Category: Literature 5177

The book The Complete Pompeii by Joanne Berry brings to light the different archeological treasures of the city in terms of its civilization, and antiquities which have been left preserved for us to see. While many a research has been conducted on the city and the lives of the people in the roman citys ruins, this book is unique as it is based on the archeological research heavily supported by innovative technology which has enabled the researchers to gather in depth information without destroying the evidence in its original state.

The layouts of the city, the shops, the graffiti as well as the art and architecture of the city is depicted in the book through in detail descriptions and illustrated as well as photographed pictures to support the descriptions. One of the interesting facet of the book is that in it Berry provides how the houses depict the social class and status of the owners and how they live their lives along with their involvement in politics and how it affected their lifestyles.

An analysis of the houses of Pompeii highlights a marked difference in the houses of the elite and the working class. The middleclass and the working class in Pompeii had fairly simple houses as compared to the elites. Their houses were built around their work and business. The houses of the workmen were often combined with their shops and work offices while those of the merchants were built around their workshops where daily work was conducted.

The House and Workshop of Verecundus is an example of a typical workshop based house belonging to the dyers in Pompeii. The house features workshops at the entrance of the house while the Forum square house paintings that depict the various dying and workshop based activities that were carried on in the house. Another notable house of a merchant is the House of Casca Longus. These houses had their own sustainable vegetable/fruit gardens and small plots that were used by them to supplement their food. Almost all the windows of the houses belonging to the middle and working class were faced inwards towards the corridor/ courtyards.

The livings quarters of the workmen and merchants were based around these courtyards on the back of the house, while the front section of the house was primarily devoted for their work activities in the workshops which give way to the simplistic layout of the house.

On the other hand the rich and the affluent in the city had houses that were expansive with elaborate garden completed with grandeur decorations, fixtures and fittings. The mosaic was a popular form of carpeting art that was used by the affluent to carpet their interiors and exteriors. The complex complexity of the designs for the mosaics and the materials used depict the high and elite social status of the inhabitants of the houses.

The House of Wild Boar is one of the houses of the elites in Pompeii which has earned its name due to the riveting use of mosaic in the house. The house features many interesting mosaics. However, the most interesting is placed in the atrium of the house which depicts a wild boar being hunted by the dogs. This scene depicts probably the lifestyle and the hobbies of the owners of the house which might have included board hunting. Aside from this the House of Boar also boasts massive landings and floors made of marble and patios around the garden that make use of marble art and sculptures.

From the outside majority of the houses in Pompeii are similar and depict a monotonous look of homogeneity. However the interiors of the house as well as the structured of the house from the inside depict the differences in the affluence and social class of the people, while others who were amongst the wealthiest the in the city had immense properties with housing spanning large expanses of areas.

The layouts of the houses in Pompeii were such that the houses had inward orientations. The house surrounded the gardens of the house which were usually located in courtyards or central regions of the house. Those with money and status in the city had elaborate art in the gardens and courtyards while those who belonged to the middle class had simple households structured with basic elements of outdoor and indoor fittings.

Those who belonged to the elite social class had houses that were magnificent in terms of their structure and style and often had multiple houses that were merged to form one structure. The House of the Citharist is amongst the largest houses in Pompeii which depicts its owners to be of the elite class. The house is a collection of merged houses with magnificent architecture and richly decorated rooms.

The well off nature of the family as well as their social status is depicted by the materials used in the house, and the decorations that are set throughout the structures as in the House of Citharist. Often sculptured fountains marked the focal point in the courtyards and the gardens of such houses while intricate fresco painting showing mythological creatures, birds, flowers and indulgence were placed throughout such houses. Aside from this the houses also had separate quarters on the grounds which were reserved housing for the servants and slaves of the family.

The House of Menander is worth a mention as well as it was amongst one of the largest in the city heavily decorated with rich art. The house gets its name from the portrait of Menander found in the house. The unique thing about this house is that the house was found to have an extensive collection of silverware. 118 pieces were discovered in the cellar and the chests in the house. This depicts the elite social status of the owners of the house as well as their well off position in the city. This house also had reserved quarters for a curator named Eros who was responsible for the security and the protection of the house and its goods housed in it.

The House of the Golden Cupids is an extensive a richly and elegantly decorated house. The house belongs to a rich family in Pompeii and is famous because of the artwork found in the Cubicula of the house. The Cubicula has a sculpture of cupids that are sculpted and painted on golden leaf. Aside from this the house is riddled with sculptures and artwork depicting theatrical masks and also has a raised platform that was evidently used for staging plays and performances in the house for entertainment. Another note worthy feature of the house is a temple dedicated to the Egyptian Goddess Isis which is unique for a house in Pompeii.

The house of Faun is the largest house in Pompeii that belonged to one of the richest and most influential families in the city, namely Sulla. The house features multiple atriums that are designed and decorated using elegant artwork. The bronze stature of the Dancing Faun was found in this house, along with the mosaic depicting the Battle of Alexander which is housed now in the Archaeological Museum in Naples.

The Battle of Alexander which was originally housed in the tablinium in the House of Faun is a unique mosaic which is interesting because of its sheer massive size and the complex scene depicted through the artwork. The house houses many other mosaics that showcase the flora and the fauna of the region as well as those of the river Nile that is housed in the garden/ courtyard of the house. This depicts that the owners of the house traveled extensively and had eclectic taste in arts.

