Category: Allegory

Margery Kempe and William Langland have in common an acute sense of the dysfunctionality of the late medieval Church but where Langland seeks ecclesiastical reform for the communal good, Kempe’s critique is motivated by more personal aims. Defend, refute, or qualify this statement.

It is clear from readings of Langland’s The Vision of Piers Plowman, that there is a satirical cry for ecclesiastical reform. The Book of Margery Kempe, however, doesn’t appear to disapprove of the church’s practice but instead calls for personal recognition to receive saintly status. This assignment will explore the aims of both Langland and Kempe’s works, comparing those favoring the communal good of Christian followers, with those of individualistic desires. I will begin by examining William Langland’s gripes with the catholic church that are expressed through the character of Will in Piers Plowman. These range from the monetary greed of the clergy to the gluttony and poor work ethic of the laity. I will start by discussing the prologue and examine the allegorical narrative employed by Langland. I will then move on to talk about the character of Piers the plowman and how he is used in many ways as an example of how to practice good faith. The second part of the essay will focus on The Book of Margery Kempe and the ways in which Kempe’s story is one containing an obvious cry for ecclesiastical approval rather than a general desire for the communal good. I will talk about her vivid visions of Christ’s suffering and the affective piety she employs in her spiritual meditation through her consistent and uncontrollable weeping. Then I will move on to the idea of Lollardy in relation to Kempe, exploring whether or not she could really be considered a Lollard or not and how she has been analyzed in modern studies.

Piers Plowman, it would appear, is an autobiographical account of the religious, social, and economic struggles of Will, our narrator. However, it is also an allegory, with Will being a personification of human free will and the everyday struggle to achieve salvation through knowledge, choice, and action. The Prologue sets the scene of the poem in a field between an elegant tower and a dark dungeon, or in other words, between heaven and hell, filled with people, both rich and poor:

As I biheeld into the eest an heigh to the sonne,

I seigh a tour on a toft trieliche ymaked,

A deep dale bynethe, a dongeon therinne,

With depe diches and derke and dredfulle of sighte.

A fair feeld fun of folk fond I ther bitwene—

Of alle manere of men, the meene and the riche,

Werchynge and wandrynge as the world asketh. (Prologue, lines 13-20).

Will begins to describe how members of the clergy act without moral judgment, in this valley, selling merchandise and preaching false sermons to unlearned people for payment. Langland writes about how false clerics join together with genuine bishops in a scheme to make money. This is a complete disregard for the decency of the catholic church and is an element that Langland wishes to reform in order to wholly follow God in good work and penance for one’s sins through prayer rather than through payment:

Ther preched a pardoner as he a preest were:

Broughte forth a bulk with bisshopes seles,

And seide that hymself myghte assoillen hem alle

Of falshede of fasrynge, of avowes ybroken.

Lewed men leved hym wet and liked hise wordes,

Comen up knelynge to kissen hise bulks.

He bonched hem with his brevet and blered hire eighth,

And raughte with his rageman rynges and broches.

Thus [ye] gyven [youre] gold glotons to helpe,

And leneth it losels that leccherie haunten!

Were the bisshop yblessed and worth bothe his ens,

His seel sholde noght be sent to deceyve the peple.

Ac it is noght by the bisshop that the boy precheth—

For the parisshe preest and the pardoner parten the silver

hat the povere [peple] of the parissche sholde have if they ne were. (Prologue, lines 68-82).

The abuse of ecclesiastical power is the main concern for Langland throughout the poems with Piers the Plowman acting as a representative of both men in multiple cases and also, as Christ. In Passus I, Piers is a simple plowman, an example of a perfect laborer, who pointed a thousand pilgrims in the direction of God, rejecting to reward offered to him. This would appear to represent the selfless good of the worker that society should aspire to be. This is to say as far as our interpretation of the symbol goes, that the role of Piers here in its very inception is more than that of a mere plowman. It is a symbol of a multi-fold aspect revealing multifold truth. (Troyer, 1932, pp 375). The second time Piers appears as an overseer to the workers, giving them the job of plowing before they can reach the heavenly tower. Again, there is an emphasis on the need to work hard in order to get to heaven. Although Langland was a Catholic, this foreshadows the Protestant work ethic that is to come during the Reformation in the sixteenth century, later to be explored further by the German sociologist Max Weber. Piers’ role of overseer in this passus, when some of the workers slack and are found to be eating in gluttony which results in a famine, as penance for their sins. Piers is also given power by God to absolve men from their sins. As Piers has always been presented as a good man, this could be a representation of the need for a new process of confession, one that is not governed by falsehoods like that of the prologue’s pardoner:

And when this deed was done, Do-best he thought,

And gave Piers power, and pardon he granted:

To all manner men, mercy and forgiveness; To him,

might, men to assoil of all manner sins.

absolve In covenant that they come and knowledge to pay acknowledge

To Piers the Plowman’s pardon — redde quod debes.

“Thus hath Piers power, be his pardon paid,

To bind and unbind both here and else,

And absolve men of all sins save of debt one (Passus 19, lines 183-91).

Langland, through his use of narrative, introduced a piece of work that would challenge the ideals of the church at the time. The Vision of Piers Plowman went on to inspire a new genre of writings called ‘Plowman’ poems. These poems were written by authors who were either heterodox or orthodox, showing the wide influence of Langland’s work. “Langland is essentially concerned to transform institutions, and as such he often adopts the textual (or oral) forms of those institutions, [their discourses] …The word ‘genre’ serve[s] to designate the formal characteristics of these textual forms… But in adopting genres, Langland is exploiting or questioning the authority of these genres, and, thereby, exploiting or questioning the institution from which the genre derives”. (Simpson, 1990 qt. in ENG2041 Week 7).

The Book of Margery Kempe recognized as the first autobiographical work in the English language, follows one ‘creature’s’ religious journey and conversion from a businesswoman filled with material greed to a devout mystic and pilgrim. Although Kempe’s book is very much an individualistic account of religion, it has been thought to cause local contemplation regarding the effect of private meditation over public prayer. Wilson states that “her [Margery’s] account shows her to be a socially divisive character whose behavior caused the more conservative-minded laity to attempt to suppress radical clerical belief according to their own standards of religious orthodoxy”. (Wilson, 1997, pp. 156). With this being said, it would be difficult to consider the book as being one with social or political intentions. Margery Kempe’s goals were of a personal nature, with her book appearing to be written as an effort to increase her chances of achieving a saintly reputation among Christians. “If Kempe’s stories of persecution were meant to give seal to her aspirations to saintly honor, the language in which she couched these stories, the language so strongly reminiscent of the New Testament, was meant to strengthen her case. (Powell, 2003, pp.20). Powell refers to the vivid mystic imagery used by Kempe in her story. Christ promises Kempe that she will reach heaven if she acts as a mirror for society; an example of how to achieve salvation. This is similar to Langland’s use of Piers, mentioned above. She must also pray for everybody’s sins in order to achieve this for herself:

Nevyrthelesse, dowtyr, I have ordeynd the to be a merowr amongys hem for to han

gret sorwe that thei schulde takyn exampil by the for to have sum litil sorwe in her

hertys for her synnys that thei myth therthorw be savyd, but thei lovyn not to heryn of

sorwe ne of contricyon. But, good dowtyr, do thu thi dever and prey for hem whil thu

art in this world, and thu schalt have the same mede and reward in hevyn as yyf al the

werlde wer savyd be thi good wil and thi preyer. (lines 4409-4414).

