Author's Posts

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

Read more

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.

Read more

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.

Read more

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.


Bovey A. Bovey A. Bovey A. Murphy L. (2012). Beowulf’s female characters Retrieved November 28, 2019, from

Bray, K. (n.d.). Medieval Women. Retrieved November 30, 2019, from On April 10, 2013. A Feminist Critical Analysis of Beowulf. Retrieved November 30, 2019, from

Porter, D. C. (2001). The Social Context of Women’s Role in Beowulf Retrieved November 30, 2019, from

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

Read more

Henry James’ popular novel The Turn of the Screw, which is a classic in the genre, is frequently re-examined due to its ambiguous writing. This prevents the readers from reaching a conclusion. This ghost story demonstrates both the faith and distrust in ghosts, who are attributed to the main events of the story. In England in the 1840s a young and inexperienced woman, Flora Miles becomes the governess at Bly, a country estate she calls. Readers are captivated by her description of events that take place in the house. A lonely woman, because of social hierarchy and her hauntings. She recruits the help of Mrs. Grose, a serious servant who took care of Flora and Mile’s grandmother before she passed away and has stayed with the family ever since collecting trust and secrets. Mrs. Grose – a downstairs maid who looked after Flora and Miles’ grandmother before her death and has stayed on with the family for years collecting secrets and trust – accepts the request without saying a word. It is believed that the stress and behavior of the governess are directly related to her supernatural encounters. However, it seems the natural world has taken a greater toll on the governess’ psyche. Mrs. Grose has a complex relationship with the governess, which is filled with passive plans. She gathers information, suggests ideas that the governess will become fixated on and executes sabotage.

In an important development in the story, Mrs. Grose continues to make the governess think that they’re friends so she can observe her and gather information which will be used to her detriment. Mrs. Grose is not eager to see the governess and so she often pretends that their encounters mean nothing unless the governoress acts strangely or says something alarming. By the governess agreeing to do a job which was often rejected, and her obsession with the uncle and his two nephews, Mrs. Grose assumes that she has a good sense of persuadability. In the same way as the reader, it seems that Mrs. Grose concludes the governess as someone who makes outrageous decisions based on little or no information. For example, she may agree to an improbable request to kiss by filling out Mrs. Grose’s sentence with strange words, such as: “Would yo mind, miss, I use the freedom-” Mrs. Grose is an obedient member of the hierarchy and believes that these actions are indicative of a governess who lacks experience and common sense. The governess has shown her to be a very easy person to work with, and Mrs. Grose believes this based on the information she receives. When Mrs. Grose has the chance, she will provide the missing information to the governess if she is confused. In a state of confusion, Mrs. Grose is able to provide the information that Mrs. Grose needs. After providing only a few details, Mrs. Grose can tell you what and who she was talking about. The governess was so consumed by her own fright that she failed to notice Mrs. Grose’s improvised explanation of Peter Quint. “Gaping, she gathered it together. “He didn’t wear his hat. He did, however, wear a waistcoat. Both were here, last year. (James 24). When asked by the governess about the death of Miss Jessel, Mrs. Grose doesn’t give any details. Instead she conveys her emotions. Mrs. Grose must be aware that the governess will fabricate a story to benefit Mrs. Grose. The governess’s instability and obsession with the stories increases as she ponders on these suggestions. The governess is seen to take Mrs. Grose’s ideas and extend them.

Mrs. Grose encourages Miss Jessel to develop strange behaviours that make her seem like a lunatic, not only to her children but also to her colleagues and boss. When Miss Jessel asks her for advice or support, Mrs. Grose is unable to respond. However, she allows and funds the conversation with her leading questions. As the governess’s expectations take over, she feels a desire to answer all of the questions. The governess feels anxious about the safety and well-being of her children. Mrs. Grose reinforces that concern and intensifies the governess’s fright. Mrs. Grose knows that the governess is desperate to succeed and she suggests the governoress contact the uncle to help the children. The governess becomes agitated when she realizes her impending failure. James 48). Feeling betrayed and hurt by her pride, she threatens to quit. This response assures Mrs. Grose of her success in threatening, and also that the full extent to which the governess’ reckless behaviour will be met. Grose can eliminate rational thought by encouraging the governess to think irrationally.

