Category: Character

In Lord of the Flies, Jack Merridew’s character traits propel the theme of violence and evil, the dark part of human nature. As a former “head boy” as well as choirmaster, Jack arrives on the island with the experience of significant success in controlling as well as exerting his power over his peers. As such, he is eager to establish rules and consequently punish individuals who fail to meet his expectations, even though he is quick to break the same rules whenever he needs to further his self-interest. This paper will, therefore, provide an analysis of how Jack’s violent, jealous, and manipulative character traits propel the manifestation of the theme of savagery and evil in the novel.

Jack is depicted as a violent character in the novel. The trait is evident when hunting begins to take over him as it is revealed that he attempted to convey “the compulsion to track down and kill things that was swallowing him up” (Golding 42). The use of the word “compulsion” suggests that killing had become an instinct that came to him easily, a characteristic of evil and savagely tendencies. Additionally, Jack’s violent nature is manifested when he rushes at Piggy, and slaps him, causing Piggy’s glasses to break. Also, when Ralph asks Jack to return Piggy’s glasses, he reacts by attacking Ralph. Based on these reactions, Jack’s actions as a violent character propel the theme of evil and savagely in the novel.

Jack is also jealous of Ralph in the novel, which furthers the theme of savagery and evil in the book. More specifically, when Ralph is chosen as chief, Jack’s jealous nature is seen as his face shows a blush of mortification. Jack’s envy of Ralph’s authority is also seen when he shouts at him, “and you shut up! Who are you anyway? Why should choosing you make any difference? Just giving orders that don’t make any sense” (Golding 79). The rant reveals that Jack is so envious of Ralph’s authority and leadership that he is unwilling to acknowledge him as the new chief. The jealously builds up in the plot until it explodes in the theme of evil as Jack eventually turns savage, calling for Ralph’s blood.

Furthermore, the theme of evilness and savagery is propelled by Jack’s cunning and manipulative nature. More specifically, he uses fear and excitement to scheme and manipulate his peers in the novel. In this regard, he uses excitement to lead his peers into a hunting adventure, which he paints as exciting and fun. In this way, using excitement, the boys cling to Jack due to the excitement that he generates. Similarly, he uses fear to manipulate the boys into supporting him as he plays up the fear and horror of the beast, which he paints as a godlike figure with the ability to change its form (Golding 82). The fear gives the tribe a reason to obey Jack, just as he intended. As such, Jack’s scheming and manipulations create chaos and manifest the elements of savagery and evil in the novel.

Jack is an essential character in The Lord of the Flies as he influences the theme of savagery and evil in the novel. In this regard, his compulsion to kill and his violent attack on Ralph are evidence of evil in the story. Additionally, his jealousy of Ralph’s authority drives him to take actions aimed at undermining his power, including attempting to kill him. Jack also uses manipulation to propel his evil and savagely deeds and further his leadership agenda. In these ways, Jack’s character traits influence the theme of evilness and savagery in the novel.

Hero. This word is mentioned frequently, but what makes a person a hero? Is heroism only saving the world from villains trying to enslave the human race, or can it be a small act of kindness? Can it be both? Yes, for a hero is someone who is brave, courageous and helps others in need. In the book The Outsiders, by S. E. Hinton, Ponyboy, Johnny, and Dally can be described as heroes because they are not afraid to step up, and help people. Ponyboy is a hero because he rescued people and befriended a soc. Similarly Johnny is a hero because he used his heroic qualities to help people. Finally Dally is a hero because of his heroic actions and his kindness towards Johnny. All three of these Greasers, Ponyboy, Johnny, and Dally show that heroism is not only a matter of saving the world, but it is also a matter of doing something for someone else.

Ponyboy is a hero because he is not afraid to rescue and help people in their times of need and he is courageous One main reason why Ponyboy is a hero is that when school children are stuck in a fire Ponyboy runs in to rescue them. Ponyboy yells to the teacher, “I’ll get them, don’t worry… I’ll get them,” and immediately rushes into the burning building to rescue the children. This quote shows the true nature of Ponyboy because he is concerned for a group of children trapped in a burning church. He was so worried that he goes in to the burning church with disregard for his safety and saves the kids. What he did when the church was burning meats the definition of a hero perfectly, he was brave, saved people who needed his help, and was even called a hero by the newspaper. Another way that Ponyboy is a hero is that when Randy, a soc comes over and talks to Ponyboy, Ponyboy listens and talks to Randy about Randy’s problems. Randy then goes on to say, “Thanks kid.” This is a small gesture of kindness shown by Ponyboy, yet it is an act of heroism too. People do not have to save the world to be a hero, a small act of kindness still can take a courageous gesture like overcoming the differences between two people like Ponyboy and Randy did. Being a hero is simple but a good way to be kind to others. Ponyboy is a hero because no matter how big or small the act of heroism he committed was, it saved, and helped people.

Jonny, like Ponyboy, is a hero in his own unique way. Johnny is a great example of heroism because he shows that everybody has heroic qualities of bravery courageousness and helpfulness inside of them and all it takes is an event to bring the qualities out. One important example is that during the chapter when the church is on fire Johnny not only saves school children but saves Ponyboy by pushing Ponyboy out of the church leaving himself in great danger of being crushed by the building’s falling timbers. Ponyboy describes it like this; “Johnny shoved me backwards towards the window… [and screamed] get out.” This shows Johnny’s bravery and heroism because the building was collapsing and about to crush him. Another act of heroism that Johnny commits is that he stands up for two girls who were being bullied by Dally. Here is the section that Johnny stops Dally from bulling the girls.

“Leave her alone, Dally.”

“Huh” Dally was taken off guard. He stared at Johnny in disbelief. Johnny couldn’t even say “Boo” to a goose. Johnny gulped

and got a little pale, but he said, “You heard me. Leave her alone.”

This part in the story was an exciting and surprising part, were Johnny stood up to Dally whom he admires. Ponyboy puts it this way, “Johnny worships the ground that Dally steps on.” and yet Johnny stood up to Dally to protect two girls. In doing so he earned new friends and gained respect. Both of these are act of heroism because Johnny protects two girls from being bullied by Dally, and is also courageous because Jonny admires Dally and Dally could have beat Johnny up for saying what he did. Instead Dally stormed off in a different direction and didn’t bully the girls anymore. Cherry, one of the girls that Johnny rescued said, “Thank you, he was starting to scare me.” This again shows that Johnny did the right thing, in being brave and courageous, and standing up to Dally. Overall Johnny is a hero because no matter how small or big the deed he committed was, Johnny saved and rescued people. This shows that anyone can be a hero, even a shy, and reserved kid like him.

