Category: Literature Review

The story ‘The Swimmer’ by John Cheever is described as the swimming journey of Neddy in the neighborhood, as an active and optimistic father and husband. “It was one of those midsummer Sundays when everyone sits around saying, ‘I drank too much last night’”. Despite joining a cocktail party, he agreed that he would swim his way home through different swimming pools. Throughout his journey, it changes him from a young man to an aged, poor man whose life is in a terrible condition. When he arrives at his home, he discovers that his children and his wife have left him. The illusions he has created about his life are taken away during Neddy’s journey, and the reality behind his society is realized in the process. Cheever shows the indignity of an unquestioned life by revealing the tragedy of Neddy’s life. The failure of Needy’s presence leads to his own death. However, I believe Neddy’s considerably fictional life reflects the hardships that most middle-aged individuals go through.

In the beginning of the story ‘The Swimmer’, John Cheever draws readers by understanding and sharing common values. The story starts by “one of those Sunday afternoons where everyone is drunk’; however, the reader may not really understand what a Sunday afternoon is like than the belief of the narrator does. The purpose of his first paragraph is perhaps the main theme of Cheever’s role: alcohol. Everyone in town on Sunday is complaining of having drunk too much from the cocktail party the night before. Although, the neighbors gather and met at the Westerhazys’ pool to drink again. The author believes that wealthy people hang around and enjoy by relieving themselves of their problems. Neddy seems to live in a fantasy world and chooses to drink more, where he makes friends and seeks to swim around the neighborhood. Alcohol is an escape path, lies as a danger to the life of Neddy because he believes that “whiskey would…carry him through the last of his journey”. Readers realize that alcohol is an essential part of the characters’ lives and is an integral role in the neighborhood. However, the widespread intake of alcohol reflects of time and Neddy’s feeling of unhappiness.

While the story’s actions cover many hours at the most, Neddy appears to age rapidly. The reader is affected by Neddy’s strength, persistence, and youthful energy as he begins his adventure along what he considers the Lucinda River (named for his wife), and he becomes an adventurer and legendary hero. The author tells us the pools through which Neddy swims as he makes his way home reflects periods of time through which Neddy crosses. A storm comes through and Neddy seeks safety. He notices when the rain crosses, “the force of the wind had stripped a maple of its red and yellow leaves and scattered them over the grass and water”. Neddy notices the changing of the seasons where he is unable to slow down his aging process. The changing seasons make Neddy doubt his understanding of the passing of time and rethink the things he ignored or decided to forget about in his life. Needy feels the world surrounding his change as he begins to swim. “Since it was midsummer the tree must be blighted, and yet he felt a peculiar sadness at this sign of autumn” shows that Needy has problems understanding a sense of time. For instance, “What had become of the constellations of midsummers”, suggests Neddy has been looking at a different time period. Overall, the hardest moment for Neddy comes when he feels his energy and optimism fading away.

In the story, ‘The Swimmer’ by John Cheever, the protagonist, Neddy, points out that he has watched time pass through his hands and realizes his true age. Neddy lives in a world of misunderstanding about what is actually going on in his life. Neddy actively leaves out the “misfortunes” of his life for many years, allowing him to lose those memories. After accomplishing his journey, Neddy eventually arrives tired at his house only to find it lonely. “He shouted, pounded on the door tried to force it with his shoulder, and then, looking in at the windows, saw that the place was empty”. Neddy finds out he has lost his money, his children, and he no longer lives in his home. He attempted to recover everything that he lost but ended up with failure, allowing the reader to question whether the action was epic or ridiculous. For so long. Merrill had lived in a fantasy world where he didn’t even realize what happened to his family and house. Although, by drinking and partying he attempted to hide his troubles, but he cannot get away from them. The conclusion makes his unhappiness know, as Neddy is abandoned with nothing but bits of memories that he has worked too hard to erase. At the end, Merrill is left with no family, house, and no future.

At the beginning of the story, Neddy began his journey youthful and enthusiastic who feels happy with his life and is treated with respect by his peers. Neddy Merrill seems to live in a dream world but is not. Therefore, in the story as he drinks alcohol excessively, parties, and continues to float around the neighborhood. He is an old man, unhappy man who has lost his way badly. Overall, it concludes the protagonist on his journey back home struggles through the impacts of swimming, friends, family, and alcohol in different settings.

Have you ever had an impression of an individual to have it then proven wrong? In the short story, ‘The Tell-Tale Heart’, by Edgar Allan Poe, we respond to the narrative of the protagonist with a variety of emotions. As he begins his narrative, we feel alienated from him because we cannot identify with him or his concerns. As the story develops and we understand his predicament more we begin to sympathize with him because we realize he is ill. However, by the denoument we have a very mixed reaction to this disturbed individual.

During the exposition of the short story, we feel completely alienated form the narrator because we cannot identify at all with his disturbed narrative persona. Narrated in the first person, the narrative is clearly unreliable because the narrator has such a distorted sense of reality. The use of repetition in his speech, “nervous very, very dreadfully nervous” suggests that he is in a highly agitated state and that what he says may not be true. This is reinforced when he tells us that “I heard all things in the heaven…”. He is asking us to believe that his sense of hearing is so ‘acute’ that he can hear things that other mortals cannot which makes us instantly suspicious. Whilst we understand that this is a symptom of his madness, he in complete denial and actually argues that this is a sign of sanity. He challenges us with a rhetorical question, asking us, “How, then, am I mad?”. Poe uses dramatic irony here in that we understand what the narrator does not. His attempt to manipulate us into believing his account does nothing more than raise our suspicions of his motives. His madness is then developed throughout the short story, exemplified through his hearing of the beating heart and obsession with the eye.

However, we begin to feel rather more sympathetic towards him as the story unfolds and we realize that he may well not be in control of his actions. Firstly, he does not sensationalize the murder: most emphasis is on the rising tension of the narrative as he impresses upon us, he obsession with the eye and his need to end its power over him. His treatment of the actual murder is concise and simply stated, “I dragged him to the floor, and pulled the heavy bed over him”. Given that the rest of the story is given over to his paranoia this account of the murder suggest that the old man’s death was a by-product of the narrator’s obsession.

The narrator is obsessed with the old man’s ‘vulture eye’. Vultures are creatures who prey on those who are nearing death which suggests that the narrator sees threat against himself in the old man. This is a manifestation of his delusion therefore we have to empathize with him, rather than castigate. He goes on to describe this eye as “pale, with a film over it” which suggests that the old man has distorted vision owing to a cataract. However, his continual return to the eye suggests that the eye is a symbol of his own distorted vision. Just as the old man cannot see what is around him clearly, the narrator cannot comprehend what is happening around him. This lack of clarity is a symptom of his mental condition therefore we do empathize.

Another reason why we sympathize with the narrator are his references to his own ill health. In the exposition he refers to his ‘disease’, and as the story progresses, he reveals “the ringing became more distinct” which would imply he is suffering from tinnitus, a condition which is likely to drive any sane man mad. He also discusses the terror of the old man on finding him in his room, stating “I knew it well”, which tells us that he himself has suffered with night terrors and paranoia. He is clearly a poor soul and this helps us to consider his situation with more patience.

Another indication that this is a man who is not himself is his inability to measure time. As he narrates the story in flashback, we become aware that the time frame that he presents is inaccurate. He tells us how “I placed my hand upon the heart and held it there many minute”, which is not what we would expect from a man who has a limited time to dismember and hide a body. He also emphasizes the time he stands at the old man’s door nightly which again seems unlikely, particularly when he states “for a whole hour he did not moves a muscle”. His time frame fails to convince us. He kills the man sometime after 12 midnight, murders the old man, dismembers the body and manages to hide the body prior to the arrival of the police at 4am.