In order to obliterate her governess’s sanity, Mrs. Grose, who has been playing the role of a false companion, detaches from this role. After some discussion, Mrs. Grose decided to accompany the governess and retrieve Flora. However, once Flora was on the other side, Mrs. Grose ran to Flora, offering her support as well as an alternative for the governess. Flora is likely to have chosen Mrs. Grose as her side because she felt threatened by the governess. Mrs. Grose also presented herself as an alternative. The governess is thrown into a frenzy for several hours and her ego is destroyed. Mrs. Grose then takes on the role of caring for the children. Flora is ill and the governess blames herself for it, leaving her feeling guilty. Miles is left to deal with the governess’s instability after Mrs. Grose takes Flora to her uncle. The governess is left alone with no one to stop her from acting on her thoughts. As the governess observes, it appears that Mrs. Grose expected the governess would fail. As Mrs. Grose has no one to turn to when the governess is having an incident or seeing a ghost, she leaves her to confront and defeat herself.

The reason for Mrs. Grose’s actions is not clear, but she leads the governess towards losing her lucidity and reputation. Mrs. Grose’s mission was accomplished in a sly way. First she suggested and then encouraged feebleminded activities. After completing these tasks, Grose leaves her role as friend for the governess. Mrs. Grose’s motives are unclear but may be connected to the many guardians that have died over the years. Perhaps she is trying to gain independence to raise the children, or she might just want to attract her uncle to their house. Henry James’ beautifully crafted work makes it difficult to make a definitive conclusion. This is because the novel creates interesting illusions. Readers may be left wondering whether Bly’s terrors came from the governess’s ghosts or Mrs. Grose.

Works Cited

No changes are necessary.

James, Henry. The Turn of the Screw tells the story of a governess who is haunted by supernatural forces, as she looks after two children in an old country estate. Ed. Second Ed. by Deborah Esch, Jonathon Warren and Deborah Esch Second Edition. W.W. Norton published a book in 1999 in New York. Print.

Killoran, Helen. Modern Language Studies, 23.2 (1993), 13-24. Web.

Read more

“Two Kinds” “TBE” “Miss Amer”

People can be changed by the expectations and pressure of the society. The evils of our society are explored in “The Bluest Eye” and “Two Kinds”, by Amy Tan and Julia Alvarez. In “The Bluest Eye”, Pecola wanted to fit in, but the interaction she had with Maureen & Junior, as well the idea that beauty was important, led her to lose her self-esteem. Jingmei Woo also didn’t like to disappoint or fail her mother in “Two Kinds”. Her mother had moved to America so she could have better opportunities. She was devalued by her self-worth when she saw what Waverly expected of her. In contrast, the movie “I Want to Be Miss America” shows how beauty can affect a person’s self-esteem, as it can lead to self doubt. So, the interaction between the main character and other people or ideas can negatively impact their self esteem.

Pecola Breedlove is the main character and protagonist in Toni Morrison’s “The Bluest Eye”. She was raped by two men, but she also suffered abuse from almost all the characters. Pecola believes that having blue eyes and a light complexion will help her change her view of life. She feels being African American is a bad thing. Pecola’s interactions with people and her ideas had a negative impact on her self-worth after she was raped. Maureen Peal appears on page 64, as she deals with Pecola’s interactions and their argument. Maureen asked Pecola the question: “Have You ever Seen a Naked man?” Pecola, in self-defense, responded that “No father would ever be naked before his daughter. Pecola broke down when Maureen started arguing with Frieda because Maureen was obsessed with boys naked. Pecola’s head was tucked in a sad, funny and helpless way (Page 72) as a result. Maureen and Junior both denigrate Pecola. Junior invites Pecola over to his house and tells her about the kittens. Pecola is amazed that it’s possible to pet them. Junior was throwing the kitten at Pecola as he handed it to her. The result is a scar. Pecola then tries to escape, but Junior tells her that she has become his prisoner. Geraldine calls Pecola a “nasty little black b*****” (Page 92). Geraldine called Pecola a “nasty little black b*****” (Page 92). Geraldine lowered Pecola’s sense of self-worth by making a judgment about her. Pecola now wants to fit into society better, which is why she has blonde and blue hair with light skin. Jing-mei Woo’s mum wants only the best and so she began preparing her for success in America by putting together a multitude of tests. This ranged anywhere from predicting Los Angeles’ daily temperature to mentally multiplying numbers. She saw her “mother’s disappointed look… I hated her raised expectations and failed expectations… [and] she began to cry.” As she is pushed and reaches her limits, Jing-mei Woo begins to question if she could make her proud. Waverly Woo, Jing’s cousin and “Chinatown’s Littlest Chinese Chess Champion” is also invited to the talent show. Jing’s thinking that as long she looks good, people will applaud her. After the performance, “Waverly shrugged and looked away.” It was then that she said, “You’re not a genius as I am” (page 4 paragraph 53) which brought back all those uncomfortable moments when she felt she had let her mother down again.

