Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The struggle and character of Nelson Mandela
Violence symbolism in literature
The struggle and character of Nelson Mandela
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The struggle and character of Nelson Mandela
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of darkness…”(Dickens 3).In the real world there are times where there is the good and the bad , but the bad always has to come to an end. In the novel A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens the story faced the two sides of the good and bad. The main part was that upper-society of people would oppressed lower classes and the lower classes would use violence against. However, the violence used against doesnt work it even brings more violence like in the real world. For example back in the history there was violence between two races of color were people got oppressed, and killed. Overall, Violence is not acceptable way to fight oppression, but
In other more circumstances violence should not be the first source but it should be the last resource for people to use violence because instead of solving the conflict violence becomes worse and worse instead of solve in it. In a article Nelson Mandela stated “This required a plan which was flexible and which permitted us to act in accordance with the needs of the times; all, the plan had to be one which recognized civil war as the last resort.... We did not want to committed to civil war , but we wanted to be ready if it became inevitable”(On Violence). Nelson Mandela , Directed a campaign of peaceful, but he was willing to use violence in order to stop the embraced racism. Mandela used Sabotage which encourage whites to used even more brutal repression. Using Violence doesn't help instead it makes more harm to humanity.For example in the book A Tale of Two Cities it talked about a woman called Madame Defarge whom family was killed when she was little which she wanted revenge and destroy the whole generation family of Darney’s even innocent people by the usage of violence. However in her revenge back she didn't get nothing. ”it passed out in the air,like the soul of the furious woman whose body lay lifeless on the ground”(Dickens 257). When she was going to use violence to destroy the family she end up killing herself with the same gun she wanted to kill Darney’s family. This shows that violence won't solve anything because at the end things will still be the
Violence usually solves nothing but perhaps sometimes it can For example in the Irish Civil War after brutal fighting and 2500 deaths they finally became independent. Since then this atrocious war has been the inspiration for many works of literature. The purpose of the song “Bloody Sunday” by U2 was to explain the terrible effects of war while in the short story “ The Sniper” by Liam O’Flaherty the purpose was to explain what war was really like from a soldier’s perspective. This makes the two texts different because they were both told from different points of views.
“Non-violence is a powerful and just weapon without cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.” - Martin Luther King Jr.
In every great novel there is a theme that is constant throughout the story. One of the better known themes portrays the fight of good verses evil. Different authors portray this in different ways. Some use colors while others use seasons to show the contrast. Still others go for the obvious and use characters. But what makes them all so different is the authors point of view. In Charles Dicken's A Tale of Two Cities, he portrays good and evil in somewhat of a unique way. Dickens shows this difference by using characters, although we sometimes have to think about the difference between the good and the evil and wonder if they are not the same in the long run. Good and evil differs with the characters in this novel, yet sometimes coincides.
Human beings are an impressionable race who learn from each other what they should and should not do. While this is sometimes a useful trait, in other instances it can lead to death and cruelty. This is showcased copiously in A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens. The book starts off with the French nobility horribly mistreating the destitute peasants, beating them and starving them without feeling any guilt whatsoever. To the rebels, it does not matter whether the people they execute are innocent or guilty of crimes against them, and instead see the entire upperclass as responsible for what a portion of them actually did. In this way, the cycle comes to a complete
Conflict is constant. It is everywhere. It exists within one’s own mind, different desires fighting for dominance. It exists outside in nature, different animals fighting for the limited resources available, and it exists in human society, in the courts. It can occur subtly, making small changes that do not register consciously, and it can occur directly and violently, the use of pure strength, whether physical, social, economic, or academic, to assert dominance and achieve one’s goals; this is the use of force. Yet, with the use of force, the user of force is destined to be one day felled by it. “He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.”
