Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The
Tragedy impacts each human being differently. Some are able to forgive and forget, some become angry and seek vengeance of some sort, while others bury those feelings deep within themselves and become apathetic. In The Assault by Harry Mulisch uses careful diction, apprehensive tone, striking oxymoron, and dark irony to show that while many may have been involved in the same tragedy, their roles in the tragedy and how they handle grief from it create a different outcome for each. Anton was a child when the Nazi collaborator, Fake Ploeg, was assassinated on his street. Consequentially, his family was killed and Anton buried his grief deep within himself, not wanting to evaluate his feelings and work through his grief. Even into his adult life, …show more content…
he has not seemed to process this grief, but he has sudden bursts of emotion through panic attacks: “ He had the feeling of having just skirted something fatal, something that now seemed to his a dangerous confusion, dizzying cerebral cobwebs caused by sunstroke.
He must forget them and go to sleep (131).” The tone Mulisch uses in this passage can be described as very tense. The first sentence is very long, but separated equally by commas. This gives the sense of being rushed, and not being able to fully stop for breath. The syntax of this sentence convincingly portrays the feeling of having a panic attack. Everything is whirring by too quickly to wrap one’s mind around and it is nearly impossible to take a calming breath. The authors diction also supports how Anton has pushed the memories of the assault far back in his mind. The “ dizzying cerebral cobwebs” are being brushed away by the sunstroke, or in literal terms, …show more content…
Anton is remembering the pain and emotions that have yet to be confronted. These cobwebs are dizzying beccause the have come back to the surface of Anton’s mind so quickly, much like the dizziness one feels when jumping up after sitting or lying down for an extended period of time. Even though Anton has become a successful doctor, with a beautiful wife and child, he is still haunted. It is because of pushing these memories back that he is able to focus on other aspects of his life. Other characters were in some way, more fortunate than Anton, but their loss of loved ones ruined the rest of their lives. Fake Ploeg only lost his father, but the rest of his childhood and adolescence was lost to responsibility. The responsibility to care for and provide for a grieving mother and two sisters prevented him from ever being able to pursue a college education, and he ended up less fortunate than Anton: “ ‘So that’s the difference, right? We’re in the same class, your parents were shot, but you’re doing medical studies all the same where as my father was shot and I repair water heaters.’ ‘But your mother is alive’, said Anton promptly, ‘and your sisters too’. Now he weighted his words carefully. They were on dangerous ground. ‘Besides, isn’t there some difference between your father’s and my parent’s death?’ (88)” This is the first interaction between Fake and Anton, since the night of the assault. In this quote, the fates of both characters are revealed: Fake is a repair-man and Anton is a medical student. Fake immediately seems to detest the fact that Anton is more successful than him. Later in their interaction, we see just how angry Fake is when Mulisch describes him as “asking aggressively (88)” and later he calls Anton a bastard. The climax of their conversation appears when Fake becomes violent: “He turned toward him…and suddenly grabbed the stone…Fake took aim and threw it straight at the mirror…Surveying the damage with a pounding heart, he [Anton] heard Fake’s footsteps run down the stairs. (92,93)” This quote shows an anger within Fake that we fail to see with a bitter and even apathetic Anton. Fake’s loss and his fate could be debated on whether or not it was worse than Anton’s, but it was decidedly different because only Fake’s father was killed. Anton is bitter and almost numb, Fake is full of anger, and Takes is lost in nostalgia.
His role in the assault cost him his brother and the love of his life, and he never seemed to recover from the loss of the latter, as Anton saw when he visited Take’s house and saw the obsession Takes had with the war: “Was this the reason why the map was hanging there? Not because of an insidious nostalgia for the War, but because her [Truus] mouth was imprinted on it? (137)” This quote shows just how lost Takes is in the past. He is consumed in it, he thinks of nothing else, and it makes him miserable. For Takes and the others that invested their lives in the war, they might as well be dead with the rest of their comrades, because they have no interest in the advancements of the world around them. Takes only seems to talk about the past: a Nazi war criminal has been released from prison and one of his old conspirator friends killed himself. He doesn’t care about how Anton feels about the war, and pushes him to the very limit asking Anton about Truus. Anton, as discussed previously, wants nothing to do with remembering the night Ploeg was assassinated, and gets increasingly more and more uncomfortable with Takes. Both of these men lost loved ones in the war, but because Takes was older, he was not able to gather his life up again; the defeat of the Nazis was his life, and when they were defeated, his life metaphorically
ended. Anton, Fake, and Takes were all part of the assault, and each of them lost a great deal. Anton, who seemingly lost the most, had the most successful life after the war, but he had a great deal of mental and emotional damage that could never heal. Fake lost only his father, but because of this, a great deal of weight was put on his small shoulders, and many of life’s opportunities were snatched away from him. Takes’s entire life was sunk into the war, and when it ended, he essentially became a nobody. War affects everyone, and makes a victim out of most. Each living thing has it’s own way of recovering from tragedy, and it is the way that one handles it that decides one’s fate.