However, although we have a sympathetic response, in part, towards the narrator, we are also conflicted because of the cunning he demonstrates. He makes us well aware of his outward kindness towards the old man, stating, “I was never kinder to the old man”. He even goes as far as declaring, “I loved the old man”, however, ironically, he is planning the death of this old man. He even talks of his ‘triumph’ which reminds us that he is monstrous in both deed and act. In addition to this, the murder is clearly premeditated. After dismembering the body, he laughs when reflecting on the mess, stating, “A tub had caught all – ha! ha!”. If this had been a crime of passion, he would not have had the appropriate equipment nearby. It is near the end of the story however we become truly conflicted. His guilt overwhelms him, causing him to hear things that are not real, “the noise increased steadily”. It is possible that his conscience will not allow him to move on from his hideous crime. The policemen in the room “chatted pleasantly, and smiled”, which tells us that the narrator is hallucinating. By the end of the story, he believes he hears the “beating of his hideous heart” and screams out his guilt. The heart, normally symbolic of the emotional center of an individual, is a symbol of his guilt which grows until he can no longer withstand it and he screams out, proclaiming his guilt to all who can hear. So, whilst he does demonstrate great cunning his desire to reveal all suggests he is not a natural murderer which causes us to look at him differently.

In conclusion, our reaction towards the narrator changes as he reveals more of his story. We move from feeling disgusted by his enjoyment of retelling his gruesome tale to sympathy as we begin to realize that he is unwell and probably not in full control of his urges. But by the end of the story, we feel conflicted because although he is defeated by his guilty conscience in the end, he demonstrates great cunning throughout which prevents his redemption in our eyes. If the story teaches us anything it is not to a judge a situation without careful consideration. It would have been very easy to dismiss this narrator as a criminal however through a more cautious examination we question his culpability. The story shows that events are often more complicated than we at first thought and that people are often even more complex.

By simply reading the titles of Mary Oliver’s poems you can see how she connects with nature, not only nature its self but with the characteristics of nature such as animals and seasons. Mary Oliver’s poems are titled after an animal with a characteristic of nature for instance ‘Turtle’, ‘Black Snake’, ‘The Snow Cricket’ and so on. Her main focus is nature and everything involved with nature. She portrays nature’s characteristics with personification, metaphors, similes, and symbols to describe the way she sees things as well as her feelings by describing them through poetry. I think that she connects to nature by giving life to these characteristics of nature such as trees, leaves, and describing them with human characteristics. Eco-criticism was shown in each of these poems Oliver describes both characteristics of nature and humans, she puts them together which I think she does this with the purpose to show the reader the link that there is between humans and nature and the importance of it as well. She uses the animals to describe humans and from the way that they think and act.

When reading the poem ‘Ghost’ right at the beginning she gives the animal the characteristics of a beast to refer to humans Mary Oliver mentions: “Where so many millions of powerful bawling beasts/ lay down on the earth and die/ it is hard to tell now/ what’s bone, and what merely/ was once” (Stands 2, Line 2-6). I personally see this as her referring to people with power in the society/ government because of the words that she uses. She describes these ‘beasts’ as “powerful bawling beast”. The rest of the stand makes me realize that what she is trying to say is that when we die it doesn’t matter the power that we held or how important we were because at the end when we are 6ft underground we won’t even be recognizable. The title that she gives this poem ‘Ghost’ also has to do with nature. If we look closely, it is common to connect spirituality with nature many people tend to make a connection between these two. Throughout this whole poem she gives animals the description of humans later in the poem, she mentions a birth of an animal and she describes the animal giving birth “with the tenderness of a woman,/ a cow gives birth” (Stands 7, Lines 56). I think that she is trying to let us see how it does not matter whether it is an animal or human who is giving birth they have that maternal instinct and the tenderness to care for their child. By giving us this point of view, we are able to see how humans as well as animals go through the same cycles of life such as death and birth.

The speaker gives us a clear perspective of how we should consider nature, and she describes it as kingdoms, in the poem ‘Other Kingdoms’ which is a small quote she describes how each characterization of nature should be looked upon as kingdoms. The speaker gives an example and describes the trees as if they have their own kingdom. I can see how she sees each character whether it is an animal or a characteristic as a kingdom. For instance, Mary Oliver mentions: “Consider the other kingdoms./ the trees, for example,/with their mellow-surroundings/titles: oak, aspen, willow” (Lines 1-3). According to my understanding these are types of trees, this helps me to visualize all types of flowers as another kingdom as well as animals, rocks, rivers, creeks, etc., as their own kingdoms. In a way, Mary Oliver is letting us see nature is a kingdom in the middle of other kingdoms.

The third poem I would like to talk about is called ‘The Meeting’. I had to read this poem twice because I did not understand it, but after re-reading it I came to the conclusion that this poem is based on an animal giving birth. The speaker describes how it is time for this animal to give birth and refers to the baby as a “creature” (Line 8) which lets us know that the speaker is referring to an animal. Mary Oliver also mentions: “The secret slippery package/ drops into the weeds” (Lines 3-4) this gives us the idea that it is an animal in the wild. I personally believe that the speaker is referring to a giraffe, because of how she describes the characteristics of the animal. Marly Oliver mentions: “She leans her long neck and tongues it/ between slack with exhaustion” (Lines 5-6). Going based on the description I think that Oliver is referring to a giraffe. We can see in this poem how Oliver uses words as “package” (Line 3) which has nothing to do with nature but that sword symbolizes the “creature” (Line 8) in the mother’s womb. I think that this poem is based on symbolism the description of the poem is a symbol of what a mother goes through while giving birth Oliver, later on, describes the animal as a woman Oliver mentions: “She is the most beautiful woman/ I have ever seen” (Lines 15-16). Obviously here the speaker is referring to the animal with human characteristics. I personally think that she is referring to the animal, not a human that gave birth in the middle of weeds because logistically speaking that is quite dangerous for a human mother as for the child. As I mentioned before Oliver lets the reader see how animals and humans are somewhat alike, these two species go through events in life that mark our entrance into this world and our goodbye as we head out of it.

As I went along reading Mary Oliver’s poems, I was able to see that she is obsessed with the fact that animals resemble characteristics as humans for instance speaking. In the poem ‘Coyote in the Dark, Coyote Remembered’, Oliver describes the scene that she is in by using the word “autumn” (Line 8) which is another word for fall. The speaker describes how she came across a coyote and the speaker describes a coyote as a scary creature Oliver describes it as “the darkest thing” (Line 1) with “a brace of teeth” (Line 4). The speaker describes this animal as something scary a dangerous creature but the speaker then mentions “to be granted this secret/ that the coyotes, walking together/ can talk together/ for I thought, what else could it be?” (Lines 14-17). Oliver believed that the coyotes were talking together which obviously it is not possible but we could also see how the speaker uses her imagination and even though later on, she realizes that it was two women who were walking in the forest she is mesmerized as to the fact that what if coyotes could speak.

The speaker also uses similes in her poems and we are able to see this in the poem ‘Carrying the Snake to the Garden’ at the beginning of the poem where Oliver writes: “It coiled itself in a corner and watched me with eyes like two little stars” (Lines 5-8). Here we could see how the speaker refers to the snake’s eyes as little stars which let us as readers visualize that the eyes of the snake must be small and bright. The way that we could tell this is a simile is by the speaker using the word like because she is describing the characteristics of the snake in a way that we could use imagery to see what the speaker is talking about. The speaker then moves on to describe the snake, which Oliver describes as “like a running shoelace” (Line 15). By the words that the speaker uses we could imagine the snake as a shoelace and the movement that the snake does as the speaker tries to get ahold of it to take it outside. She also uses a metaphor and gives the snake the characteristics of a river Oliver mentions “it was going to flow/up my leg” (Lines 31-32). This shows us how she transcends her metaphors, similes, personifications, and symbols to nature she uses its characteristics to allow us to also make and visualize the connection that she is making with nature.

