Category: Literary Criticism

Introduction

Jennifer Price’s essay, ‘The Plastic Pink Flamingo: A Natural History,’ explores the rise and symbolism of the plastic pink flamingo in American culture. Published in 1999, Price employs rhetorical strategies to examine the social and cultural significance of this iconic lawn ornament. Through the use of vivid language, irony, and persuasive techniques, Price offers a thought-provoking critique of American consumerism and the obsession with materialism.

Thesis Statement

In ‘The Plastic Pink Flamingo,’ Jennifer Price utilizes rhetorical devices such as vivid imagery, irony, and persuasive language to critique the extravagant consumer culture prevalent in America during the mid-20th century.

Use of Vivid Imagery

Price employs vivid imagery to illustrate the ostentatious nature of the plastic pink flamingo and its association with wealth and luxury. She describes the flamingo as a “vivid icon of America’s postwar boom” and “the epitome of what I saw as the era’s guilty pleasures.” Through these descriptions, Price captures the visual impact and allure of the flamingo while simultaneously exposing the excessive consumerism of the era.

Utilization of Irony

Throughout her essay, Price employs irony to underscore the contradictions and absurdities of American consumer culture. She highlights the contrast between the natural habitat of real flamingos and the artificiality of their plastic counterparts. By juxtaposing the idea of a natural bird with its synthetic imitation, Price critiques the superficiality and artificiality of American society’s obsession with material possessions.

Persuasive Language

Price uses persuasive language to engage the reader and convince them of her perspective. She employs rhetorical questions, such as “How did the pink flamingo become an icon of kitsch?” and “Why, after all, call it the Plastic Pink Flamingo?” These questions encourage readers to critically examine the cultural significance of the flamingo and challenge the prevailing consumerist values of the time.

Historical and Cultural Context

Price incorporates historical and cultural references to situate the rise of the plastic pink flamingo within the broader context of postwar America. She discusses the growth of suburbia, the emergence of Florida as a tourist destination, and the influence of mass media and advertising on shaping American tastes. By contextualizing the flamingo’s popularity, Price reveals the societal factors that contributed to its symbolism as a status symbol.

Conclusion

In ‘The Plastic Pink Flamingo,’ Jennifer Price effectively employs rhetorical strategies to offer a scathing critique of American consumerism and the superficiality of material possessions. Through vivid imagery, irony, and persuasive language, Price exposes the excessive and artificial nature of the plastic pink flamingo and its cultural significance during the mid-20th century. By challenging readers to reconsider their own values and attitudes towards consumerism, Price’s essay serves as a powerful reminder of the dangers of unchecked materialism and the need for critical reflection on the societal influences that shape our preferences and desires.

Ultimately, Price’s rhetorical analysis of the plastic pink flamingo highlights the larger issues at play in American culture and invites readers to consider the broader implications of our consumer-driven society. By delving beneath the surface of this seemingly trivial lawn ornament, Price reveals the profound impact of consumer culture on our values and aspirations. Through her skillful use of rhetoric, Price prompts readers to question and evaluate their own relationship with materialism and the role it plays in shaping our identities and perceptions of success.

Introduction:

Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar explores the downfall of a great leader, highlighting the consequences of pride and unchecked ambition. Julius Caesar, the titular character, possesses a tragic flaw that ultimately leads to his demise. This essay critically examines Caesar’s tragic flaw, its manifestation throughout the play, and its significance in shaping the tragic events that unfold.

Introduction:

Rudyard Kipling’s ‘The Jungle Book’ is a beloved classic that has captured the hearts of readers for generations. However, beneath its enchanting storyline and memorable characters, there are elements that raise questions about racial representation and stereotyping. This essay critically examines the issue of racism in ‘The Jungle Book,’ exploring the portrayal of characters and the underlying messages conveyed.

Body:

The Exoticization and Stereotyping of Characters:

One of the central criticisms of ‘The Jungle Book’ is its portrayal of characters through racial stereotypes. The human characters in the story, particularly the British colonizers, are depicted as superior and civilized, while the animal characters, who are primarily indigenous to the Indian subcontinent, are often exoticized and reduced to simplistic caricatures. This perpetuates harmful stereotypes and reinforces colonial-era narratives of racial hierarchy.

Mowgli’s Role as the ‘White Savior’:

The character of Mowgli, a young boy raised by wolves, is often seen as the embodiment of the ‘white savior’ trope. Mowgli, being the sole human character in the story, is presented as superior to the native animal characters, assuming a leadership role and ultimately saving them from danger. This narrative reinforces notions of Western dominance and implies that only an outsider can bring order and civilization to indigenous communities.

The Absence of Diverse Representation:

Another aspect of ‘The Jungle Book’ that raises concerns about racism is the lack of diverse representation. The story is set in India, a country with a rich tapestry of cultures, languages, and traditions. However, the majority of the characters are portrayed as animals, while the few human characters are primarily of European descent. This lack of diverse representation marginalizes and erases the indigenous peoples of India, perpetuating a Eurocentric view of the world.

Cultural Appropriation and Misrepresentation:

Throughout the narrative, Kipling borrows heavily from Indian culture, incorporating elements such as names, customs, and folklore. However, the appropriation of these cultural aspects is done without an authentic understanding or respect for their significance. This shallow portrayal not only fails to capture the depth and complexity of Indian culture but also reduces it to mere exotic backdrop for the story. Such cultural misrepresentation contributes to the perpetuation of stereotypes and reinforces power imbalances.

Impact on Perceptions and Attitudes:

The racial undertones and stereotypes present in ‘The Jungle Book’ can have a lasting impact on readers, especially young audiences who may internalize these portrayals. By presenting certain races or cultures as inferior or exotic, the story may inadvertently shape prejudiced attitudes and reinforce harmful biases. It is crucial to critically examine the messages conveyed in children’s literature to ensure that they promote inclusivity and challenge rather than perpetuate harmful stereotypes.

