The Little Prince Analysis

Humans have been using the measurement of time to dictate their day since the early eras of ancient civilizations with sundial then evolving into the mechanical clocks we use today. For thousands of years with time measurement tools, humans have depended on a strict schedule to determine what to do to use up the time they have. In today’s modern world, adult humans use their time to contribute to society by working nine to five jobs and young adults spending their childhood in a classroom. In Henry David Thoreau’s book, Walden; Life in the Woods, Thoreau discusses the concept of time. In Thoreau’s excerpt “Economy,” he offers the paradox whether humans live off borrowed time or stolen time from their employers. He explains in a rhetorical statement that by reading his own book would be “robbing your creditors of an hour,” implying that the human civilization has been putting their work in front of their own self-interests in hope of success and money. Although Thoreau wrote the paradox as a brief commentary for the money driven human civilization, this paradox acts as a metaphor towards Thoreau’s view on the use of time for humanity.

We are a nation obsessed with doing more in less time: we worship productivity and efficiency. The word "workaholic" suggests an addictive compulsion to constant productivity. Yet American society sees it not as a vice or an escape like any other addiction, but an ideal to strive for. We want workaholics on our team to ensure success, yet we are apathetic to the toll it takes on their personal lives. Dr. Manhattan takes this idea to the extreme, as he is a slave to his research, working round the clock and requiring no food or sleep.

Machiavelli recommends the rulers to follow the good qualities, unless needs to protect himself from a vice who would not lose the state for him or be prudent enough to escape a vice who would lose the state for him.

Comparing the The Analects (confucious) with the Prince (Machiavelli) is something like comparing George bush and Elizabeth May of the green party. Basically the wrtitings of The Analects totally disagrees with the writings of The Prince. Confucius believes people are easily improved and taught through self promotion and development, Machaveli however sees humanity in a much different light. Machiavelli was an innovator of realism politics and believed that people of power should conduct themselves as tyrants. Machiavelli and Confucius are from totally different time periods and different places in the world. Which could possibly be the reason The Analects and The Prince are so very

In E.P. Thompson’s essay “Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism”, he argues how the rise of standardized time, which coincided with employed labor and capitalism, changed how people view time from how “time passes” to “time spent”. Time became a commodity in which it could be bought and sold. Time that was not spent “properly” was considered wasted, which Thompson calls time-thrift, which preindustrial societies were not very preoccupied with in comparison. Thompson explores this transition of the sense of time in relationship to the Industrial Revolution, benefits and disadvantages to the new time-discipline, and a possible mixture of the old and new time-disciplines in the future.

What if we stopped celebrating being busy as a matter of importance? Would one make the relation that running errands has the result of the building of character? Would it be agreed upon that constant correspondence to our peers draws us nearer to our goals? Throughout our history humans have developed an undeniable connection between the fulness of one's schedule and the matter of importance they hold in a society. However, with the uniqueness and the complexity of the human mind, does one really need to be occupied in order to progress? In order to continue to effectively grow and progress, we must abandon the futile connection that being busy is directly related to the matter of a person's importance.

Ursula bribes Ariel that she will grant her wishes if she let her have her voice. She will let her be human for three days and able to see the Prince. But she must give him the kiss of true love or she belongs to Ursula. She won’t be able to see her father and sisters. Ariel agrees to these terms and signs the contract

Within the article, No time to think: Reflections on information technology and contemplative scholarship, David Levy discusses his perspective on the use of time and technology. He projects his ideas to his audience and basically says to take a chill pill with technology and life overall. Levy writes this article in a very consistent tone but does not fail to mention the ideas that he has and how society should go about them. While writing about his understanding of time, it is easy for his audience to relate his piece to Time Ain’t Money by Douglas Rushkoff in multiple forms. Although Levy and Rushkoff might have different viewpoints on the concept of time, they both go about getting their beliefs across in a familiar and direct way.