I personally loved the poems the way she used the personifications, similes, and metaphors helped me to take a picture of each poem. For instance, in the poem about the coyote, I could imagine her in the entrance of a forest with the wind blowing and all different colored leaves swirling around in the dark. I can see how by the words that she used she was quite terrified but when she hears whispers and believes that the coyotes are speaking it seems that all of the fear that she felt when away. I took this part of the poem quite personally because I took it as how we as humans tend to always assume things just by hearing. For instance, since she had just seen a coyote and right after heart chattering, she assumed it was the coyote. Also, another thing that I loved about her poems is the connection between humans and animals that she shows. It was quite interesting to see how Oliver describes the birth of an animal in the poem ‘The Meeting’. Not only that but it got me thinking how animals go through the same process as humans although there are some animals who do not carry their baby for 9 months, but we still tend to go through the same process. I like how Mary Oliver uses nature and animals to describe scenarios or experiences and in a way she mixes the experience of a human and animal who is going through the same process as I mentioned about the animal giving birth and at the end makes it one. I also like her intake and her point of view on how everything in a forest is its own kingdom. I take that as her letting the reader know that we are all different we each are our own kingdom in this world. I like how overall she uses nature and animals to relate to humans. It is quite interesting how she was able to tie up these three characteristics and write about them. Normally the poems that I read the speakers use animal or nature characteristics to describe humans or a scene but Mary Oliver did the complete opposite! I personally thought it was quite interesting the way she expressed herself. What I also liked was how some of the poems do not have a rhythm but the words itself still make the poems have a deeper meaning I truly enjoyed reading her poems and they also inspired me.

‘The Moment Before the Gun Went Off’ is a story written by Nadine Gordimer. It is a narrative of a white farmer named Marais Van der Vyver, whose gun accidentally shoots and kills his young black man farmer, Lucas. The story’s plot is strongly influenced by the apartheid policy, the segregation of whites and non-whites and the white supremacy for 50 years in South Africa.

The story is about how people perceive the issue regarding the death of a young black man in connection to the status of government in South Africa. In the story, it states that children play a fatal game with the use of their father’s revolver, and guns are domestic objects, but it never happens to be reported overseas. On the other hand, in the case of Marais Van der Vyver, he knows that his, will travel around the world. It is not only because he is a white South African, but also, he is running as a Party’s parliamentary candidate for the district. He utterly knows that in spite of telling the truth that the death is accidental; activists will use the incident as a political issue against him. This will guarantee that his reputation will be defamed. He will be used as an epitome of white brutality against non-whites, since there a lot of previous cases of brutality against farm workers.

The story presents this scenario: “When Marais Van der Vyver arrived at the police station with the dead man. He was trembling. He was crying and his snot ran onto his hands like a dirty kid”. This scenario has simply shown a depiction of a father’s grief and mourn toward his child. This is a personal issue of Marais Van der Vyver to the death of a young black man. He cannot tell the press about it to make the issue stop, since apartheid policy does not allow sexual relations between white and black South Africans and so as having a child between the aforementioned races.

It is evident at the end of the story that the writer has disclosed the personal issue of the protagonist. Lucas is not just Marais Van der Vyver farmer’s boy, but his son. He does not only keep it to the press, but also to Lucas. Though, he has not told Lucas about it, but he really loves Lucas and the moment before the gun went off is a moment of their excitement and love for each other. This also shows that Marais Van der Vyver is not a racist and not all white South Africans are in favor of the government policy.

Moreover, there are other scenario which justifies that Marais Van der Vyver is the father of the dead man. He has provided money for the funeral and has paid payments to a burial society, so that the corpse will not go in boxwood. In addition, the dead man’s mother is the daughter of the peasants who worked for old Van der Vyver. And so it happens, Marais Van der Vyver likes her and they have had a child. He and the dead man’s mother never end up staying together, since apartheid affects the social life of all South Africans including the prohibition of marriage between white and non-white. They also never verbally communicate with each other in the funeral, but just a mere stare as a means of communication. Since the apartheid limits the contact between the two races. Though, it is just a mere stare, but the feeling is the same when Marais Van der Vyver and Lucas have had the moment before the gun went off.

To sum it up, the story depicts a picture of action-restraint and complicacy of human relationship between whites and non-whites in South Africa due to apartheid policy. It deprives non-white Africans’ power in the government, when the white government strengthened the existing policy about racial segregation. This justifies that the apartheid policy affects people’s reaction about relationship and incident like the experience of Marais Van der Vyver to his son, Lucas, and he and the dead man’s mother.

“This is what it means to say Phoenix, Arizona.” By using background stories and third-person narratives, it introduces readers to tense relationships and seeks self-identity from the perspective of Native Americans. Alexei showed the audience the personal conflict and broken relationship between loved ones leading to the guidance, understanding, and guidance of the internal struggle. The author encourages others to ask important questions about themselves and others, allowing individuals to gain clarity and insight through self-reflection. In this way, the reader is able to identify the characters and culture embedded in the entire work. By observing the tension between the character and organizational structure of the work, people can not only learn more about the local people but also learn more about themselves.

The story was introduced around one of the main characters, Victor, who received news of his father’s death. The reader can feel the impact of his father’s death on Victor. Although he has not seen his father or talked to his father for many years, ‘there is still hereditary pain, which is as real and direct as a fracture.’ On the second page, the reader will introduce Thomas Builds-The-Fire. Like his father, Victor and Thomas are also very nervous. Although Victor’s relationship with his father became nervous due to giving up, his relationship with Builds-The-Fire took place through a drunken struggle. Scholars further incited the incident, saying that ‘the relationship between Victoria and Thomas is tense due to adolescence.’ This shows the predicament that Victor faced in the past. This includes peer pressure, his father’s negligence, and his need to adapt. It provides guidance and an example of his loss of self-identity.

This story shows how the indigenous people on the reservation do not give up their culture. This is reflected in the fact that Thomas likes to tell stories and listen to stories. In addition, Victor experienced a difficult period of trying to maintain their traditions while burying the dead. It caught my attention, how the author emphasized the ridiculousness of celebrating July 4, because ‘as Thomas said, it is not like their independence.’

The essence of the story is that although Thomas’s mother died at the time of childbirth, and he was raised by his grandmother, he knew that Victor had failed in the absence of his father’s absence. Thomas’s money and companionship are freely given to Victor to take care of him in this material passage to adulthood. The story ends with two young people from Washington State. After their long journey, Victor handed over half of his father’s ashes to Thomas, both of whom planned to return the ashes to the river in Spokane Falls and continue to add chapters and retell the story that Thomas had already told.

Composed as a literary novel that narrates through a legend of redemption and inscribed in the context of Ancient Troy is “Ransom” by David Malouf, which unravels how changes come to the reception of individuals in worlds. Such can also be said of the film “Invictus”, the two texts applaud the power of a changed perception as well as its impact on an individual, an institution, and a country. In addition, Malouf and Eastwood’s intention also coincides with the fact that external inspiration has internally engendered personal growth with others.