Margery’s imitation of Christ’s suffering was an attempt to save people from damnation, or so it would appear from the various times she has asked God to bring all men to salvation. However, when it comes to helping others, for example when her own husband, John is ill, she is reluctant to give her assistance, but does so regardless, as she knows it may lead her to be known as a martyr. Her mystical visions of Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection, cause her the most intense weeping, especially the moments leading up to his crucifixion, as she sees Mary, his mother suffer watching her son beaten with scourges:

An other tyme sche saw in hyr contemplacyon owr Lord Jhesu Crist bowndyn to a

peler, and hys handys wer bowndyn abovyn hys hevyd. And than sche sey sextene

men wyth sextene scorgys, and eche scorge had eight babelys of leed on the ende, and

every babyl was ful of scharp prekelys as it had ben the rowelys of a spor. And tho

men wyth the scorgys madyn comenawnt that ich of hem schulde gevyn owr Lord forty

strokys. Whan sche saw this petows syght, sche wept and cryid ryth lowde as yyf sche

schulde a brostyn for sorwe and peyne. (lines 4526-4532).

Kempe is often accused of being a Lollard by clerics she surrounded herself with and although all such charges against her are dropped, “Kempe responds to the complex gendering of Lollardy by both its adherents and opponents as a central aspect of her self-presentation as a female mystic and reformer, translating academic discourses filtered through a formidable and fascinatingly diverse host of clerical friends and advisers into a vernacular interpretation of her life”. (Shklar, 1995). Christ gives her the authority to speak up against known clerics as she has religious knowledge that they do not due to direct conversations with Him:

Drede the nowt, dowtyr, for thow schalt have the vyctory of al thin enmys.

I schal geve the grace inow to answer every clerke in the love of God. (lines 384-385).

In this way, it is easy to understand why Kempe was accused of such Lollardy throughout her spiritual journey. However, Arnold mentions an explanation given by Nancy Partner, that Kempe did not challenge the church as such, nor did she desire ecclesiastical reform, but instead simply sought approval from existing powers within the clergy. “She does not seek to defend women’s preaching but calls upon the pre-existing discourse of legitimation”. (Arnold, 2004, pp. 91-92). It is this personal desire for approval and recognition that sets Margery Kempe apart from Langland and his hopes for religious improvement for the communal good.

As stated, both Langland and Kempe demonstrate the dysfunctionality of the late medieval catholic church, however, the aims of their works differ significantly when it comes to the idea of ecclesiastical reform. William Lamgland’s Piers Plowman identifies problems such as greed, gluttony, poor work ethic, and lack of prayer, whereas Kempe speaks exclusively of her personal journey through spirituality and her experience of weeping as a means of suffering in the name of Christ. Langland inspired a large range of political and social texts and his work could be described as a leading factor for the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Kempe was scrutinized as a Lollard despite her ability to deny such accusations within the ecclesiastical court and although her book has become regarded as something of a fictitious piece of work, she was seen as a holy- woman by many people at the time. Langland on the other hand created a reformative rhetoric and in some ways achieved his goal: “Do Well, Do Better, Do Best”.

Bibliography

Primary Sources

1. Kempe, Margery. ‘The Book of Margery Kempe, trans. Anthony Bale.’ (2015)
2. Langland, 2006: William Langland, William’s Vision of Piers Plowman, ed. Ben ByramWigfield, London, E.E.T.S
3. Staley, Lynn, ed. The Book of Margery Kempe. University of Rochester, 1996.

Secondary Sources

1. Arnold, John H. ‘Margery’s Trials: Heresy, Lollardy, and Dissent.’ A Companion to the Book of Margery Kempe (2004): 75-93.
2. Kelly, Stephen. ‘Renewing the World: Piers Plowman and Reformist Writing’. Canvas. 2018. https://canvas.qub.ac.uk/courses/1154/files/70533?module_item_id=78119
3. Powell, Raymond A. ‘Margery Kempe: An exemplar of late medieval English piety.’ The Catholic historical review 89.1 (2003): 1-23.
4. Shklar, Ruth. ‘Cobham’s daughter:’The Book of Margery Kempe’and the power of heterodox thinking.’ Modern language quarterly 56.3 (1995): 277-305.
5. Troyer, Howard William. ‘Who is Piers Plowman?.’ Publications of the Modern Language Association of America(1932): 368-384.
6. Wilson, Janet. ‘Communities of Dissent: The Secular and Ecclesiastical Communities of Margery Kempe’s Book.’ Medieval women in their communities (1997): 155-85.

Plato was a philosopher born in Athens, Greece in 427 BCE and later died in 347 BCE. He was the founder of the first university, the Academy, where his students would read Socratic dialogues that he wrote. (Palmer, 2001). He was a student of Socrates and became the teacher of Aristotle. He is best known for his idealism in philosophy and the creation of theories such as the theory of forms. The Theory of the forms was his most notable contribution to philosophy because of its unique depiction between reality and knowledge. Plato proposes that the imitation of objects and the idea of said object is called eternal forms. This means that what is being sensed is an imitation of the object’s nature. “Ideas or Forms are the immutable archetypes of all temporal phenomena, and only these Ideas are completely real; the physical world possesses only relative reality.” (Colombia Record Encyclopedia, 2021). He states that the objects people are seeing are solely a representation and are not reality. For example, a bowl is circular, able to hold food, and is meant to be eaten. Every bowl is not “perfect”, Plato would believe the perfect bowl exists in the perfect world.

Plato’s allegory of the cave ties into the theory of the forms, which includes four stages. The stages are imagination, belief, intellect, and reason. These interpret the levels of knowledge in the divided line. The divided line is a visual for the theory of forms which separates the perfect unseen world and the seen imperfect world. The allegory of the cave involves chained prisoners who are unable to see the people beside them and only the wall in front of them. Behind the prisoners and the wall, there is a path where people walk with artifacts like vases and statues on their heads. The only thing the prisoners can see of the individuals walking this path is their shadows on the wall. Since this is all they know, they believe this to be reality. This highlights the bottom level of knowledge, which is imagination. The images are only distortions of objects. One prisoner becomes unchained and is forced to look at the fire that caused all the shadows he had been seeing previously. This explains the level of belief, the prisoner sees the fire and believes it to be real. Above the fire are trees, mountains, and the sunlight which blinds him and forces him to look at the shadow. This allows the prisoner to think and try to interpret the new object he is seeing for the first time. The fire symbolized false reality, while the sun symbolized intellectual truth through the senses. The man is able to view the sun and becomes newly enlightened. The prisoner realizes that the source of everything is the sun. Plato believes that if the enlightened man were to encourage his fellow prisoners to experience the “real world” it would end poorly for the enlightened prisoner. If the enlightened prisoner were to re-enter the cave, his eyes would hurt from the adjustment of the darkness. Thus, his reaction leads to the original prisoners being frightened and causes them to get angry. Ultimately resulting in the killing of the enlightened prisoner by the unenlightened prisoners. This can be explained by the desire the prisoners have of keeping the illusion of their reality untampered with. Their reality would be ruined, so in order to save themselves from disappointment they would kill the enlightened prisoner.