Conclusion:

While ‘The Jungle Book’ is a beloved classic, it is essential to engage in critical analysis and recognize its problematic aspects, particularly regarding racial representation. The exoticization, stereotyping, and cultural appropriation present in the story contribute to the perpetuation of harmful narratives and reinforce racial hierarchies. As readers, it is vital to approach such texts with a critical lens and advocate for more diverse and inclusive storytelling that celebrates the richness and complexity of all cultures. By challenging and dismantling racial stereotypes in literature, we can strive for a more inclusive and equitable society.

Students are more likely to retain knowledge if they obtain it through something they enjoy. Reading an interesting book, for example, is a more effective way of learning than simply sitting in a classroom and taking notes about concepts and events from decades ago. I believe that it is for this reason that many teachers choose to include Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird in their classrooms. The novel, which spans a few years in the 1930s in the prejudiced town of Maycomb, Alabama, explores important historical insight, thus teaching valuable and unforgettable lessons concerning social injustices. Throughout the story, Scout (Jean Louise) Finch, a white, adult narrator, looks back on the important events that shaped her and her brother Jem’s childhood beginning with the introduction to a new friend, Dill, and the mystery of neighbour Boo Radley. Over the years, the siblings are exposed to the death of a particularly racist and rude neighbour, encounters with prejudiced relatives, the sharing of lessons by their friendly neighbour, Miss Maudie, and the shooting of a rabid dog. A later summer brings eye-opening, heart-wrenching messages of deeply rooted prejudice through a rape trial concerning a falsely accused black man, Tom Robinson, whom the Finch siblings’ father, Atticus, defends in court. Unfortunately, the trial ends with a guilty verdict for Tom, which later results in an attempted jailbreak leading to his death. The trial reveals horrifying secrets about the prosecutor, Mayella Ewell’s, family. This angers her father, Bob and prompts him to attack the Finch children in revenge. The attack results in Bob’s murder and serious injuries for Jem, but for Scout and Atticus, it provokes a lot of thought about the power of truth and seeing people for who they truly are on the inside. The story effectively explains to modern day readers the ways in which stereotypical expectations were thrust upon women throughout history. Furthermore, it accurately highlights religious prejudice and discrimination present during the 1930s. Finally, the novel emphasizes the irrationality of racism and the power imbalance between those who are white or black in the time period. Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird most certainly should not be banned from today’s classrooms as it effectively delves into lessons concerning the illogical presentation of social injustices in the 1930s.

The story is full of gender stereotyping and lessons concerning the harmful impact of sexism. Although modern society has improved, gender stereotyping and sexism are still very evident, and so it is imperative that students today learn about the damage these notions cause. Throughout the story, Scout is constantly told to act more lady-like by her Aunt Alexandra. Scout explains her Aunt’s mentality: “I could not possibly hope to be a lady if I wore breeches; when I said I could do nothing in a dress, she said I wasn’t supposed to be doing anything that required pants” (108). Although the role being pushed on Scout is problematic, it is accurate to the time-period. By being asked to change her attire and play habits, Scout is pressured to be someone she is not. This chips away at her identity and forces her to conform to the expectations of her society. The worst part of this situation, however, is that the stereotype is coming from another woman, which relates to a modern day example of bias against woman by woman within the hiring process of big corporations. Clearly, this form of sexism is still an occurrence today, but by studying this novel in today’s classrooms I strongly believe students will have an easier time grasping the damage that gender expectations and prejudice cause: thus discouraging them for participating in discrimination. Furthermore, sexism, is evident in Atticus’ explanation surrounding the law preventing females to serve on juries: “I guess it’s to protect our frail ladies from sordid cases like Tom’s. Besides, I doubt if we’d ever get a complete case tried—the ladies’d be interrupting to ask questions” (296). Firstly, this informs readers that women were unable to serve on juries during the 1930s, which is important historical context. In my opinion the law is completely illogical: men and women should be given the same rights. However, Atticus’ commentary additionally emphasizes the community’s prejudiced view on women. He implies that women are fragile creatures that need to be protected, and therefore, belittles them. Additionally, Atticus unjustly suggests that women would not understand or be able to follow the trial’s content and teases them for their curiosity. The characters’ struggle in dealing with themes relevant today, such as the importance of gender equality, provide readers with a deeper comprehension of the way sexism was exhibited in the 1930s.

Throughout the story, readers are exposed to the incomprehensible ways in which religious discrimination was presented in the 1930s. One day as Scout is grappling with the meaning of sin, she inquires about Miss Maudie’s faith. Miss Maudie then explains that she is a Baptist, but some of the other Maycomb community members are known as foot-washing Baptists. This confuses Scout and prompts Miss Maudie to explain: “Foot-washers believe anything that’s pleasure is a sin. Did you know some of ‘em came out of the woods one Saturday and told me me and my flowers were going to hell” (59). The prejudice in this situation is unreasonable as both Miss Maudie and the foot-washers believe in the same faith, yet the men are extremely prejudiced against Miss Maudie. Additionally, most would agree being told you are going to hell is not a pleasurable feeling, and therefore, the emotional damage social injustices carry is exposed. The situation conveys important messages to readers as it not only emphasizes an illogical prejudice, but it familiarizes readers with the Baptist religion: a religion from the time period that some readers may not be cognizant of. Moreover, religious discrimination can be witnessed and learned from through the segregation of white and coloured peoples churches. Due to Atticus being out of town, Scout and Jem are taken to their coloured nanny, Cal’s, church. Although Scout describes the church in a joyful manor, the contrast in design and money put into the appearance between the coloured church in comparaison to the white community church is clear (157). This scenario is problematic for multiple reasons. Firstly, there is the evident racism due to the segregation of the churches. Secondly, the white church is more wealthy and has better access to decorations, tombstones and even hymn books. Although both of these injustices are more focused upon race, they thread through an illogical religious prejudice as both churches practice the same Methodist faith, and yet, they are segregated. This is peculiar as Methodism is a branch of Christianity, and Christians believe that all people should be treated equally. The segregation is therefore illogical, and it begs the question, why are the churches segregated if all people are created equally? The segregation of the churches fosters the weaponization of religion. Lee’s portrayal of the era’s religious discrimination educates readers about the use of religion as a weapon, rendering it a beneficial classroom tool.

