Slaughterhouse-Five Rhetorical Analysis

As a ghost is usually quiet and gets people's attention by moving things, Tony only demonstrates his cleverness when he fills Durante’s canteen with not water but wine as revenge when Durante has just ruined his life and commands Tony to fill his canteen. A ghost and Tony are also very silent and deadly as the book states that Toy drills the rabbit cleanly through the head with a rifle as it is as the rabbit would not know what hit it as a ghost would drive the victim crazy by misplacing things and turning things on and off. The ghost and Durante are also both disabled as Tony has an artificial peg leg and a ghost usually can not touch things and passes through the things it tries to

Using the dark humor to describe one of the characters of his book Vonnegut achieved to show the readers that wars aren’t always fought by heroes as portrayed in movies and books, but at the meanwhile he also achieved to show us another side of the war through his strange character Billy Pilgrim, incapable, innocence and lack of control, soldiers find themselves in war

At the beginning of his carrier, McNamara was fresh, wise, going out of the box advisor. Using his knowledge of statistics, mathematics, and philosophy increased effectiveness of air force. However, his blind belief in numbers and statistics made him less human, and it is obvious that some of humanity limits were crossed thanks to his conclusions and advisory. In the movie “The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara” which is an interview with him, McNamara admitted openly that it was a mistake to use B-29 bombers with incendiary bombs against civilian population in Japan.

Even though Vonnegut isn’t very emotional writer, he simply brings his ideas to the mind of the reader and lets the reader decide how to feel. The tone and diction combined can sometimes make us feel a little sad while reading Slaughterhouse-Five this just because it gives us the impression that nothing really matters and life just ends up being terrible. Kurt Vonnegut gave us some of the most timeless advice on the art and craft of writing in an essay “How to Write with Style,” published 1985 in the wonderful anthology How to Use the Power of the Printed Word where he describes the most important elements of writing styles: As for your use of language: Remember that two great masters of language, William Shakespeare and James Joyce, wrote sentences which were almost childlike when their subjects were most profound. ‘To be or not to be?’ asks Shakespeare’s Hamlet. The longest word is three letters long.

Golding has reportedly said that he wrote the novel in response to his personal war experiences. “(The war)... taught us not fighting ,politics or the follies of nationalism, but about the given nature of man is negative. As he describes the happenings, he put out an idea of humanity based on some of the happening of the past allowing the reader to set his mind on that specific happening throughout the incident and comparing parallel ideas that Golding describes in his metaphoric writing in Lord of the Flies. He clearly identifies our basic negative side within us, present in our society making a clear focus of it, symbolizing it to be very important,resulting us thinking about a big happening down in the pages of

When a new officer “found two rats on his blankets tussling for the possession of a severed hand” (138), the company turned the event into a joke. Instead of worrying about how sickening the event is, they turn it into a joke; One who cannot make light of the horrific will start to break down psychologically. As a part of gaining a stoic approach towards life, Graves starts to become emotionally detached. “Those who are killed can’t complain” (115), he says in reference to splitting up the money of those who died. By looking at the war from a purely pragmatic point of view, Graves is able to ignore the terror of combat.

This creates a rather unique point of view for the reader, to make the outlook of the character appear more sane at the time. Words such as “precious” almost further creates an underset tone. In The Tell-Tale Heart, the sanity of the narrator is questioned through the entire length of the story; however, the irony aids in showing the mindset of this character toward the end. " Villains!" I shrieked, "dissemble no more!

Nick is not an honest storyteller but he is a reliable narrator because throughout the story he has been judgemental towards others and not saying the full truth or truly giving the reader the satisfaction of knowing his feelings. In the beginning, he said this “In consequence, I’m inclined to reserve all judgments, a habit that has opened up many curious natures to me and also made me the victim of not a few veteran bores.” (Pg.1). Thus from the very beginning of the novel, Nick was stating he had to reserve all judgments but as the reader continues to read on this statement turns out to be false as he in multiple occasions judges a character such as Tom, Gatsby, and Daisy. Nick is a reliable narrator though he tells the full truth all the way to the end well at least to the reader not actually to the characters in the novel.

He to strike. My scars were the emblem and symbol of our love” (1). Here it seems that the author used verbal irony which allows the reader to understand how traumatized the character is. Verbal irony deals with something that is said, however it is meant to be completely different. Doug knows that the permanent marks he has does not have to do with love,

After all, the monster said that “I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend. Make me happy, and I shall again be virtuous.” (Shelly) He was good at the beginning, but humanity shows that the monster shouldn’t belong in the world in the first place. It was Victor’s fault that he was brought into the world.

So why did he trust President Obama with Earth’s future when so many of his cohorts are evil aliens? Well somehow, Obama escaped the massive breeding of humans that has occurred. One could go on and on about the ramblings of this man’s essay but why bother? He’s loony, or at least, he is pretending to be. Perhaps he’s smarter than we think.

“A good war story is not simply about blood and death. It examines war as a transformation in the lives of those affected.” Comment on this statement, making close reference to David Malouf’s Fly Away Peter. War is a subject that fascinates us all in many ways; our reasoning is usually out of pure curiosity as most of us have never been, although we know that war is hell on earth. Know one wants to read or watch a war story filled with blood and death, what a miserable way to spend your time, but it is just a fact about war that can not be ignored.

As a side note, clockwork orange is a vile, wicked movie, which you guys should not bother watching. It is a demonic, sicking piece of garbage. That is a warning. I do not suggest that you watch that disturbing, evil movie, at all. On a lighter note, the video that Bunnee just put up, not too long ago, was a waste of my time to watch, but she looks neat-looking in it in some ways, but the video is lame, for the most part, with the queerish-looking dude in it, which is not Dogman.

There is something off about him that no one can pinpoint. In this scene Enfield says that just a look from Mr. Hyde was enough to make him break out in a sweat, “He was perfectly cool and made no resistance, but gave me one look, so ugly that it brought out the sweat on me like running.” (2242). Hyde’s lack of reaction also reminded me of the opinion of Victorians being very collected and composed, as though he were a dark parody on what happens when it is taken to

Nemur and Dr. Strauss Charlie was disposable, and only used for their personal gain and advancements in the operation. The institute thought Charlie was a good person to test on, because he had no one to care and look out for him. Also, even though Charlie was a human being, he was viewed equal to lab mice. Charlie was not informed about the risks and consequences the surgery could bring upon him, which led him to thinking life would be impeccable. The doctors; opportunists, could have made a logical assumption that Charlie might die because of the other mice they tested on that died.