The relationship between the political affluence of the owner and the house is clearly depicted in the House of Holoconius Rufus that belonged to one of the most prestigious and politically affluent families the city of Pompeii. This house is markedly spacious as well as elegant and has devoted well ventilated galleries in the style of tablinium while large pictorial photographs on the walls of the house document the owners and their lives.

The unique feature of the house is the summer gallery which houses fountains and artwork in the form of paintings made in frescos. This shows the indulgence and the lavish life of the politically affluent in city of Pompeii. Another house that is worth mentioning is the House of Paquius Proculus that belonged to a politically influential figure in Pompeii by the name of Paquius Proculus. The House of Paquius Proculus is a complex structure which depicts that it had been constructed and reconstructed many times. The elite class of the owners of the house is depicted by the elegant mosaics in the house the showcase animals and complex geometric patterns. The tablinium in the house is highly unique as it has alabaster flooring surrounded by still life paintings.

Conclusively it can be highlighted that the houses of the elite and the affluent in Pompeii were lavish tributes to their wealth, art and architecture of the region while those of the poor and the middle class were set up based on necessity having the most basic structure and layout that integrated with their work life. The houses of the wealthy featured their hobbies, their lifestyles and their interests through the use of art, decoration and architecture styling of the house. On the other hand the houses of the merchants and workers in the city of Pompeii were mainly workshops and display shops combined with housing quarters that took up the rear portion of the buildings.

References

Berry, Joanne, 2007. The Complete Pompeii, Thames & Hudson.

Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew, 1996. Houses and society in Pompeii and Herculaneum, Princeton University Press.

Jashemski, W.M.H., Meyer, F.G., 2002. The Natural History of Pompeii, Cambridge University Press.

Sedivy, Ancient City of Pompeii: The Houses of Faun, Vettii, Large Fountain and the House of the Sliver Wedding. Web.

Outline

• Introduction

  • Thesis: Heroes and villains in Atlas Shrugged have different perceptions of money with the former trying to make it and the latter simply wishing to have it. The difference between these two views on money consists in heroes and villains knowing the real value of it, their possibility to earn money, and their moral principles and attitudes to morality in general.
• Discussion

  • Knowing the real value of money
  • Using the possibility to earn money
  • Different principles of morality
• Conclusion

Atlas Shrugged is a novel which was written by Ayn Rand in 1957. This novel operates with a number of notions which may puzzle the modern reader. It deals with the concepts of objectivism and human achievement exploring a number of other philosophical themes. Atlas Shrugged discloses different facets of the philosophy of Objectivism paying special attention to individualism, the failure of government, and the advocacy of reason.

All the characters of the novel may be divided into the heroes and the villains with each of them having his/her own principles of morality and monetary values. In this novel Rand tries to emphasize the social gap between her characters illustrating the divergence of their attitudes towards money. Heroes and villains in Atlas Shrugged have different perceptions of money with the former trying to make it and the latter simply wishing to have it. The difference between these two views on money consists in heroes and villains knowing the real value of it, their possibility to earn money, and their moral principles and attitudes to morality in general.

Discussion

Knowing the real value of money

To begin with, the main difference between the villains and the heroes view on money is that the latter know the real value of it, while the former do not. This is a common problem between people of different social ranks, because money, as a rule, defines not only the overall welfare of a person, but refers him/her to a definite social class. A number of people run away with the idea that those who have money do not value it.

This is absolutely erroneous, because those who keep to this idea make their conclusions on the basis of single instances. As stated by one of the heroes from Atlas Shrugged, Francisco dAnconia, during a dinner party, Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value (Rand 370). In addition, this hero also noted that Money is a tool of exchange, which cant exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them (Rand 370). There is hardly any villain who can define the value of money in this way.

The heroes know how much earning of the money involves, how many people are engaged in the process of exchange, and how long it takes before the goods produced by people can be exchanged for money which further is exchanged for other goods. Villains, in their turn, believe that if a person already has money, it is not difficult to increase the amount of it. The main reason why the villains wish to have money is because they think that it does not take much to manage it when one already has it.

Even the heroes spending of money differs significantly from the villains disposing of it. The heroes invest the money to increase their profits, whereas the villains would prefer spending it to luxuries and something which would never be beneficial for the society. Perhaps, the villains do not know the value of money because they do not have enough of it; however, even in this case, it is purely their own fault, because everything depends on their desire to earn money, which they do not wish to do. Thus, villains not knowing the value of money makes their perception of it different from the one which the heroes have.

Using the possibility to earn money

Moreover, villains and heroes view on money depends on their possibility and desire to earn it. At first glance, this seems to be fair, because generally people believe that those who have an opportunity to earn money (for instance, people coming from wealthy families) will always be able to earn them, while those who are not well-connected do not have these possibilities. However, this issue becomes rather controversial if applied to Atlas Shrugged.

This novel shows that earning money takes desire, rather than possibility. Heroes and villains in this novel come from different social classes, and this does not mean that heroes come purely from wealthy families. Thus, for instance, Hank Rearden and John Galt have working class backgrounds, but they are heroes together with Francisco dAnconia and Dagny Taggart who come from wealthy families.