Surprisingly, even Dally is a hero. Even though he has done some really bad things, he still has good inside of him. Dally is a great example of how no matter what your background is you can still commit an act of heroism. The best example is when during the fire in the church, a falling timber hits Johnny and Dally runs in to save him. One of the teachers of the kids that Ponyboy and Jonny saved, describes Dally’s action like this. “He burned one arm pretty badly… trying to drag the other kid out the window.” This shows that Dally is a hero because he runs into the collapsing building, without a thought, and risks his life to drag Johnny out. This is something very special because Dally a criminal who has had many run-ins with the law, yet when given the choice he become a hero by rescuing Johnny . This is definitely an act of heroism because he is saving a life, which is brave, and courageous. Another act heroism that Dally commits is that when Johnny is dying Dally is so worried and concerned for him, that when the doctor doesn’t let him see Johnny, Dally pulls out a switchblade and says, “We got to see him… We’re going to see him.” This may seem unimportant, but this small act of heroism, of making sure that they are able to comforts the dying Johnny is very moving, and special. It is tough to know that you are dying, and when Dally and Ponyboy comfort him it allows Johnny to go peacefully and happily, which is especially heroic because it take a big act of strength and bravery to see a friend pass. Both of the times that Dally acts like a hero he shows that anyone can be a hero no matter who you are or where you came from.

A hero is someone who is courageous with noble qualities that allow him to be admired by his peer and other people. In the book The Outsiders by S.E Hinton three boys Ponyboy, Johnny and Dally are all greasers, and have had run-ins with the law. But then during the book they commit heroic acts, and the biggest one was when Ponyboy, Johnny, and Dally saved children and one another that were trapped in a building that was on fire. Book shows that everyone can be heroic in and all it takes is a event such as saving someone or an event as small as making peace between you and someone else to expose the heroic qualities of bravery and courageousness.

Introduction

The question around which this paper is based is: How effectively does Charlotte Bronte demonstrate feminism through the use of her male characters in the book Jane Eyre and contrast the conventional image of women at the time?

‘Feminism’ in this sense being, acts that support the equality of genders. (Oxford Living Dictionaries, 2019)

Jane Eyre was published by Charlotte Bronte in Britain in 1847, during the Victorian Era. Gender roles were becoming increasingly defined, at this time and women had numerous expectations that they were expected to uphold. (Hughes 2014)

Through Jane Eyre, Bronte expresses these ideals and offers a glimpse at the patriarchal and classist society in which women are oppressed (her society at the time), but she also demonstrates how the protagonist, ‘Jane’, refused to conform to all of these rules.

This essay seeks to highlight the evidence that suggests that Bronte demonstrated feminism in her book “Jane Eyre”. It will also make use of papers by several researchers and information from numerous websites on the context and content of Jane Eyre.

Feminism is a topic that is still much at the forefront of people’s minds today and when investigating the topic, much can be discovered through its portrayal in the arts. There are few books from the 19th century as highly connected to gender studies as Jane Eyre and an analysis of the book should offer great insight on feminism at the time.

The Context and Reception

Jane Eyre was published by Charlotte Bronte in 1847 under the male pseudonym “Currer Bell”. This this book may have disrupted the social order at the time and would, therefore, be highly frowned upon if it were to be openly written by a woman. Some people did suspect that the author was in fact a woman, however the general populace strongly believed that it was a man who wrote the novel.

The book was apparently so out of character for a female that “The conservative Lady Eastlake suggested that if the book was by a woman ‘she had long forfeited the society of her own sex’” (Shuttleworth, S. 2014). This article also suggests that Lady Eastlake attributed to the book a ‘spirit of rebellion’ that she ‘likened to the working class…. With their demand for votes”. “Jane Eyre unsettled views as to how women should act and behave, suggesting in lady Eastlake’s eyes, almost an overthrowing of social order.”

This is only one of the reviews that Jane Eyre received upon its publication, in December of 1948, Elizabeth Rigby in her assessment for the Quarterly Review holds the with even more contempt. She “describes Jane’s strong character traits as being immoral and not intended by God: “It is by her own talents, virtues, and courage that she is made to attain the summit of human happiness, and, as far as Jane Eyre’s own statement is concerned, no one would think that she owed anything either to God above or to man below” (Harrison, K. 2015).

These reviews clearly suggest that Charlotte Bronte’s work was very controversial, pushing the boundaries of the time in which it was released. Even now Jane Eyre is one of the most popular novels produced during the Victorian Era and the book remains linked to gender relations and studies. It stands to reason that Bronte was subtly trying to protest against the prominent attitudes towards women at the time. She even chose to publish it under a male pseudonym, suggesting that she understood the powers that be at the time and knew that she would not be given a fair review under the guise of a woman. It is also ironic to note that “A critic for the Era goes on to state that the text is written with such brilliancy that no woman could have ever written this.” (Harrison, K. 2015), again suggestive of the attitudes towards women and their abilities at the time.

The portrayal of the male characters in Jane Eyre

The development of the male characters not only further the plot, but also demonstrate the attitudes towards the women and the ways in Jane stands out from the typical woman at the time.

The male characters portrayed in Jane Eyre are not ideal “Victorian gentlemen”, who were supposed to be “courteous, obliging, polite, free, and easy in his manners, honourable, humane, forgiving, humble-minded, devoid of all conceit or vanity and virtuous”(The Derby , 1831 ). Instead all of the male characters of the book have at least one of the following traits; cruelty, a propensity to lie, deception, and domineering characteristics, and there is a reason that Bronte does this.

John Reed

The first character that readers are given a full description of is John Reed (Jane’s cousin), he is described as “large and stout for his age, with a dingy and unwholesome skin; thick lineaments in a spacious visage, heavy limbs and large extremities.”, he is “bilious”, with a “bleared eye and flabby cheeks” caused by his gluttony. He is the most prominent antagonist in Jane’s early life.

Jane states that she fears him and all others in the house turn a blind eye to his poor treatment of Jane. This may be symbolic of the way in which women in Bronte’s society were constantly treated poorly by men and it was very rarely addressed. (Jane Eyre 2016).

He is domineering, cruel and wicked and with is with him that Jane first stands her ground against a male figure. Jane states that she was “habitually obedient to John” (Jane Eyre 2016), however when John hurts Jane so badly that “(her) terror had passed its climax”, she exclaims “‘Wicked and cruel boy!’ I said. ‘You are like a murderer—you are like a slave-driver—you are like the Roman emperors!’” (Jane Eyre 2016). When John retaliates physically and Jane responds in sort she is the person who is punished. When Jane is sent to the “red-room” and it is here that Jane contemplates her life and determines that her treatment is “Unjust!” (Jane Eyre 2016) and she resolves to escape it.

John serves to show Jane her self-worth, shown when the maids who are punishing Jane refer to John as her master, and she exclaims “‘Master! How is he my master? Am I a servant?’” (Jane Eyre 2016). John is also the catalyst into Jane’s tendency to advocate and stand for herself and for justice.

Reverend Brocklehurst

The next male that Jane encounters is Reverend Brocklehurst, the superintendent of Lowood School, where Jane is sent. Mr. Brocklehurst, proves to be yet another cruel man in Jane’s life, he is also selfish, dishonest and hypocritical and most importantly very oppressive. He forces the girls at Lowood to conform to his ideal of a female, a poor female at that, by instructing them all to cut their hair so they would be humble. He states “ my mission is to mortify in these girls the lusts of the flesh; to teach them to clothe themselves with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with braided hair and costly apparel; and each of the young persons before us has a string of hair twisted in plaits which vanity itself might have woven: these, I repeat, must be cut off; think of the time wasted of”. (Jane Eyre, 2016. P 40). His aim is exercise his authority in order to force the girls into the females that he believes that they should be. He tries to repress every girl’s individuality and make them believe that what he is doing is right, especially in the eyes of God.