The story’s authentic representation of the struggles within coloured communities in the 1930s, provides both insight into the daily challenges of a coloured person, and forces readers to grapple with the life-threatening consequences of prejudice. Another beneficial component of Lee’s story is her inclusion of important historical references: the lynching mob for example. With the Tom’s rape trial approaching, Atticus sits in front of the jail as four cars, filled with mob members, approach and ask Atticus to move aside. It is evident that the mob’s goal in this scenario is to lynch Tom Robinson (202). Taking a human life simply because they are not the same skin colour as you is a repulsive, horrifying action: unfortunately, it was not a rare occurrence during this time period. The representation of a lynch mob truly emphasizes the cruel realities present as a result of deeply rooted prejudice in the Jim Crow era. The mob scene additionally provokes deep consideration concerning lynching as many readers may not be familiar with the term. Thought provoking messages considering racism and injustice are additionally present during Tom’s trial and death. Following Tom’s death, as Scout is reflecting on a newspaper article relating Tom’s murder to the death of an innocent bird, she has an epiphany. Scout conceptualizes the major power imbalance between the white and black communities in Maycomb: “Atticus had used every tool available to free men to save Tom Robinson but in the secret court of men’s hearts Atticus had no case. Tom was a dead man the minute Mayella Ewell opened her mouth and screamed” (323). Scout’s understanding that Tom stood no chance at receiving a not guilty verdict due to the bias present in the community is a mature reflection in which readers can learn from. Not only does Scout’s statement point out the evident bias in the small Maycomb court house, but it also opens eyes to the extent of the prejudice and how it would have been everywhere during the time period. Her reflection highlights that even though slavery in the United States was abolished in 1865, 65 years earlier, racism did not simply disappear. I believe that it is imperative that people today are aware of this as I feel that many are quick to falsely assume that with the abolishment of slavery came the demolition of racist notions. The consequences of Maycomb’s racism also forces readers to be more conscious of prejudice and take caution surrounding it. Readers truly benefit from Lee’s moving, historical demonstration of the Jim Crow era’s racism and the many consequences concerning it.

Ultimately, To Kill a Mockingbird teaches readers valuable, historical, and eye-opening lessons exposing the prejudice of the time period, and thus, should not be banned from today’s classrooms. Firstly, the story teaches readers about the ways women were restricted by stereotypes in the 1930s and helps to break down the barriers of sexism. Through the presence of religious discrimination in the story, readers learn time period accurate examples of illogical religious prejudice. Conclusively, through witnessing the era’s bias and discrimination committed by those who are white against those who are black, readers’ eyes are opened to the consequences of prejudice. The mature subject matter in the story is necessary as it helps readers to realize the brutal, and sometimes fatal, consequences of prejudice. As famously mentioned by George Santayana, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” It is important that we, as humanity learn from our previous historical mistakes so that we do not repeat them in the future. Although it is fiction, Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird is the perfect tool to utilise in learning from our past: its content helps to inform readers on plausible historical context, while doing so in a way that discourages readers from participating in prejudicial actions. If all of humanity took the time to learn from our past mistakes, we would be more cautious of our unconscious bias and could eliminate a lot of prejudice from our world.

Basically, Frost’s writing is very much colloquial but at the same time very suggestive. And, The Road not Taken is not an exception for this but one of his finest works.

First of all, it is a Lyrical poem and we find one of his personal experiences in the poem. In the poem, the poet has done the job very impressively through his verse that one can relate. Getting to the end, we notice that it becomes a generalized theme to us and not more being just a personal lyric. In a simple sentence, we may say that it’s a metaphorical poem. One last thing, it is a poem with the rhyme scheme of ABAAB type.

Summary

At the beginning of the poem, we get to know the poet’s encounter with a bifurcation. He was walking down a road and the road was now found to be a fork. Simply, that one road is now divided into two roads. He is saying that being (alone) one traveler he can go to only one path and not to travel both. So, he thought he should choose the road wisely. For this reason, he noticed the first path very consciously and looked down toward it as far as he could.

Thereafter, it came to the poet’s mind, that perhaps the second one could be better for him. Then, he started to watch the second path. Then he found this one grassy and wanted wear- that means the majority of people didn’t choose this one, so it was grassy. But, next thing came to his mind that perhaps all paths were looking similar.

Now, after thinking and analyzing two roads, he chooses the second road and leaves the first one for another day. But, at the next moment, he becomes pretty much sure that he could not go to the first road anymore. As one road leads to another and to another and so on, that’s why it becomes next to impossible to go to that point.

In the last stanza, Frost is thinking about the future consequences of selecting the second path and leaving the first one. He is seeing himself as his future version who is sighing by thinking over that day’s decision. The road which was different from the other one made all the difference in his life.

Analysis

As it belongs to the genre of metaphorical poems, it must be critically explained and has some inner meanings. And ‘The Road not Taken’ is a poem which easily meets the criteria of being a metaphorical poem.

In the poem, the poet is found confused about choosing the appropriate road between the two roads. Apparently, it seems an experience of the poet’s own. But, Frost is not a poet who creates a poem only based on a simple meaning.

So, if we deeply focus on the poem, then it is not the dilemma of only the poet’s own, rather it becomes a symbol of choosing the right decision of every common people.

