It is a defense of studying each historical period on its own terms, and not imposing one's own moral and social standards on figures and situations that existed with, perhaps, a different set of ethical and cultural concerns. Butterfield’s text described historians who project modern attitudes on to the past, pass moral judgments on historical figures, and regard history as significant only to the extent that it labored to create the modern world. Such judgments are viewed as problematic because they tempt historians not to understand the past on its own terms. Butterfield argues that historians should write aesthetically rather than polemically, exercising "imaginative sympathy" in appreciating the lost worlds of the dead rather than seeking, or expecting, the vindication of their own current positions (92). The "Whig interpretation," as Butterfield calls it, sees history as a struggle between a progression of good libertarian parties and evil reactionary forces, failing to do justice to history's true complexity.
This is mainly due to the purpose of the representation, which is to inform based on factual detail and not to give out a message meaning the representation is free of Phillip Sauvain’s opinion. However, the text extract does not comment on supporters of the war although this could possibly be referred to in other sections of the book. Representation 3 being a cartoon fully supports the cartoonist anti-war point of view and, by that measure cannot be objective. The purpose of the cartoon is to give out a message and to provoke debate and John Fischetti does this by satirising the anti-war movement and stereotyping the characters. He also makes a conscious decision about what information to include and what to leave out in order to support his point of view and the anti-war message the representation is trying to give out.
The ultimate meanings of our lives are chosen by our experiences. The end of our lives “cannot be foreseen and will not be limited by such things as destiny” ("Steinbeck's Nonteleological Perspective"). These are common philosophies of non-teleological thinkers such as Edward Ricketts and John Steinbeck. Steinbeck, the famous literary author of The Grapes of Wrath, incorporates this way of thinking into his many works though his characters: their surroundings shaping them and giving purpose to their lives. The Grapes of Wrath is an example of his non-teleological beliefs being incorporated into the nature of his characters; their fate not being pre-determined, but rather dependent on life events.
For example, Roxanne writes, "Jay-Z has ignored calls to dump the deal." She backs her statement with a direct quote from Jay-Z, "I move and speak based on facts and not emotions." This article also includes a little jargon in regards to her belief that Jay-Z should stand up to racism. “It wouldn't be the first time "dirty money" was flipped and used for a better purpose", Roxanne states. This article is solely the writer’s opinions and in my opinion the jargon was appropriate.
Quotation within Quotations Use single quotation marks when quoting text that already uses quotation marks. Original: “I guess,” I said, but no guesswork was required; she wouldn‟t forgive him. In your paper: “„I guess,‟ I said, but no guesswork was required; she wouldn‟t forgive him” (Wolff 460). Rules of Thumb
Raglan’s purpose behind writing the letter in such a flattering way compromises the balance of the source. Source E is the only source that won’t have a political persuasion being that it is written by Captain Richard’s to his sister Caroline. The nature of Captain Richard’s letter; the fact it is being sent to his sister will make It more informal which is significant because it means he will be under no pressure to conceal or downplay any of the realities of the war. The most stark-contrast in overall message is between source E and source G. Lord Raglan does not insinuate that everything is perfect but creates the impression that everything Is being done to ensure the well-being of the British army as he states he has been ‘occupied in endeavouring to provide’ for ‘the various wants of Majesty’s troops’ and has done so ‘his whole time’. Source E on the other hand accuses the management of ‘neglect’ towards the soldiers which completely challenges Raglan’s claims.
The article states that the purpose of this article is too focus on the tension that arises as the result of the intersection of social identities, namely gender and race. The author explains clearly that he will use the PIE (Privileged Identity Exploration Model) for analysis. There is no sampling per se because the author never states what he hopes to accomplish. However, he does state he hopes to highlight complexities with race and gender. The author uses a case study he does not go into detail how these people were chosen or what their backgrounds are.
Patrick’s College use a first-person view, showing us the subjective views of the poet. Similarly, in Looking for Alibrandi, the story also uses a first-person perspective, showing us Josie’s subjective thoughts; however, they can be prejudiced at times. She longs to be a part of a world with “sleek haircuts and upper-class privileges”. “A world where I can be accepted. Please God, let me be accepted by someone other than the underdog.” In Feliks Skrzynecki, the poet does not feel that he has a sense of belonging mainly due to his cultural heritage, while in St. Patrick’s College, the persona struggles to have a sense of belonging in his new, unfamiliar school.
When he says there is “no thought” he means that there is nothing in the book that makes the reader think. To make a reader think, a book would have alternative meanings and hidden themes, none of which this book has. What you read is what you get with this book and there is nothing concealed behind Janie’s straight-forward story. Another instance is when Richard Wright points out the target audience of Hurston’s book and says, “In the main, her novel is not addressed to the Negro, but to a white audience whose chauvinistic tastes she knows how to satisfy. She exploits that phase of Negro life which is “quaint,” the phase which evokes a piteous smile on the lips of the “superior” race”( ¶ #5).
At the same time, however, literature which is nothing more than ideology, or better put, propaganda, is not a model Williams wishes to set for all literature. Commitment for Williams involves “conscious alignment, or conscious change of alignment,” a practice of recognition of “the realities of their social relations, and in this sense their alignment,” on the part of authors (204). An author’s choice to understand the real social relations in which he or she lives, what his or her alignment is, and what alignment he or she would like to have, is the beginning of commitment. More fundamentally, however, authors must commit themselves to limitations in their literature based on their choice of alignment: To write in different ways is to live in different ways. It is also to be read in different ways.