Soon after Jane entered the school Brocklehurst labels her a “liar”, shaming Jane publicly and forcing her to stand on a stool before everybody. It was there that Jane discovered “an extraordinary sensation”, she felt like the experience “imparted strength” and she “mastered the rising hysteria, lifted up (her) head, and took a firm stand on the stool.” After this, when Jane is in tears about the event, she cried and reflected that she was “treated as an equal”, and when she believed that Mr Brocklehurst had taken this away from her she felt “crushed and trodden on”. (Jane Eyre, 2016. p.42). This highlights the importance which Jane places on her equality to others, and also it shows that Jane understand the power which Mr Brocklehurst has. The girl’s response to him though demonstrates an act of feminism, Jane refuses to let him crush her individuality and Helen Burns states “Mr Brocklehurst is not a god: nor is he even a great and admired man”, suggesting that she understands that he is only a person with finite power equal in power to any human.

When Jane is asked later by Mr Rochester about Mr Brocklehurst, Jane states “‘I disliked Mr. Brocklehurst; and I was not alone in the feeling. He is a harsh man; at once pompous and meddling; he cut off our hair; and for economy’s sake bought us bad needles and thread, with which we could hardly sew.’” (Jane Eyre 2016) and goes on to speak of his cruelty. This shocking to her audience as it is uncommon for a female to speak so negatively and frankly about a male, especially one in high social standing. Here, Jane demonstrated that she would not fit into the status quo and be the ever-polite female society demanded when she was being wronged.

St John Rivers

St. John Rivers was Jane’s highly religious cousin, with whom she stayed at Marsh End after she ran away from Mr Rochester. Mr Rivers, not unlike the other men encountered by Jane, is oppressive and controlling. Unlike the others, however, St John is described as attractive with a “Grecian profile”, which conceals his coldness and “statue”-like personality. More so, perhaps than any others as he proceeds to control Jane in a way that no other male has managed to do. He was very direct in his control, when he wished for Jane to learn a new language he simply states “‘I want you to give up German and learn Hindostanee.’”.

Jane lamented, “I could no longer talk or laugh freely when he was by, because a tiresomely importunate instinct reminded me that vivacity (at least in me) was distasteful to him. I was so fully aware that only serious moods and occupations were acceptable, that in his presence every effort to sustain or follow any other became vain: I fell under a freezing spell. When he said ‘go,’ I went; ‘come,’ I came; ‘do this,’ I did it. But I did not love my servitude: I wished, many a time, he had continued to neglect me.” (Jane Eyre, 2016. p 270)

Jane also calls him “master”(Jane Eyre, 2016. p 270), a title that she had bestowed upon no other being than God. Jane admits “I daily wished more to please him; but to do so, I felt daily more and more that I must disown half my nature,” demonstrating how St John’s overbearing nature was beginning to change Jane into the typical Victorian female. He does not ask Jane to marry him he tells her, he states “A missionary’s wife you must—shall be. You shall be mine: I claim you—not for my pleasure,” after describing her as “docile, diligent, disinterested, faithful, constant, and courageous; very gentle, and very heroic”, these qualities only representing the parts of Jane’s personality that were allowed to be shown under his heavy rule. Jane finally stands up against St John, stating, “‘I scorn the counterfeit sentiment you offer: yes, St. John, and I scorn you when you offer it.’”, shocking him as she displays her not so docile side. Jane wrote that St John “met resistance where (he) expected submission”(Jane Eyre, 2016 p.278). In Victorian England marriage was highly sought after by women, it was the avenue through which they would fulfill their domestic duties. By rejecting St John’s proposal, Jane gains her independence completely and so can return to Mr.Rochester a completely independent person, she has now become his equal.

Mr Rochester

Mr Edward Rochester is Jane’s employer while she is at Thornfield and he later becomes her fiancé. From the moment that Jane encounters Mr Rochester orders her harshly and it is this harsh nature that compels Jane to obey him.

He is never described as handsome but jane describes him to have “athletic strength” and “vigorous prime”. This is a strength which Rochester later uses to intimidate Jane, “Jane, I am not a gentle-tempered man—you forget that: I am not longenduring; I am not cool and dispassionate. Out of pity to me and yourself, put your fingers on my pulse, feel how it throbs, and—beware!’” (Jane Eyre 2016 p.205), after Jane refused to be his mistress he calls on the fact that men are stronger than women to try to urge her into changing her mind. Jane is aware of his strength over her but refuses to give in she responds by thinking that “to yield was out of the question”(Jane Eyre 2016 p.205). demonstrating how Jane stands up for herself even when directly faced with a threat from a male. By refusing to be Rochester’s mistress, though she loves him, Jane takes the first step towards the independence that she finds at Marsh End.

There are two major shifts in Rochester’s personality throughout the book, first his transition after becoming Jane’s fiancé and the second being after Jane returns to him. Before they become engaged the reader gets the sense that Rochester sees Jane almost as an equal or atleast that any superiority he feels is not due to his sex or hers’ he says “I don’t wish to treat you as an inferior: that is’… ‘I claim only such superiority as must result from twenty years’ difference in age and a century’s advance in experience.”. However, after ensuring Jane’s love he begins to treat he begins to treat her as an inferior, he demands that she give up her salary and allow him to take care of her and when she refuses he says, “It is your time now, little tyrant, but it will be mine presently; and when once I have fairly seized you to have and to hold, I’ll just… attach you to a chain…”, Jane notices this shift and resolves to keep him “in reasonable check”(Jane Eyre, 2016. p.182).

The second shift is when Jane returns to Mr. Rochester he is made aware that Jane is a rich, independent woman and because he is now blind he is instead dependent on Jane. There is a mutual need for love and support (Nimni 2016) and this is important as the book ends with Jane finally having found her equal, which is the basis on which feminism is formed.

Conclusion

It can clearly be argued that Charlotte Bronte used the male characters in Jane Eyre to emphasize and further Jane’s development as what would today be called a “Feminist”. It is through these characters, John Reed, Mr Brocklehurst, St. John Rivers and Mr Rochester, that we see how Jane differs from society’s expectations. Her “shocking” behavior, that is, standing up for herself and what she believes… her refusal to be seen or treated as less than she is worth and her propensity to speak frankly to vocalize her thoughts and feelings even when she knows that it is out of place, demonstrates Charlotte Bronte’s image of a woman that stands out from society and demands equality.

