This essay compares the letters of Lord Chesterfield to his son with The School for Scandal. The comparison provides an interesting look at society over 200 years old, and what they expected. Brinsley utilizes satire and recognizes issues in society. Brinsley’s play is a satirical comedy that uses satire to ridicule the characters. The genre of the play is a comedy with manners, which has contradictions between character expectations and reality. Chesterfield’s letters are a fascinating comparison. They provide a glimpse into the expectations and behavior of people in positions of authority. Chesterfield’s and Brinsley’s differences as authors allow for a variety of viewpoints. Brinsley is a satirist who aims to entertain, while Chesterfield provides a list with strict guidelines that he believes those in need of them should know. The two are clearly different: the play is used to reflect on an individual’s life and the letters are sent to inform the recipient of the society’s expectations and the way to live in it. Sheridan’s play is written in a way that accurately reflects the upper-class lifestyle and society, which is fundamentally true. The play was created with the intention of raising questions about the gossips and slanders that were at the core of the society. Sheridan used characters to illustrate the negative effects of gossip, lies and slander. She wanted the audience to be aware of their own shortcomings. The gossip spread quickly and could destroy the character of an individual in seconds. Sheridan’s writing is a combination of satirical and humorous lampooning. By satirizing a form of comedy that allows for the delivery of the correct message, Sheridan can ridicule characters in an witty, derogatory, and snide manner. Conversations Between Sir Benjamin Backbite And Crabtree Mr. Surface I was not trying to hurt (…) you, as any man ever has been’. Brinsley uses a deliberate lampoon to ridicule the two characters and their actions. Backbite refers to a man who he initially said had no intention of causing upset in an insulting tone, even though he claimed to have done so with good intentions. ‘Ha, ha, ha! It’s hard for them not to finish a topic they aren’t completely done with. Lady Sneerwell enjoys humiliating those she targets. The individual is reduced to a’subject’ and their humanity is lost. Sheridan uses this portrait to demonstrate how people’s opinions can become distorted, with the intention to harm others just to entertain them. Sheridan, like Brinsley, describes the society’s influence in great detail and with a lot of understanding. Sheridan’s aim is to educate readers on society’s problems, whereas Chesterfield starts to make a guide on how to comply with the standards of society. They are of importance. Chesterfield is seen as a representative of the society and their expectations, and this can be seen in his writing. The language gives the impression that it is imperative for readers to follow instructions. Chesterfield’s and Lady Sneerwell’s opinions are similar. They both express their views on society’s expectations. Sneerwell also has the same standards of manners that Chesterfield does. Both are of the opinion that how an individual is presented can influence their perception. An individual who doesn’t have good manners will be viewed as unworthy, and thus deserving of humiliation. Sheridan recognizes the importance and the politeness in the public’s perception of an individual. Through the use of humor, the satirical writer tries to change the perceptions of the characters and their decisions. The characters of the play live in a world dominated by false manners. Mrs Candour’s false manors are satirized. Brindley’s last name is Candour. Candour represents innocence, purity and integrity. Mrs Candour is a gossip that can spread slander at a rapid rate, removing any respectability possessed by someone in her position. “But, Lord, would you expect me to report such things?” No, no: tale-bearers ‘. Irony in Mrs Candour, who is supposed to be against gossip but enjoys spreading it. Sheridan is deliberately creating a paradox in order for the audience to see how unstable upper-class standards were during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Candour doesn’t admit her own actions, but she does little to prevent slander from ruining someone’s reputation. These women may claim that they have no desire to gossip and are polite, but in reality their actions encourage the spread of gossip. Sheridan’s play encourages reflection on false nature and manners. Ladies Candour, Sneerwell and other characters are portrayed as being rude and unpolite. Sheridan has a talent for borrowing from the sentimental comic tradition which continues in literature. He uses satire to adapt the humor mode, but he doesn’t always use the traditional Horation style of satire. Horace’s satire is funny and witty. It allows ridicule of the stupid aspects of human nature in order to bring enjoyment to the audience. Sheridan was more interested in the domestic side of society than the politics that are usually discussed. Sheridan wanted to remove the admiration of people who would normally respect men for their folly. The satirical style of Juvenalian writing was used to adopt a certain mode of satire. This included certain attacks on certain characters’ behavior and certain speeches. The satirical style is used to convey a message of realism to an audience without being authentic. In his letters to son, Lord Chesterfield demonstrates how important manners are to society and that impoliteness is a major factor in destroying a person’s reputation. Chesterfield uses a satirical tone, but he also adds the aspect of a person’s appearance to the social politeness. Chesterfield also recognizes the importance of manners in Sheridan’s work as a way to express an individual’s social status. Chesterfield however goes further and says that “frequent loud laughter” is indicative of folly (…). There is no other form of ill-bredness or illiberalism than audible laughter. Chesterfield has similarities to characters in The School for Scandal. Chesterfield has similar opinions to The School of Scandal characters. Chesterfield acknowledges society’s ability to judge manners. Sheridan & Chesterfield are both aware of the importance that society attaches to manners. Chesterfield, when reading his other letters to Chesterfield’s son, starts to see manners in a more intellectual sense. He even says that grammar and good manners are essential for a successful person. Orthography is essential to a person with a literary background. Richard Brinsley Sheridan replicates the social climate of 18th-century London through satire. Both texts have the same sneering tone, but the genres and messages are different. The one uses it to make an ironic point, the other to teach and try to prevent malice. Sheridan uses characters such as Lady Sneerwell, Sir Benjamin Backbite and others to reveal the malice of those in high society who enjoy gossiping and slandering other people. As early as the first scene, it is clear that gossip has the ability to cause destruction. The members of the group are not adhering to the expected standard of good manners. The characters are entangled in the business of others and manipulate the situation into a scandal which can ruin a person’s reputation. Sheridan intended to use humor to teach the individual. By combining comedy and slander, the audience can enjoy the contradiction. Lord Chesterfield’s viewpoint is different from Sheridan’s because he does not observe society, but is actually a part. Chesterfield believes that by adding a layer of politeness to the individual’s physical presentation, they can create a more accurate portrayal of society. Chesterfield’s distinct voice is a reflection of the society he lives in. The texts allow for exploration of society by presenting a distinct voice. Overall, both texts shared similarities and differences. Their different perspectives helped them to better understand each other. Richard Brinsley Sheridan. The School for Scandal. Michael Cordner. Oxford World’s Classics. Oxford, 2008. P. 219, “Satire Terms”, Nku.Edu. 2017,

https://www.nku.edu/rkdrury =””>. [accessed 29 Dec 2016]. Chesterfield Philip Dormer Stanhope. The Dear Boy Letters of Lord Chesterfield to his Son. (London: Bantam, 1989) p100

Summary of Pygmalion In London’s Covent backyard on a summer’s evening, a bunch of diverse individuals are gathered together to shield themselves from rain under the portico St. Paul’s Church. Clara and Mrs. Eynsford Hill are among the group, waiting for Freddy’s return in a cab. After he fails to find a taxi, he’s sent back out in search. As he departs, he crashes with a flower girl with a thick Cockney-accent, and he destroys many of the flowers.

The flower woman tries to get the elderly man to buy plants by pointing out his remarkable appearance. Colonel Pickering is the gentleman who refuses the purchase of the flowers. He does, however, give the girl money. People in the gang tell the lady not to take the cash because they know that someone is listening to her. The bystanders start to protest when the girl shouts loudly, “I am just the right girl. I’m.”

Professor Henry Higgins – a phonetics expert – is the observer. His focus is on determining the accents and places of birth for each individual. He says he can teach this “ragamuffin”, or flower woman, to speak with the sophistication of a duchess. Now, the older gentleman identifies as Colonel Pickering. This is the author who wrote a Sanskrit booklet and came to meet Henry Higgins. The two men then discuss their shared interest in the phonetics. The two are discussing Higgins’s experiments with Mrs. Pearce at Professor Higgins’ home the following morning.

