Live Chat Support

Showing posts with label literary analysis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literary analysis. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Literary Analysis on "Stuff is not Salvation"

            When a person opens his television, it is not unusual to see television commercials advertising a particular product.  These commercials will make it appear that the products they are advertising are essential.  They will convince their viewers that that they must have purchase their products.  They will encourage their viewers to purchase these products not only because they are the best but because they are also the latest in technology.  They will also make it appear that owning their products will make a person look “cool.” 
            Marketing gimmicks has become a part of the US culture.  Perhaps, it started from the time when products were created and there was a need to sell these products.  Thus, wherever one goes, he usually sees different companies advertising their own products from billboards to newspaper advertisements and even the internet.  These marketing gimmicks have one purpose – to encourage the public to consume more.  The more we consume the more they earn. 
            With this culture, it is not surprising that the Americans are some of the most materialistic people of the world.  This can be attributed to our constant exposure to commercial advertisements.  As a result, the Americans have started to identify themselves with different products.  They have thought that they need the products being sold over the internet and that these products will make them complete or will help them gain more friends or will help them become more popular.   The manufactures and producers are partly to blame for what the people in this country have become. 
            We have lost our identity.  We have lost our soul.  We have forgotten that what is essential is invisible to the naked eye.  The material things being sold in television or over the internet are not essential.  They can never make a person complete.  They can never make a person happy.  It is no wonder more Americans go home late at night feeling empty from inside.  They may have all the riches in the world and all the properties they can buy but they are hurting inside.  Consider the cases of many celebrities who have gone into drug addition or alcohol addiction.  Most of us would want to trade every thing just we could experience living their lives not realizing that these people are also hurting deep inside because they are lonely and sad. 
            I agree with Anna Quindlen.  She said that “The happiest families I know aren't the ones with the most square footage.”  It is time for us to realize that having less is more.  There are times when have less possession can be better as it will help us appreciate more the things that we have.  It will make us love more the things that we have.  In the end, what is most important is relationships.  What is most important are a person’s family, friends, relatives and loved ones.  It is our relationship with the people we truly love that matters the most.  Relationships matter the most because they make us happy and they make us complete. 
           

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Poem Analysis of “If We Must Die” by Claude McKay



“If We Must Die” by Claude McKay was first published in the Liberator in the summer of 1919, was republished in Harlem Shadows in 1922.  and in dozens of African American journals throughout the 1920s. This sonnet alerted African Americans to protect themselves in an honorable manner during the turmoils that pervaded after the First World War. This period in history is labeled as “The Red Summer” by Harlem Renaissance writer, James Weldon Johnson. At that time, 38 major race riots sprang up in different areas of the United States. A significant number of black men, women, and children were massacred out of racism and paranoia between May and October of that year.

McKay chose to convey a non-traditional topic of African-American rights through a Shakespearean sonnet, a very traditional structure with its rhyming scheme of ababcdcdefefgg. He also uses alliteration approximately four times in his sonnet in phrases like “making their mock” and “deal one deathblow.” He also uses animal imagery such as “hunted and penned hogs” and “mad and hungry dogs” in describing a merciless and inhuman oppressor. This gives an impression to the reader that black people should fight like animals rather than just passively sit around in response to being treated like animals by the oppressor. The “open grave” is a better option over inhumane conditions.

McKay urges his “kinsmen” to take action for the injustices being done to them by racist Americans. He also pinpointed that they may be a minority, with their backs pressed to the wall, but they will not die without putting up a good fight. He also tells the reader that the oppressor's mockery must be resisted viciously. He wrote the phrase “if we must die” twice in the poem to instill in the reader's mind to take immediate action in fighting back.

The Reliable and Affordable Essay Writing Services


This poem may be brief but it pierces through the very heart of readers. It was a rallying piece written for oppressed African-Americans during the Harlem Renaissance in the early part of the 20th Century but contains a universal appeal of courageous resistance since it was also used by Sir Winston Churchill to motivate Allied Soldiers against Hitler. It still remains to be one of the most anthologized of all modern poems. There is no internal evidence that the poem is about race. Readers who have no idea about the writer or the poem's background can associate it with different types of conflict and resistance. It also shows McKay's own viewpoints towards oppression and injustice. It is through an unwavering sense of commitment and militancy that can overpower one's oppressors.

This is a free Poem Analysis of “If We Must Die” by Claude McKay. We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom.  If you need help we will write well written Poem Analysis of “If We Must Die” by Claude McKay at very affordable costs starting at $7.50/page.

BUY ESSAY ON POEM ANALYSIS OF "IF WE MUST DIE" NOW!

Did you find our blog post informative? You do not have to do research on your topic again!
If you are interested to subscribe to our email club fill out our form by clicking on the the link below
https://madmimi.com/signups/join/45368
to receive the most current and up to date information about your topic!

Thursday, September 15, 2011

Essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop

A tip in writing an essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop is to include its theme. The essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop should state that its theme is the different kind of struggles that every person should face in life. The essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop should state some are able to succeed while some fail in their own struggles. In the poem analysis of The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop, she caught a fish which she described as tremendous and venerable. Though she was surprised that the fish did not make any attempt to escape, she admired the fish because it has endured a lot of suffering during its lifetime.

