Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Fate vs free will
In Thomas Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge, there are various themes the novel touches. Two of those themes are: the indelibility of the past and fate vs. free will. These themes revolve around the protagonist, Michael Henchard. In the novel, Michael Henchard is haunted by his past and remains conflicted throughout the story, therefore the indelibility of the past follows him. However, could he just be a victim of fate or perhaps he does not completely have a free will? Under the in influence of alcohol, Henchard sells his wife, Susan, and their daughter, Elizabeth-Jane, for five guineas at a country fair. Consequently, he suffers with an internal conflict, albeit the position he earned as as mayor should suffice his selfishness he is troubled by the burden of his own mistakes, thus he lives in the shadow of the indelibility of the past. Nevertheless, he attempts redeeming himself, but unfortunately it backfires him. He accepts the fact that the past cannot be buried or denied and succumbs in guilt and self-destruction. In his will, Henchard surprises the audience with a tragically, yet nostalgic request. He It’s not a rational act, in fact, it's hard to blame fate for his mishaps especially considering that Henchard never blames any external factors for what happens to him. It can be said that he can't control his bad temper, therefore he had no free will. However, the audience can infer that his mistakes drove him into a perpetual state of guilt because he is aware that he caused them. When he realizes the loathsome mistake he made by selling his wife and daughter, he makes an oath to God. He exclaims “I, Michael Henchard, do take an oath before God that I will avoid all strong liquor for the space of twenty-one. And this I swear upon the the book before me; may I be stricken blind and helpless if I break this oath!” His misfortunes are undeniably caused by his actions and internalized
Within the memoir, The Glass Castle, the self destructing addiction of alcohol becomes an apparent theme throughout the literature. Alcoholism is a disease that can cause destruction to families and even ruin lives. This is a common occurrence that effect’s many Americans today. Alcoholism is one of the most common problems in families, it doesn’t always interfere with just the person drinking the alcohol. It also affects the people around the influenced person. Rex’s struggle with alcohol is logged through his daughter Jeannettes struggles as she is finding the balance between respecting daughter and a strong individual. It is through her accounts that the reader is able to see the truly damaging effects of this disease.
Before Mrs. Ames and the mother realize the restrictions of their old lives, their worlds have been full of disillusionment and ignorance. Mrs. Ames, for example, is oppressed by her husband’s silence and the search for love and tenderness from anyone, because she lives each day alone, ignored by her scornful husband. And, as a result of being left companionless, she does not mature, rather she longs for tenderness. In other words, Boyle explains her dysfunctional relationship with her husband, “The mystery and silence of her husband’s mind lay like a chiding finger of her lips. Her eyes were gray for the light had been extinguished in them” (57). That is, Mrs. Ames’ spirit remains oppressed by her husband who treats her as a child, and, in doing so, isolates her from his world.
The heroine, Mrs. P, has some carries some characteristics parallel to Louise Mallard in “Hour.” The women of her time are limited by cultural convention. Yet, Mrs. P, (like Louise) begins to experience a new freedom of imagination, a zest for life , in the immediate absence of her husband. She realizes, through interior monologues, that she has been held back, that her station in life cannot and will not afford her the kind of freedom to explore freely and openly the emotions that are as much a part of her as they are not a part of Leonce. Here is a primary irony.
...ueled by the debate of Fate vs. Free Will. It is unclear at first whether the events that take place, occur because they are supposed to, or because Macbeth makes them. Through further investigation it becomes clear that Macbeth is corrupting his own idea of fate, by using his free will. He thinks that his fate is something he is able to control, and continually takes steps to ensure that. While he may think what happens to him is fate, it is not. He completely takes his life into his own hands, and makes it his own. He hears what the sisters have to say, and makes his own judgments accordingly. Macbeth is a character that hears a profound destiny for himself, but shapes it in his own way.
Mary Dempster is an excellent example of someone who is different and does not embody the values of Deptford society. She is the young, light-hearted wife of the Baptist preacher. She is considered to be somewhat simple-minded and unsuitable as a minister’s wife because she lacks interest and aptitude for housekeeping and cooking and laughs like a girl at her own failures when she tries do such things. Also, her generous nature makes her incapable of living within her husband’s income. Instead of being thrifty, she is more interested in giving things away. On one occasion, she gives away an ornamental vase that the Church had provided as part of the furnishings of their house. This action causes a big uproar because the villagers view this as stealing from her husband’s Church. Mary Dempster’s kindness and generosity of spirit are definitely viewed by them as major character flaws.