In “I Want To Be Miss America”, Julia Alvarez feels the pain of not fitting in in a world where beauty is valued differently. The text says that she watches the Miss America Pageant live on TV. She was told that being thin and white would be the ideal beauty to win the Miss America title. Due to the ideals of society set for beauty, these women began to doubt themselves. They wanted in, but were “short and [their] hair frizzed” (page 38) while others were curvy. The narrator shows how self-doubt is a person’s worst enemy on page 44. Julia Alvarez is “feel[s] a foreigner in her country, which [she] considers now” (Page 43). Julia’s constant doubts about her abilities further diminishes her self esteem as both a woman and American.

At a young age, words and experiences have a great impact on developing self-worth and self-confidence. Pecola, in “The Bluest Eye”, is confronted by Maureen and Junior. They teach her about beauty and make her feel self-conscious. Amy Tan’s novel “Two Kinds”, which features Jing-mei Woo, is also rife with work and negatively impacts her self-esteem. She keeps disappointing her mom. In “I Want To Be Miss America”, Julia Alvarez’s self-doubt is triggered by beauty standards. The protagonists’ interactions with other people and their ideas begin to negatively impact on their self-worth.

Read more

Textual integrity refers to how the poet utilizes context, form and language in order to create a work that is meaningful and valuable. It is also something that will resonate with the audience and move them or even change their minds. In Auden’s “Spain”, “In Memory of W. B. Yeats”, he focuses a number of themes. These include: the way his poetry and that of others can reveal the reality of his time, and the horrors of modern warfare.

Auden begins his speech in Spain by referring to “yesterday”, and the many great achievements of mankind. There is the expansion into “China along trade-routes”, the great conquests, explorations, and wooden and rock man-made marvels like “the Chapel built in the Forest” and “the Carving of Angels”, as well as the growth and industrialisation of modernity. Now that ‘yesterday,’ has passed and we are now in the midst of “Today The Struggle”. Auden describes three main characters: a poor man, a writer, and a scientific researcher. The poet is eager to witness the horror of war in order to write about it. The scientist is occupied by his projects most of the time, but he worries about his friends’ lives. They spend their days in “fireless lodges”, thinking of how “our day was our loss”. Spain looks to the future, a time of romance, exploration, and simple pleasures like “the walks by the Lake”. Then, the harsh reality of today’s brutality ruins this wonderful imaginable idea. Today death and misery are the reality of life. Spain’s Future is Uncertain, It has a Glory Past but Might Not Have a Glory Future. In Memory of W.B. Auden’s thoughts about poetry and a poet in times of hardship as well as normal life struggles are expressed through Yeats. The poem is divided up into three parts. Auden begins by mourning Yeats. Auden then goes on to comment on Yeats’ poems. The first section uses Yeats’ environment to illustrate his death. For example, “brooks froze”, “airports were almost deserted”, or “snow defaced public statues”. It is a powerful way of showing how, because of Yeats, everything stopped. The wolves are also seen running through the evergreen forest, implying that the poet’s poetry will continue to live on even after his death. Yeats has lost his ability to speak up for himself. Now he’s relying on “his admirers” and his poetry is “scattered”, as ashes. But the average man is not able to be effective. Brokers yell and scream on the ground, while the poor continue suffering. Auden’s thoughts are thrown between two elements. One is that a poet can die unnoticed, and almost be insignificant. The other is that it should be a major national crisis. The second section is about the way Yeats’ poetry was shaped. “Mad Ireland Hurt You into Poetry / Now Ireland Has Her Madness and Weather Still” reinforces Auden’s belief that Yeats’ poetry will live on even after his death. Third section: a call. The “Irish vessel”, which has “emptied its poetry”, is still “barking”, indicating that war continues even though Yeats died. Auden says in the final stanza, “We need a poet to teach the free man to praise”, since Yeats has died and we now lack a powerful voice. Auden positions his audience as themselves and not something abstract or abnormal. In “Spain”, for example, he compares characters with ordinary people, such as poets, scientists or poor people. Auden uses this technique to make his audience feel his poetry and for it to stick in their mind. Auden’s dream at the end “Spain” is that “poets will explode like bombs”, implying he would like poets to possess the explosive power of bombs. Auden describes in his poetry the horrific living conditions he had to endure. Dictators suppressed freedoms, and their country was forced into a brutal war. In “In Memoriam W. B. Yeats”, he examines the role of the poet in these horrible situations. In “In Memory of W. B. Yeats”, he explains his belief in the power of poetry to “lift our spirits” and to “persuade us rejoice” despite the hardships that we may face. Auden believes that we should celebrate life now, because it could be taken away from us one day due to an event beyond our control. Death is inevitable and you cannot stop it. Auden acknowledges the importance of love, but also that death and suffering are part of life. They must exist with wonderful things like love. Auden is always commenting on how poets are used to define the way people see reality. He also comments on how their work continues even after they die. He suggests that poetry is a powerful tool to change the minds of people and therefore, the government. Auden’s “In Memory of W. B. Yeats”, the final chapter of the book, calls for other poets who can replace Yeats in his position as a string influencer. Auden’s ending to “Spain” is bleak, as if he didn’t think poets could change anything. In the end, I feel that “In memory W. B. Yeats'” has a greater impact on changing the audience’s mind.