The description of the fish is essential in writing an essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop. The essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop should describe the fish as very old and battle-scarred which is evident in the “five old pieces of fish-line” “with all their five big hoods grown firmly in his mouth.” The essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop should indicate that the fish had been through a lot during its lifetime. The essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop should also mention that it had been caught several times already and it was able to escape all of them.



The comparison of the fish’s scars to medals should also be stated in the essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop. In The Fish, Elizabeth Bishop stated that “like medals with their ribbons frayed and wavering.” Elizabeth Bishop’s early struggles in life should also be mentioned in the essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop. When she was a young girl, she lost her father to a disease. Her mother, on the other hand, was not able to recover from the loss of her husband and went insane.  The genre should also be included in the essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop. It is classified as a lyric since Bishop wrote the poem based on her personal experiences when she went fishing.

This is a free Essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop.  We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom. If you need help we will write well written Essay on The Fish by Elizabeth Bishop at very affordable costs starting at $7.50/page.

BUY ESSAY ON ANALYSIS OF THE FISH BY ELIZABETH BISHOP NOW!

Did you find our blog post informative? You do not have to do research on your topic again!
If you are interested to subscribe to our email club fill out our form by clicking on the the link below
https://madmimi.com/signups/join/45368
to receive the most current and up to date information about your topic!
 

Essay on "Making the Most of Clinical Education"

This article stresses the importance of clinical education in the lives of the students.  It serves as a place where the students can apply into practice the theories they have learned while inside the classroom.  David Campbell emphasized that the students’ success as a radiologists will be determined by their ability to respond to the challenges they face during clinical education.  This aspect of student life is therefore very important.  He emphasized the importance of commitment, cooperation and communication to the success of the clinical education.  The first is commitment which is the determination of the student to finish what he or she has started.  As students nowadays are more exposed to peer pressure and other external influences that may affect their education, it is only the students’ commitment to finish their education that can help them finish their education.  The second is cooperation which is necessary for the creation of a harmonious relationship between students and the technologists.  Students must understand that the technologists are not their teachers and so they cannot expect the same level of interaction with their professors.  Students must also learn to cooperate with their technologists so as to facilitate learning.  The third is communication.  The technologists may not be able to assess the students as to what they know and what they do not know unless the students communicate with the technologists and asks questions about the areas of confusion. 

Clinical education should be the most exciting part of a student-radiologist’s life.  It is here where the student can assess himself in relation to his desired profession.  This is where the student gains insight on the physical, mental and emotional demands on the job which has serious repercussion for his future.   In case the student enjoys the clinical education he may look forward to the time when he is given the license to practice the profession.  If he finds the clinical education difficult to adjust to then this is also the right time for him to make the important decision of whether he will pursue the education or shift to another profession.  The most important thing however is for the students to learn that there are challenges and responsibilities in every profession which the students must find a way to overcome. 

This is a free Essay on "Making the Most of Clinical Education" .  We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom. If you need help we will write well written Essay on "Making the Most of Clinical Education" at very affordable costs starting at $7.50/page.

Critique of "Doing the right thing: how ethical are you?"

This article speaks about the ethical dilemmas that can be encountered in radiologic sciences profession.  According to the author, certain rules have to be observed in this profession.  It is important for technologists to be familiar with these rules so that in case a similar situation happens the technologists will know how to respond.  The first scenario involved a decision between facing termination for not observing the instruction of the supervisor or possibility of the patient being pregnant.  Peter Shams-Avari stressed that the foremost duty of the technologist is towards the patient and not towards his supervisor.  The author also advised that termination is not to be feared so long as the technologist acts in accordance with the rules of ethics.  The second scenario is the alteration of a report which is also a serious violation of the code of ethics of radiologic sciences profession.  The third scenario discusses about the prohibition of aiding, assisting, or allowing a person who is not a licensed technologist to engage in the practice of radiologic technology.  This is based on the principle a person cannot practice this profession unless he has been given a state license or permit. 


Every profession has a set of rules and principles which enjoins strict observance from everybody belonging to the same profession.  Doctors, Lawyers, Nurses, Accountants and other profession have a set of rules and ethical principles.  The principle is that the practice of this profession is not a matter of right.  It is a privilege that is given only to those who have the excellent skill and exemplary character to comply with the strict ethical rules.  Its purpose is to ensure the protection of the public who may be prejudiced by the failure of those in the radiologist profession to observe that highest ethical standards.  By upholding these ethical principles not only is the public benefited but even the technologists themselves since the respect of the public to the radiologist profession is maintained.

This is a free Critique of "Doing the right thing: how ethical are you?".  We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom. If you need help we will write well written Critique of "Doing the right thing: how ethical are you?" at very affordable costs starting at $7.50/page.

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Essay on Henrik Ibsen's A Doll House

A brilliant philosopher once remarked that there is no universal standard of morality.   By this he meant that the morality of an action should be determined and measured not according to a universal law that sets the standard for what is right and what is wrong for everyone.  It is man that determines what is right and what is wrong.  Thus, an action is moral if such act promotes his needs.  An act is immoral if it does not promote his needs.

This is the ethical concern for the main character in Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House.  The character in this story is confused on the morality of her action.  By her own standard she has done nothing wrong.  By forging her father’s signature for the purpose of saving her husband’s life, she thinks she has not violated any law.  On the other hand, the society considers that a law has been violated.  She has also put her husband to shame.  The question here is not limited to the morality of her action rather who determines whether an action is moral or immoral.  Should the wife be allowed to suffer because the society condemns her action?  

