How do the connections between the two texts enrich the meaning of each text? When considered on their own, texts are constructed to create meaning and impart that meaning on a responder. However when two linked texts a considered together, their meanings are enriched as the responder can compare both texts, and take extra meaning from how the two texts differ and agree with each other, by evaluating which is more effective. Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice when read in isolation can be a simple bildungsroman narrative about the maturation of a young woman. However if the responder were to read Fay Weldon’s Letters to Alice on first reading Jane Austen, the connections between the two would shape and then reshape the responder’s understanding of both texts.
She does not feel sorry for anybody. She accuses Elizabeth Proctor in witchcraft to get rid of her and have Proctor for herself. But this will never happen. In the third act a big conflict in the court is shown. Abigail pretends she feels cold and sees a yellow bird.
Evidence, such as Irene’s hand that was “laid on Clare’s bare arm” (209) can be cited as evidence pointing to Irene as Clare’s killer, but Irene, could not have, and would not have pushed Clare, no matter how much she wanted to. On top of the evidence for Irene’s mental inability to have actually pushed Clare, Larsen describes the situation in the room moments before Clare’s death by saying that everyone was “staring at [Clare] in curiosity and wonder” (208). Certainly someone would have noticed Irene, who was in a frantic moment of “terror, tinged with ferocity” (209), push Claire out of the
Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll House ends on either a very negative note, or a very positive note depending upon how one views such situations. At the end of the story, Nora Helmer leaves her oppressive, belittling husband, and children - who are hardly her children - behind to rediscover and educate herself. Ibsen states, “The wife in the play ends by having no idea of what is right or wrong; natural feeling on one hand and belief in authority on the other have altogether bewildered her.” (Ibsen. 409) Nora’s situation was a very unique one with many tunnels and slides to be trekked. Her exit was a fully rational, completely acceptable action.
She lives in her mind, barley speaks to anyone. She spends most of her time analyzing all the things around her life. She wants to tell someone how she feels but is scared that she might get rejected or no one will believe her. “I can’t believe you, you’re just jealous.”(184) when she finally tells one of her former friends from the party who is now dating Andy Beast, what happened and the reason for her calling the cops she lashes out and does exactly what she was afraid of. In reading and studying “Speak” By author Laurie Halse Anderson , my character analysis has taught me how Melinda dealt with her problem and what she went through to get her life back…it also taught me to choose my friends carefully and that keeping your anger and pain bottled up can hurt you more than you know.
Another reason their relationship is dangerous is that if John Procter were to prosecute against Abigail Williams saying that she is in fact a witch, Abigail Williams could very easily tell the entire town that she and Procter have been having an affair to get revenge on him. It wouldn’t really affect her too much, but on the contrary, it would ruin his reputation in the town and his relationship with his wife. Later in Act I, Abigail is being “interrogated” by Reverend Hale and she claims “I never sold myself! I’m a good girl! I’m a proper girl!” (Miller 40) in this statement, Abigail is defending herself that she never sold herself to the devil.
How does miller present Abigail as a powerful character in The Crucible? Abigail first shows her power when she is heavily questioned about what was going on in the woods. Abigail starts answering the questions that she is given but soon realises that she will be court and get into trouble. So she uses her power to shift the attention to someone and make people forget about her. Miller presents this when Abigail is asked about the devil and she responds by saying, “I never called him!
So, there are many examples of not thinking for yourself and thinking for youself in this novel. In the novel the main character is Guy Montag and his wife Mildred Montag, and Mildred is the one who should be thinking for herself. She is letting the government get to her head, and everything they say she believes. Even though she is married to Montag, she thinks that the "parlor walls are her family" (Bradbury 49). Montag is her family, but she doesn't consider him as much as a family compaired to the parlor walls.
The end of the story is her dreaming she is only reading a book of ghost stories that end. 3. My reaction to this piece is worry, as this haunting could happen to anyone, including me. She seems to have comes to terms writing about her experiences. The author seems to have told her story before but no one has taken it seriously.
Mary Davis Dr. Blair Eng. 1102 February 7, 2013 Opposites Attract Reading “The Yellow Wallpaper”, it is clear that Charlotte Perkins Gilman wants her reader to do something the narrator's husband did not do; that is, to understand. As the story begins we see that the narrator is an imaginative and very expressive woman. The only obvious affliction she has, is that John has no idea as to what her actual needs are as a patient. The narrator is forced to suppress her opinions concerning her condition.