Read more

Ray Bradbury said that he used to read his short stories at girls’ houses. You can imagine what a girl would think if you read her a story rather than slap her. Bradbury, while speaking in a humorous way, understands that short stories have power. They can create an alternative reality. Unfortunately, they are underrated compared to a novel. This is because they contain less information, have fewer pages, and less detail. The length of a story does not affect the message it conveys or its style. Reader’s reactions determine the essence of any story, no matter how long it is. Writers must use the most important elements in story telling to get the audience’s attention. These include setting, character, and theme. Stephen Crane’s story “The Open Boat”, however, reveals these three elements with a chillingly real perspective.

The historical facts about the setting and the context of the story are not only important for the context, but also because they create an authentic, disturbing reality. This story is based on a true incident that occurred in Stephen Crane’s career and life. Crane was a war journalist who traveled around the world to cover war-related events. Crane’s role in this account and in this short story is to report an incident of gunrunning by Cuban rebels to the United States just before the Spanish-American War broke out in 1898. A shipwreck diverts his attention. This information is invaluable, especially when you consider the context that the story provides. When describing the condition of water, the narrator is only hinting at the physical context. He states, “The water off the Florida coast was very cold in January. It was even colder than what he expected.” (356). It is easy to overlook a simple detail in a story that has been so long. This situation becomes more real when you understand this one detail. This story is true. Florida is a real place. It’s on our fifth-grade maps. Florida is the actual place where Crane set off to Cuba, intending to spend 30 hours in an unknowing dinghy. Deep-sea diving is dangerous if you are not prepared. Crane wrote in a report on the sinking, “The Commodore’s whistle had been blown, and the only voice of despair and mortality was that whistle” (Fact and Fiction). 43). Crane is describing a true event in the first-person perspective. This fact, which is a reality, creates an urgency that changes the tone of the story. This is because panic can lead to disaster. This story is based on real historical characters who were also fighting for their life, and united by a “subtle Brotherhood”. These counterparts add a scary element of reality to the story. In truth, Crane represents the correspondent. The cook represents the actual cook for the Commodore. This four-person crew is a real group of people, with real families, jobs and identities. According to Crane’s article in the newspaper, both Murphy & Higgins are men of exceptional character. Crane’s article would have revealed “the splendid manhood of these two men” if he had told the whole story. 72). Murphy and Higgins came close to death on the dinghy. As we’ve already said, deep sea swimming isn’t something to laugh at. Two honorable lives are also not a matter for laughter. Unfortunately, one life ends with the narrative. The short story does mention Higgins, but Crane’s newspaper article mentions the fact that he died. In the story, Crane mentions that “the oiler was lying face down,” but his newspaper article says that “Billy Higgins was lying with his head on sand which was free of water” (358). 73). The story ends with the reader having hope but then the account of history crushes that hope. This is because, although the characters were not deserving of such suffering, the historical account makes it seem even more horrifying.

This short story has a frightening theme, and the history of it adds to the fear. The struggle of man to find his purpose in the world is one of the main themes in this story. This “purpose” is something that almost all human beings have, do, or are going to ask themselves. The narrator struggles with this too. He repeats the quote throughout the story: If I’m going to drown, why was it that I came so far to contemplate trees and sand? This phrase, if not understood in context of Crane’s life purpose and his trip in particular, may lead to pity for Crane and misinterpretation. The reader might think that the narrator’s upset is due to the idea of death. But the story is much more complex than that. Crane, a historian and Commodore passenger, has a specific purpose. He was on his way to Cuba to record an important historical moment. He was supporting the cause of rebels. He was willing to help others. His purpose was instantly taken from him in an apparently random series of circumstances. Crane’s constant doubt about his existence is a result of the depth of Crane’s purpose. Losing your purpose can be depressing, but it is also a reality. Even without the shipwreck, it’s difficult to find a purpose in your life.

