Moll Flanders And The Preface

Sorry to disappoint you, but in the next 5 minorly-detailed paragraphs, I’m going to express to you whether I value the novel or the made-for-tv movie of Tuesday’s with Morrie more and why I do so. It’s probably safest if you toss on your seat belt because it just so happens that this overdue, late night written essay, is pretty choppy of a ride. Please continue reading to discover my undesired opinion displayed within this writing extravaganza. Enjoy!

This paper will be a unique interpretation coupled with an analysis of rhetoric in A Thousand Acre’s by Jane Smiley. This non-fiction novel is told in third person omniscient and is focused on the point of view of one of the main characters, Ginny Cook. A Thousand Acres was a modern-day retelling of Shakespeare’s King Lear; set on a large farm and small town in Iowa. This setting is important to the plot because it is more realistic compared to a far away mystical land that is detached from its audience. Smiley uses various rhetorical and literary techniques within her book to engage readers while still keeping to the basic storyline previously written by Shakespeare. Smiley’s use of language positively aids the imagery and emotions seen

1. Throughout the story suspense is aroused and maintained excellently. This is achieved by the character the author creates. Mr. Martin is characterized as a neat and cautious man, who never took a smoke or a drink in his life. Our suspense is aroused when the author states that it has been “a week to the day since Mr. Martin had decided to rub out Mrs. Ulgine Barrows”. This arouses our suspense because we are told Mr. Martin is planning to murder this woman. The suspense is maintained with Mr. Martin’s thoughts. We as an audience are given his thoughts through the use of the 3rd person omniscient point of view. His thoughts are mostly on the issue on his dislike of Mrs. Barrows. Because of this, he

"I've done nothing wrong - and you know it!" Mrs Birling exclaims, refusing to take responsibility for her actions, which is just one of the reasons why the audience may not see Mrs Birling as a very likable character. This essay is going to explore how J.B. Priestley creates such a disagreeable character and why the audience feels this way about her.

The article displays an appeal to credibility through detailed accounts of Debrow’s life, yet there is also careful consideration to elicit specific emotions throughout the text. Hollandsworth makes a prominent appeal to pathos through literary devices and specific use of detail. “The night of the robbery, Edwin drank Thunderbird wine mixed with grape Kool-Aid” (para. 23). This is an example of selective use of detail and literary devices together; he juxtaposes the crime and Thunderbird with the nostalgic and childlike connotation of grape Kool-Aid. Hollandsworth constantly reminds the reader that Debrow was 12, even though he may seem to be so hardened and already involved with a gang, crime,

“You’re Convinced there was nothing important here…Nothing that would—point to any motive?” (Glaspell, pg. 5, 1908). In 1916, Glaspell worked for Des Moines daily news as a reporter where she later met her husband George Cook who was a play director. Together they wrote and produced plays, two of which are Trifles and Jury of Her Peers which are based off a crime scene she encountered while being a reporter. Glaspell’s plays are on the feminist side focusing on the roles women are forced to play in society and their relationships with men. Motive is the overall theme found in both versions of Glaspell’s story and is evidenced through the Wright’s relationship, the anger portrayed in various ways, and finally, regret found in Mrs. Wright.

Miller writes the story in a very unique way. He gives his readers a chance to explore the words written on his pages, with the hope that the reader is able to draw their own conclusions from his work. His unparalleled approach to the essay forces the reader to use critical thinking in order to make since of the essay. Miller’s feelings about reading, writing and the

The narrator’s diction on the page can be described as vain due to the fact he doesn’t need an introduction when the narrator says it is “not really necessary” (4). The narrator’s diction reveals that he has a methodical, stone cold personality that puts the narrator in a more superior position then the human race. Achieving

While each proses a serve of justice and determination to do the right thing; the men approach the crime scene emotionless, indifferent and determined to go in and get to the bottom of the mystery as quick as possible, and push aside the little details. Little do they know that the things they are putting off could be very essential to their case? For example, in a conversation between the attorney and Mr. Hale who remarks, “..I said to Harry that I didn’t know as what his wife wanted made such a difference to John..” who was interrupted by the attorney in mid conversation and interjects, “Let’s talk about that later, Mr. Hale. I do want to talk about that, but tell now just what happened when you got to the house.” (1127) Meanwhile, while the men are out on their hunt for clues, the women stay in the kitchen to look through Mrs. Wright’s things and discuss a motive for why she killed her husband. Glaspell proposes a plan that by looking deeper into circumstances, you may in turn fully understand its true meaning; leaving no stone left unturned.