Even more controversial is the situation with the villains where Betty Pope and James Taggart are from wealthy families and Fred Kinnan belongs to the working class. This testifies to the fact that it is desire, not the possibility that makes people earn sufficient amount of money and shapes their views on money correspondingly. The desire to simply possess the money without making any effort to earn it is what most of the villains are driven with. Consequently, they believe that money is the root of evil. As applied to this book, such a perception of money by the villains derives from their trying to find the easiest explanation to the difficulties which they face.

The villains see everything on the surface and, just like they believe that stealing money is the easiest way to earn them, they think that naming the money the root of evil is the easiest way to fight all the problems which the world encounters. Perhaps, sometimes simplicity is the best way to solve a problem, but it is inapplicable in defining the root of evil. There is no doubt that money, like nothing else, gives a person power and self-confidence, but depriving people of money will not help in fighting with world problems; it will only aggravate the existing situation. Therefore, the villains view on money differs from the heroes one in the formers unwillingness to earn money with hard labor and their erroneous considering money as the root of evil.

Different principles of morality

Finally, the heroes and the villains have different views on money due to the differences in their moral principles. The basic theme of the novel Atlas Shrugged is the morality of rational self-interest, though Rand skillfully intertwines this theme with the one regarding monetary values. Nevertheless, the villains and the heroes difference in the views on money may lie namely in their morality.

From the perspective of moral principles, the heroes will always believe that it is unfair to take somebody elses money simply because one has a desire to have them; in contrast, from the villains point of view, taking away money from somebody who has it is the only way of treating the person who has large amounts of money at his/her disposal. In other words, the heroes have moral principles and are reluctant to break them, whereas the villains do not admit that moral principles exist when it comes to money.

This is the case with Atlas Shrugged where the villains believe that the words to make money hold the essence of human morality (Rand 374), while the heroes state that you cant discuss morality in materialistic terms (Rand 842). In addition, the heroes bounds between materialism and morality are clear; they keep to the point that making money in a way which is not contradictory to the law is morally correct.

The situation with villains is even more complicated. In Atlas Shrugged the villains wish to take away money from the heroes in order to eradicate what they consider to be the root of evil. To some extent, this may be regarded as the action beneficial for the community. However, the way it which it becomes beneficial goes against the common morality, though not necessarily against the villains moral principles. This means that difference in moral principles of the heroes and the villains accounts for their different attitudes towards money.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Rands Atlas Shrugged puts forward an idea that the heroes and the villains have different perceptions of money. There exist several reasons why the former try to make money and the latter prefer to have it. First, the value of money is different for them, since the heroes know how much earning of the money involves and the villains do not. Second, the villains do not use all their possibilities to earn money in an honest way, which makes them believe that the heroes also get money undeservedly. And third, the villains and the heroes have different principles and different attitudes regarding the correlation between money and morality. This all makes their views on money different.

Works Cited

Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged. New York: Penguin Group, 1996.

It is hard to think of two poets whose lives are more different from each others than Langston Hughes and Sylvia Plath. Hughes was born in 1902 in Joplin, Missouri of mixed-race parents, and was mostly raised by his grandmother in Lawrence, Kansas.

He worked odd jobs, including a six-month stint as a seaman but eventually became well-known enough to live off his writing. He died in 1967. Plath, on the other hand, was the daughter of middle-class Austrian and German immigrants living in Boston. Her father was a professor of apiology and she was an outstanding student who seemed well on the way to success when she was chosen to intern at Mademoiselle magazine in the early 1950s. She eventually married the English poet, Ted Hughes, had two children and committed suicide in 1963, at the age of 30.

What they do have in common is that both attempted suicide more than once, that both were gifted poets, and that they saw themselves not just as victims of oppression but also as somehow complicit in their oppression. This is evident in Hughess Themes for English B, and Plaths Daddy, as an analysis of the poems will show.

Themes is a deceptively simple poem, a meditation on an insignificant event that comes to mean a great deal to the poems narrator because from it he learns how to write true poetry. The instructor of the English B course advises him to let the page come out of him but the narrator at first thinks it cannot be that simple. There are obstacles between himself and the instructor, a gap which the speaker crosses daily by walking through Harlem to attend a class in which he is the only colored student. He asks himself who he is and whether he is all that different, but realizes the page that will come out of him will not be colored, nor will it be white.

As Americans the speaker and the instructor are united beyond the divisions of race, willingly or not, and so at the end the speaker reluctantly accepts that he can learn from the white instructor and guesses the instructor can learn from him even though he is more free, implying that the speaker is less free because of the white man. In writing poetry, therefore, he must collude with the enemy, as it were, in the hope of writing the kind of poetry that can close the divide.

Daddy is addressed to the speakers father in a way that expresses her ambivalence toward him. Plaths father died when she was eight years old but his memory oppresses her as tightly as a shoe. He is a colossus whose fallen form extends from Boston to San Francisco, a bag full of God who left her before she could kill him, that is, before she was grown-up enough to see that he was no God, just a man. He dominates her as Nazis once dominated Europe and struck fear in the hearts of the Jews they chuffed off to the concentration camps. Her father was German, she says but her mother had Jewish blood, and the conflict between the two races plays itself out in her mind and body.