Moreover, Ransom and Invictus elucidate the liberating power of forgiveness. The texts also ex Malouf and Eastwood in agreement on the point that external inspirations conspire to produce a resultant change within the interior of the individual. In Invictus, the director uses the median shot when a door of the restroom is thrown beer cans at by Springboks team member features the guilt of Pienaar and his team of disappointing their fans with their performance. This is later demonstrated in the film with the upbeat soundtrack along with a rendered theme of jubilance, it outlines every player of Springboks tries their utmost at full tilt throughout the match against all Blacks. Nevertheless, Mandela’s external enlightenment that motivates the Springboks “to do their best” has consequently occurred to Pienaar and his team the necessity for them to transform their “unprepared and arrogant” attitude for the establishment of a “rainbow nation” into a similar vein, the theme also suggests in the novel Ransom such as Achilles kneels to Priam and mistaking himself. Achilles’ eagerness to change and for others to rescue him from being devoured by his grief to revenge is unleashed by the advent of Priam, which internally bridges both aspects of his personality to trigger a change within him. Therefore, Ransom and Invictus intertwine at the ideology that outer enlightenment is what can inspire a drastic change in the individual’s inner belief.

A change in attitude also allows individuals to rise above the limited, immediate present to have a vision. In the film Invictus, Mandela’s vision is exemplified by the change in his imagination to change the Springboks from a symbol of apartheid, a crestfallen loser to a symbol of reconciliation and a world champion. The film also applauds Mandela’s ambition is not limited to a victory in the sports field. His pursuit and design are more focused on uniting his people, black and white through the attraction of sports and projecting an image of reconciliation in front of the world to themselves with Mandela’s goal and the destiny of South Africa as “a rainbow nation country.” Similarly, in the novel Ransom, Priam’s change in attitude eventually provides him with a vision of approaching Achilles as a father and commoner. As Troy’s living and breathing symbol. King Priam realizes that the Trojans need a fixed icon as a symbol of stability and unity. Thus, Priam acknowledges his role as a king. “an abstract of the lands he represents, their living map”. Whilst he is aware of the importance of the figurehead, he realizes he is in fact a vulnerable old man and he constantly worries about revealing his true humanity.

Moreover, both texts illustrate that the power of forgiveness is liberating for every character which makes them change their departure from revenge to forgiveness. In the film “Invictus”, The theme can be found in Mandela’s words to his bodyguard Jason and Linga to accept the white staff who used to work with “de Klerk administration”. Jason’s tense facial expression as well as his words “am I under arrested” and “not long ago, they tried to kill us”. Nevertheless, Mandela adopts a fatherly stance to preach to him and points out that a “rainbow nation starts here”, comparing ‘forgiveness’ to ‘the most powerful weapon’ and asserting that “reconciliation starts here.” Thus, Jason has learned to forgive and his change reflects the critical importance of forgiveness. In addition, in the film, Mandela as a father figure appeals to his humanity, and highlights the power of forgiveness in its ability to “liberate the soul” and “remove fear” as “a powerful weapon”. Similarly, Malouf also portrays forgiveness as an outcome of liberating and change in perspective. Unlike the film Invictus, which uses more language techniques, such as the inner voice and dialogue to explore the theme. Through a minor character, the writer commends Somax’s courage in overcoming the grief over the loss of a son and forgives his mule Beauty whose loss of footing “knocked him sideways” and causes his death. Somax’s natural response of revenge, as he “felt like punching her”, however, Somax is quelled by the knowledge that there is no “good of that” and vengeance would “not bring him back”. Hence, Somax chooses to accept the tragedy as part of his life and forgive Beauty rather than wallow in feelings of resentment and self-pity. Additionally, Somax’s denial of vengeance spurs Priam away from his uncontrolled vitriol as he realizes that like Beauty.” It is in Achilles “nature to kill”. This acts as a catalyst for Priam to transcend his past mentality and come to an understanding of the futility of revenge.

In a general sense, women are supposed to share the same rights as men; however, throughout the centuries, women have suffered under men’s control. Men have been viewing women as their personal property in varying degrees, using their power to create a pattern that shapes women‌’s characters in our society and to create rules for women to follow. Under such a societal structure, there is a dominant power in the male social class that has caused women’s rights to be oppressed in many situations. Despite the women’s rights movements over the years, which promote gender equality, women are still often bound by the public’s expectations. Not all women want to be united to fight for their rights; some often restrain themselves at a significant level. Furthermore, based on the idea that women are “naturally weaker,” many believe that they should not enjoy the same rights as men do. However, these arguments usually focus on a woman’s physical structure. For instance, contemporary media has the tendency to exaggerate a woman’s unstable physical conditions, such as a sudden pregnancy that affects her working abilities. Perceiving such an image, society suspends women’s progressive, professional positions.

Women’s roles have been discussed for decades, and there are two main points of view. One explanation focuses on the characters of the male-dominated society. The other aspect is the oppression of women as closely connected to the relationships between men and women. For instance, men can use their role in relationships, such as those of lovers, husbands, and fathers, to force women to follow the pattern that men have created. From different perspectives, “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” by Joyce Carol Oates, “Marks” by Linda Pastan, “You Fit into Me” by Margaret Atwood, and “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, all convey the same message about the social constraints that women are trapped in and about the way men use their power to force women to follow their idea of how a woman is supposed to be. Women suffer oppression from various levels in society.

This oppression is ubiquitous. It comes from their family, their partners, and even the entire civilization that has high standards for women. Women have been expected to stay at home, be servants, take care of the family, and engage in jobs that are appropriate for them. For example, they are expected to be teachers, secretaries, and housewives. Women’s social roles are limited and restricted, even if the gap in gender inequality is gradually narrowing, and support for gender equality is already more politically correct. However, many women still have a pessimistic attitude towards the future and believe that society will continue oppress them. As long as the different physical structures of the body still exist, women wait for the day when gender equality will come. In her essay about the social identity of women, Carolyn Z. Enns analyzes how women’s social identity was built. She writes, “Women’s identity is built on the assumption that psychological growth and distress are best understood within a biopsychosocial, ecological framework that emphasizes how the personal becomes political or how personal lives are shaped by social context and culture”(1). Her work draws attention to a significant social problem. She discusses how women’s self-awareness has been affected by the environment. Moreover, she points out that many women accept how society treats them, follow the pattern of how to be “good women,” and force other women to follow the rules. Therefore, women do not want to be united to fight for their rights and often restrain themselves to a significant degree. How women are treated in their families profoundly affects their personality development.

This is especially important because the family environment is the first place where people come into contact with others after birth. In a research paper about Joyce Carol Oates’ story, “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” Stephen Slimp listed three female characters that are related to Connie: Connie’s mother, Connie’s sister, June, and Connie herself. They have very different personalities in the story which creates different statuses at home. Connie’s mother is a typical American housewife. She does not have any outstanding personality characteristics, and only appears as the image of the mother of Connie, the protagonist in the story. She does not have any strengths to make herself independent in society, which is why she has to stay at home and serve other members of the family. She is also a defender of male authority, obeying the standards set by men for women. Society believes the role of women is to stay at home like Connie’s mother. Even if a woman goes out to work, there are only a few jobs that are appropriate for women. As a faithful obeyer of male authority, Connie’s mother kept criticizing Connie’s rebellion in front of Connie’s father.

Her passiveness under male control made Connie feel dissatisfied. Not only that, but Connie’s mother also appeared as the image of Connie’s repressor on the road to freedom and happiness. She used to be young and beautiful, but now, she is old and her daughter, Connie, is young and beautiful. Steven Slimp writes, “As the story opens, Connie is shallow and vapid, believing, among other things, that the height of human suffering is the annoyance she feels at her mother’s chiding. So shallow are her emotions that she responds to her mother’s corrections by saying that she would like to die, that is, literally to lose her breath” (1). Connie’s youth and beauty are a sharp contrast to her aging body. Connie’s mother, under the leadership of male authority, never realized her obedient personality and passive situation. Not only is she satisfied with her position, but she also sets the standard for Connie so that her daughter is in the same condition. When Connie does not meet this standard, Connie’s mom uses her mother’s role to insult Connie. She is not united with her female compatriots but devalues them to highlight herself. Her weakness and passiveness turned her into a victim of male desire and intensity. Women are trapped in the mother’s character.

