Spies

Keith and Stephen Complex Relationship

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

In Spies by Michael Frayn, the description of Keith as Stephen’s ‘best friend’ does not suit him nearly as much as the ‘officer corps in [their] two man army. Keith is very obviously depicted as pushy, bossy, dominant and a bully on some occasions, always needing to be in charge, always needing to ‘have someone to be braver than.’ It is these times when we see just how little of a true friend Keith is to Stephen, and how he acts more like his leader than his equal.

Right at the beginning of the novel in chapter 2, Stephen feels as if he has ‘good fortune in being Keith’s friend’ which shows just how much Stephen is grateful towards Keith, to the point where he is willing to be pushed around and led by him. During Stephen and Keith’s first interaction, Keith’s social standing is much higher than Stephen’s as he lives in a posh, impeccable house, ‘number 2. Chollerton. The Haywards.’ And the boys are ‘socially color coded’ as Stephen goes to a public school while Keith goes to a private school. It is also worth noting that Keith is most likely the way he is due to his home life. Mr. Hayward is depicted as apathetic, formal and it has even been blatantly stated that he abuses Keith.

In the third chapter, as Stephen and Keith are investigating Mrs. Hayward, Keith misspells words in their log book multiple times. Despite this, Stephen doesn’t call him out and late in the novel when Mrs. Hayward realizes that Keith has misspelt ‘private’ as ‘privet’, Stephen has half a mind to take responsibility for it as to spare Keith the embarrassment. This shows how low Stephen is willing to stoop for Keith, perhaps because he thinks he owes it to him.

When Mrs. Hayward visits Braemar and tells Stephen that Keith is ‘easily led’, Stephen is left staring at her in disbelief, unable to even imagine Keith being led by him. He wonders how Keith manages to fool both their mothers into believing that Stephen is the leader. This leads to sympathy towards Keith for a change rather than Stephen, as Mrs. Hayward’s words imply that Keith is pushed around at home, presumably by his father.

Keith is also depicted as a flat out bully in various scenarios as he does not acknowledge Stephen’s bravery and often undermines, belittles and mocks him, such as when Stephen gives Keith the sock that he found in the tin box or when Stephen offers theories about Mrs. Hayward’s whereabouts. Keith ignores him and his ‘eyelids come down’ in disapproval to show that Stephen that his ideas don’t deserve acknowledgement and all ideas that are not Keith’s are invalid. Juxtaposition between Keith and his father clearly show the same condescending sneer and arrogant expression.

Further in the novella, Keith also mocks Stephen for ‘hiding [his] face like a little baby’ when he sees the man near the tin box. The hypocrisy of this statement shines through soon after though when they hear someone approaching, and they both hide their face in the mud. That is the first time we see the boys as equals with the second being when they ran back to the Close after terrorizing the tramp, ‘neither of [them] leader, neither of [them] led.’ This shows that fear is the equalizing force between the boys and it also shows that Stephen has now started realizing Keith’s role and so now is trying to take more of a leadership position.

Another example of Keith’s dominant nature arises when he makes Stephen take an oath on the bayonet that Stephen would not tell anyone otherwise Keith would kill him. His arrogance is also shown in how he must always take the binoculars and walk in front of Stephen and in how Stephen comes to fear him, letting him boss him around and being grateful to just be allowed near Keith. This causes the reader not only to be enraged at Keith for bossing Stephen around but also for the reader to be enraged at Stephen for letting Keith push him around and for hero worshiping him.

This novella claims to be about two best friends, but by the way the reader is shown Keith and Stephen’s interactions, their relationship and their dynamics, it is made obvious that one of them is definitely the leader while the other one is led. Overall, it is impossible for the reader to feel no sympathy towards Stephen in his immense misfortune in being Keith’s so-called friend.

