It could be said that his decadence changes his portrait without changing him. Nevertheless, this is not true because the plot of the book can led the reader to understand that living as a sinner ends up killing the soul of the sinner, and of the people around him. In order to understand this, it is important to see that Dorian 's actions affect other people 's life. For example Sybil Vane commits suicide upon the decision dorian took about their marriage. Basil is killed by Dorian.
Second is Oliverotto of Fermo, who also became a military commander and killed citizens amid feast with the assistance of his troopers who later terrorized the city for submission. These kinds of acts what Machiavelli pertains to as criminal means. He argued that these cruel acts, though evil, maybe be justified if done at once to build a prince's power and then swung to the regale of his people. Moreover, the prince having attained the principality is required to live with his subjects and should do all the injuries at once, if not, it is no longer acceptable. This second argument resembles Machiavelli's famous phrase “the end justifies the means”, showing that he approves bad behavior as long as at the end it will turn
Scott Fitzgerald has written in his book “The Great Gatsby” supporting the idea that Triumphant Underdog is a myth. The main purpose of author was to emphasise that the greed for power and glory , eventually ruins the person himself. As it was Jay Gatsby , the self-created plutocrat , destroyed as if being judged by the gods of Old Money for his audacity towards them. Furthermore F.Scott Fitzgerald assumes that our lives are defined by opportunies, even the ones we miss . This quote beautifully explains the great ambition, presumption of Gatsby for power , money and glory until he was murdered and also his life was still going up , but now up in heaven.
Rorschach, one of the heroic characters who is determined to fight for the goodness, dies by giving up his moral standings. The villain Adrian Veit kills and frames innocent people, however, he has the intention to create goodness in the world. The moral contradictions in Watchmen fails to make clear what values the dystopia is criticizing. In conclusion, the masked heroes emerged to work for America driven by patriotism in order to protect citizens from themselves. The masked heroes are normal humans too and most of them have pessimistic view of humanity that human nature would always bring problems to the world and the peace is impossible.
Two people die every second, but the world only knows of those that are important or interesting. This rating system of human lives is what allows Assad to commit mass atrocities and The Onion to make humor out of it. “Constantly Worrying What Other People Think About Your War Crimes Is No Way To Live Your Life” is wrought with rhetorical questions that coax people to form a connection with and listen to a despot. It preys
But he is the villian in the end.Agatha Chritie makes us feel like there is no villian at all.Judge Wargrave changes his personalty from the begging to the end.At first he seems nice,then he seems like the percfet hero,but at the need he is an evil person who wanted to kill people who were wrong and accidnet or purposaly killed other pople.The judge says in the book,I have wanted-let me admit it frankly-to commit a murder myslef.” That shows us that he really was evil the whole time and not the person he said or seemed to be. This passage allows the read to see that Judge Wargrave is not the hero but truly an evil
This ideology is so strong that "you can put the key of his emancipation in a man’s hands and he will throw it back at you with a curse". Balram believes that an individual will have to act to get himself/herself out of this rooster coop and he also justifiies his action of murdering his maalik Ashok by saying that he killed him because he wanted to get out of the rooster coop, he’s not at all regretfull and instead says that this action will inspire others like him from the darkness to make their own way.He’s proud of himself and says that Ashok anyways did not had the virtues of being a master and hence it’s only right
I arrived at this conclusion with the help of the scene where Romeo kills Tybalt and also the discussion in class. Some people complained about how, in Luhrmann’s portrayal of Tybalt he seems cowardly (when compared to Zeffirelli's Tybalt) , because he ends Mercutio’s life by stabbing his back. My theory is that maybe Luhrmann was trying to let us see how when we rely on technology and forget about “old” values like courage and chivalry we become small and selfish beings. This definitely brings a new perspective and dimension to the table. In Zeffirelli's version we see that the highest power is the king, but in Luhrmann’s justice (the police) is the power that replaces the king.
It did to Javert in the book Les Miserables by Victor Hugo, and is the reason why Jean Valjean is the reason Javert had no other choice than to take his own life. When Valjean has Javert trapped in the barracaid he tells him “you are free” (pg. 264) but reality was that those words really made Javert a prisoner of his own mind. Javert believed that once a criminal always a criminal, and that all criminals wanted revenge and would do anything to get it. That took a big turn when He was proven wrong by Valjean when he didn’t take revenge on him and set him free because it went against all of his beliefes that’s why Javert told Valjean to “take your revenge” (pg.
Although it was unfortunate for all of the lives lost, life may have been worse without it. Something terrible always has something good hidden behind it. Furthermore, I think the King's execution was a very controversial event. He was killed for treason, which is betraying your country. This probably would have shocked some people because the Levellers (a political movement during the war) believed that the only crime you could be executed for was