Sometimes, we have to choose one between two decisions which we face throughout our life. And this dilemma comes to every person’s life and we have to choose it sincerely. It can be the decision of taking arts or science stream after the exam of class 10th or it could be the choice of medical field or engineering or general stream. And, we have to choose one path or road for the future and leave the other one. Not only just selecting but also the right thing becomes necessary for our upcoming future. And it becomes one of the most vital and critical times of our life as every decision that was made by leads to the different outcomes as well as the destination.

One more thing, the poet, has beautifully described in the poem that sometimes all the roads seem almost the same. And, then it becomes very much difficult for us. At that time, we cannot make the decision very easily as we become very much confused.

Last but not least, the poet, is metaphorically giving the reference to his chosen decision. Perhaps, metaphorically he is trying to say about his decision, taking the field of literature which creates larger impacts in the literary world. And that’s why we are discussing it.

In the novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, by Harper Lee, the author demonstrates how she uses literary techniques to convey the theme to the readers. The story is about a young girl named Scout living during the Great Depression and the Jim Crow era with her brother and father. The town is a society sharply distinguished between the whites and blacks, with racism being a big part of it. Scout’s father, Atticus is hired to be an attorney for Tom Robinson, a black man wrongfully accused of raping a white woman. The women’s father, Ewell decides to take revenge on Atticus and their kids for defending Tom. While carrying out the action to hurt them, Boo Radley, a mysterious man with many rumors about being evil, shows up and saves them. To emphasize the theme of prejudice in this novel, Lee incorporates the literary techniques of diction and symbolism which allow the readers to visualize the setting.

Lee uses the essential strategy of diction in her novel to portray the previously established inclination in the society. The townspeople are known to be prejudiced by any individual who doesn’t comply with their desires. Boo Radley is persecuted and rumored because he has not been seen outside his house since being locked by his father after a violent incident. Jem, Scout’s brother, while expressing the first glance of Boo Radley, says that he “dined on raw squirrels and any cats he could catch… his hands were bloodstained… there was a long jagged scar that ran across his face; what teeth he had were yellow and rotten; his eyes popped, and he drooled most of the time” (Lee 13). This is a misled information spread in the town, as Boo is nothing like the rumors. He is rather innocent and a hero that saves Scout and Jem when attacked by Ewell. This scene shows how the whole town of Maycomb likes to judge an individual without really knowing them.

Another scene of prejudice is shown when the trial is ended, and Aunt Alexandra is having missionary tea with ladies. One of Alexandra’s friends, Mrs. Merriweather, talks about how she pitties the Mruna tribe of Africa, saying that “the poverty… the darkness… the immorality” is very cruel and that everyone should show sympathy for them (Lee 230). However, the Mruna tribe is nonexistent- it is a way Lee shows how the townspeople, especially Mrs. Merriweather, are hypocritical and pious. It is also ironic when the ladies go on and call the black people “sulky darky”, saying that they are acting rude after the trial. The townspeople are capable of showing sympathy towards the Mruna people for having a squalid and unpleasant lifestyle when they are unable to feel any sympathy for the black people living in the same town. Using diction, Lee lets the readers recognize the biased town which the characters are living in.

In addition to diction, Lee writes manipulates symbols to show the preconceived notion of the town. When Scout is talking with her neighbor, Mrs. Maudie, about mockingbirds and blue jays, she says that shooting a bluejay is not a sin but “it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird… [as] they don’t do one thing but make music for us to enjoy” (Lee 10). The mockingbird symbolizes Boo Radley, who is an innocent man doing nothing but getting misjudged by society. Just like a mockingbird, which does not do anything but to sing, Boo is not harmful but rather the opposite. The bluejays portray the racist, prejudging townspeople who try to kill little birds such as the mockingbird, Boo. Moreover, prejudice is shown again when a rabid dog appears and Atticus shoots it. In the scene, Atticus shoots the mad dog, kills it and it “flopped over and crumpled on the sidewalk” (Lee 96). Here, the dog that Atticus shot represents the racial prejudice and racist people in the town. By shooting the dog, it symbolizes how Atticus, who is also trying to get rid of racial prejudice in the town by defending a black person, successfully gets rid of it.

Much ado about nothing’ is a play written by William Shakespeare in 1598 over 400 years ago. The play explores the message and the theme of love and how it can be complicated, which is still true today. There are three types of love in this play, Claudio and Hero show an example of romantic love or love at first sight. Beatrice and Benedick’s love starts with hatred and then ends up with them falling in love. Leonato is the father to Hero and the father figure to Beatrice and his love for them is equally the same. As Shakespeare once said, “the course of true love never did run smooth”.

Hero and Claudio’s relationship represents love at first sight which is a form of romantic love, which all human beings can relate too. Claudio says “Tis certain so. The Prince woos for himself. Friendship is constant in all other things Save in the office and affairs of love…” (Act II, Scene i ) meaning Claudio is mad at Don Pedro for trying to woo Hero himself. Shows how his love for her is very strong, that all his thoughts went to jealous and to get revenge. Towards the beginning at a masked ball, the antagonist of the play, Don Jon, approaches Claudio and misleads him into thinking that Don Pedro is going to do something that he is not. Don Jon continues to make people In the play look bad including Hero where she had act dead and then get her dad, Leonato, tell Claudio to marry her twin cousin Which he did when he felt bad for falsely accusing her. This is shown into day to day life with people always trying to get in your Head, but Claudio let that happen to him.

Beatrice and Benedick are the most complicated couple there can be they start off hating each other and never wanting to get married to anyone but that soon changes after Leonato, Don Pedro, Claudio, Hero and one of her servants trick them into falling into love. “Benedick: Do not you love me? Beatrice: Why no, no more than reason. Benedick: Why then, your uncle and the Prince and Claudio Have been deceived. They swore you did. Beatrice: Do not you love me? Benedick: Troth, no, no more than reason. Beatrice: Why then, my cousin, Margaret, and Ursula Are much deceived, for they did swear you did.

