Historical Fiction Comparison
Colonial Life in Orwell’s “Burmese Days”, Rizal’s “The Reign of Greed”, Binh’s “The Red Earth” Essay
Updated: Apr 25th, 2021
A picture of colonial life can hardly be positive as the idea, that one country may expand its rules and standards on the territory of another country with its own ideals and social norms without certain agreements and concessions, usually oppresses people and make them believe in personal inabilities and dependencies. The current paper touches upon the three different literary sources, the authors of which talk about the peculiarities of colonial life, its role in history, and the effects on human understanding on how the relations between different societies may be developed. These are Orwell’s “Burmese Days”, Rizal’s “The Reign of Greed”, and Binh’s “The Red Earth”. These accounts help to realize that each author demonstrates his own attitude to the process of colonization and the reactions of the people on the demands of the government: Orwell underlines the impossibility to avoid corruption and prejudice, Rizal admits the necessity to remember about the personal interests and beliefs, and Binh wants to explain that sometimes not only the colonists but also the colonized people may benefit from the process.
Being a witness of how the British Empire turned Burma, a considerable and prosperous Indian state, into a poor colonized part of British India, George Orwell could not help but wonder how the people of Burma could allow a new power making them the slaves of corruption, prejudice, and their own wrong understanding of the human ideals. It is normal for colonial life to force people to “take bribes from both sides and then decide the case on strictly legal grounds” (Orwell 6) and believe that “no European cares anything about proofs. When a man has a black face, suspicion is proof” (Orwell 12). This approach to understanding colonial life’s peculiarities is not new; still, people need to believe that there is hope for a better life and a possibility to use humanism as a reason to become more confident even during the colonization period.
This is why the ideas of the Filipino nationalist, Jose Rizal, who survived the influence of Spain on the Philippines, seem to be humane and supportive for those, who want to believe in a better future. The main idea of the reading in Rizal’s “The Reign of Greed” is an inability to resist the rise of taxes, but a burning desire to protect personal beliefs and remember the truths of life. The author underlines that it is better to “pawn myself rather than the locket he gave me” (Rizal 32). The life under colonization presented in this story is not easy and requires numerous sacrifices; still, people should never forget about who they are and what they actually can.
Finally, the reading offered by Binh proves that even the most terrible aspects of colonization can be defined as the most powerful issues for people to rely on. In spite of the fact that the Vietnamese had to suffer from maltreatment of the French, get the worst medical care, and live under terrible conditions like in the “hell on earth”. Binh writes that “the more savage the repression, the stronger the struggle” (27). It proves that people should not define their colonization as something irreversible, unfair, or wrong. Such conditions should make people stronger and ready for some other challenges the overcoming of which can lead to a happier life.
In general, the three readings under consideration introduce how the process of colonization influenced human lives and make them believe in personal strengths or weaknesses and use them accordingly. The chosen accounts may be treated in history in a variety of ways, but nevertheless, all of them prove that each political, economic, and social process had its purpose and place and should never be neglected but understood and considered.
Binh, Tran, Tu. The Red Earth: A Vietnamese Memoir of Life in a Colonial Rubber Plantation, Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Centre for International Studies, 1985. Print.
Orwell, George. Burmese Days, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1962. Print.
Rizal, Jose. The Reign of Greed, Quezon City: Giraffe Books, 1997. Print.
This essay on Colonial Life in Orwell’s “Burmese Days”, Rizal’s “The Reign of Greed”, Binh’s “The Red Earth” was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
History in Shakespeare’s, Bronte’s, Auerbach’s Works Essay
Updated: Jan 21st, 2021
Literary works and societies
Literary works have played an important role in human societies as they have reflected numerous epochs and have helped people to acknowledge the changes which were taking place. Notably, literary masterpieces have also been reconsidered by many generations. People often saw some works differently, whereas other works have been interpreted without any alternations. The interpretation of literary works largely depends on the major idea of the work and/or on the major purpose of the work. For instance, Auerbach states that the Bible, one of the most important books in the Western world, has been seen differently in different periods1. It is possible to consider this work and some other literary works created in different epochs to understand how literary works reflect specific issues of their historical moment.
The Bible and history
As has been mentioned above, the Bible, like any other work, is a certain reflection of its epoch. There can hardly be any literary work that does not contain specific historical facts or references to these facts. As far as the Bible is concerned, it is necessary to note that the book narrates the history of humanity (or rather it’s past). Auerbach notes that the Bible’s “religious intent involves an absolute claim to historical truth”2.
Thus, the Bible has been seen as a particular description of past events for centuries. This ‘absolute claim’ has raised many questions that have remained unanswered until now. Auerbach points out that various elements in the Bible “require subtle investigation” and even “demand” it3.
It is also important to add that the Bible refers to various historical events, and researchers have been trying to identify specific proofs in history. Nonetheless, the Bible does not contain many facts that can be proved historically. It is possible to claim that the book is rather metaphorical. Auerbach stresses that the Bible’s “claim to truth” is “tyrannical – it excludes all other claims”4 Notably, though it claims to be the only truth, there are far too many spots to address. This specific representation of the historical facts is closely connected with the major purpose of the book.
The major point
It is important to remember that the major purpose of the Bible is not to tell some stories but to guide people. The book is meant to establish “absolute authority”5. The Bible includes a set of norms that “seek to subject” people, and if people “refuse to be subjected” they are regarded as “rebels”6. It is rather difficult to object to such arguments. The Bible is very deductive. It teaches people to conduct in a specific way providing particular examples, i.e. stories. Auerbach is very precise when considering the major purpose of the Bible. He states that the book is not meant to entertain people. The book is meant to be guidance for people.
More so, Auerbach puts this in the following way:
it seeks to overcome our reality: we are to fit our own life into its world, feel ourselves to be elements in its structure of universal history7.
Thus, the Bible is a work that does not simply reflect some epochs. The book is meant to create the entire universe where people fulfill specific tasks by specific doctrines. Remarkably, the book served this purpose for a long time. However, things have changed significantly.
Admittedly, the Bible is still one of the most important books in the Western world. However, this work has been seen differently in different epochs. In the Middle Ages, it was seen as the entire universe to fit. People were to live by conventions revealed in the Bible. Those who did not fit the universe were punished. No one could doubt the complete truth provided. People accepted the authority of the work. No one could even think that some stories were not historical facts. The stories depicted were regarded as true stories from the past.
Nonetheless, the epochs of Renaissance and Enlightenment have brought many changes. People have worked out new doctrines and conventions. Nowadays quite a few people have the same faith as medieval people used to have. Auerbach mentions that “the Biblical stories become ancient legends, and the doctrine they had contained, now dissevered from them, becomes a disembodied image”8. Admittedly, people now see the Bible as a brilliant literary work, and some see it as an important historical source. Of course, there are quite many who still try to follow the conventions provided.
However, irrespective of those who still follow the conventions, the Bible has lost its ‘absolute authority’. At present, the Bible is seen as a metaphorical representation of the ideal world. People understand that the book reveals particular examples of moral and ethical conduct. Nonetheless, it is up to each individual either to follow or violate the rules.
Shakespearean representation of reality
One of the greatest literary works, Anthony and Cleopatra, also reflects a specific epoch and has a specific purpose. As for the Shakespearean play, it does depict various historical events that were reported on by historians. Of course, the major characters of the play are real historical figures. Cleopatra VII, Mark Antony, Octavian, Lepidus, and Sextus Pompey are all known too many. Apart from these prototypes, the play also reveals the relationship between the two states, Egypt and Rome, in the middle of the first century B.C. Of course, Shakespeare speaks of these relationships in his specific poetic form:
I kiss his conquering hand: tell him, I am prompt
To lay my crown at’s feet, and there to kneel:
Tell him from his all-obeying breath I hear
The doom of Egypt. 9
These Cleopatra’s words can be regarded as a kind of manifestation of Roman people’s aspirations. The Roman Empire always wanted to establish their absolute rule over Egypt with its riches. The play reveals the battles which also took place many centuries ago. Of course, Shakespeare was not very precise as to facts, dates, etc. However, this was not his primary concern. The major concern of the play is not historical accuracy. Shakespeare did not attempt to recreate the precise course of events which took place many centuries before his birth. Shakespeare had another idea in his mind.