Background of the Play
The play A Doll’s House represents the different interpretations of morality every individual must face in life.  Every individual must struggle against the morality that is imposed by the society.  Henrik Ibsen, however, questions the authority behind the prevailing morality in our society.  For him, the prevailing interpretations of morality are imposed upon the majority by the ruling elite.   Thus, morality is not the question of what is right or wrong but rather it is a question of power. 

In this play, Ibsen shows how the society creates powerful rules for the people to follow.  Anybody who can comply with these rules of morality apparently lives a relatively stable economic life.  In the case of the Helmers, the main character in this play, they have a nice home, and they have servants who work for them.  They were happy according to the society’s standard.  They live within the comforts of their own home. 

However, society demands absolute obedience to its standard.  Society demands that everybody must be within the circle of obedience.  If any person fails to comply within its own standard then they fall outside of its circle.  Everybody must conform to a view of proper conduct which in many respects, extremely narrow and unforgiving.   In this play we find the society giving importance to respect for the sanctity of contracts, money and conventional roles of men and women in marriage.  The society is quite unforgiving to people who cannot comply with these standards. 

This is apparent in the two other characters in this play.  In the case of Christine, she has made an immoral decision early on in her life by leaving the love of her life for someone else.  As a result, she has become outside of the circle.  This is depicted in how the author showed the disparity in the social status and how it would seem that she had aged a lot compared to Nora.  In the case of Krogstad, he also had been outside the circle for a long time as he was caught forging another person’s signature.  Society considered him immoral.    

The playwright likewise showed that both their characters, Christine and Krogstad, are attempting to re-enter the society’s circle.  This is manifested in the way Christine tries to go back to Krogstad to start over.  In the case of Krogstad, he wants to maintain his job because his society only respects someone who earns well. 

The question now is will the main character of this story stay within the circle or would she choose to go outside of the circle just like what Krogstad and Christine did.  Ibsen showed his criticisms on the traditional roles men and women play in marriage.  In this play, Ibsen criticized the dominant role played by man.  This was the situation especially during the 19th Century for Europeans.  They regarded the husbands and wives as unequal. Here, Ibsen showed that in a marriage the spouses should live as equals so that they will have the opportunity to live as normal human beings.  

Summary of A Doll’s House
Act 1 opens with a very happy Nora Helmer, one of the main characters in the play.  Immediately, Ibsen reveals so many things that will guide the entire play.  Nora Helmer is shown eating Macaroons which her husband has always reminded her not to eat.  This could be an indication that she is concealing a secret from her husband.  Torvald, her husband, immediately calls her ‘my little lark’ and ‘my little squirrel’.  This symbolizes his low regard for his wife.  Also, the conversation between them centers on money which serves as a sign how important money is for this family.

They talk about their good future because Torvald has just been promoted to bank manager.  Nora is very happy because she thought she can buy so many things for her and for her family.  Torvald senses that Nora may have been violating the rules by eating sweets but she denies this.  Later on Dr. Rank, a family friend enters and Torvald talks with him in a separate room.  Upon leaving, Nora is visited by a friend, Christine Lindie.  Christine wastes no time recounting her unfortunate life to Nora.  She shares with her that she was forced to marry someone she did not love.  Now, she has been a widow for several years.  She narrates the hardships the she had to endure to make ends meet.  She also gives a comment about how lucky Nora is.  Nora replies that she too had to work hard for her family.  She boasts that because of her hard work for several years she was able to save someone she dearly loves.  She proceeds to tell Christine how she had to borrow a large sum of money from one person just so she and her husband could travel to another country with a better climate which greatly helped her husband’s health and condition.  She explains to Christine that she secretly saves money from her personal expenses and that she accepts additional work at night just so she could repay her loan in installment.   She reveals to her that she has to do this secretly since her husband would not approve of this.  She even expresses that their happy marriage would fall apart if he finds out that he owed money to his wife.  She is proud to say that someday she will inform her husband that she has done something to save his life that is after “my dancing and dressing-up and reciting have palled on him.”  She sincerely believes that a “wonderful thing” will happen if she tells him what she has done.           

Their conversation is stopped by the entrance of another character, Nils Krogstad, who is a money lender. He now works in the same bank that Torvald works.  Krogstad makes it clear with Nora that he came only to talk to Torvald about a very important business matter.  At this point, Dr. Rank makes a remark about Krogstad being a morally diseased person.  

The Reliable and Affordable Essay Writing Services

When Torval re-emerges, Nora attempts to convince him to accept Christine as his employee.  Torvald remarks that he will study the matter.  As Torvald leaves, Krogstad once again emerges.  He asks her if she could help with in his predicament.  He learns that Christine may be accepted and he may be dismissed from her. He explains that the society has lost respect for him because of the crime he has done in the past.  Though Nora was not listening at first, Krogstad reminds her of a crime she has done in the past.  He tells her that she has committed forgery.  He tells her that he has evidence that will prove that she borrowed money from him using her father’s signature.  Nora defends herself as she merely wants to save her husband’s life.  Krogstad informs her that forgery is a crime regardless of her intention.  Thus, Krogstad pleads that she should help him with his predicament. 