Read more

A Book Review Of Washington’s Spies: The Story Of America’s First Spy Ring By Alexander Rose

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

Introduction

In Washington’s Spies: The Story of America’s First Spy Ring, Alexander Rose tells the story of the spy ring that helped America win the Revolutionary War. Rose takes us beyond the battlefields into the secret world of double agents and triple crosses, confidential operations including code breaking, and tells the story of a few spies who completed these top-secret assignments. Rose focuses on four longtime friends that create the Culper Ring, one of which who was the American Major, Benjamin Tallmadge. He reveals this operation system as a third-person point of view and exposes the method that led America to victory against Britain also mentioning the reactions of other people to this wild method. This paper is intended to review Rose’s book as well as his main points, evaluate the excellence of Rose’s writing and focus on any weaknesses within the story.

Summary

This section contains a summary of Washington’s Spies: The Story of America’s First Spy Ring. Alexander Rose begins the story in the summer of 1778, with the war expected to go in General George Washington’s favor. Washington was desperate to know what Britain’s plan was and where they were planning to attack next. At the time, Britain’s headquarters were located in New York. So, to figure out their plan Washington sent a small group of men, soon to be the Culper Ring, to New York to gain information of their military strategies, including future battle plans. Going into this he acknowledged chances of the plan be successful were unlikely. However, Washington went against the odds thus unleashing his secret weapon.

br>Washington’s spies included a young Quaker, Nathan Hale, who had been educated at Yale, a sickly farmer who begged to retire but always supported Washington, and Benjamin Tallmadge, an American military officer at the time, and Abraham Woodhull. Although each of the men proved themselves to be excellent spies, the sickly farmer stood out by enlisting to do whatever was necessary to assist Washington. Ironically, he proved himself to be an expert at spying. The intelligence networks the spies created became known as the Culper Ring. Although Washington thought the men were underperforming, he gained a tremendous amount of information from the Culper Ring that perhaps may have never been discovered. To communicate with Washington, the spies had to develop their own system of spy craft including invisible ink and attempts at cryptography. Also, the British were aware of the Culper Ring and were determined to stop them. They would pay for information on the Culper Ring, and if they thought you knew something and were not telling they would harshly punish you. The British, unintentionally lead the spies to learn of loyalty, betrayal, and friendship. Though Alexander Rose was not present during this time, he provided detailed information on the life of spies within the Culper Ring.

Author’s Arguments

As stated above, Rose’s main purpose for writing Washington’s Spies is to inform the reader of how intelligent the Patriot’s spies were by revealing the complex, secret world that helped America win the Revolutionary War. Rose’s three main points, or arguments presented were the complexity of the spy’s communication tactics with Washington, the importance of remaining unidentified to the British, and the overall experience during the Revolutionary War.

Communication with Washington during the late 1700s was hard enough, but having to communicate without anyone knowing was a real task. The members of the Culper Ring must have been of the smartest in their generation. Cryptography, or secret codes, was one method used. The spies had symbols, codes, and signs used to convey different messages undercover. Invisible ink played a huge role in cryptography, the black chambers used to scan mail did not detect invisible ink which gave the spies a private way to exchange messages with Washington. To interpret the letters, the government would heat the letters and the message would be revealed by the spies. “There are some five hundred known sympathetic-ink formulas, and no doubt many hundreds more could be concocted”. George Washington also used encryption to pass the letters through by having a certain letter represent a different number, letter, or person. “His code was a distant descendant of the Ave Maria cipher created by a priest, Johannes Trithemius”. To say that the communication system between Washington and his spies was complex would be an understatement.

Remaining unidentified to the British was also a difficult undertaking because not only did the spies have to remain undercover, but also, they had to gather tons of confidential information. From simply talking to the townspeople and gathering what little they could from them, to struggling to overhear the towns meetings. Many time the spies would pose “as a merchant” and “discuss defenses of the West Point” with British Generals to retain information. One of the spies, Woodhull, would go between New York and Long Island everyday to collect information and observe the naval tactics. Dedication to the Culper Ring was essential in being successful, and it also made the unpleasant circumstances not so bad for the spies.

The overall experience for the members of the Culper Ring during their spy times was focused on in Washington’s Spies. Rose documents the “long and bitter experiences” the spies encountered. They experienced many things physically and mentally; while away from their families they experienced loneliness, and, they were faced with all the pressure that came with their job to gather information and please their boss, George Washington.