Eliza Doolittle remembers how Higgins boasted about his ability to teach her to speak like a duchess. She has come for lessons to get a job in a florist shop. Pickering offers Higgins a wager. Higgins agrees in good spirit to make the wager. Mrs. Pearce is ordered to take away the girl, scrub it and burn its clothes. Eliza has no objections to him, so he takes her away. Eliza’s father arrives to blackmail Higgins. Higgins intimidates him so much that he asks him for 5 pounds and immediately gets rid of him.

Freddy Eynsford Hill’s mother and Clara Eynsford Hill are also gifts. It turns out that these are the people who we first saw beneath the portico at the beginning of the play. The visitors don’t know that Eliza had been the “ragamuffin-flower girl” that night. Eliza’s perfect English and her pedantic speech amuses everyone. Her description of the death of her Aunt is also shocking.

After Eliza leaves, Mrs. Higgins reveals that the girl’s public presentation is far from ready. Higgins and Pickering return to the house late at night. They are ecstatic with their success in passing Eliza off as a duchess to an ambassador at a backyard event. They are so proud they totally ignore Eliza. Infuriated Eliza finally throws a pair of slippers at Higgins. Eliza worries about what she will do after the experiment. Will she be thrown into the gutter again? What is her future fate? Higgins doesn’t see this as a problem. He tells her to go home after he has told her the garments she is carrying are hers. Higgins’ mother is shocked to find Eliza missing when Higgins visits her the next morning. After calling the police, he is shocked to learn that Eliza was upstairs.

While Eliza is waiting, Mr. Doolittle comes in and accuses Higgins for ruining his life. Higgins informed a wealthy man of Doolittle’s reputation as England’s best moralist. This man then left Doolittle an immense sum of cash to be used for moral reforms. His wife, who is a common-regulation person, is miserable because he has been forced into a middle-category morality. Eliza is invited to his marriage, another concession made to middle-category morality. Eliza accepts her father’s invitation to the wedding.

Higgins holds Eliza in place as the group prepares to leave. He then tries a little to convince her to return to Higgins’ condo. He insists that he is treating everyone equally. For him, there is no difference in the way he treats duchesses or flower ladies. Eliza has made up her mind to become independent, so she refuses Higgins’ invitation to stay in his apartment. Higgins admits to missing her and admiring her newly found independence. Eliza does not agree with him and leaves to attend the wedding of her father.

It is difficult to read Tracks, a novel filled with complex and often confusing references. The discord in the story between Pauline Nanapush. The differences in distances between narrators’ accounts and those of the characters, narrators’ accounts and that of the reader and narrators work together to encourage the reader to choose one over the others. The reader’s relationship with each narrator is affected by the narrative distance and closeness of both narrators in terms intellect, emotion and time. Nanapush, despite being a trickster and having a strained relationship with Pauline, can be seen as the most trustworthy and likable narrator.

Pauline is a dual character who narrates the story. This creates an emotional distance and an intellectual distance from her other characters. Pauline can escape emotional turmoil in her Ojibwa society by embracing a self-imposed Catholic martyrdom. Pauline is emotionally and intellectually separated from the other characters despite the fact that it offers a psychological break from the strife caused by the government. She admits to her distance from the Matchimantos: “I said Superior that this was going to be my last trip…They would not have missed me.” After completing the task, I no longer had any interest in this lost tribe of Israel. She is expressing her dissatisfaction with her relationship by saying that this will be her last visit. She has always taken the Christian identity she holds to the highest level. By doing so, it is clear that her characters are not able to grasp or commit themselves to God the way she has. This is why they won’t miss each other. She is so determined to be separate from her Ojibwa past that she becomes frustrated with other characters who are not as religious. It is because of the religious dissonance that she has an intellectual and emotional distance. Combining her disconnection from the characters’ reality, she is able to create a story that is tinged by unreliability.

Pauline’s alternating between her experience at the convent in France and her time back home creates a time fracture in her account. In addition, the fact that some of her recollections are not clear, as in “In The Years To Come, I learned Her” (92), or the period of time covered by each chapter, make it harder to accept the account. It is confusing for the reader to understand when Pauline is receiving information and when she decides to share it with the reader. As long as Pauline is telling the story of the community, it’s easy for the reader to rely on her. But when Pauline decides to join the convent to separate herself from the rest of the world, she loses that sense of timing Nanapush can provide. Nanapush is able to become more close in time as Pauline distances herself. This is apparent when she begins narrating chapter 8. Nanapush narrates that Nector took the money at the end Chapter 7, but Pauline details her own self-proclaimed martyrdom in the beginning of Chapter 8. This transitional positioning in the narrative shows the clear difference between the two narratives. The reader is influenced to choose Nanapush because of this.

Nanapush is more relatable than Pauline at first glance, and it appears to be due to his wit and sincerity. If we look closely at his character, his relatability seems to be based on his closeness with the other characters, both emotionally and intellectually. As he has more time to spend with them, he can relay more information to them about the government problem. His concern for the circumstances in which his people find themselves is a sign of his intellectual and emotional closeness. Quotes like the one below show how emotionally close he was to Lulu or Fleur. The uncertainty of living in a world without a homeland was now a reality for me. I recognized Fleur’s signs” (187). He is willing to go out of the way to speak with Moses Pillager about how to comfort Fleur. Nanapush’s care and concern for the other characters mediates Pauline’s division. Nanapush’s active expressions of his care for the others mediates the divide that Pauline creates to split herself as a distinct entity.

Nanapush has the best overall reputation as a trustworthy and likable character. He can show a closeness to the characters that he interacts with, and to the reader. His assertions about Pauline’s untrustworthiness only make the reader want to believe in him even more. Nanapush’s statement further implies that Pauline is untrustworthy because her separation from religion was a selfish act. He is more concerned about the collective’s well-being than Pauline is. Nanapush’s interconnectedness to the Ojibwa Community allows him, in spite of Pauline’s claim that Nanapush “arranges secrets” and creates “manufactured embarrassments” (196). He is able convince the reader of his ability to convey the most realistic, factual, and appropriate narrative.

Milton’s Paradise Lost establishes a divine hierarchy of angels, men and their respective proximity to God. The characters of Paradise Lost develop a variety of different and often opposing ideas about the spiritual hierarchy. This is based on their different interpretations to the underlying rules that govern hierarchy action. These include the relationship that exists between rank and achievement, how freedom in the hierarchy is defined, and why one is promoted. Milton shows how the characters interpret the spiritual hierarchy. He also explains the consequences of their interpretations. The reader can thus struggle with the characters and come to conclusions which will help shape their spiritual approach. The reader will also be able draw comparisons with the hierarchies in the human and spiritual worlds. Milton uses the hierarchy of the spiritual world to lay a foundation for his theology. The reader is asked to struggle alongside the characters as they try to grasp the principles that are central to Christian thinking.

Milton demonstrates that the way a person views the relationship between rank established by God and spiritual accomplishments is crucial to their understanding of spiritual hierarchy. Milton makes clear very early in Paradise Lost how God is the one who decides on rank, not the other way around. God tells His Son directly in Book 3: “Thou…hast bee found/By merit more than birthright son of God./ Found worthyiest by being good” (III. 305-10). Even though the exaltation is seen as a distinct event from God establishing the original angelical hierarchy, one must remember that there is no time in Heaven. Ide states that “…this event in heaven isn’t the actual begetting, but rather a revelation of a previous begetting. This contextual difference is important as it changes the meaning and application of the term “birthright”. Milton is thus establishing through God that spiritual merit, not arbitrary factors like human hierarchies, was the factor which determined the initial establishment of all. This definition provides the reader with a solid intellectual base from which to begin analyzing the convergence between spiritual hierarchy, and meritocracy.