When her husband enters, Nora attempts to convince her husband not to remove Krogstad from work and retain him in his position.  She warns him that he might do the same thing Krogstad had done to her father before.  Subsequently, Torvald admits that Krogstad’s moral failings as a person can be overlooked but what he cannot stand is Krogstad’s familiarity with him.  He points out that since he knew Krogstad from years back, Krogstad has been calling him on a first-name basis even at his office.  Surprised by the flimsy reason for his plan to remove Krogstad from his work, Nora remarks on how narrow-minded Torvald was.  Torvald is angered by this remark and he immediately gives orders to the maid to post the letter of dismissal of Krogstad.  As this conversation progresses, the author shows that Torvald had little regard for the opinions of his wife.  He thought that he will never let his wife influence his decision. 

Nora is now seen talking with Krogstad who is now aware that Torvald wants to dismiss him from work.  Irked by the actions of Torvald, Krogstad warns Nora that he plans to blackmail Torvald.  He tells her that she committed the crime of forgery at the time she loaned some money from Krogstad and signed her father’s name.  Krogstad narrates to Nora that he intends to humiliate Torvald in the society by telling them that his wife forged her father’s signature when she borrowed money from her.  Nora becomes very worried.  She thinks that she does not want her husband to be humiliated.  She would rather die than allow Torvald to be blamed for a crime that she committed.  He warns her to do something about his situation otherwise he will inform Torvald about her secret.  As he leaves, he drops a letter inside the letter box. 

Nora now tells Christine everything about the money she borrowed from Krogstad and the forgery she committed.  She asks Christine to stand as her witness so that should anything happen to her she should tell her story that only she is responsible for the forgery and that Torvald had done nothing wrong.   Christine tells Nora that she would help her by immediately going to the house of Krogstad to visit him and convince him to change his plan.  During this time, Nora desperately tries to distract Torvald so that he will not have the opportunity to read his mails.  Later on, Christine returns.  She tells Nora that she was not able to talk to Krogstad since she was away but she left a note for him to read in case he comes back. 

Krogstad and Christine are now seen talking with each other.  He expresses his anger to Christine for having left him for somebody who is better able to support her.  He tells her that now she comes back again this time to take away from him his position in the bank.  Christine denies this and reassures him that she still loves him.  She tells him that she came back for him to renew their love for each other.  She also tells him to recall his letter to Torvald.  Krogstad eventually tells her that he is willing to recall his letter to Torvald.  This time, Christine changes her mind.  She tells Krogstad that it would be better for their marriage if Torvald finds out the truth. 

Despite all her distractions, her husband finally gets hold of Torvald’s letter.  When he finds out about what he had done, he shouts at Nora and expresses abusive language at her.  He scolds her for bringing shame to him.  He declares that the public may even think that it was he who told Nora to do the act she did.  He tells her that he denounced Nora as his wife and that she will no longer be allowed to raise their family.   

At this moment however, the maid brings another letter to Nora.  Torvald grabs it and reads it.  He finds out that Krogstad had surrendered the bond indicating that he no longer wishes to bring dishonor to them.  At this point, Tovald is overjoyed.  He tears the bond and shouts that he is saved.  He instantly tells Nora that she has been forgiven.   

At this point, Nora lets everything out.  She reveals to him how unhappy she had been for the past eight years.  She narrates that all those years there was never an opportunity that they were able to talk seriously about their disagreements.  She compares her life as his wife to her life at her father’s house.  She tells him that they are basically the same. In both houses she was never given an opportunity to express her own opinion.  Her father disliked it when she disagrees with anything that he said.  She remarks that she was always treated as a toy.  She now realizes that her life at Torvald’s house is basically the same with her life at her father’s house.  She declares that they both committed a sin against her.  She thinks that because of them she made nothing of her life.  For his part, Torvald admits that he may have some shortcomings though most of her statements are exaggerated.  She responds that she will accept nothing from him that tells her how to be a proper wife.  She explains that she is not yet ready to raise their children.  She realizes that she must first try and educate herself before undertaking the serious responsibilities of motherhood.  Then she leaves their house. 

Character Analysis
A.  Nora Helmer
Nora Helmer represents the antithesis of the 19th Century society.  At first we thought that she is a selfish woman who only cares about material wealth.  Towards the middle of the play we found out about the sacrifices she made for her husband and for her family.  Nora Helmer is described as an innocent person who questioned the narrow-mindedness of society’s standard of morality.  She was confused when Krogstad revealed to her that her act of signing her father’s name in a loan is a crime.  She could not understand why it could be a crime when her intention was pure and noble.  Towards, the end of the story, she experiences a realization that the person she married is no longer her husband.  She learns that her husband was not proud of what she had done to save her.  In the end, she decides to leave the comforts of her own home as she tries to leave her family behind.  It would seem to be a liberating experience for Nora who will finally learn how it is to live without the dictates of her husband and the society.  However, the author also shows that what she did may cause her self-destruction as she tries to go outside of the society’s circle. 

