Group items tagged

Argument: Khaled Hosseini gives a face to the Afghan people in The Kite Runner. It humanizes the culture and gives outsiders to the culture a little insight to the fact that we may not be that different from each other after all. The novel offers the theme of personal redemption that many have dealt. Literary critics have seen this book as being an allegory but Jefferess takes this a step farther by pointing out how this novel is really a political allegory that uses a humans shot at redemption in comparison to that of the country Afghanistan's chance to fix itself. Evidence: "Hence the novel "humanizes" Afghan culture, providing depth and meaning to the sign "Afghanistan" for the non-Afghan reader, otherwise a mere signifier of post-9/11 conflict" (Jefferess). "While Amir's quest for personal redemption may be read as an allegory of Afghanistan's national project of healing, I read the novel as a political allegory that reflects the way in which the "third world", marked by its difference from the "West", becomes a site to be transformed through the project of nation-building" (Jefferess). "This project is presented in the West as an ethical demand that is paradoxically conceived of as both a humanitarian project and a disciplinary one; to be recognized as human, Afghanistan must conform to particular western expectations of democracy, liberalism, and multiculturalism. While the novel's reception reflects an openness to, and a desire for, understanding the Other, it also reflects the limits of acceptable difference"(Jefferess) Thoughts: The view that Jefferess took on The Kite Runner is extremely interesting. Not many have seen the novel as merely an ethical allegory, but he argues this point well. The fact that since the US has entered the war in Afghanistan, many people view that the end of the war will be when Afghanistan becomes a democracy and adopts western ideals, but what isn't always understood is that with change, comes

Argument: Naturalism is the application of principles of scientific determinism. Humans view the world as animals would, responding to environmental forces and internal stress and drives.  Claim: There are eight ways to determine if a piece of literature contains naturalism: objectivity, frankness, amoral attitude toward material, philosophy of determinism, bias toward pessimism in selection of details, bias in selection of characters, characters are subject to certain temptations, and complexity and American Determinism. Evidence: Smith gives no evidence to support his claims, however he does cite three books (Parrington's The Beginnings of Critical Realism in America: 1860-1920, Murfin and Roy's The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms, and Holman and Harmon's A Handbook to Literature). Evidence, however, can be shown throughout naturalists' novels. Steinbeck, a proven naturalist by critics, has these criteria shine through vividly throughout his literature. For example, one criterion given was the bias in selection of characters. "There are usually three types: (a) characters marked by strong physiques and small intellectual activity; (b) characters of excited neurotic temperament, at the mercy of moods, driven by forces they do not stop to analyze; (c) an occasional use of strong character whose will is broken" (1). In Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, Lenny (type A) is a strong, tall man with no brains. His friend, George, (type b) who has extreme mood swings between sympathetic and furious, must keep his Lenny from speaking because his stupidity might ruin their jobs. http://www.viterbo.edu/perspgs/faculty/GSmith/Naturalism.html

Branislav L. Slantchev's purpose of discussing Eiji Yoshikawa's, Taiko, is to relate this work to Yoshikawa's more popular title, Musashi, and to also show the few faults Yoshikawa has made in his writing. Slantchev's opinion is that since so few people know of Yoshikawa, those who are familiar will become enthralled and find his work flawless. Slantchev is one of the few to finally go against the majority critical opinion and voice his personal issues with Yoshikawa. The article begins with a general summary of Taiko with an explanation of the tale as one that is about bringing "prosperity to the ravaged land is an inspiring, if bloody, tale of courage, imagination, and political intrigue." This statement already sets up the beginning with the multiple literary similarities between Taiko and Musashi. The article even discusses the "historical reality" still being "fictionalized." Nevertheless, Slantchev still continues to praise Yoshikawa when speaking of the engaging narrative and attention to battles until he reaches the character development. Slantchev argues, "Hideyoshi is so likable, he appears terribly one-dimensional." This statement is supported by the fact that even though the main character, Hideyoshi, has a "monkey face" he is still able to have success when it comes to the opposite sex. Slantchev recommends many other novels that would actually contain a more balanced point of view. Ultimately, Slantchev still ties his argument back to how Yoshikawa is still a stunning author that has the ability to write a complex mixture of "loyalty, honor, calculation, and greed that is bound to baffle the foreigner." There is a perfect consistency of admiration as well as points of dissatisfaction within the article. Thorough evidence is provided for all of the arguments made. Slantchev does appear to possess a slight bias in writing his article, as he occasionally slants his writing in comparing Taiko to Musashi almost too often. Al

