Paper 2 :Hedda Gabler and The Handmaid 's Tale How can we explain the continued interest in a particular work in different contexts and at different times? Symbolism is a literary devices, that enables the author to imbue everyday objects with alternative meaning, often related to universal concepts. The authors of Hedda Gabler, and The Handmaid’s Tale explore a multitude of universal themes in their works, ensuing their relevance through time and culture. The play “Hedda Gabler”, was written in the late 19th century, by a famous Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen. Margaret Atwood, a Canadian author, spent over thirty years writing the novel, which was published in 1985.
Throughout the novel, Go Tell it on the Mountain written by James Baldwin, there is a shift between time periods. The way that James Baldwin wrote this novel, kept readers attentions and also provided readers with background information in regards to each of the characters’ lives and the events that were being taken place. James Baldwin’s writing technique switches time periods from the past to present time. At first, I found this writing technique to be confusing because often times I would find myself thinking that things that happened in the past of the character’s lives were really happening in present time. For example, on page 11, the narrative breaks from past time to present time when Baldwin goes from describing how Ella Mae and Elisha were no longer seeing each other after school to talking about Johns birthday.
Additionally, these kinds of books could be classified as travelling writings because of its events take place in more than one place. Philosophers also argued that the importance of Candide lays in its philosophical message which is ‘Optimism’. Voltaire who wrote this novel was not believed of the philosophy of Optimism and strongly attacked the supporters
Unlike other trifle characters in the story, What if the protagonist, Guy Montag, never met Clarisse, Beatty, and Faber Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451? Clarisse, Beatty, and Faber are the main reasons why the novel has depth. These characters are essential to the story because they make the story more interesting and suspenseful. Each character has a particular purpose in why they have written and how they each impact the main character. At first all the characters were not close and they where impersonal with each other as the book goes on they started to get personal with each other and started to have an impact with montag.
Similarly in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four Oceania represents and extended metaphor as well. In both novels the characters struggle to regain their freedom from the authoritarian governments. The Maze is a representation of life and all its challenges. It is mentioned in the novel
The point of this inquiry is not to consider whether the readers of “Mending Wall” prefer one of the two neighbors more than the other. The point is to inquire whether Robert Frost does—and what his preference says about him. The speaker in a poem often reveals more about himself than he does about the person of whom or to whom he is speaking. The reader of “Mending Wall” discovers more about the narrator than about the neighbor he is talking about, and by extension, the reader learns something about the author of the poem. When a writer picks up a pen, he necessarily opens an artery of his heart, whether he wishes to or not.
You need to now. Well, can you speak?" (Miller, 1959, 300) "You need to now" is deliberately written incorrectly by the author, as phonetically 'know' and 'now' sounds similar to each other. A Canticle for Leibowitz consists of 30 chapters which are divided in to three different parts 'Fiat Homo', 'Fiat Lux' and 'Fiat Voluntas Tua'. The story is linear from the very start to the end, yet it has many 'jumps' in between.
G.R. Thompson mentioned that “The novel/romance issue was a version of the perpetual debate of the real and the ideal shaping western tradition including the conflict of empiricism versus transcendentalism, of mimetic versus poetry, of history versus fiction and of romanticism versus realism (Thomson: 2012,
The story is not easy to read and even harder to understand due to the many time jumps, one must take time and not rush the reading, in order to not miss important details. The narrative perspective is also unfamiliar: Faulkner uses an anonymous first-person narrator, who never appears in the first person singular, but is present as a “we” in a sense, I suppose one could therefore even speak of a we-perspective. Faulkner does not tell the story in a traditional order, this can be seen right from the start, 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. It almost seems as if he time jumps, every time he remembers a new (old) detail/part of the story.
To the Lighthouse depends almost on the passing of time, it expands or contracts the sense of time very freely It is a book, with an ironical or wistful query and questions of life and reality. The people in Woolf’s book seem to be looking through each other with some far question; and, although they interact vividly, they are not completely real to know people in outline are one way of knowing them. Moreover, they are seen here in the way they are meant to be seen. However, the result is that you know quite well the kind of