Much as she hates her father, she loves him so much that she tried to kill herself to be reunited with him. When that failed she married a man just like him, a man with a Meinkampf look who, she hoped, would replace the image of her father with his own. Instead her husband and her father merge into the devil who bit her pretty red heart in two, and the vampire who had to be killed by villagers driving a wooden stake into his heart. At the end she says, Daddy, daddy, you bastard, Im through, an ambiguous line which may suggest that her father has turned into her husband to make up one lover with whom she is finally through.

In both cases the poets suffer from ambivalence toward the person who had the greatest influence on their life and work. The white instructor gave Hughes the information he needed to turn him into a real poet, and Plaths father was the driving force behind her becoming a poet. They both thank their mentors in these poems, then try to separate themselves from them, as they must if they are to become independent poets.

Work Cited

Gardner, Janet E. et al. Literature: A Portable Anthology. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2008.

In The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano, the author describes the events of his life as a slave. I think Equiano sets the beginning of his story in Africa instead of starting it with his American enslavement because he aims to share details about his native culture. Additionally, in the beginning, Equiano hypothesizes about the origins of his ethnicity; for example, he writes that his dark skin is a result of exposure to the hot climate of a tropical country. Equiano also writes about a connection between the Africans and the Jewish people, by which he aims to point to a connection between the Europeans and Africans. For example, he writes the following: Let the polished and haughty European recollect that his ancestors were once, like the Africans, uncivilized, and even barbarous. Did Nature make them inferior to their sons? And should they, too, have been made slaves? Every rational mind answers, No (Equiano, 43). Hence, the reason why Equiano begins his story by describing his life in Africa is the authors attempt to explain why slavery is unacceptable and unjustifiable practice.

Equiano also includes some details about his family life before he was kidnapped and enslaved. For example, he writes about his sister and their life together. The sister and Equiano are both kidnapped, although they are eventually separated. This detail about the authors family is another attempt to show the inhumane Nature of slavery and how slaves were treated, kidnapped from their homes, separated from their families, and forced to live in terrific conditions. In summary, Equiano begins his story by detailing his life in Africa instead of focusing on his arrival in America to show that slavery is an inhumane practice.

Reference

Equiano, O. (1791). The interesting narrative of the life of Olaudah Equiano, or Gustavus Vassa, the African. New-York

Outline

Slavery is generally considered as a practice of the past that has no meaning in the modern society. However, this is not the case considering many cases that occur and only a few of them are reported. There are new forms of slavery that have emerged in the contemporary society in which the manipulator uses power and the advantage that he or she has to harass the victim. The reason why many of these cases are common yet not reported is because; the victim draws some benefit from the manipulator which is the reason for their survival. The fight against such slavery can only be won when each and every individual takes responsibility for their lives.

Introduction

The novel, kindred is a story about the life of a black lady by the name of Dana who lives in America. In the story, Dana experiences slavery in two different forms, one that is direct and the other one in an indirect form. Dana who is twenty six years is married to a white man, Kevin Franklin and they are both authors. Dana goes to antebellum south through her medical knowledge and assists Rufus and other slaves. In her struggle to resist the torture that comes with slavery, she sustains injuries that include lose of her arm. In her effort to forget and prevent the past torture from recurring, she kills Rufus who was the first white slave master she encountered (Butler, 2004).

The story generally reflects a scenario of slavery and the challenges that the slaves go through. It also reveals the different efforts by the slaves to overcome the pain and harassment they have to go through. Dana who is the main character in the story is presented as a woman of integrity who tries to protect herself. He is however found in some confusing conditions when she has to differentiate between fulfilling her obligation as a married woman and protecting her dignity. She finds that in both cases she is being manipulated and the only difference is the relationship that she shares with the manipulator. Even though she finds a loving husband of whom they share a similar past, she finds it difficult to be convinced that he is not similar to her manipulator. The reason for this behavior is that both parties are white and it makes her figure the nature and character of her past manipulator. On the other hand, Danas husband feels that she owns her and is therefore free to treat her the way he likes.

Main body

Even though Dana is a free woman, she can not run away from the pain of slavery that was experienced in the past. She has to move from different regions working without pay and appreciation. She gladly stretches her hand to help, but the purity of her help sublimes when she sees the kind of torture that faces the people of her race. Freedom in this context is only theoretical but the psychological pain is evident (Butler, 2004). The marriage between Dana and Kevin is out of free will and acceptance, yet they face opposition from their family members who feel that interracial relations cannot work. Kevins sister was not ready to accept Dana into the family, which even made her dislike the brother because of her decision to marry a black woman. Danas uncle on the other hand wanted a black man for Dana. Physically Dana is married to Kevin but psychologically it is a slave-master relationship

Kevins marriage to Dana was with the aim of possessing her and making her serve him just as she wished. Similar to the relationship that Dana had with Rufus, she had been possessed by him and had to do all the work that she was given. She had no freedom to choose what she wanted to do. The same situations and circumstances reflected with her husband Kevin of whom he had to serve without any complain. To avoid such psychological strain of trying to figure out whether Kevin was her husband or master, she starts appreciating the fact that Kevin has possessed her as a slave and enjoys the relationship.