Evaluation

This section contains an evaluation of Rose’s book. Firstly, Alexander Rose did a phenomenal job of recounting the time when the Culper Ring was in action. He told the stories in the perspective of each member and at some points in the story you would feel as if you knew the men personally. Rose also presented the book using an uncomplicated choice of words. Rose informed the reader of the tactics used by George Washington in detail, and he tells you what the spies tactics to gain information were. Although Rose does do an excellent job at informing the reader of the tactics it almost seems as if he drags the information out and expands the information to far. This flaw serves as a minor weakness in his writing style.

A second weakness in Rose’s writing style is that at certain points in the story I would find myself very confused and uncertain on what was going on, resulting in lots of rereading. In the beginning of the story (chapters 1-3) I found myself questioning whether the Culper Ring was even truly favoring the patriots and not the British. Personally, I feel like the side to which the group was favoring should be clearly stated and undoubtedly reassured throughout the entire book. Throughout chapters 4-9 I slowly started to catch onto Rose’s subtle writing style and comprehended much more information. In the end, I did gain information on the Culper Ring, and their method to victory.

Finally, Rose sometimes went into too much detail on the situations and transitioned from the British to the colonies tactics in strange ways that made the book seem unorganized. Also, he mentions other people that are important at the time but not in the story, making it seem a bit more unorganized. This flaw alone can cause the reader to become frustrated and result in them taking the wrong idea away from Washington’s Spies, and this is a third weakness in Rose’s writing.

Conclusion

This critical review has evaluated the book Washington’s Spies: The Story of America’s First Spy Ring by Alexander Rose. The time of the Culper Ring and American Revolution that Rose recaps is very interesting and informative. Rose excels in educating the reader on many historical figures and the cleverness of George Washington along with his spies. However, Rose’s writing was weakened by stretching the information, vaguely expressing which side the Culper Ring favored, and carelessly transitioning from British tactics to the patriots causing confusion to the reader and making the book seem unorganized.

Read more

Analysis Of How Mr Hayward Is Presented In The Novel Spies By Michael Frayn

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

The meta-fiction novel ‘Spies’ was set in the 1940’s and written in 2002 by the author Michael Frayn. It revolves around the events and behaviours in relation to World War II. Frayn’s family’s financial situation turned for the worse after his mother’s death; he has experienced upper class and lower class lifestyles. Since the book was set during a war, an obvious theme in ‘Spies’ was masculinity, men who were able to fight in the war were considered as masculine; men who didn’t join the war felt emasculated and were discriminated against. The narration in this novel was indistinct and untrustworthy as it constantly switches from a young and innocent 12-year-old Steven to an unsure and befuddled 70-year-old Stefan. The main antagonist in the novel Mr Hayward is presented through Frayn’s use of language techniques, theme and dialogue.

Mr Hayward’s superiority is presented through Frayn’s use of dialogue. Mr Hayward uses the phrase “old bean” often, although it is a phrase of affection or a term of endearment, he creates an unnecessarily frightening and terrifying touch to the term. His sarcastic use of polite language like “old bean” is condescending and exhibits dominance. An additional example of Mr Hayward’s supremacy is from his threats to Keith, demonstrating their contrast of power. Mr Hayward accuses Keith of “taking other people’s things without permission- that’s stealing. You know that. Saying you didn’t when you did that’s lying. Yes?” His use of declarative sentences emanates a menacing aura, nobody dares to stand up to him or contest his ludicrous accusations, indicating that they are all petrified of Mr Hayward. The verb “stealing” is a severe and punishable offense, Mr Hayward is hoping to intimidate Keith by threatening him. Frayn portrays the austere control Mr Hayward has over Keith by accusing Keith of misconduct. Frayn’s use of dialogue depicts Mr Hayward’s disciplinarian nature shown through his manipulation of the imperative “Wash that stuff off your hands, dry them properly” directed towards Keith. The quote suggests that Mr Hayward has rules in the house that Keith and Mrs Hayward must follow. We can also deduce that punishments are mandatory whenever mistakes were made. By using an imperative, Mr Hayward is expecting fulfilment without objections and failure. They have to obey to his orders so that he is able to uphold his authority over the household. Mr Hayward communicates in short sentences. He is straight to the point and he seldom addresses the person he’s speaking to. This is because of the absence of respect he has for others; he considers himself to be strong and in control hence the others who are inferior to him don’t deserve personal recognition. Even so, Mr Hayward needs Keith and Mrs Hayward because there would be no one for him to forcefully imply his rules upon if they were gone. They are important to him: he wants to feel virile and the only approach is through oppressing others and appearing to be fearsome and daunting. Keith also had to “ask his father for permission to walk on the lawn, or lay out railway track on the paths.” This indicates that Keith is an obedient underling of Mr Hayward, even something as infinitesimal as walking on the lawn requires his permission. Also, this displays Mr Hayward’s obsession with control: everything has to be under his strict control.

