Category: Comparative Literature

Although Henry David Thoreau and Jonathan Swift in different historical periods, both of them actually address the ways and methods of social change in their respective essays Civil Disobedience and A Modest Proposal. In the work entitled Civil Disobedience, David Thoreau provides the ideas, which could be categorized as the peaceful and non-violent anarchism and refutes the importance of law and authority and the sources of compulsion. Jonathan Swift, one of the most outstanding adepts and apologists of political, social and scientific Enlightenment and the author of a variety of satirical essays, created his tract entitled A Modest Proposal in response to the incongruence between the degree of adoption of humanist values in England and the inhumane social policies in Ireland, which were inhibiting national dignity of Irish people and abuse the true understanding of humanity. The present paper is intended to analyze the internal conflicts of both works and argues that whereas the essays are quite similar due to the evidence of clash between the idea of social use and asociality in both of them, the incongruence between Thoreaus ideas is associated with his distrust for the majority, whereas the major logical and conceptual fallacy in Swifts work consists in his sympathy with the majority, or the livestock.

In Civil Disobedience, there is an intrinsic incongruence between the social use of the actions proposed by the writer, and his actual asociality as one can interpret it when reading the pamphlet. For instance, the scholar proposes that individuals, for the sake of terminating the bloody Mexican war and prevent the deaths of their fellow citizens as well as in order to eradicate slavery, avoid paying taxes, as taxes are actually the costs of maintaining the exploitation of others and the armed conflict (Thoreau, par.1-2). As one can understand, the purpose of civil disobedience refers to the universal human feelings of compassion and mercy for the soldiers and slaves and is possible only if the perpetrator of this transgression has a high degree of social interest. On the other hand, Thoreau himself declares his own indifference to the communitys needs: The State, having thus learned that I did not wish to be regarded as a member of that church, has never made a like demand on me since (Thoreau, par. 25). Therefore, whereas the source or sender of the message about the social use of civil disobedience positions himself as antisocial and indifferent to the social issues, he nevertheless promotes his proposal as beneficial to the entire society. This incongruence makes Thoreau a less credible speaker. In A Modest Proposal, the inconsistency between the idea of social use and antisocial nature is not fully associated with the sender, like is Thoreaus case, but rather with the nature of the proposed action. In fact, Swift suggests that it would be useful for the good of the entire society to introduce the possibility of eating young children. On the one hand, the author provides six points which substantiate the economic appropriateness of legal endorsement of such actions. For instance, the author claims: Whereas the maintenance of an hundred thousand children, from two years old and upward, cannot be computer at less than ten shillings a-piece per annum, the nations stock will be thereby increased fifty thousand pounds per annum, beside the profit of a new dish introduced to the tables of all gentlemen (Swift, par.23). On the other hand, Swift also incorporates into his paper a notion of maternal care about and attachment to little toddlers: for instance, in the first paragraphs, it is made clear that Irish mothers are desperate to gain or earn some money for supporting their children and are literally forced to beg (Swift, par. 1-2). Due to the prevalence of such negative social phenomena as mother beggars or hard-working mothers who barely make ends meet, feeding their children, one can assume that family bonds are particularly strong and socially constructed and enforced so that women would rather die of hunger and exhaustion than let their children die. As one can assume, this proposal is also antisocial; moreover, although the innovation associated with children farms, regardless of its obvious social and economic gains, will undermine the very foundation of the existing polity by dissolving families and eliminating such important aspect of intrafamilial connection as maternal commitment to children. As a result, all above described economic profits will not be relevant in the partly destroyed and disunited society.

The second point of logical incongruence in the two works directly derives from each authors attitude towards the majority. In particular, in Civil Disobedience, there is a conflict between the ideas of treating the views of majority with suspicion and the very nature of justice. On the one hand, the scholar states: But government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it (Thoreau, 4). However, it is not actually clear which source of justice the author recognizes; Thoreau merely states that the individual should decide by themselves the frames and boundaries of their own conception of justice. Therefore, the major agent of justice is individual rather then majority, according to the essay. On the other hand, the whole cognitive construct of justice can not be embedded into human mind at once, the development of the understanding of justice as a phenomenon, endorsed and controlled by individuals, is a gradual process, which occurs in the course of human socialization. Socialization, in turn, is the continuous influence of microsocial (family and school environments) and mezzo social (contacts with communities and bureaucratic institutions like churches) majorities on human character. Therefore, due to the fact that the understanding of justice can be shaped only under the influence of common practice, the essay should have specified where the individual can find the idea of justice if they are expected to approach the views of majorities with suspicion. Thus, the author disregards majority as a powerful force and views it as an agent of mass consciousness which promotes and enforces corrupt ideas of justice. Conversely, the major logical inconsistency is Swifts work is the sympathy for the poverty-stricken majority he expresses, which is not compatible with the inhumane idea of eating little children. In fact, the first lines of Swifts work depict the plain and severe realities, encountered by the families of beggars in Ireland: These mothers, instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in strolling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants: who as they grow up either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes (Swift, par.1). The authors language, as one can conclude, doesnt de-prioritize the sentimental nature of that period, when infants were doomed to miserable existence in poverty and pain, so Swift obviously expresses compassion with and concerns about their fate. At the same time, he mercilessly proposes that families be split and children be murdered to serve as a dinner for wealthier people (Swift, par.5). At the same time, it is barely possible to imagine a family, in which parents voluntarily agree to sell their little child for meat and doom them to such a horrible death.

As one can conclude, due to the fact that both Thoreaus and Swifts proposals are barely realistic, they are both characterized by the striking incongruence between the projected social benefit and underlying asociality. At the same time, Thoreau propagates individualism in worldview and judgments about equality and justice, so he fails to recognize the importance and power of the majority, forgetting that human beliefs and moral norms are constructed by the significant others surrounding each person. Swift, in his turn, expresses too great compassion with the majority, affected by poverty, and as a result his essay appears to be unconvincing, as the writer probably planned.

Works cited

Swift, J. A Modest Proposal. In Chapter 6 of The Broadview Reader, edited by J.Flick and H.Rosengarten. Broadview Press, 1998. Web.

Thoreau, H.D. Civil Disobedience. In Chapter 6 of The Broadview Reader, edited by J.Flick and H.Rosengarten. Broadview Press, 1998. Web.

