The Critique Of Henrik Ibsen's 'The Contrast'

Gordon Wood’s Radicalism of the American Revolution is a book that extensively covers the origin and ideas preceding the American Revolution. Wood’s account of the Revolution goes beyond the history and timeline of the war and offers a new encompassing look inside the social ideology and economic forces of the war. Wood explains in his book that America went through a two-stage progression to break away from the Monarchical rule of the English. He believes the pioneering revolutionaries were rooted in the belief of an American Republic. However, it was the radical acceptance of democracy that was the final step toward independence. The transformation between becoming a Republic, to ultimately becoming a democracy, is where Wood’s

The 18th century can be marked as a period of internal and external struggle for the American colonists. From improper representation, to unfair taxes, such as the Stamp Act, to being overall abused by Britain, the colonists were justifiably angry. From this anger, the slogan “No taxation without representation” was born and quickly began to emerge from the lips of almost every colonist all across America. The demand from colonists everywhere for no taxation without representation weighed heavily as a symbol for democracy, as it revealed the mindset of many – Britain was using the hardworking colonists and took their money without even giving them a say – and laid the foundation for the American revolutionary war, allowing more arguments and

Howard Zinn’s argument on the nature of the American War for Independence was the war for independence was not a social revolution. Instead, he argues the colonial elite used the war for their own personal gain in power and status. The wealthy and powerful found a strategy to maintain and even increase their social and political status by leading the war against England and the courtiers associated with England.

In contrast, some divisions of the colonial population supported Britain whole-heartedly with their lives. They delighted in the short-lived emboldened ties. A New England minister proclaimed “…the Children of New England may be glad and triumph, in Reflection on Events past, and Prospects for the future…” (Document E). Comprehensibly, he felt that Britain gave them a future, that they owed their lives to their mother country. “…Mother, who has most generously rescued and protected us, [must] be served and honored…” (Document E). This is a deep contrast to the ways of thinking possessed by the soldiers and Native Americans, and it would not last long.

Self-reliance was a commodity that was little known in colonial America before the war, and now that the colonists had had a taste of it, they were understandably slow to relinquish it. The seeds of conflict had been planted.

When America’s founding fathers broke away from England, they weren’t the first colonial Englishmen on the American continent, there were plenty of French, Spanish, Dutch and even Russian colonial outposts established before them. What makes the English colonies along the Eastern seaboard story so important, was the fact that 13 colonies joined together to form what is now known as the United States. Furthermore, this 13 colonies New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia risk their lives, fortunes, and sacred honors to start a new nation free from Great Britain’s rule. In the mist of declaring independence from the most powerful nation on earth, America’s founding fathers created a governmental system that was unfamiliar during their era. America’s founding fathers created a government designed to protect civil liberties and encourage independence, a complex yet young and evolving system.

Joseph J. Ellis, the author of “The Founding Brothers,” identifies and give a better vision of what is happening in the American Revolution. Ellis states, “On the inevitability side, it is true there was voices back then urging prospective patriots to regard American Independence as an early manifest destiny” (3). The book introduces the revolutionaries: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin. Ellis focuses on the characteristics, actions, events, and the ideologies differences that affect the American Revolution.

In 46 Pages author Scott Liell is able to poignantly illustrate the colonies metamorphosis from a dependent arm of the English Empire to an independent country, the catalyst for which was Thomas Paine's Common Sense. Liell is able to not only articulate the turning point of the American consensus towards independence, but he also very intelligibly depicts the sentiments of all facets of colonial dogma and the torrential effect that Common Sense had in loosening the cement that held those beliefs. Using fantastic examples of the opinions of Tories, Whigs, and those ambivalent towards independence, Liell efficiently and

Henceforth, the overall rundown of the book is based off the British view of the the American Revolution and how they viewed the colonist from a retrospect in the events happening. To begin with, King George the III had been placing taxes on the colonist, which made them furious over their relationship with him. The loyalist saw these “acts” as a part of

The creation of the American nation became what it is today from years of struggle in which the common people, as well as the Founding Fathers, played a vital part for independence. The promise of the Revolution, a nation based on the republican ideals of liberty, independence, and equality, was to some extent achieved. Yet the great principles of the Revolution have long shaped our thoughts of what it means to be an American. All the events leading up and after the American Revolution will have effects on the common people. The story of George Robert Twelves Hewes helps historians comprehend the part that the common people played in their struggle for freedom and republican ideals they wanted to achieve for the generations to come in the new nation.

In this essay I explain the evolution of American attitudes and ideologies—apropos of Britain—from 1764 to 1776. I do so by, first, beginning with providing the context and explaining the state of the relationship between America and Britain throughout the course of the years 1764 to 1774, which in turn, consequently lead up to and instigated the creation of Thomas Jefferson’s 1774 piece entitled A Summary View of the Rights of British America. Next, second, I situate and analyze this very piece, that being: Thomas Jefferson’s A Summary View of the Rights of British America, which is was a tract written before the Declaration of Independence, in which Thomas Jefferson (under his own personal authority/discretion) lays out—for the delegates of the First Continental Congress—a set of grievances directly against the King of England and his corresponding Parliament, and moreover, ultimately radically forewarns and threatens specifically the King of England to fundamentally change, alter, and lessen Britain’s stronghold on America or else something will be done on behalf of America. Finally, third, I reach to and evaluate another subsequent document, that being: the Committee of Five/Continental Congress’ 1776 Declaration of Independence, which is a statement written by the so-called “Committee of Five” (Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Roger Sherman, and Robert Livingston) and the Continental Congress, which was to be adopted by the newly formed United States of

It is easy to interpret the American Revolution simply as a struggle for freedom. The magnanimous phrases of the Declaration of Independence have embedded in our hearts and minds glorious images of the Founding Fathers fighting for the natural rights of man. The American Revolution, however, also had a darker side to it, the side of self-interest and profit. The signers of the Declaration represented various classes – the working class, the wealthy land owners and merchants, the intellectuals, and the social elite. Each of these strata had its own set of expectations and fears, which lent a new dimension to the cause of the Revolution. The pressure of these internal, and often overlapping groups, combined with the oppressive external

Language and characterization often play hand in hand to strengthen a work of literature. Ibsen 's use of the two in Nora, Mrs. Linde, Torvald, and Krogstad enables the audience to have a sense of perception on the themes in the play and their effect on a dynamic society.

Henrik Ibsen is a very common and almost an essential person if you where to judge him by his plays. Ibsen plays are a symbolic representation of how to deal with the reality of social issues. Social issues can be manipulated and used as a powerful political weapon. During this period writers would commonly form information in order to gain the attention and support of the public. Henrik Ibsen understood human nature, he played a crucial role in exploring and illuminating society by uniting honesty and the reality of life, through his work. Writing as a psychologist, Ibsen could quickly sway others when it came to understanding his creative work. His relationship with human life formed an intense social and abstract perspective, which is the essence of art. Ibsen 's work as a writer mainly symbolized a long writing style that reflection on people 's need to live in a more advance mental way. Ibsen wrote about the contradiction between ability and the aspiration between will and possibility. Ibsen commonly uses a great deal of desperation in his work. Within the darkness of his work the conflict mainly surrounded humanity and the individual tragedy of one 's true self. Ibsen would use symbols that represented how the social issues within his work would be part of reality. His plays allowed a combination of the feminist social issues and reality. The subjects were expressed in both “Hedda Gabler” and “A Doll 's House” is extensive and diverse.