The allegory of the cave represents the sensory world, and how people perceive information that is being shown to them. Further, it symbolizes the physical world where things are not always what they are perceived to be. There is much more out in the real world, like the forms. What is considered the outside world represents the world of thoughts and ideas that are a more realistic reality. The imagery of the prisoners’ shackles represents ignorance and fear of the unknown or truth. The man being freed of the shackles and enlightened by his freedom from the cave shows how getting rid of old beliefs and gaining new ones is beneficial. People tend to be hesitant when experiencing new things because they want to stay in their comfort zone. Once they overcome their hesitation of leaving their comfort zone, they are likely to share their experiences with others and encourage them to do the same. Plato argues that people believe they fully understand what they are sensing in everyday life. However, people are only perceiving shadows of real forms that create the world they live in.

Criticism

Plato argues that the world that people are living in is only an imitation of the real world. However, there is no “fake “world that exists where everything is perfect. Human knowledge to date is not able to prove whether there is a metaphysical world that exists. Every person views the world differently so there can be no such thing as the perfect ideal. For example, someone may think that a specific car is the best-looking car in the world. They could try to support their claim through the form of beauty. Although doable, there is no guarantee that the person is able to prove their statement is correct. Ideal standards such as goodness, virtue, excellence, truth, and beauty will not be seen as exactly the same for every person.

Plato argued that the form of the good was the highest connection to knowledge. Aristotle disagreed with this idea. This is so because there is no universal meaning to what is considered “good” so without a standard, the term then loses its value. Since Plato did not define what is viewed as good, the idea has no basis to be perceived as being a reality. The problem continues to arise time and time again when thinking about Plato’s theory of forms. For example, the form of a cat. There is no type of cat that is considered to be the ideal cat. Plato did not determine if the perfect cat has blue eyes, brown fur, and is male. Resulting, the form of a cat is no longer universal and has no meaning.

Plato encouraged his followers to remember that beauty is everlasting while beautiful entities eventually die off. However, he viewed beauty to be objective because it is not the experiences of the observer that determines what is beautiful. Plato’s objective view challenged today’s subjective standards of beauty and fashion. Beauty can be shown through the work of makeup artists who do art on different types of faces. Makeup artists are able to see a face and help amplify that specific client’s beautiful features. Makeup artists are also able to determine whether a makeup look is pretty or not based on past experiences and judgments. Makeup artists also have different styles so not everyone will see their work as beautiful, but it all depends on who is viewing it. Beauty is subjective because everyone views beauty with their own desired characteristics. The ideal beauty standard also varies from culture to culture, especially in fashion. Unlike Plato’s objective view of beauty, people’s thoughts and experiences define and set a standard for what they perceive to be attractive or beautiful. For example, a traditional Chinese Kimono is seen as beautiful by Chinese people while someone from another culture may disagree. Plato even goes as far as viewing art as an illusion and a depiction of reality. In Plato’s writing of The Republic X, he views art as solely a corruption of people’s minds in the “fake” world. (Karelis, 1976). That art will result in people being attached to an imitation generated from their own perception. “All art is essentially an imitation for Plato and Aristotle. But imitation means for them not only the portrayal or description of visible and tangible things.” (Shorey, 1937). However, art is a way to be expressive and a way for people to look at things more abstractly.

Conclusion

Plato concluded that people are deceived by how they process the world around them, the objects they perceive are only imitations in their heads of what the real world looks like. The theory of the forms is a metaphysical system that is dependent on the idea of two worlds that exist. The material world and the world of forms. Plato believed the world of forms is unchanging where everything is perfect. The material world is only a copy of a form in the realm of universals. Nevertheless, the theory of the forms is not able to be proven because there is no evidence that it is trustworthy. The forms are not visible to the human eye and we cannot touch them, therefore, it raises the question of how Plato knows that it exists. Plato’s theory of the forms is inconsistent and unconvincing because there is no clarification that it is true. The same is true for his views of ancient aesthetics like beauty and art where he remains close-minded to the idea of perfection and truthfulness. This causes Plato’s view on philosophy to be untrustworthy to people because of a lack of certainty in his theories.

Lord of the Flies can be seen as a political allegory for different methods of leadership with Golding’s ideas on the subject being made clearer as the novel goes on. In the novel, there are two main opposing methods of leadership: one of democracy and one of dictatorship. However, Golding does not fully condemn nor fully praise either method for they both seem to have their own flaws in the novel. Instead, Golding’s view on leadership seems to be that it inevitably ends up depending on power and who really holds it.

In the beginning, power is organized democratically. Ralph, the novel’s representative figure for law and order, finds the conch, and with Piggy’s help, uses it to call the other boys on the island they are stranded on. Once they are all together, it becomes clear that someone needs to take charge. Initially, Jack, the head choirboy, stakes his claim that he ‘ought to be chief’ based on somewhat arbitrary values such as being able to ‘sing C sharp’. Obviously being an irrelevant skill in the boys’ new situation, Golding is making it clear to the reader that Jack believes he deserves power simply because he is used to having it. This absurd reasoning is juxtaposed by the modal verb ‘ought’ which shows Jack’s arrogance, but also implies a moral and automatic right to power. However, they decide to use the ‘toy of voting’ to pick the chief. Although the boys find this democratic approach more ‘pleasing’ (therefore showing they find comfort in a democracy), the use of the noun ‘toy’ used to describe it shows an insufficient understanding of its real value as more than just a ‘worthy play-thing’, which may foreshadow the downfall of this way of leadership and rule. As for the vote, while Jack was ‘the most obvious leader’, the other boys found that ‘most powerfully, there was the conch’. The conch in the novel represents the powerful values of civilization and democracy and is closely tied to the character of Ralph, which is what causes the other boys to elect him as chief. Ralph holds the power in the beginning, therefore his method of leadership is the one that is followed.

But as the novel progresses, we see the boys begin placing power into different things, beginning with Jack. In chapter 4, rather than follow Ralph’s direct order of keeping the fire lit, Jack and his choirboys choose to go against him in order to undertake hunting pigs, showing a disregard for Ralph’s power. This causes a clash between the two boys, and the others watch, now with a higher appreciation of Jack and his ‘brilliant world of hunting, tactics, fierce exhilaration, skill’ in comparison to Ralph’s ‘world of longing and baffled commonsense’. Here, Jack is described in terms of his adroitness, Ralph in terms of his shortcomings, and the ideals he represents are presented as less tangible or attractive. This shows the directly contrasting qualities and leadership styles of the two and signals a reason as to why the boys may be inclined to follow Jack over Ralph now instead. Golding also uses the adjective ‘baffled’ to suggest that the other boys still don’t understand the true value of democracy and order, since it is a complex idea, and this could possibly be another reason for the boys to place more power in Jack. As these boys gradually move away from order and good sense, they become more primitive and respect Jack’s version of leadership more.