Introduction

The depiction of life struggles in literature can be as varied as the authors approaches to details are. In the case of Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage, written by Alice Munro, and Miss Adele Amidst the Corsets, written by Zadie Smith, the difference is tremendous. The former storys characters are more credible, the ideas of societal changes are more clearly presented, and stylistic decisions correspond better to the original intentions compared to the latter.

Description of Characters

The principal aspect distinguishing the literary works under examination and explaining the advantages of one over another, is a detailed description of the main characters, determining their will to live. In both stories, the authors depict individuals struggling with specific life circumstances; however, the difference is in the varying degree of success of the writers in portraying their key traits. For instance, in Munros piece, Johanna, who was the subject of the hoax of Edith and Sabitha, is well-written and possesses many virtues, determining her ability to survive. Thus, she is a person who could see what needed to be done, and how, and she could round up and supervise people to do it, implying that she is independent, strong-willed, and responsible (Munro 8). Throughout the narrative, many events support this vision and contribute to the explanation of why she is regarded as a positive character despite occasional rudeness (Munro 2). In this way, she is clearly virtuous and appears to be more human than others, which is underpinned by substantial evidence.

In this respect, she is more attractive and well-thought than Adele from Miss Adele Amidst the Corsets since the latters life is seen solely through the lens of her personal convictions, relationships, and bad habits. In the story, she gains weight while refusing to change her diet and keeps complaining about her brothers lifestyle while neglecting the inevitability of her aging (Smith 1-2). By doing so, she rejects the idea of others being different and having varying priorities and is seen as a mean person as opposed to Johannas mere lack of charm. In the subsequent conflict in the shop, Adele also neglects the cultural characteristics of its owners and exacerbates the problem by shouting at them (Smith 8). Thus, even though her struggles are real, she does not evoke much sympathy. The information about Adele is limited to her past and rigid habits, while the reader knows nothing about her actual traits, leading to the adverse outcome.

Central Ideas and General Meaning

Munros narrative is also more intriguing due to her particular attention to the role of individuals in overcoming challenges, contrasted with Smiths emphasis on the importance of circumstances. For example, when misled by the teenagers, Johanna relies only on herself while moving to Ken, thereby supporting the idea of ones power over hardships (Munro 12). In this way, the central idea of this piece is the possibility to improve ones life by simply acting on the chance, while the general meaning is the possibility for everyone to make a change. On the contrary, Adele expects the world to readjust to her liking instead of putting herself in other peoples shoes. During the conflict, she completely disregards the fact that Mrs. Alexander lives under the constant pressure of traditions (Smith 7). In this case, the central idea of a shift in society to be made for accepting diversity is not effectively transmitted as the general meaning is not ones strength but the inability to understand others.

Text Organization: Style, Tone, and Diction

From the perspective of text organization and particular characteristics of writing, Munros story is more interesting than Smiths piece due to its greater complexity. In the former case, the narrative is non-linear from the beginning to the end and frequently shifts between the scenes, thereby allowing the reader to grasp the important details in the process. In contrast to it, Smiths approach is simple, and the change of locations determines the progression of events, thereby limiting ones understanding to particular occasions. In terms of stylistic choices and tone, Munros story is more beneficial as the author adopts a descriptive approach while keeping it optimistic since the ending is good for everyone (29). These benefits are opposed to the drawbacks of Smiths narrative writing limited to a single viewpoint, and the vindictive tone worsens the perception (4). Munros diction is also more effective when depicting misunderstandings; she relies on mild language instead of Smiths harsh words. This characteristic tells the reader that the formers approach is friendlier, whereas the latter is more quarrelsome.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the story of Alice Munro is more impactful than the one of Zadie Smith due to several reasons. First, the former is more interesting from the perspective of characters descriptions as they seem more human because of more numerous details, whereas the latters sole focus is on their beliefs. Second, the depiction of life struggles, determined by society, as the main motivation for writing is better in Munros piece as it shows an actual way out of hardships. Third, the larger point about the world is made more explicitly by Munro than Smith since she uses a more optimistic tone, relies on the non-linear progression of events, and uses a milder language. Thus, Munros intentions in presenting the story are more apparent than those of Smith, and the overall organization is better.

Works Cited

Munro, Alice. Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage. 2001 [Word Document].

Smith, Zadie. Miss Adele Amidst the Corsets. 2014 [Word Document].

Both Sophocles tragedy Oedipus Rex and William Shakespeares Hamlet can be viewed as illustrations of the resilience of human beings. Resilience means ones capability to adapt and recover quickly from stressful events. Both Oedipus and Hamlet have difficulties accepting horrible truths about themselves and their families; however, Hamlet seems to be more resilient, behaving with more patience and countenance instead of making reckless choices.

In the course of the plays, both characters learn difficult truths about their past. Oedipus finds out that he killed his own father and married his mother, as was prophesized to him, and this revelation shocks him. Sophocles writes, &is there a man more agonized? More wed to pain and frenzy? Not a man on earth& (Sophocles 56). Hamlet is appalled to learn from the ghost of his father that he was killed by his uncle, the new king of Denmark: O villain, villain, smiling damned villain! (Shakespeare 47). The initial reaction of both characters is that of shock and anger, and they could not accept the truth.

Further actions of Oedipus and Hamlet show the difference in their characters. Oedipus enters into a fury, rushes to kill his wife and mother, and blinds himself in despair: I stabbed out these eyes. Why should I have eyes? Why, when nothing I saw was worth seeing? Nothing (Sophocles 68). He cannot bear the pain and guilt of his actions and the understanding that the discovery of the truth was not worth the death of his wife and the corruption of his family (Steiner 558). Hamlet, on the other hand, does not fly into a rage but swears revenge, as the ghost asks him: So, uncle, there you are. Now to my word; It is Adieu, adieu! Remember me. I have swornt (Shakespeare 47). After the initial shock, he is filled with determination to avenge his father rather than the desire to destroy everything around him.

Sophocles Oedipus Rex describes the characters journey towards the truth, while Hamlet tells the story of revenge. Oedipus blinds himself after his horrible discovery and pledges to live the rest of his life in exile. He is devastated and cannot live with the consequences of his actions: If only I had died, this weight of monstrous doom could not have dragged me and my darlings down (Sophocles 69). Hamlet is more resilient, and throughout the course of the play pursues his goal of avenging his father. He is determined to kill his uncle, He that hath killed my king, and whored my mother/ Popped in between the election and my hopes/ Thrown out his angle for my proper life (Shakespeare 208). He loses all fear of death and believes that if his time has come, there is nothing he can do about it. At the end of the play, Hamlet succeeds in killing his uncle but has to give his own life to his purpose. He dies with the feeling that he has fulfilled his purpose, while Oedipus goes into exile devastated and not able to forgive himself.