B. Torvald Helmer
He is what Ibsen considers as typical head of the family during the 19th Century.  At first we thought that he is a loving and generous husband who wants to take care of his own family.  Towards the middle of the story we found out that he is more concerned with maintaining is reputation to the society rather than his love for his wife.   He is a representation of the social malaise in Europe in the 19th Century.  He considers himself as superior to his wife.  He regards her wife as a sex object whose role is to gratify the sexual desires of her husband.   His concerns about his family are limited to supporting them and making sure that they are well-off financially.  He is shallow minded as he wants Krogstad dismissed from work because of flimsy reasons.  He tries desperately to make sure that he complies with what is moral and immoral according to society’s standard.  He even prefers his public reputation over his wife as he renounces and disowns his wife for having forged a loan even if that was done for his health.      

C.  Christine Linde

Christine Linde depicts the exact opposite of Nora’s character.  Early on in her life, she obeyed her father’s wishes by leaving a man whom she loved for someone else who can support her and her relatives.  She eventually finds out that she made a mistake.  Because of this mistake she lives in poverty and was forced to make ends meet in order to survive.  Now she tries to go back within the circle so comfortably created and dictated by the society.   Nora’s character is being compared to her character.  Ibsen shows that at the end of the story just as Christine attempts to go within the society’s circle Nora’s character decides to live her life outside of that circle. 


d. Krogstad

Krogstad also depicts the exact opposite of Torvald’s character.  He is judged by the society as morally diseased since early in his life he was caught forging another person’s signature.  In the past he chose to live his life outside of what the society considers an acceptable standard for morality.  However, Ibsen also shows that he experienced the society’s cruelty to those who cannot comply with its laws and standards.  Krogstad now suffers from poverty.  He realizes that the only way society will respect is if he keeps his job. 


Theme of the play
This play addresses so many social issues.  The first is the desire for material wealth that was prevalent during Ibsen’s time.  During the 19th Century, there was a huge social and economic change in Europe.  Manufacturing and production were at their peak which led to the development of the urban centers.  The consequence of this is that the society measured a person according to his ability to make money.  Those who had money were respected and revered.  The more money a person has the more he is able to control his own life and other life of other person.  They were also the ones who determined which people lived a moral life and which did not.  It was the affluent who set the standards not only for morality but how everybody should live.   This is apparent in this play as Torvald, the representation of the 19th Century middle class male, controls her wife and manipulates her like his little toy.  He also judges Krogstad character and he decided for no important reason to remove him from work.

Another theme which Ibsen sought to address is the unequal stature given to married women.  During the 19th Century, the women played more of a secondary role to the family.  Their responsibility is only to raise children and take care of their husband.  They cannot work and earn money on their own.  If they do decide to work they will find it hard to get an acceptable work which pays good.  Since women could not earn their own money, they depended on their husband for support.  Consequently, they cannot spend this money without their husband’s consent.  They also were not allowed to make decision on their life.  This has left women in the 19th Century totally dependent for their husband even for smallest decisions in their life.  They had no voice in their own family.  They were not respected by the society.  This explains why in the middle of the play, Torvald was infuriated by the idea of him being influenced by her wife in his work. 

Conclusion
The play concludes not with a revelation of an important plot in the just like any other story.  It ends with Nora’s self-discovery.  It is also considered as a tragedy because she finds out that her husband does not love her as much as she loves him.  Unlike, the other plays that end in the death of one or both of the main characters, this play ends in death of the love between two couples. 

She also discovers that aside from her role as a wife and as a mother she is also a woman.  She discovers that aside from her duties to her husband and her duties to her children, she also has duties to herself.  She became totally disappointed by her husband’s reactions to the one thing that she was proud of doing.  When her husband discovers about the loan and the forgery though she was afraid of his reaction, she thought that he will be proud of her for saving him.  But for her the wonderful thing that she had been waiting for several years did not happen.  In fact, she was astonished that her husband was willing to renounce and forsake her just because of the reputation that he has to protect.  The play concludes with Nora leaving her husband to try to search for her self-identity.  

This is a free Essay on Henrik Ibsen's A Doll House. We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom. If you need help we will prepare a well-written Essay on Henrik Ibsen's A Doll House at very affordable costs starting at $6.50/page.

Friday, July 29, 2011

Essay on Anton Chekhov's The Woman with a Pet Dog

Dmitri Gurov is a Moscow banker who is intrigued by the sudden appearance of a young woman walking alone along the sea front of Yalta.  He is a married man with children.  While it may appear that he lives an ordinarily life, he is a discontented married man.  He despises his wife whom he thinks is unintelligent and inelegant.  He develops a strong attraction to Anna Sergeyevna, a woman whom he sees one day walking alone with her dog.   He eventually develops an affair with her.  At first, he thought that she is just like another woman with whom he will have an affair.  Little did he know that because of Anna he will find out more about himself. 

Anna Sergeyevna is a young and naïve woman who is married to a government official.  She describes her husband as flunkey.  Just like Dmitri, she is unhappy with her married life.  She becomes attracted to Dmitri and falls in love with him. At first she feels guilty for sleeping with him but she soon realizes that she is very much in love with him such that even after they parted ways at Yalta, they still decided to see each other at Moscow
           

The Reliable and Affordable Essay Writing Services



Theme
At first glance, “The Lady with the Pet Dog” may be considered as a story about moral corruption, infidelity, disloyalty, and sin since this is essentially a story about two married people having an affair.  A deeper reading of the story will reveal that this is more than just about morality but about life. 