References

1. Bronte, C. (2016). Jane Eyre. Enhanced Media.
2. Gao, H.( 2013), ‘Reflection on Feminism in Jane Eyre’, Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 3, No. 6, pp. 926-931. Retrieved April 7, 2019 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.735.6412&rep=rep1&type=pdf#page=64
3. Harrison, K. ( 2015, June 15). Jane Eyre as Seen Throughout the Times: A Critical Reception
4. History of Jane Eyre in the 1850s and 1960s and 70s. Retrieved April 8,2019 from https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/123456789/4596/Harrison%2C_K_1.pdf?sequence=1
5. Hughes, K. (2014, February 13). Gender roles in the 19th century. Retrieved April 7, 2019, from https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/gender-roles-in-the-19th-century
6. Nimni, Israt Jahan. (2016). THE INFLUENCE OF MALE CHARACTERS IN SHAPING INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE, LITERATURE AND TRANSLATION STUDIES (IJELR) A QUARTERLY, INDEXED, REFEREED AND PEER REVIEWED OPEN ACCESS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL http://www.ijelr.in KY PUBLICATIONS. 1.
7. Oxford Living Dictionaries (2019) : Feminism
8. Senoussi, K., & Hafsa, N. 2018. Women empowerment in Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre.
9. Shuttleworth, S. (2014, May 15). Jane Eyre and the 19th – century woman. Retrieved April 7, 2019, from https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/jane-eyre-and-the-19th-century-woman
10. The Derby Mercury -Derby England – Wednesday March 16 1831 Issue 5149, CHARACTERISTICS OF A GENTLEMAN. Retrieved from: http://www.buzz-litteraire.com/the-gentleman-figure-in-19th-century-victorian-england-the-re-fashioning-of-a-manhood-ideal/).
11. Thomson, G(2005), ‘Women in the 19th Century: Early Feminists.’ Feminism in Literature: A Gale Critical Companion. . Retrieved April 03, 2019 from Encyclopedia.com: https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/women-19th-century-early-feminists

In the story “Othello”, Shakespeare created a story of 2 men, the villain Iago and the hero Othello. Villain because we tend to see Iago deceives everyone in an elaborate attempt to bring down fictional characters. The premise behind Iago’s deceit is targeted on jealousy of a fictional character that is triggered once Iago isn’t promoted to lieutenant rather than Cassio is given the work. Combined with the racial hate and his suspicions, Othello supposedly slept with his wife Emilia, so he makes use of the weaknesses of the many to mislead and fool them into wondering and doing what he needs Shakespeare uses Iago’s deception towards Othello to illustrate how people who are rock solid can be broken down.

For someone to invariably lie and mislead like Iago is either natural evil or has no morals. For the most half, the story focuses on Iago and the manner he hints Othello into thinking his wife Desdemona became having an affair without any concrete evidence except Iago’s persuasive and intellectual communication can be a deadly mixture that’s shown at some point in the play. Specifically, the scene where Iago and Cassio are talking concerning Bianca but Othello thinks it’s approximately Desdemona. Iago is a professional who decides on individuals and their characters and might hunt down their weaknesses for his advantage, so, therefore, targets Desdemona. ‘… abuse Othello’s ear’ (Act1.Scene 3) Iago borrows Othello’s authentic imagery of ‘feeding’ Desdemona’s ear with his stories. Othello received Desdemona telling her stories, and Iago will ‘win’ Othello doing the same. It’s Othello’s love for Desdemona and his trust for Iago, it just leads to Othello’s demise. Iago will use this to effectively take down Othello and make Rodrigo look bad.

Throughout the play Iago makes an idiot out of Roderigo, so Iago comes into it with deceptive skills and exploitation of people’s weaknesses to his advantage; he finishes up using Roderigo in his final attempt to bring down Othello. “Thus do I ever make my fool my purse, for I mine own gained knowledge should profane If I would time expend with such a snipe

But for my sport and profit.” (Act 1. Scene 3) Iago makes the decision that he’s going to create a small quantity of money since he’s taking gifts supposed for Desdemona for himself, which offers some motivation to hold deceiving Roderigo, with this it is much like Iago has no conscience. In the last part of the play, Iago faces the accusation that he has not been honest or that, inside the least, it helped him convince Desdemona. “So will I turn her virtue into pitch and out of her own goodness make the net That shall enmesh them all.” (Act 2. Scene 3) Iago simply says that killing Cassio can resource his purpose and Roderigo all over again falls for his lies. Iago begins the dying of Cassio once he uses his persuasion on Cassio to drink. Iago not only destroys the name she jointly uses in her attempt to assume that Desdemona had an affair.

Iago being the great friend he tells Cassio to raise Desdemona to assist him to get his job back locution “she holds it a vice in her best to not do quite she is In the end,” (Act 2. Scene 3) Cassio, as do several others, falls into the entice of trusting Iago and taking his recommendation that results in Cassio being led into a trap wherever he’s dislocated. It is Iago’s talent for understanding and manipulating the wishes of those around him that creates him a strong and evil person. Iago will make the piece of cloth from genus Emilia reciprocally for a few attention he can tell Othello of the handkerchief and apprehend that Othello won’t doubt Iago will persuade Cassio to drink and refer to Desdemona; he might persuade Roderigo to offer him his cash and to try to his bidding.

In conclusion, Shakespeare uses Iago’s deception towards Othello to illustrate how people who are rock solid can be broken down. Iago elaborated a plan with horrific acts to take down Othello for giving a job to Cassio instead of him. Iago ruined Othello’s vision of Desdemona by claiming she’s having an affair with Cassio. Iago’s racial hate for Othello and jealousy made him deceit all the people near him because of a grudge.

The Odyssey is an ancient Greek epic poem of Homer. It is the continuation of the Iliad, the other Homeric epic poem. In the Odyssey, we can see the journey of the heroes and the literary representation of the ideal woman. It can be said that women in ancient times were not considered equals to men. In Homer’s Odyssey, there are war stories describing the adventures of the soldiers. However, there are not many female characters in the Odyssey that can portray the vital role that Odysseus has in the Odyssey. The Odyssey allows us to understand what is proper and what is improper in relationships between mortals, gods, women, and men. Womens’ roles are vital in the development of this epic poem. However, it is clear that women do not have the same power as men. The women in the Odyssey are unique in their personalities, actions, and servitude. However, this is not very transparent throughout the story. All the women in the odyssey differ but they each encompass character traits that symbolize what an ideal woman looked like during that time. The Odyssey gives us two versions of women in ancient Greek society. Penelope is one version of the perfect woman, and she represents the loyalty and the perfection of what was to be expected of a wife in ancient Greece. Penelope not only portrays commitment to her husband but also, intelligence, obedience, and the power to trick people (such as her husband).

In the Odyssey, the main character, called Odysseus, meets and entertains an impressive array of women. All the women in the Odyssey are very different and have different personalities, and Homer shows his attitude towards each of the women. There are many female characters in the Odyssey, like Nausicaa, a young, innocent maiden, Arete, Circe, Calypso, Helen, and Athena. These characters help us to understand how a woman can be important in the play of a situation. There are many ideal women in the Odyssey, but the central character proves to be Penelope. Penelope is the wife of Odysseus and she represents the ‘ideal woman’, i.e. loyal to her husband. When Odysseus was trapped on the island of Calypso, Penelope was dealing with suitors who wanted her hand in marriage. She did not want to marry any of those men because it was thought that a queen without her king had no power. She made a plan to gain time with the hope that her husband would make it back home. In the text, Penelope says ‘I have worked hard to weave this winding-sheet to bury good Laertes when he dies…she wove the mighty cloth, and then at night by torchlight, she unwove it’ (Homer, Book 2 page 337). Unfortunately for Penelope, this plan did not last long. Penelope showed her wisdom and cleverness during the entire epic poem. Throughout the years that Odysseus was gone, she remained loyal to her husband.