An epitome of a bully and a tyrant to others, Mr Hayward implements his egotistical wishes on others and denies their decision-making abilities. He uses his direct and straightforward way of speaking: “Basket, then.” He asks Stephen for the basket without addressing him nor asking politely – being impolite towards Stephen. When he receives no riposte from Stephen, he enunciates once more “Basket. On the bench, old chap.” Mr Hayward uses the affectionate term “old chap” sarcastically to generate the opposite effect. Mr Hayward realises the disappearance of the basket, he instinctively blames Keith for taking the basket without permission. However, it wasn’t Keith who took the basket, he was being accused of something he didn’t do. He ordered Stephen to place the basket on the bench but Stephen doesn’t comply. There is a slight indication that Mr Hayward will be resorting to other procedures to express his acrimony if Stephen isn’t obeying to his edicts when he articulates that he’s “not going to say it again, old bean.” Again, his scintillating usage of affectionate terms serves to frighten Stephen so that he hands the basket to Mr Hayward via consternation. Mr Hayward might be pretending to be amiable to Stephen so that Mr Hayward’s desires will be actualized. He intimidates others to implement his demands through trepidation and not by force because it exhibits his total power over others.

Mr Hayward is a prominent persona in ‘Spies’, to the extent that he is perceived as an idol or a deity to Stephen and Keith. Mr Hayward’s activities around the house are described as “making perfection yet more perfect.” Inferring from the exaggeration, Stephen has an impression that everything that the Haywards carries out are considered as unsurpassed perfection. Stephen’s perspective that the Haywards are ‘perfect’ may cause polarities to the novel, his view of the story will be divergent from other characters who disagree with Stephen’s mentality. Mr Hayward’s garage is a “wonderful private kingdom”, the exaggeration and metaphor of the phrase elucidates that Mr Hayward is royalty and one of power. It proposes that he is a King because of his ownership of a kingdom. The adjective “private” also proves that Mr Hayward is affluent due to the fact that only the wealthy had private ownership of land at the time. Keith “smiles his father’s thin smile” and uses his father’s phrase “old bean” because he looks up to Mr Hayward, everything and anything he does is an example or a model for Keith to follow. Keith even seizes power over Stephen near the finale of the novel because he wants to be comparable to Mr Hayward.

Mr Hayward is a villainous and oppressive character in the novel ‘Spies’. Mr Hayward: a quintessential tyrant, a pessimistic idol, disciplinarian and superior figure. He governs over others to compensate for not fighting in World War II. He strives for full control over his surroundings and the people around him to make him feel masculine and tough. Mr Hayward doesn’t talk about his feelings because the notion of ‘Masculinity’ is all about strength and aggressiveness, being emotionally open and expressive is classified as a feminine trait. As a result of his fixed concept of masculinity which manifests machismo, he is unapproachable and lacks a genuine camaraderie; he is an isolated character. Frayn utilises different methods and techniques to present Mr Hayward as a character as well as apprising the readers of the paramount social issue of the 1940’s: machismo.

