The dialogue of spy fiction’s role in regards to detective fiction does tie somewhat into realism, which is connected to the useful properties of American detective fiction. It still, however, stands apart because the focus is on the lack of realism and the glorification of violence. Though these things are not wholly removed from the topic at hand, the—fairly lengthy—discussion feels misplaced. The result of the long detour to spy fiction is that it is “no more a clouded mirror than any other” (9). While this conclusion is intriguing, it seems as though it could be another article in its own right, and it lessens the strength of the thesis.
Arguments Revolving Around This Theory 1. An interesting conversation between Gassendi and Descartes Gassendi: “There is just one point I am not clear about, namely why you did not make a simple and brief statement to the effect that you were regarding your previous knowledge as uncertain so that you could later single out what you found to be true. Why instead did you consider everything as false, which seems more like adopting a new prejudice than relinquishing an old one? This strategy made it necessary for you to convince yourself by imagining a deceiving God or some evil demon who tricks us, whereas it would surely have been sufficient to cite the darkness of the human mind or the weakness of our nature.” Descartes: “Suppose a person had a basket full of apples and, being worried that some of the apples were rotten, wanted to take out the rotten ones to prevent the rot spreading. How would he proceed?
Through the individual representations of the multifarious shades of madness, Cervantes and Diderot are able to bring forth similar tools of character attachment and evaluations of the “sane” in order challenge the polemical contemporary judgments on the “mad”. The term madness is very vague, and serves as a broad umbrella for those with mental ailments or deviant thoughts. Though the two aspects can be associated with one another, having aberrant thoughts does not necessarily equate to a mental illness. In the case of Don Quijote, the main character has a mental ailment that distorts his view of reality. It should be noted that his inaccurate view of reality, though mildly problematic at times, is not as completely negative as the connotation holds.
The author will usually rely on his examples to prove is arguments. He does not explain the claims he makes, which decrease the strength of his arguments. For example, he mentions that a high-five is “not the mutual appreciation of achievement, but the feeling we get upon the achievement of mutual appreciation”. This statement is arguable, some people perform the high-five to actually show appreciation of achievement rather than of trying. The author does not signify whatsoever why the high-five does not mean “job well-done”.
Card believes he is teching through his book that the morality of an act is based solely on the intentions of the person acting. On the other hand, John Kessel, a writer, thinks the book is about making the readers feel bad for the main character Enderx. Kessel’s evidence that the book is not a work of moral fiction is through the points of the defeated being ignored, intention-based morality failing to make sense, and Mr.Wiggins always receiving the sympathy of the victim. Kessel’s evidence is strong, especially when it comes to the defeated being ignored. Normally, when someone dies in a book, the aftermath is usually included.
The character is fictional and his story does not necessarily need to converge. Consequently, although the play does present to some extent Freud’s Oedipal complex it is riddled with various other lessons that are more evident and likely to be the message the play intended to bring
As the French Algerian philosopher Albert Camus once passionately stated, “This world in itself is not reasonable, that is all that can be said. But what is absurd is the confrontation of this irrational and the wild longing for clarity whose call echoes in the human heart.” Camus is an outstanding author and philosopher, who emphatically advocated the philosophy of absurdism. According to Camus, absurdism is the belief that humans live in an irrational, meaningless universe, which deems the search for explanations as futile. Many individuals have the tendency to ask questions about nearly everything and expect a reasonable answer in response. However, in his literature, the acclaimed philosopher often covertly implies the lack of meaning or purpose within life.
However, even when Conrad through the use of his protagonist Marlow, that through commentaries like “The conquest of the earth, which mostly means the taking it away from those who have different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it too much” tries to show a position against the racism, the truth is that he does not really establishes any real opposition against the racism, if not that he suggests to turn around from the reality and keep it going. As noted above, even when many people argue that Heart of Darkness is not a book filled with racism, the evidences are just devastating, the series of events that are presented through the story clearly demonstrate the inhuman racism executed by the protagonist and many other people, even the journals that try to avoid the reality of the book end admitting the conclusion that there “is indeed substantial and demonstrable evidence of racism in the novella.”(Source Ramogale), racism that is successfully implemented through the use of intense symbolism and a dark perspective of a
Ernest Hemingway, a well-known modernist writer, adopts the iceberg principle, a typical feature of modernist literature in his works. According to this principle, the top represents the given story, while the foot depicts the concealed story. This principle restricts the writer’s dictatorship, the reader however has to pay a price. The writer only provides, mostly vague, information, it is now up to the reader to compile the concealed story. With this information in the back of the head, it is clear that a wide array of opinions from various readers will come along, which evidently produces many disputes.
There is a persistent opinion in a large section of critics that Chatterjee’s work is unredeemed by any positive value. But substantiating to any such view would amount to undermining the value of Chatterjee’s literature as his genuine concern for growing debasement and a hope of betterment behind the façade of cynicism is too obvious to