With the use of understatement and irony, the letter states his values as a loving, yet strict father who only wants his son to succeed and nothing more. "I confess I have often my doubts whether [my writing] is of any use to you", the first line in Chesterfield's letter, shows that he is doubtful as to whether or not his advice will help his son. The use of understatement is very clear here, as Chesterfield is making it seem like his words aren't as important as they really are. "I know how unwelcome advice generally is" is a clear example of this. Chesterfield is making his words feel unnecessary and not worth the time to read.
In the eyes of Lord Chesterfield, he doesn’t need another diamond, he has enough diamonds. He wants his son to let the Chesterfield crest shine! To make his family name known and respected, and he wants his son to carry on the ancestral morals that is carried through the Chesterfield name. By using words such as disgrace, ridicule, shame and regret we see that his disappointment tone is carried through the letter, although the Lord is stating that he is acting as a guide using past experience, and in no way wants to dictate. But a short sentence later, he is listing off flaws of the boy, such as how dependent he is, how he must act upon more generous morals, and essentially, get his act together.
He tells of a time when Argos was trained by his master to be a great hunter of wild goats and other smaller game. Further he touts the dog’s bravery, strength and speed. Although he never got the chance to hunt with Argos, this can be seen as a representation of Odysseus because, as a great warrior and leader himself, he trained Argos to be as such in the way of hunting. It is as if Argos was a piece of Odysseus that he left at home, the care-taking, responsible and hard working protector and provider. It would not be prudent to expect this of his son, Telemackos, due to his youthful age; it was only a purpose
Also, yesterday I hated him; now we were calling each other by our first names” (67). The friendship of the boys, though unlikely, grows to benefit them both. Mainly, Reuven is able to “liberate” Danny from his father. Danny’s father is very strict and cold, and seemingly unloving. Reb Saunders uses the silent parenting style on Danny, where he only speaks to him while studying religion.
In the Lion King Scar never once feels bad for killing Mufasa and even confesses to Simba proudly that he was the one who killed his father. Where as in Hamlet Claudius is found paying and repenting for his sins against Hamlet senior. I think the director made the choices he did in making all the characters animals because he wanted to put a story that children can understand and sit down and enjoy with their family. I also think the differences in characters I stated above were necessary because I feel like in the Lion King the wanted to
Gandalf also is interested in Frodo’s and Bilbo’s well-being. In “The Fellowship of the Ring”, Gandalf sacrifices himself to protect Frodo and the whole fellowship when he fights against the Balrog. In “The Hobbit” he is very glad and relieved when he saw Bilbo alive after the fight against the orcs for the Lonely Mountain. As you can see by Gandalf’s example both wizards also sacrifice themselves to protect their protégés. Gandalf didn’t only kill Balrog, he also died in this battle, but he came back from death, after Eru gave him new life, so he could protect the hobbit’s journey.
Most people shudder at the thought or sight of a Pit Bull and consider them vicious atrocities, but I will show that Pit Bulls are innocent and really are just misunderstood. I would like to give some facts, dispel some myths, and show the side of the breed that the media chooses not to tell. American Pit Bull Terriers were first introduced during World War I and World War II. The job of the Pit Bull was to deliver messages back and forth across the battlefield. Pit Bulls were first bred to bait bulls and bears as a sport back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but soon became more commonly used as house pets due to their friendliness towards people (Brom, 1987-09, p.14).
A kind of excellent dumb discourse, Willie” (Bradbury 107). Beatty reveals that he was once educated and he is not afraid to use his knowledge to challenge someone. To hide his intelligence, Beatty acts like an uneducated normal person. Beatty cares about people even though he comes off as a tough guy. Montag did not get Beatty’s hint about the books until Beatty said “Didn’t I hint enough when I sent the Hound around your place” (Bradbury 113).
First the author shows the theme by integrating character’s actions throughout the story. Before Charlie becomes intelligent he wrote, “I want to be smart.” (Pg. 221) I think this quote confirms the theme because since he wasn’t smart he could have separated himself from smart people. As Charlie was reading a book called Robinson Crusoe he wrote, “I feel sorry because he’s all alone and has no friends.” (Pg. 229) I believe this quote reveals the moral because as he reads this book he find out Crusoe is all alone and isolated and even though Charlie doesn’t realize it yet he himself is isolated and lonely as well.
I have also used the family angle because of the well documented relationship that Kafka had with his own father. The most obvious change that occurs within Metamorphosis is Gregor becoming a monstrous vermin at the beginning of the novella. Even though he has changed beyond recognition he does not panic, there is an uncomfortable calm, he thinks he can still function normally. He is worried about catching the next train and getting the samples ready but then ironically being the boss’s creature, stupid and spineless. His physical change as far as he can see will not change his enjoyment of life, there will be no difference as he was a bug before, towing the line for the boss.