In the story Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck uses three stylistic elements. This story contains Imagery, Symbolism, and Allegory. Imagery affects the text by describing contents that have a feel on our 5 senses. For example, “You can hear the crunch of the fallen leaves as you walk through the scary forest.” Symbolism adds more depth to the story through phrases or actions that have deeper meanings. An example of symbolism is that black stands for darkness and evil. Allegory affects the text by using symbols that have a different literal meanings. An example would be, “The Hunger Games” and how it’s reality television and shows us how we are literally obsessed with it that it splits us from reality and television.

Steinbeck uses Imagery throughout the story to add depth to the story’s detail. On page 2, it says “And then from the direction of the state highway came the sound of footsteps on crisp sycamore leaves.” This is an example of imagery because it said, “crisp sycamore leaves” and “the sound of footsteps.” Another example is on page 19, which says “He rubbed his bristly white whiskers with his knuckles.” This describes his whiskers and what he rubbed them with.

Symbolism is used throughout the story and has a deeper meaning to various things. Candy’s dog is a symbol in the story. The dog was useless due to its age, so Carson insists to kill the dog. Candy doesn’t want to let the dog go since he raised the dog. This example shows that once a living thing has outlived its expectations and become useless, it must die. Carlson said, “The way I’d shoot him, he wouldn’t feel anything.” Even though it may sound ruthless or messed up. It’s how it went in the story, it’s how Carlson looked at things. In the text, it said, “Right back of the head. He wouldn’t even quiver.”

Allegory is implemented throughout the story, there are many concepts of allegory. An example of Allegory is Lennie and his disability. Lennie is an example of discrimination against those that are disabled and shows how others treat those kinds of people just because of their well-being.

Steinbeck uses Imagery, Symbolism, and Allegory to add depth to his story. These 3 elements deeply affect the story’s theme. Imagery uses our 5 senses to expand on detail. Symbolism adds further detail, adding 2 to several meanings for a single phrase. Allegory adds depth by having further detail on something that has a different literal meaning. These 3 stylistic elements affect the text by adding detail.

Analysis of the quote from Fahrenheit 451

In Fahrenheit 451, the narrator at one point states that at least once in his career, every fireman gets an itch. What do the books say, he wonders. Oh, to scratch that itch, eh? Well, Montag, take my word for it, I’ve had to read a few in my time, to know what I was about, and the books say nothing! Nothing you can teach or believe. They’re about non-existent people, figments of imagination if they’re fiction. And if they’re non-fiction, it’s worse, one professor calling another an idiot, one philosopher screaming down another’s gullet. All of them ran about, putting out the stars and extinguishing the sun. You come away lost.’

It is this quote that tells us that by nature a person is curious. Everything that happened to humanity, all the time of its existence, the man was curious about everything that was happening, asked questions, and looked for answers to them. A lot of controversies were due to various studies among scientists who wanted to prove their case. These words try to convince the protagonist, like the whole society of this novel, that there is nothing good in books and new knowledge.

The situation in the novel reminds me of Plato’s Allegory of the cave. People live in ignorance and live only with the knowledge and ideology that is given to them from above. Montag – the main character of Fahrenheit, like the protagonist of the allegory, distinguished himself by not believing in all this false truth. This gives the idea that humanity is not so easy to manage, because there will always be one that asks questions about why and how.

The society described in Ray Bradbury’s dystopia receives information from the screens of TVs, which flooded all the walls of houses, from the noise of radios, and from other distributors of digestible propaganda necessary for the state. But here are books that make you think about everything that happens around people and within society, in this world that are banned. Where they are burned, there is no room for riots and discontent. People who have forgotten how to communicate with each other, are only able to perceive the information they provide, without the need for understanding it. A society that is not able to think is easily governed by the government, which is why under the conditions of a totalitarian regime, literature is prohibited by law, from which it is subject to immediate destruction. This is done so that people continue to consume state propaganda, and do not learn to think and analyze information on their own. Bradbury also creates examples for us of victims of such propaganda, as well as their values, ideals, and views.

In a world where television imposes its opinions and ideals on us, we need to be able to separate the important from the unnecessary, the right from the erroneous and imposed. You need to be able to appreciate and love the world around us, which is much more beautiful and realistic. You need to find time for real communication, which is much more interesting and exciting. We must not forget about books that develop our thinking and imagination.

When you read the lines from Fahrenheit 451, you involuntarily think that we are moving towards the same society and it was precisely on such trends in our society, as the ever-growing role of the simplest sources of information, the alienation of people from each other, the reduction in personal communication between them, and the decreasing number of people reading books every year, and made Bradbury write his anti-utopia.

A Grasp For Free Will

“We must believe in free will because we have no choice.” This event was one of the most profound statements that have ever been spoken to me, and I heard it from my grandfather, Grandpa Bob, days before he passed away. This moment and the readings from our class have led me to believe that the “The Matrix” philosophy coupled with Plato’s allegory of the cave is the most compelling argument for how we can describe a free life. The reason my grandfather uttered these words while in the hospital was because of a conversation that triggered a discussion of the concept of determinism. At the time, I was a confused 11-year-old visiting a sick relative and wasn’t educated about the concept of free will. It was explained to me then that some teachers thought there was no way to escape the situations we find ourselves in, and rather all the events that occur had preexisting causes out of our control. In his last few days, he pushed me to believe that myself and my siblings have control over our future through our decisions because determinism led to a life of hopelessness and despair. I seek philosophy as a method to help me perceive the world as it truly is and the metaphor that Plato describes as a process by which we can free ourselves from this illusion.

Many philosophers have created ideas that the real world is an illusion, and the Matrix trilogy contains references to the people who have attacked this concept from many different angles. Although the films are meant to stand on their own and create their own set of philosophical questions, the directors took some advice from a variety of different works from real philosophers. Four philosophical references that can be compared to the Matrix trilogy are Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, Herman & Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent, John de Graaf’s Affluenza, and Emmanuel Kant’s What is Enlightenment? The films slightly refer to and compare the ideas established in the work of these philosophers throughout the series, and I will discuss throughout this paper the similarities and differences with how these different philosophers view freedom.

