‘Mental Cases’ and ‘Dulce et Decorum Est’ are two outstanding pieces created by Owen, each using techniques such as hyperboles, personification and imagery that associate the two poems, giving us, the readers, a bigger picture of what is happening in the poets eyes. In the poem Mental Cases Owen expresses his perception that war is taking away a soldiers future, a life full of happiness. It illustrates the bloodshed and suffering of war, using a series of graphical description of young men who are treated for war-related illness’, such as shellshock. It was a heart-wrenching poem for Owen because he himself was a patient of shellshock. The repetition of question marks and dashes illustrate the confusion and frustration witnessing Owens fellow comrades, it is a demanding tone begging for explanation for the entrapment of victims.
New York: Broadway Books, 1998. Print Bill Bryson uses a very sarcastic and humorous tone throughout this early paragraph. The way he goes from using delicate words like cupcake to graphic phrases like “shit in the woods” really magnifies the two totally different word choices. Bryson chooses very descriptive words that create vivid sentences and really paint a picture in one’s head. When he uses phrases such as “eyes of chipped granite” and “years of waddlesome sloth” are extremely effective at showing and not just telling.
They can see how he lived during the time he served and how awful he made it seem. The best way to have a convincing argument is to make the audience see through the eyes of the author, and to make them envision a mental image of what the author has seen. Gurganus tells how he was, “dressed in ugly clothes exactly like 4,000 others, to be called a number, to be stuck among men who will brag and scrap and fight but never admit to any terror, any need” (606). This flashback makes the war sound very unappealing and an experience that most of his readers would not like to experience themselves. Through this detailed description, Gurganus adds to his argument, making the war sound even more horrific.
Passion there was none. I loved the old man…Now this is the point. You fancy me mad”(37). As a result of this specific first person style of writing, the audience assumes insanity. By the narrator already assuming psychological judgment from the reader, the reader can also feel to question and doubt his sanity through just the first-person perspective.
The audience learns as much as is known by Art Spiegelman of Vladek’s story, while still strongly emphasizing a major subplot of Vladek’s relationship with people in the modern day. This unusual writing style proves to confuse the audience when panels change between the past and present, but allows us to see a greater amount of flaws in Vladek. It feels real. He is human and imperfect, which is shown in his distasteful relationship with his son and wife. All in all, both styles
George Orwell's book 1984, written in 1948 in a post war context, warned about the dangers of a totalitarianism society. He penned the book after seeing the effects of the Cold War firsthand which had just ended not long before. Orwell's book is a portrayal of the perfect totalitarianism society in which he explores the consequences in depth with the use of many language techniques to contribute to the frightening aura. His overall use of language as power makes the book terrifying to readers. Orwell shows that language is of high importance to human thoughts as it structures ideas that one is capable of thinking.
Red is the mediator or polemicist, meaning that he’s a smooth talker and debater. In Shawshank he’s know as the man that can get anything for you from the outside … for a price of course. He’s a crook with a good heart and somewhat good intentions, but he confides to the prison walls to blur the lines of reality outside in the real world. Inside the prison he has value to his name and his insecurities are concealed by the opaque violence, and hard stance of Shawshank’s environment. Hope motivates him, but he does anything in his will to cloak that fact.
Joe Sacco is a journalist who is famous for his comic books and journalisms. Sacco tries to influence people with his comic, “The Underground War in Gaza.” In 2003 the war began when The I.D.F (Israel’s Defend Force) tries to access the border and entered town called Rafah, from there they were working to secure that area. However, Sacco have experienced the war himself to show people what dose happened, show both side of the parties, how they are acting, and how innocent Palestinians are being the victims of the war. Sacco attempts to show how hopeless and sorrowful the Palestinians are through pictures in the form of a comic. Especially, by describing and putting children who were around trying to fight for their families and their own homes.
This is how Duffy, conveys the issue of how cruel and gruesome war is in stanza one. In stanza two Duffy writes about his job and how he, the persona struggles to accept it. ”he has a job to do.” Duffy uses the word job to show a sense of duty and obligation, therefore it makes it seem that this is something that he has to do and accept. ”Beneath his hands which did not tremble then though seem to now” this shows us how the persona feels and how he is devastated but at the scene of the war, he cannot afford to shake and take a bad photo. ”home again to ordinary pain” This line shows us that the persona has seen what real suffering is like.
The character of the inspector is written by Priestley as a representation of morality in the play. The manner of The inspector is one the Birling's find rather disconcerting. This question of his character grows throughout the play, mirroring Sheila's and the audience's growing suspicion of him.” we didn't tell him anything he didn't already know" This all knowing quality of the character of the inspector gives a sense of being super natural, a quality confirmed by Priestley during the Inspector's outburst at the end in which he foretells the prophecy of 'fire, blood and anguish' giving the audience an underlying sense of unease at the reference to war. Therefore showing them the consequences of a lack of responsibility. This ironic hindsight into the war also gives the audience a sense of the inspector's wisdom.