Read more

The Portrayal of Mr. Hayward in Spies by Michael Frayn

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

Michael Frayn wrote the novel ‘Spies’ to present a partly-autobiographical novel in 2002. Frayn grew up in Ewell, Surrey, during World War 2. He had a precious and happy early childhood until his mother died when Frayn was 12 years old. Frayn got to change form an exclusive private school to a public school due to financial issues. Frayn portrays the character Stephen in ‘Spies’ who transforming from a child to an adolescent. Stephen and his best friend, Keith were both in a curious process. We can know that they wanted to find out whether Keith’s mother was a German spy or not. Frayn commented on the sense of control that Mr. Hayward, Keith’s father always needs to have, which might link to the idea that in 1940’s Britain some men felt emasculated by their lack of involvement in World War 2. Mr. Hayward is incapacity to go to war which may mean he feels that he needs to declare even more control over his family to overcompensate for this.

In the novel ‘Spies’, Michael Frayn presents the disciplinarian aspect of Mr. Hayward with his interactions towards Keith which we can know from the quotation: ‘wash that stuff off your hands, dry them properly.’ It implies Mr. Hayward was ordering Keith to wash the hand and show him as a disciplinarian, Mr. Hayward wants Keith did everything well and in order. The noun ‘stuff’ refers to the green slime on Keith’s hand which he gets on when he followed Mrs. Hayward to the tunnel. The adverb in the quotation ‘properly’ conveys satisfactorily, means that Keith has to ensure he wash his hand perfectly clean due to the disciplinary expectations of his dad.

Furthermore, in the imagery quotation ‘selection of canes’ shows that Mr. Hayward is a disciplinarian. The phrase ‘canes’ implies that a stick for beating Keith if he didn’t return the thermos to Mr. Hayward. The word ‘selection’ implies there is not only one cane that Keith got beaten before, Keith may be beaten before by umbrella or sticks. Also, the quotation ‘tell them no thank you so much, I’m not such a fool’ portrays Mr. Hayward was lecturing Keith about if someone asks him play some stupid game he must reject because it will make Keith looks idiotic and ludicrous and it may affect Mr. Hayward’s reputation. The word ‘fool’ presents it as a person who behaves in a silly way it may be sarcastic towards Keith. This quote shows that Mr. Hayward was controlling Keith shows him as a disciplinarian.

The novel ‘Spies’ portrays a sense of false geniality on Mr. Hayward towards Keith and Stephen which shows from the quotation: ‘his lips drawn back in the familiar thin, impatient smile’. It exhibits Mr. Hayward was smiling with false kindness towards Keith and Stephen. The word ‘impatient’ portrays someone who is not calm and Mr. Hayward was smiling with impatient shows that he is a person of false geniality. Moreover, the quotation ‘old bean’ presents in dialogue between Mr. Hayward and Keith was a false geniality too. ‘Old bean’ was a friendly form to address on a person but Mr. Hayward express it as an ironical way towards Keith and Stephen. The quotation: ‘there is sorrow and pity in it’ demonstrates Mr. Hayward was disappointing on Keith when he said he dint took the thermos but it isn’t true so he smiles with sorrow and pity. The word ‘sorrow’ shows a feeling of deep distress caused by lost on Mr. Hayward and the word ‘pity’ is a fellow feeling that shows by Mr. Hayward.

Frayn conveys Mr. Hayward with sense of masculinity by: ‘dexterously filling or sawing or planning; or sharpening his great range of chisels’. The quotation shows Mr. Hayward was trying to do some physical work to shows his masculinity. The word ‘sharpening’ is a verb showing an action to make the bayonet become sharp, the reason that Mr. Hayward sharpening the bayonet because he wants to shows his masculinity and enhance himself become a manlier person. The quotation ‘his father’s huge shadow, like an ogre in its cave’ portrays that Mr. Hayward is as arrogant and aggressive as an ogre. The phrase could be an exaggeration ‘huge shadow’ shows that Mr. Hayward is terrifying and dominant even child as naïve as Stephen is capable of seeing the evil in Mr. Hayward. The phrase ‘like an ogre in its cave’ is a simile, it describes a dreadful ogre as Mr. Hayward Mr. Hayward’s authoritarian is made clear by Frayn through use of dialogue. Authoritarian is someone who takes charge of which is Mr. Hayward, he expects Keith obey his rules. It shows from the quotation ‘basket on the bench, old chap.’ Mr. Hayward is enforcing Keith to bring the basket to him. Frayn uses the technique imperative to further emphasizes his authority. Mr. Hayward said to his son ‘thermos’ shows that it’s a short and clear voice that Mr. Hayward wants to convey it. A short and clear voice contains authority inside e.g. how surgeon orders the soldier with a short command. This quotation also expresses how Mr. Hayward desperate to be in a War which can give order to those soldier, so he act those authority toward his son.

