Some people say Edgar Allan Poe was crazy and that he had a really messed up mind, but, under all that, he wrote some good interesting horror fiction stories, and he became known as the best. In “Tell-Tale Heart” a man lives with an old man's that had a defective eye. The man somehow it’s scared of the old man’s eye and wants to kill the old man eyes. Edgar Allan Poe used the literary device of setting to create a dark, deep tone in his short story by using two important elements of setting, time of day and the mood and atmosphere. Edgar Allan Poe is using the primitive scary scenes that we are fearful to.
In Roger Corman's film, there is romance, much more mystery, an even greater essence of horror, and even a bit of sadness. Romance is a very big component of the film because without it, there would be no plot to follow. There is also a greater mystery in the film adaptation. The entire movie is mainly about the mystery of the castle that could be possibly haunted and the major discovery of the true reasoning behind the haunting. One of the biggest additions to the tale was the addition of even more horror.
Some say that the narrator, was a father figure, or a servant to the old man, or it could be that the old man was the narrator’s landlord. It is striking that details which reveal the identity of the two characters are not in abundance which makes it stand in contrast, to the very detailed plot that leads up to the murder ("Sparknotes: Poe’S Short Stories: “The Tell-Tale Heart” (1843)"). The short story takes place in the house of the old man. The conflict of “The Tell-Tale Heart,” lies in how the narrator felt for the old man. One may wonder, if Poe was channeling the painful resentments, he had for his foster father Allan, onto the character of the “old man.” These deep emotions have lain dormant in Poe, hidden in his heart and one may ask if somehow, these emotions are now spilling out, as if out of control.
In the story written by Shakespeare, King Hamlet is not in the story line at all because he was murdered before the story began. This tactic makes it difficult to get a feel for the story and how hard it was for Hamlet and Gertrude to lose King Hamlet. While Hamlet was grieving and trying to get over
Nobody knows how the enemy is going to react, nobody knows when danger will arise, soldiers do not know where they are, what will happen, what has happened, whether they are going home, and occasionally they do not even know what they are fighting for. Besides not knowing anything, countless people also disagree about what they do not know or about what they believe they do know, this creates even further chaos. This immense amount of chaos festers in the mind. The author decided to distribute the chaos in the book to form a truer war experience. The chaos that is distributed throughout the book is naturally not as upsetting, massive and powerful as in times of war, however, it does paint a better picture about the chaotic ambiance than non-ambiguous words ever could.
The story is not easy to read and even harder to understand due to the many time jumps. The narrative perspective is also unfamiliar: Faulkner uses an anonymous first-person narrator, who never appears in the first person singular, but only as "we" occurs. One could therefore even speak of a we-perspective. The fact that Faulkner does not tell the story in a traditional order can be seen from the fact that he begins, so to speak, with the end of the story: the death of Emily. Starting from the end, the narrator keeps making different flashbacks and leaps in time.
But these stories are not the evidence that at least one of them is true because their no sound proof of any afterlife existence. Scientists all over the world put forward the theories and doing researches on this topic but actually no one still didn’t found any truthful confirmations about what is on the other side. However, if you ask somebody from your family or friend, or just stranger on the street, they all will have a different view on what will happened when you die according to their believes. In the study of life after death, appears startling coincidence between cultures separated both geographically and historically. The repetition of certain motifs is quite remarkable, and the idea of the existence of the final refuge for all people on the other side of life – in Heaven or Paradise – occurs in many
Introduction: The story I’m the King of the Castle is set in a desolate area and most of the action transpires largely in a house known as Warings. The story centers around four major characters and follows the bullying and torment of one boy, Edmund Hooper towards another, Charles Kingshaw ending with his chilling suicide. This story evokes a fair number of questions from the reader, one more commonly discussed question being, and who is most to blame for the death of Charles Kingshaw? There is no one answer, for when analyzing this highly debatable question a number of related issues come into play, a highly contentious one being whether nature impacts how we behave more than how we are nurtured. Edmund Hooper: Edmund Hooper could easily be blamed for the death of Charles Kingshaw for it can be assumed that if it weren’t for his constant taunting and pestering nothing would have happened to Kingshaw.
Many of us are scared to die because we never had any information about what would happen in the afterlife. What if ceasing to exist means that we are now being removed in the jar of reality? Just think of us as God’s toys then once we die we are like the toys which are being thrown to the garbage can because of having no more use. Well that’s terrifying as it sounds. There have been some persons who are almost near to death yet revived and told things which they
Man is unwilling to believe them, He is having a decentered consciousness, the Ideals/ Theories which he believed so far have failed to offer him any solution. But at the same time postmodernism never refuses t0 accept the existence of truth, justice, morals, etc. But laments that there is no any foundation to form all these, There are no rules, morals and laws suitable for all periods and for all people. Pinter’s plays frequently contained awkward pauses, ambiguous or confusing language and circuitous or endlessly wandering plots. He used these techniques to present the unreliability of language which was a theme explored by post-structuralists, deconstructionists and postmodernists.Harold