Shaw believed that artist makes us insightful to the spitefulness of the world that we believe to be beautiful. Art and artists have a social and moral purpose not just a mean to amuse reader. It purifies the senses of the reader and makes higher their soul. Therefore he emphatically rejected the artistic responsiveness as the whole aim of art. But it is important to comprehend that Shaw does not use morality in the conventional denotation or gist.
My defense is that the book is supposed to make the reader uncomfortable since it’s on morality and racism. It informs the good and evil of the reality. It delivers powerful messages such as one should not judge by appearance and one should not hold prejudice against people. Not only that, the story delves into rights and wrongs in a figurative way. It highlights lots of great themes like conflict, coming of age and friendships.
Not only can one piece of writing be understood differently by its audience, but an author can interpret a certain topic in a completely unique way from another writer. This phenomenon can be seen in the two distinct pieces Superman and Me from The Most Wonderful Books: Writers on Discovering the Pleasures of Reading by Sherman Alexie and “Books are Dangerous” by Frank Furedi. Although Alexie’s short story is a personal narrative and Furedi’s article is essentially the opposite:
Being a good listener can affect someone 's ability to be amendable. For example, Elie Wiesel expresses the negative outcomes if society were to ignore ideas. In Wiesel’s Nobel Peace Acceptance Speech he states, “Human rights are being violated on every continent… How can one not be sensitive to their plight?” Human rights are very important therefore if society is willing to listen to others hardships, then the world could realize the true horrors that people have to endure. In an article called “The importance of Active Listening” the author states, “When you accurately reflect back to a person what’s been said, you show that you’ve been listening—not just hearing—and that you genuinely understand the feeling/s or message/s they are trying to convey. This creates an environment that allows the speaker to go deeper, and sometimes even to come to new realizations” (Mulvania).
The prominent theme of imperfection throughout ‘Mary and Max’ is evident through Max stating ‘you can’t choose your warts, but you can choose your friends.’ REFERENCE This reinforces the idea that an individual should not suffer for being different to society but they should be accepted for their imperfections. Such a quote delivers a raw emotion to the audience prompting them to sympathise with the character for having to suffer further hardships at the cruelty of others. There is an emphasis here on how society’s judgement is based on perception of individuals rather than for individual’s personalities. Perception as a theme in the film is regarded as something that is one dimensional, which contrasts against the reality of perception of there being more to an individual than their stigma of disability.
Johnathan Swift’s novel, Gulliver’s Travels, demonstrates this miserable and dreadful consequence of human life managed only by reason. The Houyhnhnms is a society that represents the ultimate end of the Enlightenment thinkers by removing emotion and passion from their lives. Gulliver describes the Houyhnhnms understanding of reason “Neither is reason among them a point problematical, as with us, where men can argue with plausibility on both sides of the question, but strikes you with immediate conviction; as it must needs do, where it is not mingled, obscured, or discoloured, by passion and interest” (Chapter 8, pg. 246). The goal of these creatures’ existence is to completely remove any emotions from the intellectual faculties.
Faulkner's inability to accomplish this realization Slatoff finally attributes to his “disposition”, a gesture that categorically underscores out conventional notions about texts. The text looks not only toward manifest meaning, but also toward its manifested author; presences always should appear behind their denotations. But Faulkner apprehends that the meaning of the story may inhere in its play around voided centres of authority, being and signified ideas. Stories may mean without signifying, constitute selfhood without expressing it. Faulkner tells a tale not out of his unique and extreme temperament, but out of the extreme nature of
So humans, by tempering them, are challenging the will of God, and as a result, they are likely to make human affairs worse, rather than better. They believe that the human beings are imperfect creatures who are always in an urge for power, and can be persuaded to behave in a civilized fashion if they are deterred from expressing their violent anti social impulses. They believe that this can be done, only if they are governed by tough and strongly imposed law, which will be backed by sanctions, long prison sentences, and the use of corporal or even capital
By the way, the current article reads as: Human Comedy in Soyinka’s Jero’s Metamorphosis: A Pragmatic Analysis. Indeed, the leading hypothesis of the work is that readers don’t actually grab the very intent and philosophy lurking behind the allegorical language of literature. Accordingly, our objective is to contribute to deciphering with more ease Soyinka’s in-built message and philosophy so as to make his societal mission more operative, the vital goal of pragmatics being to scavenge for and atomize the “Invisible meaning” (Yule, 1996:127) potential of language. For that matter, through the sieve of pragmatics, this article leans on an excerpt from the target play to unveil manifestations of Soyinka’s unsaid intentions. Our foci of analysis revolve around presupposition, inference, speech act, and conversational implicature.