The Death Of Ivan Ilyich

In The Death of Ivan Ilych Leo Tolstoy conveys the psychological importance of the last, pivotal scene through the use of diction, symbolism, irony. As Ivan Ilych suffers through his last moments on earth, Tolstoy narrates this man's struggle to evolve and to ultimately realize his life was not perfect. Using symbols Tolstoy creates a vivid image pertaining to a topic few people can even start to comprehend- the reexamination of one's life while on the brink of death. In using symbols and irony Tolstoy vividly conveys the manner in which Ilych views death as darkness unto his last moments of life when he finally admits imperfection.

The role of the patriarchal society and its impact on the oppression of female characters

In his novella, The Death of Ivan Ilych, Leo Tolstoy offers his audience a glance into the life and death of an ambitious man, Ivan Ilych. Tolstoy uses the death of Ivan Ilyich to show his audience the negative consequences of living the way Ilych did. Ivan Ilych followed society and made decisions based on what others around him conformed to and not so much about what he genuinely wanted until he was on his deathbed. As death approaches Ilych he realizes that he wrecked everything that should be meaningful in his life in order to work and make money and in the end his friends did not really care much about him. Ilych’s desire to conform made him live a miserable life and led him to darkness. Ivan Ilych attained everything that society

As the perception of women changes constantly, society is the only factor in creating their ideal image. These societal views are the basis of their treatment, with the expectation that it is beneficial for them. However, societal expectations of women in the Elizabethan and Victorian eras severely limit their freedoms and rights. William Shakespeare’s Othello and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein portray most women in their typical roles. Both authors depict the level of injustice in society’s treatment of women through the passivity of women causing their deaths, the silencing of vulnerable women and the portrayal of women as more humane than men.

By exploring settings societies governed by political and social patriarchies, both Arthur Miller’s the Crucible and Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaids Tale provide commentary on women’s role in society. Both texts are set against a backdrop in which women are seen as a ‘second class’ and are subject to male dominance. The similarities in the two texts lie within their separate discussions of gender roles in society, but they differ on the intricacies of this. From a theocratic standpoint, the play and the novel dissect the faults in an oppressive society, with Miller making it abundantly clear that it can in fact be challenged instead of conformed to. Atwood also somewhat entertains this concept, but both writers have different perceptions on identity and individuality in worlds that don’t seem much unlike our own.

Reading literature, at first, might seem like simple stories. However, in works like William Faulkner's “A Rose for Emily,” Katherine Mansfield's “Miss Brill,” and Kate Chopin's “The Storm,” the female protagonists are examples of how society has oppressive expectations of women simply because of their gender.

Many wifes throughout the years have endured countless amounts of persecution from their husbands, but some men take it to a whole new level. Two male authors, Henrik Ibsen and Robert Browning, brought female hardships to light in the nineteenth century. Ibsen’s 1879 play, A Doll’s House, was so controversial at the time that he was forced to write a more pleasant ending in which Nora returned after having left Torvald. Browning’s poem, “My Last Duchess”, written in 1842, showed the immoral perspective of a Duke who had his wife murdered merely because she did not preserve her pleasant personality singularly for him. It was influential writers such as these who eventually gave feminism a kick start. The two husbands in these stories share a vast amount of similar characteristics. Despite the fact that Torvald loved his wife, and Duke had murdered his, both of them exhibit extreme authoritative and egoistic behaviors.

“Death is the solution to all problems. No man - no problem.” This is a direct quote from one of the most notorious men in history, Joseph Stalin. Stalin was the leader of the Soviet Union from the mid 1920’s until his death. The period in which he ruled over the Soviet Union was known as the Reign of Terror because he was a malicious leader who was ready to do anything to maintain the level of power he achieved. He will forever be remembered as a cold blooded and heartless leader, who took the lives of millions without remorse. This research paper will cover this notorious and deceitful dictator and his early life, rise to power, his reign of terror, and the aftermath of his actions.

     To many individuals the word “progress” has a positive meaning behind it. It suggests improvement, something humans have been obsessed with since the dawn of society. However, if closely examined, progress can also have a negative connotation as well. While bringing improvement, progress can simultaneously spark conformity, dependency, and the obsession of perfection within the individuals caught in its midst. It is this aspect of progress within modern society that negatively affects Ivan Ilych, Leo Tolstoy’s main character in The Death of Ivan Ilych. Ivan’s attempt to conform to modern society’s view of perfection takes away his life long before he dies. Furthermore, his fear of death and

Though it may seem natural to desire a better place in society, this improvement may come at a price. In Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto, Marx discusses the various problems that arise in society to due capitalism and how to solve these problems through communism. Leo Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilyich focuses on a man whose capitalistic desires end up causing his own downfall. Tolstoy and Marx would argue that some of the biggest problems with capitalistic societies are that they cause individuals to put on a façade and display a false persona for society while also prioritizing the more superficial aspects of life such as material goods and social status over family relations. The result of such a society is a working class that is

Hedda Gabler is a play in which the author, Henrik Ibsen, demonstrates the heavy shackles of society and the burden it impinges on women through the words and actions of the protagonist, Hedda Tesman. Hedda is a woman living for her own pleasure. At twenty-nine-years-old and having been recently married, she is under enthused with her surroundings and yearns for titillating experiences. Obsessed with the aesthetics of the world, she wants to lead a poetic life filled with lust and luxury, yet is too frightened by what her Victorian values deem proper, to do so. Ibsen constructed a brilliant character that simultaneously arouses both sympathy and scorn from the reader through Hedda’s own words and actions.

She depended on people. Even though it seems she had found happiness in the end of the story because Carl saves her from her loneliness, yet again she makes the same mistake. She depended on Carl to save her. Ivan from the story “The Death of Ivan Ilych” makes a similar error has Alexandra did. Ivan gets married and stars a family by the wrong reasons. He lived his life in accordance with his social statues. “He was swayed by both these considerations: the marriage gave him personal satisfaction, and at the same time it was considered the right thing by the most highly placed of his associates” (The Death). There are consequence to every actions people make. God puts it this way “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he

It occurred to him that what had appeared perfectly impossible before, namely that he had not spent his life as he should have done, might after all be true. It occurred to him that his scarcely perceptible attempts to struggle against what was considered good by the most highly place people, those scarcely noticeable impulses which he had immediately suppressed, might have been the real thing, and all the rest false. And his professional duties and the whole arrangement of his life and of his family, and all his social and official interests, might all have been false. He tried to defend all those things to himself and suddenly felt the weakness of what he was

Through the characterization of Hedda, Ibsen explores the oppression of woman in the Victorian Era.