The major point
The major purpose of the play was to entertain people. Shakespeare was not interested in historical facts that much. He was interested in feelings, passions, and relationships between the main characters. The great playwright tried to reveal the human passions of the great people who changed history. He focused on relationships between the greatest people of that epoch. Shakespeare focused on psychology.
It is necessary to note that it is clear that Shakespeare did expect people to believe in the events he had depicted. He wanted to reveal the hidden (or rather unknown) side of history. There are no rules to follow. The author does not set rules. He does not try to make people follow his doctrines. Everyone understands that the play is a literary work which is aimed to entertain people.
The purpose of the play and its major focus influence greatly the way this work has been interpreted throughout times. The work has always been interpreted similarly. Of course, there were many ideas as to the sources of the play, the major ideas, etc. Now researchers find new facets to look at. Of course, people pay attention to the beauty of the play and, at the same time, they try to trace various trends characterizing the epoch.
However, the interpretation of the book remains unchanged. People see it as a brilliant literary work that reflects certain periods (the first century BC, as well as the beginning of the seventeenth century). Of course, the play is still seen as an entertaining piece.
One of the major reasons for such stability is that the play is not meant to establish some doctrines. Unlike the Bible, the play does not create the entire world to comply with. The play simply depicts a short episode from history. It enriches people’s knowledge instead of establishing ‘absolute authority.’ Since the play does not have such an aim to create the entire system of values, there is nothing to object to. People do not rebel as there is no authority to oppose. Of course, the play touches upon some basic values. However, there is no preaching, as the author simply offers his work without insisting on complete submission.
Jane Eyre and historical representation
Another famous literary work can shed more light on the way literary works reflect various historical moments. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte is a story of a girl who lived in the middle of the nineteenth century. There can be no doubt that the epoch is depicted in detail. Of course, the characters and events are not regarded as real. However, this story is considered to be a plausible story that could have happened at that time. Bronte did not try to reveal some historical facts as she depicted the world around her.
Bronte depicted places as she saw them. She also alluded to various books that were popular at that time. For instance, at the very beginning of the work, she referred to Thomas Bewick’s work and works by Samuel Richardson or John Wesley10. Importantly, the author did not want to insist on the accuracy of the facts provided. Bronte, as well as Shakespeare, is more concerned with feelings, morals, and the latest trends.
The novel is a perfect reflection of the time when it was created. Bronte depicted conventions that were followed at that time. Of course, the novel is also didactic as the right things are praised, whereas bad things are punished. Thus, the poor rightful girl obtains a loving husband after long years of loneliness and humiliation. Notably, Edward Rochester is granted his happiness due to his sacrifices (sufferings and blindness). Nonetheless, there are no specific rules provided in the book. The book does not create the world to comply with. The book simply reflects the epoch.
The major point
As far as the purpose of the film is concerned, Jane Eyre can be compatible with Anthony and Cleopatra by Shakespeare. The novel is not aimed at establishing any authority. However, it is not mere entertainment. Bronte also focuses on feelings, emotions, and morals. However, the novel is written in the first person singular, which makes it intimate.
Bronte focused on psychology to a great extent. More so, she was not interested in the world around the main character. The writer rather revealed the inner world of her protagonist. The world is shown in Eyre’s perspective. Thus, the novel is a reflection of the world as it was seen by a female. Admittedly, Bronte did not expect that people would believe the facts provided. The major concern of the text is still emotions and decisions made.
The novel has been discussed by many generations. Notably, the interpretation of the novel is rather stable. All readers focus on the life of the rightful girl who tries to conduct properly in the sinful world full of hypocrisy. Researchers also analyze the work as it is a very precise reflection of the Victorian world. However, all viewers (those who lived in the nineteenth century as well as those who live nowadays) focus on morality and ethics when reading the book.
Admittedly, this stability can be because the novel was written rather recently. It can be assumed that the values revealed have not changed since then. However, the major reason for this stability can be explained by the universality of the values revealed. The novel has no claims for creating a new world to comply with. People do not need to submit to the doctrines provided. They take pleasure in reading a story that could happen in the real world. The reader is not overwhelmed by any doctrines and can simply focus on the story.
Why do texts reflect specific issues of the historical moment differently?
Thus, it is clear that the works discussed reflect historical issues differently as the works have different aims. Anthony and Cleopatra and Jane Eyre seek “merely to make us forget our reality for a few hours” whereas the Bible “seeks to overcome our reality”11. The former two works can be regarded as a personal reflection on specific issues. However, the latter is a set of doctrines which is meant to guide people. The works by Shakespeare and Brontë have always been regarded as literary works which are created to entertain people. However, the Bible is the work that is created to be taken seriously. The Bible establishes ‘absolute authority.’
This authority creates a specific kind of historical moment representation. Thus, the Bible provides various stories that are meant to be taken for granted. For many centuries people did not doubt events revealed. Though the historical facts are regarded as real, the major focus is never on the facts themselves. The major focus is always on the meaning of the events depicted. The events are also regarded as illustrations of proper and rightful conduct.
Thus, the Bible is a set of examples to follow in various situations. Interestingly, the Bible is a universal work that tells the stories from the past and, at the same time, remains timeless. The major focus of the work is guiding, so the Bible can hardly be regarded as a proper reflection of the epoch.
As for the other literary works, the historical facts are often brought into question. The two works are often seen as specific reflections of the major trends that were common in those epochs. At the same time, historical accuracy is not in the center of the reader’s attention. The two works concentrate on feelings, emotions, and passions. More so, Jane Eyre focuses on the inner world of the girl depicted. Notably, the works do not provide any particular doctrines to follow. These works are light, and they are pleasant to read. Of course, there are morals to be considered by readers. However, the works are not preaching.
Thus, the major difference between the Bible and other literary works is in their purpose and as a result, in the way, the works are interpreted. The Bible has been seen as the absolute authority for many years. However, things have changed, and many people have become too critical about the Bible. The authority has been jeopardized significantly. People have acquired many other doctrines to follow. At the same time, literary works like Anthony and Cleopatra and Jane Eyre were created to entertain and to make people think of some issues without establishing any authority. Even though some doctrines have changed people still seek entertainment.
Literature provides people with what they need. The literary works make people think of various issues and enable people to plunge into beautiful worlds of the past, the present, or the future. Thus, some aspects of the works can be interpreted differently, but the major ideas will remain the same as major values hardly change.
Auerbach, E 1953, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, translated by W.R. Trask, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Brontë, C 2001, Jane Eyre. R.J. Dunn (ed.), London, Norton Critical Edition.
Shakespeare, W 2008, Anthony and Cleopatra. M. Neill (ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press.
- Auerbach, E 1953, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, translated by W.R. Trask, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 15.
- ibid., p. 14.
- Auerbach, E 1953, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, translated by W.R. Trask, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 15.
- ibid., p. 14.
- ibid., p. 14.
- ibid., p. 15.
- ibid., p. 15.
- Auerbach, E 1953, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, translated by W.R. Trask, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 16.
- Shakespeare, W 2008, Anthony and Cleopatra, M. Neill (ed.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 274.
- Brontë, C 2001, Jane Eyre, R.J. Dunn (ed.), London, Norton Critical Edition, pp. 7-8.
- Auerbach, E 1953, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, translated by W.R. Trask, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p. 15.
