Analysis Of The Book ' The Killers '

Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytical theory of personality argues that human behavior is the result of the interactions among three component parts of the mind: the id, ego, and superego. The Id (Anger), is concerned with satisfaction of basic and physical needs and urges.

Perry Smith and Dick Hickock are two remarkably different characters. In the beginning of the novel, they’re known only as the murders of the Clutter family, but Truman Capote tells their life stories in such a way that they become more than that. Even though these two men are basically introduced as murderers, they quickly become relatable and interesting characters. So much is learned about their feelings and lives that one can not help but almost look past their reckless ways. Both of these men have unique character traits that amalgamate in an intriguing way. Throughout In Cold Blood, Capote includes many instances that show how Dick and Perry, when combined, make the perfect murderer.

The way the plot of Killings by Andre Dubus is arranged changes how the reader sees the characters in the story. This plot starts out in the present, then goes into the past, then back to the present. There are two main characters, and three secondary characters in this story. The way the reader views all of these characters is affected by the plot arrangement. The two primary characters who are most important to the plot, and also most affected by the plot arrangement, are Matt Fowler and Richard Strout. Because the first thing the reader reads in the exposition of the story is “On the August morning when Matt Fowler buried his youngest son, Frank, who had lived for twenty-one years, eight months, and four days…” pg 93, and not Richard Strout’s backstory and reasoning for his actions, they are immediately persuaded by the author to feel sympathy towards Matt. The author needs the reader to feel this sympathy so that when Matt kills Strout at the climax of the plot, Matt is not viewed as the antagonist of the story, but rather as the protagonist. The author needs the reader to view Strout as the antagonist so that the reader does not dislike Matt, and so that the story is one of justified revenge and not just another murder. If the reader had been presented with the plot in chronological order, with Strout’s backstory and reasoning for killing Frank first, then the reader might almost feel bad for Strout. If seen like this, one might conclude that, while he did not take

The Man I Killed is the story of the man that Tim O’Brien killed. However, this story is not true. He later mentions that he did not in fact kill the man, yet he was present and that was enough. This story, according to him, is told to show the reader how he feels, because O’Brien feels as though the truth is that by doing nothing, he killed the man, so in his story, he does kill the man. Imagery is the biggest literary device seen in this story, but diction also helps make the story seem more true, it helps the reader to truly believe that O’Brien did in fact throw the grenade that killed the man. This story is told from O’Brien’s point of view, which would be first person, despite the fact that the word “I” is

The film “Murder on a Sunday Morning” is a documentary on the murder of Mary Ann Stephens. This murder took place on May 7, 2000, in Jacksonville, Florida. Mary Anne Stephens was at the Ramada hotel with her husband when a dark male wearing a dark shirt, shorts, and a flat brim hat approached her and demanded for her purse. Within 5 seconds she was shot in the face by the bridge of her nose and killed. It was later that day hat Brenton Butler was stopped by police and identified by husband of Mary Anne Stephens. Brenton Butler was taken into custody where he remained for the next six months facing charges of murder in the first degree and armed robbery. Through evidence such as the clothes Brenton was wearing on the day of the murder, an alibi of going to blockbuster to hand in an application, and lack of forensic testing, Brenton was found not guilty in the case of Florida v. Brenton Leonard Butler after the jury convened for forty-five minutes on the twenty-first of November in 2000. The Jacksonville grand jury also decided not to file criminal charged against the three officers. After the case on March 12, 2001 the forensics department retrieved the purse to process all parts of it to find fingerprints matching to Juan Curtis who admitted to shooting Mary Ann Stephens. The Butler family planed to sue the sheriffs officers in an $8.5 million civil rights lawsuit.

Lennie is unaware of his own strength, and accidentally kills Curley’s wife, which causes George to weigh Lennie’s options. He decides that killing Lennie would be the best option, and, after delivering the killing bullet, Carlson asks George how he does it. George stiffly sits on the bank, and his “voice was almost a whisper. He looked steadily at this right hand that had held the gun” (107). The fact that George acts very calm and quiet indicates that he is in deep shock. The trauma from killing Lennie really deals a blow to George’s energy. George himself would be happy if his friend did not have to die, but he is completely aware of how it is the option that is best for Lennie. Shooting Lennie causes George to experience deep sorrow, anxiety, and anguish. He feels emotionally drained and tired, which he could avoid by just leaving Lennie alive, but he sacrifices his own emotional health to benefit Lennie. If Lennie was not George’s good friend, George would not invest so much of his own happiness. Friends not only have to deal with their own problems, but also have to sacrifice more energy by managing their friends’ as

Plot is defined as, "the authors arrangement of incidents in a story it is the organizing principle that controls the controls the order of events (Meyer,64)." The element of plot is heavily relied on in the short story, "The Killings" by Andre Dubus. The plot which is completely made inside the imagination of an author (Meyer,64), gives the audience important insight to people, places, and events in the story (Meyer,64) . "The Killings" provides a somewhat conventional plot pattern, where the character is confronted with a problem and is then led into a climax, which late leads to the resolution of the story (Meyer,65). The conventional plot is easy to follow and serves as a basis for movies and other

Max is first described as “. If we were to judge him solely on his appearance, we might assume that he is very big, brainless, and he isolates himself from the world. In fact, when we first see him in daycare, “Called me Kicker for a time- this was day care care, the year Gram and Grim took me over-and I had a thing about booting anyone who dared to touch me.”