Milton uses Satan’s example to explain the relationship of spiritual merit with rank. Satan shows the folly it is to believe that rank represents spiritual merit. Satan begins by demonstrating that he believes that rank is the source of his spiritual authority. Durham notes that “”…Throughout the poem, [Satan] addresses each of his minions by title…as though titles were indicative (and to remind him of his superior rank).” (Durham 16,). Satan is unable to grasp that a rank does not determine one’s value. This prevents him from understanding that a spiritual leader rises by increasing his spiritual worth. Satan’s attempt to ascend by subverting hierarchy is a tactic which seems rational compared to the human hierarchy but fails in Heaven. The failure to achieve Satan’s goal shows that a misconception of the spiritual hierarchy is a major factor in forming an intellectual foundation when approaching spirituality.

Milton instead uses Abdiel to counter Satan’s wrong understanding of rank in the spiritual hierarchical system. Abdiel’s low angelic status is not a factor in the reader’s perception of hierarchy. Durham writes “… Abdiel is a demonstration that “a lesser angel can compete with an angel higher in rank, as long the lower being obeys the commands of God.” (Durham 16.) Abdiel gets his strength from God by reiterating his correct hierarchy as he exalted the Son. Abdiel says to Satan “God bids the same” when referring to the Son. He also asserts the Son’s great spiritual worth as a worthy candidate for heavenly authority. Abdiel’s own position in God’s hierarchy is not necessarily a direct change in title. However, he does become more respected and admired by God for his efforts to spread God’s word and obey God. Abdiel’s intellectual victory against Satan shows how spiritual hierarchy differs from human hierarchy.

The idea that spiritual hierarchy ranks are merely a reflection of merit is profoundly important for the newly created human. There are two tiers of hierarchy among men: Adam and Eve. Milton’s bold claim that the hierarchical rule that applies to angels also applies to men is both a statement in favor and against gender equality. Adam’s superiority over Eve is supported by their equal spiritual rank. This could be interpreted as Eve being able to surpass Adam spiritually, despite Adam having a superiority in creation. Milton’s engineered design leaves ambiguity in the potential spirituality of men and females, as well as who is most likely to be tempted.

The characters in Paradise Lost are all able to see the spiritual hierarchy from a purely objective perspective. However, their perception is often skewed by the rank they hold and how that affects the way the hierarchy works. In Book IV Satan is depressed, believing that his rebellion was a mistake. In his debates with himself, he temporarily suggests his folly stemmed from his position. “O his powerful destiny had ordained me / Some inferior angel, I was standing / Then / Happy; no unbounded Hope had raised / Aim” (IV. Satan, in 58-61, laments his position and believes that it was his ambition which caused his fall. Satan rejects this notion, believing that he could have been a lower level angel who fought God much in the same manner, but that angels higher up were still loyal. Milton shows Satan’s inability to understand spiritual hierarchy through his internal confusion over the impact of rank on hierarchy perception. This intellectual barrier is the main obstacle between Satan and the possibility of a spiritual redemption. It mirrors the difficulty the reader has with spiritual hierarchy principles. This allows the reader the opportunity to understand theological concepts both correctly and incorrectly.

Milton gives specific insights into Satan’s problem with the spiritual hierarchies. In Book V Satan rallies his minions and tells them to rebel. He then asks why any angel would accept the Son’s position as leader when all angels are on equal footing with the Son.

[The son] can… without law

You can’t even mistakenly believe that this is your Lord.

Look for the adoration of abuse

The imperial titles that assert

Is it not our calling to govern and not serve? (V.798-802)Satan argues that since the angels were created by God and so should the Son, both groups share the same level of freedom. Satan’s claim is a hypocritical one. Satan is happy to be the most influential and primary ruler of his minions as his carefully staged Hell conference demonstrates, but he does not see any merit in God appointing a leader who would have authority. Satan considers anything that would hinder his freedom, such as the appointment of an angel-guiding Son, to be a threat. Milton uses his argument on the nature of free will to frame a debate that is ongoing in Paradise Lost about the hard-to-understand concept that you are always free as long as you choose good. Satan’s hypocrisy serves to remind readers that his intellectual concept of spiritual hierarchy is what ultimately leads to his downfall, not his base motives.

Milton is trying to make the reader understand that the freedom of a person is not diminished by their acceptance of their rank, which is divinely determined. Satan is mistaken in his view of the hierarchical system as a prison that he wants to escape. In one of Satan’s most powerful lines, Satan says to Michael, “Thou fablest. But here to live free, or to reign, even if not this heav’n” (VI. 291-93). Satan’s statement that he was content with being free from the authority of the Son shows that his rebellion is not a result of power-lust. Satan’s idealistic motivation to achieve freedom is based upon his false belief that one could subvert the spiritual hierarchies in order to obtain freedom. Abdiel again offers an alternative view to Satan’s hierarchy. He tells Satan in the heavenly battle that servitude is serving the unwise and those who have rebelled against their worthier. 178-80). Abdiel illustrates here a key principle in Milton’s hierarchy of spiritual worth: that subversion will not allow you to leapfrog a more worthy individual. He reinforces the notion that one can always choose to do good. By explaining that servitude, or the loss of liberty, is caused by making the wrong choice spiritually.

Milton also introduces Milton’s notion that the individual’s perspective on spiritual hierarchy is influenced by their position. Adam is aware of how superior he is to Eve. This affects his interpretation of spiritual hierarchy. Adam’s understanding of the spiritual order is shaped by his desire to be in charge. As a result, he tends not to stick with the same position as the Son or Satan. Benet writes Adam attempts to emulate the Son when he asks Eve not to leave him. This would allow Adam to be able to deny Satan to both of them as if the Son had offered to die for all man’s sinnings. Adam, however, shows, as Satan did, that he also places a lot of faith in rank rather than potential merit. “But I can’t proceed. / But both my mind and my will are corrupted.” (X. Adam’s cry for help is heard in 824-25. Adam believes that the resultant fall of his status will make it impossible for his sons to gain rank. Understanding that Adam’s ideas about spiritual hierarchy are based in part on his perception of rank will help the reader to understand how these theological thoughts apply to real life.

Adam and Eve have different conceptions of spiritual hierarchy because Eve is at the bottom rung. Benet writes “Eve is tempted to emulate Abdiel because the status of Abdiel in relation to the high-ranking demons and angels are similar to Eve’s position in comparison to Adam. She suggests that Eve was motivated to act in a similar way to Abdiel, i.e. to show active obedience to God. Though Eve might not have done so because she could identify with Abdiel and his position of lower status, the fact that they had similar spiritual concepts is worth noting. Eve’s failure to defeat Satan is obvious, but she takes responsibility almost immediately for her actions, and helps Adam begin repentance.

As we have already mentioned, God’s original spiritual hierarchy was not permanent. Milton reveals that there is more than one way to improve one’s status spiritually. Milton’s strategy of spiritual advancement involves assuming a position lower in the hierarchy to be closer to God. This is more evident than the Son taking on human form in order to redeem the world from its sins. God affirms this act would be ultimately a good spiritual step, telling him “thy humiliation will exalt / with thee also thy majesty to this throne”. 313-14). Milton is also very careful to explain that lowering your self does not mean you are removing yourself from God. God informs his Son, who has agreed to assume the human form (III), that by descending into the Man’s nature he would not degrade or diminish “his” own. 303-4). Milton’s words here are a reminder that God doesn’t view lower ranks as a sign of inferiority.

Adam and Eve show us how to lower one’s status in order to be closer to God. Eve offers to be punished for Adam and herself if God permits it. We see a physical, symbolic lowering of oneself that, although unanswered, gives the sense that spiritual renewal is possible. Later, the two lower themselves and weep for repentance. This passage is unique in that it contains the only repeated line in the whole text. God doesn’t answer the cries again, but the reader is able to recognize the significance of the scene because earlier, hierarchical implications had been established.

Satan’s reaction is exactly the same as when his position, and therefore value, are lowered. Abdiel is the example throughout Paradise Lost for someone who has the right conceptions of spiritual hierarchy. During their battle, Abdiel shows Satan his flaw. Abdiel tells Satan the angels at all levels in heaven are not “obscured” by Satan’s reign. They have become more illustrious because of him. Abdiel believes that the Son is not an authority who diminishes angels’ worth, but a spiritual conduit between God and them. Ide says that God is condescending in his exaltation “…. He now allows angels to have a more intimate relationship with God. Satan is unaware that in much the same way as Eve has a relationship with God through Adam, God’s Son gives all angels and Satan the chance to have a closer spiritual connection. Satan rejects the Son because he believes that it is the only link between God and angels.