This essay on History in Shakespeare’s, Bronte’s, Auerbach’s Works was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
The Story of Historical Fiction and Nonfiction for Children Essay
Updated: Jan 12th, 2021
Suzanne Rahn, in her article “An Evolving Past: The Story of Historical Fiction and Nonfiction for Children” of 1991, described how the historical fantasy novels proved to be so essential in the historical years. Despite the success experienced by the fiction writers in historical years before World War II, Rahn in her article explored the failures of English writers regarding the fiction novel. However, due to high demand of the fiction books by children, current English writers have embarked in fiction writing with reference to the historical fiction novel.
In her article, Rahn portrayed the efforts inputted in reconstructing the past. For instance, she explained on how Scott attracted the attention of young children by writing historical fiction novels. In addition, according to Rahn, Scott ensured that he had advocated historical aspects by writing non-fiction novels such as “Kidnapped” with the goal of presenting the real people, real events, and consequences that young children experienced in the past while struggling for their rights.
Rahn in her article also outlined the role of women in regenerating the past. She expressed on how women crossbred the past and the present through feeding young individuals with stories. According to Rahn, through the stories told to the young children by the old women, the children ended up intermingling the past cultures and forces with the current cultures of the world.
Rahn also used symbolism to express her views about the historical novels. For instance, in the novel “The Time Machine” by Well, the travelling of the children to the past according to Rahn symbolized the quest for civilization anticipated by the writer through the children to overcome experienced cruelty and oppressions. However, Rahn in her article warned young children against the spirit of adventure. She related the death of many young children to the quest of adventure during historical world.
According to Rahn, “Grandfather’s Chair” a title for Hawthorne’s novel was also symbolic. Rahn argued that through the topic “Grandfather’s Chair”, Hawthorne succeeded in making young children develop a sense of belonging and desire for heritage. At the same time, Rahn argued that the Hawthorne, in writing his novel, fixed fiction and non-fiction with the aim of attracting the attention of young children into loving his piece of writing.
According to Rahn, some of the historical novels expressed some vital roles played by young children. For instance, she outlined the theme of survival in her study of Harriet’s novel. She supported her point by explaining the responsive roles played by young children left as orphans.
Rahn also viewed the past historical stories used as baits in involving children into participating in some community responsibilities. For instance, she explained on how young girls participated in revolution wars in the past.
To capture the attention of young children, Rahn argued that most of the historical writers such as Yonge and Scott wrote romantic stories, which they knew to be loved by young children. According to Rahn, the audiences of most historical writers were young children, and historical writers could do anything to capture their attention.
Some of the historic novels also aimed at recruiting young children into army indirectly. For instance, Rahn argued that Henty wrote a historical novel with the intention of acquainting young boys with military personality. She later explained on how Henty became jovial after succeeding in coaxing young children into military.
Rahn argues that some of the historical writers chose to reflect most of their writing to children with the intention of correcting the past through introducing some values of the past through their writing to young children. Most of the writers also used pictures to help children create imaginations of the past to revise instead of rejecting it.
2. Kidnapped is a historic fiction novel written by a Scottish writer, Stevenson. Just as Rahn reflected in her article, it was written in 18th century to young boys with the aim of passing information about the historical and political situation of Scotland. The novel is all about a young boy, a stylistic device used by the author to capture the attention of young children. The novel reflects on how helpless David at the age of 13 managed to escape and came into contact with Alan in the ship, showing the children responsibility in rescuing themselves from the past, theme portrayed by Rahn in her article as demand for civilization.
The novel supports Rahn’s views on how children undergo troubling situation in fighting for their lives. The novel further reflects on how David ended his captivity on the ship by stumbling together with Alan into new adventures, supporting the views of Rahn about the orphans’ problems in the historic times. Surprisingly, David was running away from the police because of the accusation of murder by his uncle.
On the other hand, many of the escapades that David encountered were well caused by his naivety and too much confidence. For instance, David walks into his uncle’s home with the courage that he can handle him only to end up in a trap, a situation explained by Rahn as quest for adventure of children in intermingling the past and the present. In the sea, David also risked his life; he shipwrecked almost losing his life.
Girouard, Mark. The Return to Camelot: Chivalry and the English Gentleman. New Haven: Yale UP, 1981. Print.
Marryat, Frederick. The Settlers in Canada. 1844 rpt. London: J.M Dent, 1909. Print.
Stevenson, Robert. Kidnapped. Victoria: Arc Manor LLC, 2009. Print.
This essay on The Story of Historical Fiction and Nonfiction for Children was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Russian Revolution in Orwell’s “Animal Farm” Essay
Updated: Sep 18th, 2020
Two major revolutions that occurred in Russia in 1917 largely shaped further development of the country and its global political position. In March 1917, the communists managed to remove Tsar Nicholas II fro the throne, and in November 1917, the Bolsheviks overthrew the provisional government, finally changing the country into a communist state and creating the U.S.S.R. Later, the U.S.S.R. developed into a totalitarian state under the rule of Joseph Stalin. Orwell’s allegorical work Animal Farm serves to highlight the key aspects of the Russian 1917 revolution and Stalin’s harsh role that followed suit.
The key long-term cause of the 1917 Revolutions was the class system that existed in the country under the monarchy. Until 1861, the vast majority of the country’s population were peasants that were owned by the affluent upper class. In 1861, they were freed but remained poor nonetheless. The industrialization created a new class – the working men – who were heavily exploited due to the harsh economic conditions. Their working and economic conditions were significantly worse than in other countries, which led to protests and increased the people’s dislike towards the monarchy (Goff et al. 139). In Orwell’s Animal Farm, the monarchy is represented by Mr. Jones, whereas most of the animals represent the working class or the peasants. By portraying the society in this way, Orwell highlights the inequality and oppression that were characteristic of the Russian society of the time.
Another significant long-term cause of the Russian revolution was the tsar’s military failures in Japan and the events of the Bloody Sunday, which showed Nicholas II as an unstable ruler. He was unable to address the people’s struggles and did nothing to support the low and middle classes, which led to public disapproval of his rule and the monarchy in general. Similarly, in the Animal Farm, Mr. Jones fails to fulfill the need of his animals and care for them while reaping the benefits in the form of money and food. The old Major’s words serve to outline the conflict between the monarchy and the Bolsheviks: “Man is the only creature that consumes without producing […] Yet he is lord of all the animals” (Orwell 2). The development of the Marxist ideology that would treat all human beings as equal and abolish class distinction was exactly what the society of the time was willing to create.
The main short-term cause of the revolution was the World War I (Hodge & Cambridge par. 5). The war resulted in significant demographic and economic struggles that further impaired the position of poor peasants and the working class. The peasants were especially outraged at the military losses, as farming without young working men was barely possible, while the working class was upset at the closing of the Putilov plant in February 1922. Orwell shows farm animals experiencing the same problems that were pertaining to Russian society of the time, including poverty and hunger.
Both the long-term and the short-term causes of the revolution contributed to the public outrage and diminished the people’s belief in the monarchy. People wanted to build a new society, one that Orwell represents in the Major’s animalism teachings. Marxism became the primary ideology behind the revolution as it stressed the idea of all men being equals and deserving equal rights. Using this idea, Lenin and Trotsky were able to gather supporters in order to overthrow the monarchy and the temporary government, just like old Major and Snowball did in the Animal Farm. However, the idea of a Marxist state soon developed into a totalitarian rule once Joseph Stalin (Napoleon) came to power.
Stalin’s Totalitarian Rule
After Lenin’s death and the extradition of Trotsky from the country, Stalin took sole control of the U.S.S.R. (Goff et al. 147). Unlike Lenin or Trotsky, who were genuinely invested in the Marxist ideology, Stalin sought to increase his personal power and abolish all opposition. This is described in the Animal Farm through the image of Napoleon and his dogs. Orwell’s description of nine enormous dogs driving Snowball out of the barn is a metaphor of Stalin’s opposition with Trotsky that ended in Trotsky’s exile in 1940 (16). The dogs are then used by Napoleon to silence any opposition and hunt down animals that do not obey his rule, just like Stalin’s repressions in the U.S.S.R. worked to support the new totalitarian rule. Stalin’s ascend to power largely relied on the success of the Communist ideology. However, whereas Lenin and Trotsky convinced people that Communism would bring freedom from oppression and establish equality, Stalin’s rule was centered around power, not equality or freedom. Stalin’s repressions served to hold the opposition in fear and to avoid political competition, thus supporting the formation of the totalitarian state.