Both in Oedipus Rex and Hamlet, the characters are faced with horrible truths and try to cope with them. Both have difficulties accepting reality, but Hamlet is more resilient. He reacts calmer, sets a goal, and acts with determination to achieve it, while Oedipus flies into a rage and seeks to destroy himself and his family. Hamlets capability to adapt to reality leads him to the fulfillment of his purpose and the acceptance of the inevitability of death, while Oedipus goes into exile feeling guilty and devasted, unable to accept the consequences of his actions.

Works Cited

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Yale University Press, 2003.

Sophocles. Oedipus Rex. Prestwick House Inc., 2005.

Steiner, John. The Trauma and Disillusionment of Oedipus. Psychoanalytic Theory and Technique, vol. 99. no. 3, 2016, pp. 555568.

Shakespeare provides very many examples that can be used for comparing O.J and Othello: the juice and the fish. They are all stars in different ways, champions, combatants, and gladiators. Therefore, having all these ideas in place it is possible to get down to comparing and contrasting the two.

Othello is a well-known gracious moor. His heroic features started just after his birth. He is believed to be of a gracious birth. Othellos graciousness was identified when he became a general commander during a war. It was due to his leadership skills that he became the overall leader of the Turkish army. People had great respect and honor for him in that region. The power he held was so great that he could order attendants together with other members whatever he wished them to perform and they did it with great pleasure.

Othello the moor of Venice was produced at the period when racism based on color in the European nations was beginning. Simpsons tragedy on the other hand came into existence when color-based racism was declining. O.J Simpson and Nicole are the core characters of the obvious racial chauvinists in the history of the Western nations. Othello in a real sense is just about a white woman by the name of Desdemona who fell in love with Othello a black man and they ended up in a marriage.

Several racist references come up due to the marriage between the two couples although the intention of the writer was greatly on the aspect of lovers. Iago comes out to be a well-known racist in the play. During this time, the new problem got married to the old problem of slavery that started a long time ago in the history of the Western nations. Othellos compatriots endured long periods of suffering while the O.J Simpsons suffered from the traumatic events of enslavement.

O.J Simpson could marry a white woman during his time without breaking the states law as it was in the earlier period. It is true that the two women Nicole and Desdemona got attracted to the black men due to their characters being heroes in their activities. For instance, Othello was a heroin military activity while O.J Simpson had perfection in the sporting activities mostly in football. The two characters signified physical presence that was nearly greater than life. They also held similarities in their warfare and sporting activities. Additionally, both sporting competitions like football and boxing were preliminary masculine. The same was applicable in war activities where men used to be at the forefront during war and women stayed at home.

The tragedy of an outsider trying to make courtship with a woman from the Japanese society provides a different version of the play. It is believed from this idea that Othello did not have dark skin nor was he an African. He was just a stranger in Venice. This gives the impression that Othello was just an outsider ruling out the issue of racism. It clearly depicted that the issue that brought about segregation in the community was class and not racism. O.J Simpson became a class-oriented nationalist rather than a race-oriented nationalist. When O.J married his lover Nicole it came out vividly that, he had married from a high-class family while he belonged to the low-class level.

On the contrary, Othello married within his class level. This is because he held the position of general commander, which was almost the same level as Desdemona who was a senators daughter. The only difference was that Othello was an outsider while Desdemona was from the surrounding community. The same issue also comes out clearly in the case of O.J and Nicole.

All conventional norms established by members of society have a specific purpose and a prevailing ideology as a basis. Generally, rules are created by a hierarchical elite based on an ideology that is either initially shared by the majority as in Orwells Animal Farm or eventually imposed on it as in Bradburys Fahrenheit 451. In the first case, ideology is a community value, and when rules become distorted or inconsistent with it, they lose their meaning. In the latter case, ideology is inherently contrary to the interests of society, which makes it appropriate to challenge them. This paper argues that challenging the rules is only appropriate if the ideology behind them is in disagreement with the values of the communitys individuals.

Essence and Function of the Rules

Orwells Animal Farm is a satirical parody of events that took place in the Soviet Union after the 1917 revolution. Every animal on the farm initially respected and supported the ideas of the Old Major, who believed that no animal must ever tyrannize over his own kind, because they are all equal (Orwell 8). The old pig taught that human habits generate evil, and animals must behave differently. After Old Majors death, three pigs, Napoleon, Snowball, and Squealer, brought his ideas together in the teaching of animalism that parodied communism and reflected it in seven commandments they inscribed on the wall (Orwell 16). These rules in their meaning represented the essential provisions of animalism, and, therefore, all animals expressed their agreement with them.

The prohibition against storing and reading books in Bradburys Fahrenheit 451 was a reflection of the idea imposed by the government that books contain dangerous and revolutionary thoughts that undermine the equality of citizens. Captain Beatty makes that point explicitly, stating that all people must be alike, and that not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal (Bradbury 55). According to this ideology, joy should not be overshadowed by contradictory book reasoning and theories, and peoples lives should be filled with entertainment. Many citizens have been repressed for keeping books, and their houses were burned down by firemen.

Thus, both in the Animal Farm and Fahrenheit 451, the rules represented the essence of the ideology behind them. The primary function of the rules was its implementation through specific regulations created by governing subjects. Nevertheless, in the first case, the ideology was accepted and supported by all participants in society. In Fahrenheit 451, the underlying ideology was forcibly imposed on citizens and largely contradicted their interests.

Eligibility to Challenge the Rules

It was Napoleon who was dissatisfied with the necessity of considering the opinions of all animals in making decisions and began to violate the provisions of animalism even before the official reformulation of the commandments. He stated that all issues would be resolved by a special committee of pigs, presided over by himself, and there would be no more debates (Orwell 34). This directly contradicted the spirit of animalism and the ideas of the Old Major, who condemned tyranny and proclaimed equality between animals. Nevertheless, animals have continued to support Napoleons authority and work tirelessly, convinced that they do it for their own benefit and that of their offspring (Orwell 36). Almost none of the animals noticed that the leader made an ideological substitution, and his power loses the features of animalism.

Over time, pigs began to adopt human habits, such as trading and drinking alcohol, and reformulated all the commandments, and then excluded all but one. This last commandment was already in direct conflict with animalism and claimed that all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others (Orwell 80). It should be emphasized that the amendments to the existing regulations modified them into directly opposite ones in spirit. Thus, Orwell provides an illustrative example of rules that initially expressed an ideology beneficial to society and later were inappropriately distorted for the welfare of the ruling elite.