Argument: In The Pearl, Steinbeck, not only shows hardship and suffering but argues that peoples rights and freedom were lost. He shows that not every story is a happy ending. "The loss of the pearl at the end of the story suggests his loss of hope for the future and a loss in his belief that he can control his life and destiny." (Perkins). It is another story about achevining the "American Dream" Evidence: "Kino's rebellious spirit challenges but cannot change the system. Unable to fight off the forces that try to oppress him, he loses his son along with his dreams of a better life for his family." (Perkins) "Steinbeck offers his response to oppressive political systems that try to crush the human spirit, declaring that he believes that the "free, exploring mind of the individual human is the most valuable thing in the world." (Perkins) "Steinbeck illustrates the tragic consequences of the loss of that freedom of the spirit in The Pearl, expressing a profound sympathy for the individual and the community that suffers under such an oppressive system." (Perkins) Thoughts: Based on the article the author explains a valid point how in this world we might say were equal on paper but we have to show we are equal. In my opinion I don't think life should end that way i think you should always have a second chance. Steinbeck doesn't describe his books like that. Maybe hes showing the actual world as it is. We might say all this pretty stuff about how the world should be and how life should end up but nothing happening. John Steinbeck is a realist and shows the world how it is. The pearl symbolized his dreams. And an education shouldn't be the only way to be successful in life school and education is not for everyone Steinbeck shows that it just takes a lot of heart to do what you dream of. Kino showed a lot of heart but with the effort he failed and described the world as a failure. Quotes: "But the pearls were accidents, and the finding of one was luc

argument: Orwell's Burma experience heightened his suspicions of social inequities and his sympathy for oppressed peoples. On his return to England in 1927 he aggressively transferred this suspicion and sympathy to the British class structure. Claim: In 1936 Orwell wrote that his desire to "submerge myself, get right down among the oppressed" reflected the " bad conscience" he had acquired from the Burma experience. Evidence: where the narrator is employed as a dishwasher. Here Orwell reverted to a favorite strategy: illustrating through analogy so that British readers might apprehend a lesson about class structure.

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: Basically that "Beatrice and Virgil" is the worst book of the decade, because supposedly it mock Jews and the Holocaust by misinformation and a strong lack of merit. The writer feels Martel completely underscored the Holocaust, and trivialized the entire tragic even, by representing the Jews with donkeys to satirize the Holocaust. "There comes a rare time - perhaps once every ten or fifteen years - when you read a book with such dreadful syntax, without even a fiber of merit, so libertine in the manner it insults the audience, and so producing the literary equivalent to being completely submerged into a vat of shit, that the reader, having embarked on the fetid journey, begins to pine for a brutal throng of vigilantes to chop off the author's hands and prevent the hopeless hack from ever holding a pen or setting foot near a laptop again." "This book will fill you with such vileness that you will find yourself instantly ruminating about what an AK-47 might be able to do when fired in the right direction." "The book asks us to sympathize with a douchebag named Henry, whose only real character traits are that he has written a successful book and that he is revered by his readers. Tough life, this Henry." Analysis: The author writes with a lot of passion and eloquence, about his extreme almost dramatic distaste for the book. Even the most simple slightly sarcastic sentence just breathes malice and hate. The man used plentiful support and an easy to read chronological layout that was easy to read which I very much liked.

Argument: Animal Farm is a modern satire. Claim: -The novel satires Russia's perversion of socialism -The animal's revolt is a symbol for any modern revolution -Any revolution is ultimately self-defeating Evidence: -"The use of multiple historical references gives a universal quality to this work." -"The rise of a ruling class of intellectual workers, the development of a leader figure, the use of scapegoats, and, above all, the rewriting of history and the misuse of language for party purposes, all figure in this satire" http://search.ebscohost.com.lib.chandleraz.gov/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=MOL0089900020&site=lrc-live