Penelope remains faithful to Odysseus after twenty years of him being absent and is even hopeful that he will return home. She was not seen every day, especially not after so many years of waiting. This makes her gain the name of such a loyal wife in the Homer epic. Odysseus and Penelope share a rational partnership based on true love. However, if we look closely, we can see how Odysseus slept with every Goddess and woman that came into his sight. Infidelity in women results in a disaster and dishonor while infidelity in men is considered natural and maintains a kind of power structure. Penelope is sagaciously contrasted with the story of Clytemnestra. Clytemnestra cheated on her husband with Aegisthus and planned to kill her husband. Clytemnestra’s action takes place when her infidelity to Agamemnon makes her seem like a weak and bad wife. Penelope was waiting for her husband for twenty years, while Clytemnestra conspires to kill Agamemnon upon his return home. This contrast between characters only further serves to illustrate Penelope as the ideal woman.

Another story that contrasts with Penelope’s stories is Helen. Helen was the wife of King Menelaus and soul mate of Paris. She was the cause of the Trojan war and was considered a self-centered person. She did not think about what would happen if her decision and actions were reckless. The Trojan war brought misery and destruction to the Trojans and their families. In Helen’s case, she did not know that her actions would bring the destruction of many people and was selfish to have not considered the consequences of her actions. On the other hand, Penelope thinks carefully about what decisions to make and which actions to take. Penelope is brilliant, like her husband, and knows how to trick people. In a way, Penelope knew that her actions could have horrible effects if she decides to make the wrong decision. There was a part in the text when Odysseus returned home. However, he was disguised as a stranger. Penelope tests him in order to determine if this “stranger” was telling the truth about being Odysseus.

In the text, Penelope exclaims, ‘You extraordinary man! I am not acting proud or underplaying this big event, yet I am not surprised at how you look. You look like this the day your long oars sailed ways from Ithaca. Now, Eurycleia, make the bed for him outside the room he built himself. Pull out the bedstead and spread quilts and blankets on it’ (Homer, Book 23, page 585).

It is easy to infer that Penelope was testing Odysseus. Only Odysseus and Penelope knew about the secret trick hidden within that bed. When Odysseus got angry and began to tell her all of the things that he did to make that bed, Penelope knew that the stranger was Odysseus. It was known that some Gods disguised themselves to accomplish something or to trick a mortal. Penelope knew that it could be a god in disguise trying to trick her by telling her that he was her husband and go to bed with her. However, she knew that by sleeping with a god, she would be being unfaithful to her husband. If this happened, her husband would be looking for revenge and would only be killed since Odysseus did not have the powers of a god.

These actions not only tell us how loyal Penelope was but how intelligent and competent she was also. Penelope had resembled an “ideal woman” of those times. Even though it appeared as though Penelope had some power, it was often questioned because a queen had no power if she had no king. There is another character that is similar to Penelope’s personality when it comes to the representation of ideal women/marriage: Alcestis of Euripides. She came to represent female perfection. The Greeks refer to this perfect female as a good housekeeper, nurturer of her husband, grateful and pure. There are many similarities between these women when it comes to being perfect. It is important to mention how these women represented the ‘ideal women’ of ancient Greece.

The possibility of being a good wife, beautiful and intelligent, is what was expected of a woman. The idea of an “ideal woman” required that women be faithful and obedient. Obedience was an important characteristic for a woman to have. A submissive woman let a man know that they were the one in power. The article ‘A Translator’s Reckoning with The Women of the Odyssey by Emily Wilson, reads: ‘Her keen mind is not liberating it keeps her stuck. By contrast, Odysseus’ intelligence is defined as an ability to find a fix for any situation. This proves that Penelope shares her husband’s brilliant mind, but her ideas are limited. Elite women of ancient Greece had some power that required them to be cautious about how and when to use it. Penelope was balanced: she knew when to trick others and how to use her power. At the same time, she knew when to stop or have a limit. Penelope has the characteristics of both an ideal wife and a perfect lover, which makes her a perfect woman for her husband, Odysseus. This makes me look at how compatible they are with each other. If Penelope represents a good woman (prudent, chaste, and obedient to her husband’s interests) then it seems as though all other women were considered unworthy. However, if they are mortals and had feminist powers, they were Goddesses. As a woman, Penelope’s life is narrowly defined. Over the long journey of 20 years, Odysseus faces a vast sea’s worth of choices, while Penelope only has one stay loyal to her husband or take a new husband. Is Penelope the ideal woman because she is intelligent but obedient to her custom and husband? There is a lot to think about, but it is seen that this is the answer.

If we compare the ‘ideal woman’ from the present and ancient times, we have to admit that things are very different. In the past, women were expected to wait for their husbands, spend their time sewing, and adhere to all the customs and traditions. However, nowadays women can go to work, they can vote, and they have some power in society. The other women in the Odyssey did not represent the ideal woman because they were not obedient. They do not do what was expected of them as a wife. We cannot speak about the Goddess because they have power and can do whatever they want, while mortal women have to follow custom and try to be a good wife. To remind again when Odysseus returns home, it’s Telemachus, who first learns the true identity of the stranger. Telemachus and his father are connected through the truth that is not revealed to Penelope. This relationship perpetuates the idea that women are subordinate to and dependent on, the actions of men. Since Penelope is passive, submissive but at the same time, intelligent like her husband Odysseus, Penelope represents the perfect wife that Odysseus desired which caused him to leave all the other women that he was with on his long journey.

As we know, Fahrenheit 451 is a dystopian themed book that makes references to the multiple events that occurred around the time the book was published, which was 1953. Because of this, the core of the book was written under the heavy influence of World War 2, which was still raging on only a decade earlier. Fahrenheit 451 depicts a world in which society is under the complete control of the government and is characterized by the absence of individuality and free will. The same situation had occurred in World War 2, where the Nazi Regime introduced the practice of burning books, used to eliminate the presence of individuality and free spirit in which books are conceived to bring.

In addition to the reasons for which the Nazi Regime destroyed books, it is suggested that books are also burned as they are symbolized as an icon of discord and unhappiness, which is why the government declared the reading of books forbidden. Captain Beatty states, in defense of book burning, ‘Coloured people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book.’, implying that society is better off without books. In this statement, Beatty argues that books have the power to light a flame of anger within anyone that may be offended by the books’ contents. However, it seems rather ironic that, even with the practice of book burning, many people within the dystopian world of Fahrenheit 451 are already miserable and unhappy, wouldn’t you all agree?

Moving onto the psychological perspective of Fahrenheit 451, it is evident that the oppression of the government has shown some serious psychological impacts on the characters within the book. At the beginning of the book, we are introduced to Mildred, Guy Montag’s wife. It is revealed rather early that Mildred has a variety of mental impairments through her attempt in suicide and forgetting it the next morning, suggesting that she is mentally unstable. Mildred is also a fine example of what the majority of society in Fahrenheit 451 is, a person with robotic mentality and equipped with blind obedience, with her only purpose of acting as the perfect puppet for the government. This element peaks when Mildred outs Montag for hiding and reading the books he left in the ventilator grille.

