“In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can't build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery and death,” -Anne Frank After reading both The Diary of Anne Frank and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas many blatant differences were shown, but also many deeper thinking similarities. The stories of two completely different children still bring the same meanings and theme of love. With Bruno from The Boy in The Striped Pajamas being the son of a Nazi and Anne from The Diary of Anne Frank being a Jew in hiding, the two both express the message of goodness in the hearts of everyone. The Diary of Anne Frank and The Boy in the Striped Pajamas are two very different stories.
It is an explanation and defence of survivors and who they truly are. The Drowned and the Saved is a meticulous examination of both the prisoners and the officials of the camp as well as the general public, meditating on the meaning of the mass exterminations while also arguing it should not be forgotten. Levi presents an analytical discussion of his experience in the camps and after, considering The Drowned and the Saved outlines the author’s survival of Auschwitz, but more importantly considers the emotions of survivors and the German people after the their release. Levi discusses in detail the shame the prisoners felt once released. This is a perspective unique to Levi and other narratives like his.
All books that young adults read have power. Their power results in their ability to sway and to change the reader in so many ways, not the least of these is morally. These books can create a moral sense in the young by demonstrating what is morally right and what is morally wrong. They can raise and resolve ethical issues. The reader may not agree with each resolution, but is certainly forced to think about issues he or she may never have thought about before (Smith 63).
Gretel had to explain to him that the people were Jews, and his father told him that the people on the other side of the fence, weren’t people at all. Bruno is important to the story, because without him, none of the adventures would occur, the book would show the cruel Germans; but with Bruno in the story we saw war life from a little boy’s perspective. Bruno made the story progress with his kindness and caring for others. Without him we wouldn 't have learned about Pavel or Maria’s past, and the story would just be about how a family moved next door to Auschwitz. Another main character is Shmuel.
In The Grapes Of Wrath, By John Steinbeck, the ending is very controversial in many ways, the most obvious ways though are fundamentally wrong, morally wrong, and just how depressing it is.Since the book came out in 1939, everyone has had a opinion on the ending to John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath. Michael Harmon once said, “The ending can be seen two ways, as a tool for people to recognize the poverty and destruction at that time, or as a way to get more citizens to read the book”. It has a very controversial ending, that Steinbeck thought would name the last nail into the coffin, so to speak, on how bad the dust bowl and moving west really was. Ma and Rose of Sharon look at each other and they agree that Rose of Sharon should use her milk, that she doesn’t need because her baby was stillborn, and feed this old man. Everyone gets out of the barn, and she feeds him.
The son claims that his father “could drop it [the bunt] like a seed,” which implies that the father’s sacrifice has been gingerly placed in order to grow strong one day (8). This simile demonstrates the care with which the father tries to teach the son how to bunt. The only other simile compares the son’s sign to his father, the poem itself, to “a hand brushed across the bill of a cap” (21). Once again this figurative comparison connotes a tender love and mutual respect between the father and son, especially considering that this simile compares the poem to the baseball equivalent of a salute. Overall, through the use of symbols and figurative comparisons, the poem conveys the tender admiration shared between the father and son, despite their lack of
While admiring children for their kindness, genuine nature and innocence, he believes in the idea that adult corruption has ruined virtuous children. In the novel he states how he wants children to be protected from vulgarity and therefore wants to be ‘The Catcher in the Rye’: the one who rescues adolescents from falling into, what he considers to be, the phoniness of adulthood. Throughout the novel, Holden has a positive attitude towards children and these relationships are essential to him. When Holden found out about the tragic death of his younger brother, Allie, he was devastated. He ‘slept in the garage’ and ‘broke all the goddam windows’.
This said blindness is presented on many different levels, from the pure ignorance of Zorbach of the plot development to the ride the reader is taken on with a sense of foreboding but no real clues of what will happen. The author uses repetition to great effect in the epilogue and prologue, in an effort to create the haunting effect of what could have been should Zorbach have realised the implications of his actions. The interchanging of third person and first person narration, however, is what allows all the plot devices to flow together in the making of the “perpetuum
George Norton’s 2014 analysis of William’s Blake’s Songs of Innocence and Experience focuses primarily on the two poems titled “The Chimney Sweeper”. In his response to the innocent version, he says that, “the boy explains that he was sold by his father after the death of his mother. The reader, too, becomes implicated in his exploitation: ‘So your chimneys I sweep’ (my italics), he declares, though the suggestion is Blake’s; the speaker seems unaware of his own degradation. Central to the poem is the dual contrast between the grim realities of the sweeps’ lives and the ecstatic vision of liberty contained in the dream of Tom Dacre, a new recruit to the gang.” I agree with this completely. Next in the poem, it discusses the new recruit, Tom,
Two boys, Bruno and Shmuel, become best of friends despite their differences in race, religion, and belief. As stated in the novel, “‘Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree,’ said Bruno, who didn’t want to fight with his new friend” (Boyne 114). This was the beginning of their friendship created during tough times of the Holocaust. The races of Jews and Germans were separated after World War I and Jews were put into concentration camps run by the Nazis. This quote shows that Bruno did not want to disagree with his friend Shmuel even though they did not share the same ideas.
Wiesel explains that one of the reasons for writing about his experience is to leave behind a legacy of words that will influence people and prevent history from repeating itself (Wiesel vii). What Wiesel was referring too is not having a second holocaust and that if people learned about the way of life inside a camp, they would not want that same way of life again. Another reason for writing was to preserve the memories of a kid inside a camp (Wiesel vii). During the time of the camps Wiesel is a young adolescent put to work for the Nazis. He explains what he saw like death and gore which he says that a kid like him shouldn 't have to see that other than in a form of literature.
Told by Natan (Nathan), whose father lost his life to the youngster that ultimately became King, despite the tragedy, his visions of the future led him to serve as David’s lifelong prophet and confidant. Perhaps, the only man that could reprimand the King, his intimate relationship with David, and those closest to the King, allows the story from Natan’s perspective to reach depths that would not otherwise be possible. Conclusively, The Secret Chord crosses nearly all genres’ as the King’s life exemplified the experiences of being human; he just had all of them. The author’s story comes across as if we found in a cave somewhere original well-written texts. Love, hate, murder, and jealously, the delivery makes it all feel real.
McCarthy is blunt in his descriptions. He uses repeated struggles and similar scenes forcing the reader to share the tough experience of the characters. I agree with the author that The Road is the picture of a post-apocalyptic world. I also agree with the opinion that suffering might never end, like the novel indicates through imagery at the very end. The author manages to combine happy moments with sad ones even though the sad ones takes the larger share.
It is a terrifying yet wondrous experience to see the aftermath of what our words and actions can bring one person to do. This book does so much with what it is trying to do and say and it completely nails it. I can’t think of a single thing I would ever want to change. Violent Ends left me feeling haunted, feeling a sudden fear of “what if?”. I can’t think of a better book to read if you are looking for something that is going to make you think.
This story shows how such amazing people in human society have come from unfavorable situations. Ishmael easily could have blamed everyone else for his situation, his loss of family, and the drug abuse, however, instead Ishmael focused on the future and what he wanted to be, and not what he was. This example is perfect for explaining how literature can shows us every aspect of human