The interlude of Thomas C. Foster’s How to Read Literature Like a Professor captures theories that I find myself identifying with at large - that there is only one story. When Foster writes this, he speaks of literature and the idea that originality is impossible because we are all retelling the same human experience. While I would agree, I would even go as far to say that it is because experiencing something that no one else has is so rare. It’s so unlikely that the experiences that our lives consist of are truly our own and that is displayed in the lack of originality in storytelling. Foster goes on to explain how archetypes are hidden throughout literature and it can also be seen in the clichés found throughout life.
Critic Jed Re Sula comments, “Very few writers have so openly allowed the language of their poems to be helpless, to be written from a condition of abrupt syntactic disintegration consciously attended to.” Here again, it may be understood that it is the magnum of the sublime that does not obey the rules of grammar and syntax. Only the quantum can be punctuated because it can be properly understood, it can be controlled. The Magnum, the sublime cannot. Celan’s poetry is slammed with stripped-down syntax, telescoped words, neologisms, and multilingual puns which were his attempts to conceptualize the ‘sublime’ phenomena of the holocaust and give it an almost physical shape whose poignant touch can be felt in the tone of
Hat there been the least uneasiness, anger, impatience or impertinence in his manner; in other words, had there been anything ordinarily human about him, doubtless I should have violently dismissed him from the premises” (376). Bartleby's choice is decisive to the point that it's inhuman – his choices are so definite that his mind is unchangeable, a quality that makes them difficult to address. One may state that the baffling character of Bartleby is the genuine heart of this mysterious short story – yet he's not precisely an enthusiastic, dynamic, thumping heart. It's noteworthy that Melville picked basically to name the entire story after this odd man; like our anonymous storyteller, we are all increasingly fascinated and maybe stunned by Bartleby's behavior. Melville's choice to place his inactive anti-hero smack-dab in the middle of the busy Financial District makes Bartleby himself considerably a greater amount of a peculiarity.
Stanley Corngold states “The Metamorphosis” displays “the desire to represent a state of mind directly in language” meaning Kafka tries to show his thoughts and intentions directly through his writing (Corngold 84). Kafka is an excellent writer in the way he transmits the intent of his thoughts onto paper, through his incredibly well thought out symbolism and metaphors. The uniqueness of Kafka can be best described by Walter Sokel, who writes “It is difficult to place Kafka in a literary tradition” due to his nightmarish and absurd storytelling there are not many authors that can be compared to Kafka
Vonnegut uses literary devices to develop his unique style. His own style helps bring out the tone of “Harrison Bergeron”. In the beginning of the story the author used a lot of repetition sentences to really emphasize on the layout of the story when stating multiple times “nobody was” or “they were/weren’t”. Throughout the story there are plenty of negative sentences speaking of what people used to be like and what they weren’t allowed to do now. Hazel and George’s dialogue were made up of several sentences that are all really simple and random and illustrates to the reader that to them there is not too much to talk about.
The passion and drive in Tamburlaine’s speeches has the effect of disrupting the static pattern of the old rhetorical structure. “The procedure of piling up phrase upon phrase, motif upon motif, balancing verse-paragraph against verse-paragraph in an attempt to build up an obvious symmetry is resorted to comparatively seldom, indeed only in a handful of set speeches.” Marlowe introduced a new dynamic principle into the dramatic speech which made a profound impression on his contemporaries: Such metaphorical language is characteristic of the majority of Tamburlaine’s speeches, even when he does not talk about threats or war projects. When he is pursuing Zenocrate, he does it by means of promises for the future which develop into increasingly unreal dreams: This kind of dramatic speech is not based
The narrative of the French, Jewish, and Berber relations, while an exceptionally well-rounded story does not acknowledge, in the text itself, Geertz’s role in the situation - thus giving an incomplete account of the events. To not be reminded of the author's role, allows the reader to view the narrative as fact when in actuality the author’s observation and interpretation separate the reader from the truth. Observation is often taken for granted as an ethnographer's view and understanding is changed depending on the perspective he uses. While his approach to ethnography provides the reader with a coherent narrative, it neglects to show how the information was gathered or an evaluation of the reliability of the sources. Had he placed himself
In one of his negative statements in which there were contentions in the translation of the word into other languages, besides, he also mentions that deconstruction is not all about analysis, methodology, and criticism. He indicates that deconstruction cannot be a method in any way because it is not a mechanical operation, this is because it carries some aspects of a procedural form of judgment that give the whole word a different meaning far from philosophy. Nietzsche and the Postmodernism Subject Postmodernism depicts the movement and application of styles and concepts in arts, and architecture that was used in the mid-20th century to late 20th century. Nietzsche lived a life that needs to be put on active record as his contribution on philosophy and life left a legacy which revives and needs recognition of our minds and
A largely held opinion of Rousseau’s manuscript is that when writing it he was mainly preoccupied with developing an abstract normative perfect model which can serve as criteria for assessing the lawfulness of other existing societies and states, so it was not aimed at suggesting feasible and very explicit ways of achieving that goal. Contentiousness of the masterpiece, taken together with its differing explanations complicates the analysis and interpretation of its key postulates. However, despite debatable content and its further ramifications, Rousseua’s Social contract is very
However, they all are different in a sense. Xenophon’s was written by word of mouth but nonetheless he still quoted what he was told, and tried to explain what was going on and almost animate what could’ve been going on. Aristophanes’ was a humorous, sarcastic representation of Socrates. This could’ve easily been mistaken as a negative point of view on him, when in reality it was all pure sarcasm. And lastly, there was Plato, who seemed to have grasped Socrates the best.