White men in this story are depicted as oppressors. No matter the kind of relationship they share with the women around them. To them a woman is a property that they own and they are free to treat them in the way that seems right to them. Rufus who is a slave owner had possessed Dana and mistreated her. This was the past pain that Dana experienced from a white man that is affecting her marriage. Whenever she gets closer to Kevin, the memories of Rufus and his ruthless treatment comes to her mind. She sustained bruises from this man which acts as an evidence of her past life (Butler, 2004). At some point she mistakes Kevin for Rufus. Rufus who has bought Alice as her slave treats her ruthlessly. Alice has come to accept the fact that since Rufus has paid for her; he is free to use her in any way, sexually and also to in a violent manner. However, when her husband Isaac Jackson discovers that Rufus was trying to rape her wife, he beats him up an incidence that makes Isaac to be separated from Alice after he was beaten and sold. In his relationship with Alice, she gives birth to Joe Weylin a child that is later taken away from her by Rufus. Alice is so much affected by this that she commits suicide.

Even though there are black men who are slaves like Nigel, Luke, Sam James, Isaac Jackson and Jake Edwards, they are given higher responsibilities of managing other slaves. They do not go through the psychological pain as their female counterparts, if they had to suffer pain, it is only physical. Even though they are also black, they mistreat the black females that are under them. One incidence of such torture is when Jake Edwards forces Dana to do the laundry by threatening to whip her. To the women in the story, submission to each and every need of these men was not a matter of choice. They either had to submit to their needs or face whipping. In the process of Dana trying to resist the torture of being forced to submit to Rufus demands, she lost her hand and the only way of forgetting the pain caused by Rufus was to kill him.

Even though this story can be looked at as a fairy tale, it is a true reflection of how most people are still bound by their background. Freedom has been preached, fought and achieved by many people, yet it is only the physical part. Many more people continue to suffer in the hands of the people whom they expect to guard and take care of them (Cahill, 2003).There are many people that are still bound, but because of the situations that surround them, they have come to accept it as part and parcel of their life. There are others yet who know that they are bound but because of the benefits they get from the relationship, they hold on to it no matter how much pain they go through.

Many women have to go through psychological torture imposed to them by the men they relate to as their husbands. Most of these men take advantage of the fact that they paid a fee to marry them and that alone qualifies them to be their property. A man will therefore treat her woman the same way he treats his property. He will use it and discard it when he feels it is not valuable. A perfect example from the story is Alice who gets a child through rape and later on not only damped but also denied the possession of her child. The pain made her to commit suicide which is a reflection of what some women do when the level of torture reaches its peak.

Due to the fact that some of these women depend on their husbands to provide for them almost everything, they will not have the courage to speak out due to the fear of loosing their security (Akbar, 1984). Some are still bound in the tradition of accepting and doing anything that men tell them to do. They are denied the ability to make decisions and even to own property. It is also clear from the story that unlike women, men are free to do whatever they wish without being questioned. There are several incidences of extra marital relationships on the part of men. Their wives who may come to notice this may do nothing much rather than quarrel among themselves.

Conclusion

Slavery and ownerships is not only something of the past, but also exists in the contemporary world. The only difference is that in the past it was being done openly and people could see it happen. The bondage that many people are yet to recover from is the pain they have to endure psychologically in order to survive. Pain has become an order that will make them live. They may have nobody to speak to due to the relationship they share with the person who is torturing them.

References

Akbar N. (1984): Chains and images of psychological slavery New Mind Productions.

Butler E. (2004): Kindred: Beacon Press.

Cahill M. (2003): Traditions, values, and humanitarian action: Fordham University Press.

The world of literature is the sphere of entire features and prospects that never die in peoples minds. The fact that the literature comprises the wholeness of the experience gained during thousands of years is apparent and presents many themes for discussion. The paper is dedicated to three works by outstanding authors who are aimed to evaluate whether literatures main function is to pass judgment on political, social issues and people themselves. The analysis touches upon three works: Agamemnon, The Inferno, Don Quixote.

First, the role of an author dealing with the artistically arranged text is mainly to bring up the inner set of moral features which a man possesses. The examples in all three cases are the best representation of how the writers interpret these three fields of a mans activities: policy, society, soul. Starting with Dantes greatest work, the picture of hell is, of course, associated with negative emotions and deeds. Sin is that burden that makes people fall when there is nobody to help, and consciousness tells about the wrong way of coming and how to prevent it. Three types of main sins comparing with three circles of the inferno stimulate a reader not to follow them due to Dantes picturesque description of the place where the fire never stops burning.

Don Quixote is a farcical character whose activity props up against many contradictory situations provided in society. One of the examples touches upon his disagreement with the traditional way of marriage promotion when a potential bride is forced by others in order to make a wedding ceremony. Thus, the writer wanted to outline that women should have a personal opinion as to whom to marry. The social background was broken with a new initiative from the side of Don Quixote.

Agamemnons example straightforwardly illustrates the idea of the reasons for many problems. The woman is the greatest intention for a mans zeal. The situation got the political coloring when the problem concerned the points of state pride and wholeness. It was an impertinent interference of Paris, but, on the other hand, it was a desire of Helen. Nevertheless, because of two men having violated the moral interests of people being in power, the well-known political conflict of the Trojan War splashed.

The wholeness and contradiction of two parts giving new life on earth, man and woman, is greatly discussed in the above-mentioned works. For example, in Inferno main character is intended to think and get to the point that his desires and passion towards a woman, in many cases, made him suffer and go through the fire of hell. This part of Dantes work illuminates that many of the sins which a man makes concern women and that love are dangerous but worth doing stupid things.