Benedick: They swore that you were almost sick for me. Beatrice: They swore that you were well-nigh dead for me”(Act V, Scene iv ) This is still true in today’s society people don’t understand hat opposite do attract and not everyone judges a book y its cover.

Leonato, Hero and Beatrice is an equal love were a father of one and uncle/fatherly figure to others and he is there for them no matter what. Leonato: Well, niece, I hope to see you one day fitted with a husband.( II,1,450) Say he just wants her to be happy and saying that one day there will be a man for her even if she does not want to wed that the person will change her mind a conviction that she is for them. Leonato showed his love for Hero when he said this “Why ever wast thou lovely in my eyes? “(Act IV, Scene i ) turtling saying that he loves Hero no matter what and he will do anything for her and shtick by her side. But when the prince said she was unfaithful he believed here which question his love for her but then understood it was a misunderstanding and felt guilty for accusing her of such thing and was quick to help to get her man back.

Even though their love situation in the story was very powerful, the story got very complicated along the way, this is shown all through the movie. All the love end with happiness and the message hidden behind all of it is still true today, that love is complicated and sometimes it takes a long time for it to end in happiness. As Shakespeare lives in his words through all his plays and his hidden messages.

During Edgar Allan Poe’s time, most writings and books were about the bible or related to religion. However, Poe wrote twisted, grotesque short stories that had a recurring theme: a narrator with a mental illness. In his short story, “The Tell-Tale Heart”, the narrator has a mental illness, specifically schizophrenia. Looking at this story in a present-day court case point of view, the story can be analyzed to attempt to find out what sentence and punishment the narrator would receive.

To begin, the narrator from “The Tell-Tale Heart” shows symptoms of schizophrenia. After going through a few The Tell-Tale Heart essay examples, it’s clear for me that exploring the narrator’s psychological state could help us understand things better. According to psychiatry.org, a schizophrenic person may have “hallucinations, such as hearing voices, paranoid delusions and exaggerated or distorted perceptions, beliefs and behaviors.” Poe’s narrator experiences many of these symptoms in the story. After the narrator kills the old man, he believes he can hear the old man’s heartbeat. Poe wrote, “The ringing became more distinct…. it continued and gained definitenessーuntil, at length, I found that the noise was not within my ears.” The narrator seems to be having hallucinations of the sound of a heartbeat which is nearly impossible because a heartbeat is too quiet to hear and the old man is dead so his heart should not be beating. Another symptom psychiatry.org states is “bizarre behavior”. The narrator definitely portrays this symptom in the story, specifically on the eighth night of watching the old man sleep, where he ran towards the old man and “dragged him to the floor, and pulled the heavy bed over him” (Poe). This behavior is definitely abnormal and can be categorized under a schizophrenic type illness.

Moving on to the narrator’s case, he would most likely be charged with first degree murder. According to justia.com, first degree murder, “involves any intentional murder that is willful and premeditated with malice aforethought.” This applies to this narrator because he was planning to kill the old man a couple of days before he murdered him. Poe wrote, “I was never kinder to the old man than during the whole week before I killed him.” It is obvious that the narrator knows that he is going to kill the old man, and he has been waiting and watching him sleep for “seven long nights” (Poe). The punishment for first degree murder in California results in “Imprisonment in state prison for a term of 25 years to life; Life imprisonment in state prison without the possibility of parole; or Death (though it should be noted that capital punishment is currently suspended)” (statelaws.findlaw.com). The narrator could potentially receive one of the three punishments because of his despicable actions.

However, from diagnosing the narrator with schizophrenia, he could try to plead not guilty because of insanity. The insanity plea requires the defendant to “prove to the court that they didn’t understand what they were doing; failed to know right from wrong; acted on an uncontrollable impulse; or some variety of these factors” (criminal.findlaw.com). A defendant can be found guilty but insane, meaning they would be sent to jail but can be given treatment for their illness. For this narrator however, it will be very difficult for the court to accept a plea of insanity from him. In the story, the narrator hides and tries to conceal the body of the old man. Poe wrote, “First of all I dismembered the corpse. I cut off the head and the arms and the legs. I then took up three planks from the flooring chamber, and deposited all between the scantlings. I then replaced the boards so cleverly, so cunningly, that no human eye–not even his– could have detected any thing wrong.” The narrator openly confesses to the readers that he purposely hid the body for no one to find. This means that the narrator must have known that his actions were wrongful, which leads to the narrator knowing right from wrong. Since the narrator knows right from wrong, it goes against the requirements in pleading insanity.

To conclude, it would be very difficult for the narrator to plea for insanity in a present-day court house. The narrator most likely experiences some form of schizophrenia from looking at the evidence from the short story. The narrator obviously has a mental illness from his callous actions he commits with no remorse, but because he knew that what he was doing was wrong and could have gotten him into trouble, the court would not be able to accept it.

The transition between childhood and adulthood is a time of growing independence along with constant questioning, especially when being exposed to the cultural norms of society, some of which are divisive and not always driven by pure motivation. When becoming adults, our personal world is shaped around what we have been taught and through our experiences. This highlights that it is inevitable that you will be influenced by the world and people around you, but you will always have the final say on your own beliefs and values. To Kill A Mockingbird (1960), a southern gothic textual novel written by Harper Lee and Persepolis (2000), a graphic novel written by Marjane Satrapi, both explore the conflict between the personal and public worlds of their two protagonists as they grow up within intolerant societies, using similar techniques despite their different distinct forms. Lee and Satrapi both use their two main characters (Scout and Marji) to show the ability that others have to influence people’s values and beliefs, as well as the choice to either accept those values or reject them. This is effectively shown through the power that the protagonists’ families, rules and teachers hold over the two main characters, the effect that loss of innocence and being confronted with the hostility of the world holds and the respective responses of the main characters.