In Bradburys Fahrenheit 451, the rules were challenged by a group of ordinary citizens who did not have government power. At the beginning of the story, Guy Montag meets his neighbor Clarisse McClellan during a night stroll and discusses feelings and thoughts, nature, and even books with her (Bradbury 4). Over time, he realizes that his previous life was empty, including his work and relationship with his wife. Guy Montag challenges the prohibition on reading books since he believes something is missing for peoples happiness, and books might help (Bradbury 78). This leads him to disagree with the fundamental ideology of the government and challenge the existing rules.

In this case, the challenge takes the form of an outright protest against the existing system, which is an appropriate response to the repressive ideology of the government. Bradbury demonstrates an example of the citizen opposition to the prevailing order, where the underlying ideology is inherently perverse and imposed on society. This ideology limits the freedom of thought and behavior of people, and therefore the author takes the position of a protagonist.

Conclusion

It should be concluded that in both literary pieces, there is a gradual process of challenging the rules. However, Napoleon, by modifying the commandments, distorts and deviates from the fundamental animalism ideology supported by the inhabitants of the animal farm, and therefore his actions are inappropriate. At the same time, Guy Montag is opposed to a totalitarian regime of a government that infringes on the citizens, and challenging the rules that reflect such an ideology is legitimate.

Works Cited

Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451: A Novel. Simon and Schuster, 2012.

Orwell, George. Animal Farm and 1984. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2003.

Notwithstanding that both William Golding and Mary Shelley created hypothetical situations to explore the nature of humans, their approaches and motives significantly differ. However, the given paper will prove that simultaneously they share the research on how the environment influences people and on what the inner nature of these creatures is.

During the 20th century, the scholars viewed The Lord of the Flies as a warning novel, a novel indicating how the civilizations commitment to the ideas of Nazism and Fascism could end. Meanwhile, the political component of the work is just one of the historical particulars, while the meaning of The Lord of the Flies is more extensive and comprehensive. In his novel, Golding showed not specific ideas characteristic of a certain time, but the timeless essence of human nature  sinful, terrible, and descending to the cruelest crimes in the absence of positive restraining power. The given paper will prove that Golding had a reason for doubts about the infallibility of a civilized man.

The author tells the reader a story in which children, due to the absence of rules and restrictions of a civilized society, turn into savages, for whom strength is the main weapon for survival on the island (Singh). Despite this, children still attempt to build a disciplined and organized society, but as the boys are divided into groups, their behavior also changes. Jack, ultimately, establishes a hierarchy between the boys, and, ultimately, this leads to terrible consequences. I should have thought that a pack of British boys&would have been able to put up a better show than that&. (Golding 184). One group still seeks to maintain order and adhere to the established action plan, the other, in turn, is already seeking anarchy and violence, which leads children to sad consequences in which Piggy dies and Ralph is seriously wounded.

The author claims that a person is born uncivilized. Children are born innocent and are shaped by society. Children need not only material goods, but also spiritual support from an all-knowing adult mentor. In the history written by W. Golding there is an almost complete absence of adults; all the boys, young and old, are alone on the island. There are no adults who could help with advice and direct, thus the island manifests their universal human nature, which contains evil and animal instincts. For adults it would be much more difficult to adapt to new conditions, but children with unformed values transformed easily.

The first book of an aspiring author, who is only nineteen years old, rarely becomes the property of national literature. Mary Shelley is an English writer, who wrote Frankenstein at the age of nineteen, completing the task of a literary competition. The terrible story was published and instantly became popular, bringing the author world fame. An ugly creature created by Victor still had a kind human soul, capable of gratitude, good and evil deeds; he needed the guidance of his creator, his help and training. However, the creator was only a frightened young man, who was afraid of his creation. It seems that the most important leading aspect of the novel is the warning message about responsibility to oneself and to others. Only at the end of the novel and at the end of his confession, the scientist admits that if he created this monster, then he should have given him upbringing and education, should have introduced it to the society. The scientist, having made a discovery, abandoned it, thereby dooming himself to eternal fear and endless suffering the result of his searches. Victor Frankenstein is a bad father who abandons a child because he is ugly (Singh). A monster is a collective image of someone who is not pleasing to society, he absorbs the full potential of both evil and good. It is not only about a scientific experiment but also about the models of social and everyday life. A monster is also a separate nation that is discriminated against by language, skin color, traditions, and religious beliefs.

The conclusion can be made that in the Lord of the Files we can see the essence of human nature. Both authors share the research on how the environment influences people and their inner nature. If a person lives in a civilized society, he or she is cultured. However, if a man is brought up in conditions where there are no restrictions, they are uncivilized and follow animal instincts that are present in every person. The influence of the environment on a mans character is considered in both novels. While the deprivation of human society, its care, and love are responsible for the evil in Frankenstein, in Lord of the Flies it is the deprivation of a society that allows the inner evil inherent in boys to manifest. Thus, for Shelley, the absence of a society leads to evil, but for Golding, it is the absence of society that gives the chance the evil nature of humans to manifest.

Works cited

Golding, William. Lord of the Flies (Print ed.). Boston: Faber & Faber, 1958.

Singh, Minnie, The Government of Boys: Goldings Lord of the Flies and Ballantynes Coral Island, Childrens Literature, vol. 25, 1997, p. 205213. Project MUSE.

Shelley, Mary. Frankestein. 1818. edited by J. Paul Hunter, New York, W. W. Norton & Company, 2012.

The issues of racial diversity and equality have been some of the most frequently discussed subjects for many centuries. The racial diversity used to be referred to as the racial difference meaning that the individuals of different racial backgrounds were treated based on rules and laws supporting the fact that some ethnicities were recognized as more valuable and deserving while the others were depowered, discriminated against, and disregarded. Today, the issues of cultural and ethnic diversity circles around the needs for recognition and tolerance in the society comprised of multiple communities with their specific features and traits.

However, this tendency had occurred and became powerful only a few decades ago. In particular, the confrontation between white and black ethnicities went on for centuries and affected the lives of thousands of people in every generation. This paper focuses on the works of two well-known authors associated with the movement called Negritude, Aimé Cesaire and Leopold Sedar Senghor studying them from the perspective of cultural identity and self-recognition.