A psychological impact can also be seen on figures with higher statuses in this society, namely Guy Montag and his work as a fireman. It can be safe to assume that Montag was also a puppet of the government, seen in the opening line of the story ‘It was a pleasure to burn’, where Montag was blindly burning books for the fun of it without questioning the reason behind doing so. It was not until Montag had met Clarisse McClellan before he began to wonder about the purpose of his occupation. Later in the book, Montag is called out to a book burning, encountering a woman who displays her stance by burning alongside the books, which has a strong, negative impact on Montag, overwhelmed by guilt as he experiences firsthand his profession causing the loss of a human life.

Now, that brings us to the end of our discussion on the different perspectives of Fahrenheit 451. To revise what we talked about just then, Bradbury utilized historical and psychological perspectives to convey a deeper meaning to the story.

Introduction

The Alchemist is a fiction novel written by a Brazilian author, Paulo Coelho. This novel is based around the story of a shepherd boy who dreams about a treasure and sets on a journey to find it. The book’s main idea is to find one’s destiny. This is fantasy book and involves supernatural incidents. The protagonist is out on an adventure in his quest to find the treasure he dreamt of.

The main plot of the alchemist takes place in the Spanish pastures, the Spanish town of Tariff, the city of Tangier in North Africa, and the Sahara desert.

About the author

Paulo Coelho was born in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Paulo Coelho always dreamt of becoming a writer. Coelho was opposed by his family; his parents used to think of the world rationally and were realist while Coelho was an optimist. He studied law on the wish of his parents, but dropped out after a year. He travelled from place to place and worked as an actor, journalist and theatre director before he could pursue a writing career.

Paulo Coelho published his first book “Hell Archives” in 1982. Next in 1986 he wrote a book but then dropped it off. Later in 1987 he published “The Pilgrimage” after making a pilgrimage to Santiago-de-Compostela, and the following year he published “The Alchemist”, his international bestseller.

Body

Plot

The novel is story of a boy named Santiago who is confronted by a dream that there is a treasured near some pyramids. Santiago, who is a shepherd and thus a traveler, had never seen the pyramids before, and the recursive appearance of this dream, decides to set on a journey to find the treasure. The writer has described a very interesting plot on how he sets out on this journey, the motivation behind his adventure to come. During the plot writer has focused on the narration of ancillary characters but always returned back to Santiago’s story. Although the author made use of too much spiritual terms and happenings, the way he described them, no confusion was left behind and the plot became clearer with time. The details that the author has produced for each part of the journey, detailed description of surroundings and settings helps one create a perfect imagination of how all those places must have looked like. As you read it, you will dive into the story. You would start believing that you yourself are the main protagonist, going through all the adventures and moving onwards to a quest that is your own.

The writer has greatly maintained the plot of the story. Although he has added supernatural activities, he fits them with the story so well that they feel like a part of the story, but more than that like real life.

Throughout the story, the writer has talked about the things that we usually do not pay much attention to. These are the personal quest, the awareness of omens, the soul of the world, and the idea of listening to one’s heart as a guide. He has described the story around these particular ideas. The writer leaves a great influence of what he wants to describe on his readers.

The main idea that the writer has highlighted throughout the plot is destiny and the universal language. Destiny is a pre determined course of events, plays a large role in the novel. It is the driving force that guides Santiago on his journey. The writer stated, “When you want something, the entire universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.” One must follow through his destiny and never give up; is the point that the writer focuses on and explains it in the novel. Next is the universal language and soul of the world. The writer says that all the elements in the universe are connected by some means and that is the soul of the world. The writer states that all the elements share the same common soul and it is our heart that connects our soul to the soul of the world. In the statement “Wherever your heart is, there you will find your treasure.” By the story point of view; the writer is talking about Santiago’s treasure; but in literary context; the writer is referring to destiny. Wherever the will of your heart lies, is where you will find your destiny.

The other things that the writer has focused on are omens and personal legend and nature. Omens as the writer has stated are the signs through which the universe guides you towards your treasure or destiny. Throughout our life, we see different omens (signs by the universe), motivating and guiding us to our destiny. Moving through omens, the writer slightly moves towards nature. Coelho slowly develops the concept that nature and man. Man can communicate with nature through the universal language of soul. The writer has described natural scenery throughout the story, the deserts, the types of wind, the grass, the oasis and so on.

The overall story plot did not seem confusing and was clear although due to too much talk about the soul of the world and use of deep solitary language and spirituality, it becomes confusing, especially to those who don’t care about things like solitary and dreams. The writer has planned the whole story on the basis of a single dream which occurs in recursion. In my personal opinion the plot was not much confusing but in a general and critic opinion, there was overuse of symbolic words and supernatural happenings and spirituality which become confusing at points.

Final Thoughts

The book itself is a nice piece of literature and deserves to be on the international bestseller list. The story was touching at some parts, and the way it was told, was attractive and attention gathering. I liked the character of the crystal merchant. He lived his whole life wishing that someday he will be able to get to Makkah for the pilgrimage which is a must on every Muslim who is capable of going on a pilgrimage. The merchant was a positive character, as helped Santiago get a job in nick time when Santiago was in need of it. Secondly he also had a deep and great understanding of omens and a little about the soul of the world and the needs of the heart. He was one of the greatest sources of Santiago’s motivation towards his destiny and provided him with his full support. He appeared at the plot twist where Santiago was planning on cancelling his journey and returning to his old life as a shepherd. I liked his quote that “I am not going to Makkah and you are not going back to being a shepherd” where he explained how one’s heart needed to keep following his destiny in order to be in peace and live happily.

The characters of the story all seemed real except for the alchemist and the King. They both seemed to be the same person as their talks and the way they both appeared in the story resembled. So it can be said that the character of the alchemist was not described apart from the King but in resemblance to the King. The rest of the characters all seemed real and were well defined. The story had a great impact on me and it kept revolving around my mind during the time I was reading it.

My favorite part of the book was when Santiago decides to move onwards to his journey towards his destiny rather than living his life as a shepherd. After working one year at the crystal merchant’s shop he finally decides that he is going to go and discover his treasure waiting for him near the pyramids. And then in the end, he finally gets there gets his treasure, and realizes that his real treasure or his destiny was not to find the buried treasure but to get closer to the soul of the world and find true love for himself. I liked this part the most as it shows how one should just not give up on his goals after going through some small losses. And that one should look beyond what they see. One should look at the things, which mostly goes by unnoticed but are the guiding stars towards their destiny. Our destiny is not always what it seems to us; sometimes we are just so concerned with things happening around and forget what’s important to live in true peace.

The story was a type of tragedy and adventure but with a happy ending. It was so grabbing that once I started reading it, I couldn’t hold myself from reading further.

Conclusion

I would sum up by saying that The Alchemist is a fine piece of literature and spirituality. It is worth reading, especially for those who are optimistic in nature. Although the story could turn confusing at times but on reading it for the second time, all the confusion is cleared. This novel is worth reading.

Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare analyze the consequences of the decisions made by characters in the play based on their intense emotions. Shakespeare makes this evident through Romeo and Juliet committing suicide because they lack belief in the complicated situation between their families ending well. Tybalt is a character whose tragic fate ends in death because of his abnormal passion for the feud between the Capulet’s and the Montagues.

Shakespeare demonstrates the characters Romeo, Juliet, and Tybalt as victims of their passionate natures. All of these characters have the common habit of listening to their hearts more than their minds at some points in the play which affects the way we know the memorable and tragic play today. Shakespeare portrays both sides of passion through Romeo and Tybalt, each a member of one side of the feud. By displaying each side of emotion, Shakespeare explores the consequences of the decisions made by these characters due to their feelings. Romeo and Tybalt both use an excessive amount of their passion to deal with their problems, whereas Juliet knows how to balance the way she listens to her head and her heart by dealing with her feelings towards Romeo when they are first introduced to each other.

The importance of balancing reason and passion is emphasized to help one make rational decisions when dealing with difficult situations. This is demonstrated in Act 2, Scene 2 where Romeo professes his love for Juliet, however, she warns him that things are moving too fast while saying that she mirrors the same feelings. Shakespeare uses imagery when Juliet initially says, “Thou knowest the mask of night is on my face,” in her monologue. This is used to accentuate the fact that it is dark so Romeo has no evidence to prove that his words are affecting her. The tone is also used as Juliet conveys her anger towards Romeo as he overheard her talking about the confusing idea of her love for a Montague. “I should have been more strange, I confess, but thou overheard, ere I was ‘ware, My true love’s passion. Therefore pardon me, and not impute this yielding to light love, Which the dark night hath so discovered.” She displayed maturity and determination as she snapped Romeo back into the reality of the situation. Thus, Shakespeare demonstrates the idea of balancing reason and passion through Juliet as she handles the situation responsibly after thinking about the possible consequences that may occur thoroughly.

The idea of being too passionately involved in a particular situation could lead to terrible consequences for the person and those around them. A character who is heavily engrossed with the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets is Tybalt, a man who cannot control his violent nature whereas Romeo is unable to handle certain instances when in love. This is further analyzed in Act 3 Scene 1 where Tybalt is itching to fight with Romeo, however, he attempts to settle him down, claiming that he has his reasons not to fight him. “I never injured thee, but love thee better than thou canst devise, till thou shalt know the reason of my love. And so, good Capulet—which name I tender as dearly as my own—be satisfied.” Shakespeare makes the use of dramatic irony evident in this statement as the audience is aware of the meaning behind Romeo’s words, however, the other characters in this scene could not comprehend his puzzling reason as to why he refused to battle with one of his family’s mortal enemies. The tone is implicated through Tybalt as he expresses his anger about the pain the Montagues have caused him. “Boy, this shall not excuse the injuries that thou hast done me. Therefore turn and draw.” It is implied that Tybalt’s anger was directed towards the Montague family as it is not clear whether Romeo has caused Tybalt physical harm in the past. It is evident that the feud has mentally and physically drained Tybalt, however, he refused to admit this to Romeo. This may have prevented Mercutio and his death. In this way, Shakespeare acquainted us with the idea that the consequences that may occur, without proper control over our passionate nature, will not turn out well though the tragic ending for Tybalt and Romeo.

Shakespeare showcases the consequences of violence through the feud between the Capulets and the Montagues. This feud is the main source of many of the complications throughout the play. The prologue sets a doomed tone as it briefly outlines what happens in the play. Shakespeare portrays Tybalt as a bitter person who acts upon his emotions fiercely. If Tybalt did not take the feud further than intended, Mercutio, Romeo, and Juliet would not have died caught in the crossfire. In a way, all characters in the play are affected negatively by the feud.

Hate is the source of many of the reasons why many people deal with war and death. The feud between the Montagues and the Capulets was the main reason why all citizens in Verona suffered, including their beloved children who were born into the ‘fatal loins’ of their parents. The meaning behind the establishment of the feud is not yet determined, however, the prologue explains that it had lasted a long time before the events in the play took place. “From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.” Rhyme is used to emphasize the point that this enduring feud will continue to repeat in the generations to come unless something is done to end it. The prologue sets a somber tone for the rest of the play as it foreshadows that the death of Romeo and Juliet will end the long-lasting feud. “From forth the fatal loins of these two foes, a pair of star-crossed lovers take their life whose misadventured piteous overthrows doth with their parent’s strife.” Dramatic irony is evident as we are made aware of the feud being the cause of Romeo and Juliet’s death before the event befell in the play. Shakespeare also uses this to diminish our impression of Romeo and Juliet’s love lasting forever as he raises awareness of the fact that life is definitely not a fairytale as not all people who fall in love will end up living happily ever after. Therefore, Shakespeare explicitly states that hate and anger will determine our fate in an unfortunate manner.

Dwelling too much on past events will lead to many problems in the future that are difficult to repair. Tybalt resents the events which occurred in his family’s history and strives to mend the past mistakes others have made to hurt his ancestors. In Act 1, Scene 5, Tybalt makes this clear by saying, “Now, by the stock and honor of my kin, to strike him dead I hold it not a sin.” Rhyme is used to add emphasis towards his hatred for the Montague family as he believes that killing Romeo would not be considered a sinful act in his eyes. However, Tybalt takes things to a new extent by murdering Mercutio, a man who had nothing to do with the feud. In Act 3 Scene 1, Romeo exhibits his anger by slaying Tybalt. “Mercutio’s soul is but a little way above our heads, staying for thine to keep him company. Either thou, or I, or both, must go with him.” Shakespeare uses imagery to demonstrate how fresh Mercutio’s death was and how it greatly affected Romeo as they were extremely close. Hence, those who are like Tybalt and fail to live in the present will encounter many complications throughout their lives, including death.

Therefore, Shakespeare exposes the consequences of what loving or hating someone will bring through the play, Romeo and Juliet. This is majorly conveyed through the characters Romeo, Juliet, and Tybalt as they all die due to the aftermath of the feud. We are taught to think about our situations thoroughly before acting upon them, as it may result in serious issues that are difficult to resolve.

In 1953, author and novelist Ray Bradbury published a book titled Fahrenheit 451, and it has become a must-read in American literature. It is often studied in classrooms across the countries not only for it’s relevant themes of censorship and government control, but also the literary devices used by Bradbury to convey his message. The message that Bradbury tries to convey in Fahrenheit 451 is the reasoning behind the most famous aspect of the novel which is books have been outlawed, and any form of media must have government approval.