In Don Quixotes case, he meets people of various strata of the society: prostitutes, scorned lovers, etc. Their examples urge to think over the so-called moral principles when people are dying from love or passion towards the opposing sex. Cervantes was intended in his work to project the reality of medieval times and to resolve such difficult problems of moral shaping. Society was and is the main obstacle to feel freedom in love relations.

Society played a great role in the issue of Agamemnon, who made Helen his wife without her consent and did not want to leave her alone with Paris. This equaled her death because men had more privileges in ancient times. If only Agamemnon let his wife go, the society and closest people would begin despising him due o the standards of mens idea to share and use. Thus, the way of love met in this story a very cruel and bloody barrier that caused the deaths of thousands of people.

Works cited

1. Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de. Don Quixote de la Mancha. Harvard University. J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1862
2. Seneca, Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, Tarrant Richard John. Agamemnon. Cambridge University Press, 1976
3. Alighieri Dante. The Divine Comedy. Kessinger Publishing, 2004

In the literature of various genres, authors have repeatedly referred to the topic of self-awareness and self-understanding of a human being in multiple settings and contexts. Apart from an array of key philosophical themes addressed by literary works, self-understanding occupies a unique place due to the reflection of the authors views on the interaction of a personality with the world. Indeed, as is seen from some vivid examples from poetry, short fiction, and novels, self-awareness and self-learning always occur through the perspective of ones social interactions, identification with nature, or compliance with societys rules. In this paper, the issue of self-understanding of the main characters in The Story of an Hour, Hills Like White Elephants, The Lottery, I, Too, and Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening will be analyzed.

A short story under the title The Story of an Hour by Kate Chopin is a powerful example of feminist literature. In this work, the author depicts the very process of the main heroines revelation of her inner self as it unfolds in the background of the alleged death of her husband. Chopin uses the opposition of male and female social roles and their understanding of freedom and dignity in a marriage to emphasize the dramatic collision of Mrs. Mallards grief and happiness about the obtained freedom. The main heroines self-awareness is portrayed through her own words when she states, Free! Body and soul free! (Chopin 14). It is through the freedom from the oppressive compliance with the patriarchal society that the main heroine perceives her personality.

Similar to Mrs. Mallard, Jig, the main character of Ernest Hemingways short story Hills Like White Elephants, also experiences a revelation about her inner self on the background of the relationship with a man. Like Chopin, Hemingway interprets the main heroines perception of her life and personality as it is defined or influenced by mens decisions. The abortion the couple in Hemingways short story discuss is the point where the mans and the girls opinions differ. Their difference in opinions and worldviews is manifested through the seeing of hills like white elephants.

The girl emphasizes this similarity but changes her mind when she notices that the man does not agree. Her conformity with his opinion becomes clear when she states, but if I do it, then it will be nice again if I say things are like white elephants, and youll like it? (Hemingway 231). Jig tries to express herself and make her own decision but fails and keeps her true feelings to herself, which is evident in the last scene. Indeed, after stating several times that she did not care about herself, Jig finally fails to confront the man and states that she is fine, although she is not.

Shirley Jacksons treatment of the main characters self-awareness in The Lottery is different from Hemingways and Chopins in a way that it shifts from marriage or relationship issues to a broader social context. Although both Jig and The Lotterys main heroine Tessie Hutchinson try and fail at confronting the circumstances by expressing their sincere views, Jacksons portrayal of self-understanding is more explicit. Indeed, Tessie does not keep her opinion to herself but speaks to the others to stop the deadly lottery. However, the glimpses of self-understanding are fragmented and uncertain because although she resists the decision, she said it as quietly as she could, trying to be true to herself but afraid of confrontation (Jackson 6). She tries to appeal to the fairness of the procedure, repeating, it isnt fair, it isnt right while the villagers stone her (Jackson 5). The author uses the opposition of an individual and society to emphasize the difficulty of a person to maintain the uniqueness of personality when influenced by others.

A different approach to the depiction of ones perception of oneself is taken by Hughes in the poem I, Too. The distinctive difference is in the confidence with which the speaker in the poem expresses the views on the unfairness of a life of a Black person in a dominant white society. The author uses first-person narration to present the main heros self-awareness explicitly. The poem is written using anaphora, where the first and the last lines repeat the phrase I, too, which represents the association of the speaker with the rest of the American society (Hughes par. 1-5). Despite being sent to eat in the kitchen When company comes, the speaker is confident about dignity and self-worth because the day will come when theyll see how beautiful I am and be ashamed (Hughes par. 2-4). Thus, it is through power, self-esteem, and understanding of self-worth that the main character in I, Too expresses self-understanding, unlike characters in Hills Like White Elephants and The Lottery.

Finally, there are several similarities and differences between the analyzed works and the way Robert Frost treats the main characters self-awareness in Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening. The key difference is in the utilization of nature as a context through which the lyrical hero identifies as a personality. Indeed, the speakers stopping by woods and observing them fill up with snow is a manifestation of the opposition between humans as part of nature and as part of society. This dualism is at the center of Frosts portrayal of the character self. The speaker says, the woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, implying that the unity with nature is undeniable but socially irrelevant. Indeed, although the speaker is capable of admiring the beauty of nature, the issue of ownership of the woods, the accessibility of property, and other socio-economic concerns prevail.