Namely, the poems compared and contrasted in this paper are Notebook of a Return to the Native Land and Black Woman. Even though both of these poems belong to the movement of Negritude and reflect similar themes related to Black consciousness, the way the poets express their perceptions of their native lands differs significantly in form and approach as Cesaire emphasizes the sufferings and struggles of the revolutions while Senghor compares his motherland to a beautiful African woman.

The Movement of Negritude

Cesaire and Senghor are known as the initiators and the main participants of a movement called Negritude that was dedicated to the establishment of the sense of self by the African nations colonized by the Europeans and forced to live in inequality (Zahid and Hussain 3). Negritude was a logical and natural response of the communities that had been tolerating oppressive policies and unfair treatment for many years.

The rage of the Black nations was based mainly on the fact that all the mistreatment, cruelty, and discrimination against them from the side of the white Europeans and Americans was based only on the color of their skin as the main point of difference that made the two sides hopelessly inappeasable towards each other. Having survived years of endless sufferings and disrespect, the African community of Europe has generated a response that was, basically, an attempt to reclaim freedom, equality, dignity, and respect embracing the native culture and communicating their pride of being African to the rest of the world.

One of the most obvious common features of the authors of Negritude is what was recognized as a chromatic palette reduced to only two primary colors that are black and while (Clement 172). For example, Senghor starts his poem with the description that says: Naked woman, black woman (1). Further, in his poem, black or dark turns out to be the main color that is emphasized and noticed. As for the work of Cesaire, in his Notebook of a Return to the Native Land, he portrays the colors of white and black as engaged in ruthless confrontation; and, clearly, he sides with the color black referring to himself as a lone man imprisoned in whiteness/ a lone man defying the white screams of white death (21).

Overall, in Cesaires poem white is associated only with death and sufferings as the color of aggression, horror, and destruction. The narrowness of the chromatic palette of the poets of Negritude is quite understandable as their main point was to bring up the issue of racial inequality and discrimination against their native people both in Europe and in their motherlands. The poems of Cesaire and Senghor, regardless of their different key and mood, were designed to depict the unfair environment the poets and their African communities had to live in for decades.

One may argue that Cesaires reference to the color white as a symbol of evilness and death could be seen as a generalization and the authors perception of all white people as enemies. However, the poets of Negritude have never claimed to be unbiased. On the contrary, they intentionally had a bias in order to make their point to the rest of the diverse society and the unfair, one-sided tendencies that took place at that time.

The theme of Beauty and Love

Even though Cesaire has many poems about women namely, Notebook of a Return to the Native Land, a work dedicated to the poets national identity and the history of his people was chosen for this paper to be analyzed and contrasted with Senghors poem, Black Woman. The main subject may not match one another in an obvious way; however, the theme of love, admiration, and pride of the aspects of the Black ethnic identity can be seen very clearly in both poems. Senghors work makes a clear comparison between him motherland and an African woman: I come upon you, my Promised Land/ And your beauty strikes me to the heart/ like the flash of an eagle./ Naked woman, dark woman (8-11).

Praising the beauty of a Black woman, the poet makes an unconventional statement as his poem was written at the time when African women were not regarded as beautiful in the white-dominated societies (Moore 55). In his poem, Senghor goes against the commonly accepted standards, in a way, and focuses on an aspect that has been overlooked or misperceived for a long time demonstrating the narrow-mindedness of the socially appropriate views and likes.

Cesaire makes a step similar in nature to that of his Negritude fellow Senghor and expresses the pride of his nation writing, Eia for those who never invented anything/ for those who never explored anything/ for those who never conquered anything/ Eia for joy/ Eia for love (42). As much as the author is in love with his nation and his land, he is also appalled by the sufferings they have experienced throughout the decades of oppression and humiliation.

Compared to Senghors Black Woman, Cesaires Notebook of a Return to the Native Land is a rather lengthy poem as the author does not fail to remember all the horrific details of his peoples past contrasting them with the life of the poets present (Pope 541). This theme of praising his nation and celebrating its strength, endurance, and patience goes hand in hand with Senghors celebration of the African womanhood as both of the subjects are directed against the commonly accepted points of view and designed to emphasize the national and ethnic identity of the Black people as the heroic and stoic community that remained true to its legacy even after decades of its thorough and cruel elimination by the white conquerors and colonizers.

The Form and Expression

The belongingness of both of the reviewed poems to the movement of Negritude is their dominant similarity as it unites the authors focuses and goals  the description of their motherlands, their peoples history, the appreciation of their legacy, and the promotion of Black identity as a form of national and ethnic consciousness that has been ignored and neglected for many years.

Having similar goals, Cesaire and Senghor choose very different approaches putting into practice their thoughts, views, and perceptions. Reviewing Notebook of a Return to the Native Land and Black Woman, it is easy to notice some of the most obvious differences. For instance, the forms of the poems are varied significantly as Senghors work is much shorter than that of Cesaire. Besides, even though both authors attempt to familiarize the reader with their feelings and emotions towards their motherlands and nations, Senghor decides to be brief and general while Cesaire chooses to retell his peoples history in detail writing, So much blood in my memory! In my memory are lagoons./ They are covered with death heads. They are not covered with water lilies (29).

The author is persistent in his attempt to use colorful and detailed descriptive language in order to shock the reader with the horrific realities of his peoples past. Cesaire employs to appeal to negative emotions of sadness, grief, horror, and disgust as powerful persuasion techniques helping him make his point and produce an influence on his readers.

The approach preferred by Senghor is different. The author attempts to demonstrate the beauty of a Black woman and help his readers see it the way he does describe the authenticity and outstanding spirit of his land. Senghor employs detailed, emotional, and impressive descriptions attempting to make an impact. He writes, Firm-fleshed ripe fruit, somber raptures/ of black wine, mouth making lyrical my mouth/ Savannah stretching to clear horizons,/ savannah shuddering beneath the East Winds/ eager caresses (12-16). The emotions to which Senghor appeals for the persuasion are admiration, delight, and excitement.

That way, both authors achieve the same goal employing different measures, and at the same type focus on different aspects of their culture, motherland, and history expressing their never-dying love to their roots as love to the woman whose beauty is overlooked or a nation whose history is full of nothing but horror.

Conclusion

While Africa portrayed by Cesaire is exhausted and devastated by endless sufferings and pain caused by the white colonizers, the motherland described by Senghor is beautiful, seductive, and even regal in its spirit. Choosing very different approaches in their attempts to present the readers with their views of their legacy, the two authors have a similar goal and perspective as they demonstrate unconditional love to their roots, culture, background, and nation.