The whole of society and the fathers are pushing the responsibility of raising children to the role of a mother. In her poem, “Marks,” Linda Pastan uses metaphors to emphasize the assessment of mothers and the pattern created by society. The protagonist is a mother whose husband and children criticize and grade her on what she does. Her husband evaluates her at dinner: “My husband gave me an A for last night’s supper.” When she fails to iron, she says, “My ironing is incomplete” (1008). The husband even scores his wife in bed. These scores and the pressure that her family puts on her lead to a negative ending. The speaker metaphorically “drops out.” The action of dropping out represents her feeling that she cannot deal with the pressure anymore. The pressure of being graded in all aspects of life is intolerable. As mothers, women are expected to stay at home to take care of their families. Society constructs an image of a good mother, creating standards that women should meet by doing different tasks and providing multiple services. Mothers do not have the option of not loving their families. Women are not qualified to be exhausted, but not all women fit in this position. The highly anticipated mother pattern oppresses mothers who have different personalities and identities.

The mother standard is not suitable for all women, and women are often forced to live in an environment that judges them all the time.The speaker in the poem may be the author herself. Like the speaker, Pakistan is both a woman and a mother. The speaker may also represent a woman who is tired of being judged. Indeed, women’s passiveness and ignorance was one pressing issue in the family. For example, because of Connie’s sister’s ignorance, Connie felt no one in the family could understand her. This indirectly caused her rebellious personality. An essay writes about “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been?” by A. R. Coulthard.

The work discusses family relationships by analyzing the problems between Connie and her family members. The author illustrates the ignorance of Connie’s sister. She writes, “Connie’s relationship with her sister, June, also seems to be rather nonexistent. Through Connie’s perspectives, June ‘was so plain and chunky and steady that Connie had to hear her praised all the time by her mother and her mother’s sisters’ ” (250). Because June has a lot in common with her mother, coupled with her passiveness and obedience, she is seen by her mother as a better woman than Connie. However, she doesn’t care about the unfortunate situation of her sister, Connie. What she did was not to protect or help Connie get out of the predicament, but to care less about her affairs and avoid communicating with her. If June had helped Connie, the tragedy would have never taken place. Connie is a girl with two sides to her personality. David K. Gratz mentions in his work, “Connie is shallow and vapid, believing among other things that the height of human suffering is the annoyance she feels at her mother’s chiding” (2). At home, Connie is a rebel against the traditional female role. She is in sharp contrast with her sister, June, in the family. She is cute, charming, and understands the charm that her sister and her mother do not have. Her approach against her mother and her indifference towards her sister are a sign of her rebellion. Her sister helps her mother with the housework, and she goes out to hang out with other boys and girls. However, after leaving the house, she meets the male aesthetic standards. Given that masculine social values profoundly influence her, she already knows how to attract and please men, and her behavior ultimately leads to her tragedy. When she is tempted and threatened by Arnold, she is terrified and does not dare to resist.

At this time, it was too late for her to seek help from her mother. Her mother and the other family members had gone to a barbecue, and they never thought of uniting to protect themselves from male violence. Furthermore, “The Yellow Wallpaper” is a symbol of women’s oppression and unfair treatment in society. For the wife, the patterns in “The Yellow Wallpaper,” especially those in the shape of a lattice, indicate that women’s freedom is deprived and imprisoned in society. Charlotte Perkins Gilman wants to critique women’s liberation in a male-ruled society. The husband of the protagonist used the dual authority of the physician and the husband to suppress the treatment and decide what is right for women. John believed that he knew the best treatment plan, so he placed her in a closed room, although she repeatedly protested that she didn’t want to be in there. The overprotectiveness of the husband made the main character feel depressed. For example, the author emphasizes the overprotectiveness of the husband. John forbade her to do any brainstorming work during the healing process, such as writing. “He hates to have me write a word” (381). She felt that she had become John’s burden because of the treatment that she received from him.

The consequences of her husband’s treatment were that the traditional method of recuperation failed, and her condition has not improved but rather deteriorated rapidly. Given that she was doing nothing, coupled with extreme inferiority and depression, she finally paid attention to the creepy crimping women under the yellow wallpaper and developed a keen interest in the above patterns.The women creeping under the yellow wallpaper refer to the protagonist herself and the social role of women, so, the yellow wallpaper pattern and the woman inside are a nutshell of the status of women in the male-dominated society at that time. The climax of the story appeared in the end when the protagonist finally creeped out of the recuperation room when the spirit completely collapsed. She tore up almost all the wallpapers and told her husband, John, that no one could throw her in a room again. John was stunned, he eventually fainted, and the protagonist climbed over his body. Unfortunately, her mind was devastated at the end of the story. The author used the first-person perspective to let the reader dig into the woman’s frame of mind; additionally, the author metaphor these crazy irrational behaviors to the oppression that women received.

During the author’s background, women receive neglect and unequal treatment from society. The dramatic ending of the story also shows the author’s want and confidence in achieving equality between men and women. John’s fainting symbolizes the collapse and disintegration of the patriarchal society under the male-ruled society. Some of the characters of the “The Yellow Wallpaper” and “Where Are You Going? Where Have You Been?” seem to have something in common. In both stories, protagonists cannot be understood by the people around them. Also, both stories have female characters that try to oppress the protagonists. For example, in “Where are you going? Where have you been?”, the mother insults her daughter in front of her father. In “The Yellow Wallpaper,” John’s sister monitors the protagonist to stop her from writing. These scenes provide a profound message that indicates that the women who obey a male-ruled society constrains the development and behavior of other women, weakening their self-identity and confidence. In an essay about the similarities of “The Yellow Wallpaper” and “Where are you going? Where you have been?” Fran Bartkowski compares the cause and effect between the two stories. She writes, “The stories focus on battered women; women who escape their batterers; women who kill their batterers; women who return to their batterers; a notion that rape is the battery.”(5) The protagonists in both stories had gone through violence in different degrees.

The wife suffered violence that forced her to stop writing. Connie suffered from the violence of Arnold Friend due to her passive and weak nature. Men oppress women because they think that women are their accessories, so women should follow their mandate. However, endless oppression will only lead to tragedy. In a research paper by Carolyn Z. Enns that shows that women defend themselves from the social force in various ways, she mentioned, “Identity development models typically describe how individuals move from internalized oppression or privilege to heightened sensitivity, personal upheaval, and anger in response to the knowledge and experience of oppression or privilege, and subsequent efforts to gain knowledge and explore positive and new aspects of social identity.” In the quotation, the author explained that women use multiple ways to escape from the oppression and identity they are trapped in. An example is the wife in “The Yellow Wallpaper.” At the end of the story, the wife escapes from her unequal marriage by creeping over her husband. For the protagonist, the patterns on the wallpaper indicate that women’s freedom is deprived and imprisoned in a society that is ruled by men.

The wife finally gets rid of the pressure, but she sacrificed her mental condition. Moreover, men can be seen as a complex existence for women. In “You Fit into Me” by Margaret Atwood, she uses a metaphor for inequality and the complex relationships between men and women. In the poem, the narrator uses “hook” and “eye” to describe the behavior between “you” and “me.” The word “You” is the actor and like “hook,” is generally aggressive: “I” is the bearer, and is a metaphor for “eye”, which is generally weak (780). Such a pair of relationships is a subtle metaphor for the relationship between the two genders. The relationship between “hook” and “eye” in the poem accurately portrays a more general relationship between two genders. By losing one part, the relationship will miss the meaning of existence. Ironically, men pursue women but oppress women at the same time. The profound message behind the poem is the problematic and complex love of men and women. Comparing the theme between “You Fit Into Me” and “The Yellow Wallpaper,” the message that these two literature pieces have in common is that men oppress women. The former conveys the meaning of the situation that women are oppressed, the tragedy caused by men’s incomprehension, and the deprivation and imprisonment of women’s freedom in male-dominated society. However, the poem tends to describe the complex relationship between the two sexes in a gentle and concealed way. Indeed, one of the reasons that women are still vulnerable in society is that they do not unite to fight for their rights. Those women who adapt to male authority will try to prevent others from fighting for their rights. In a closed system, women will still suffer oppression.