Overall, the Russian 1917 Revolution was a crucial step in the country’s development, as it marked the end of the monarchy and the beginning of a Communist rule. The reasons for the revolution included poor economic conditions, poverty, hunger, and the loss of people’s faith in the monarchy. People believed that Communism would bring freedom and equality; however, Stalin’s rule was famous for repressions that served to support totalitarianism. Orwell’s Animal Farm is useful in studying the causes and development of the 1917 Revolution in Russia. Through metaphors, Orwell highlighted the failures of both the monarchy and the Communist rule, thus contributing to the exploration of the revolution.
Goff, Richard, et al., The Twentieth Century and Beyond: A Global History. 7th ed., McGraw-Hill, 2008.
Hodge, Mark, and Elle Cambridge. “Red Revolt: What Was the Russian Revolution of 1917, Why Did It Happen and Who Were Trotsky and Lenin?” The Sun. 2017, Web.
Orwell, George. Animal Farm. 1945, Web.
This essay on Russian Revolution in Orwell’s “Animal Farm” was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Chinese Community and External Issues in Literature Essay
Updated: Aug 24th, 2020
Novels are composed based on the challenges affecting society. Protagonists mirror societal values and challenges. This discussion is based on Chuan-Sheng, in ”Regret for the past”, Zhenzhen, in ”When I was in Xia Village”, and Pak Hun, in Descendants of Cain. The discussion aims to examine historical events that affect the lives of protagonists.
Chuan-Sheng, in ”Regret the past”
Women in power and politics have no voice. The society is male-dominated. Traditional social relations have affected how women and children are viewed by other members of society in China (Lu 84). Chuan—Sheng is an educated intellectual who has developed a relationship with Tzu-Chun. However, the relationship between Chuan-Sheng and Tzu-Chun is affected by feudal traditions and no-belief inequality among different sexes.
Chuan-Sheng as man is controlled by history in terms of societal systems that do not recognize women. The society as part of history focuses on economic growth and domination. As a result, love cannot be developed among two persons in a relationship, feuding about values. Women are silent characters in a society dominated by men. In particular, the female sex is treated as the “other”. Gender struggle for power affects Chuan-Sheng’s ability to live with a woman he loves.
A fading love forces Chuan-Sheng to find new ways love can be developed with Tzu-Chun. When love cannot be developed again, Chuan-Sheng blames the woman partner in the relationship. The protagonist, therefore, is a captive of societal values and traditions that do not consider women as part of the power and decision-making process. Even though women have achieved education, they are not viewed as intellectuals who cannot assist in the decision making process. Chuan-Sheng blames Tzu-Chun as a woman for the challenges and wretchedness of the present life (Lu 85). The woman returns to the father, but based on patriarchal traditions, a woman is not allowed to break away from the husband.
Zhenzhen, in ”When I was in Xia Village”
In the early 1930s to the 1940s, the war between China and Japan led to the establishment of the current communist system of government. Zhenzhen as a protagonist is affected by this cruel history of China and Japan (Ding 286). In particular, Zhenzhen is raped by Japanese soldiers. Zhenzhen was sent by the Communist Party of China to work as a spy while serving as a prostitute. After returning from the battlefront, Zhenzhen experiences more contempt from society than sympathy. The fact that prostitution is not allowed in the society makes Zhenzhen be an outcast.
Despite the need to be patriotic to the government, the society still judges Zhenzhen because she decided to be a prostitute so that she could spy on the Japanese. As a woman, Zhenzhen cannot interact or make choices in society because of the consequences of war (Ding 286). Zhenzhen cannot make choices on marriage since society members detest her attempt to find a marriage partner and live a happy life in society. Further, loss of virginity is a detestable phenomenon that makes Zhenzhen an outcast who cannot make decisions on who to marry (Ding 287). In the end, Zhenzhen becomes unsuccessful in integrating into society because of societal cultures.
Pak Hun, in Descendants of Cain
Pak Hun is a landowner in Korea. However, the protagonist’s past is affected by massive political sufferings that arose because of the Japanese occupation in Korea. As a captive of the past, Pak Hun watches without any resistance as the village is affected by communist land reforms. The Japanese occupation in Korea shows how the protagonist cannot engage in any activity to avoid the current land from being taken away by the rulers (Hwang 81). Pak Hun as a landowner struggles to survive because of Japanese occupation and the massive political upheavals affecting the society.
The conflict also affects Pak Hun’s current relationship with Ojaknyo. The need to make love and develop a family is affected by past events related to the Japanese Korean conflict. Pak Hun would rather listen to the father and brother engage in arguments about the conflict but fail to acknowledge the love and affection demonstrated by Ojaknyo. In particular, the protagonist is affected by the epochal moment in the history of the Koreans.
Politics as part of history affects all aspects of life. The key concern is not on political processes that took place in history but on individual reactions towards historical events. As a captive to historical events, Pak Hun has no choice but to allow communist authorities to take away the owned land (Hwang 81). Even the ability to forge relationships with brothers and sisters, as well as loved ones are based on experiences of the past. Pak Hun’s current mourning arises from the destruction of society by the landowning class.
Wars, politics, and societal values and traditions have major effects on the life of community members. Chuan-Sheng is an example of a man affected by patriarchal traditions and values that do not respect the woman. China’s traditions and history do not regard women as an important part of society. Pak Hun, in Descendants of Cain, cannot make decisions concerning love and property because of communist government control. Finally, Zhenzhen as a woman can only serve the government by becoming a prostitute spy to the Japanese soldiers. The society has no place for prostitutes.
Hwang, SunWon. The Descendants of Cain. New York: Routledge. 2015. Web.
Lu, Hsun. ”Regret for the past”, in the Power of Weakness. New York: Createspace Independent Pub. 1925. Web.
Ding, Ling. ”When I was in Xia Village”, in the Power of Weakness. New York: Feminist Press at the City University of New York. 1941. Web.
This essay on Chinese Community and External Issues in Literature was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
The Brazen Desire to Succeed Essay
Updated: Jul 5th, 2019
Setting and characterization in ‘The Destructors’ by Graham Greene and ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ by Richard Connell has been used to increase the effectiveness of the themes and motifs.
Even though the stories are written by different writers, there is a striking similarity in the use of elements to communicate the deeper meaning of the two tales. The setting of ‘The Destroyers’ is a gang of youth formed in the period after the Second World War.
Connell’s story is set on a remote island far away from civilized human society. In ‘The Most dangerous Game’ Connell explores the theme of Rainsford’s human rationality and intellect as opposed to Zaroff’s beastly instinct by setting the story in a jungle.
Rainsford, a fine human and a fighter, falls prey to Zaroff’s insane and bizarre sadistic hunt. In ‘The Destroyers’ Greene explores a similar theme of uncanny destruction by T. and his gang who have no real motive for destroying Mr. Thomas’ house.
Both stories, “The Destructors” and “The Most Dangerous Game” explore the raw human grit and determination and are prime examples of the underlying destructive nature of mankind.
Set in the post World War II, Greene’s characters in ‘The Destructors’ represent the divide between the various generations, the old and the new.
Mr Thomas symbolizes the old ways, beliefs and mindset while the gang is symbolic of the new generation, completely dissociated from their past, incapable of understanding or respecting old traditions and customs.
Mr Thomas believes that his age and experience give him the authority to instruct the boys about the things they should or should not do. However, the boys at the threshold of youth are selfish and destructive by nature and refuse to accept authority.
