It can be said that Richard Sheridan was a man who was far ahead of his time, not only in ideals but in humor as well. The way that Sheridan chose to expose his insight on the world that lay before him was through the literary medium, The Rivals. In it, Sheridan uses various allegorical characters to display faults that he observes in human nature as a product of 18th century society. Some of the traits that Sheridan is attempting to illustrate to his readers are ignorance in women, neuroticism and captious attitudes in couples, and pride. Sheridan creates a satirical masterpiece in his play and clearly displays some of the many absurd characteristics that were prevalent among the individuals that made up his own culture.
The character that Sheridan used to satirize the trait of ignorance of education in women was Mrs. Malaprop. Mrs. Malaprop was easily one of the most humorous characters in the play because of her subtle errors in the usage of the English language. At various times throughout her dialect, words would blatantly be misused due to their approximation in sound to the correct word that was appropriate to the context of her dialogue. For example, when Mrs. Malaprop spoke of the uselessness in pursuing Lydia she claimed “there’s nothing to be hoped for her; she’s as headstrong as an allegory on the banks of the Nile” (50). Clearly the word Mrs. Malaprop should have used was “alligator”, but the word “allegory” sounds so similar most people are able to spot the mistake with ease. This misuse of words due to similarity in sound is
known as a malapropism, which actually gained its name after the play had become quite popular. Another example is when Mrs. Malaprop tells Lydia “No caparisons, miss, if you please. C...
... middle of paper ...
...ant ways to point of the faults and flaws in a various array of things. When being too aggressive or hostile when trying to show one’s opinion on a matter, others are normally not receptive to such methods of persuasion. But when a lighthearted attempt to point out matters is used with the help of humor, people become receptive and willing to see what someone has to say. This is exactly how Richard Sheridan was able to point out ridiculous human traits through his play The Rivals. He used Mrs. Malaprop and her many malapropisms to illustrate ignorance in women and how it presents a problem in English society. He also uses the character Faulkland to show how captiousness can spoil a relationship that was in no danger in the first place. Lastly, Sheridan uses understatements made by Sir Lucious to show the futility and foolishness that come as a result of pride.
In The Crucible by Arthur Miller, both pride and excessive pride influence the characters throughout the play. Pride is a sense of one's dignity and worth. Excessive pride is being overly confident of one's own self worth. Throughout, pride influences the actions, reactions, and emotions of the characters in such ways to establish the outcome of the story. Three characters are impelled by their pride. Hale, who takes pride in his ability to detect witchcraft; Elizabeth Proctor, whose pride makes forgiving her husband difficult; Proctor, whose excessive pride causes him to overlook reality and the truth.
Conroy displays his life through his novel, The Lords of Discipline, to give readers a visual demonstration of how life connections can transform the entity of a novel. Conroy's attendance to the Citadel, his family, and the South helped influence his innovative writing style.
September 11, 2001 marked a tragic day in the history of the United States; a terrorist attack had left the country shaken. It did not take long to determine those who were behind the attack and a call for retribution swept through the nation. Citizens in a wave of patriotism signed up for military service and the United States found resounding international support for their efforts in the war on terror. Little opposition was raised at the removal of the Taliban regime and there was much support for bringing Osama Bin Laden and the leaders of al-Qaeda to justice. Approval abroad diminished approximately a year and a half later when Afghanistan became a stepping stone to the administration’s larger ambition, the invasion of Iraq. The administration would invent several stories and in some cases remain silent of the truth where would prove positive for the Iraqi invasion. It seems they were willing to say anything to promote the largely unpopular and unnecessary war they were resolved on engaging in.
Where Men Win Glory is an ironic euphemism for war. The title is ironic because there is nothing glorious about war or the way it ended Pat Tillman’s beautiful life. Jon Krakauer orchestrates this masterpiece with his diligently, articulated descriptions and with a timeline sewn together from the threads of two worlds. The author’s style can best be characterized by his challenging, precise diction and his ability to fluently intervene pertinent quotes and facts that further persuade the reader toward his cause. Throughout the book, the author’s tone harnesses resentment towards the militant hierarchy; for through its ingenuousness, deceit, and manipulation, the military uses Pat’s death as propaganda to bolster the war’s support. Furthermore, the military covers up the fact that Tillman was a victim of fratricide, and it deceives the nation into believing Tillman’s end was a valiant fight against insurgents. When the truth is exposed and pursued by Dannie - Pat’s mother - the army destroys evidence and pleads guilty to ignorance as a rebuttal. This book is molded by three prodigious aspects that help to illustrate Pat’s life story. The carelessness of war, importance of family, and enhancement through change were all important ingredients that created a virtuous life. Each theme, in addition, challenges me personally to reassess the facts I have been fed and the reality that I have been presented. By doing so, I can achieve a sound base of knowledge and an intellectual prowess capable of challenging all facts presented.
