He is obviously a pratical thinker and problem-solver, but, however, the omission of such details of why he was sentenced to death and what did he do to deserve that. Not knowing the wrongdoing of this character can really shift the feeling, whether his death was deserved or not. Along with the plot, while fairly simple and easy to follow, the historical aspects of the story, could be inaccurate to the time it 's meant to be set in, which might unsettle with a group of people. Then with the theme, the theme really makes it cherishable, there was no holding back of the psychological terrors that were bestowed upon this character, though there was no death or gore the possibilties of what could have happened begin to arise. The first person view really was the best decision, because with that an author can really make the reader go into the mind of the protagonist, and develop attachments or emotion toward that character.
I argue that through the use of various forms of understatement in Benito Cereno, Melville produces a destabilizing effect that undermines and mocks the supposed power and intellect of Captain Delano. One of the first descriptions we get of Captain Delano sets this tone for his characterization throughout the rest of the novella: he sees himself as noble, but Melville’s writing fosters doubt about this in the reader. This occurs very early on, as after observing the mystery ship in the distance, Delano decides that despite the fact that it shows no colors, as was customary, the ship probably means no harm. Melville’s narration justifies this by explaining that “Delano’s surprise might have deepened into some uneasiness had he not been a person of a singularly undistrustful good nature, not liable, except on extraordinary and repeated incentives...to indulge in personal alarms, any way involving the imputation of malign evil in man” (36). Rather than say outright that Delano is trusting,
There comes a point in life where some people face an opportunity to do an unlawful act and must decide to go through with it or not. Macbeth was faced with a chance to end King Duncan’s life and to become King himself, as Lady Macbeth had just come to him and made him aware of her plans to murder Duncan. In Macbeth’s soliloquy during Act I scene VII, he uses an apprehensively cautious tone to convey how conflicted he is to the readers. The purpose of this speech is for Macbeth to explain why killing Duncan is a horrible idea. Also, Macbeth’s faith in the three witches is a big reason he decides to do and they are why Lady Macbeth created the idea to kill the King.
Arguments On the other hand, objections against the government of philosopher-rulers can be made. However strong the foundation of the strengths of his idea of a philosopher king may be, there are also a lot of flaws and weaknesses and misconceptions that can be found in it. While in truth that his arguments with regard to them as the ones who are more suitable and capable of giving better judgments than those of the normal men, it is still not persuasive enough to capture the minds of the other philosophers that time into taking into action the idea of the philosopher king. And while his altercation may be valid enough to stand in solid ground, it is still not contemporary with the realistic perception of the world and as well as to the modern
Once Romeo had seen the fight start between Mercutio and Tybalt, he should have stayed where he was. Asking them to stop was a "valiant" move, but interfering could cause disaster in between. Law acts really quickly, so by following one 's impulses could mean an assured unhappy doom. It does not take much, just patience, to be able to stop and think before acting. In the end, it is worth it, decisions taken guided by impulses and rushed are most likely to be regretted afterward.
In this book, Hall’s writing was effective because he was able to affect the audiences due to his experience in the field which gave him credibility that has appealed to logically. Hence it was easier to gain the trust of his audience in viewing his ideas. However, some of his information is inaccurate because some of his examples are based on the events he went through and from that he concluded that all
This is generally not a good idea when you are trying to argue and trying to make a point. However, in this essay, David Sedaris manages to pull it off. The reason that is possible to do in such an untraditional way is that the point he is trying to make can be turned in so many different directions that no one would want to argue against it as we all can agree that self-proclaimed experts are assholes. Another thing that makes it work is the humor in the essay. If it would have been without it the essay would have been hard to get
Although Macbeth has done some really bad deeds, he cannot be called a bad person out and out who goes on to achieve his ambitions without any consideration. He’s also a victim of the realization that there is no meaning as such in this world. This instability snatches his power to think and he gives in to his wife’s provoking speeches without providing any counter arguments to her. If he had any of his individuality left, he certainly must have had given some thought to her speeches but the lack of it shows his confusion. As soon as he joins the opposites foul and fair, he’s encountered by the weird (which is undefined because in the world of Macbeth nothing is normal).
But this could be argued in various forms that it was not necessarily true, because Mbeki began implementing this separation program that caused obvious tension, which made his rule more difficult. However, it is argued that Mbeki is not narrow minded, nor a corrupt leader, but that he lacked strategic adaptability (Gerrit 2). Which is debatable, but comprehensive because he did have issues regarding the application of strategies in a way that could benefit the population while being “modern”, but what ended up making him unpopular. So, Thabo Mbeki was the one expected to be responsible for the politics post Mandela and De Klerk in South Africa, yet he is also criticized for being “a self-proclaimed modernizer in a government laced with incompetent, corrupt cronies; a critic of world capitalism for the widening patterns of inequality while he embraced conservative macroeconomic policy at home” (Foster 13). This established that Mbeki was not coming with positive changes, which he claimed were, but in fact did not aid South Africa or it’s population.
Vaulting Ambition in Macbeth “I have no spur / To prick the sides of my intent, but only / Vaulting ambition, which o 'erleaps itself, / And falls on th’other. . .”. Macbeth like a horse has no spur, he does not want to commit murder but his vaulting ambition causes him to overleap himself and carry out actions which he regrets. His ambition is his major flaw as it makes him desire things which most would find impossible to achieve but with his sometimes crazy eagerness he rationalizes his actions for his unachievable goal.
Others were angry with Chavez because they didn 't feel he had a just cause, and they hated paying more for their produce. This article also gave Bishop Donelly 's views on Chavez. This was a valuable resource in that it better described both sides of the issue. Giving both sides created balance in the information offered and allowed me to make an informed decision. Bisignani, Dana, and Allan Brizee.