In conclusion, Mr. Hayward is presented as aggressive and impatient person who only try to manifest his masculinity and don’t care about others feeling since he was inability to go to World War 2. Frayn implies the character Mr. Hayward was a disciplinarian, false geniality, masculinity, authoritarian and intimidating person. All those sort of Mr. Hayward was impacted by the inability to go to World War 2 so he needs to declare more control on his family to overcompensate all his defect by lack of involvement in the war.

Read more

The Role of Women Spies in the Civil War

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

Hundreds of women posed as spies for the Civil War, on both the Confederate and Union sides. These women are arguably some of the bravest people in American history, who took great risks to do anything they could to stand up for what they believed in. What they went through was terrifying and difficult. Women who acted as spies in the Civil War played big roles throughout the war, and aren’t credited enough for how much they’ve done.

One of the most famous and well known women spies in the Civil War was Belle Boyd. She was born into a family with strong southern ties in May 1844. She was only 17 years old when the Civil War started, and soon after the Union army captured her hometown of Martinsburg, Virginia (now West Virginia) on July 2nd 1861. They treated many citizens, namely women, badly and forced them to go around armed. On July 4, Union soldiers raided her home, destroying things, bringing in a federal flag, and, as she said in a memoir written after the war, “addressed my mother and myself in language as offensive as it is possible to conceive.” She had had enough with them and drew out her pistol and shot one of the soldiers. It was through this event that she acquired her career as a “rebel spy.”

On hearing that she had shot and killed someone, soldiers were often sent to her to see if their behavior was tolerable. These frequent interactions abled her to learn about important plans and positions of the Union army. She wrote them down on paper and sent someone trustworthy to give them to a Confederate camp 7 miles away. However, at some point she was betrayed, or someone had identified the letters to be hers. She was brought before a colonel where she was “threatened and reprimanded” and then was read the “Article of War,” which stated that if she was to give any help to the Confederate army again, it could be punishable by death. She then took a bow and sarcastically thanked them for their help. She then wrote, “I departed; not in peace, however, for my little ‘rebel’ heart was on fire, and I indulged in thoughts and plans of vengeance”. After this encounter, any relations with the confederate army that revealed anything of the Union plans were planted on her.

Another very important woman who played an important role as a spy was Rose O’Neal Greenhow. She became a widow in 1854, when her husband died in an accident. In 1961, when the Civil War broke out, she was recruited to join a spy network for the Confederates. Her most well known accomplishment was helping the Confederates win the First Battle of Run, or the First Battle of Manassas, in July 1961, which was one of the first battles of the Civil War. She was able to persuade a Union military official to give her information about the attack. With the help of another spy, Betty Duval, she was able to send encrypted messages to a Confederate officer about the Union’s plans and whereabouts., which she did by “hiding the message in a small piece of silk and secured it in Duvall’s hair bun before sending her off”. The Confederates sent reinforcements and won a “decisive victory”. Soon after this, the president of the Confederate states, Jefferson Davis, sent her a personal letter thanking her for her assistance.