In the opening lines of the passage, the story’s antagonist, Captain Beatty, pays the protagonist, Montag, a visit after he had called in sick. Bradbury immediately paints a picture of Beatty’s character and his habit of smoking every time he pauses dialogue to simply state the word “puff.” An example is below “Beatty puffed his pipe. “Every fireman, sooner or later, hits this”….Puff. “Only fire chiefs remember it now.” Puff. “I’ll let you in on it. (pg 45)

By occasionally interrupting himself to take a puff out of his cigar, we do get to see that aspect of Beatty’s character. Soon, by the end of the passage, we get lines he says: “Now Beatty was almost invisible, a voice behind a screen of smoke.” (Pg 46)

So at this point we have a basic outline of some of the characteristics Beatty shows: he loves to smoke, even when speaking with someone in conversation, and he makes general assumptions about people (“…every fireman, sooner or later…”). Apart from those two similarities, we read a lot more into Beatty’s character through more precise lines of dialogue. When Beatty speaks about a time when “books appealed to a few people,” he goes on to say how books became a problem once “the world got full of eyes and elbows and mouths. Double, triple, quadruple population.” By the end of the passage, he goes on to say, “Now let’s take up minorities in our civilization, shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities.” Along with his lines about how as the population got bigger people began to demand things to be quicker, these lines reveal that Beatty holds a sort of hatred for diversity. Not just diversity of people, but diversity of thought as well. He goes on to list everybody from the Chinese, to Mormons, Mexicans, and Baptists. He believes that the reason people need to be kept in line, and without an opinion, is that our conflicts come from this never-ending cause of diversity. As long as everybody thinks and acts the same way, people will remain calm.

As much as we have discussed Beatty, Bradbury also gives us insight to the character of the story’s main protagonist, Guy Montag, and his wife Mildred. We see throughout the passage that Montag is able to remain calm in the presence of authority, while his wife comes off as startled. Montag sat in bed, not moving…. Mildred arose and began to move around the room, picking things up and putting them down.” (Pg 46)

The fact that Montag remains essentially motionless the entire conversation could be interpreted one of two ways, Montag is calm, or Montag is frightened. Mildred’s behaviors come off as being a little less unclear. She is nervous. The entire time Beatty is talking Mildred either fiddles around, gets up or repeats the last words of Beatty’s sentences to Montag. The reason for Mildred’s nervousness cannot be entirely revealed without understanding deeper into the story, but Bradbury paints the picture of each character’s feelings and behaviors: Beatty is snobby and upset, Mildred is a nervous wreck, and Montag is taking it all in.

There are many examples like those above throughout Fahrenheit 451, and Ray Bradbury proves through the use of said examples that he was deserve of his title as an extremely fluent author, or poet. Hopefully, while studying this novel, somebody else sees how powerful the use of words in a piece of work can be when creating a world the reader can see before them.

Jonas is a twelve-year-old boy who has accepted the sameness in his community just like everyone else. When December rolled around Jonas became the receiver of memory. On his first day he received the memories sunshine and sunburn. He described the sunshine as pleasant and the sunburn as pain. The more and more training he received the more and more painful his memories became. Later, on in the novel he got to see the real world. And when he did, he realized the community was a lie. He had had found out release wasn’t peaceful it was death. He asked why his father had lied to him and started questioning the community. He now questioned the community wondering who else was able to lie to him. Lois Lawry stated, ‘ What if they had all been instructed: You may lie?’ (179). This quote is talking about when he and other new twelves received their assignments if in their rules, they were able to lie. This quote supports my main idea because he used to be supported the community now, he is started to question it and its people.

We perceive Jonas in 3rd person limited omniscient meaning we mainly get to only know him. So, we get to see the devotion and transgressions Jonas makes. In the beginning of the book Jonas used to be apprehensive and childish now he is mature, wise, and brave. Once Jonas began receiving intensified and heightened memories, he became furthermore perceptive and independent. But after he got to that point of being the seer of what was before sameness. And once he understood the community was a lie. He also realizes that they took away the community’s freedom. The elders only provide for them if they work. Meaning their basically emotionless laborers with no will or privilege of doing what they want. The bad thing is the people can’t realize this because it’s been like this for a long time. So, overtime they’ve learned just to accept it without even knowing the terms they get to live on because their born with no choice. Another thing is when the children are born their birthmothers don’t get to keep them there are examined and tested to see if they’ll make it too the ceremony where parents get appointed to children who don’t even belong to them. If not, then there released. The more profound Jonas gets into knowing what’s happening in his district the more outraged and furious he gets. He is just so frustrated and mad because they can’t seem to realize what the community is doing. Then, another thing is they do these pointless dream/emotions telling rituals every morning/evening. It’s doesn’t make any sense because they don’t really have real emotion or feeling. They just have a somewhat reaction counted as a feeling. Lois Lawry stated, ‘But now Jonas had experienced real sadness. He had felt grief. He knew that there was no quick comfort for emotions like those’ (329). Anticipating when mother had said she felt sad and yet she wasn’t actually sad, and Jonas knew this now that she or anyone else in the community didn’t really have any real emotions just reactions and this made Jonas feel sorry and sad for them. This relates to the topic because we get to see Jonas’s decision, actions, and emotions.

In the beginning of the novel Jonas and the people of his community are very careful of their actions because they didn’t want to break any rules. This is Because if the rules of the community are broken three times than the offender is released and not in a peaceful way. So, the they’re too frightened to break any rules. During chapters twenty-one Jonas when he is left the community, he was thinking of going back. Then, he just thought there for a second of the three important rules he just had broken which were: Leaving your dwelling at night, stealing leftovers, and he took his father’s bike. After knowing this he and Gabriel would most likely be released if found. He knew the community would be aware of him missing by the time everyone woke up. So, he began pedaling faster over being hesitant and with an injured foot. He was doing this because resolved around the idea of getting else ware so he could have his memories be released out into the public were his memories would be accessible to the public. He wanted the community to be able to handle these memories on their owns without the help of any receivers. He wanted them to experience these emotions like love and pain. He wanted them to be able to have these emotions not just react to them. He wanted them to be able to rebel against them and for them to get their freedom and will back, to have their own children, and to make their own decisions mainly even if it could be dangerous. He wants the community to be like it was before sameness. According to Lois Lawry, ‘ It wasn’t fair. Let’s change it.’ (285). This quote is talking about when Jonas got upset because the receivers of memory carry all he pains and the burdens for them instead of them handling it themselves. This relates to my topic because it talks about how Jonas feels about the community.

The giver is the current receiver who transferred memories from him to Jonas. Jonas is a receiver in training who takes his life very seriously now. The giver helped him become wise. By, transferring memories of the real world to him. He does this for Jonas’s benefit into the big realization of the community being a lie. As they get to know each other more their relationship gets deeper to the point where Jonas wishes the giver was his grandpa and the giver tells Jonas he loves him. Jonas begs the giver to come with him, but he says he can’t because he must stay and help his people because they won’t be able to handle, he memories themselves when Jonas gets to else ware. The giver helps teach Jonas wisdom, determination, and love. Lois Lawry said, ‘I want to, Jonas. If I go with you, and together we take away all their protection from the memories, Jonas, the community will be left with no one to help them. They’ll be thrown into chaos. They’ll destroy themselves. I can’t go’ (390). This quote is talks about when Jonas and he are talking about the plan and Jonas asks miserably if he’ll come but the giver say he can the haves to stay and help the people. This involves with my topic because my quote talks about the relationship of Jonas the giver and how it affected his character.

Jonas is a changed character because he sophisticates and becomes astute. We know this because Lois Lawry the author wrote this novel in third person limited omniscient. We for the most part get to only perceive Jonas. Jonas is a very complex character with many thought, feelings, and emotions. So, we get to see him change and many ways. This is what makes him a dynamic character.