Milton’s portrayal of ambition is another fascinating aspect of Paradise Lost’s spiritual hierarchy. Satan admits to his rebellion being motivated by ambition, at the very least for a short time. 40). Satan is unaware of how his concept of spiritual hierarchy causes him to be suspicious of the values and beliefs of other angels. This suspicion, which can reach cynicism, blocks any chance of redemption. Abdiel’s cynicism is clear when he rejects Satan. God congratulates Abdiel for his actions.

Well done Servant, you have fought well.

Whoever haste maintained, the better fighter.

The cause of the revolted masses

In words, truth is stronger than arms (VI. 29-32)

God explains Abdiel’s good deed as a struggle to protect the truth. Satan wrongly interprets Abdiel’s obedience to be an ambition to climb the social hierarchy. “But well thy come’st / To thy fellows / Ambitious to win / Some plume from me” (VI. 159-61), Satan tells Abdiel. Satan accuses Abdiel, not only for his detestable ambitions, but he also immediately assumes Abdiel was aiming to surpass himself. This suspicion demonstrates the extent of Satan’s misunderstanding about the spiritual order.

Satan accuses Jesus of having similar motives. In Book V Satan tells minions “The Great Messiah…/…speedily despite all hierarchies/ Is intending to pass triumphantly and give laws”(V. 691-93) Satan is making a double accusation here: First, the Son does not deserve to be king, and secondly, the Son has not paid for his duties. In this case, Satan is implying that God awards status or power to those who perform righteous actions, even if they are performed by a cherub at the bottom of the hierarchy. Satan is saying that his motivation for serving God and performing good deeds is to obtain status in the spiritual order.

It is possible to identify the way Satan sees God’s relationship as dependent upon mutually beneficial exchanges of service and rewards. Michals focuses on the way Satan, in Book 4, analyzes his choice to rebel in terms of economics. Michals writes that Satan’s “language” is a mixture of values, a feudal system of hierarchy, which is less based on reciprocal duties and more based on debts and payments. Satan cannot understand, then, why someone would want to serve God but not get a similar return. Milton’s narrator said earlier that God most appreciates service performed without expecting anything in return. This contrast shows the extent of Satan’s misperception, and its economic nature helps the reader to relate spiritual hierarchy with human hierarchies.

Satan destroys God’s spiritual hierarchy by reducing God service to a transaction of mutual benefit. Not only him, but also other characters have lowered the importance of merit in the hierarchy. Adam, who has already shown a tendency to Satan’s view of spiritual hierarchy, also makes the same mistake. He says that God degrades those who face temptation. Benet claims that “…denies the benefits of loyalty …”. Eve reduces, too, the spirituality of hierarchy by mixing ambition with service. She tries to stop Satan because she expects appreciation from God, or Adam. These examples, which reduce the importance and significance of spirituality while retaining the dramatic action of the epic, demonstrate that Paradise Lost can guide readers from making incorrect theological conclusions.

This concept is also important for understanding the spiritual hierarchy in Paradise Lost. Two characters could be at different levels within the hierarchy, but still maintain the same degree of perfection. The idea that God has imbued all his creations with Godliness is one part of this perfection. Man, for instance, is made in God’s Image. In order to fully understand spiritual hierarchy, relative perfection is crucial because it allows a degree of equality to be established among those holding different positions. Relative perfect allows everyone to compete for God’s approval, without feeling like they are competing. Durham states that at the start of the war, “…all angels performed admirably…in battle, hierarchy rank is no longer important to the warriors (Durham, 18). Satan appears to be envious over the Son’s position of exaltation.

In the end, it is important to analyze the spiritual hierarchy in relation to Adam and Eve’s worldly knowledge. It is possible to argue that man’s incomplete understanding of the spiritual hierarchy was a factor in the fall of mankind. The reader’s spiritual experience of the concepts in Paradise Lost is negated by this position because the world accepts that man’s knowledge of God and Heaven is incomplete. The fall is explained by man’s incomplete understanding of God’s spiritual hierarchy. This is a more convincing argument. Benet argues that if man had a complete understanding of God’s hierarchy, it would be easy to choose not eat the fruit, “…and make obedience, faith, and love meaningless.

Benet believes that Adam’s and Eve’s trial is not about intellectual understanding. The fall of mankind is similar to the one of Satan and His minions because they did not know what their actions would lead to. This continuity confirms that Adam and Eve made a decision that was so simple, it could only have been possible if the spiritual hierarchies were studied closely. Benet continues to say that Michael had told Adam in Book XII, “Not intelligence but faith and love is the crucial weapon …” to resist Satan’s temptation.”

Milton is credited with arranging biblical characters into an easily-understood spiritual hierarchy. A closer look at the structure reveals that it is made up of a system of rules, concepts and other elements that both serve to maintain the story and to give meaning to characters’ theological discussions. A character’s perspective on the spiritual hierarchy can help us understand the reasons for their actions as well as their particular approach to the spiritual. Satan, as an example, appears to be bound by his duty due more to intellectual misconceptions than stupidity or evil. Adam and Eve may have also chosen to emulate models in heaven when they dealt with God or tried Abdiel. Milton’s engineered hierarchy structure can be examined in greater detail, and compared with Milton’s other theological essays.

Works Cited

The Works Cited is usually the same for both the original and paraphrased versions of a text, as the Works Cited should include the sources of the information used in the text.

Benet, Diana. “Abdiel’s Son and Separation Scene” Milton Studies. Vol. 18. 1983.

Charles W. Durham discusses how Abdiel, obedience, and hierarchy are portrayed in Milton’s Paradise Lost. Milton Quarterly. 26.1 (Mar. 1992). 15-20.

Fiore and Peter Amadeus “Freedom, Liability, And The State Of Perfection In Paradise Lost”. Milton Quarterly. 5.3 (Oct. 1971). 47-51.

Ide Richard S., “On the Begetting Of The Son In Paradise Lost”. Studies in English Literature from 1500 to 1900 were published in the 24th volume, 1st issue of the year 1984. 141-55.

Michals, Teresa. “Sweet Gardening Labour”: Merit, Hierarchy and Paradise Lost.” Exemplaria. 7.2 (1995).

Rebecca Solnit argues “Walking and the Suburbanized Psyche”, an article by the art critic and the writer of Wanderlust: A History of Walking. Solnit argues that the suburbanization of the world has broken down the connection of the mind, the body and the environment that was made possible through walking. Our society has devalued walking due to the proliferation of cars and suburbization. Solnit thinks that devaluing walking will make it harder for us to connect with other people and to do good. Solnit’s statement that walking is devalued will result in the loss imagination, of the body, and of the world, I do not agree with. Walking isn’t the only activity which can enhance imagination, our body, and our world.

Solnit says that if walking is devalued further, there will be a loss in imagination. Walking is not the only activity that helps you imagine. I can reflect and think deeply when I go to the gym. Running on a treadmill boosts my creative imagination and relieves me of stress. I have found that painting and drawing both give me similar benefits. Imaginers are not limited. It is not true that walking alone can make you imagine. Solnit should take disabled people into consideration. Do they have a problem imagining? Not everyone can walk or traverse. Solnit basically says that disabled people don’t know how to imagine. This is contrary to her claim that walking would lose its value if it were devalued. It is true that there are many other ways we can imagine than by walking. Solnit would be wise to consider other factors than walking as the only way of fostering imagination.

Solnit says that we should value walking more in society. Walking is something that we all do, so I don’t see why it should be appreciated. It’s something that we can’t get rid of. It’s not something special or extraordinary. Solnit claims that people need to try walking more. She acts as if people don’t walk or only rarely do. No matter how short or far we walk, it’s always something. Walking can be voluntary or necessary. Voluntary walks are those that you do out of the goodness of your heart, while required walking is for school or work. Solnit argues that natural space is lacking in many communities. Los Angeles, New York and other cities have a dense population. In order to meet the demand and increase in population, there is hardly enough space. This area makes it nearly impossible to demand more space. There are areas where the sidewalks can’t be walked because cars are pulling to one side. Los Angeles has sidewalks that are twisted and distorted by the roots of trees. This makes it nearly impossible to walk. Solnit must consider that the terrain, and surrounding areas can make walking impossible.