Plato, a greek philosopher from over 2,000 years ago, explored the idea that the real world is an illusion in the Allegory of the Cave. This thought experiment is a theory concerning the human perception of reality and what is fake. Plato claimed that what we learned through our senses is no more than opinion and that, in order to have a “true” understanding of reality, we must gain it through philosophical reasoning. A brief overview of the story is that Plato imagines a cave in which several people have been kept prisoners their entire lives. These people are bound by chains in such a way that they can look only straight ahead and cannot move their necks at all. They can only see a few shapes as the shadows cast in front of them, but this is all that they have ever known so they don’t view it as abnormal. Therefore, because these images are all they’ve ever seen, they believe these images constitute reality. One day, a prisoner escapes the bonds and looks behind him to see what he thought was the real world, but it was actually an elaborate set of shadows. He is freed from the cave altogether, sees the world for the first time, and has a hard time adapting to this newfound knowledge of reality. Now fully aware of true reality, he returned to the cave to try to teach others what he found out, but the other prisoner’s reaction represented that people are scared of knowing philosophical truths and have a difficult time trusting philosophers. In the matrix, this metaphor is too close to perfect when he sees the real world for the first time with the help of the red pill. Everything that Neo thought was real was only an illusion created by the machines—much like the shadows on the cave walls that were cast by the fire. Plato insists that those who free themselves and come to perceive reality has a duty to return and teach others, and this holds true in the Matrix films as well, as Neo takes it upon himself to save humanity from the tyranny of the machines who control them.

Manufacturing Consent, by Herman & Chomsky, takes a view of the mass media to ask why only a narrow range of opinions are favored while others are suppressed or ignored in modern society. A well-educated modern citizen knows that the different news conglomerates in America such as CNN, FOX, and MSNBC will skew the information to attract certain audiences. It describes a so-called propaganda model which shows how information is filtered out by various factors by allowing the news to be dominated by those working as wealthy elites. The media as a whole in fact maintains our broken and rapidly changing society by being biased in how they present information to the public. The democratic systems of governance imposed on the populous trifle human reasoning because governments wish to continually restrict the abstract and innovative thoughts associated with enlightenment. Although these democratic systems wish to prohibit such “dangerous” thought processes, both Herman & Chomsky, and Plato believe that enlightenment is attainable for individuals in specific but contrasting ways. Herman & Chomsky introduce the ideas of “worthy” and “unworthy” victims in Manufacturing Consent to demonstrate the control that the government has over the media. This media bias is politically advantageous to U.S. policy-makers because it calls for U.S. hostility against the victims of enemy states. Herman & Chomsky believe that education is the key to revealing the truths behind these lies “democracy” feeds us. Both Herman and Chomsky believe that the common man is capable of attaining an Enlightened status through rigorous education and attention to the techniques of media persuasion. In the conclusion of Manufacturing Consent, the authors state, “The organization and self-education of groups in the community and workplace, and their networking and activism, continue to be the fundamental elements in steps toward the democratization of our social life and any meaningful social change.” (H&C, 307 PDF). The extent of these educational developments is the key to enlightenment for the masses and thus the gradual change of mainstream media. Plato argues that enlightenment comes in a much different way than education. First, Plato believes that only a select few individuals are able to become enlightened because they are forcibly stripped from the “cave” of illusion by agents of enlightenment and brought into the reality that surrounds them. “He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first, he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves,” (Plato, 2). Secondly, Plato believes that education is not the path to Enlightenment. He argues that the innate capability to learn and adapt to surrounding environments allows for the enlightenment of select individuals because the elites of society wish to gradually expose them to the realities of the world around them in the hope that one day they can return and rule the masses of the cave. These authors have developed varying opinions on the capability and methods in which the common man can attain enlightenment when subjugated to manipulative and powerful “democratic” societies.

The five filters of Manufacturing Consent that lead to the control of the propaganda model are 1) ownership 2) advertising 3) sourcing 4) flak and 5) anticommunist ideology. Although there is a dispute about the validity of these filters and how they affect society, there has been an agreement among philosophers that there is significant bias in how information is passed to the masses. It is this bias that can develop into a false perception of reality. The similarity to the Matrix can be reflected in how the machines filtered information so that humans were distracted from living a regular life. There is a belief in the Matrix that people do not question their surroundings, and this ideology follows that information has been tainted. Neo questions his surroundings on how the information is delivered, and this leads him to find Morpheus. The scene with the red pill as a mechanism for “opening the mind” is key to understanding what Herman & Chomsky were warning about trusting the centralized government and falling into a “democracy” trap.

Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic by John de Graaf highlights our world as one of over-consumption of material goods, and then further argues that it is a contagious disease that needs to be eradicated. The average person is chasing this hollow ideology of success, and how it will translate into a happy lifestyle for them and their families. The book offers specific case studies and examples noting the large amounts of money families will spend on material goods with little interest in savings and accumulated credit card debt. Although this book acts as a critic of modern globalization, it provides some novice solutions to how we could cure this disease. One example that intrigued me was of the Gross Domestic Happiness Index or Gross National Happiness Index (GNH). GNH is distinguishable from Gross Domestic Product by valuing the collective happiness of a population as the goal of successful governance and traditional moral values as expressed in the 9 domains of happiness and 4 building blocks of GNH. The building blocks of GNH are 1) sustainable and equitable socio-economic development; 2) environmental conservation; 3) preservation and promotion of culture; and 4) good governance. All of these combined for a country can give an index of actually how happy the citizens in that country are. I think one of the most powerful messages from de Graaf in this book is that of complacency. By treating our current mass consumerism in the United States as a disease, it is easier to convince the public that we need to change the way we measure success. The other philosophers compared to in this paper don’t address this as well as de Graaf, but I think that there is still more work to be done about what type of approach we can take to solve it. De Graaf does an excellent job at raising awareness of what the problem is, but a mediocre comparison on what steps we can take as a society to change our behavior.

“We must believe in free will because we have no choice.” This event was one of the most profound statements that have ever been spoken to me, and I heard it from my grandfather, Grandpa Bob, days before he passed away. The reason he uttered these words while in the hospital was because of a conversation that triggered a discussion of the concept of determinism. At the time, I was a confused 11-year-old visiting a sick relative and wasn’t educated about the concept of free will. It was explained to me then that some teachers thought there was no way to escape the situations we find ourselves in, and rather all the events that occur had preexisting causes out of our control. In his last few days, he pushed me to believe that myself and my siblings have control over our future through our decisions because determinism led to a life of hopelessness. My understanding of this and readings from our class have led me to believe that the “The Matrix” philosophy coupled with Plato’s allegory of the cave is the most compelling argument for how we can describe a free life. The prisoner in the cave is a metaphor for the process by which humans free themselves from the world of illusion and, with the aid of philosophy, perceive the world as it truly is.

Many philosophers have created ideas that the real world is an illusion, and the Matrix trilogy contains many references to the people who have entertained this idea. Although the films are meant to stand on their own and create their own set of philosophical questions, the Wachowski brothers, the directors of the film series, seek advice from these philosophers. Three philosophical references that can be compared to the Matrix trilogy are Plato’s allegory of the cave, Herman & Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent, and the work of John de Graaf. The films refer to and compare the ideas established in the work of these philosophers throughout the series, and I will discuss throughout this paper the similarities and differences with how these different philosophers view freedom.