Rose was suspected of being a spy, and was constantly being monitored by a secret service. She learned that a guard had been standing outside of her house at night, and that she was followed when she went on walks or outside her house. Then on August 23, 1961, two men came up to her before she entered her house, and declared that she was under arrest. She then said, as put in her memoir, “I have no power to resist you; but had I been inside of my house, I would have killed one of you before I submitted to this illegal process.’”. She was immediately put under house arrest. Officers swarmed around her house. The officers arrested anyone, “casual visitors”, as she called them, who came to the house. After the house had been searched, every drawer and cabinet turned upside down, the chiefs of the detectives left, leaving the rest of the men alone with the “prisoners”. Several of them “possessed themselves of rum and brandy, which added in developing their brutal instincts; and they even boasted, in my hearing, of the ‘nice times’ they expected to have with the female prisoners”. Officers and soldiers often acted like this after searching someone’s home, leaving many unsuspecting women to fend for themselves. In the following year, she was still able to send her messages, and even once she was moved into a prison, she was still in contact with the generals. She died a few years later, and recieved full military honors from the Confederates.

The final important and significant woman spy is Harriet Tubman, perhaps the most well known woman in the Civil War. While she is most famous for helping slaves escape to Free states, she was also a spy. Her smarts and ability to remember large quantities of information at once made her a valuable addition to the Union army. One of her main contributions was when she went to Hilton Head to assist newly free black people in adjusting to living on their own. While she was there, “She selected and paid (out of ‘secret service money’) nine reliable black scouts, riverboat pilots who knew every inch of the local waterways, and trained them in methods of gathering intelligence.” With her leading them, she and these scouts mapped out shorelines and islands in South Carolina. They found Confederate plans and vulnerabilities. “Her team sneaked up and down rivers and into swamps and marshes to determine enemy positions, movements, and fortifications on the shoreline beyond the Union pickets.”

These women played crucial parts in winning battles, and helping whenever they could, no matter what side of the Civil War they were on. Whether they were willing to be arrested, or risk their lives, they did so much for the war, and they are important figures in our history.

Read more

The Spies of the American Revolution: Nathan Hale

January 11, 2021 by Essay Writer

The spies of the American Revolution turned the tides of the American Revolution to favor the Patriots. In order to win this war they would have composed mystery messages with invisible ink, create hidden messages to discover British plans, and report what they have learned. When Nathan Hale got caught while trying to deliver a message, watched people get caught then killed for spying on the opposing side.

Nathan Hale was a spy for the Patriots, he was undeniably courageous, but he wasn’t a very skilled or clever officer. It only took a couple of days before his suspicious questions hooked the attention from the local loyalists, and he later blew his cover after a British promotor approached him in a tavern and pretended to be a fellow Patriot spy. Hale was arrested the next day and discovered to have compromising documents buried beneath the soles of his shoes. Hale, the 21-year-old Patriot encountered the gallows with “gentle dignity” before reciting the brilliant words, “I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country.”

The invisible ink was a very initial spy technique, it helped the Patriots receive letters with secret information that no one would understand but themselves. George Washington informed his agents in the use of what was mentioned as the ‘sympathetic stain’, noting that the ink ‘will not only render…

communications less exposed to detection but relieve the fears of such persons as may be entrusted in its conveyance.’ George Washington spoke these words because this was the technique that know one could read but the Patriots and even if one of them got caught, like Nathan Hale did, the Loyalists wouldn’t know what the letter was saying. The soldier who received this letter placed the paper over the flame of a candle or provided it with a chemical reagent, such as sodium carbonate, which would reveal the letter’s invisible contents. Now, without this invention that was made up of a chemical solution out of tannic acid, everyone would know what their battle plan was.

The Culper Code Book was invented by Benjamin Tallmadge in 1778, to gather information from the British unit and military plans from the New York area. Informants used fake names and a numerical code book consisting of seven hundred and sixty-three numbers representing words, names, and places to communicate their information. Developed by Tallmadge, the Culper Code Book was essential in protecting the vital communications and identities of this important intelligence gathering group.

From the incident with Nathan Hale, to the invention of the invisible ink, and the invention of the Culper Code Book by Benjamin Tallmadge. Nathan Hale, the very courageous spy with not that much skill had been caught by the Loyalists, then arrested and hanged. The invisible ink was a very useful technique the Patriots had. It helped their spies get their information without having the Loyalists find out. Now the Culper Code Book was used to gather information from the British unit and military plans from the New York area. It is a valuable technique from the Patriots’ side.