It may seem that Anton Chekhov wanted the readers to despise Dmitri as he was depicted as a philandering man who did not love his family.  It must be emphasized here that Dmitri was married to a woman who was not even named in the story.  Perhaps, Anton Chekhov wanted to emphasize how unimportant Dmitri’s wife is to his life.  She was however described as a “tall, erect women with dark eyebrows, staid and dignified, and, as she said of herself, intellectual.” Yet Dmitri considered her “unintelligent, narrow, and inelegant.”  His scorn and despise for his wife was made evident as it was emphasized that Dmitri did not like to be at home with his family.  It was also described that he had extra-marital affairs many times in his life.  He was not only described as an irresponsible husband and father but he was also chauvinistic as he considered women as “the lower race.”  This arrogant attitude towards women was highlighted in the first part of the story.  Even if he had not even talked to Anna, he was already excited about the thoughts of him conquering the woman whom he thought was young and naïve, to wit:  

but when the lady sat down at the next table three paces from him, he remembered these tales of easy conquests, of trips to the mountains, and the tempting thought of a swift, fleeting love affair, a romance with an unknown woman, whose name he did not know, suddenly took possession of him.

On the other hand, Anna was depicted as a young and naïve married woman.  One may think that she was living a normal life yet she secretly despised her husband whom he described as “flunkey.”  She revealed to Dmitri that she had been unhappy with her husband for a long time.  She tells him that she had been deceiving him for a long time.  She even considered her marriage as a mistake, to wit:    

I was twenty when I was married to him. I have been tormented by curiosity; I wanted something better. 'There must be a different sort of life,' I said to myself. I wanted to live! To live, to live! . . . I was fired by curiosity . . . you don't understand it, but, I swear to God, I could not control myself; something happened to me: I could not be restrained. I told my husband I was ill, and came here. . .
           
Yet, the storyline radically shifted to a new direction towards the end of the story.  What was previously thought of as a story of moral corruption and degeneration was in truth an accurate picture of the realities of life.  Anton Chekhov wanted to tell the readers that the things that happened to Dmitri and Anna may very well happen to every one of us.  People do fall in love even if they are already married.  As married couples interact with other people there is always the possibility that they may be attracted to other people.  The married couple need not be unhappy or discontented with their marriage to have an extra-marital affair.  In fact, there need not be a reason to be involved in an affair.  Even happy and contended couples may by accidental chance meet somebody else and develop passionate feelings for them. 

What Anton Chekhov had shown in this story was that he was not a conventional moralist.  He treated morality from a different perspective in this story.  Though he did not say that engaging in adultery or promiscuity is good, he did emphasize that this is a reality of life that we must deal with.  He was in fact a realist. 

The underlying message of the story is that Dmitri was unhappy with his married life.  Anna was likewise unhappy with her married life.  By some stroke of chance, they met and found each other.  Though it may be possible that they their attraction for each other in the beginning of their story was brought about by their unhappy marriage, they soon developed deep feelings for each other.  In the end, the feelings they had for each other was more than mere passion or lust but even friendship.  This was made evident towards the end of this story, to wit:

Anna Sergeyevna and he loved each other like people very close and akin, like husband and wife, like tender friends; it seemed to them that fate itself had meant them for one another, and they could not understand why he had a wife and she a husband; and it was as though they were a pair of birds of passage, caught and forced to live in different cages. They forgave each other for what they were ashamed of in their past, they forgave everything in the present, and felt that this love of theirs had changed them both.
           
His realistic attitude towards life and its endless possibilities were shown in this story.  The characters were depicted in a very realistic manner.  His characters were very real as they had their own strengths and weaknesses.  Dmitri was a male chauvinist who did not love his wife.  He was consumed with his desire for sex with random women.  Anna was a young and innocent woman who was having second thoughts about her marriage.  She went to Yalta hoping to take a break from her sad married life.  They were both trapped in a loveless marriage.  Towards the end of the story, Dmitri’s character was transformed from a carefree and unsympathetic character to a loving and caring man.  He fell in love and deeply touched by the strong bond and connection he had with Anna.  He chased her to her province.  He became vulnerable by revealing to her his true feelings for her.  This was something that Dmitri had not done with the other sexual escapades he had in the past with other women.  He even acted stupidly in kissing Anna in public forgetting that her husband may be in the vicinity.  Verily, all people who have experienced being in love may truly relate with the character of Dmitri.  We will all go out of our way, make ourselves vulnerable and act stupid at times because of love.  Truly, this is the power of love as realistically portrayed by Anton Chekhov.

While being realistic, Anton Chekhov was not judgmental.  He simply wanted to tell the realities of life without convincing his readers that a character or an act is immoral.  He just wanted to tell a story while at the same time refusing to judge the characters or attempt to offer suggestions on how to improve their situation.  This was evident in this story, to wit: 

And it seemed as though in a little while the solution would be found, and then a new and splendid life would begin; and it was clear to both of them that they had still a long, long road before them, and that the most complicated and difficult part of it was only just beginning.
           
It was very typical of Anton Chekhov’s style to give an open-ended ending to a story.  The ending was written with ambiguity leaving the readers to try to think for themselves what may eventually happen to the couple. 

Though the future remained uncertain for Dmitri and Anna, they both willingly accepted their situation.  Both of them were living two separate lives.  One life is open, seen and known by their families and friends.  The other life is known only to both of them.  They were happy but they also know that they could not openly enjoy it for a long time.  They also knew they may not have a happy ending but what mattered to them was they were enjoying each other’s company.  Truly, these are the realities of life. 