Plato, a greek philosopher from over 2,000 years ago, explored the idea that the real world is an illusion in the allegory of the cave in his work, The Republic. The ‘Allegory Of The Cave’ is a theory concerning the human perception of reality and what is fake. Plato claimed that knowledge gained through the human senses is no more than opinion and that, in order to have real knowledge, we must gain it through philosophical reasoning. The brief summary of the story is that Plato imagines a cave in which people have been kept prisoner since birth. These people are bound by chains in such a way that they can look only straight ahead, not behind them or to the side, and have been stuck there their entire lives. On the wall in front of them, they can see flickering shadows in the shape of a variety of figures. Because these images are all they’ve ever seen, they believe these images constitute reality. One day, a prisoner escapes the chains and looks behind him and sees that what he thought was the real world is actually an elaborate set of shadows. He is freed from the cave altogether and sees the world for the first time. Fully aware of true reality, he must return to the cave and try to teach others what he knows, but the other prisoner’s reaction to the escapee returning represents that people are scared of knowing philosophical truths and do not trust philosophers. In the matrix, Neo is pulled from a kind of cave in the first Matrix film, when he sees the real world for the first time. Everything he thought was real is only an illusion—much like the shadows on the cave walls. Plato insists that those who free themselves and come to perceive reality has a duty to return and teach others, and this holds true in the Matrix films as well, as Neo takes it upon himself to save humanity from widespread ignorance and acceptance of a false reality.

Manufacturing Consent, by Herman & Chomsky, takes a view of the mass media to ask why only a narrow range of opinions are favored while others are suppressed or ignored. It describes a propaganda model which shows how information is filtered out by various financial and political factors or “elites” by allowing the news agenda to be dominated by those working on behalf of the wealthy and powerful. The media in fact maintain our unequal and unfair society by being biased in how they present information to the public. The democratic systems of governance imposed on the populous trifle human reasoning because governments wish to continually restrict the abstract and innovative thoughts associated with enlightenment. Although these democratic systems wish to prohibit such “dangerous” thought processes, both Herman & Chomsky, and Plato believe that enlightenment is attainable for individuals in specific but contrasting ways. Herman & Chomsky introduce the ideas of “worthy” and “unworthy” victims in Manufacturing Consent to demonstrate the control that the government has over the media. This media bias is politically advantageous to U.S. policy-makers because it calls for U.S. hostility against the victims of enemy states. Herman & Chomsky believe that education is the key to revealing the truths behind these lies “democracy” feeds us. Both Herman and Chomsky believe that the common man is capable of attaining an Enlightened status through rigorous education and attention to the techniques of media persuasion. In the conclusion of Manufacturing Consent, the authors state, “The organization and self-education of groups in the community and workplace, and their networking and activism, continue to be the fundamental elements in steps toward the democratization of our social life and any meaningful social change.” (H&C, 307 PDF). The extent of these educational developments is the key to enlightenment for the masses and thus the gradual change of mainstream media. Plato argues that enlightenment comes in a much different way than education. First, Plato believes that only a select few individuals are able to become enlightened because they are forcibly stripped from the “cave” of illusion by agents of enlightenment and brought into the reality that surrounds them. “He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first, he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves,” (Plato, 2). Secondly, Plato believes that education is not the path to Enlightenment. He argues that the innate capability to learn and adapt to surrounding environments allows for the enlightenment of select individuals because the elites of society wish to gradually expose them to the realities of the world around them in the hope that one day they can return and rule the masses of the cave. These authors have developed varying opinions on the capability and methods by which the common man can attain enlightenment when subjugated to manipulative and powerful “democratic” societies.

The five filters of Manufacturing Consent that lead to the control of the propaganda model are 1) ownership (i.e., media outlets filter information that is incompatible with the interests of their parent companies); 2) advertising (i.e., advertisers pressure the media to filter information that is incompatible with the advertiser’s interests); 3) sourcing (i.e., the media are dependent on government and major corporations for news, and these sources filter the information they share); 4) flak (i.e., the government and major corporations are able to pressure media outlets to filter information); and 5) anti-communist ideology (i.e., the media is influenced by dominant ideologies and filters information to align with ideology). Although there is a dispute about the validity of these filters and how they affect society, there has been an agreement among philosophers that there is significant bias in how information is passed to the masses. It is this bias that can develop into a false perception of reality. The similarity to the Matrix can be reflected in how the machines filtered information so that humans were distracted from living a regular life. There is a belief in the Matrix that people do not question their surroundings, and this ideology follows that information has been tainted. Neo questions his surroundings on how the information is delivered, and this leads him to find Morpheus. The scene with the red pill as a mechanism for “opening the mind” is key to understanding what Herman & Chomsky were warning about trusting the government.

In the play, The Crucible, by Arthur Miller, a group of young women in Salem, Massachusetts falsely accuse other villagers of witchcraft. The trials and accusations put the village into a frenzy that results in the death of nineteen individuals and the arrest of two hundred others. Arthur Miller wrote this play to create an allegory between McCarthyism and the Salem Witch Trials. Throughout the play, there are many characters who play key roles that lead up to the deaths and trials. One of those is a supporting character, Mary Warren. Mary is a servant of Elizabeth and John Proctor, who denies her claims of witchcraft after being threatened to be hanged. Later on, Mary was arrested for supposedly practicing witchcraft herself, but did not confess. Mary Warren describes the bewilderment and restlessness that the people in Salem felt at the time.

Mary is the servant for the Proctor household after their former servant, Abigail, was let go. Mary is a fragile person, who is attracted to drama and gives in to peer pressure very easily. She moves back and forth between her group of friends that are liars and the Proctors. Mary knows that the girls are liars because there is no such thing as “witchcraft” in Salem. In the play, Mary realizes that Abigail intends to falsely accuse Elizabeth of being a witch, so Elizabeth will then be executed and then Abigail can marry John. Mary tries to help Elizabeth, despite her fear of Abigail and the other girls. Mary is not strong enough to stand up for what is right, eventually giving in to the girls and accusing John of being a witch. Mary is brought to us as a character who is fragile and has a hard time making decisions for herself, which sets the tone for her and the rest of the play.

Mary’s indirect characterization can be defined as weak. Mary has a difficult time standing up for herself, so much so that Abigail is able to intimidate her when John Proctor is right behind her. Mary felt a sense of validation for being included in the court which shows us that she has low self-esteem. She also has a very severe case of cracking under pressure. We see this in court during Act III, when Abigail makes up a lie that Mary’s spirit is a bird, saying “Why do you come, a yellow bird.” (Act III). Abigail says this to Mary because Mary is lying and Abigail wants to catch Mary with this lie of seeing a yellow bird. Using a bird in this quote was well done on Abigail’s part because a bird flies high in the air and Abigail is looking up high into the court’s ceiling responding to the bird. Mary does not know how to react, she crumbles under the pressure and points at John Proctor responding, “You’re the Devil’s man!” (Act III). Mary points at Proctor and says this for one reason only. Beforehand, John Proctor had told Mary he will murder her if his wife is hung. Mary kept this a secret hoping she wouldn’t be hung, but crumbles under the pressure she was put when the girls started to mimic everything she said. Mary’s indirect characterization affects her in a negative way, which results in the death of John Proctor and her friends.