Conclusively, the analysis of the main characters self-awareness portrayal, as it is depicted by authors, demonstrates the central role of the context and the perspective from which a hero is characterized. Depending on the period in the history, and social and philosophical issues relevant to the time, the authors employed various approaches to depicting the characters self-awareness. The confrontation of female and male perspectives on life in The Story of An Hour and Hills Like White Elephants predetermine female characters self-perception and the dramatic outcomes of their revelations about themselves. On the other hand, the attempts to understand oneself through the perspective of society and either belongingness to it (as it is portrayed in I, Too) or not belongingness (as in The Lottery) were presented by Hughes and Jackson. A unique approach used by Frost appealed to nature as a part of human self-identification, which is oppressed by the need to comply with social norms. Thus, the discussion of the examples from literature demonstrates that the issues of self-awareness and self-understanding are central to literature and are emphasized by authors as a persistent existential concern that unfolds differently in different contexts.

References

Chopin, Kate. The Story of An Hour. Hemingway, Ernest. Hills Like White Elephants. VCU, 1894. Web.

Frost, Robert. Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening. Poets. n.d. Web.

Hemingway, Ernest. Hills Like White Elephants. Faculty Weber. n.d. Web.

Hughes, Langstone. I, Too. Poets. n.d. Web.

Jackson, Shirley. The Lottery. HCC, 1948. Web.

The problem of the behavior of the teenagers is the problem of the schools and their teachers, who should follow and correct this behavior. The book Nothing but the Truth by Avi is a good example of the conflict between teenager, whose behavior was awful, and a teacher who wanted to correct it without investigating the causes but sending the problem to Superintendent of the school. I agree with the second student who sees Philip as the wrongdoer because of a) his spoiled and uncontrollable behavior, b) the lies which created a lot of problems to Miss Narwin, an English teacher, and c) consequences as results of his action which ruined the teachers reputation.

His spoiled character and his behavior were awful because he did not want to study English class owning to the fact that Classic literature is boring and stupid. Philip Malloys attitude was directed by his bad upbringing and consideration Miss Narwin as so dumb because she did not understand his joke. Philip tried to protest the English studying by contradicting that he liked math, and that the exam he wanted to study for was math, Philip wanted to attract teachers attention, as if he wanted to say, Look at me! I am popular among the classmates without your English classes! The teenager psychology subscribes that to be cool is the main aim of his life, and that he knows a lot without these lessons. He made the clown of himself in the class with the only purpose  to irritate Miss Narwin. In spite of being intelligent Who was calling who, his spoiled character was demonstrated trough his laziness and rebellion to sacrifices for English class.

Another thing that becomes clear is that being a liar, Philip tried to slander his teacher in the eyes of the whole society. Philip Malloy sang the National anthem during Miss Narwins classes not due to the fact of his patriotism as he presented, but for the reason that he wanted to annoy her. Even though from very beginning Philip new the truth, he was tiring to manipulate Nati.

People should care about their personal spiritual development. Life without God is impossible as people should believe in something, as people should know that there is somebody who cares about them. Peoples faith in God helps them to lead a normal life or to cope with problems that appear. There are a lot of people who do not think about God and their spiritual development every day, but nevertheless, they turn to God at least once during their life. Faith in God is in our minds, and some people try to understand its nature and to develop their faith, but others do not think about it at all. There are a lot of people who devoted their lives to God, to the development of their souls, and to the understanding of the essence of these feelings: Jonathan Edwards and Elizabeth Ashbridge are among them.

Some Account of the Fore-Part of the Life of Elizabeth Ashbridge, written by her own hand many years ago, is one of the greatest autobiographies written in the XVII century, which dwells upon religious and gender roles in American cultural society. Leading a rather adventurous life, Elizabeth had the power to change and to devote her life to God. Having come to visit her Uncle, she went to the meeting, and after that, she concluded that he was a messenger sent of God to me, and with fervent Cries Desired I might be Directed a right and now Laid aside all Prejudice and set my heart open to receive the truth in the Love of it (Ashbridge p. 342).

Elizabeth Ashbridge did not have the desire to become a Quaker woman, and it may be said that she came to Quaker meetings because of curiosity. Listening to the speeches there, she was surprised and was sure that she would never be in her place. She was even pity of that woman and watched her with the feeling of ignorance. Some time had passed since Elizabeth Ashbridge decided to become the Quaker woman. It is crucial that since she became a Quaker woman, she was proud of it, and the whole book, with Elizabeth Ashbridges life description, shows that it was a long way to that and that her decision was weighed but not sudden (Ashbridge p.342).

Jonathan Edwardss Personal Narratives is the other nature of reading. The main aim of Jonathan Edwards life was to save his faith in Christ. Jonathan Edwards was born in a religious family, so his feeling could be understood, it has often appeared sweet to me, he writes, to be united to the Christ: to have Him for my head, and to be the member of His body: and to have the Christ for my teacher and prophet (Edwards p. 324).