In Night, he informs his reader of many examples on how a myriad of good people turn into brutes. They see horrific actions, therefore, they cannot help by becoming a brute. They experience their innocent family members being burned alive, innocent people dieing from starvation due to a minuscule proportion of food, and innocent people going to take a shower and not coming out because truly, it is a gas chamber and all f...
In the aftermath of a comparatively minor misfortune, all parties concerned seem to be eager to direct the blame to someone or something else. It seems so easy to pin down one specific mistake that caused everything else to go wrong in an everyday situation. However, war is a vastly different story. War is ambiguous, an enormous and intangible event, and it cannot simply be blamed for the resulting deaths for which it is indirectly responsible. Tim O’Brien’s story, “In the Field,” illustrates whom the soldiers turn to with the massive burden of responsibility for a tragedy. The horrible circumstances of war transform all involved and tinge them with an absurd feeling of personal responsibility as they struggle to cope.
The arguments of Christopher Browning and Daniel John Goldhagen contrast greatly based on the underlining meaning of the Holocaust to ordinary Germans. Why did ordinary citizens participate in the process of mass murder? Christopher Browning examines the history of a battalion of the Order Police who participated in mass shootings and deportations. He debunks the idea that these ordinary men were simply coerced to kill but stops short of Goldhagen's simplistic thesis. Browning uncovers the fact that Major Trapp offered at one time to excuse anyone from the task of killing who was "not up to it." Despite this offer, most of the men chose to kill anyway. Browning's traces how these murderers gradually became less "squeamish" about the killing process and delves into explanations of how and why people could behave in such a manner.
In this frame Spiegelman displays his anger with being compared to his died brother, Richieu. His aunt poisoned Richieu because she did not want the Nazis to take him to the concentration camps. The only thing his parents had to remember him by was a picture that hung on their bedroom wall.
When Mulisch sends Anton to visit Takes and discuss what happened on the night of the assault, the reader learns that Cor Takes and Truus Coster risked their lives to assassinate Fake Ploeg because they thought it was the right thing to do. The two came to the conclusion that it was time to liquidate Ploeg because he had “killed God knows how many people, and sent many more to their deaths in Germany and Poland” (111). Anton also learns that Ploeg “had a whip with barbed wire braided into it that ripped the skin off your bare ass, which he then shoved against the blazing stove” as a form of punishment (111). Learning of Ploeg’s transgressions helps Anton understand why Coster felt the need to sacrifice her own life to eliminate some of the “Fascist gentlemen” that had brought turmoil to her country, and brings him to the realization that Takes’ motive for participating in the crime was revenge (113). Takes even suggests kidnapping children because “all the love and happiness and goodness in [the] world [cannot] outweigh the life of a single child” or the children of his enemies (113). Although their motivations were different, they worked together to eliminate Ploeg. They both kne...
...rest of Anton’s family and why the assault ever happened, “although there are no ashes in sight.” (Mulisch 84).
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.
In Art Spiegelman’s Maus, the audience is led through a very emotional story of a Holocaust survivor’s life and the present day consequences that the event has placed on his relationship with the author, who is his son, and his wife. Throughout this novel, the audience constantly is reminded of how horrific the Holocaust was to the Jewish people. Nevertheless, the novel finds very effective ways to insert forms of humor in the inner story and outer story of Maus. Although the Holocaust has a heart wrenching effect on the novel as a whole, the effective use of humor allows for the story to become slightly less severe and a more tolerable read.