When the play opens up, we can already sense the tension in the room between the characters. Mary enters Act I saying, “The whole country’s talking about witchcraft.” (Act 1). Mary says this quote almost as if she is afraid. Mary is afraid of her past events of dancing in the forest with the other girls. This is when Mary decides to take action. Mercy, a friend of Mary’s, then accuses Mary of wanting to tell people about their nighttime endeavors. At this time, Mary then tells Mercy and Abigail that they must confess to witchery now instead of later. Mary wants them to confess now because their penalty now will be a whipping instead of their penalty in the future which is hanging; witchery’s punishment. This part in Act I puts Mary Warren in the situation of whether or not she will betray her friends or not. Mary’s situation changes from holding back this confession in Act I to betraying her friends in Act IV when she is brought to court.

Mary is motivated in the play by the same components that have motivated the other people in Salem, Massachusetts; anxiety and insensitivity. Anxiety is a component in the play for example when Mary was afraid of Abigail and of being accused of witchcraft. Like the other girls, Mary was caught in a frenzy. When the girls were caught by Reverend Parris in the woods, they were afraid of what punishments may happen to them. Abigail tells them in Act I, “Either of you says a word, and I will come to you in the night and alarm you.” (Act I). Abigail, from this quote, is deadly serious, literally. Abigail does not want the girls to confess this at all. Abigail goes as far as threatening them if they do so. The girls do not doubt Abigail’s threat of violence because they know she will show violence if one of them goes against her. When Mary goes to court in Act III to confess that the girls lied about the allegations of witchcraft, Abigail turns against her because Mary’s claim about these allegations makes Abigail a liar. Abigail starts to say that Mary is a witch and out of fear Mary contradicts herself and says, “Stop it, I cannot!” (Act III). At this point, Mary is backed into a wall so far that the only way out is to confess and betray her own friends. Mary confesses and betrays her friends in spite of her fear for Abigail and what she might do to her. Mary knows that if Abigail accuses her of witchcraft and the other girls follow her she will go to prison and will very possibly be hanged. The ignorance of the people of Salem comes into play because they did not believe that witches could be amongst them and that hanging the girls was the right action to take. Mary showed courage by revealing the truth and finally believing in herself. Mary was fearful of Abigail because she knew that Abigail was a dangerous person and that she would hurt Mary if anything happened to her.

Mary made many choices in the play that affected both her and the other characters. As we read about her situation, Mary in Act I tells Abigail and Mercy that the whole village is talking about witchcraft, and Mary is afraid they will be named witches. At this point, Mary makes the choice of urging Abigail to tell the truth. Abigail declines the request, to tell the truth, resulting in Mary making the choice of not telling the truth either. In Act III, Mary is brought to court by John Proctor to confess that she never saw spirits, witches, or the devil. In this trial, Mary was only pretending to see these so-called “spirits.” However, when she was asked in court to pretend to see these spirits again, Mary cannot pretend to respond with, “I have no sense of it now.” (Act III). Mary responds with this because if Mary fainted on the spot, it would be a way of showing her confession. Mary also didn’t faint because she did not want to be accused as a witch. If Mary fainted at that time, then Mary very well could have been arrested and then hanged for being a witch. Then Danforth, the judge, brings the other girls out to question them if they too have been pretending. The girls immediately start to act as if Mary is captivating them. Mary panics and tells the girls to stop saying such things. The girl’s only response to Mary’s request to stop is mimicking everything she says. Mary then gives into her peer pressure, sobbing and confessing that John Proctor made her sign her name in the Devil’s book and persuading her to testify against the girls in court. Mary’s choices affected her and others in the play, resulting in the death of John Proctor and betraying her friends.

Many changes occur throughout the four acts. One of the most indisputable changes in Mary and how she becomes more decisive. In Act I, John Proctor enters and threatens to beat her. Mary stands her ground and is more decisive in responding to how she does not need to obey him and must worry about what she needs to worry about at the present time. John Proctor is surprised by her newly found sense of power. In Act II, Mary presents herself as much stronger and more assertive because of her role in the trials. Now that Mary has been affiliated with the trials, she has power and is not afraid to show it. Fate is defined by Webster’s Dictionary as, “that which is inevitably determined; destiny.” Mary’s fate goes back to Act I when Mary should have confessed so their penalty would have been less severe than what it had been. Instead, Mary chooses not to confess, gives in to peer pressure, and betrays her friends, which resulted in her friends being hung. Mary’s changes throughout the course of the play give us a clear vision of what her fate may be in the end.

In the play, The Crucible, by Arthur Miller, we read about how a group of girls falsely accuse other villagers of witchcraft. The trials and accusations for the Salem Witch Trials push the village into a frenzy that results in the death of nineteen and the arrest of two hundred. Arthur Miller wrote this play to create an allegory between McCarthyism and the Salem Witch Trials. Throughout this play, many different characters play key roles that lead up to the deaths and trials of others including Mary Warren. Mary Warren in The Crucible is a supporting character who describes the bewilderment and restlessness that the people in Salem felt at the time.

One national authoritative source demonstrated that American people are all living with fear and extended intimidation in their life, reflecting on the declining participation rate in public safety construction. Arthur Miller, the admirable and passionate writer, offers a convincing argument that accusation on people’s identification not only has been considered a violation of personal rights, but also has immensely destructive effects, socially, politically, and even economically. Throughout this fictionalized story, some characters accuse witchcraft of one another for their own interests such as relationship, reputation, and wealth. As the confession and executions continue, people expose their negativity on the pretext of justice. As a result of this tragedy, nineteen innocent people died of fear and hysteria of witchcraft; on the other hand, Abigail Williams, who ran away with stolen money, was not convicted and punished. The author initially builds his credibility by successfully using symbolism, perfectly employing the ethos and pathos appeals, and highly-efficient command of his compelling language. Arthur miller’s primary purpose in writing this masterpiece appears to draw attention to a severe political mistake with broad consequences, reminding people to increase their awareness to defend themselves from hysteria and fear.

Arthur Miller utilizes the presentation of symbolism and allusion within the crucible to back up his claim that excessive interrogation within ideological suspicion will create social fear and hysteria which is detrimental to the public. The introduction stated, “it was an allegory of our times that miller seized upon it, and though it was to be the McCarthyite witch-hunts of the house un-American activities committee that seemed to offer the most direct parallel.” (Miller xv) This quote indicates the implication of Miller’s crucible, making the connection between the court of Salem and McCarthyism. Furthermore, the author has participated in the interrogation, which that demonstrates he shares his credibility and experiences with the audience. On the other hand, the introduction states, “what took him to Salem was not, finally, an obsession with McCarthyism, not even a concern with a bizarre and, at the time, obscure historical incident.” (Miller xvii) In contrast between the red scare and The Crucible, tremendous similarities took place, public people punished and blandish the people with different ideologies to eliminate the fear, conversely, the consequence turned out cause more and more people’s involvement and followed by fear and hysteria. As the tragic ending goes, countless innocent people died because of the fear, which exactly reflects how people use the red scare to manipulate the public and bring the downfall to society.

