What are the Main Ideas of this Lens? * Stereotypes distort people and races * Multiculturalism allows us to look at literature through a perspective of empathy for those who are different * It shows us any instance of victimization has relevance to everyone, not solely the individual victimized. Especially in a text we may apply this. * Ipseity vs. Alterity * Multiculturalism shows us how to view life while we consider others (alterity) before ourselves (Ipseity) * Ipseity vs. Alterity provides a strong theme that can be found in almost all literature as the selfish human nature of failing to respect the ways of others. * Post-colonialism * This is a smaller lens inside the multicultural lens.
Through these conflicting perspectives, the textual form of Julius Caesar creates greater interaction with the audience. The conversation between Cassius and Brutus in Act 1 Scene ii is important for the construction of the two characters of both individuals and Caesar himself. The structure of the conversation is in itself revealing of the characters of Brutus and Cassius; Cassius constructs a long argument, using evidence which he can only claim to have happened, to convince Brutus of Caesar’s unworthiness. It is possible that the events Cassius describes are lies and this would serve to reinforce his characterisation as manipulative, though it is equally possible that they are truths – this in itself highlights the complexities of human nature. Brutus says very little and listens through the entirety of Cassius’ monologue with no comment on it at all, and this provides the audience with the perspective that Brutus is judicious.
The reader must think about all the elements of the work and use them to make inferences, or reasonable guesses, as to which themes seem to be implied. An example of a theme on the subject of pride might be that pride often precedes a
Diction After deciding the structure and the other related norms of writing the sentence, the next step should be the diction. Diction is in fact the writing style of the writer, which sometimes also depicts the mood of the writer. The writer can use the narrative tone, the descriptive tone, and any other style. But some of the major things that should be considered in writing the effective writing include clear thoughts and concrete abstract concepts. Mixing and intermingling, the text can make the reader confused and overall the image of the writing is conveyed as
In both of these stories the authors use imagery to help drive home their main points, although in a somewhat different manner. In “Desiree’s Baby" Chopin uses imagery to hint at the “truth” and lead up to the ironic ending. While in Carver’s “Cathedral” imagery is used to reinforce his main theme of don’t judge a book by its cover. Now we will take a closer look at imagery, and examine the intricacies of how these great authors use it in their works. So what is imagery?
2. Literary works may echo, imitate or allude to other works. Discuss with close reference to The Poisonwood Bible. Kingsolver utilizes numerous allusions in The Poisonwood Bible to emphasize the main issues in the novel. The reader is heavily influenced by their personal context and their relationship with other novels, which shapes their conceptualized idea of the text.
Perspectives within a literary text tend to be depicted in different ways in order to confront the responder, challenge perceptions and promote a varied perception of the human condition. This depiction of conflicting perspectives creates a makeup of the entire construction of the text, as it effectively creates a cause for conflict; the protagonist of a story very rarely does not have a differing perspective on an issue to the antagonist of the story, inevitably leading to conflict, and therefore, a story line. This notion of conflicting perspectives is powerfully expressed through various textural forms, as shown through William Shakespeare’s 1399 dramatic text, Julius Caesar, Mark Haddon’s 2003 novel, The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, and Sylvia Plath’s 1966 poem Morning Song. Throughout Julius Caesar, Shakespeare effectively utilises textual form to shape the responder’s understanding of the conflicting perspectives surrounding the personality of Marcus Brutus. Throughout the dramatic literature medium, Brutus experiences many different forms of conflicting perspectives relating to his own sense of identity as well as his relationships to those around him.
Throughout this text, the protagonist Holden Caulfield is portrayed as someone who is facing the typical struggles that became apparent in society due to the industrialisation of the 20th century. Despite his un-heroic nature, we’re called to examine wether or not Holden has enough characteristics to be titled an archetypal anti-hero. His mental instability and judgemental personality can be used to argue against this statement. Conversely, the obvious flaws that he posses and the heroic desires that he has may just be enough for him to redeem his title as an anti-hero. Through the discussion of these points, we can come to an educated conclusion as to wether or not Holden is in fact the archetypal 20th century anti-hero.
Through any and every writing, an author has a point hidden within literary elements. With literary elements authors develop a style to their writing to prove the point they intended from the beginning. There are many various literary elements to make up a rhetorical situation, to develop a side of ideas, some very commonly used in especially rhetorical situations. Like allusion, hyperbole, rhetorical questions, hypophora, and commonly simile. Mohandas K. Gandhi and Henry David Thoreau speak of and develop similar government opinions and points, through their interpretations of Civil Disobedience through literary elements; they prove similar points of civil disobedience but with their own style of writing and use of rhetorical devices.
Each author’s method in integrating the oral history may be different and, to some degree, inadequate, but the presence of oral accounts in their essays give voice to different perspectives of that time. It is evident, then, that altogether the oral history in each essay holds value and plays a significant role in the integrity of each argument. We must be careful, however, to fully accept the perspectives and arguments the author presents to us as definitively as any individual identity in any historical account, including the author, has the power to misinterpret and miscommunicate historical accounts accidently or