Solnit believes that a reduction of walking could lead to the loss of human interaction. We will also lose contact with our friends and society. You won’t always find yourself in a conversation with a stranger when you walk. You will not find love or new friends by walking. I walk 6 miles daily, from class to dorm. Strangers I passed on my way to class have not become friends or acquaintances. Today, approaching or talking to strangers is considered weird. They will not be willing to speak to strangers, but instead become frightened by their presence. The crime rate in our community is a major factor. We have developed a new inner instinct to ignore strangers. Many people are afraid to leave their houses for fear of being robbed or kidnapped. People are avoiding walking because of the dangers. Solnit believes that walking for leisure is only possible in wealthy, safe neighborhoods. Walking doesn’t always mean you are in the world. You can meet people and socialize by joining clubs, volunteering or doing other activities. Solnit is wrong when she says that not being able to walk would cause us to lose contact with the wider world. There are other ways of interacting with it. Walking isn’t the only way to interact with the world. You can use many methods to interact with your world.

Solnit also makes a case for cars, claiming that car diffusion has led to a significant reduction in walking. She says that people should walk more instead of driving. Some drive 30-50 miles daily to work. Does she want to make them walk back and forward that distance each day? Walking is good for you, but it’s important to be able to travel from A to B within a certain time frame. It would take a long time to get to work if people walked more. They’d also cause more traffic. Walking everywhere is simply not possible with our modern lifestyles.

Solnit is wrong in her claim that devaluing walking will lead to a loss imagination, world and body. Walking isn’t a factor or an activity that helps us boost our creativity, interact with the outside world, or our body. Working out and doing yoga help us to imagine. Sporting events and local events can be a great way to meet people. Walking is not the only way to exercise. You can walk for a number of reasons and through a variety activities. Solnit has to consider the disabled, those in high-crime neighborhoods, as well as other factors, before she can say that not walking is bad for us.

A number of literacy experts over the years have examined critically Beowulf’s portrayal and role of woman. These analyses enable us to understand women more precisely and accurately. The critics seem to believe that women are portrayed as hostesses and peace weavers in every narrative. This is important as it establishes the importance of this role for the overall story. These are the categories that all of the women in this narration belong to. A hostess represents a women who looks after the men of the king, while peaceweavers unite opposing tribes. Other analytical interpretations corroborate the relationship between the categories in order to give insight into Beowulf’s writing time.

Dorothy Porter has written an article entitled “The Social Centrality of Women: A new Context”, which examines the portrayal of Beowulf’s women. Porter claims that the female characters are important to both the story as a whole and society. Porter begins with an analysis of the female characters that are important to the story: Wealtheow, Hygd and Freawaru. Hildebruh’s mother Grendel, Thryth and Grendel himself. She first discusses Wealhtheow & Hygd together because both are queens & considered to hostesses. She says that both of them have an influence on the meadhall. Their husbands are not always in agreement with the influence they have on the mead hall. Porter continues to talk about the characters. Wealhtheow, a “mindful of the customs”, a “woman of excellent heart”, a woman of “sure speech” is what Porter describes Hygd as. Both women offer mead to the men in the kings’ halls. Porter reaches the conclusion that the women in question were used as tools by the kings. Hildeburh, Freawaru and other peace-weavers are considered to be a group.

Grendel’s mom and Thryth will be the characters discussed. These women have been portrayed in a monstrous manner. Porter describes Thryth first as a woman corrupted by terrible crimes. Thryth’s status in the society is enhanced by her being a daughter of a monarch. She is vilified and not praised in society. She is now praised for her new attitude after marriage. She becomes known as someone who does good in the community. She talks about Grendel’s mother, who welcomes people into her house and uses violence as a way to settle disputes. She is finally tamed by Beowulf after he kills her. She’s apparently related to the descendant Cain, which is why Grendel is a mirror of Cain. Porter goes on discussing Grendel mother and her being scolded for not avenging the death of Grendel. She then compares and contrasts Grendel with Grendel’s mom, stating that the mother was more vengeful than Grendel. Porter concludes, Porter believes that the Beowulf women are symmetrical for a purpose and encourages comparison and contrast. The hostess and peace weavers are central to the poem and aid in its comprehension, while the monsters serve as counter-examples and contrast the female characters.

The focus is now on the role of women in Beowulf. Petra Prochazkova argues in “Female Characters of Beowulf” that female characters in Beowulf are merely categorized as peace-weavers. She discusses Hildeburh’s and Freawaru’s roles as intermediaries who are trying to bring two tribes together. However, some of the female characters are not very good at weaving peace. Thryth uses violence for self-defense as does Grendel’s mum, but both are deemed unacceptable because of their violence. She also states that queens are praised by their sons. In Grendel’s case, they may be praising or mourning their deaths.

She then continues her discussion on the social role of the queen. She also asserts Wealhtheow’s role as hostess is depicted in Beowulf. However, the argument is that Wealhtheow’s role as a mead-hall instrument should not simply be the way in which the text is examined. She explains that a queen’s order of approach towards the men of the king is determined by their position. She argues that Wealhtheow is the one who has the real power in the hall, not the queen. She discusses Wealhtheow’s functions in great detail. She believes that Wealhtheow’s other functions are crucial, such as conversing with kingsmen and praising their loyalty. Wealhtheow serves as a sort of intermediary between kings and the men. Wealhtheow struggles to achieve her goals and is not passive. The author also concludes that the female characters are symmetrical and provide differences through comparisons and contrasts.

Murphy highlights the importance of masculinity in Beowulf’s central theme. She says Beowulf, as written by a man’s perspective, has male characters. Beowulf has a dominant male theme. Valor, prowess, violence, and other themes are included. According to the author, women have little influence in Beowulf. The author goes on to explain that women are classified as either a hostess or mother. Murphy claims that Wealhtheow’s role is more like a peace-weaver than a hostess.

Continue to argue her active role in the society by pointing out that she encourages the men of King’s. The author analyzes then the impact that the women’s narrative has. Murphy claims that Wealhtheow is the glue which holds the Scyldings together and Beowulf. She explains that Hildebruh, who failed to be a peace-weaver like Wealhtheow represents the contrast. Murphy agrees that Wealhtheow was a great hostess, whereas Grendel’s Mother and Thryth may have been hostesses too, but they were not the best. She found it fascinating that Grendel’s mom was the only character sent into exile. Murphy says that women’s characters have a stronger connection to grief. Grendel’s mom is ultimately driven to revenge Grendel’s murder by this grief. Murphy concludes that women play masculine roles. Grendel’s mom challenges the idea that women are passive and masculine when she fights Beowulf. Beowulf has a strong focus on men. The female roles are described to show a normal functioning society.

In an article entitled “Our Monsters Ourselves,” author… offers a new perspective on Beowulf and its female characters. She agrees with the author that Beowulf focuses on themes such as honor, war, and violent acts. According to the critic, all the females in Beowulf are peacemakers. The women are either peace-weavers that try to avoid conflict between tribes, or used as trophy ideas. She is critical of the fact that these characters did not fulfill their roles. Wealhtheow served as a prize to help avoid wars between tribes. Hildebruh, Freawaru and others failed in their roles as peace weavers. They did not rise above the gender norms of women.

Grendel’s Mother is the only character in the story that appears to have masculine qualities. Grendel’s Mother was a character who fought against her fate and refused to be a victim of society. The author makes a great point by pointing out that Grendel’s Mother was not always portrayed as a villain. She was depicted as a creature because she posed a danger to male authority and departed from the typical female roles in narration. In the narration, she is described as a fighter. Grendel’s mother challenges the traditional roles of women in the story by breaking into Heorot’s hall, and eventually fighting Beowulf. She challenges gender roles as she decides to avenge son’s murder. In most stories, avenging the death of a son is usually a man’s role. However, in Grendel, Grendel mother takes on this masculine role. She believes that Grendel’s mom was evil because of her masculinity in Beowulf. She defied the gender roles and was therefore compared to a monster.