The initial leader of the gang, Blackie is mischievous but not dangerous. When T. takes over, the dynamics of the gang change and under his leadership the gang assumes a more destructive stance.
Blackie represents the qualities of a good leader while T. is symbolic of a leader who believes that power gives the right to dominate and destroy.
In ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ the protagonist of the story, Sanger Rainsford is a daring game hunter with the ability to fearlessly face the most challenging situations with ease. Zaroff, on the other hand, is destructive man and uses power to feed his animal instincts.
While both Rainsford and Zaroff are brave and powerful, Rainsford uses power responsibly in contrast to Zaroff who uses power to satiate his animal instincts simply for the sake of pleasure.
Rainsford is similar in his ways to Blackie, of ‘The Destructors’ in their use of power with conscientiousness. Zaroff is comparable with T. of ‘The Destructors’ in his misuse of power to destroy things simply for the sake of pleasure.
Even though the two stories are different, there is a striking similarity between the characters. Set in the post World War period, they are relevant even in today’s world, giving them a universal appeal.
The jungle in ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ is strongly symbolic of the chaotic and powerful nature of Zaroff, which knows no limits. Within the jungle, the struggle for survival supersedes all other needs.
Rainsford constantly struggles to save himself from Zaroff who has lost complete control of himself. Zaroff and Rainsford present the stark contrast of the jungle and civilization; Zaroff is animal like in his instincts and severely lacks the ability to think and reason, while Rainsford is a representation of a civilized society which rejects violence in favour of human sanity and peace.
Zaroff is offensive like the wilderness of the jungle while Rainsford is defensive in his actions and behaviour.
On similar terms, Greene’s ‘The Destructors’ presents a modern view of the civilized society as a jungle in which the old and young differ in values, beliefs, morals and ethics.
The formation of the youth gang is symbolic of today’s modern jungle in which the younger generation vents energy through physical power and destruction.
There is a disconnect between the youth and the past who no longer revere history or its makers represented by the Wormsley Common gang led by T. T. assumes leadership of the gang from Blackie and plans to destroy the innocent and old Mr. Thomas’s house.
T. forces his beliefs and decisions on the other members of the gang and asserts his power over them.
The shift in power occurs from the non-dangerous and mischievous Blackie to the conspiring, angry and irrational T. Despite his destructive and irrational behaviour, T. does not want to cause any harm to Mr. Thomas and tries to protect him from damage by keeping him safe.
This aspect of T.’s personality is indicative of the struggle between the good and evil in humans. T. is a symbol of the youth in the modern day society which shares a lost relationship with Mr. Thomas, representing the older generation.
While T. is determined on destroying the traditional house, he has no personal hatred for Mr. Thomas and wants no harm to come to the old man.
T. is fully aware of the beauty of the house but knows its association with the higher social order, which he seeks to destroy by destroying the house.
The Destructors in Greene’s story have created a man-made jungle with their animal like instincts of destruction. Similarly, Connell’s characters represent the real jungle in which man has to save himself from the brutality and savagery of other animals.
Zaroff’s hunt for Rainsford forces Rainsford to use his cat like instinct in order to keep match with the animal in Zaroff. This descent of Rainsford from a rational thinking human to that of an animal is symbolic of the basic human instinct which tries to survive at all costs and never gives up.
Rainsford who has on earlier occasions functioned like the fox, is now forced to behave like the cat to save himself from the preying Zaroff. In order to keep pace with Zaroff, Rainsford has to stoop down to his level of an animal, though of a different order.
After creating a misleading path through the jungle to lose Zaroff on the first night of the hunt, Rainsford switches modes and hides in a tree to save some of his strength.
Both stories demonstrate the grit and determination of humans to succeed and win, albeit for different reasons. In Cornell’s ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ Raisnford and Zaroff fight till the end to succeed and beat each other.
While Zaroff is a psychopathic sadist who kills without a purpose, Rainsford kills only to protect himself. In ‘The Destroyers’ Greene portrays the picture of a conflicted jungle-like society post World War II in which the youth do not have a purpose to destroy but do so for the sake of power.
While both the stories represent man’s basic human instinct for destruction, Greene’s characters are less harmful than those of Connell.
Zoraff is completely animal like in his behaviour lacking empathy, compassion and reason while T. is only irrational and does not cause physical harm to Mr. Thomas; on the contrary, he makes sure that Mr. Thomas is safe in his out-house when the house is being pulled down.
Both the stories are symbolic of instinctive human nature which can be devastatingly destructive without any purpose, rationality or logic. The protagonists in both stories demonstrate the underlying will to succeed.
Graham, Greene. The Destructors, 1954. Print.
Richard, Connell. The Most Dangerous Game, 1924. Print.
This essay on The Brazen Desire to Succeed was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov & Camus’ story The Guest Essay
Updated: Nov 19th, 2019
The introduction: the fundamentals of the stories
The basic theme of Dostoevsky’s production The Grand Inquisitor is the Catholic Inquisition over the Protestants. The Brothers Karamazov represents two opposite sides: one of the brothers Ivan is anti-religion, while another one – Alyosha believes in a superhuman controlling power. Geoff Uyleman states:
The chapter The Grand Inquisitor in The Brothers Karamazov describes in detail Dostoyevsky’s notion and rejection of demothologized religion. As such, it is embodied by the Grand Inquisitor himself who, having lost his own faith, now exploits faith to cause desired behavior in those whom he governs (24).
One of the most important issues, which is to be discussed is the notion of morality. Thus, there are two opinions. Ivan thinks that he is responsible only for his own actions. He is once again “caught in the toils of his moral psychological dilemma – the dilemma of intending to follow the dictates of a conscience whose precepts his reasons cannot justify” (Uyleman 31).
Ivan states that if people don’t believe in a superhuman controlling power, they can do what they want in spite of the death of God. The basic idea of Camus’ story The Guest is considered to be the same.
Generally, the author refuses God, “in a profound sense, is angry at God – for the transcendent God of the Christians is too far removed from the world to be part of us, and even when the Christian God participates he glories in suffering and colonizes death!” (Meredith 23).
The thesis statement
The existence of spiritual redemption is one of the key points both stories disclose. The notions of morality and belief are rather ambiguous and complicated. The basic themes of both stories are partially similar; however, certain contradictions and different approaches to God’s existence make the basic ideas of the stories different.
The body: The Brothers Karamazov vs. The Guest: the similarities and differences
The common feature of The Brothers Karamazov and The Guest is, on the one hand, the absurdity of existence. The most important theme of a short story The Guest is Camus’ concept of absurdism. Symbolism, irony and foreshadowing are the central literary techniques Albert Camus used.
The Brothers Karamazov and The Guest disclose the problem of choice, although the context of choice is different.
Lawrence Meredith says that for Camus, “if God is alive he lives in the midst of incredible suffering which apparently he can do nothing about. Ivan Karamazov faced with this inexorable logic of belief, simply turned in his ticket to heaven” (24). Thus, the main characters of the both stories recognize the logic of unbelief.
In this case, the basic theme of The Guest is that “nothing is gained by bringing to life a powerless god” (24). However, the chapter The Brothers Karamazov is mostly related to the choice of freedom. There is a position that a genuine humility depends upon a person’s attitude towards God. Gilles Mongeau states that:
Christ proposes that we begin to desire a genuine spiritual poverty, and even an actual poverty, a material simplicity of life that promotes interior freedom before created goods and allows us to use them to God’s greater service and praise” (1).
Taking into account Mongeau’s opinion, one may affirm that if people want to be free, or want to feel what freedom is, they must recognize that they are God’s beloved creatures. Moreover, such acceptance is to be honest and sincere.
According to Dostoyevsky, “Humanity suffered with the burden of freedom of choice in the knowledge of good and evil” (Tncc.edu 1). So, if moral codes are to be developed by people, then freedom seems to be unnecessary as well as the power of God.