Argument: Dexter Filkins, of the New York Times Book Review, delivers a tough critique of Where Men Win Glory by Jon Krakauer. Filkins believes that "This would have been a better book had it been a hundred pages shorter." Claim: Much of the background about Pat Tillman's life is unnecessary. Also, the tiny details that Krakauer recounts are "banal and inconsequential." Evidence: "Tillman doesn't arrive in Afghanistan until Page 230." The book is supposed to be about the death of Pat Tillman, and the ensuing cover-up, but Krakauer talks too much about Tillman's early life and the NFL. However, once Tillman reaches Afghanistan and Krakauer starts telling the story he promised, the book takes a turn for the better. Filkins writes "The death of Tillman is handled deftly" and that "Krakauer performs a valuable service by bringing them [facts] all together". http://go.galegroup.com.lib.chandleraz.gov/ps/i.do?id=GALE|A207732676&v=2.1&u=chandler_main&it=r&p=LitRC&sw=w

Argument: * Russ Allbery breaks down Catch-22 as a great novel, but not without its flaws. What makes this review and criticism so imporant in research of Heller's novel are the (opinion-based) negative sides of the novel as a whole. Such negative connotations include the "monotonous" circle made by Heller in arguments (such as paradox made by not ordering combat missions chronologically when related to the novel's conclusion) and the fact that many would categorize the story with a main theme of humor - which Allbery denies is the core of Heller's work. Allbery goes on to summarize how the term "Catch-22" was integrated into the English language (via slang) and that Heller's work is truly a 'best-of' even if flaws persist. Evidence: * "Catch-22 didn't entirely succeed for me as a comedy. The huge ensemble cast was mostly too unbelievable and exaggerated for me to find funny" (Allbery) * "Due in part to the way that Heller stresses paradoxes and insoluable conflict, the writing can be quite repetitive and a bit circular." (Allbery) * "Heller provides as a clue the linearly increasing number of missions the airmen had to fly before theoretically being allowed to rotate home, but ordering can still be frustrating." (Allbery) * "The war acts in this book like a force of nature. Nearly everyone just accepts that it's happening and tries to ignore it, or revels in fighting it, without really thinking about it. It's only Yossarian, normally trying to maintain a long-suffering sarcasm, who occasionally can't help but tell the blunt truth." (Allbery) Thoughts: * While this is somewhat an opinionated "summary" of Catch-22, it is the only review I have that stresses some of the negative sides to the novel; from my view, the strengths of the novel further stand out amidst these criticisms. It is a strong point to make that Heller used too many "circle arguments" for it shows his position in writing the novel and how certain themes may have lead

"The Decay of Lying" by Oscar Wilde is a criticism based solely on the topics of Aestheticism. Aestheticism was an ideal that Oscar was passionate about, as he was one of the more influential people of the Aesthetic movement during the late 1800's. The ideal held that art should not be used as a form of social education and enlightenment, that "art need not any other purpose than being beautiful". This essay is very critical in enforcing Oscar Wilde's views and opinions, as many of the points made in "The Decay of Lying" parallel those inside "The Picture of Dorian Gray." One quote stands out when it comes to Aestheticism, and it is this: "Lying and poetry are arts-arts, as Plato saw, not unconnected from each other-and they require the most careful study, the most disinterested devotion" (Wilde). This sentiment was very evident in "The Picture of Dorian Gray": in the novel, the painter would end up making the portrait of Dorian Gray a very personal work of art, one that goes against the rules of Aestheticism. In the end, the painter would face the consequences of this, dying in the end in result of caring so much of the painting. The other part of Aestheticism dealing with the idea that Art should not be used as a form of learning and enlightenment is seen here, in which he uses an example to reinforce it. He states that "the most obvious and the vulgarest from in which this is shown is in the case of the silly boys, who, after reading the adventures of Jack Sheppard… pillage the stalls…, break into sweetshops at night,… etc" (Wilde). Again, this parallels Dorian Gray: in the beginning of the book, there is this yellow book that Lord Henry gives Dorian Gray. This piece of literature would soon change Dorian's life: he becomes obsessed with it, living the way it says to live, and would become an evil, corrupt man because of it. Here, it is obvious of the lesson Wilde is trying to convey to the audience: that literature

AP Literature Analysis 3 Although George Bernard Shaw had the standing of a classic dramatist, people still question how good he truly was. This is in fact the purpose of the author writing this criticism. Morgan wanted to look into Shaw's work to see if he was justly able to have that prestigious standing. The critique was very well written, and supported the argument throughout. To back up her argument Morgan referred to not only his great works, but also situations in his life that shaped his writing. The author uses substantial evidence in order to support Shaw's standing. In his works Shaw focused on marriage, genius, and class distinctions. He wrote about these things in a satiric way in order to show society during that time period. And when he was unable to keep people interested, he changed the way he wrote by adding more of a comedic element to his work. The author of this criticism concludes that Shaw did in fact deserve that prestigious title, and he was in fact an amazing writer. She shows this by describing how he was able to change his work when he needed to appeal to his audience. Morgan also points out how Shaw put heartrending human emotions in the center of all of his plays. His plays showed the pure grain of true feelings amongst the irrationalities. Morgan states "…Shaw's comedic brilliance and his geniality tend to enliven the mind and break down prejudice". Morgan may in fact be a fan of the Great Shaw's works making it very easy for her to see Shaw as a classic dramatist.

