Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis of the "war stories
Psychological conflicts and literature
Causes Of Conflict In Literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Analysis of the "war stories
War brings out a side of people they may never have been aware of beforehand. This side is darker and scarcely guided by morals. This in the two texts “The Man I Killed” by Tim O’Brien and “The Man He Killed” by Thomas Hardy. In the first text, the main character, Tim, as well as the reader, is plagued with vivid descriptions of the dead man’s corpse. In the second text, the main character mulls over the idea that if the situation had been anything else, things would have gone differently, which sets up his hesitancy in his action of killing his enemy. There are several similarities shared between the two texts, such as the doubt of the justification of their actions as well the reinforcement of the mentality of either kill-or-be-killed, …show more content…
They both bring in the sense of devastation which follows taking of one’s life and their hesitancy in their justification of their actions. In the first text by Tim O’Brien, the hesitancy isn’t shown through the main character, but rather the side characters, who detail the silence and disbelief which comes from the main character. The unsureness is also displayed in the second text, where it is stated “I shot him dead because - / Because he was my foe, / Just so: my foe of course he was; / That’s clear enough; although” (Hardy). The last word of the quote shows while he is clearly aware the man was killed due to them being on opposing sides of the war, he isn’t sure if he is truly justified in taking the man’s life. Another similarity is the mentality displayed the main character is in a situation where they either kill or be killed. This is exhibited in the second text by the character Kiowa, who tries to comfort the shell-shocked Tim, who states, “ ‘ All right, let me ask a question,’ he said. ‘You want to trade places with him? Turn it all upside down - you want that? I mean, be honest?’” (O’Brien). This shows while the character struggles with his decisions, he also is aware the only other option was the one which would result with his own death. However, despite these similarities, there are several differences between these two
In both books they share some traits, even though they may not look anything alike they are. both of these novels are dystopian novels and many characters share similarity’s.
The topic at hand for both of these stories is simple, but has many opinions. That being a black man was accused as a murder/murder accomplice and was put on trial for it. Both, Monster and Murder on a Sunday Morning, deal with racial issues and being judged for the color of their skin; their cases are very similar but also have some key differences.
In both books, these two gangs decide to have a rumble, a fight with all the members of the two gangs. This is one similarity between these books.
In "Killings"by Andre Dubus and In the Bedroom, directed by Todd Field, the author and director decided to go different directions with the beginning of the story, keeping the plot of the story almost identical. However, beginning the story differently impacted both works in completely different aspects. Dubus begins the story at the funeral of Frank which leads the reader to draw conclusions about what happened before Frank's funeral, while Field’s gives more background to viewer which allows the reader to make more connections. Dubus begins the story at Frank’s funeral which leads the reader to become confused throughout the story. As the reader reads through the story, they have to be able to connect the dots to understand what is happening. While in the movie, Field’s begins with the backstory leading up to Frank’s death which makes it easier for the viewer to understand what is happening. The difference between the two stories impacts how the reader and viewer are able to interpret the story.
between the two authors, they share similarities towards the message they try to send out.
... almost nothing alike from a superficial aspect. The stories have different historical contexts and they simply don’t have much in common to the average audience. It is easy to contrast the stories, but deep within certain elements, the stories can be linked in several ways.
The similarities are prolific in their presence in certain parts of the novel, the very context of both stories shows similarities, both are dealing with an oppressed factor that is set free by an outsider who teaches and challenges the system in which the oppressed are caught.
The underlying themes of the stories are l valid contrasts between the works. In some portions the themes are of the same facets, such as how in both books two men have a direct conflict between
These men are transformed into guilt-laden soldiers in less than a day, as they all grapple for a way to come to terms with the pain of losing a comrade. In an isolated situation, removed from the stressors, anxieties, and uncertainties of war, perhaps they may have come to a more rational conclusion as to who is deserving of blame. But tragically, they cannot come to forgive themselves for something for which they are not even guilty. As Norman Bowker so insightfully put it prior to his unfortunate demise, war is “Nobody’s fault, everybody’s” (197).
The boy awakes from a night of being lost in the woods, a product of pushing the lines of his invisible enemy deep into their own territory and the fright of an unfamiliar animal. He arose to a sight that he is unable to comprehend; that what he is seeing could even be a creation of war. What the boy is confronted with is a horrific and stomach churning scene of “maimed and bleeding men” (Bierce 43) that “crept upon their hands and knees.” (43). Being confronted with the ghastly scene the boy’s ideals of war blind him to the reality of what he is witnessing. An idea that Bierce portrays that even with the sights of battle many men are blinded by their own machismo and idyllic of
It is inevitable when dealing regularly with a subject as brutal as war, that death will occur. Death brings grief for the victim’s loved ones, which William Faulkner depicts accurately and fairly in many of his works, including the short story “Shall Not Perish” and The Unvanquished. While the works differ because of the time (The Unvanquished deals with the Civil War while “Shall Not Perish” takes place during World War II) and the loved ones grieving (The Unvanquished shows the grief of a lover and “Shall Not Perish” shows the grief of families), the pain they all feel is the same.
After an event of large magnitude, it still began to take its toll on the protagonist as they often “carried all the emotional baggage of men who might die” during the war (O’Brien 1187). The travesties that occurred with the brutality of war did not subside and began to affect those involved in a deeply emotional way. The multitude of disastrous happenings influenced the narrator to develop a psychological handicap to death by being “afraid of dying” although being “even more afraid to show it” (O’Brien 1187). The burden caused by the war creates fear inside the protagonist’s mind, yet if he were to display his sense of distress it would cause a deeper fear for those around him, thus making the thought of exposing the fear even more frightening. The emotional battle taking place in the psyche of the narrator is directly repressed by the war.
When you look at the books closely together, you can see how alike they are. Both authors use many analogies to get their points across. For example, Eboo used the Martin Luther King Jr. and George Washington analogy. King knew Washington was a slaveholder, and a symbol of democracy, and it “Neither paralyzed him nor made him cynical.” Both the essays also use repetition with words and phrases such as, “What is the point?”
Aside from the conditions, which lead to the creation of these works, they share a number of other common threads. Symbolism aside these works are very similar on the surface. Both are a collection of seemingly disjointed images, which when put together by the reader or observer serve up a strong social message. That messages being that the wars and conflicts of the times have twisted the world. This is reinforced by the contorted and misshapen images in both works.
The biggest similarity between the two stories is the notion of moral decline; the beings start off as peaceful things that don’t need homes, food or anything. As time goes on they need those things and more. After a while they start stealing from each other and eventually hurt each other.