The author presents a scenario towards the end of the book where Grange reminisces on a bygone time in which he failed to protect his wife from being dishonored by the man whose land he sharecrops on, ??Grange, save me! Grange, help me!? He had plugged his ears with whiskey, telling himself as he was not to blame for his wife?s unforgivable sin?he had blames Margaret he blamed Shipley, all the Shipleys in the world?
Thornton Wilder was born on April 17, 1897, and died on December 7, 1975. He was born in Madison, Wisconsin to Amos Wilder, an American diplomat, and Isabella Wilder. Thornton Wilder started writing plays in The Thacher School in Ojai, California, and graduated from Berkeley High School in 1915. He served in the Coast Guard in World War II. After the war he attended Oberlin College, then Yale University where he earned his B.A. in 1920. His writing was honed at Yale where he was a part of the Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity which is a literary society. In 1926, he earned his M.A. in French from Princeton University. Wilder won Pulitzer Prizes for The Bridge of San Luis Rey in 1928, Our Town in 1938, and The Skin of Our Teeth in 1942. He also won the Peace Prize of the German Book Trade in 1957, the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1963, and the National Book Award in 1967 for his novel The Eighth Day.
Through the character of Silas, Howells illustrates the themes of affluence, ambition, rise/fall as Silas undergoes challenges with social standings throughout the novel. One would think that as a result of Silas’ huge fortune attained through his work in the paint business, that he would rank high in the social standings. However, in giving the reader a clearer sense of the Lapham’s wealth, Howells states, “They went upon journeys, and lavished upon cars and hotels; they gave with both hands to their church and to all the charities it brought them acquainted with; but they did not know how to spend on society” (pg. 25). Howell’s parallel structure in repeating “they” followed with a distinct action- evidenced through the words went, lavished, and gave— emphasizes and builds momentum to the contrast seen in the phrase “they did not know” in referring to their inability to connect with society. Due to Silas’ extreme wealth in addition to his exceedingly strong desire to ...
As her dad could never choose between drinking or raising a child , but shouldn’t that be easy ? Of course on the ground that as a caring parent one chooses their family well being and happiness over their own selfish needs. Together Jeannette and her siblings experience lack of care and attention from their irresponsible Parents. As she states “ I had been counting on Mom and Dad to get us out, but I now know I had to do it on my own.” At that moment she had began to lose hope in her parents, and decided to take matters into her own hands. Not to mention the self centered woman they had as a mother. She exclaims, “why spend the afternoon making a meal that will be gone in an hour, When in the same amount of time, I can do a painting that will last forever ? She put her own selfish needs before her children 's need. Is that a mother someones want ? One, where you can’t even rely on for a hot cooked meal ? I think not! Despite the difficulties jeannette face, she’d still overcome
In Plato’s republic, a philosophical account on the kallipolis (the beautiful city) is built on the perspective of Socrates and his discussion between his companions. In the republic, the city in which ones live in depends on the soul and the character of the city one lives in. In this paper the character of human nature and politics will be discussed in how a city is ought to be by the influence of human nature and politics. Firstly, the influence of human nature on politics will be looked at, for example according to Plato on behalf of Socrates; he claims that a just soul creates a just society, where it is human nature to be just, that influences in creating a just political system. Secondly, politics influences human nature, where in the republic when the discussion of guardians starts out between Socrates and the companions, there is political thought discussed between them, where Socrates wants to create the perfect guardians through specific training in all types of skills instituted to creating a perfect protector. Lastly, human nature is human soul if the soul is just the city is going to be just. It is the human nature which has created communities without any political thought put in place; it political thought that forms rules and laws. Thus, human nature is part of the individual understanding of its society that creates an understanding of how one ought to be, which in turns creates rules and laws that is essentially viewed as politics.