It is expected for arguments to arise when writing about controversial topics. Many times the meaning of a book is not as obvious as the author intended, which may lead to problems. Other times, books are challenged because they contain sexual or inappropriate material. When Kurt Vonnegut released Slaughterhouse-Five critics were quick to judge his peculiar way of writing. Although Kurt Vonnegut’s book Slaughterhouse-Five was oftentimes misunderstood, interpreted as inappropriate, and judged for the peculiar point of view, critics seem to appreciate and accept one aspect of it: the structure of the book.

George was right to kill Lennie. Lennie, a man of tremendous size, has the mind of a young child, while George on the opposite, is an independent individual. Yet such two different people have formed a “family”, clinging together in the face of loneliness and alienation during their journey. Innocent Lennie is mentally challenged with no ability to understand abstract concepts like death. He consistently does not mean to do the things that put him into trouble, and once he does get into trouble, he has no conscience to define his actions in terms of guilt. Consequently, the dramatic scene unfolded - George had no choice but to kill his best friend Lennie after he knew that Lennie killed Curley’s wife. Was George right to kill Lennie? This essay

One reason suggesting Ray Leetuff’s guilt in Max Powers’s murder is his compelling motive for the crime. Part of Ray’s motive is financial. Max had recently inherited $12.4 million, and Ray and three others “were all named equally in his will” (“CSI Preliminary Report”). The only way this money could be inherited by Ray is if Max dies. The significant bequest provides a compelling motive for Ray to commit this crime. Along with the financial benefit, Ray disliked Max. Ray’s dislike of Max was not unjust: “he continually criticized everyone and everything around him” (“CSI Preliminary Report”). Ray had no emotional connection to the victim

Baruch Spinoza once said “Experience teaches us no less clearly than reason, that men believe themselves free, simply because they are conscious of their actions and unconscious of the causes whereby those actions are determined.” He compared free-will with destiny and ended up that what we live and what we think are all results of our destiny; and the concept of the free-will as humanity know is just the awareness of the situation. Similarly, Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five explores this struggle between free-will and destiny, and illustrates the idea of time in order to demonstrate that there is no free-will in war; it is just destiny. Vonnegut conveys this through irony, symbolism and satire.

Oliver Stone’s 1994 classic, Natural Born Killers, excited and traumatized its audiences while also causing controversy. The tale of white trash lovers caught up in a realm of chaos that includes a continuous murderous rampage from state to state, draws in audiences with its graphic violence and riveting pulse inducing music. Yet, the message of this film seems to be much deeper than just exposing audiences to yet another chaotic action movie filled with guns, blood and mayhem. Stone’s Natural Born Killers examines the subject of media’s investment in serial murder very thoroughly, and so it seems likely that it has the potential to offer a more rigorous interrogation of the nature of the American public’s fascination with the serial

Slaughterhouse-Five, a novel written by Kurt Vonnegut, tells the story of the devastating effects of war on a man, Billy Pilgrim, who joins the army fight in World War II. The semi-autobiographical novel sheds light on one of history’s most tragic, yet rarely spoken of events, the 1945 fire-bombing of Dresden, Germany.

As one re-reads the story, it is evident that Hemingway has chosen this style for a particular reason.  Hemingway did not have Ole executed, because in doing so the reader would focus all the attention to his tragic death.  The murder does not occur, and the reader is forced to focus on the reaction of Nick, Sam and George, and the nonchalant attitude of "The Killers."  "One has to read it two or three times before he realizes that Nick Adams is the central figure" (Walcutt, 305).  The story can be broken into four scenes; first, "The Killers" are introduced; second, Nick warns Ole; third, Nick speaks to Mrs. Bell; fourth, Nick returns to the cafe.  Nick is the only character present in each scene, and in returning to the cafe his final statement to George is, "'I can't  stand to think about him waiting in the room and knowing he's going to get it.  It's too damned awful."'  George replies, "'You better not think about it'"(Hemingway, 252).  It is obvious Nick is unwilling to accept defeat, and give up his delusion of a world without evil.  To maintain his delusion, he is willing to escape the reality that is presented to him.  "So, of the two boys, it is obviously Nick on whom the impression has been made.  George has managed to come to terms with the situation.  By this line of reasoning, it is Nick's story" (Brooks, 195).  Nick is the only character that evolves; Nick is a round character.  The other