The issue of ethical life is one of the key points the chapter The Brothers Karamazov describes. Simon de Beauvoir “rejects the familiar charge against humanism made famous by Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor: If God is dead everything is permitted” (1).
According to her, “ethical passion is defined by its generosity — specifically the generosity of recognizing the other’s difference and protecting the other in his difference from becoming an object of another’s will” (Simon de Beauvoir 1). So, existential-ethical situation of both stories is considered to be ambiguous.
Camus’ The Guest also discloses the same problem. Trudy D. Conway says that “Camus’ character also clearly recognizes hospitality to be the virtue he must practice, even if and when others misread or ridicule his actions” (16). That’s why Daru lets the Arab stay as the guest.
Hospitality and generosity of the main hero are considered to be the best traits of character people should possess. Camus’ tale states that we are to create cooperative interactions and to improve the practice of hospitality. “Perhaps, as philosophers in the contemporary world we need to reflect on how, on many levels, in many ways, in our lives and our communities, we can actively further an ethos of hospitality” (Conway 17).
The conclusion: the importance of philosophical conflicts in the stories
Brian Phillips says that “The central philosophical conflict of The Brothers Karamazov is the conflict between religious faith and doubt” (11). However, the central philosophical conflict of Camus’ The Guest is the absence of God. The points partially coincide.
Dostoyevsky’s The Grand Inquisitor affirms that “In a world in which the absence of God makes moral distinctions meaningless, people are logically justified in simply acting out their desires” (Phillips 12).
Camus’ The Guest states that people shouldn’t be afraid of God, there is no need to raise the eyes towards the heaven, where nobody lives. Thus, there is the same opinion.
Beauvoir, S. The Ethics of Ambiguity: Bad Faith, The Appeal, The Artist, 2010. Web.
Conway, T. From Tolerance to Hospitality: Problematic Limits of a Negative Virtue, 2004. Web.
Meredith, L. Invocation from Algeria: Albert Camus and the Living God, 1969. Web.
Mongeau, G. Lenten Thoughts, 2011. Web.
Phillips, B. The Brothers Karamazov, 2002. Web.
Tncc.edu. Again? Web.
Uyleman, Geoff. Nietzsche and Dostoevsky: Creating and Resolving Existential Despair, 2005. Web.
This essay on Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov & Camus’ story The Guest was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Shakespeare “Richard II” and “Henry IV” Essay
Updated: Dec 17th, 2019
Historical reports indicate that Kings, like the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt claimed to be gods or at least descended from them. Due to this fact many a time their coronation ceremonies were for the primary intention of demonstrating divine approval of their ascension to the throne (Cannon, Cannon and Hargreaves 2009). This doctrine was spelled out even more clearly in the sixteenth century when estates and parliaments had begun to express a challenge to royal authority.
In British history the most explicit exposition of this right was made by James VI of Scotland in two separate treatises. These treatises namely, The Trew Laws of Free Monarchies and Basilikon Doron maintained this view of Divine Right in relation to the Monarchs.
He moved to England in 1603 while maintaining the same view under the name James I (Cannon, Cannon and Hargreaves 2009). Evidence of this is seen in his speech to parliament in 1610 when he informed the parliament that Kings exercised a resemblance of divine power on earth and as such were accountable to none but God.
On the contrary, a Machiavellian view to power considers the strength of a leader by the degree to which the leader is independent of others and their ability to maintain domination over people (Denhardt, Denhardt and Aristigueta 225).
According to this view of leadership, politics and power are human enterprises and as such are outside the realm of God or fate. The founder of this line of thought argued that because State is paramount then whatever means necessary to perpetuate power must be used by the leader (Denhardt, Denhardt and Aristigueta 225).
This position suggests that a ruler should be ruthless where necessary so long as they are able to keep their subjects united and loyal. This approach is most probably responsible for the philosophy of “the end justifies the means (Denhardt, Denhardt and Aristigueta 225).” Having introduced these various points of view the rest of the discussion will now attempt to place the rulers in the plays into either of the categories.
It has been observed that the play Richard II marks an exciting advance in the development of the author’s artistry. The play has an unusual formality of structure and tone and an impressive eloquence used to express the mystique of kinship more emphatically than any of the other earlier histories (Forker 1). The story depicts in vivid terms the dethronement of an unsuitable anointed monarch by an illegitimate but more suitable ruler.
In the play the author manages to bring the power and ordered grandeur as centered on the throne into a tragic conflict that emanates from human weakness and political inadequacy of the ruler Richard II (Forker 1). In so doing the author manages to bring the audience to consider the disturbing possibility of the fact that hereditary monarchy may be unviable. The unique thread in the play is the stress laced on the divinity that was thought to hedge kings. This comes to light given the abandonment of the historical practice and the probing of the concept of divine right as seen in the unstable ruler who places his entire trust in theoretical protections (Forker 1).
In the play the author manages to point to the king’s reputation for empty pomp and ceremonial posturing that leads the reader to understand the Kings vanity (Bergeron 85). In the play the author also helps to point out that despite the pomp and ceremony, Richard II is actually a sham of kingship.
This is evident in the fact that much as the lay depicts Richard as the King he does not play this role as efficiently as Bolingbroke (Bergeron 104). In fact this leads Bolingbroke to admit at the end of his reign that most of the era has been like an act in a play.
However, in relation to the question of whether the play depicts a Machiavellian or doctrine of divine right it would appear that the play tends to display more of the doctrine of divine right. This is seen in the lavish coronation ceremony accorded to the new King, Richard II (Bergeron 89).
It is reported that following this ceremony Richard appears to see new heaven and new earth. In light of this the new King begins to see himself a savior as he redeems and pardons various subjects. Evidence of this is seen when a banished murderer throws himself before the king’s horse as the procession makes an entry into the city (Bergeron 90).
Such scenes are again repeated in the city itself as the mayor and sheriffs parade themselves before his judgment and confess various sins. The play manages to depict the manifestation of the new King as some kind of Jesus within the city.
These dramatic actions of the new King serve to form complex relationships between Richard and the subjects gathered around to watch the events unfolding. These activities also serve the purpose of entertaining and impressing the new king. The King serves as the most important piece of the action as the subjects come to be entertained by his actions and explanatory speeches (Bergeron 90). In these repeated pageants the city grants Richard majesty and glory as he comes to judge errant members of the public.
However, despite all the pomp depicted by the King in the play there are numerous occasions in the play that the author uses to point to the aspect of divine right as held by the King. In one scene after the king’s return from Ireland and discovery of Bolingbroke’s rebellion, the Bishop of Carlisle reassures the sovereign of the ability of the power that made him King to keep him King (Morrison 117).
This statement by the Bishop appears to suggest to the sovereign that he has been made King by Divine Right and as such will remain sovereign.
Following this reassurance by the Bishop it is further observed in a statement by the King in a proclamation that suggests not all the water in the sea can wash the balm of an anointed King (Morrison 117). Again in this statement it is evident that the sovereign suggests the role of Divine Right in relation to his reign. He continues to make similar statements in mentioning that the speech of worldly men cannot depose the deputy elected by the Lord (Morrison 117).
As the plot of the play thickens it emerges that the subjects may have began to rebel to which the King suggests that if this has come to pass then the subjects has broken allegiance with God (Morrison 117).
In this statement as well it is evident that the King had a firm belief in the doctrine of Divine Right in relation to ruling his Kingdom. However, as the plot thickens and it becomes apparent that his throne is threatened the King abandons his claims of divinity. This is indicated in his statement to his remaining supporters when he mentions that he lives on bread just as they do (Morrison 117).
In summary, in the play Richard II the author uses very rich poetic imagery to depict the story of an inept ruler and his eventual disposition from the throne in England. Among the potent themes used in the play is that of blood, which is portrayed in two basic shades. The blood of kinship and inheritance which serves to grant Richard II the throne of England, and the blood of violent murder and conflict which eventually strips him of the throne (Morrison 120).