The short story, “Where Are You Going? Where Have You Been?”, discusses family relationships by analyzing the problems between Connie and her family. Women equality is a long-term movement. Although time has passed and ideologies have changed, the current society has still not achieved the goal of gender equality. Women have been trapped in different social expectations of how to be good. They can be bound by their husbands, families, and even other women. Although a female is vulnerable in society, writers used literature to gain power to influence the community, express their perspective, and appeal to the public. Margaret Atwood, Joyce Carol Oates, Charlotte Gilman Perkins, and Linda Pastan are examples of women who use their unique ways to spread their thoughts on gender equality. Furthermore, Fran Bartkowski, A. R. Coulthard, Carolyn Z. Enns, Stephen Slimp, and David K. Gratz all provided useful resources to analyze and support gender equality. Unequal treatment and social expectations still exist. The issue of women’s rights has not been solved by society, and it is a continuing challenge for modern civilization.

Why are Machiavelli’s ideas in The Prince often described as a ‘handbook for tyrants’? Are they compatible with his republican views in the Discourses on Livy?

Machiavelli was born in Florence in the year 1469. At this point Italy was not a unified state, Florence was a city state and a republic. Machiavelli was not from a noble rich family, still he worked his way up and by 1498 age 29 he became the Second Chancellor of the Florentine Republic. This opportunity gave Machiavelli access to become a diplomat in the powerful courts of Europe. However, in 1531 he was exiled by the most powerful family in Florence the Medici. The Medici’s believed that Machiavelli wanted to overthrow them after took over due to the Florentine Republic falling. In Machiavelli’s life span Italy was extremely different with shifting alliances, and betrayals between cities and powerful families. The world was also highly religious with the powerful Catholic Church being the dominant force. Machiavelli saw the ancient world as a more noble and less corrupt world than his own. During his time in Exile Machiavelli wrote his book “the Prince. This was a way of him seeking a return to politics in power. The book was written to Lorenzo de Medici explaining how he could help him the book was also a guide for rulers on how to obtain power and sustain that power as well. In the time of Renaissance, which has been characterized by the age of reawakening of humanism. The prince plays one of the most important role in the dramatic development of politics in the Renaissance period and still hold a universal impact on today’s politicians. However, its views points have been debated over time. Machiavelli maintains that thoughts which is essential for the cruel to a successful leader. To those of viewpoints according to Machiavelli’s thoughts are the arguments that a prince is to be clement or cruel, to be feared or loved. Those significances are appeared in his written and plays the main role in his viewpoints. Machiavelli not only wrote the Prince during his time in exile but also wrote the Discourse on Livy which will be the comparison book in this essay to his devious views written in the Prince.

Niccolo Machiavelli’s gift to Lorenzo de Medici, The Prince, is a dialogue discussing politics and how a prince should rule his state. The discourse is often described as a handbook for tyrants. This is firstly because of the way Machiavelli goes on to describes his beliefs on the most efficient way for a prince to rule and remain in power he “I want to give two examples from living memory: namely Francesco and Cersare. Francesco, using the rights of means and by his own great prowess, form being a private citizen became Duke of Milan” (Machiavelli 1532). Machiavelli validates his arguments by referencing historical examples. This shows how the Prince can be labelled as a handbook for tyrants as by using factual examples it makes it more accessible to the reader and their desire to rule and to sustain that ruler ship more achievable as they have historical evidence to show them how they should or shouldn’t go about something.

Furthermore, another way the Prince is described as a handbook for Tyrants is due to a One of the most prominent themes of the text, fortune. When describing the theme of fortune, Machiavelli is referring to fate, chance or luck. He applies this concept to princes and principalities. Fortune can be either useful or advantageous, or it can be harmful or dangerous. believes that fortune controls half of one’s life and the other half is controlled by one’s own talent. Machiavelli argues that someone can gain power through his own ability or by good fortune. ’This is the case with men who either buy their way into power or are granted it by the favour of someone else. (Machiavelli 1532) Machiavelli also put across the idea of good fortune possibly coming in the form of being born into power, buying power, or being assigned a governmental position. Similar to the way Machiavelli using historical examples to make his ideas more achievable and accessible to the reader, it can be argued that Machiavelli also does this with the concept of man coming into power, describing it as a fairly simple factor. believes that it is very easy to come into power with fortune but very difficult to come into power with one’s own ability. Machiavelli compares fortune to a powerful and flooding river that inflicts destruction of plants, houses, and valuable resources. Although there is nothing that can be done to stop a raging river already in progress, preventable measures can be taken to ensure that such a river inflicts little to no harm by building dams and barriers

Machiavelli believes that staying in power after acquiring it through fortune is highly difficult.’ just as the one who is born a prince and loses his state through incompetence (Machiavelli 1532). Machiavelli supposes this because people who have come into power with fortune “rest simply on the will and fortune of whoever has given a state to them, which are two very inconstant and unstable things. It can be argued that the way Machiavelli argue how man especially one born into fortune can withheld the power is one of the main reason why the prince is termed as ‘the handbook for tyrants’. Machiavelli is cynical and cruel in his approach of maintaining power. One of his biggest argument in the discourse of the Prince is the theme of being loved or feared. ‘The answer is that one would like to be both the one or the other but because it it’s difficult to combine them, it is far better to be feared than love. ‘(Machiavelli 1532)This approach can be seen as quite heartless and human less as it is focusing on human emotion or the lack of it. Machiavelli reasons for this argument is that people are less hesitant about injuring someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared. According to Machiavelli, people will always fear punishment regardless of the circumstances. On the other hand, if a prince is loved rather than hated, people will be more willing to disregard a connection of love for their personal benefit. However, as mentioned before, Machiavelli believes that a prince cannot be hated by the public. Therefore, a prince must ensure that he is feared but not hated. He is pessimistic in his regards to his opinion on human nature believing that natural human is out to work against each other and be the enemy to one another especially when it come to power. Therefore, highlighting another reason why, The Prince is called the handbook for Tyrants as by saying it is better to be feared than loved describing human nature this a take away the moral consciousness of the leader/person in power making it easier for the leader to make decision such as going to war far easier because Machiavelli the Prince strips them of compassion and empathy as he focuses on being feared over love.

Throughout the prince Machiavelli has two central and interrelated concepts. This being Fortune which has been previously mentioned and explain but also Virtu (virtue). Virtue is the set off skills required for successful political leadership arguing that to achieve this it may require man learning how not to be good. Highlighting another reason why the text is frequently deemed as the handbook for Tyrants. Machiavelli compares the most successful way to gaining and keeping leadership to animals. This is because animals are more inclined towards force, Machiavelli asserts that a truly effective ruler will become like animals. He draws attention to the fox and the lion. A fox is unable to protect itself from wolves and the lion is unable to protect itself from traps whereas a fox can detect traps and a lion can fight off wolves. Thus, leading to Machiavelli’s conclusion; if a prince became like a lion and a fox then he would truly be a great ruler. A prince should appear virtuous where possible but use beastly methods when necessary. It is therefore necessary to be a fox in ore to recognize the traps, and a lion in to frighten the wolves. (Machiavelli 1532) The animal the fox is often described as a cunning and sly animal and therefore by writing that a leader should be like a fox Machiavelli is insinuating that a leader should be sly and not really care about others in getting what he wants. As well as comparing them to a lion which is a very powerful intimidating animal which again shows the argument of it is better being feared than loved but also showing how the text is regard as the handbook for tyrants in the way Machiavelli compares to leadership to the lion and the fox.