This is a free essay on Anton Chekhov's The Woman with a Pet Dog.  We are the leading provider of essay writing services in the US and UK.  If you need help we will prepare a well-written essay on Anton Chekhov's The Woman with a Pet Dog at very affordable rates starting at $7.50/page.




Essay on Billy Joy's Why the Future Doesn't Need Us - Critical Analysis

In August 1945, human race was appalled by the destructive power of nuclear weapons after it was used against Japan.  There were thoughts that nothing could be worse than these weapons.  At present, people fear of world-wide catastrophe that biological and chemical weapons can bring to the human race.  Billy Joy thinks otherwise.  He thinks there are things far worse than the threats of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.  Without a decisive and conscious action on our part, it is possible for human race to cause its extinction, or at least diminish its importance, by the creation of new technologies called genetic engineering, robotics and nanotechnology. 

Robotics, genetic engineering and nanotechnology pose a significant and more dangerous threat to the human race compared to the nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.  The latter, once they are detonated, are capable of causing damage only once.  Though they may have long-term effects on the physical and psychological health, the fact remains that they will only blow up once.  On the other hand, the former are capable of self-replication.  They can, with or without our knowledge, multiply and easily get out of control, hurt the human race more than once and even cause its extinction. 
Another difference is that nuclear, biological and chemical weapons require conscious and deliberate acts for them to be created, detonated and exploded.  They have to be purposely built.  Building and creating them, however require not only talent of one person but also access to raw materials and classified information which is not available to everyone.  On the other hand, the dangers that may be caused by robotics, genetics and nanotechnology, may be trigged on purpose or even by accident.  What makes them more dangerous is that robotics, genetic engineering and nanotechnology do not require any raw materials or elaborate facilities.  Knowledge alone is enough.

In the area of robotics, it is not far-fetched now to consider the possibility that in the future, scientists and technologists may be able to create robots with intelligence far exceeding human capability.  If this happens, the possibility that intelligent robot species may eventually roam the streets is not far away.  Billy Joy expressed his concern about human’s insatiable thirst for knowledge that has driven them to discovery new things.  Though this may be beneficial to the public in the short-term, scientists should as early as now start to look at the direction the human race is going.  Serious attention should be given to the possibility that these inventions may in the future be able to have a life of its own.  These robots may eventually replace the human race and be able to someday have consciousness – something that we now think is possible. 

The field of genetic engineering has helped the human race by revolutionizing agriculture, increasing crop production and reducing use of pesticide.  It promised to help humanity find cure to certain diseases which have eluded many physicians.  However, genetic engineering has reached the critical level where it is possible for any person with sufficient knowledge and evil mind to create a plague that is so contagious that it may be transferred from one person to another causing death to thousands if not millions of people.  The troubling part is that this may happen either by means of a deliberate terrorist action or simply by accident.

Nanotechnology is a field that promises to provide low-cost solar power, causes for cancer and other illnesses and complete cleanup of the environment by means of rearrangement of atoms.  However, this field also has military and terrorist potentials as in the future a massively destructive device may be released to the destruction of the human race.

The human race has reached a critical level in its search for knowledge. According to Billy Joy, we, as a race, have become a danger to ourselves, to the people around us and to the world.  Scientists should learn from their mistakes in the past.  The creation of the atomic bombs has paved the way for its use against another country.  Until now, we fear that other countries may without the world’s knowledge be creating weapons to be used against each other in case of war.  Billy Joy proposes as the only solution to avoid this possibility of destruction of the human race is to abandon and to relinquish the development of these new technologies.  Search for knowledge may be good and is a worthy endeavor.  The safety of the human race, however, demands that pursuit for more knowledge should be stopped before we all become endangered species. 

This is a free essay on Billy Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us." We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services in the US and the UK.  If you need help we will prepare a well-written essay on Billy Joy's Why the Future Doesn't Need Us at very affordable rates starting at $7.50/page.


Literary Criticism of “Road Not Taken”

Robert Frost is recognized as one of America’s most popular poets.  (Seattle Post-Intelligencer 1)  What made him standout from the rest was his ability to tell his poems and relay a particular image and voice which at first glance may seem trite and common.  Upon careful reading, however, the readers will discover the skepticism and irony in his style and find out that it is not as old and common as what they first seem.  This is the case in his poem “Road not Taken.”

Robert Frost was born in San Francisco California in 1874.  He was named after Robert E. Lee, the Commander of the Confederate Armies during the American Civil War.  (MSN Encarta 1)  His father was William Frost, a journalist and a Democrat, who was very strict to Robert Frost as he was growing up.  His mother, Isabelle Moody, was described as a schoolteacher who was very protective of Robert Frost.  After graduating from high school, Frost briefly entered Dartmouth College.  While studying he preoccupied himself by having numerous jobs such as working in a textile mill and teaching Latin while at the same time writing his poems.  Frost married Elinor White after proposing to her for the second time.  It was said that Frost was rejected by Elinor White the first time he proposed to her.  (Seattle Post-Intelligencer 1)  They had six children.  Among the difficulties Robert Frost suffered were the early demise of his wife, and four of his children.  Because of the many problems he encountered, Frost suffered depression and self-doubt.  His first few years as a poet were not very successful as he was rejected by publishers.  He achieved his first success after he moved to England where his book of poems, A Boy’s Will (1913), was published.  This was followed by North of Boston (1914).  Among the honors Frost received during his lifetime were tributes from the US Senate (1950), the American Academy of Poets (1953), the New York University (1956) and the Huntington Hartford Foundation (1958)