What would you do if you had a huge secret to hide? In the book Cross Fire, James Patterson demonstrates a secret that needs to be hidden for some time. Within doing this he also demonstrates a good example of a complete plot. On the other hand the book is mostly written in first person point of view. This has a major effect on the book, in the way it is used.
you to keep up the good fight. I never told you, but our life is
Nora and Mrs. Wright’s social standing when compared to the men in each play is inferior. Both works expose their respective male characters’ sexist view of women diminishing the women’s social standing. Each work features egotistical men who have a severely inflated view of their self-worth when compared to their female counterparts. The men’s actions and words indicate they believe women are not capable of thinking intelligently. This is demonstrated in “Trifles” when Mr. Hale makes the statement about women only worrying about mere trifles. It is also apparent in “A Dollhouse” when Torvalds thinks his wife is not capable of thinking with any complexity (Mazur 17). Another common attribute is of the women’s social standing is displayed as both women finally get tired of feeling like second class citizens and stand up to the repressive people in the women’s lives (Mulry 294). Although both women share much in common in their social standing there subtle differences. Torvald’s sexist view of Nora is more on a personal level in “A Dollhouse” while the male characters’ sexist views in “Trifles” seem to be more of a social view that women are not very smart and their opinions are of little value. This attitude is apparent in “Trifles” as Mr. Hale and Mr. Henderson’s comments about Mrs. Wright’s housekeeping (Mulry 293). As the women in both works reach their emotional
I felt a wave of irrational guilt and fear. My teeth chattered, my skin turned to goose flesh, my knees knocked. Yet I was strongly attracted and looked in spite of myself. Had the price of looking been blindness, I would have looked. (Ellison 939)
If I had to pick one out of the many stories that we have read and say that it moved me the most, I would have to say that the story would have to be “Battle Royal”. The reason that the story did move me so was because of the author’s keen use of symbolism, the author portrays a larger meaning than what is initially implied to the reader who does not thoroughly analyze the text.
Throughout the ages, men and women have been at the heart of myths and legends, evolving into tragic heroes in large part due to the embellishment bestowed upon them over the ages. From Odysseus and Achilles to Brutus, Hamlet, and King Lear, epic poems have revolved around the tragic hero. Pat Tillman was a man of many aptitudes and virtues, never satisfied by the mediocre, striving for more adventure, more meaning, in his tragically short time on Earth, and personifying the phrase carpe diem. Even Pat Tillman had tragic flaws; his unwillingness to be typical, his undying loyalty to family and country, and his curiously concrete set of morals amalgamated to set in motion Tillman’s eventual death. These, whatever the outcome might have been, are not by any means, the archetypical tragic flaws. They are, as Jon Krakauer later described, “tragic virtues.” Where Men Win Glory is not solely a tribute to Pat Tillman. What makes it truly unique is its exhaustively comprehensive history preceding Tillman’s death, and equally essential, the events that transpired following his death, including the cover-ups, scandals, corruption, falsified documents, indignities, and lies that facilitated, also, in emphasizing the core themes, of which Tillman was the epitome. Tillman’s fidelity and devotion to the people whom he loved, the use of misinformation and cants surrounding his death, and others’ responses to what Tillman considered paramount in his life all played a key role in the tragedy of a man who won glory.
The task which Shakespeare undertook was to mold the hateful constitution of Richard's Moral; character. Richard had to contend with the prejudices arising from his bodily deformity which was considered an indication of the depravity and wickedness of his nature. Richard's ambitious nature, his elastic intellect, and his want of faith in goodness conspire to produce his tendency to despise and degrade every surrounding being and object, even as his own person. He is never sincere except when he is about to commit a murder.
In the 1940‘s racial segregation gripped southern American life. The notion of separating blacks from whites created immense tension. Separate water fountains, bathrooms, restaurants, etc. were variables that helped keep races apart. “Jim Crow” laws in the south were intended to prevent blacks from voting. These laws, combined with the segregated educational system, instilled the sense that blacks were “separate” but not equal (174). Many people of color weren‘t able to survive through this time period because of the actions of whites. One individual who overcame the relentless struggles was Ralph Ellison. Ellison, a famous author, depicted racial segregation in the 1940’s through a fictional short story entitled “Battle Royal.” Battle Royal symbolized the actions of what “other” people became accustomed to. Blacks were thought to be socially inferior and live in the shadows of whites. The idea which Ellison uses to paint “Battle Royal” consists of that when one sex or race treats another as an object or animal, both become dehumanized (174). Ellison’s use of hidden meanings conveys his theme more effectively.
Instead of a powerful physical image, like Queen Elizabeth I, Richard implements elegant soliloquies, engages in witty banter, and attunes the audience to his motives with frequent asides. This flexibility demonstrates Richard's thespian superiority and power over the rest of the play's cast, making him a unique character in the play, but why does he do it? This constant battle between characters to claim mastery over a scene leaves the audience with a seemingly overlooked source of power for an actor [clarify/expand].
And yet, if we do not place our sympathies with Alceste, we search this play in vain for another character worthy of them. The silly marquises do not command much respect. Arsinoé is conniving, spiteful, and a critic of everyone else's morals. Oronte is not only as vain a...
In Twelfth Night, Shakespeare portrays several characters in a controversial way. Some witty characters are portrayed as foolish, and some foolish characters are portrayed as witty. In the beginning of the play, Sir Andrew and Malvolio are presented as smart people; however, as the play progresses, the audience is exposed to their foolish sides. On the other hand, Sir Toby and Feste are portrayed as fools, but as the plot develops the audience acknowledges their wisdom. Malvolio and Sir Andrew’s foolish sides are exposed because of their gullible nature, while Feste and Sir Toby’s wisdom is revealed through their insightful remarks and brilliant prank ideas.