With both main characters being young children, Lee and Satrapi utilise a young girl’s perspective in their chosen textual forms to explore the main influences on the girls’ open minded outlook – one of these main influences being the protagonist’s school and families. In To Kill A Mockingbird Scout becomes greatly accustomed to the workings of the court system due to her father (Atticus) being a lawyer. When her father risks his life defending Tom Robinson, Scout later finds a new sense of anger within her, but for reasons she does not understand. She is upset that others call Atticus racist names and look down upon the family due to his choice, however although their family faces the consequences of his actions which are opposed to the social norms of the day, Scout still admires her father for doing the best he can in the face of such extreme opposition. This new found value she holds establishes the automatic influence that her father has had on her. “You can just take that back, boy!” is an emotive quote evoking the imagery of Scout being irritated, taken from chapter nine, which shows Scout wrestling with the social norms of other classmates looking down upon people who defend “black” people, like her father. In To Kill A Mockingbird we can see the strong influence that her father holds over Scout, which causes Scout to challenge the public world and uphold her family’s values over the public belief system.

In the graphic novel, Persepolis, Satrapi shows children to be extremely malleable ideologically and behaviorally during the Iran-Iraq war due to the fact that the children don’t currently have the capacity to understand the complexity of the situation around them. “I really didn’t know what to think about the veil.” is a quote taken from the chapter “The Veil.” This quote alerts us to the fact that for a child born into this new rule, it would seem perfectly normal, just as before not wearing a veil felt normal for Marji prior to the Revolution. Although at first Marji follows or reveres anyone within a power position and with popular appeal, she begins to become constantly confronted with the contradictions and confusions of life. Due the Iranian government understanding that the children of today are going to be the future adults, Marjane’s school becomes a microcosm of the wider world in which the government hopes to gain the support of the “future adults.” The 9th panel in the chapter “The Key” shows the students looking identical with a hand placed on their chests. Satrapi uses symbolism of the repetition of each hand on the girls chest to establish strict policing and allegiance. The vectors of the veils convey a sense of uneasiness while the high modality highlights the starkness and severity of the scene. Marjane’s confusion leads her to understand that she can’t simply follow the opinions of others – she believes that she needs to make up her own mind about the political realities and questions surrounding her. In Persepolis we can see the clear influence that the rules and her school have over her, and how due to her struggle with these rules she decides to challenge the public world just like Scout and form her own decisions.

Another main influence over the young protagonists views includes their early loss of innocence and being confronted by the hostility of the world. In To Kill A Mockingbird we see both Scout and Jem (Scout’s brother) lose their childhood innocence after witnessing Tom Robinson become a victim of racial injustice when wrongly convicted of assaulting and raping a woman. “Judge Taylor was polling the jury: “Guilty… guilty… guilty… guilty…” I peeked at Jem: his hands were white from gripping the balcony rail, and his shoulders jerked as if each “guilty” was a separate stab between them.” is a quote where Lee effectively uses both repetition and simile, that conveys the severe effect it had on Jem as she realises that not everything in the world is “good.” When Bob Ewell tries to stab Jem and Scout, we see the characters become completely exposed to the dangers and hostility of the world. The racial-segregated society which has caused much trouble for Scout and her family, cause her to therefore steer away from the public world norms and form her own passionate way of thinking.

Throughout Persepolis, Marji explains several moments in her life that causes her to lose innocence and therefore become more mature, both physically and mentally. After being told of an interaction at one of the demonstrations in her town, she recalls: “Something escaped me. I realized then that I didn’t understand anything. I read all the books I could”. (p.32) Marji realizes that she is still young and doesn’t understand as much about the world as she thinks she does. She loses the somewhat “innocent” way that she used to perceive the world to be as she becomes more informed about the world around her. Furthermore, when Marji finds out Anoosh had been executed for being a spy, she realizes that even people who she looks up to are not immune to the world’s vast amount of cruelty. This is established in one of the panels from the chapter “The Sheep” which shows Marji lying down on her bed crying, while telling herself that “everything will be alright.” This panel is particularly powerful as the reader can see the clear contrast in what she is saying and what is portrayed in the panel. She is telling herself that everything will be alright, while crying and looking distressed, proving to the reader that she is, in fact, not alright. The close up of her lying on her bed and clear facial expression enables us to sympathise with her. We can see that Marjane understands that she is not immune to the dangers of the world either and in fact even more so in this case. Marjane responds to these events, by showing her nonconformity in response to the social norms and government expectations that she deems unjust. Her new found rebellious attitude proves to show that her loss of innocence greatly influenced her, causing her to rebel against the public world like Scout did.

Both the textual novel To Kill a Mockingbird and the graphic novel Persepolis enhance our understanding of how it is inevitable that you will be influenced by the world and people around you, but you will always have the final say on your own beliefs and values. This is conveyed as both protagonists react to the events around them as well as their families, rules they are ordered to obey and schools. We see both Scout and Marji struggle with their personal world and how they want to be portrayed in the public world. Scout ends up following her father’s way of thinking based off what she was taught as well as what she saw while Marji disobeys her authority and changes her beliefs and value in spite of what she finds out and begins to understand. Both of the distinct forms of text convey the unavoidable influence that your experiences and others will have on you, but how you will always have the option to conform to these influences or make your own path.

Macbeth is a play created by Shakespeare that emphasizes and brings out the true tones of humanity through greed, ambition, and wanting, however through the use of figurative language as well as the combination of dramatic techniques, Shakespeare is able to express the dire emotions of Lady Macbeth as she begins to fall into madness and despair as for she is overcome with guilt and pity over the murders and actions that she carried out with Macbeth. This scene on the other hand introduces us to the leading themes of this play, blood, supernatural, and ambition. The meaning of this scene within the play was used to help show that as people become infected with greed and ambition, they are driven by those factors to commit horrible things, yet as time progresses they will come back to bite you in spite of what you have done and gained. Lady Macbeth is clearly suffering from those demons that are the remorse of her contribution to the murders with Macbeth. In this passage, Shakespeare will use techniques such as figurative imagery and dramatic techniques to express these emotions.

