Reflection Of The King's Speech

Bernard is unlike any other when he deals with his feelings and problems in World State. Bernard turns “pale” when he hears other men objectifying Lenina, whom he is attracted to(44). Although he knows she has many other men and other men have the choice to have her, he is unhappy with the way society is. It angers him and makes him want to “hit them in the face” because of the way other men don’t feel feelings the way Bernard does(45). Bernard does not take soma when he feels unhappiness, but decides to pursue Lenina even more. He wants to be “himself and nasty. Not somebody else”(89). He doesn’t feel that soma is the solution for any of his unhappy episodes. Bernard wants to develop himself in a conscious way, not taken over by soma. Although he has a harder time fitting in, he still wants to fit in and to love. His conscious mind seems to be more similarto those of contemporary society than those of World state.

The speech by the Player King in Act 3, Scene 2, is part of the play that Hamlet asks the Players to put on to try and find evidence of Claudius's guilt. The speech itself is a response to the statements by the Player Queen regarding her ever getting a second marriage if he dies. The Player Queen suggests that second marriages are not on the grounds of love or want, but on money and fortune. This part of the acted play by the Player King and Queen is a trap to try and invoke any reactions from Claudius that would show his guilt in the murder of Hamlet’s father. The topic in the speech of second marriages clearly points out the wrongness of Claudius’s marriage to Gertrude.

Bernard was brought up knowing that hard work and effort will lead to success. With taking his father’s advice, Bernard makes sure that he is prepared for graduation. All of the time invested in school pays off when Bernard gains status as an important Lawyer later in life.

Thesis: King brilliantly applies rhetorical strategies such as pathos, logos and ethos that are crucial in successfully influencing detractors of his philosophical views on civil disobedience.

In conclusion, Bernard is interested in pursuing his personal desires, instead of conforming to society because he doesn’t like the way society is and what it is restricting people from.

Edgar, although an important character, scarcely speaks when he is first introduced as an honest, innocent man. In effect, his first true speech starts as prose since he is forced to disguise himself so early on in “King Lear.” Through multiple progressions of Edgar’s speech from prose to blank verse, Shakespeare parallels Edgar’s transition from a naive, trusting man to a hardened and prudent man that becomes the only person capable of ruling the wounded country; his growth into a selfless and wise man is illustrated by the rare use of rhymed verse.

The movie well portrays the conflict between the couple while maintaining the different shades of grey in their character. Bernard was shown as an egoist, with narcissism and no sense of responsibility for his actions, but he was also shown having a vulnerable side of him. He lacked the capacity to contain emotions this frequently made him feel that others are being ‘difficult’. His inability to express his emotions was shown by his usage of words like - ‘comic timings’, ‘hurts my feelings’ and ‘it’s

diction used both in describing the Duke and in his own thoughts, the reader sees his

Bernard is introduced as a man that does not fit into society and is different from everyone else in the “Social Society”. Throughout the novel he changes though, he becomes self-centered and views himself as a superior to others. The main event that lead up to this change is his encounter with the “Savages”, which allowed him to secure his job and further his career.

In his letter, King uses all three modes of persuasion- ethos, logos, and pathos. King addresses all of the clergymen's concerns methodically and answers them both with clear, indisputable facts and with emotional appeals to allow the reader a closer and honest view of a colored person's life in the South at the time. King uses ethos to establish his character, but also to reassure the reader of his intentions. In this letter King keeps his tone unemotional and informative allowing logic to prevail. Throughout his letter King is successful using metaphors and imagery to express ideas or emotions that would otherwise be difficult for the reader to grasp.

In King Lear, a tragedy written by William Shakespeare, the title character is depicted as quite a peculiar man. While in the beginning of the play readers might think that the actions the king portrays might simply be his personality, the further one reads into the play, the more they begin to gather that the manner in which Lear is behaving, while it may be just his personality, there is good cause to believe that there is a stronger, more neurological reason behind his actions rather than just bizarre and curious quirks of his psyche. The closest approximation of the neurological condition King Lear might suffer from is dementia. Almost all of the actions of Lear throughout the play can be attributed to the symptoms of the disease; a “decline

Bernard tries explaining how he wants to be free, have his own individuality, and have his own ability to think and feel; not like everyone else, but like himself. He also explains how he wants to be happy, truly happy. He feels that in the World State, and because of his conditioning, this can never happen. Lenina’s response enables the audience to see how much she’s been brainwashed, showing how powerful the state is.

While The Kings Speech draws upon a number of historical facts and events, this is not its primary concern. The film is about the effect of a person’s family on how the person develops. For example, in The Kings Speech, King George VI’s brother abdicating and his father’s cruelty played a part in his stammer and lack of confidence. The film is also about the importance of a secure support system, for example Queen Elizabeth and Lionel Logue were Bertie's support system and they helped him overcome his stammer and lack of confidence. A third important issue in the film is about the different approach to class distinction by British and Australian people, as shown by the expectations of Bertie and Queen Elizabeth that Lionel Logue will do

In the film “The King’s Speech”, written by David Seidler and released on November 26, 2010, the filmmaker portrays Albert being constantly under pressure for speaking correctly, by comparing his speech to great broadcasters who are anything but great leaders. The pressure that comes from Albert’s father, King George V, results in more frustration for the both of them, without either of them realising that to lead a country into greatness depends more on just speaking well. Throughout the film, there had been ideal speech models like Hitler, David, and King George V, shown in order to compare their speech to Albert’s and to show what a great speaker has to sound in order to gain the public’s support. Ironically, all of those speech perfect models turned out to be egocentric individuals and the least egotistical leader, Albert, is the one with the impaired speech. I argue that in “The King’s Speech”, the characters who serve as models of ideal speech are figures of oppression, therefore the author is implying that the idea of having ideal speech does not live up to it’s praise.

Bertie, is seen as a soon-to-be agonizing heir to the throne because he lacks communication skills. The only thing stopping Prince Albert is himself. In the movie he states: “If I'm King, where's my power? Can I form a government? Can I levy a tax, declare a war? No! And yet I am the seat of all authority. Why? Because the nation believes that when I speak, I speak for them. But I can't speak”(“The King’s Speech (2010)”). Prince Albert was a troubled child who was repressed of using his left hand, possessed knock-knees, had an abusive nanny and a death of a brother at an early age. As time passed, Prince Albert never grew out of his comfort zone and continued to speak poorly. Because Prince Albert speaks of himself that way, we can assume that communication is essential in leading a nation and is a foundation for personal life, relationships, professional success and civic life. By saying that a nation believes when he speaks, one can generally expect a leader for any reason or cause to possess great speaking skills in order to be prosperous.