Kelly Bray’s “Medieval Women” focuses primarily on Beowulf. Bray argues that Wealhtheow didn’t make for a very good peace weaver. She admits to being a tool. Bray discusses Hildeburh’s and Freawaru’s marriage as peaceweavers. She concludes, in the end, that marriages built on the idea of peace weavers lead to conflict or war. She says that Grendel’s Mother is the only woman in Beowulf who has power. Grendel’s Mother, in her attempt to avenge the death of son she was attempting to kill Beowulf. She is defeated. Grendel’s mom was unique because she went above and beyond the normal roles women play. She took the matter into her head and faced the issues head-on when she sought revenge for her son’s murder.

By researching Beowulf and analyzing the narrative, literacy critics came up with a unique way to portray the women. Each critic chose three or more categories to describe women. Porters argues that Beowulf is a story about women, and they are also central to society. She describes hostess and peace weavers as well as monsters. Some other critics discuss the same idea but order women differently. Each critic has a centralized idea of women falling into two categories: hostess or peace weaver. Critics were divided on the role of Grendel’s mom. Was Grendel’s mother a hostess and a beast? According to critics Bray as well as the author of Beowulf’s Female Characters “, Grendel Mother was the one woman that defied the stereotypes of women. Both agreed that Grendel’s Mother is portrayed as a monster because she is powerful and capable.

Murphy, another critic, says that Grendel’s Mother belongs to the hostess category but is a terrible host because she kills any guest who enters her house. The reader will learn that the different categories the women fit into played a key role in Beowulf’s setting and society. After reading the paper and the analysis, it is clear that the author based the structure of Beowulf on the women’s roles. The critics could identify the categories that they thought the woman fit into. Readers can confirm that critics have classified the woman in different categories based on valid arguments and evidence. Grendel’s mom was the subject of the most discussion and the evidence that supported the critics’ claims about her categorisation. The primary debate was whether or not she should be considered a monster. This is a volume of a speech about objectifying women in order to satisfy male libido. When she no long serves this purpose, she’s viewed as an obscene monster who is capable of destruction.

Citations

Bovey A. Bovey A. Bovey A. Murphy L. (2012). Beowulf’s female characters Retrieved November 28, 2019, from https://canterburymonsters.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/hello-world/.

Bray, K. (n.d.). Medieval Women. Retrieved November 30, 2019, from http://csis.pace.edu/grendel/Proj2004A13/women.html.

Medievalists.net. On April 10, 2013. A Feminist Critical Analysis of Beowulf. Retrieved November 30, 2019, from https://www.medievalists.net/2013/04/a-feminist-critique-of-beowulf-women-as-peace-weavers-and-goaders-in-beowulfs-courts/.

Porter, D. C. (2001). The Social Context of Women’s Role in Beowulf Retrieved November 30, 2019, from https://www.heroicage.org/issues/5/porter1.html.

PROCHAZKOVA, Petra. Female Characters of Beowulf Online. Brno, 2007 [cit. 2019-12-06]. Available at: Bachelor’s thesis. Thesis supervisor Prof. Mgr. The supervisor of the thesis is Prof. Mgr. Milada Frankova, CSc..

Unknown. On January 1, 1970. Beowulf’s Female Characters. Retrieved November 30, 2019, from http://acourmonsters.blogspot.com/2016/02/beowulf-and-its-female-characters.html.

Power, Protest, and Change focused on a period when racism and unequal treatment towards blacks were at the forefront of people’s minds. These stories are based on the authors’ writing style, their vocabulary, and the problem and solution. With their choice of vocabulary, the authors showed author’s choices. The writing style effectively demonstrated the author’s preference. By using problem and resolution, authors demonstrated text structure. After reading the following texts: “Black Boy”, What to the Slave is the Fourth of June”, “Ain’t I a Woman”, Brown v. Board of Education”, “Was Brown v. Board a Failure”, the authors demonstrate the text structure by using vocabulary, the style of the writer and solving the problem.

The authors’ vocabulary choice was a good way to demonstrate their authorship. Frederick Douglass’s ideas are clearly expressed. “You can rejoice, but I must weep” (Frederick Douglass 291). Frederick Douglass has a way of expressing his thoughts that is clear. To make sure that the audience understands what he’s saying. Earl Warren’s words can convey a tone. Earl Warren’s use of inconclusive reveals a confused tone. The reader will get a sense of what the author is trying to convey. It is important to remember that vocabulary plays a major role in the story.

The second thing is that the writing style effectively shows author’s preference. Richard Wright’s writing style was descriptive. Richard Wright 4). “One day, my mom invited the tall-black preacher to dinner with fried chicken. Richard Wright describes the preacher as well as the mother’s purpose in communicating with him. Sarah Garland’s writing style was expository. This style of writing allows the reader vivid images to be created. Sarah Garland says that Brown v. Board has been a failure. Frederick Douglass, in his speech “What’s the Fourth of the July to a Slave?” begins by asking rhetorical queries. He asks, for example, what is the relationship between blacks and whites in terms of independence? And if whites rights are extended to Africans. It is effective, because it is meant to make the listeners think. Frederick wants to influence the audience’s perception of the Fourth of the July. They showed that certain writing styles are effective for helping readers understand.

Thirdly they showed text structures through the problem and its solution. Richard Wright has a problem to solve. “I never thought that without him, there wouldn’t be food. “I don’t understand, I replied. My mother asked, “Who brings food in the house?” “Papa,” said I. He was always bringing food. She answered, “I’m not sure.” She said, “You’ll just have to wait for me to get a job so I can buy food.” Richard Wright had to deal with a situation where he was out of food. His mother needed to find a job to solve the problem. Sojourner spoke about her experience of being treated unfairly by men in “Ain’t I a Woman”. She used analogies to describe the solution. This format is very effective, as it allows the reader to easily follow the story flow.

While some will dispute the effectiveness or choice of text structure, it is clear that an author’s writing style may confuse the reader. Wright’s use of imagery in a lyrical manner can cause the reader to be confused and draw conclusions which are neither present nor eluded. Truth’s parallelism can be mistaken as being too wordy or “on her soapbox” by many critics. They claim she makes a lot of generalizations without providing enough specific information. Douglass uses rhetorical techniques that are misleading. The reader will be led down a path of nothingness by his questions, which is a complete waste. The selections for these units are at best biased, with many examples of the rants, ravings, and other ramblings from speakers. They may be notable but they could benefit from more clarity and evidence to support their usefulness and purpose.

In general, Earl Warren, Frederick Douglass and Richard Wright all used author’s selection and text structure in their writings. Sarah Garland and Sojourner Truth also did. They were able to demonstrate author’s selection through their extensive vocabulary. The writers’ styles of writing successfully demonstrated author’s choices. These writers demonstrated how to use problem and solution in a way that supported the main idea. These authors showed that author’s choices and text structures could contribute powerfully to the overall meaning.

If you ask someone to describe the feeling of love, they are likely to give a recent account. We have been influenced by romantic literature, professor interpretations and the notion of a magical series of moments in love. Though most people see love-stories in terms of trust and dedication, they are actually social commentary on the mechanisms that lead to avarice, self-fulfillment, and a desire for power. Love-stories are not true romances, as they contain satire.

George Cukor’s romantic comedies The Philadelphia Story (1940), and The Philadelphia Story (1941) are, in a way, comprehensive comments on the peculiarities human desire. The movie is considered a classic “remarriage” film, a genre created by philosopher Stanley Cavell. The analysis based upon Cavell’s ideas on love elaborates the idea that true love has as its object reality. Cavell writes that the key to mutual love is being aware of one another’s needs. He summarizes the fact that affection is not perfection-seeking, but rather is dependent on judgement and is attentive to one’s true self.