The clear message of Act 5 Scene 1, is to highlight and exploit the fact that Lady Macbeth is falling into madness and insanity due to her guilt and pity for what she has caused in the path to ensure that her husband is crowned king. This is shown when Lady Macbeth is sleepwalking and the Doctor and Gentleman are able to eavesdrop on what she is saying, when she says the statement: “A soldier, and afeard?” and “What need we fear who knows it when none can call our power to account?” These parts of the passage are her talking to herself in her sleep in which she attempts to comfort herself about the murders and try to make sure that she can soothe herself out of the guilty conscience. When Lady Macbeth says: “A soldier, and afeard?”, what she means is that she has the mentality of a soldier, which is needless to say, brave, strong, and carries out actions without remorse due to the fact that they are instructed to go through life-threatening and changing aspects as a show of loyalty for their country and people. Lady Macbeth calls herself a soldier as she was the one that creates the drive of greed within Macbeth and is the leading cause of King Duncan’s murder as she pushes Macbeth over his own set line and killing his own leader. This requires the “mentality” of a soldier in which she calls herself. Yet she is afraid of the consequences, unlike a soldier, as for they are driven by loyalty and are shielded from the factors that might affect them when they are sent into battle. However, Lady Macbeth is still afraid of what will happen to her after the action she just did due to guilt and pity for the murders. When she says “What need we fear who knows it when none can call our power to account?”, it once again insinuates the fact that she is worried for her life that she may get caught and exposed for her actions against the kingdom even though, she was able to cover her tracks to the connections of the murders. Yet this does not change her mentality and still lives in guilt and fear that no matter what, she will eventually get caught and face a penalty for her crimes. This once again links back to the main message and drive of this scene which is to show that Lady Macbeth is getting eaten up by her own guilt.

Another point and key message within the play that insinuates the guilt of Lady Macbeth is the constant upbringing of “blood” on her hands. Within the scene, Lady Macbeth is sleepwalking around her house, constantly rubbing her hands as if washing them and murmuring the fact that they won’t come off and no matter what, there is still one stain of blood on her hands, this is shown when Lady Macbeth says: “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!—One, two. Why, then, ’tis time to do ’t. ” and “Here’s the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh, Oh, Oh!”. This is one of the most iconic scenes in the play as you can clearly tell that Lady Macbeth is suffering from guilt and pity with the blood on her hands a clear figurative expression that she was the cause of the murders and the blood on her hands will stain her legacy and mind, started out when she says: “Out, damned spot! Out, I say!”. This dialogue message is her attempting to scrub off the imaginary blood that plagues her hands and mind and is supposed to symbolize guilt for her actions. Yet when Lady Macbeth says “Here’s the smell of the blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh, Oh, Oh!”, it is once again backing up the point that she is scared from the actions that she carried out. When she says that “Here’s the smell of the blood still”, it is used to symbolize that the blood of King Duncan is so evident on her body that it could be smelt, stating that she is no longer confident about her carrying out such horrendous acts and getting away with it. It is further more taken into consideration when she says: “All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. Oh, Oh, Oh!”. This is meant to show that no matter what she will do, the smell of blood will reek off her body signaling that she committed the murders. It is expressed by the statement of perfumes of Arabia, as for a perfume is meant to mask and conceal a smell however not even that from as far as Arabia will assist in pulling herself away from the murders.

Finally, one of the most idolized figurative and dramatic techniques used within this scene to express how Lady Macbeth is feeling, is when her sleepwalking comes to an end and she says the terms: “Wash your hands. Put on your nightgown. Look not so pale.—I tell you yet again, Banquo’s buried; he cannot come out on ’s grave.” and “To bed, to bed. There’s knocking at the gate. Come, come, come, come. Give me your hand. What’s done cannot be undone.—To bed, to bed, to bed!”. This part of Act 5 Scene 1 is used to show that Lady Macbeth is attempting to hide and push down her fears of getting caught as well as guilt while at the same time, she is attempting to try to pass off the fact that she was associated with the murders to other people in order to protect herself. When Lady Macbeth says “Wash your hands. Put on your nightgown. Look not so pale.—I tell you yet again, Banquo’s buried; he cannot come out on ’s grave.”, she is meant to insinuate the fact that she can still try to get away with murders and have nothing to relate with it when she says: “Wash your hands. Put on your nightgown. Look not so pale.”. It is a clear indication that she will try to play off the murders by looking normal so that people will not suspect what she has done to the victims. She also tries to calm herself down b saying “I tell you yet again, Banquo’s buried; he cannot come out on ’s grave.”, which she means that Banquo can not come out of the grave to expose them and tell the others of her actions and that the deed is done and can not be reversed. This is also backed up by the phrase: “To bed, to bed. There’s knocking at the gate. Come, come, come, come. Give me your hand. What’s done cannot be undone.—To bed, to bed, to bed!”, in which she once again will try to calm herself down by saying that she can no longer reverse the pass and she must learn to adapt to her actions. This backs up the point that Shakespeare is attempting to make a show that guilt is biting back on Lady Macbeth and for the actions, she committed with Macbeth himself.

To conclude, Shakespeare conveys clearly to the audience that Lady Macbeth has fallen on a dark path with extreme guilt, but also manipulating Macbeth’s actions to the dark. This is extremely sinful as she also forced in some way Macbeth to do horrible actions that he had never imagined doing at any normal time. This once again backs up and builds upon the point that Macbeth is a play created by Shakespeare that emphasizes and brings out the true tones of humanity through greed, ambition, and wanting, however through the use of figurative language as well as he combination of dramatic techniques, Shakespeare is able to express the dire emotions of Lady Macbeth as she begins to fall into madness and despair as for she is overcome with guilt and pity over the murders and actions that she carried out with Macbeth.