My response paper speaks directly to Murray Forman’s “Welcome to the City” essay, pecifically, the complex relationship the ghetto has with its inhabitants as well as outsiders. In the essay Forman says, “Youth continues to be framed against the American middle-class ideals of a liberated consumer culture” (47). Since our course is focused on black popular culture, I thought it would be interesting to examine the portrayal of domestic space occupied by black families on television sitcoms, a genre defined heavily by shows from the 1950s. Additionally, Forman specifically mentions Chicago’s Cabrini Green housing projects as an example of urban housing development, and that seemed like an invitation to analyze episodes of Good Times. Understanding the ghetto as both a real and imagined place needs to be contextaulized in the larger concept of homeownership and the American Dream.
Henchard's fate was strongly rooted in his character. He has several character flaws that contributed to the break down of every relationship he had. At the beginning of the novel it is his temper that starts the whole story off. At the fair in Weydon - Priors, he becomes angry with his wife while he is drunk. Henchard tries to sell her because he believes that it is Susan's and the child's fault that he is not successful. This is evidently not the first time. He finds an interested man who pays five pounds and five shillings for her. This of course is the beginning of the break down of his family life and his role as a father. Henchard is upset when he sobers up the next morning. There are other instance where Henchard's temper destroys his relationships. The next episode in the story is when Farfrae's idea for the fair works better than his own. In a fit of jealous rage, Henchard fires his good friend. This alienates Farfrae from both Henchard and Elizabeth-Jane. It also distances Henchard from Elizabeth-Jane and Farfrae. His temper has now caused a fault in his business and his family. Farfrae sets up a business in competition with him. Henchard also denies Farfrae the right to court his daughter. This of course pushes Elizabeth-Jane farther from her father. In Henchard's anger and other habits there is an element of control. That is lack of control. Henchard, it seems, likes his drink. In the beginning of the story he asks for some liquor to be added to his furmity. Once drunk, he losses control and becomes angry. This of course leads to the family break up. In the morning, he swears, While he is sober for those years, he is very prosperous. Henchard becomes a wealthy corn merchant as well as the Mayor of Casterbridge. However, when the twenty-one years are over he starts drinking again. Prior to this because of his temper and the such, he is a ruined man. When he takes up drinking again it just hastens the downward spiral he is on. He is an embarrassment to himself and all that know him. This quote is from the visitation of the Royal Personage. Farfrae had set up a reception for the royal guest. Henchard's presence at the arrival of the guest was denied by the council.
In actuality, she was defiant, and ate macaroons secretly when her husband had forbidden her to do so. She was quite wise and resourceful. While her husband was gravely ill she forged her father’s signature and borrowed money without her father or husband’s permission to do so and then boastfully related the story of doing so to her friend, Mrs. Linde. She was proud of the sacrifices she made for her husband, but her perceptions of what her husband truly thought of her would become clear. She had realized that the childlike and submissive role she was playing for her husband was no longer a role she wanted to play. She defied the normal roles of the nineteenth century and chose to find her true self, leaving her husband and children
Webster defines fate as a “ a power thought to control all events and impossible to resist” “a persons destiny.” This would imply that fate has an over whelming power over the mind. This thing called fate is able to control a person and that person has no ability to change it.
Along with remarriage and the responsibility of a daughter, Henchard also adopts a work associate. Donald Farfrae, a young Scottish man, is appointed manager of Henchard’s dwindling corn business. In this point of the novel, the character development of Michael Henchard is proved through every outwardly observable aspect. Henchard holds postion of mayor, rekindles his marriage, and gains a friend. Alas this prosperity for Michael Henchard is not permanent. Although the managing skills of Donald Farfrae allow for a revival of Henchard’s corn business, Farfrae’s interest in becoming mayor drive the two apart. Henchard displays immense insecurity as he reverts to old habits and dismisses his colleague, Farfrae, despite the tremendous help he has provided Henchard with both his business as well as his well-being. This tendency is not odd though, Henchard also disowns his daughter, Elizabeth-Jane, for a similar reason. When Henchard is given the upsetting news of his daughter’s biological origins, he can no longer tolerate her presence in his household. Feeling as if he holds no importance in Elizabeth-Jane’s life, he lets insecurity and self-pity take control. Although Elizabeth-Jane was all Henchard had left after his wife’s death, the thought of caring for another man’s daughter was too much for Henchard to bear. Elizabeth-Jane eventually slipped out of Henchard’s life just as she had before that night at the furmity