Literature Analysis of “Road Not Taken”
In the first stanza, Frost provided his reader with an image of a traveler who was wandering alone.  The traveler had been walking when he suddenly saw two roads in front of him.  The traveler knew, however, that he could not take both roads.  The traveler attempted to look down the road as far as his eyes can see for quite some time trying to decide which road to take.  Forks are always used not only in poems but also in short stories to symbolize choices, crises, and decisions.  This is something that we can all relate to since making decisions and choices are essential part of life. 

The Reliable and Affordable Essay Writing Services



In the second stanza, the traveler made his decision.  He chose one road over the other.  The traveler made his decision to take one road because he initially thought that the other road was more worn out than the other.  The road was still grassy indicating that it was seldom used by other travelers.  However, as the traveler continued walking, he quickly realized that the path he had chosen and the path he did not choose were essentially the same.  It would seem that in this stanza, Frost was talking about the traveler choosing to do something that is contrary to what others do.  It is as if Frost wanted to emphasize freedom from social pressures.  Frost wanted us to think that this poem was all about individuality and self-identity.  The last two lines however should be read together with the first three lines the meaning of which will be clarified in the succeeding stanzas.

In the third stanza, the traveler continues with the realization that there was not much difference between the first and the second road.  The leaves appear to have fallen very recently which indicates that both roads have seldom been traveled.    The traveler immediately thought about the possibility that someday he would go back to take the other road.  Yet, the solitary traveler also realized that it is also possible that he may not be able to come back.  He may not have the opportunity to take the other road.  This stanza confirmed that both roads are essentially the same.  It is also here that Frost starts to confuse his readers.  If the poem is about freedom and individuality why does it seem that the traveler is having second thoughts about his choice?  Why would he want to come back if he was happy with his decision? 

In the fourth stanza, the traveler tells us that in the future he will be telling his story to other people.  Someday he will share to others that he came upon two roads in a wood and that he made the decision to choose that which was less traveled. 

A keen analysis of the poem will reveal that it is not actually about how one person breaks away from and transcend social expectations.  While it may appear that we should celebrate because the main character from the poem is able to express his own self and decide on his own, the last stanza will reveal that the poem could be interpreted negatively in the sense that the traveler appeared to be regretful about the choice he made. 

There are several evidences for this interpretation.  The first is the title.  The title itself is worded in the negative indicating regret, sorrow, frustration, disappointment and sadness.  If the traveler felt fulfilled after making the choice then consistency demands that the title should also be worded in the positive.  One of the possible titles could be “The Road Taken” which gives more emphasis on the actions taken by the traveler not on what the traveler failed to do. 

The second evidence is the statement in the third stanza about the traveler looking back and wanting to take the other road the next time.  Even before he completed his journey the traveler was already unsure of himself.  He already wanted to go back and change his decision.  This emphasizes hesitation instead of the self-fulfillment. 

The third evidence is the last stanza where the traveler uttered the word ‘sigh’ which could be a sign of regret.  In saying that his taking the road less traveled was the one which “made all the difference”, the traveler impliedly said he regretted making that decision in life. 

The fourth evidence is Robert Frost himself.  Other literary critics say that the poem was about his friend Edward Thomas with whom he had walked many times in the woods.  Being a master of irony, Frost could also be taking about himself in this poem.  He may be talking about the regrets and disappointments in his life.  Some biographers of Robert Frost say that he had financial and emotional insecurities in his life.  (Seattle Post-Intelligencer 2) He was an oversensitive boy as a result of his father who was a heavy drinker and his mother who was over protective. (Seattle Post Intelligencer 1)  He came from a poor family.  He was denied by his wife the first time he proposed.  His wife died very early and his children either died or succumbed to mental illness.  He had a lot of failures in his life despite his success.  It must be emphasized that this poem was published around 1917 at which time he was still a struggling and lesser-known poet.  It could be inferred that at the time the poem was written he was having second thoughts about his career.  All these evidences prove that it is also possible to interpret the poem in the negative. 

Conclusion
Whether the traveler made the right decision or not and whether he was happy or regretful is something that nobody can answer.  That is life.  Nobody knows whether we have made the right decision or not.  As Frost had said the choices in life we have are essentially the same.  We do not know which the better choice is until we have made the decision.  Ultimately, I think “Road not Taken” is about people making decisions and avoiding procrastinations.  When we over think trying to make the best decision we forget that oftentimes we have no control over the events that happen in our life.  In the case of Robert Frost, he had his personal battles from the time he still young until he became an adult.  Yet he did not give up his dream of becoming a poet.  He made the decision, he struggled and persevered.  That is all that makes a difference.

This is a free essay on Literary Criticism of Road Not Taken.  We are the leading provider of affordable essay writing services.  If you need help we will prepare a well-written essay on Literary Criticism of Road Not Taken at very affordable rates starting at $7.50/page.

BUY ESSAY ON LITERARY ANALYSIS OF "ROAD NOT TAKE NOW!