Boule De Suif

The German Command, in planning for a short and swift war, found themselves in a bind when the war started to prolong itself. From the very beginning, their plan started to fall apart, as Belgium, who they assumed would just let them march through to France, took up arms in resisting their approaches (Hull, 2005). The war would get longer and longer and seemed farther away from its conclusion as the months grew colder. As a result of this as well as their Prussian roots, they resorted to dangerously risky and destructive tactics, trying to bring the war to a quicker end while putting more of their resources in jeopardy, a move that eventually did not pay off and ended up leading to the German Empire’s demise (Hull, 2005).

French wants to draw attention to the harrowing nature of Hitler’s ideas. We are then forced to contemplate and question the dramatic pause and about how these prejudicial ideas impacted upon the lives of the Jewish people.

Whereas, claimed, “Austria and Prussia were monarchies and both were afraid that the revolution might spread to their countries, hence sent a 80,000- man army into France.” (Doc. C). Furthermore, the outsiders wanted to destroy this revolution springing for rights of man and fairer treatment, thus the radical killings through the Pro-Revolutionary people helped push back the tides from the armies attempting to eradicate them. Additionally, a counterrevolution was arising just the same within the French borders since stated, “People here fiercely fought against the military draft called the levee en masse and against laws,” which made purpose of the keepers of the revolution to unite and briefly display an essence of

Throughout the book “Au Revoir Les Enfants” Louis Malle highlights at several points the typical associations which the majority of people have when discussing the role of the Germans during the war. However Malle approaches the topic from a more complex angle thus forcing the reader to question the general stereotypes and examine the varying attitudes of both the French and Germans, by portraying them in certain situations in which they adopt a sometimes unexpected attitude.

While this was going on in France, the army was trying to make France’s government better, but while doing it, the rights of the people were violated. From Louis XVI’s unfair treatment to the citizens, it caused them to revolt. Since the citizens did not agree with the authority, they were not treated right for speaking out. The rights they deserve were not given to them. For example, “People here fiercely fought against the military draft called levée en masse and against laws that tried to abolish Christianity in France.” (Doc C). They were not given the right for freedom of

The French Revolution was spreading and Prussia and Austria had grown fearful; therefore, to stop the spreading of the revolution the countries waged war against France, gaining land, troops, and power bringing fear to the French. The neighboring countries in the awakening of the revolution, August 1791, formed an alliance wreaking havoc in the French cities. (Doc A) When the guillotining of Louis the 16th occurred Austria became fearful and angry hoping for the safety of the queen and beloved sister Marie Antoinette. (Doc A) The raging war went on for many years but in 1794 the invasion of foreign enemies grew short and the French are close to stopping them. (Doc A) In the words of Robespierre “We must smother the … external enemies of the Republic or perish.”(Doc G)

Grenouille is further conveyed as a victim of social decay when upper class supposedly high ranked and highly respected people are portrayed as fools and almost idiots. Through Comic Irony Father Terrier is seen as an uneducated fool and childish when using the phrase “poohpeedooh”. The repetition of this phrase further illustrates the foolish nature of a highly respected person showing social decay. Moreover, presenting the upper class in France as silly and foolish shows the decay of society and how even foolish people such as Father Terrier are respected and looked up to making Grenouille a victim to this social decay as well as an outsider as he does not respect these foolish upper class people and does not follow the demands of society.

Her need to see her enemies destroyed is so strong that it overrides any other emotion that Madame Defarge may have left, and it leaves her “absolutely without pity” (367). She cannot see the monster she has become because she is so focused on immolating every last aristocrat or enemy of the republic. France may have suffered from poverty,

The violence in France will not stop until equality is reached. The revolutionaries picture a time when all the people of France live equal. This reasoning is the core factor of why they are fighting against the system. When we learned the motive for Madame Defarge’s reasoning for hating the Marquis and anyone associated with him, she replies that everyone against the revolution should “...tell the Wind and Fire where to stop; not me!” (326). We learn here that she has not intent to stop until she gets even with the Evrémonde family. Madame Defarge’s idea of equality is the death of Charles Darnay and everyone associated with him. When Madame Defarge and Defarge were discussing the end of the revolution Defarge asked the question, “but one must stop somewhere. After all, the question is still where?” (324). Defarge questions Madame Defarge’s intent to stop somewhere but Madame Defarge replies with “At extermination” (324). This strengthens the fact that Madame Defarge believes the revolution will be complete with the death

“Man has the right to deal with his oppressors by devouring their palpitating hearts.” Although harsh, Jean-Paul Marat’s words resonate strongly with the ideals he pushed for in revolutionary France. With his newspaper and political positions, Marat pushed for a complete eradication of the noble class in current power, advanced the Convention beliefs, and pressed for liberal changes throughout the Parisian government. According to Ide, In Marat’s newsletter L’Ami du peuple, meaning friend of the people, he intensely criticized the upper class and nobles throughout France. Even before his newsletter’s first issues, Marat was outspoken against the injustices done by English aristocrats.

Monsieur Loisel, in contrast, is content with his place in life. He too is proud, but of what he has achieved, not what he desires to be. He does not yearn for dainty dinners but is satisfied with plain cooking: “... her husband, who uncovered the soup-tureen and declared with an enchanted air, ‘Ah, the good pot-au-feu! I dont know anything better than that.’” (Maupassant 1). Monsieur Loisel is happy and shows pride in the simple things in life. He is also proud when he receives the invitation to the ball and cannot understand his wife’s negative reaction to the invitation: “Instead of being delighted, as her husband hoped, she threw the invitation on the table with disdain…” (Maupassant 2). He sacrifices money he has saved to buy a gun so that his wife can buy a suitable dress, but she is still not happy.

Guy de Maupassant is really exploring the theme of greed in this short story. The power of greed within materialistic people is clearly shown with Mathilde losing everything when she just wanted more than she could afford. M. Loisel had a lot of trouble getting an invitation to the party he courteously proposed to his wife Mme. Loisel. Mathilde’s reaction to the invitation shows the social pressures French society had at this time; since she was not content since she “haven't a dress and so [she] can't go to this party" (Maupassant), which made M. Loisel heart-broken.

A people that are repressed and have a strong national identity are prone to violent and unpredictable revolutions and uprisings. We see examples of that precept in the French Revolution and the tumultuous republics that followed in the aftermath of Emperor Napoleon.

In his novel, Les Miserables, Victor Hugo identifies the principle social evils of French society through the actions and qualities of his characters. By depicting each of his characters’ struggles through destitute and oppressed measures, Hugo is able to identify the social errors of 19th century France. The fact that characters such as Valjean, Javert, Fantine, and Cosette, attempt to rise above poverty and redeem themselves indicate that such inequalities did, and still do, exist to this day. Through the use of feminist ideals and the criminal injustice system, Hugo attacks the principle social evils that each of his characters face in Les Miserables.

In the 18th century, European society put an emphasis on social standing; each social class was expected to act differently, thus affecting the way one would get treated and the amount of opportunities available to them. In Flaubert’s Madame Bovary, food imagery and the way each character acts towards food reveals the distinctions between the various social classes and, more importantly, the mediocrity of the French bourgeoisie. However, Flaubert chooses not to focus on all of the social classes, but solely on the characteristics and mannerisms surrounding the middle and the high classes. Revolving the novel around middle-classed characters who represent the middle class, Flaubert criticizes the bourgeoisie through their desire to escape