The article has shown me how a well -written book in the and high respected in literature world can still have flaws and elements of racism. 3) Note Ideas that stretched your understanding. Specifically, did the author make arguments you struggled to grasp in full? Briefly, what were they? In the beginning of the article I was hesitant to believe that Conrad meant to put the two rivers into contrast.
(D.H. Lawrence, "Morality and the Novel") Aesthetically, the fiction which reveals a truth by explicit sermonising rather than as a natural conclusion drawn from the relationships and events it presents, is displeasing, even "immoral." Indeed, Martel's statement is likely to have the opposite effect on his reader, provoking a determined counter-reaction not to succumb to a didactic religious agenda. Surely enough, Life of Pi fails to meet its ambition. As he travels through its pages, apparently on the Damascun road to enlightenment, the reader will not, atheist or already committed follower, experience some major revelation to the spirit, coming to, or restoring, a belief in God. Nor, despite Martel's explicit but deceptive statement, is he intended to.
If we follow Wilde’s words then we can invariably agree that this novel was “a classic” of “timeless power.”1 Admittedly however, the harsh scrutinisers of The Catcher in the Rye would have been unlikely to approve of Oscar Wilde’s wisdom. It seems somewhat absurd that a book viewed by many as an ingenious piece of literature could be paradoxically viewed by others as “obscene”, “profane” or “vulgar.” 2 Many children felt that Holden represented the archetypal teenager. Can anyone, past or present, truly say that there are no elements of Holden’s character, to which they can relate? The grim sense of realism of the cult novel juxtaposed with American idealisms made the novel a prominent threat to the fabric of American society and thus the novel was branded as “unsuitable for children to read.” Much of the firestorm and debate the book prompted, was a direct consequence of the context. In the 1950s America had just emerged victorious from WW2 and the country was one of exceeding wealth and power.
EXPLAIN MORE(HOW IS THIS QUOTE RELEVANT TO THE PROMPT? THEN LINK BACK ? (LIKE A CONCLUDING STATMENT)!!! Tom Robinson is the metaphorical ‘mockingbird’ of the novel. His intention,was noble and honorable yet it was overlooked as a result of racial discrimination “I felt sorry for her... You felt sorry for her, you felt sorry for her?"
The tendency in his essays to digress into anecdotes and personal ruminations was seen as detrimental to proper style rather than as an innovation, and his declaration that, 'I am myself the matter of my book', was viewed by his contemporaries as self-indulgent. In time, however, Montaigne would be recognized as embodying, perhaps better than any other author of his time, the spirit of freely entertaining doubt which began to emerge at that time. He is most famously known for his skeptical remark, 'Que sçay-je?' ('What do I know?' in Middle French[->16]; modern French Que sais-je?).
Does it offer significant insights into the complexities of human existence and the development of American culture, or does it simply appeal to vulgar adolescent minds with its obscene language, complaining about everything without developing any positive insights of its own? While some of the initial reviews of The Catcher in the Rye were negative, critics later acknowledged it as a significant literary work and demonstrated how the novel's narrative structure, themes, and character development resemble other great works of literature. For example, Arthur
I saw that some reviewers didn’t like how there was no “twist” or “wow factor” towards the end, but honestly, does every book need it to be successful? Definitely not. What is the novel questioning exactly? In Never Let Me Go, the question this book raises is what “being human” is and treating “clones” lesser than humans. That’s what we should be asking ourselves, and
In spite of non-intentionally becoming a philosopher, William Golding wrote a novel that shed light on the true human nature. Yet, despite the up-beat ending to Lord of the Flies, you can infer that William Golding had an intellectual agreement with Thomas Hobbes on the viewpoint of human nature, evil and warlike. Hobbes and Rousseau both had a way to relate the defects of society back to the defects of human nature. Despite taking opposing sides, and in Hobbes case, being philosophically rejected by Rousseau, they both had firm and intuitive viewpoints on human nature. Despite living a few hundred years prior to the birth of Rousseau, Hobbes was able to put the evil of the world in perspective.
Another is that it was a warning, saying that if things continue the way in which they were going, the future could end up bearing some resemblance to what he wrote. Another interpretation is that his book was not a prediction at all; it was purely a fiction book. I do think that it is difficult to ‘talk into a black hole.’ I think that authors are writing and writing and not enough people are reading their books and those who are perhaps are not reading deeply enough or not seeing what the author intended for the reader to see. I do not think, though, that this is a problem. I think that books are open to the reader’s interpretation and once the book has been published, the author relinquishes the sole right to own the book’s meaning because it means different things for different
The film Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis was an interesting, action-packed movie but does not accurately interpret the classic poem Beowulf translated by Burton Raffel as a masterpiece of literary merit. The motion picture provides the viewer with a good background of Beowulf and the epic hero’s battle with Grendel. However, beyond that the film has some major differences to the epic poem lessening the movie as a worthy work of literary merit. The film differs in major plot events, the portrayal of Beowulf, and the conflict between Grendel’s mother. The motion picture Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis has some significant alterations in plot events compared to the epic poem.