Tortured and neglected (as in the poem by Cesaire) or gorgeous and alluring (as in the work by Senghor), the motherland possesses one powerful common feature  the unbreakable pride and a freedom-loving spirit that finally took over in the 1940s when the movement of Negritude was founded and began to spread the word about the Black consciousness and engage more and more individuals to go back to their roots traveling to the countries of Africa or simply remembering and appreciating their legacy.

Works Cited

Cesaire, Aime. Notebook of a Return to the Native Land. Trans. Clayton Eshleman and Annette Smith. n.d. Web.

Clement, Vincent. Latitude And Longitude Of The Past: Place, Negritude And French Caribbean Identity In Aimé Cesaires Poetry. Caribbean Studies 39.1 (2011): 171-193. Print.

Moore, Gerald. Senghor: Poet of Night. Research in African Literatures 33.4 (2002): 51-59. Print.

Pope, Jacquelyn. Notebook of a Return to the Native Land (Review). Callaloo 26.2 (2003): 540-541. Print.

Senghor, Leopold Sedar. Black Woman. n.d. Web.

Zahid, Sazzad Hossain and Asad Ullah-al-Hussain. Aime Cesaires Notebook of a Return to the Native Land: A Self-Liberation. Prime University Journal 2.2 (2008): 1-11. Web.

Introduction

The role of pornography in modern society should be considered as the topic for debate because of the controversial nature of this subject. Womens ideas regarding the concept of pornography are important to examine and discuss in detail because of the prevalence of males views in this field. In 1972, Gloria Steinem wrote her essay titled Erotica and Pornography: A Clear and Present Difference to accentuate a difference between these two notions. Later in 1988, this topic was also discussed by Margaret Atwood in her essay Pornography. Although both essays are focused on associating pornography with depicting sexual violence against women or other victims, the main difference is in discussing the context of pornography: in contrast to erotica or contrast to prudence and entertainment.

Similarities in Margaret Atwoods and Gloria Steinems Essays

The definition of pornography provided in the two essays is similar because both authors apply the idea of violence in order to explain their vision of pornography. Steinem claims that Pornography begins with a root porno, meaning prostitution or female captives, thus letting us know that the subject is not mutual love or love at all, but domination and violence against women (37). Furthermore, the author also declares that pornographic content is related to dirtiness or even filth because it is rather obscene (Steinem 36). This definition is correlated with Atwoods explanation of the concept: The cutting edge of pornography & was no longer simple old copulation, hanging from the chandelier or otherwise: it was death, messy, explicit and highly sadistic (318). It is possible to note that Steinem and Atwood are inclined to view pornography in association with violent actions of men against women, causing some physical and emotional harm, sadism, and even perversion.

According to Steinem and Atwood, the key message that is spread with the help of pornographic content is that sexual relationships mean some inequality, and women should accept the fact of their submission. This idea is presented in the essay by Steinem: the message of pornographic films and images is in violence, dominance, and conquest (37). As a result, both men and women begin to perceive sex as a tool to reinforce some inequality, or to create one (Steinem 37). Sex becomes associated with violence and pain that can lead to pleasure. Atwood develops a similar idea stating that pornography contributes to educating young men and women that violence and rape are acceptable in society. As a result, the shift in the publics morality is observed: In a society that advertises and glorifies rape or even implicitly condones it, more women get raped (Atwood 321). The authors state that pornography should not be confused with the expression of human sexuality despite other peoples views on this subject.

Another similarity in the essays is that the female authors support their positions regarding pornography with the help of illustrative examples that can seem quite shocking for readers. Still, these examples serve as the evidence for Steinem and Atwood that are helpful to illustrate their ideas that can appear to their opponents as rather conservative. Thus, Steinem depicts the images involving the use of weapons of torture, a physical attitude of conqueror and victim, and a very unequal nudity among other details (37). Her purpose is to emphasize abuse, unequal power, and inequality in sexual relations. Similar examples are presented by Atwood, who refers to the results of her research on the topic: pornography is observed when women getting their nipples snipped off with garden shears or little girls being raped (318). The authors present shocking images to illustrate the concept of pornography to present a clear distinction between this notion and erotica and sexuality. The reason is that, as it is noted by Atwood, different people have various visions of pornography because there are still no effective definitions to demonstrate the dissimilarity.

Differences in the Authors Positions

However, in spite of many similarities in the discussed essays, there are also differences in these two authors approaches to presenting the information and the context in which they argue their positions. Thus, Steinem opposes the idea of pornography to the meaning of erotica (36). One should note that, according to the author, people need to distinguish between erotica and pornography in order to avoid using violence and oppression in sexual relations as a normal practice. Erotica in contrast to pornography is in a mutually pleasurable, sexual expression between people who have enough power to be there by positive choice (Steinem 37). The author develops this idea and concludes that erotica is about sexuality, but pornography is about power and sex-as-weapon-in the same way, and rape is about violence, and not really about sexuality at all (Steinem 38). From this perspective, erotica does not mean any violence or the objectification of women, but pornography means, and it creates a certain pattern to follow by men and women in their sexual life.

On the contrary, the discussion of erotica is not presented in the essay by Atwood, and pornography is contrasted with entertainment and prudery in this work. Atwood accentuates the presence of a certain dialectic in the analysis of the impact of pornography on society: this is the Youre-a-prude/Youre-a-pervert dialectic (320). Consequently, those people who express their ideas against pornography are inclined to be perceived as prudes, who do not allow themselves and others to focus on entertainment or enjoy life. However, the problem is that the spread of pornographic content is not only entertaining but also harmful because this content forms young peoples visions about sex. In most cases, people do not want to act as prudes and they prefer to choose entertainment, but pornography is harmful because of the spread of the focus on violence. Atwood supports her idea, stating, Although pornography is not the only factor involved in the creation of such deviance, it certainly has upped the ante by suggesting both a variety of techniques and the social acceptability of such actions (321). In this context, abuse and harm in sexual relations become viewed as normal.

It is important to state that the idea of pornography effects with a focus on its harm is more obviously discussed in the work by Atwood. According to the author, the key question to pay attention to is Whats the harm? (Atwood 320). The problem is that, since the debate on the existence of pornography is present, there is no clear answer to the question, in spite of the fact that people understand that pornography is rather dangerous for society. Thus, Atwood notes in relation to the question of the harm of pornography: Nobody knows, but this society should find out fast before the saturation point is reached (322). The author tries to find the answer to this question in order to persuade that pornography cannot be and should not be perceived equally to any other kind of entertainment. On the contrary, Steinem does not focus on the real harm of pornography, but she is interested in avoiding the confusion of such notions as erotica and pornography because of their different impacts on peoples relations.

