Love in Literature

Love is a popular theme in a multitude of literature pieces throughout the times. Forbidden love seems nearly as popular as does love gone wrong and unconditional love. Two tales that contain the theme of forbidden love, the theme of love gone wrong, and the theme of unconditional love are: William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream and Fay Weldon’s “IND AFF or Out of Love in Sarajevo.” Though these stories were both written many years apart, they have a commonality with their themes. These themes can be drawn by the individual story’s main characters and main events. Even though the theme of love gone wrong displays itself a bit differently in each piece, its identification is still very clear in

Each time Nora finds herself unable to help herself the problem is easily directly traced back to her husband, her father, and to the overbearing dominance of the male society. She tries to save the life of the man she thinks she loves and in doing so sees how she has become a victim of her own ignorance which has been brought upon her by the men in her life.

Love is undoubtedly one of the most frequently explored subjects in the literary world. Whether the focus is a confession of love, criticism of love, tale of love, or simply a tale about what love is, such literary pieces force readers to question the true meaning and value of love. Raymond Carver accomplishes this in his short story “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love.” As the unadorned setting and the personality of each character unfold, the reader realizes that Carver is making a grave comment on the existence of love. Carver utilizes strong contrast, imagery, and diction to ultimately suggest that love cannot be defined concretely and therefore cannot be defined in words, and because of this, it is better off unexplored.

Throughout the ages, many have tried to comprehend the human experience of love and its ineffable and mysterious force that leads us to complete euphoria or utter despair, with songs, paintings, and stories. In Plato’s Symposium, six guest including Socrates, tackle and attempt to define love amongst each other. With each attempt, and our study of Johns gospel, the intertextuality between the symposium and John 15:8-17 helps one better understand the portrait that John portrays of Jesus as the ultimate lover and only way to being fully complete.

The love story is one of the oldest and most cherished traditions in any world culture. The prevalence of romantic works throughout history, whether Greek myths, Jane Austen’s dramatic narratives, or today’s dime-a-dozen romantic novels, ultimately encourages us to believe in the power of true love. We identify with the archetypal star-crossed lovers, who combat established convention in order to assert their romance, because we too yearn for our own “happily-ever-afters.” When used in conjunction with reason, love is the highest form of compassion – without it, we could not possibly interact productively with one another or develop as individuals. But when we take a new perspective and examine love as an independent,

Nora expects when what she calls the terrible storm breaks over her, “Krogstads letter” that her husband would step forward and take all the guilt and responsibilities, but to her ammusement he never did. She needed validation that her husband loved her inspite of what she had done, He continued to argue that no man would sacrifice their honor not even for love. Showing his self-centredness and only concerned about himself. Nora argues that millions of women have.

Detached from love, being the “unloved”, and not knowing how to seek or expel love are all problems that are relevant to the lives of many. Through the plot of Ernest Hemingway’s “Soldier’s Home,” Jesse Lee Kercheval’s “Carpathia,” and Susan Minot’s “Lust,” it is evident that love and its psychology plays a major role in one’s self worth and ability to love and accept it in

“The matter must be hushed up at any cost. And as for you and me, it must appear as if everything between us were just as it were before –but naturally only in the eyes of the world.” Helmer stated. In this very sentence the author highlighted the standing views on marriage and political views. It is clear that Helmer is not happy with his wife after what she has done and to learn of how she has lied. Helmer is not worried about his marriage and his wife’s feelings, he is worried about what others will think. Through this dialogue in the play it become clear to the audience that what is important in society shouldn’t be. The characters were influence by other around them, others views and perceptions of them. It was shamed upon to have a broken marriage and a deceitful wife. Helmer states, “Before all else, you are a wife and a mother.” Nora replies, “I don’t believe in that any longer. I believe that before all else I am a reasonable human being, just as you are-or, at all events, that I must try and become one.” (Page 1390) Henrik did an amazing job at touching on key points of societies views and did it in such a way that empowers women and the feminist movements. In a time when woman are encouraged to be obedient and act as a second citizen, the author wrote this story out differently. Nora realizes her worth as a woman and understands that her feelings are more than just second best

Teacher and classmates, A few weeks ago, I questioned Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet wondering why, why is this literature still prominent in today's society? The foreign tongue it is written in, the seemingly basic and boring plot and the lack of action all combined being regarded as one of man’s greatest achievements didn't quite equate. However through my studies of the question, How effectively does Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet shape our notion of love, I realised. Throughout the text lies defining moments of romantic, fickle and fraternal love and the complexity of the text allows for both interpretation while maintaining relatability. However our perception of love, the strong feeling of affection, has differed immensely since 1595. Romeo and Juliet, a story over four centuries old is the foundation of love and romance throughout history.

The two poems “Magic of Love” by Helen Farries and “Love Poem” by John Frederick Nims are both poems with the central theme of love. The ways that these two authors express this theme differ significantly from each other and show two spectrums of love in literature. Through their use of syntax, diction, rhyme, and meter, these poets portray love in a unique and personal manner that illicit specific emotions from the reader for a variety of possible reasons, which will be analyzed in this essay.

In modern society, love is a buzzing topic. Whether it be true-love or the mushy Valentine’s Day cards, love is all around. Love is something the human mind thrives on, for it creates a sense of calm and peace, thus making it human nature to yearn for love. In literature, there are many “love stories”. William Shakespeare, often called a true expert on love (based on his many plays, sonnets, etc.), has written many of these “love stories”. One of the most well-known stories is Romeo and Juliet. Romeo and Juliet, often remarked as one of Shakespeare’s greatest works, is a perfect example of false love. Throughout the course of the play, it is revealed in many ways this is a story of artificial devotion in which Juliet is in love, and Romeo is

In literature love is described in many different ways. In particular first love allows the author to explore a character’s reactions to new feelings, and this can also cause a reader to experience a variety of emotions themselves. This essay discusses how first love is depicted in both Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ and Bronte’s ‘Jane Eyre’, and look at the similarities and differences that there are in how Juliet and Jane respond to love.

The time periods that each text is set in varies and it is therefore interesting to note that this does not change the fundamentals, we are prepared to make sacrifices for love. All the characters were forced by restrictions of the time to make difficult decisions and in these cases they were willing to give their lives, either physically or emotionally, for their love. It shows the extremity of love, that it is worth more to these literary

Here, Nora pulls together the tragic circumstances. She sees that she was never truly happy in the house, just content. Her father kept her as a child would a doll, and Torvald continued this when they were married. They formed her opinions for her, set expectations to which she was supposed to adhere, and wrote a vague script of how she was supposed to act. She was like a puppet, with no thoughts or actions of her own. When she finally realizes the injustice being done to her, she decides to free herself.

Her final goal was so important to her, protecting her family, she knew she had to do whatever was necessary, even if that meant not being true to her husband or society. In the end, she realizes that it was more important to her husband his reputation, than what it had meant to Nora, all she had done for the love of her family, concluding to the raw truth that her husband didn´t really love her: he loved what she represented before society, a loving, faithful wife that compelled to all his expectations. She knew that to love her children, she needed first to understand and love herself, a thought way beyond and ahead of time, for a woman in the late 1800´s.