Author miller proceeds his persuasion by using the passionate diction of her subjects, describing the character’s strong emotion “pointing at the confession in Proctor”, “because it is my name because I cannot have another in my life”, “I mean to deny nothing.” (133). Miller is able to build his point on the agreement with a standard moral law, highlighting the punishment for committing adultery. Miller then immediately refocuses on a conversation between Proctor and Rebecca, “let you fear nothing! Another judgment waits for us all!” (Miller 134) as a foreshadowing of the result. this utilization of emotional appeals from two different characters conveys that people tend to make the wrong decision on judgment when they are in fearful nature which assists in logically leading Miller’s audience to the conclusion that excessive accusation indicates more severe results for society. On the other hand, the author makes the conversation extremely real and excited, “without warning or hesitation, proctor leaps at Abigail and, grabbing her by the hair, pulls to her feet. She screams in pain.” (Miller 102) The language is straightforward and definitely understandable to the audiences, and it emphasizes the claim that innocence died for fear. Therefore, as people get accused and punished heavily, chaos erupts in society and left people in a fearful and intimidating atmosphere. There is some consequence to the red scare, for they both significantly lead to social coup and revolution, which leads to the loss of more lives.

Finally, the author subtly strengthens his central claim by illustrating emotional and ethical appeals with respect to society and politics, solidifying its persuasiveness on the purpose. Reverend Parris defends his niece Abby against the accusation of witchcraft, to keep Parris’s reputation and fame, rather than justice and glory. On the other hand, someone like Thomas Putnam encourages the accusation of the speculation of more land and treasure. Thus, everyone has their purpose, not standing on their faith and justice. the author portrays Putnam and Paris’s behavior, contrasting them with moral law to frame a critical choice between justice and injustice. This phenomenon mainly reflects McCarthyism in the present time, which accusation of being a participant during red. This information not only reinforces the Author’s credible command of the issue but also establishes the magnitude of the political problem. Upon the analysis, the author has successfully finished his persuasion by using ethos and pathos appeals.

Overall, The Crucible represents the Salem witch trials, and also serves as an allegory of McCarthyism, revealing that fear and hysteria definitely make the downfall of society. Meanwhile, Arthur miller uses enough rhetorical devices, reasoning, and careful diction to not only make readers take a stance on freedom of belief, but also provoke audiences to take action on what seemingly considers an epidemic that is truly detrimental to the nation.

Work cited page

1. Miller, Arthur, the crucible penguin books, 2003.

George Orwell uses the character of Boxer to explore the idea of abuse of power and corruption in ‘Animal Farm’. He does this through Boxer’s lack of education, strong loyalty and trust, and use of emotive imagery. Orwell uses Boxer to represent the proletariat in Russia whose work pay was exploited, meaning they could not afford food or housing. Therefore, this political allegory highlights the abuse of power and corruption they would have experienced, which is especially obvious through Boxer’s character.

Boxer, as well as many of the other animals, is uneducated and struggles to express himself and his thoughts, which is shown when Orwell illustrates that “he set his ears back, shook his forelock several times and tried to marshal his thoughts; but in the end, he could not think of anything to say”. Unlike the pigs, who kept education to themselves, the animals weren’t given the opportunity to learn. The fact that he couldn’t “think of anything to say”, shows that even simple tasks like expressing his feelings are extremely difficult for animals like Boxer. Orwell uses this to provide a strong contrast to the pigs’ level of education, shown by the fact “Snowball often won over the majority by his brilliant speeches”. This meant that the pigs could abuse their power and manipulate animals like Boxer to do whatever they wanted, as they didn’t really understand what they were following. This mirrors the real events of a Russian leader, Stalin, who abused his power over the proletariat at the time. The pigs represent Stalin’s leadership, whilst Boxer symbolizes the uneducated peasants and workers, creating an allegory that is very relevant and important to many readers.

Orwell also uses Boxer to show that without the benefit of learning, he cannot express himself and so he will never be able to speak out against the pigs. The repetition of the quote “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” shows the inequality of education between the farm animals, which allowed the pigs to corrupt and maintain their power over them. They could control the animals by keeping them ignorant, so they did not realize that they were being exploited. Repeating this quote throughout the book, reminds the reader over and over again that there isn’t true equality. This demonstrates the impact of the lack of education, as this is one of the reasons they can’t become truly equal. Boxer’s hard-working mentality with his lack of education shows how easy it was for pigs to abuse their power.

Another way that the pigs abuse their power is by manipulating the strong loyalty and trust that honest workers like Boxer have toward their leaders. Orwell uses the repetition of “I will work harder!” and “Napoleon is always right” to display that the proletariat believes everything that Napoleon tells them. The language is simple and short, which reflects how naive and unaware Boxer is, despite being the strongest animal on the farm. Boxer even stands up for the pigs when he says “If Comrade Napoleon says it, it must be right” in Chapter 7. Orwell uses the imperative noun “must” to show how Boxer aimlessly believes everything the pigs say, without questioning their trust. The pigs abuse the strength that Boxer has, by getting him on their side so that others join him. The noun “Comrade” is repeated throughout the book to represent the communist ideology of everyone being a companion and equal. It demonstrates that Boxer speaks of the pigs as equal to him and trusts them like a friend. However, the pigs abuse this relationship so that they can use Boxer’s physical presence and loyalty to their advantage.

Finally, Orwell uses the technique of emotive language and imagery to create sympathy for Boxer, and stress how awful the abuse of power and corruption was for him and the other animals. Boxer puts in a lot of effort to make a windmill for the farm, which shows his strength, and his work ethic. Orwell includes a detailed, asyndetic quote of Boxer’s hard work.; “To see him toiling up the slope inch by inch, his breath coming fast, the tips of his hoofs clawing at the ground, and his great sides matted with sweat, filled everyone with admiration”. This description of Boxer is very emotive and inspirational. The image and metaphor of him dragging huge rocks whilst “matted with sweat” shows his great strength and the struggle he went through, but also shows how much the pigs abused this strength by making him do extremely hard work. The personification of “his hoofs clawing at the ground” shows the tribulations and intense fatigue that he had to go through. This creates a vivid illustration for the reader, which may provoke sympathy for Boxer, and therefore for the proletariat. The reader feels a sense of dramatic irony, as they know that the pigs are corrupt and are abusing their power over good, hard-working characters like Boxer.

In conclusion, Orwell’s use of characters such as Boxer demonstrated the themes of abuse of power and corruption by highlighting his lack of education and strong loyalty through the clever use of powerful imagery. The emotive language, repetition, imperative nouns, and extended allegory emphasize the cyclical and almost inevitable corruption and abuse of power, that Boxer clearly experiences