The catastrophic Greek tragedy, “Medea” deals with the maltreatment faced by the titular character and how such struggles can lead to immoral retributive acts. Medea challenges society’s paradigm of the typical woman who is a “timid creature” and a “coward” through her headstrong and opinionated character, thereby establishing herself as an exemplar for women. Moreover, Euripides illustrates how Medea, as a woman, struggles against her male consort, as well as the patriarchal Athenian society and how this conflict is only exacerbated by the corruptive nature of isolation. Furthermore, the pursuit of power moves Medea into action, turning her from a devoted mother and wife to a vindictive murderess; this transgressive journey of revenge stemming from the bridling anger at the lack of power she possesses. Additionally, Euripides’ portrayal of his eponymous character, Medea, is often seen through a combination of contrasting traits. Despite being female in gender, she is majorly responsible for the achievements of her husband. She is powerless in her liaison with Jason yet powerful in her intelligence. Lastly, she is perceived by society as an agent of divine will, despite being a mortal.

Medea, constructed by Euripides as a symbol of spiritedness, challenges the political leadership, education and bureaucracy of her society in order to redefine the perceived notion of male-dominated justice. She is a woman with a paroxysmal passion unmoderated by the veneer of human civilization, resulting in the scarring of her humanity. Euripides depicts Medea rising against the socially accepted standard for women as a “sensible” woman was to bear children whereas she would rather “face the enemy three times over”. Aggrieved by Jason’s infidelity, Medea plans vengeance; she does not submissively tolerate his actions and instead desires to see him and his bride in “utter ruin”. Medea destroys gender roles and defied perceptions of gender by exhibiting both “male” and “female” tendencies. She acts as a harbinger of justice for women as her ability to display sophrosyne enables her to perform unpredictable macabre acts of violence. At times she was the ultimate woman, at times she was the ultimate man. As such, Euripides confronts the notion that women were inferior to males in Corinth, sympathetically exposing the potential consequences of female subservience in a misogynistic society.

The struggles of an outsider are often harsh enough to corrupt the individual and can catalyze moral bankruptcy. Medea’s morbid plan to kill her children to carry out her “purpose” and “achieve her wish” is considered to have been initiated as a result of her outsider status. The personification of “the fiercest anger of all, the most incurable is that which rages in place of dear love,” implies that the root of Medea’s struggles is the blatant rejection of her love by her husband and society. Furthermore, her rebellion against patriarchy and her subsequent struggle as a foreigner evokes pathos from the audience as they sympathize with her. Her declaration to Jason of “thus wretchedly your fate shall end this story,” further alludes to her obsessive hatred thus linking the murder of her children to the hostility she has experienced as a result of Jason’s iniquity towards her.

Medea, in her struggles against her male husband, as well as her androcentric society, and this conflict is the essential beginning of a chain reaction of her determinations. Throughout the drama, there are references towards the notion that women are merely needed for “reproduc[tional]” purposes and they should “submit… graciously to the will” of the males in power. Furthermore, the lack of Royal Princess, Glauce, speaking for herself is a structural element within the play, implying how women were silenced by men unless being “gracious” within society. Ergo Medea with her powers as an immortal and passion intimidates even those with more power than her. The king of Corinth is “terrified” of Medea’s schemes yet grants her the extra day she asks for despite “see[ing] his mistake”. Medea’s mercurial temperament is frightening in nature and sparks a feeling of consternation and apprehension. Creon’s callous banishment is motivated by his fears of Medea’s position as “a woman of hot temper”. This acts as a stark reminder for Medea’s willingness not to supplicate herself to the power of men. Euripides repetitively utilizes animalistic imagery such as a “glaring bull” and “lioness with cubs” when characters refer to Medea, painting her as a barbaric entity who sacrifices her humanity to fulfil her vengeful desires. This subversion of gender roles created in a rigidly hierarchical and phallocentric society emphasizes the evident nonconformity Medea’s character provides.

The play Medea explores the breakdown of the Jason-Medea marriage as a socio-psychological exchange of power and how an imbalance leads to such a breakdown. The liaison between Medea and Jason demonstrates how both males and females assert power in the relationship and how exploitation of this domination leads to dilemmas. The resentment Medea feels for the confines of her sex and her need for control are the underlying reasons that she feels powerless in the legal premise of her society. Medea’s search for a way to gain power causes the radical anti-heroine of the play to commit many heinous acts. Though she cannot become a man or take power as a man, she commits crimes like a man might and seeks retribution with the same kind of determination that a man would pursue an enemy. Jason’s assertion in regard to being the alpha substantially affects his relationships. Additionally, Euripides incorporates Medea into this relationship suggesting that though females do possess power in an alliance, their form of authority differs when compared to that of a male’s.

Whilst the play horrifies an all Athenian audience by the passionate usurping of patriarchal power in the play, Euripides also cautions the destructive power of female passion. In his harrowing tragedy, Medea, Euripides’s protagonist is not a feeble, subservient woman, but rather an excessively passionate divine figure who seeks justice for women. Moreover, Euripides’ use of peripeteia and divine intervention depicts Medea as a clarion voice for the crippled plight of women fettered by men. Ultimately, Euripides exposes how the societal gender roles facilitate the struggle and condemnation of outsiders who attempt to express their individuality. Euripides utilization of Deus Ex Machina, furthermore, represents Medea’s transcendence of misogyny and ability to punish men that violate their oaths by executing justice on her own accord. In our present-day world where gender biases exist perennially, Medea’s struggles remain as relevant as ever.