Larson describes one of the great performances by Buffalo Bill at the fair. He describes his hair as “streaming,” the trim of his outfit as “glinting,” and his bow of respect to Susan B. Anthony as “seeping” (286). The parallelism and word choice creates a sense of awe for the reader which further contributes to how Larson portrays the people to see the fair as extravagant. Larson’s intent with the loaded language in his description of Holmes’s murders switches to draw attention to the evil and darkness. He repeats the word “phase” when describing his “quest for possession” to emphasize the fact that Holmes had this unpropitious thing of murder down to a routine. The level of evil goes up as Larson describes what Holmes did with the bodies afterwards. He emphasizes how Holmes could’ve cared less what happened to the bodies after he was finished with his game of seduction and murder by referring to them as “materials,” “irrelevant,” and a “recreation” (199-200). Both the hinting to Holmes’s routine of murder and his disposal of the bodies continue to illustrate Larson’s point of how wicked Holmes’s actions really were. If it hadn’t already happened, the repetition of the rhetorical device of loaded language in Larson’s descriptions of the fair and the murders help bring the reader to the harsh realization that there

Examining the short stories, “St. Lucy’s Home For Girls Raised by Wolves” written by Karen Russell, “I’m Not Martin” by R.L. Stine, and “The Veldt” created by Ray Bradbury, readers are able to find a similar pattern in characters such as Jeanette (St. Lucy’s Home For Girls), Martin (I’m Not Martin), and Peter (The Veldt), and question how the authors develop these characters. The way these authors develop Jeanette, Martin, and Peter is by making them all give the impression as if they were good people, but be truly very evil and they also develop them by creating the characters as extremely self-centered.

From the way, the author tells Bartleby’s story, we can tell that his tone reflects these two feelings and it successfully speaks to us the Narrator’s courtesy and his emotional involvement in the events that are written in the story. Through the narrator’s perspective, we can identify with narrator and see Bartelby as both pathetic and a little frightening, like the narrator does.

Finally, the reader is introduced to the character around whom the story is centered, the accursed murderess, Mrs. Wright. She is depicted to be a person of great life and vitality in her younger years, yet her life as Mrs. Wright is portrayed as one of grim sameness, maintaining a humorless daily grind, devoid of life as one regards it in a normal social sense. Although it is clear to the reader that Mrs. Wright is indeed the culprit, she is portrayed sympathetically because of that very lack of normalcy in her daily routine. Where she was once a girl of fun and laughter, it is clear that over the years she has been forced into a reclusive shell by a marriage to a man who has been singularly oppressive. It is equally clear that she finally was brought to her personal breaking point, dealing with her situation in a manner that was at once final and yet inconclusive, depending on the outcome of the legal investigation. It is notable that regardless of the outcome, Mrs. Wright had finally realized a state of peace within herself, a state which had been denied her for the duration of her relationship with the deceased.

In Flanders FieldsIn Flanders fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row,That mark our place; and in the skyThe larks, still bravely singing, flyScarce heard amid the guns below.We are the Dead. Short days agoWe lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,Loved, and were loved, and now we lieIn Flanders fields.Take up our quarrel with the foe:To you from failing hands we throwThe torch; be yours to hold it high.If ye break faith with us who dieWe shall not sleep, though poppies growIn Flanders fields.     

Glaspell develops the theme of gender roles by what Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters fret about at the crime scene. For instance, the first concern that Mrs. Peters voices revolves around Mrs. Wright’s fruit preserves and implies that the women are housekeepers. Both the Sheriff and Mr. Hale remark about how the women are “worryin’ about her preserves” and “worrying over trifles” (Glaspell 3). Later, when the men go upstairs to look for evidence, the women decide to bring Mrs. Wright’s apron, fruit, shawl, and quilt for her in prison. To further establish Mrs. Wright as a domesticated housewife, Mrs. Peters suggests that Mrs. Wright wants her apron “to make her feel more natural” (Glaspell 5). Because of what Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters discuss at the crime scene, Glaspell verifies that the women play the role of housekeeper and cook.