Not by coincidence, JK Rowling nicknamed her most complex, morally ambiguous Harry Potter character “The Prince”. Severus Snape’s royal epithet has more than a little in common with Machiavelli’s The Prince, which Rowling, as a student of Classics and Literature surely read. To be Machiavellian, one must be “cunning, scheming and unscrupulous,” (OED) and those who belong to Snape’s Hogwarts House of Slytherin are “cunning folks [who] use any means / to achieve their ends” (Rowling, Philosopher’s Stone, 88). Even firmer parallels are drawn between Severus Snape and Machiavelli’s Prince as the texts continue.

1.During the time period that Machiavelli wrote the Prince, Italy was tons of different group of cities and states. Each one of them was trying to gain control and power over the others. Along with the small civil wars over power, other countries such as the Spanish, Germans, and the French. The French had an ally with one of Italy’s oldest and most powerful cities of Florence. When the French were defeated by the Pope, Florence was also taken out. Florence was important to Machiavelli because it was where he served as a diplomat and a counselor for thirteen years. When Florence was taken over, Machiavelli nearly escaped execution and was later charged with exile. He was not allowed to come back to his beloved city. Machiavelli continued to write letters to the government trying to convince them to let him come back to his usual position of power. Along with many of the letters

Socrates was a man who sought goodness and wisdom above all else, and would find Machiavelli’s concept of a prince to be a leader void of these qualities. Socrates would be critical of a Machiavellian prince’s character and actions for failing to meet his morally absolute standard of goodness, and of the Machiavellian prince’s notion of wisdom for conflicting with his own. Socrates would not be supportive of the political system formed under a Machiavellian prince, the perpetuation of which inherently clashes with his stringent moral absolutism and ideals of devotion to one’s country.

Niccolo Machiavelli’s “The Prince” attempts to explain the necessary tactics and required knowledge a ruler must attain in order to gain and maintain a successful reign. The novel serves as an abstract manual, addressing the definition of a good/bad ruler by placing emphasis on the required military organization, the character a ruler must posses, and the success that could be attained if a ruler should follow the guide. The scope in which the book is written is that of a scholarly observant. Machiavelli places his findings and observations of history, as well as the needs of the people so the information may serve the prince as a tool, that once implemented will create and maintain a powerful state.

The Little Prince is a French novella adapted to different languages worldwide and is considered as one of the greatest Children classics. This work of fiction was first published in 1943 and was created by a French aristocrat and former pilot, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. This novella is a story of a little prince who came from an asteroid and had met a pilot who crashed his plane in the Sahara Desert. In the whole course of the story, the little prince told his journey to the pilot, starting from the time he left his small planet and when he began exploring to the other planets where he met the “elders” whom he cannot fully understand, and up to the time he would go back to his small planet again. Besides the different language translations of the book, the Little Prince was also adapted to films. One is a 1974 British musical film, and the other was a recently made 2015 animated film. Here, I would compare the musical film, animated film, and the book version of the story of the Little Prince, and what version I prefer among them.

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli provides an analysis on how to govern and maintain power in a principality. In the first five chapters, he defines the three ways a monarch can acquire his dominion: either he inherits it, whether he creates a new one, or annexes territories, and further discusses how to govern them. Machiavelli states that hereditary principalities are less problematic than the mixed ones since newly acquired dominion tend to be more rebellious. The ruler must therefore colonize them and allow citizen to keep their laws or annihilate the governmental structure. In order to illustrate his point, he analyses the success of Alexander the Great conquest in Iran.

Throughout The Little Prince (1943), Antoine de Saint Exupéry gives the reader a look at how society views time. In particular, Saint Exupéry offers up a critique on how many individuals value saving time and efficiency over anything else. The titular character witnesses this first hand through his various interactions with grownups along his journey. He meets characters who are so enthralled with their tasks that they would not “waste time” to enjoy other things in life that may be more meaningful. Furthermore, the novella is able to convey the fact that society has become overly consumed with the pursuit of efficiency, although taking your time is often more rewarding than rushing in an attempt to save time.