Argument: Author Sarah Hackenberg presents the opinion that women are only hiding behind their servant attitudes in order to get where they would like. She presents the sequence of events that led up to the initial true image of Jean Muir, not that of a nineteen year old but in fact of a haggard old woman. Hackenberg also gives certatin prominence to the idea of womens' highest achievement would be their marital status. The entire story epitomizes a servant of a governess that exhibits the standard female behaviors up until the very end where the maanipulative and devious women unmasks her self, hypothetically and literally. Evidence: "Most critics of "Behind a Mask" attend closely to the tale's radical gender and class dynamics: the way Alcott overtly aligns operating behind a mask with female power" (Hackenberg) "the fact that the governess's ultimate ambition, despite all her formidable powers of artistry and perception, is to "trick" a man into marriage..."(Hackenberg) Thoughts: Hackenberg raises many interesting points. Jean Muir was the ultimate woman. She only lacked in one area and that area was her status. Her only hope of climbing up in the world would to be marrying someone of a higher class. She said multiple times in the story that if this did happen to her that she would be completly content and only honor and follow her husband's rules. However, with the history that she has and what we know of her from reading this story we can be almost certain that Jean will not be content and will have to stir up some troulbe somehow. The story leaves off at a crucial point that leaves the readers contemplating all the different outcomes it could have.

Argument: Coupland illustrates the characters in Girlfriend in a Coma as confident and collected while simultaneously demonstrating their struggle to find their place in the world. Each chapter interrupts the flow of the story, often jumping from one major event to another, skipping the minor details in between. Hamilton is concerned that they are not doing anything to change the world on their own but rather wasting their time with careers such as modeling that have no positive impacts in the world around them. Karen's fears transform into a reality when she falls into a coma for seventeen years. As time passes, her friends lose all of their dreams, hopes, and passions for their careers. An apocalyptic event has not taken place so Coupland takes his story Girlfriend in a Coma to the extreme by inventing and transforming the book from a story about teenagers into a story about teenagers whom are trapped in adult bodies. Evidence: "And they don't cope well. "There's nothing at the centre of what we do," Hamilton complains, and Coupland homes in on his true subject. Waking from her coma, Karen is alarmed that her friends mirror the new soullessness she sees in society: "Their dreams are forgotten, or were never formulated to begin with...they seem at best insular, and without a central core, which might give purpose to their lives." "Coupland successfully raises the pitch to the apocalyptic with his sarin-style, X Files-ish mass sleeping, but then stumbles headlong into adult fable by pursuing his Big Moral Question. Why are our lives empty? Jared, a ghost, takes over from Richard as narrator, introducing a dangerously glutinous, pan-Christian murk of cosmology as he leads the adult-kids though fumbling dissolution towards an ethical gravitas." "Such chapter headings as "Reject Every Idea" (familiar from Generation X) slice across the continuity of Couplan

In Clifford J. Kurkowski crisism of One who flew over the Cuckoo's Nest, Kurkowski discusses that women who want to obtain power and stature in society have always struggled to keep their position, such as Nurse Ratched. Kirkowski talks about the fact that Kesey is not trying to degrade females by representing them negatively but also in a positive light. He analyzed the language used to describe Nurse Ratched and came to a conclusion that she is always trying to stay in control in power when put in chaotic positions. He said that it should be seen as a positive character trait that her "dominating attitude is a calculated move to maintain order". He says that she needs to be seen in a positive light. At the time that the book was written Kurkowski brings up the fact that America was a young nation looking for it's identify. Along with that was the uprising of the Women's Liberation movement, which was looking for equal opportunities and rewards for women. It's vital to understand a stories background, back then women were seen as less, so they were more likely to be written as less, and since they were advocating to be more equal it is understandable that women would think that they were being seen in a negative light, but there is always to sides to a story.