The cumulative effect of Crane’s writing is impressive: images, characters and setting details are all contained within just a few pages. Lessons, themes, themes, etc., can also be found. Readers can feel almost as if they are interacting with the characters even without having any personal knowledge. When the reader explores the historical context of the story, he is presented with a different, scarier perspective. These elements, including the plot, characters, and themes are all constantly at work to create an unsettling story.

Read more

George Orwell’s semi-dystopian tale 1984 tells the story of a totalitarian government that dehumanizes its citizens, preventing them from thinking for themselves. Winston Smith is a member the Outer Party in the ranking system of his society. He struggles against the Party as an entire and Big Brother. Big Brother represents many things in 1984. He is the Party’s leader, the Thought Police of Oceania, the ever-lasting conflict, and his vague leadership. George Orwell makes the point that Big Brother has a lot of power and is watching you.

Big Brother plays a significant role in Winston’s daily life from the very start of 1984. In the beginning of 1984, Winston is not fond of Big Brother or his ambiguity. He knows Big Brother is immortal, but has no idea if he exists or not. George Orwell makes the point that Oceania is a country whose ruler has never been known to anyone in the world. Because of this, Oceania’s free-willed citizens who commit thoughtcrime—the only crime there is—question Big Brother and his actions. Winston wonders if the Party’s obsession with being right is the reason they erase their past when wrong. Oceania citizens fear Big Brother because he is more than their leader. He is the terror of going against the grain. He is afraid to think. He is fearful of the thought process. Winston is made aware of his crime after Big Brother’s introduction. In response, Winston begins to make reckless decisions and has an affair. Orwell shows us that Julia influences Winston’s decisions and causes him to think. One of those decisions is to attempt a’rebellion’ against Big Brother, also known as Brotherhood. O’Brien, a member of the Inner Party, confronts Winston. He invites Winston into his home, implying that he is aware of Winston’s thoughtcrimes. Winston interrogates Julia and O’Brien, who are both members of the rumored Brotherhood. O’Brien gives Winston a briefcase containing a copy of Emmanuel Goldstein’s book, which all members of the Brotherhood are required to read.

George Orwell reveals that Winston, Julia and their friends have rebelled far enough by now to hate Big Brother. Orwell tells us that Winston and Julia are aware of the fact that they may be caught one day for their crimes, and will then be erased from the history books. So they do everything they can to avoid being caught by Big Brother.

Winston found out that O’Brien had set up the Brotherhood, as well as Mr. Charrington. The latter gained Winston’s trust through the sale of antiques from eras the Party has erased. Mr. Charrington revealed himself to be a thought police member and took Julia and Winston away for their affair, as well as the belief that a Brotherhood-like organization could exist. Big Brother watched them through O’Brien, Charrington, and a hidden screen in Mr.charrington’s business. Nevertheless, Big Brother’s presence was not important, because they were still criminals. Fear of Big Brother wasn’t enough to keep them on their guard. Orwell made a point that Big Brother is more than just an unnamed political figure. Big Brother is the Party, Thought Police, and also the unspoken or unwritten laws of Oceania.

O’Brien tortures Winston and makes him answer questions to gain his trust. O’Brien brainwashes Winston into believing that 2+2=5 is true and that freedom equals slavery. But he realizes that Winston has still resisted Big Brother despite weeks of brainwashing. O’Brien told Winston that he wouldn’t die if he hated Big Brother. Orwell tells us that Winston is taken into room 101 where “the worst thing” is supposedly hidden. O’Brien then explains that everyone has a different worst thing. For Winston, however, it was the rats. The rats made him betray Julia, the only thing he truly loved. Winston fell in love with Big Brother after he had betrayed her and let her leave. Winston finally received the bullet to his head that he desired and loved Big Brother. Orwell’s explanation of Big Brother with Winston changed as the story progressed. Winston began to view Big Brother as an ominous figure that was always on the watch and was to be despised for his existence. However, after a powerful brainwashing campaign, Winston saw Big Brother in the way he had intended. Big Brother transformed from a looming figure to a leader and protector who helped Oceania win a long-running war.

George Orwell’s Oceania uses its main political character as a metaphor for the government, the police, and the reason why the world is run by compliance. Winston learns from Big Brother that “WAR is PEACE”, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength. Oceania won’t be truly happy with Big Brother but Oceania would crumble without him.

Read more

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.

Read more