The Philadelphia Story makes this point well. Several scenes in the story show the flaws of Tracy and Dexter’s marriage. Dexter wants Tracy to learn from her past mistakes and not make them again. The reasons Tracy divorced Dexter seemed reasonable at first, but as the film progresses we learn how they both played a role in destroying the other’s character. Tracy’s demands and accusations encouraged Dexter to be an alcoholic. When they weren’t met, Dexter became more addicted. Cavell writes that when Tracy pointed out that Dexter’s drinking problem was hers, he responded “Granted.” However, when you got married to me you became responsible for this problem. Red, you were not a help-meet. You were a critic'” (Cavell 164).

Dexter says to Tracy exasperatedly that she has never listened to her problems, but continues to scold Tracy. It’s easier to wish someone well than to truly be compassionate. Similarly, it’s easier to divorce your spouse than to wait for him to sort out his problems. The comedy “Re-marriage” aims at showing the character’s ability to change their nature and not simply adopt a passive attitude. Cavell writes, ”Importance” is a word that is important to Dexter. As he links Tracy being unable to recall the events of the night in which she became drunk to the fact that she cannot tolerate human weakness.

He mocks Tracy’s upper-class snobbery by contrasting two different adjectives meaning “first class”. Tracy, although raised in a first-class environment, frequently fails to differentiate between what being a decent person means and what it is to be acceptable by the elite. A dull father and the absence of a mother could have contributed to this. Tracy weeps after she ponders Dexter’s words and reminisces about her former marriage. In order to truly be happy and to reciprocate Dexter’s love, Tracy must learn to accept the difficulties that life brings. Tracy and Dexter grow closer when they realize that love for each other is built on understanding the flaws of others. Cavill says that Tracy must learn to accept herself and her fallibility. She can then accept life’s highs and lows.

Cavill’s analysis of The Philadelphia Story sheds some light on how the heart works. He shows that real love comes from facing downfalls and pressures in life and learning to grow. Cavill writes about how Tracy threatened to sink True Love, if Dexter accepted another woman as a passenger. He also describes that Dexter grabbed the person who spoke badly of Tracy and told them that they “still have a wife in me until today” (Cavill 151). The words of these characters have much more power than the rest. Dexter has the ability to manipulate situations using his words, just as Tracy can. George appears to Tracy just before their wedding and they discuss the previous evening. Tracy translates George’s message as a wife “Behave naturally” (Cavill 141). Dexter corrects Tracy in a sly manner by saying, “Behave yourself normally” (Cavill140).

Dexter says that Tracy doesn’t need to follow the social standards of how to treat her husband, but should instead be confident. This is especially true in 1940s when women were not given much respect and were considered housewives. Dexter is quick to respond to George’s attempt to mock Tracy by criticizing his patriarchal society beliefs about the proper attitude for a female. Dexter’s and Tracy’s relationship is authentic, even though they may not always agree on certain issues. They accept the challenges that reality throws their way. Cavell believes that remarriage movies require a transformation of the female character. Tracy’s transformation occurs during the swimming scene, when she becomes aware of her flaws. When Dexter worries about her, she says “Darkly, sire,” Not wounded, but dead.”” (Cavill 141). Tracy’s “rebirth”, which is a rebirth, leads her to discover that she has bad assertiveness. Her first marriage ended because she possessed ‘goddess like’ qualities. Tracy’s rebirth makes her human again and frees her from being locked up in an ivory-tower.

The Philadelphia Story ends with her relinquishing her title, Tracy Lord. This is a sign that she’s been freed from all power issues. Cavell is of the opinion that both men and woman have equal spiritual rights in remarriage movies. Cavell uses Milton’s analogy of love to explain how no one would want to destroy their marriage. They just want to fix whatever is causing the strain. Cavell says that to find true love, you must first understand the depth of your problems. You also need to be patient to maintain strong relationships.

Identity is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “the characteristics which determine who or a thing is” The identity of a person can be defined by their sexuality or age, as well as political beliefs, religious views, or other factors that define them. F. Scott Fitzgerald depicts Dick Diver as a character who is constantly dealing with identity throughout his life. Diver changes his original plan for the novel in an attempt to regain his identity. Dick Diver has a tendency to self-destruct. He is a social climber who has a tendency to self-destruct. Diver’s quest to find sanity, however, leads him on a journey of alcoholism. Incest and a lack in self-knowledge.

Dick Diver is defined by his decisions in Tender is the Night. They determine who he is and what he will become. Diver is distracted by the standards of society, his family, and himself. He struggles to stay true. Diver made a number of bad decisions which led to the current state of his life. Diver makes important decisions, such as choosing a major in college and marrying the woman he chooses. Diver has to make decisions that will affect their entire life. They should not be made lightly. The decisions that Diver makes can bring him happiness or pain. The consequences are obvious. Not choosing your career or marrying someone just because they have money is not a wise choice. Diver’s life would have been very different if he hadn’t made irrational and rash decisions. Dick Diver is under pressure to succeed and to conform to society’s expectations. Scott Fitzgerald shows this. Diver gets into trouble because he believes that one’s social image is determined by the status of their ancestors and themselves. He begins to base his decisions on the opinions and reactions of others. This will only satisfy Diver for a short time and leave him empty. Diver is not happy, but he wastes time and money on extravagant parties. Dick discovers later in life that social status and material possessions do not make you happy. The greatest American allusion was “the awareness of myth of the self made man …. It was impossible to ignore the truth underlying the myth (Pitcher). Diver accepts this unrealistic notion of American Dream that emphasizes wealth, perfection, and success. This belief has caused Dick to lose his American Dream when he realizes that he’s not rich (Florida Atlantic University). It’s an illusion. The Divers are the perfect American Dream. They are attractive, have money and seem happy. The American Dream, however, is a myth. As the novel progresses, readers will see that the Divers’ lives are not perfect. Dick’s initial identity is clouded because of the influence of society on his mind. Diver initially believes that the artificial life he has created is who he is. But we soon learn that Dick Diver doesn’t know himself and is lost without money or material things. Diver discovers that opinions from others do not affect a person’s identity.

Diver’s presumptions about his family also change who he is and set standards that he feels obligated by. Diver’s father is the main source of inspiration for his search for identity. Dick’s dad is the embodiment of everything Dick aspires to be. He is described as being “beyond all doubts” (Fitzgerald 204). Diver’s dad is confident and powerful, just like Diver. Dick Diver was also an honest and virtuous man. Dick Diver could improve on these characteristics. Dick mimics his father but spends most of his time pretending he’s someone else. Diver’s constant attempts to imitate his father’s traits and actions furthers Dick’s lack of identity. Dick’s identity will only be found when he embraces his own personality.

Dick Diver is under even greater pressure to be a good person after his father’s death (Stern). This only makes his bad habits worse. Dick’s addiction to alcohol leads to violence, destruction and violence. Dick Diver’s death changes everything for him. Diver has lost all senses of identity, as he does not behave like a parent to Rosemary nor Nicole. Diver knows that his fate is out of his hands and says, “Good-bye to all Fathers” (Fitzgerald 244). He is completely devoid of any hope. Dick Diver also loses his chance to succeed and does nothing right. He is unable to properly treat his patients, maintain healthy relationships, or lead a virtuous lifestyle. Dick has lost all sense of himself and is unable to achieve “as much as he wanted to” (Fitzgerald 204).

Dick Diver acts like a father in all his relationships, because he has no control over his own life. Diver is a control freak, and he enjoys it because it makes him feel powerful and respected. “Diver undergoes a process of self-dissipation throughout the novel: from a state of initial “all completeness” to an intermediary one in which we are told that “he still had pieces of his own most personal self for everyone”(Fitzgerald, 139) and finally to a total exhaustion, which is a form of inertness”(Stamatescu). This is because younger women have been conditioned to accept being ruled by parents and adults. These women might also be younger and less experienced. They may believe Diver is acting in his own best interest by controlling a relationship. Diver feels more valuable and important when he holds this power. This is because Diver fills in the vulnerability he felt by taking care of others. It’s unhealthy for Diver and leads to him losing his identity when the relationships fail.