Read more

“Best Friends” or Not: Analyzing Keith and Stephen

March 1, 2019 by Essay Writer

In Spies by Michael Frayn, the description of Keith as Stephen’s ‘best friend’ does not suit him nearly as much as the ‘officer corps in [their] two man army. Keith is very obviously depicted as pushy, bossy, dominant and a bully on some occasions, always needing to be in charge, always needing to ‘have someone to be braver than.’ It is these times when we see just how little of a true friend Keith is to Stephen, and how he acts more like his leader than his equal.

Right at the beginning of the novel in chapter 2, Stephen feels as if he has ‘good fortune in being Keith’s friend’ which shows just how much Stephen is grateful towards Keith, to the point where he is willing to be pushed around and led by him. During Stephen and Keith’s first interaction, Keith’s social standing is much higher than Stephen’s as he lives in a posh, impeccable house, ‘number 2. Chollerton. The Haywards.’ And the boys are ‘socially color coded’ as Stephen goes to a public school while Keith goes to a private school. It is also worth noting that Keith is most likely the way he is due to his home life. Mr. Hayward is depicted as apathetic, formal and it has even been blatantly stated that he abuses Keith.

In the third chapter, as Stephen and Keith are investigating Mrs. Hayward, Keith misspells words in their log book multiple times. Despite this, Stephen doesn’t call him out and late in the novel when Mrs. Hayward realizes that Keith has misspelt ‘private’ as ‘privet’, Stephen has half a mind to take responsibility for it as to spare Keith the embarrassment. This shows how low Stephen is willing to stoop for Keith, perhaps because he thinks he owes it to him.

When Mrs. Hayward visits Braemar and tells Stephen that Keith is ‘easily led’, Stephen is left staring at her in disbelief, unable to even imagine Keith being led by him. He wonders how Keith manages to fool both their mothers into believing that Stephen is the leader. This leads to sympathy towards Keith for a change rather than Stephen, as Mrs. Hayward’s words imply that Keith is pushed around at home, presumably by his father.

Keith is also depicted as a flat out bully in various scenarios as he does not acknowledge Stephen’s bravery and often undermines, belittles and mocks him, such as when Stephen gives Keith the sock that he found in the tin box or when Stephen offers theories about Mrs. Hayward’s whereabouts. Keith ignores him and his ‘eyelids come down’ in disapproval to show that Stephen that his ideas don’t deserve acknowledgement and all ideas that are not Keith’s are invalid. Juxtaposition between Keith and his father clearly show the same condescending sneer and arrogant expression.

Further in the novella, Keith also mocks Stephen for ‘hiding [his] face like a little baby’ when he sees the man near the tin box. The hypocrisy of this statement shines through soon after though when they hear someone approaching, and they both hide their face in the mud. That is the first time we see the boys as equals with the second being when they ran back to the Close after terrorizing the tramp, ‘neither of [them] leader, neither of [them] led.’ This shows that fear is the equalizing force between the boys and it also shows that Stephen has now started realizing Keith’s role and so now is trying to take more of a leadership position.

Another example of Keith’s dominant nature arises when he makes Stephen take an oath on the bayonet that Stephen would not tell anyone otherwise Keith would kill him. His arrogance is also shown in how he must always take the binoculars and walk in front of Stephen and in how Stephen comes to fear him, letting him boss him around and being grateful to just be allowed near Keith. This causes the reader not only to be enraged at Keith for bossing Stephen around but also for the reader to be enraged at Stephen for letting Keith push him around and for hero worshiping him.

This novella claims to be about two best friends, but by the way the reader is shown Keith and Stephen’s interactions, their relationship and their dynamics, it is made obvious that one of them is definitely the leader while the other one is led. Overall, it is impossible for the reader to feel no sympathy towards Stephen in his immense misfortune in being Keith’s so-called friend.

Read more
Order Creative Sample Now
Choose type of discipline
Choose academic level
  • High school
  • College
  • University
  • Masters
  • PhD
Deadline

Page count
1 pages
$ 10

Price