he sees in this unknown artists creation. What hits me the strangest is that Hall never thought the work would grow, that he never wanted to make it a global sensation, but merely wanted to expose audiences to what he saw in the metaphorical work. As stated "Waiting for Godot hasn't dated at all. It remains a poetic masterpiece transcending all barriers and nationalities". Which is exactly how the work should be considered in today's work of drama and English literature .

Argument Heller used juxtaposition and the idea of "déjà vu" to create the insight on the world that Yossarian had been it at the time (World War 2). By the use of "black" comedy and the influence of works such as Crime and Punishment and Dante's Inferno, Heller was able to craft such a fine "epic" that there are authors today who use the similar style of non-organized (or non-chronological) order - such as William Faulkner. Evidence * "Most significant is Heller's incremental repetition of the Snowden episode; he presents fragments of the scene and builds to a climax where Yossarian learns the extent of his gunner's injuries." * "Heller relies heavily upon patterns of recurrence-whether of scene, image, or verbal exchange-so that the reader experiences a sense of deja vu." * "Heller uses the technique of black humor, juxtaposing comic and tragic effects, mixing the slapstick with the grotesque." Thoughts This article stresses the importance of the non-chronological order that Heller had to defend upon Catch-22's initial release - in which critics were just stupid and though he did it out of panic and misrepresentation rather than using it as a true surface style with meaning.

Author is not stated directly - blocks the page when clicking on source information (@ school).