Dick Diver is attracted to younger women, because they are freer and don’t have any responsibilities. Diver’s attraction towards Rosemary is explained by this. Diver describes Rosemary as “her body hung delicately between childhood and adulthood–she was barely eighteen years old, almost finished, but there was dew on her.” Diver’s description of Rosemary is a little disturbing, but he is attracted to her youthful qualities. Also, he notes that there was still dew on her skin at that time, indicating her innocence. Diver compares Rosemary and his daughter Topsy. Diver says that Topsy is “nine years old and has a very fair complexion and a beautiful body like Nicole…Dick worried about this” (Fitzgerald 255). Diver’s behavior is extreme and out of place. He even feels attracted towards his own child. Dick Diver has relationships with girls his age like Rosemary. He wishes he was given the same opportunity as they are. The future of young people is in their hands, unlike Diver whose was predetermined by his marriage to Nicole. Diver can witness the younger generation grow and flourish by surrounding them with like-minded people. Diver feels young and free. Diver is also distracted from discovering his true self because he has a false identity. Dick Diver can never be young and must accept that his age is what he is.

Dick Diver’s relationship with Nicole tainted his self-image. Nicole’s schizophrenia made the arranged wedding a good way to gain attention. Nicole’s incestuous childhood and lackluster confidence made her almost totally dependent on Dick Diver, her husband. He reminded Nicole of his own father. Dick Diver, Nicole’s doctor and husband became her father figure. This relationship is stable because of Nicole’s weaknesses and Dick’s sense of importance (Galioto). Dick and Nicole were once very close. This was evident when Dick “left a letter for Maria Wallis, signed “Dicole,” which is the word he used to sign communications with Nicole in their first days of romance” (Fitzgerald 113). The Divers became so dependent on one another that they began to use their own names as if it were one. As the years went by, their marriage grew more and more strained. Dick began to dislike the relationship and Nicole’s inability for him to control her reflected Dick’s own inability to manage his life. The relationship began to deteriorate once Nicole became more confident and independent without Dick.

Dick did not expect Nicole to leave. He felt trapped. Dick did not like their relationship but it was hard for him to realize that Nicole was no longer interested in him and she was also not dependent on him. Diver’s inability to control Nicole, reflected his own lack control. Dick Diver was desperate to have some control in his life, so he tried to save his marriage. Dick Diver’s desperate desire for power was satisfied when Nicole chose to marry Tommy Barban.

The divorce of the Divers changed both Dick’s and Nicole’s identities. Dick lost his identity through their separation, while Nicole discovered hers. Dick lost the idea that he had any importance to anyone and was a father or hero. Dick is depressed and Nicole even tells Dick that he has failed. Nicole was able to find her identity when she separated from Dick. Nicole found her identity through this separation. She felt valued, independent and self-sufficient. Nicole felt like “everything had an overtone” of a different meaning. This would be determined by Dick. Nicole can be herself now that she isn’t relying on Dick. Nicole will be able to live life free of Dick Diver’s constraints now that she is no longer dependent on him. She can have the relationship that is healthy for her.

Dick Diver has a new worldview after he rejects the belief that destiny is inevitability. Diver’s outcome was by no means what he had anticipated. Dick Diver was able to feel powerful because of the status he held in his family, and because he was important to women with weak relationships. But Diver still couldn’t control his destiny. Diver tried to change his fate in order to avoid surprises and unhappiness. Diver was unable to let go of the idea that you cannot control your entire future. Each choice, every action, every feeling, and each decision are inevitable. Dick begins to experience a change in his life, making it increasingly difficult to hold onto his past. He starts to feel like he no longer has an identity. Dick’s self-destruction will not stop until he learns to let go of his control. When he finally realizes it, it’s too late.

Dick Diver’s attempt to change his fate was bound to ruin the reputation he built and to destroy his social perfection. Diver’s attempt to become an ideal member of the society leads him to ruin his career, marriage, friends, and ultimately his identity. Diver destroys all that is valuable to him, including his marriage and friendships. He also loses his sense pride in himself. Diver is punished in many ways and misses out on the opportunity to become the man of virtue and respect he had hoped to be. Diver’s perfection is ruined when the world realizes who he really is. Diver has no identity and his public failure makes him someone else. Diver’s confusion in life leads to a muddled identity. Diver has completely lost his senses of self.

Alcohol distracts Dick Diver so that he can’t deal with his own identity. Diver drinks a lot of alcohol in order to blend into society, and to dull his worries. Dick is reckless and overindulgent because of his complete hopelessness, and he wants to fit in with society. Dick becomes an alcoholic and his image in society changes completely. Diver becomes violent and pitiful. Diver becomes a drunken, uncontrollable man from an otherwise well-groomed man. He lets alcohol define his identity.

Dick Diver is struggling to find himself in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Tender is the Night. Diver’s attention is constantly diverted by obstacles both personal and collective. He is constantly trying to stay away from the society’s expectations of perfection, while dealing with divorce, affairs and alcoholicism. Fitzgerald makes identity a central theme in the novel, highlighting that losing one’s identity can lead to mental illness, as Diver demonstrated. Dick Diver, in his quest to discover himself, develops bad habits and becomes controlling and unrealistic. Diver’s character traits become an integral part of who he is.

Stephen Vincent Benet’s short story “By the Waters of Babylon”, is very much a story about setting. The setting of the story is initially described as if it were thousands of years in the past, but the reader soon realizes that this setting actually takes place in the near future in a post-apocalyptic New York City. The world was destroyed by an event, which reduced all of humanity to living like a caveman. Scenic descriptions were used to establish and investigate this tragic fate.

By the Waters of Babylon’s timing is crucial to the story’s final outcome. It seems from the exposition that John’s Hill People practice hunting and angling skills similar to those of thousands of centuries ago. They use a very formal English and are governed by strict religious beliefs that dictate how they act and think. The way they get food is by hunting, fishing, using bows and arrows and cooking their meals over fire. These are not practices that we see very often today. John notices a few buildings with names on them, like one with the words “UBTREAS”, (581) which is part subtreasury. It is likely that the New York Subtreasury sign was also destroyed. This gives an indication of what has happened. John describes the building in which he was “many steps” that made him “dizzy” (583). The reader is informed that John lives in a high-rise apartment or building. There are no people, or what the author calls “god[s]/demon[s]” (581) present. This tells the reader the previous inhabitants of the building died in the “Great Burning”. It is also the distance between John’s place and the Dead Place that gives the story its mysterious feel. John’s daring to cross the river is a clue that the setting of the story has been established. It sounds similar to the Hudson River, which runs around New York City. John’s home is likely to be somewhere along the Hudson, either in northern New Jersey, the Poconos area, or Southern New York. John is amazed when he crosses into the “Place of the Gods,” (580), by the huge buildings. He says that the city is “dotted” with high-rises (581), as many were likely destroyed during the “Great Burning”. These buildings create a dangerous environment, since they can easily fall on him and cause his death. The setting is more lively because he sees the return of many natural elements, like butterflies and fish. He uses his religious perspective to explain the place. Many buildings are referred to as temples. Statues of American heroes are referred as unknown gods. For example, the statue he calls “ASHING”,(581) is a statue from New York that resembles a god. After the Great Burning, the statue was left in ruins by someone or something.

John travels through many strange places. He describes “passing by many Dead Places”, (578), and “god-roads”, (580), along the way. These are simply a strange interpretation of asphalt. These are probably abandoned places from the “Great Burning”, 580. His fascination with modern technology leads him to think that it has some sort of magical power. His final destination also has an unusual name, “a Place for The Gods” (581). These are the old human civilizations.

This short story’s setting is important because it helps to convey the idea that the story takes place after an apocalypse. The area of the city gives the reader an idea as to why it is so dilapidated. New York City, a big city, would be an obvious target for a calamity. The clues that give the location and date of the story can also provide hints on what a destroyed society might have been like.