Conclusion

In spite of the fact that the essays by Steinem and Atwood are similar in terms of their key messages and the association of pornography and violence, the key difference is in the context in which pornography is analyzed. Thus, one should note that Steinem focuses on the opposition between erotica and pornography. Atwood, in her turn, is interested in analyzing pornography in contrast to prudence, and moreover, she develops the idea that pornographic content is not appropriate to be viewed as entertaining because of its harm. While using similar images and examples in order to illustrate their ideas, Steinems and Atwoods works effectively add to the content of each other. From this perspective, Steinems discussion of the concept is not enough without Atwoods analysis of the harm pornography can have on young peoples visions and behaviors. Atwood does not provide an explanation of the notion of erotica, and her argument regarding pornography is successfully supported by Steinems comparison of two concepts. Therefore, although the essays have similarities, their content has also specific differences that allow for presenting a full picture of pornography as the topic under discussion.

Works Cited

Atwood, Margaret. Pornography. Canadian Content, edited by Sarah Norton and Nell Waldman, 3rd ed., Harcourt Brace, 1996, pp, 317-323.

Steinem, Gloria. Erotica and Pornography: A Clear and Present Difference. Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography, edited by Laura Lederer, W. Morrow, 1980, pp. 35-39.

The protagonist of the story The Devils Drool, Roberto Michel, a Chilean living in Paris, accidentally takes a strange picture, depicting a woman seducing an inexperienced youth. The appearance of the photographer gives the guy the opportunity to escape, but the card begins to live its own life, and a different reality appears on it. The protagonist realizes that he was not filming date of lovers, but a pimp, trying to get a boy to entertain her cruel and terrible master.

The main principle of Julio Cortazars novel The Devils Drool is magical realism. In the artistic space, the fantastic and the real collide. The narration is conducted in the manner characteristic of the author, based on the original thinking and experience of ancient civilizations such as the Maya. The documentary nature of photography and the reality prevent the reader from understanding what is more reliable  the reality that is seen not in detail, perceiving only a small part of it, or a photographic image that does not have a continuation, but is spread out with more information as widely as possible. The story reflects on this  on the deceptiveness of the perception of reality and the completeness of a work of art.

In Big Mamas Funeral, in his specific manner, the author draws the reader into a strange whirlpool of events, listing material values and regalia, and the readers find themselves looking at the end of a certain era. With his beautiful language and interestingly constructed phrases, the author makes it clear that with the departure of such a person, although contradictory  but at the same time powerful  specific values remain. The matron herself, of course, suffered from her own imperative decisions, from which her people have suffered for a long time. A certain cosmic justice can be traced to the readers eye. At the same time, there is a picture where all the procedures, processions are over, and ordinary people, as usual, got only garbage on the streets.

It seems reasonable to state that both described works represent the crucial traits of the Boom to a great extent. The Devils Drool visible appeal to the instruments that were of the movements characteristic  Cortázar tends to question the boundaries of reality by mixing the revived images from the photos with the protagonists rationale and speculations. These speculations and depictions in some moments start not only to add realness but to replace it, which might be considered as magical realism that was the primary feature of the Boom (Cohn 155). In turn, Big Mamas Funeral also utilizes magical realism by exaggerating the common image of a politician in Latin America of the period. The overconcentration of power, self-praising, and lack of concern for the fate of the people are all combined in Big Mama. She is kind of a metaphorical embodiment of the political approaches of the country that are to be overcome. From this perspective, the given peculiarities unite the stories as representatives of the Boom.

However, there is a number of features that separate them in this regard as well. The main message of the movement was to claim a protest against the undesired and irrelevant socio-political system. Big Mamas Funeral puts a clear emphasis on this, and its opening sentence sets the tone for the whole story, Big Mama, absolute sovereign of the Kingdom of Macondo, & , and whose funeral was attended by the Pope (Márquez 1). Such an apparent political issue as overconcentration of power is accompanied by the inappropriacy of the peoples acceptance of this social order, the garbage men will come and will sweep up the garbage from her funeral, forever and eve (Márquez 7). Meanwhile, The Devils Drool contains the accentuation rather on the societys flaws and philosophical issues than on the political problems. Images appearing in the protagonists mind one by one make the depiction of this society and its possible principles darker and more morbid. Hence, despite there is a number of the Booms traits that characterize this story, the absence of political emphasis in The Devils Drool separates them in this framework.

It should also be noticed that The Devils Drool contains several peculiarities of neorealism. The latter is characterized by a combination of descriptive concreteness and profound psychologism  socio-historical problems give way to moral and philosophical (Pacifici 51). This story shows an in-depth dive is the protagonists state of mind and realitys perception. The Devils Drool is filled with many symbols and concrete metaphorical passages about life  such as the one at the storys end when Michel draws a parallel with the arrangement of living and a clear sky with clouds (Cortázar 115). And Big Mamas Funeral stays a little aside from neorealism as the emphasis is on political and social issues, and the story is rather a symbol of inappropriate politicians aspirations itself. Nevertheless, it should be summarized that The Devils Drool and Big Mamas Funeral are both prominent stories that contain plenty of the Booms significant characteristics.

Works Cited

Cohn, Deborah. A Tale of Two Translation Programs: Politics, the Market, and Rockefeller Funding for Latin American Literature in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s, Latin American Research Review, vol. 41, no. 2, 2006, pp. 139164.

Cortázar, Julio. Blow-up and Other Stories. Collier Books, 1968. UBC, Web.

Márquez, Gabriel. Big Mamas Funeral. World Heritage Encyclopedia. 1962.

Pacifici, Sergio. Notes toward a Definition of Neorealism. Yale French Studies, no. 17, 1958, pp. 4453.

Introduction

Two epic poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey have great significance due to the poetic content they encompass. It is essential to consider two characters in these readings  Hector from the Iliad and Menelaus from the Odyssey. The former is the oldest descendant of the Trojan king Priam and his wife, Hecuba. Hector is the husband of Andromache and the general of the Trojan soldiers, while Menelaus is the king of Sparta and the husband of Helen of Troy. Menelaus is one of the main characters in the poem and has a significant role in the advancement of the plot. Hector is the most important soldier in the Trojan army, as shown in the Iliad, and he is the primary character in the text. His bravery and altruism toward the people motivate and inspire the soldiers to fight. They present a matter of interest, as they both are one of the main characters of Homers poem. They both participate in the Trojan War and reveal their courage, but their path in life is extremely different. This text serves as a comparison of the two mentioned heroes.

