-In nadsat style, addressing the reader with ‘’O my brothers’’ creates a more personal bond with Alex, and their for it is easier for the reader to sympathize with Alex even though he is such a flawed character. -When the violence is shown in the book, more nadsat is used with for example: ‘’to tolchock a chelloveck in the kishkas’’ this being an alienating and distancing the reader and Alex from the violent acts he commits. If the nadsat is purely read for its language it sounds humorous, but often takes a sickening and repulsive turn, that is when you realize what is actually happening. For example: ‘’So he did the strong-man on the devotcha, who was still creech creech crecching away in very horrorshow four-in-a-bar, locking her rookers from the back, while I ripped away at this and that and the other, the others were going haw haw haw still, and real horrorshow groodies they were that then exhibited their pink glazzies, O my brothers, while I untrussed and got ready for the plunge.’’ This sounds quite comical and humorus until its found out that the devotcha (woman) is being raped. In short: -What is the Nadsat language, where is it
His use of half responses leaves the reader feeling like he has more to say, but just will not spit it out. One very clear example of his half response comes when the narrator asks him “What does she have that other women don’t have” and he responds “That’s just it”. The vagueness of this response can imply many different things. He could be pointing out exactly what it is that this other woman has, or he
Love at first sight- Does it exsist??? Do I believe in love at first sight? Unfortunately no I don’t. There is scientific evidence stating that there is love at first sight but I just believe it is lust at first sight and not love. You cannot love a thing which you have no idea about, you may love there looks the way they walk and things like that but you can never actually love them properly, love grows over time of knowing the person and even though they act like the person on their outside they may not be the same person on the inside they may act all hard but actually on the inside they are a big softie who cry’s all the time.
“The way we communicate with others and ourselves ultimately determines our quality of life.” Yes, there is power in the spoken word. But, most of us aren’t AWARE of what we say, how we say it, and how it affects every aspect of our lives. Too often we get into bad habits and say whatever pops into our heads without thinking. Good communicators are aware of what they say, how they say it, and how well they listen. Talking is possibly the smallest piece of the communication puzzle.
In general, people don’t like talking about their infanthood, because it is not easy to discuss it with an unknown person. If for some reason he or she has to do it, they will choose to use simple and fun words as Vowell did. She used humor; imagery and contrast as techniques to skillfully create a strong, convincing essay. The author is able to draw the reader in by her vast use of imagery. It is easy for me as reader to put myself in her place.
He seems to be a round because he feels caring and nice at first, yet threatening as well. The reader may consider this character to be static, because he doesn’t really change throughout the story. The audience surely doesn’t like this character, considering he forced Maya into uncomfortable situations.
Although it is overall empowering to women, that does not have to automatically mean it must be downgrading to men. There are some positive male roles, such as the police detective, Hal, and Jimmy, Louise’s boyfriend. When Geena Davis was asked about Thelma and Louise being considered a male-bashing movie, even she commented, “Most guys don't relate to the truck driver or the rapist, and if they do, their problems are bigger than this movie.” My analysis of Thelma and Louise discusses the friendship between the leading characters and their different personalities, how males are perceived in the movie and their relationships with the women, and the controversial ending of the movie. Thelma and Louise have opposite personalities but are together in the same risky undertaking. Thelma is passive, allowing her husband to dominate her life.
This may be seen as lying, but he made someone’s day. Holden loves his sister because she’s not a phony like the others. I don’t think it was Salinger’s intention to make Holden a Christ like figure because Holden mostly talks about his issues with
Raymond Carver though lets Mel unable to completely understand ‘real’ love. He portrays how love is truly ambiguous. Through the character, Mel McGinnis, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love” reveals love cannot be concretely defined but it is abstract. The plot of the short story revolves around the conversation of four friends on the topic about love. Mel McGinnis does most of the talking throughout the entire conversation.
Pi tries to show value in storytelling, even convincing that the fictional story is the better story. Despite this achievement, Life of Pi manages to demonstrate the many flaws storytelling can have, including confusing the audience, insulting to the original story, and discrediting the author. Although it could be argued to be beautiful and heartwarming, the story in Life of Pi can be very confusing to the audience trying to interpret it. One example is if someone were trying to determine the actual events of Pi’s survival at sea. Pi presented the audiences with two different stories and, although one does seem more reasonable, he never really clarifies which story is true.