Another reason why The Prince is often regarded as the handbook for Tyrants is due to the writings of Leo Strauss. Strauss was a German political philosopher and wrote the book Thoughts on Machiavelli in 1958, within the text Strauss argues that the most visible fact about Machiavelli’s doctrine is also the most useful one: Machiavelli seems to be a teacher of wickedness. Strauss sought to incorporate this idea in his interpretation without permitting it to overwhelm or exhaust his exegesis of The Prince and the Discourses on the First Ten Books of Livy. Strauss looks at Machiavelli through a modern eye. Believing that Machiavelli political thoughts could not perform a good function any more as it did in the past centuries. Strauss also compares both Machiavelli’s work in The Prince and also the Discourse of Livy distinguishing their similarities and differences’ the two books are not clearly distinguished from each other by subject matter, we have to consider whether they are clearly distinguished from each other by their point of view.” (McShea 1963)

The Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy was published in 1531,but was written 1517, It is often referred to simply as the ‘Discourses’ or Discourse, and is a discussion regarding the classical history of early Ancient Rome although it strays very far from this subject matter and also uses contemporary political examples to illustrate points. Machiavelli presents it as a series of lessons on how a republic should be started and structured. The discourse is far larger than The Prince, and while it more openly explains the advantages of republics, it does also contain many similar themes. [75] It includes early versions of the concept of checks and balances and asserts the superiority of a republic over a principality. It became one of the central texts of republicanism, and has often been argued to be a superior work to The Prince. Both books comprehend Machiavelli’s understandings of politics and explicit analysis on the various methods of government with respect to principalities and republics. There is large evidence that Machiavelli wrote both text at the same time this is due to the fact that there is no essential argument in the Prince that is not repeated in Discourse of Livy. An example of this is that the first sentence in The Prince is “All states all the powers, that have held and hold rule over men have been are either republics or principalities. (Machiavelli 1532)Then in the second chapter of the Discourse of Livy Machiavelli writes ‘I will leave out all discussion on republics inasmuch as in another place I have written them at length. (Machiavelli 1531).The second part of this quote clearly refers to Machiavelli’s work in the Prince therefore showing a connection with the two books but also insinuates that someone should read both works of Machiavelli to truly understand the point of view of the philosopher. In both his pieces of work, Machiavelli starts with a generalization rather than a value of judgement. It can be argued that there are two types of government in the prince he discusses one of these and in The Discourse of Livy he discusses the other. However, the difference in his writings is that in the Discourse of Livy there is a transparent discussion on when it is appropriate have personal rule and when there needs to be a broader base of republic

A large difference between Machiavelli’s two texts is the role of the people. In the Prince, Machiavelli focuses primarily on how one can become a leader and preserve this role making the life of his inhabitants satisfactory. By focusing on power and fortune which will help the prince come to power Machiavelli doesn’t describe the role of the people in a comprehensive way although he does imply it as if there is no one to rule there is no need for a ruler However the use of the public in the Discourse on Livy is far different to the one in the Prince as Machiavelli pays a great attention to the general people he talks more about the role of the people in each kind of government: principality, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and little bit in anarchy. if we compare the faults of a people with those of princes, as well as their respective good qualities, we shall find the people vastly superior in all that is good and glorious. Although it doesn’t mean that his view on that concern has changed. Consequently, showing that even though Machiavelli has slightly different use of the populism in both his text his view point on leadership and democracy is equal in both The Prince and the Discourse of Livy.

A similarity between both text is Machiavelli uses of factual example to explain his theory. For example, in the Prince he writes about previous leader in Rome on how they downfall came. Machiavelli also does this in the Discourse of Livy giving the reader an example from Ancient Rome: In book 3 of the text Machiavelli focuses on whether everything has a natural ending and to validate his theory uses the example of when the Gaul’s, referring to them as the French, sacked Rome in 387 BC. He believes that the Gaul’s’ aggression was necessary, ‘if one wished that that it be reborn and, by being reborn, regain new life and new virtue, and regain the observance of religion and justice, which were beginning to be tainted in it.'(Machiavelli 1531).As well as using real situation in both Machiavelli thoroughly discusses the importance of religion in the formation and maintenance of political authority in his famous works, The Prince and The Discourses of Livy. In his writing on religion, he states that religion is beneficiary in the formation of political authority and political leaders must support and endorse religion in order to maintain power. However, Machiavelli also critiques corrupt religious institutions that become involved in politics and in turn, cause corruption in the citizenry and divisions among the state.in the Prince If anyone ask me how it is that the church has attained such great temporal power’ It can be argued Machiavelli’s view on religion stems from his famous argument of whether it is better to be feared or loved as a leader of a state. Machiavelli feels that it is safer to be feared than loved, but a great leader would hope to be both even though it is rather difficult. His reasoning behind this is that he feels the nature of man is to be fickle and greedy and man will turn against the political leaders in difficult times despite his loyalty during prosperous times. Machiavelli Prince has a clear theory on why it is better to be feared than love which this assignment has already touched upon, but he also repeats this theory in his work The Discourse of Livy Men are driven by two principal impulses, either by love or by fear.”(Machiavelli 1531) This therefore shows how Machiavelli republican viewpoint is apparent throughout both his works.

In conclusion, it is clear to see why Machiavelli text the Prince is regard as the handbook of Tyrant due to his The Prince, by Machiavelli, is often considered a handbook for tyrants because it offers a series of blunt arguments about how a prince should behave in order to stay in power. He seemingly abandons the ancient concern with virtue by explicitly appealing to the self-interest of the prince. It is also transparent that even though the Prince is more well-known are more explicit than the discourse of Livy the two texts have the same view point. This being the behaviour of rulers and the story of expansion of Rome, Machiavelli also contributes a large portion of his books to discuss about the types of roles that the populace should be entrusted with in a republican government. Additionally, The Prince and Discourses on Livy discuss the significance of history, and how modern states have grown weaker because of their lack of historical understanding, ranging from the point of religion to the relationship between fortune as well as power.

Bibliography

1. Machiavelli (1961). The Prince. Sullfolk: Penguin
2. Machiavelli (1970). The Discourses. Sullfolk: Penguin. all.
3. McAleer, S. (2016). Machiavelli: Prince or Republic – An Examination of the Theorist’s Two Most Famous Works. The Corinthian. 17 (9), 1-11.
4. Robert J. McShea. (1963). Leo Strauss on Machiavelli. The Western Political Quarterly. Vol. 16 (4), 782-797.
5. Strauss, L. (2019). Full text of ‘Leo Strauss ‘Thoughts On Machiavelli”. [online] Archive.org. Available at: https://archive.org/stream/LeoStraussThoughtsOnMachiavelli_201411/%5BLeo_Strauss%5D_Thoughts_on_Machiavelli_djvu.txt [Accessed 25 Mar. 2019].
6. Unger,M (2012). Machiavelli: A Biography. london: simon and schuster.

When readers of Margaret Atwood’s Oryx and Crake are first introduced to the Children of Crake, we observe their foreign appearance through the eyes of Snowman, to whom their “sound of tooth”, “smooth of skin” and “no body hair” feel deeply uncanny and “leave him chilled”. These Crakers possess, to an extent, the features and proportions of human beings, however their “perfection”, like “retouched fashion photos” or “animated statues”, make them feel like either something less or more than human.