In the play blood is less frequently used to depict a hot blooded character. As a result of this the play tends to depict well an ominous atmosphere and helps to display the familial relationships that are essential in the play. However, in the play Richard II the author manages to depict division of loyalties within the family and the relationship to the crown (Morrison 120). The reduction of Richard from King to a non entity is seen to arise from his own nature with a little help from initiatives of Bolingbroke (Moseley 53).
It has been suggested by some that one problem that appeared to have preoccupied the author throughout his career was whether it was possible for high political office to be properly exercised without any effect to the person exercising it (Moseley 53). For this reason it is possible that the author took time to prepare plays on various perspectives on rulers and the effect of ruling on their personality.
However, in the play Henry IV, the King is presented as a very painstakingly careful ruler who cares very deeply about his land. In addition to this the play presents him as an individual given to working very hard ad seeking peace with as much justice as possible (Moseley 53). Despite of this he is devoid of his attractiveness from the era of Richard II. For this reason even acts for which he appears to deserve praise have come to seem as the fruit of policy as opposed to virtue.
The text suggests that he is an old man, cold and constantly in engaged in efforts to prove the truth. However, despite this cold summary the author also manages to paint him as a man and father who thinks and feels (Moseley 54). Unlike his predecessor Richard, he sees the crown as a heavy duty bestowed upon him and is aware that his path to the crown has left him morally tainted.
As a result of this it is reported that his head often lies uneasy and he barely trusts anyone. It is reported that he is a fundamentally decent individual though he has suffered betrayal by those whose hearts he won during his youth. He is aware of the guilt he bears in relation to what he did to Richard (Moseley 54).
The realm he presides over is torn by revolt and his life is characterized by constant battle against disorder. His opponents are hardly a bed of roses. It is reported that Worcester and Northumberland are clearly making attempts to see what they can get under the guise of avenging Richard while using the military clout of Hotspur (Moseley 54).
It is reported that Northumberland is shrewd enough to wait the results of the Hotspur/Glendower campaign before committing itself. On the other hand Hotspur is apolitical innocent whose rashness is being manipulated by others (Moseley 54).
In summary, the play bears the name of the Henry IV but is more concerned with the process of reforming Hal, the Prince of Wales. The text is involved in the themes that see Hal change from a carefree, fun loving individual to a responsible man prepared to accept the crown of England (Modugno 80). The play follows Hals transformation from the world of Falstaff’s tavern to one of the King’s court and the responsibilities that come with it.
The play depicts an England beset by rebellion and the possibility of war. There is disorder throughout Henry’s kingdom and this is evident both in the court and the common world that includes inns. The play traces the actions of Henry and Hal and the reestablishment of order in the Kingdom (Moseley 82).
As mentioned in the introduction a Machiavellian view of power is represented by the degree to which the leader is able of maintaining order while remaining independent of others. In this view of power whatever means necessary must be used to perpetuate power. It is possible to suggest that the play Henry IV tends to support the Machiavellian approach to power as opposed to one of Divine right. The main reason for this is first of all due to the guilt of Henry in relation to what he did to Richard (Moseley 54).
It is apparent that the Divine Right to the throne lay with Richard. In addition to that the Machiavellian approach seems to be supported in this play given the underhand tactics being used by Henry’s detractors such as Worcester and Northumberland. It has already been observed that the two are awaiting the outcome of a campaign against Henry in Hotspur/Glendower. It is based on this Machiavellian approach that Henry manages to overcome the erratic Hotspur (Moseley 87).
Bergeron, David M. Pageantry in the Shakespearean Theater. Georgia: University of Georgia Press, 2011. Print.
Cannon, John, John Ashton Cannon, and Anne Hargreaves. The Kings & Queens of Britain. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 2009. Print.
Denhardt, Robert B., Janet Vinzant Denhardt, and Maria Pilar Aristigueta. Managing Human Behavior in Public & nonprofit Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 2002. Print.
Forker, Charles R. King Richard II. London: Thomson Learning, 2002. Print.
Modugno, Michael A. Henry IV, Part I (MAXNotes Literature Guides), Part 1. New Jersey: Research & education Association, 1996. Print.
Morrison, Michael. Richard II (MAXNotes Literature Guides). New Jersey: MAXNotes, 1996. Print.
Moseley, Charles. William Shakespeare: Henry IV, Parts 1 and 2. Penrith: Humanities-Ebooks.co.uk, 2007. Print.
This essay on Shakespeare “Richard II” and “Henry IV” was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
Analysis of Two Anne Frank’s Entries Essay
Updated: May 12th, 2019
Terrible events that shake the world at the beginning of the last century left awful marks in the souls of the people who faced this tragedy, the Holocaust. Nowadays we can’t even imagine what the time it was, but it does not mean that we are allowed to forget it. Quite the contrary, we should remember not only the events that happened that time.
The writings of Anne Frank in her book dedicated to the Holocaust and called The Diary of a Young Girl should be considered as the greatest masterpiece of that period. It would be interesting to compare two entries from this book to understand the importance and significance of the themes issued in this writing.
Thus, one can find out a lot of interesting information about the character and the world-views of Anne Frank as well as plunge into her world comparing the two extracts of Saturday, 20 June, 1942 and Wednesday, 12 January, 1944.
The entries that were chosen for analysis feature the topics of the Holocaust, militarism, relationships with other people, self-identity of the main character and her writing style which are described in a hopeless voice.
The first theme that unites the fragments is girl’s attitude towards her diary and her version of the relationships in her family. The first extract, Saturday, 20 June, that is under consideration is the second writing in the diary of Anne Frank. That’s why it is considered to be so important for analyzing the whole context of the book. Wednesday, 12 January, 1944’s fragment seems to be a continuation of the first entry.
The thing that impresses the reader is a discrepancy between the themes aroused in the diary and the age of the author. The first impression about Anne Frank that you get when you read the first lines of the Saturday, 20 June, 1942’s writing is that this girl is a very thoughtful and precocious child.
She approaches her diary very serious because she emphasizes that she is not eager to describe her ordinary routine, but her feelings and considerations about the most important themes. However, first of all, we get acquainted with her family. She describes its members very bare giving just the most necessary facts.
Quite the opposite situation, we can observe in the entry of Wednesday, 12 January, 1944 where we can see the relationships between Anne and her mother, girl’s version about the lack of understanding in her family. Thus, she tries to find excuses for her mother who she considers to give too little attention to her daughter.
The second theme that unites these two fragments is the girl’s reflection about her self- identification. It is very interesting to learn about the theory that Anne creates about herself in the society.
She tries to understand in Wednesday, 12 January, 1944’s entry what it is to “see myself through someone else’s eyes” (Frank 150) and find her place in the world. It is shocking when you understand what a deep abyss of despair is hidden in her soul.
The solitude that runs through the whole two entries is described in the voice of the narration that seems to be hopeless, but it doesn’t except the hope for a future improvement. The girl says that she wants the diary that was present to her on her thirteen’s birthday “itself to be my friend” (Frank 13). This fact says that Anne has no one to reveal her feelings to and confide in.
Though she admits that she is surrounded by a lot of people, relatives and friends, she feels alone. This theme continues in the second part of the Wednesday, 12 January, 1944’s entry where the girl ponders over her dissimilarity with other people in way of thinking and seeing the world. That is the main reason why she is so lonely and can not find a kindred spirit.
However, she blames no one, but herself in this situation. The reader feels how much the girl loves her family. It is visible in her descriptions and worries connected with her grandmother in the first entry and the relationships with her mother and her older sister Margot in the second writing.
Her diary appears to be her only resort. However, her despair becomes a little bit lesser when she writes about her boy friend Peter at the end of the second entry.
The thing that made the girl so self-critical is a hard time that she lives in. The spirit of the Holocaust and growing militarism influences the whole book. Though Anne gives just bare facts of the life of the ordinary Jews in Saturday, 20 June, 1942’s extract, you can understand that it bothers the young girl.