Hector

Hector is one of the key figures in the Iliad, and the character is used to reveal the theme of bravery and courage. Krieter-Spiro highlights that Hector also was loved by the gods, best of all the mortals in Ilion (2018, para. 65; Book 17 17.65-70). His wife claims about him, Hector was the wall around her world that kept lifes perils at bay (Rhiannon 2019, p. 368; Book 9 9.322-24). Through this statement, it is clear that Hector was a vital part of his wifes life and took his marriage seriously. It shows the complexity of Hectors character in this plot and the sophisticated role that he has to play. Hector acts as an agent to bring Achilles into battle, but the latter becomes a victim of Hector and his treachery. The illusion of a Trojan conquest traps him and leads to the conflict between the two characters (Krieter-Spiro 2018). Hector serves as the opposite of Achilles and an experienced individual with a household. He is intended to indicate the battle between civic and personal responsibilities, which are omnipresent in the Iliad.

The relationships between Hector and his wife can be compared to Andromaches family values. Both of them treat their wives with love, respect, and tenderness. Apart from this, Hector shows the accurate strain between his personal and civic responsibilities and his struggles to keep these aspects together (Baumbach 2017). The narrator used personal discussions to describe Hector as the genuine protagonist since he has significant roles to play. To highlight the specifics of this character, he concludes: A man dies still if he has done nothing, as one who has done much (Homer 2011, p. 224; Book 9 9.319-21). Homer indicates that Hector is a significant personality but does not separate him from the other notable characters. For example, Hector organizes the cease-fire and the combat between Menelaus and Paris, and the former arises as to the frontman of this conflict.

Menelaus fights Paris to return his wife, Helen of Troy and wins the confrontation. However, he is not able to retrieve Helen because Paris flees with the help of Aphrodite. Hector is conspicuously missing from the troops of Trojans who encounter Diomedes in the battle. When Sarpedon begs Hector for his protection, Hector quickly runs away without answering this particular plea. Instead of taking time to tend to his injured companion, Hector goes ahead and attempts to join the Trojan frontline and ensures safety in this situation. This scene is one of the exploits of the character, which shows that he values collective victory over personal relationships. This attribute is common among military-centric individuals who fight to protect their homeland. Hector, despite his physical capacities, does not survive the war. After mistaking Achilless brother and killing him, Hector is called for a duel, which he loses and parts with his life.

Menelaus

To conduct a comparison of Hector and Menelaus, it is essential to provide some description of the latter. Menelaus does not hold an enviable role in the Homeric ballads, and he appears to be out of place in both of these poems. He lacks the martial virtues which belong to characters such as Achilles and his brother, Agamemnon. Although he is the hero responsible for the Greek effort in the war, Menelaus lacks a distinct personality and is considered mostly secondary in all of the occurrences (Krieter-Spiro 2018). To understand this character, it is worthy to remember his phrase No man alive could rival Zeus, dear boys& (Homer 2006, p. 227; Book 8 8.319-21). Claiming this, he was determined to highlight that he did not have hubris and Zeus would not strike him.

The character is shown as one of the most notable Achaeans, and he is the only individual whose reason for coming to Troy has been specified in the Iliad. At the beginning of the conversation with Telemachus and Pisistratus, he describes pain and regret. In his speech, Menelaus mentions his suffering and intimates that the entire splendor found in his palace cannot represent all the painful memories in his past. Menelauss mental state can be seen in one scene where he tells Telemachus and Pisistratus not to compare him to the Gods (Homer 2011, p. 224; Book 9 9.319-21). Menelaus talks about the hardships that he has faced to get into the situation he is in and explains how he has fought to become a king.

The king of Sparta has won the peoples favor and believes that he has reached this state because of the will of his supporters. However, there are some aspects of Menelauss character, which reveal that he is a hurt individual. Menelaus drinks the potion of remembrance, and he does this even though he is compelled to remember (Baumbach 2017). It makes him forget Helen and her good characteristics, and he dismisses his anger and frustration at the same time. Menelaus is urged to move forward with his life by remembering the good and disregarding the unfortunate events that have happened in his past. This huge aspect reveals his incapability to process the pain in his own life.

Comparison

Both Menelaus and Hector feature extensively in these epic readings. Their differing characters reveal their attempts to deal with their predestined positions as essential characters in Troy. They both play a part in the battles, and they can use their unique personalities to overcome the adversities they face (Thornton, 2015). These two individuals play essential roles in the two poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey. Their character roles help bring out specific themes, and they also captivate the reader with their exploits. Hectors journey in life ends in the Iliad when he loses the duel against Achilles. Menelaus, on the other hand, continues to live after the Trojan War and is featured in Odysseus (Mari, 2019). While Hector was one of the central figures in the Iliad, Menelaus plays complementary roles in both of the epic texts.

The image of Hector regards the ideal warrior and a long husband, father, and son. He is loved and supported by the gods, such as Apollo and Ares. His story is full of exploits, and he is depicted as an honorable personality. However, the image of Menelaus is presented as a deceived man, who loves his wife and is determined to release his revenge plan. It should be noted that the end of the poem is different for both of the characters. Hector was killed, while Menelaus received everything, he attempted to achieve during the entire narration.

Conclusion

In summary, both these characters are considered to be prominent heroes in the poems, though they live in different circumstances and have to encounter different hardships. However, both of them teach the readers important lessons about love and devotedness to the family. In addition, their courage and the readiness to sacrifice themselves for their family cannot be underestimated. Menelaus also demonstrates how the perseverance and resistance to help achieve the aims. Furthermore, their stories can be educative for both ancient and modern audiences, as well as they can be useful for the next generation.

References

Homer. (2006). The Odyssey. Translated by Robert Fagles. Penguin Classics.

Homer. (2011). The Iliad. Translated by Richmond Lattimore. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Krieter-Spiro, Martha. (2018). Homers Iliad. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Mari, F. (2019). Politeness, gender and the social balance of the Homeric household Helen between Paris and Hector in Iliad 6.321356. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 20(2), 244262.

Rhiannon, Janell. (2019). Rise of Princes. Janell Rhiannon.

Thornton, A. (2015). People and Themes in Homers Odyssey. Routledge.