A recurring theme of interest to me during my reading of this text was Atwood’s exploration of how much can be exercised within the alteration department before an organism is no longer the original, or the ‘real’ thing. Snowman reflects time and time again on the ‘realness’, or lack thereof, of the foods he eats: “Real chicken, Jimmy suspected… And real beer. For sure the beer was real.” What is the turning point then, at which these foods become no longer real? Is an apple, say, no longer an apple, just because the fruit has been modified to be larger, more delicious, more resilient? Is it an apple at its best potential, or not an apple at all?

Jimmy asks this question of Crake, in relation to the butterflies with “wings the size of pancakes and shocking pink”; “Are they real or fake?” In response, Crake rationalises that after the genetic alteration happens, “that’s what they look like in real time. The process is no longer important…. These butterflies fly, they mate, they lay eggs, caterpillars come out.” Or in other words, if the butterfly still functions as a butterfly, must we deconstruct and interrogate the process in which it became that way?

By extension of this conundrum, a question I found myself asking was: if the Crakers did not evolve naturally, to what extent are they really human?

Granted, the circumstances of the Crakers are quite different than those of the butterflies, because the Crakers in many ways do not appear, function or behave as their originals – homo sapiens – do. They have skin that is immune to UV damage, they have built-in insect-repellent, their genitals turn blue when it is time for mating – which occurs as purely a reproductive act – and their digestive systems are designed to digest unrefined plant material. Strictly biologically speaking then, the Crakers are not ‘humans’ as we are.

However, to gain a better understanding of whether or not these creatures are human, I believe it is necessary to analyse the Crakers on more than merely a scientific or biological level. Crake, with only his scientific deduction of the world and experiences around him (even Art, he views, serves only a “biological purpose”), is not completely fit to decide what constitutes as a human organism, because ‘human’ is a folk-category, rather than a scientific category. We assign ourselves the subjective, vernacular label of ‘human’ the same way that we place other organisms under the umbrella categories of ‘plants’ and ‘animals’, even though, for example, mushrooms are in fact more closely genetically related to humans than they are to plants, though we would not categorise them as such, and chimpanzees are closer to humans than they are to gorillas, though many of us would be displeased to learn so.

However, even on a non-scientific level, there are undoubtedly indications of the non-humanness of the Crakers. For one, they are ignorant to the human experiences of desire and, as a result, suffering. They have everything they will ever need built-in to their DNA (supposedly) and they carry no incentive towards conflict or violence – “Oh Snowman, please, what is violent?”. Without the capacity for deep desire, they demonstrate a similarity to non-human animals (at least in the way some belittle non-human animals under a human exceptionalist view); we might think of a goldfish, or an ant, to be driven solely by instinct and lacking the ‘human’ capacity for emotional pain or pleasure, for satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Is an ant truly happy? Or merely content? Or neither, because it does not know the opposite, and is just absentmindedly plodding along the tick-tock of its life course?

Despite these limitations, there are also some distinctly human interests retained by the Crakers. While Crake saw best to breed religion, history and art out of his Children, it seems that he was unsuccessful. And given that these are concepts commonly reserved for the human species alone and believed to be the markers which distinguish us from all other animals, the true nature of the Crakers suddenly becomes a little more obscure.

Firstly, what makes us distinctly human, in part, is our inquisitive, reflective, pondering minds; a mind complex to such an extent that it has the capacity and inclination to ask the ‘big questions’, to theorise where we come from? Does God exist? What does this life mean? What is it to be human? The Crakers begins to ponder all these things; they begin to develop what Jimmy called “symbolic thinking”, which Crake feared most of all would bring about their downfall. The Crakers, while in Paradice, wrestle with the question of their origin, asking Oryx “Who made them?” to which she replies “Crake.” Then, gradually, with the help of Snowman, they construct a kind of mythology for themselves, too, within which Oryx and Crake are their Gods. “Crake thought he’d done away with all that… God is a cluster of neurons, he’d maintained… but they’re conversing with the invisible, they’ve developed reverence.” In the narrative of the Bible, the answer to ‘What is a human?’ is that a human is he who was created in the image of God, and who therefore has the capacity for a relationship with God – something which the Crakers start to develop. Snowman’s comment that “take out too much in that area and you’ve got a zombie or a psychopath” lends itself again to the notion that there is something about reverence that gives us humanity, or that humanity and religion are inextricably intertwined.

The Crakers also begin, towards the end of the novel, to make art – as they create a “scarecrow-like effigy” in hopes that it would return Snowman to them safely. Art, music, words, images – it’s these imaginative structures which define human meaning. Even as Snowman himself feels himself spiralling into insanity and feeling more and more separated from the human civilisation he once knew, he urges himself to “Hang on to the words… the odd words, the old words, the rare words” – he holds onto the memory of literature as his only grip on his humanity.

While the Crakers were not created in absolute biological likeness to homo sapiens, their inclinations towards art, history, introspection and faith, characteristics which are distinctly humanistic, suggest that they are more like us than they may seem at first. However, while the novel concluded before these events could unfold, I believe that we would have eventually seen an ugly end to the Crakers at the hands of any remaining humans. Even if Snowman could convince his human counterparts that the Crakers, too, are human – if not in its scientific category, then its folk category – and therefore a non-threat, the question would turn from ‘Are the Crakers human?’ to what it means to recognise humanness in others; to see others as human. We have discovered too often across the span of history and its many atrocities, that members of even our own species have been excluded by others from the category of the human; take, for example, the Jews and the Nazis or the Africans and their North American enslavers. A likely scene of the Crakers and Homo sapiens’ inevitable meeting would be a live-enactment of a ‘Barbarian Stomp’ game, where the Crakers – the barbarians, the uncivilised – meet their gruesome fate.

Relative clauses found in the novel entitled The Pearl by Steinbeck in 1947. This analysis based on the theory of Generative Transformation via Chomsky in his book.

Syntactic Structure (1971) and supported through Bradford in his e-book Transformational Syntax: A Student Guide to Chomsky’s Extended Theory (1988). The findings of this learn about show that there are three outstanding patterns of the relative clause and clause structure

Relative is an embedded clause that is modified through a noun in a noun phrase. The issue these can be embedded subjects or objects. Relative clauses are marked with relative pronouns or a relative verb. There are three types of relative clauses found in this study, such as: restrictive, nonrestrictive, and free. The analysis in this study suggests that all the major relative clause sorts found in the data. They are fantastically restrictive, nonrestrictive, and free clauses added by means of the pronoun relative who, whom, whose, which, or that, and with relative auxiliary verbs, like when, where, or why. In terms of their function, depending on the type they can be features as a problem and object that gives facts from nouns previously as an antecedent or providing the extra data from a noun Previous.

Var Holstein and Anne Wig (2012) The poison sacs of the city began to manufacture venom, and the town swelled and puffed with the pressure of it” (John Steinbeck, The Pearl) … Inspired through the Steinbeck passage quoted at the beginning, we name this The Pearl Hypothesis natural sources limit social trust? This paper reviews the literature on natural sources and on trust. The present theoretical and empirical literature suggests that natural assets can decrease have confidence through quite a few oblique mechanisms. Notably, studies show that herbal sources lead to institutional degradation, corruption, inequality, and civil war, all of which have been related with reduced trust. In addition, game theoretical work on windfall beneficial properties suggests that there may also be a direct impact of herbal assets on trust. This article assessments empirically whether there is a direct impact of herbal assets on have confidence (The Pearl Hypothesis), the usage of cross-country data. The consequences indicate that no such direct impact exists, but we locate a substantial effect on have faith of intermediate variables affected by means of natural resources, such as institutions, corruption, inequality andor civil war. Importantly, the relationship between corruption and trust turns out to be non-linear, indicating that the effect of natural resources on have faith depends on the initial corruption stage of a country. In exceedingly corrupt societies, institutional enhancements that reduce corruption may additionally