Just an enumeration of the limitations that the Jews were to face hints on the hidden risk of this measures and growing tension in the world that doesn’t know what to wait from these orders. It seems that such a young girl can not understand the full threat of the situation, but it appears that Anne has a special perception of the reality that allows her to appraise the situation even better than many adults.
She aims her diary to be a description, “a mirror in which Anne could see her own reflection” (Kopf 3). We can trace how she tries to change her manner of writing because she begins keeping diary not for herself, but for the others.
A time that made the young girl grow older too early almost deprived her of her childhood and made her feel alone and alien to that world. You feel that Anne longs for understanding and seems to be desperate, but doesn’t exclude hope for better life.
Analyzing the extracts of Anne Franks’ diary, you understand that her book is a tribute to the Holocaust. It also deals with her world-views, the unjust regime, humiliation and total extermination of the nation.
Frank, Anne. Anne Frank The Diary of a Young Girl. Trans. B. M. Mooyaart-Doubleday. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1952.
Kopf, Hedda Rosner. Understanding Anne Frank’s The Diary of a Young Girl: A Student Casebook to Issues, Sources, and Historical Documents. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997.
This essay on Analysis of Two Anne Frank’s Entries was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.
“The Blitzkrieg Myth: How Hitler and the Allies Misread The Strategic Realities of World War II” by John Mosier Essay
Updated: May 1st, 2019
Those people, who want to improve own lives and achieve success in present and future, have to pay much attention to such issue like their history and be able to learn on the mistakes, made by other people from the past.
The German nation is considered to be one of the most remarkable ones due to its abilities to stir up rebellions and wars in order to demonstrate their desire to power and recognition.
Within short periods of time, this nation achieved unbelievable success and enthralled many people; however, German people did not have much time to enjoy their victories and hold their positions.
My passion to history and the role of the German nation and Hitler in particular makes me pay attention to the book by Pr. John Mosier The Blitzkrieg Myth: How Hitler and the Allies Misread The Strategic Realities of World War II and get an opportunity to learn more about the strategies, used by the Germans, and clear up what promoted their failure.
The title of this book promises to discover the reasons of why Hitler did not succeed with the chosen tactics and what strategic realities of World War II were.
The main topic of the book under discussion is the analysis of the strategy, known as Blitzkrieg or Breakthrough, as Pr. Mosier called it, its errors, and the outcomes, which led to German loss of the war. John Mosier tells about the peculiarities of armoured warfare and the strategies, connected to air bombing.
The peculiar feature of this author is his readiness to face with the sources, he may both agree and disagree with. In order to present a clear picture of German participation in the war and the reasons, which provoked these people to fight and kill, it is necessary to concentrate on various sources and perspectives and find out strengths and weaknesses of the chosen positions.
The idea of the Blitzkrieg myth was connected to the innovations in tank and airplane technologies. These innovations should cause considerable changes and rapid breakthroughs that would be able to demoralize the enemy within several days.
Mosier gives the reader a chance to rethink the events of World War II and to evaluate Hitler’s attitude to the military doctrine. He, as no one else, believed in success of that breakthrough and used it for two times, in France and in Belgium. However, those two times were feeble attempts to gain victory.
John Mosier is one of the most fascinating American current academics, who prefer to deal with history, films, and English. Such preferences of this author demonstrate his variety of tastes and abilities to analyze the case from different perspectives.
Mr. Mosier got his Ph.D. in Tulane University in 1968 and presented a splendid dissertation that discovered the topic of historiography. Nowadays, he worked at the University of New Orleans and has access to numerous historical sources. His skills in editing and writing also promise that this book is written in clear and comprehensible English.
This person is not afraid of challenges and changes; his desire to investigate our history, use own points of view, and share them with the reader make him one of the most powerful writers about history and warfare.
It is not necessary to accept his standpoints and use his book as the only reliable source. The Blitzkrieg Myth is one of those secondary sources, which allow to study German strategies and to evaluate their mistakes to improve personal actions.
John Mosier’s background in military and history provides him with a good chance to study World War II, German strategies and mistakes, and the environment that affected war’s development.
This is why his personal approach to the subject, described in the book, lies in the idea to demonstrate own ideas and understanding of the situation concerning the place of the German nation in the war.
“To understand what happened in this war, one must begin with an explanation that embraces the facts as they are known to exist, not as several generations of analysts have wished them to be” (Mosier 2003, 2-3).
This approach to forget about past investigations and use own conjectures is not frequent in history and literature, this is why it should cause respect and attention of the reader.
His teaching abilities and interests in history support him and promote the development of one of the most captivating and provoking pieces of work about history and German war.
After the book by John Mosier is analysed, it turns out to be very hard to define one sentence as a strong thesis of his ideas. From the very beginning, the author admits that this work differs considerably from many other historian writings and provokes its reader to think and present own suggestions as for the events of the World War Second.
“The purpose here is not a reevaluation of their careers but to suggest how our perceptions have been so decisively shaped by the blind acceptance of the breakthrough theory of military operations” (Mosier 2003, 11).
These words introduce the reader a new way to perceive information and may serve as a good and strong thesis of the whole work. The Blitzkrieg Myth has many sides and controversies, and it is better to present several sources for the reader’s analysis and allow him/her study the material and come to certain conclusions independently.
In spite of the fact that such shortages as support of one of the most disliked generals like Montgomery and attention to Western front only can weaken the book, Mosier’s notations and ideas that were not inherent to other writers strengthen it and show the reader another way to comprehend past events.
In order to support own ideas and thoughts, John Mosier uses different kinds of evidence. First of all, Mosier adds extensive notes to each chapter and leave some comments on them. He presents both types of notes: which he could agree with, and which he could argue.
All these notes are arranged properly and help to comprehend the essence of each chapter. Secondly, the author makes considerable use of numbers in order to clear up the situation and analyse the outcomes of the Blitzkrieg. The reader faces no difficulty to comprehend the material and the notes, which support author’s point of view.
Even if the reader cannot comprehend why the author chooses this or that idea as the major one in the chapter, the notes and the numbers prove that the author’s choice is great indeed and the reader has to re-evaluate his/her position and analyze the author’s one.
Reading this book is probably one of the most fascinating events in my current education. Many books present rather different ideas as for the evaluation of the war actions and Hitler attitude to the events.
However, Mosier’s The Blitzkrieg Myth presents an absolutely different position and provokes the reader to think and re-organize background knowledge about this topic.
John Mosier shows how wrong our attitude to German military doctrine can be: he tells that the Germans did not plan to use armoured spearheads in order to frighten the Allied but did prefer the broad-front strategy that implied numerous attacks to different places simultaneously.
The idea that numerous casualties prevented German success in the chosen strategy was a new one, and I got a wonderful chance to study this issue from a new perspective and a new approach.
In general, the theme of history becomes more interesting and more educative if a person makes an opportunity to evaluate the events from own perspective. Even if the chosen way contradicts the already established facts and numbers, it is not the reason to drop it.
John Mosier proves that a new approach concerning German military doctrine, the Blitzkrieg Myth, and Hitler errors is worthy of attention. The approach, taken in the book, and the material, we learnt about the Blitzkrieg Myth from other textbooks and lectures, differ considerably.
Mosier admits that it is not obligatory to regard Hitler as pure negative character as well as it is not necessary to search for some points to support Hitler’s actions.
In order to study history and comprehend the essence of blitzkrieg, it is better to evaluate, analyse, and use own points of view to clear up what cause German failure and why the Blitzkrieg Myth remains to be a myth.
Mosier, John. 2003. The Blitzkrieg Myth: How Hitler and the Allies Misread The Strategic Realities of World War II. New York: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.
This essay on “The Blitzkrieg Myth: How Hitler and the Allies Misread The Strategic Realities of World War II” by John Mosier was written and submitted by your fellow student. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.