The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton proves the point that violence can be justified if necessary. To inflict change in their lives people often fight with violence instead of peace to evoke change. The world strives for change everyday whether or not you like it. How the people create a change in society whether they use peace or war, it is up to them to decide how to modify our ever changing world. Violence and fight between the Socs and Greasers tells us that both can be justified if it inflicts positive change in society. ‘
“Violence never really deals with the basic evil of the situation. Violence may murder the murderer, but it doesn’t murder murder. Violence may murder the liar, but it doesn’t murder lie; it doesn’t establish truth. Violence may even murder the dishonest man, but it doesn’t murder dishonesty. Violence may go to the point of murdering the hater, but it doesn’t murder hate.
After writing this essay, I realized that unfair, terrible things will happen around you, but the way that you fight these things is what matters and is what really makes a difference. When you face an issue that you feel strongly against, will you only result to violence, like Uncle Hammer, and then get into deeper trouble? Or will you use more cunning ways to solve it, like so many characters I have proven to you above, and solve the problem once and for all? This decision with a simple answer will change the outcome of the effect by a long way, so think
Archetypal Characters: Characters are presented from the start of the novel as good or evil. There are no characters that the reader see as good and turn out to be evil at the end or vica versa. Their goodness or evilness is clearly shown from the beginning. 	
Once we understand what violence is the question that is raised is how does one decide the difference between a legitimate and an illegitimate act of violence? Since violence is bringing harm to others whether that is individuals, property or organizations why would violence be considered permissible or legitimate on some occasions but not others? Universally, the idea of legitimacy is “that something is right, proper, or appropriate within the bounds of a system of norms, values, or beliefs” (Schoon 779). Since norms and values are changeable depending on the culture, legitimacy can be “shaped by the availability of alternatives to that which is being evaluated” (780). While legitimacy is not solely based on cultural norms and values, it is also based
The role of violence in the fight against injustice is a tricky one. If an oppressor is willing to use violence to maintain control should not the oppressed use violence to achieve liberation? Franz Fanon would argue that the pent up anger and frustration must be released in violent action to tear down the oppressor’s regime. However, there is a better way and that is through non-violence and understanding that Martin Luther King, Jr. champions. Only through creating tension around injustice via non-violent direct action can the conversation begin around mutual understanding and justice. It is this justice achieved through non-violent means that will last as violent action is ultimately unjust in nature.
A Tale of Two Cities Essay Throughout history, the powers of love and hate have constantly been engaged in a battle for superiority. Time and time again, love has proven to be stronger than hate, and has been able to overcome all of the obstacles that have stood in the way of it reaching its goal. On certain occasions, though, hate has been a viable foe and defeated love when they clash. In the novel A Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens presents several different power struggles between love and hate.
In A Tale of Two Cities, the author, Charles Dickens, uses a great deal of irony in the opening chapter to draw the reader into the story. By using a slew of contradictory statements in the opening paragraph, the author forces the reader to further investigate the meaning of the cryptic opening line: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times..." As the reader continues, he finds that the story is a dramatization of the circumstances surrounding London and Paris during the time period of the French Revolution.
A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens, is a story set in the year 1775 and through the turbulent time of the French Revolution. It is of people living in love and betrayal, murder and joy, peril and safety, hate and fondness, misery and happiness, gentle actions and ferocious crowds. The novel surrounds a drunken man, Sydney Carton, who performs a heroic deed for his beloved, Lucie Manette, while Monsieur and Madame Defarge, ruthless revolutionaries, seek revenge against the nobles of France. Research suggests that through Dickens’ portrayal of the revolutionaries and nobles of the war, he gives accurate insight to the era of the Revolution.
While using violence to counteract violence may seem like a contradiction of sorts it is possibly the only recourse for the oppressed. It is impossible to create a formula of what works and doesn’t work in terms of emancipation because it is highly dependent on the particular situation but it is quite apparent that counterviolence is a necessary tool in this struggle. As we have seen, violence is not the only tool in liberation; the reconstruction of human ethics and perceptions is as, or more, important. Furthermore, it has been shown that sometimes nonviolence can create systemic change and that violence is not always applicable. Other times, violence is the only means to achieve true human emancipation.