After reading and evaluating the works of T. S. Eliot, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock and Chuck Palahniuk’s Fight Club, there are various discussion points pertaining to the connection between tragedy and human conditions. Herein, tragedy is the result of a specific human condition, disengagement. This essay aims to identify and explain the behavioural traits between characters in two literary works which leads to a disengagement by the characters from a typical social environment.
The reader is put in the middle of a war of nerves and will between two men, one of which we have grown up to learn to hate. This only makes us even more emotional about the topic at hand. For a history book, it was surprisingly understandable and hard to put down. It enlightened me to the complex problems that existed in the most memorable three months this century.
Earnest Hemmingway once said "Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime." (Ernest Hemingway: A Literary Reference) War is a gruesome and tragic thing and affects people differently. Both Vonnegut and Hemmingway discus this idea in their novels A Farewell to Arms and Slaughterhouse Five. Both of the novels deal not only with war stories but other genres, be it a science fiction story in Vonnegut’s case or a love story in Hemingway’s. Despite all the similarities there are also very big differences in the depiction of war and the way the two characters cope with their shocking and different experiences. It is the way someone deals with these tragedies that is the true story. This essay will evaluate how the main characters in both novels deal with their experiences in different ways.
Ian McEwan illustrates a profound theme that builds details throughout the novel Atonement, the use of guilt and the quest for atonement are used with in the novel to convey the central dynamic aspect in the novel. McEwan constructs the emotion of guilt that is explored through the main character, Briony Tallis. The transition of child and entering the adult world, focus on the behavior and motivation of the young narrator Briony. Briony writes passages that entail her attempt to wash away her guilt as well find forgiveness for her sins. In which Briony ruined the lives and the happiness of her sister, Cecilia, and her lover Robbie. The reality of the events, attempts to achieve forgiveness for her actions. She is unable to understand the consequences of the actions as a child but grows to develop the understanding of the consequence with age. McEwan exemplifies an emotional novel that alters reality as he amplifies the creative acts of literature. In this essay I will be arguing that, the power of guilt prevents people from moving on from obstacles that hold them in the past.
Whether a person’s life is something experienced authentically, or factually written down as literature, there are more complexities faced then there are simplicities on a daily basis. This multifariousness causes constant bewilderment and hesitation before any sort of important decision a person must make in his or her life. When it comes to characters of the written words, as soon sensations of ambiguity, uncertainty, and paranoia form, the outlook and actions of these characters are what usually result in regrettable decisions and added anxiety for both that character as well as the reader. Examples of these themes affecting characters in the world of fiction are found in the novel The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon, and the play Glengarry Glen Ross written by David Mamet. Throughout both of these texts, characters such as Oedipa Maas who allows these emotions to guide her in her journey of self discovery, and Shelly Levene who is so overcome with these emotions that they become his downfall. For both of these characters, these constant emotional themes are what guide their most impulsive actions, which can generally also become regrettable decisions. Even though it is a distinguishing factor of human beings, when these characters are portrayed in print, it somehow seems to affect the reader more, because they are able to see the fictional repercussions, and also know how they could have been avoided.
Director Mark Herman presents a narrative film that attests to the brutal, thought-provoking Nazi regime, in war-torn Europe. It is obvious that with Herman’s relatively clean representation of this era, he felt it was most important to resonate with the audience in a profound and philosophical manner rather than in a ruthlessness infuriating way. Despite scenes that are more graphic than others, the films objective was not to recap on the awful brutality that took place in camps such as the one in the movie. The audience’s focus was meant to be on the experience and life of a fun-loving German boy named Bruno. Surrounding this eight-year-old boy was conspicuous Nazi influences. Bruno is just an example of a young child among many others oblivious of buildings draped in flags, and Jewis...
“To whom shall I tell my grief?” Grief must receive closure. Grief has the power to make the strongest person helpless. For an individual to share their grief they receive a sense of compassion instead of endlessly searching for answers. In the short story “Misery”, Anton Chekhov effectively shows the desperation of communication through the character Iona Potapov and his mare. Chekhov illustrates the difficulty Iona faces to communicate his sufferings to the various people he speaks to as a sleigh driver. He accomplishes this through his style of writing, imagery, and the events that take place in the story.