Considering God closer and closer, Edwards began to understand how sinful people are and that it is impossible to cover those sins by actions during their life on the earth (Edwards pp. 326-327). Reading these pages, it is impossible to avoid thinking about the exaggeration of his sinfulness. But Edwards does not think so, and it never came to his mind that his thoughts and beliefs could be rated as an exaggeration.

In conclusion, both writings are of different nature. Elizabeth Ashbridge describes her way to religion, her spiritual development, and coming to the understanding that religion is very important in peoples lives as it fills their lives with faith and hope. Jonathan Edwards, vice versa, was brought up in a religious family and did not have to search for religion, but he faces the problem that all people are more sinful than they may appear at first sight. This problem troubles him as he did not think about it when he was young. These works are very different, but at the same time, they are similar as they depict a persons way to God and their existence with God.

Works Cited

1. Ashbridge, Elizabeth. Some Account of the Fore-Part of the Life of Elizabeth Ashbridge in Heath Anthology of American Literature Concise Edition, pp. 339-349.
2. Edwards, Jonathan. Personal Narratives in Heath Anthology of American Literature Concise Edition, pp. 317-327.

The story begins in Ancient Greece, in the times of Gods and Heroes. It starts in a small town at the edge of the country. People here grow olives, catch fish, and hunt deer to sell their produce to bigger cities. Here the main heroine Chrosta lives on her tiny farm.

She is a young Greek woman, dressed in a simple light gown, with her dark, messy hair brushed away from her face. Her hands are strong and covered in dirt from all the hard work she does around the farm. She feels connected to the Earth, and whenever she works with plants, she can always make them flourish. Everything happens in due time, her mother used to say, and the girl took that advice to heart. Her neighbor, Maramenos, is a man of her age. With golden curls and bright eyes, he catches every young womans glance. He comes from a wealthy farming family but never has to work a day in his life. His familys servants do the hard work for them at the farm. The young man has a sharp mind and even a sharper tongue. When he can, he sweet-talks his way out of work, and when Maramenos cannot, he cheats.

One day something unexpected happens: both Chrosta and Maramenos see Demeter approach them in their dreams. She tells them there is a task: and if they succeed, she will bless them immensely. Both agree: Chrosta out of devotion and Maramenos out of pride. She tells them to come to a small shrine in the middle of the wilderness and pray there. The next day they leave, and dryads and satyrs follow them on their way to the shrine.

Maramenos is intrigued, but Chrosta ignores them. Eventually, they reach the shrine at a brisk of dawn. The young woman sits down and prays to the Gods, but Maramenos falls asleep under a big trees shade. Eventually, Demeter appears in front of them at the shrine. She tells them that she is soon descending into the underworld and cannot protect her favorite forest from the cold of winter. Trees die when the snow comes, and then she needs to replant and regrow them the following spring. It is a tiresome cycle, and it pains her to see forests withered and dead.

Demeter gives each of them a bucket of paint and a brush. The Goddess tells them to paint every leaf on every tree in this forest by the end of autumn. Demeter blesses the paint to let trees sleep rather than die in winter, but only if it is applied to each and single leaf three times. The trees will lose their leaves, so the cold will not bother them. She divides the forest in two for each hero. Maramenos boasts that he will paint every single leaf before autumn ends. Chrosta takes the paint and promises to fulfill her duty. Demeter tells them that she will be back in spring and then disappears.

Chrosta starts painting, but the man tosses the brush aside. He has a plan: instead of coloring each leaf three times, he rips them off until all his trees are barren. The heroine frowns at his tomfoolery but keeps doing her work: she must cover every bit in the paint. She painstakingly moves her brush, never shifting her attention. Although she is not a painter, this feels familiar to her, and so she paints leaves with the same determination and patience she attends her crops. Meanwhile, Maramenos runs with the dryads and satyrs, dancing and drinking the day away. Days fly by, and winter grows closer until it is the last day of autumn.

All the trees Chrosta painted orange she then painted red, and after brown. Her hands are covered in bruises and scratches, but her face shines with a smile. The young man panics and grabs the bucket of his paint. He splashes it on the leaves under his trees, and they haphazardly change their colors. The air grows colder, and first snowflakes start falling: it is Boreas, bringer of winter. He flies through the forest and blows leaves off Chrostas trees. Maramenos laughs at her, saying that all the work she did was for nothing, as the wind did all of it anyway. The young woman shakes her head and says, Everything happens in due time. They return home and wait for the spring to come.

When the snow melts away, they come back. Trees that Chrosta so thoroughly painted are still alive with young green buds growing on their branches; meanwhile, Maramenos trees are all grey, cracked, and dead. A bright light shines upon them, and Demeter returns with her daughter. When Demeter looks at Maramenos, her voice breaks with anger: For your smart wits and cheating ways, I shall give you a place you can always call home.

Demeter then turns and smiles at Chrosta: For your hard work and honesty, I shall let you stay by my side and color the leaves every autumn. The Goddess turns Maramenos into an earthworm, so he may forever find recluse under the trees he doomed. Dryads dress Chrosta in a beautiful gown and embed her hair with leaf-like gems. Her hands are still covered in dirt: it is a sign of pride, not shame.

From then on, trees no longer die in the winter when Demeter descended into the underworld. Instead, a young a hardworking woman paints them each year to help them sleep, and a cheating Maramenos has to live under roots to this day. Cheaters never prosper, and hard work is the proper way to happiness.