The Red And The Black

Meursault's character is the determining factor in his conviction and sentencing. His social rebellion is deemed immoral and abominable. The reader and the novel's characters both try to rationalize Meursault's actions in order to give his life meaning. But according to Meursault, life is meaningless and consequently needs no justification.

Thesis statement: During the 19th century social class was more important than values, as the story focuses on Armand being ashamed of his baby due to his color, which creates conflict for him.

The different colors of the cherry filling show different emotions that Abigail cleverly hides under her beauty. The differing shades of red reveal characteristics of Abigail. The dark red of the cherries symbolizes love. However, the darkness of the shade connotes a stronger love, turning into passion or even infatuation. After being dismissed from the Proctor household and Proctor distanced himself and denounced her, she still believes for over seven months that he loves her. Abigail's infatuation with Proctor also suggests a more physical attraction between them, rather than love. Though Proctors says that he would “cut off [his] hand before [he’d] ever reach for [her] again” (23) she continues to pursue him. Dark red could also symbolize

Authors often use characters within their novels to show the consequences of challenging cultural boundaries and, in turn, display their own personal concerns. It is not uncommon for characters to reflect an author’s ideology regarding social groups in their contemporary time periods. It is clear that this is certainly the case with the 1975 novel The Lost Honour of Katharina Blum, (also referred to as How Violence Develops and Where it Can Lead), written by the German Author, Heinrich Boll. The Lost Honour is, on the surface, an attack on yellow journalism and the damage it causes to the lives of the people reported on. However, with a more in depth analysis of the novel we are able to

Rubin’s dissection of Meursault in The Stranger details that he “is a man condemned to death not so much for a criminal act as for his attitude.” In regard to this statement, the reader is presented with the idea that he is being put to death as a result of his “attitude,” which is that of an outsider, or someone “removed” from society, and his motives were based on an absurdist mentality that leads one to think of death as “just another thing” because of the pointlessness of life, as there is no hope. We are lead to believe that Meursault is some “sick and twisted” person without realizing his indifference to the emotional expectations of society. The murkiness of his conscience is like a black and white film over his eyes that open to the

Revenge can be analyzed, as it becomes the exhibited behavior of the Widow resulting from a number of causes. First cause is the harm done to her family; second cause is the Widow’s perception of violence during that time; and the third cause is her aggression toward the killer of her son. The first cause of her revenge is the most obvious reason why she avenged the death of her son, and this is because the killer caused pain to her family. Any mother would be committing the act especially that her son was the only company she has. The second cause pertains to the Widow’s perception of revenge during that time, and because at the time, wars and feuds were still evident in the French society, bloodshed for the Widow is not something to be scared of, given any means. This story was only successful in showing to its readers how the society thinks of death during those times, which can be achieved through any means, by which losing one’s life was not something to be thought of carefully. This just proves that during that time, morality was not given high regard as it is now. Death by any means can be accomplished by anybody, regardless of age, gender, and status in society. The third cause of the Widow’s behavior is her aggression toward the killer of her son, which was not literally shown or described in the story, but was evident based on

Michel Basilieres "Blackbird" is a very dark, gothic type novel. It deals with terrorism, death, political crisis and familial strife. Accompanying the darkness, however, is a layer of humour and wit shrouding each character. With Black Bird, Michel Basilieres has written a comic and disturbing study of how the October Crisis and the question of Canadian nationalism and identity play out through the disjointed relationships within one family. The plot is full of twists and turns and incorporates many social and political aspects derived, albeit slightly altered, from Canadian history to pull together a story ultimately about a dysfunctional family coming together. The characters in this family are obtuse and often difficult to understand, but even when they do completely ridiculous things like stealing electricity, robbing graves, committing acts of terrorism, or bringing bodies back to life, there is a likable ness about them brought about largely due to the humour imbedded in their personalities, their actions, and the events they partake in.

It is my intention to compare the book, Dangerous Liaisons by Choderlos de Laclos, to its modern movie version, Cruel Intentions starring Sarah Michelle Gellar. I intend to examine how the original French text was modified in reference to plot, character, morals/values, and themes. I also plan to discuss how these transformations change the meaning of the story and reflect different cultural/historical contexts. There are some major differences between these two works, if only because of when they were written.

In the novel, The Stranger by Albert Camus, Meursault the protagonist, becomes drawn into a “senseless” murder that has to face the absurdity of life and because of his actions, Meursault is presented as a danger due to his lack of “morality” to society. Meursault who is not able to take control of his life but respond to what life offers him believes in the simplicity of life. He tries to understand the living through logic and objectivity, which ultimately turns futile, as he himself cannot maintain proper control over his thoughts and emotions. From the interactions between Marie, to the murder of the Arab, and the meeting with the Chaplain, Meursault overcomes his indifferent views to form an opinion about what life really means. The central theme presented by Camus is how the threat of mortality becomes a catalyst for understanding the significance of life.

     In the beginning of the novel, capital punishment serves as the "cure-all" for France’s social problems. After all, "death is nature’s remedy for all things, and why not legislation’s?" (62). It is this attitude that

Meursault was introduced as a young man whom recently found out his mother, Maman, died. He was not the most emotional person, but he dealt with his feelings the best he knew how. Meursault lived his life on the verge of truth and honesty. He was honest within every aspect of life, from women to freedom. He was never certain about anything in life ,but one thing he was sure of, death was inevitable. After murdering an Arab, he was on trial in front of many people being interrogated with many questions about why he did what he did, but also to evaluate his psyche about the situation. Unlike others, Meursault did not hide from the truth and that is what others could not cope with. Living his life the way others were afraid to, Meursault was the outcast in his society.

This easy-going, pleasant hedonism is interrupted permanently by Meursault's murder of the Arab on the beach. Not only is he incarcerated, but also he must examine the reality behind the illusion of his trial and, ultimately, of his life. Introspection has not been his metier. It takes him a while to realize that the judge, the jury, the journalists, even his own lawyer, do not wish him well. Meursault finally realizes that he is going to be convicted, not because he killed an Arab but because he did not mourn his mother's death.

With each letter in Les Liaisons dangereuses, Choderlos de Laclos advances a great many games of chess being played simultaneously. In each, the pieces—women of the eighteenth-century Parisian aristocracy—are tossed about mercilessly but with great precision on the part of the author. One is a pawn: a convent girl pulled out of a world of simplicity and offered as an entree to a public impossible to sate; another is a queen: a calculating monument to debauchery with fissures from a struggle with true love. By examining their similarities and differences, Laclos explores women’s constitutions in a world that promises ruin for even the most formidable among them. Presenting the reader glimpses of femininity from a young innocent’s daunting debut to a faithful woman’s conflicted quest for heavenly virtue to another’s ruthless pursuit of vengeance and earthly pleasures, he insinuates the harrowing journey undertaken by every girl as she is forced to make a name for herself as a woman amongst the tumult of a community that machinates at every turn her downfall at the hands of the opposite sex. In his careful presentation of the novel’s female characters, Laclos condemns this unrelenting subjugation of women by making clear that every woman’s fate in such a society is a definitive and resounding checkmate.

In his novel, Les Miserables, Victor Hugo identifies the principle social evils of French society through the actions and qualities of his characters. By depicting each of his characters’ struggles through destitute and oppressed measures, Hugo is able to identify the social errors of 19th century France. The fact that characters such as Valjean, Javert, Fantine, and Cosette, attempt to rise above poverty and redeem themselves indicate that such inequalities did, and still do, exist to this day. Through the use of feminist ideals and the criminal injustice system, Hugo attacks the principle social evils that each of his characters face in Les Miserables.

This socio-historical commentary is valid however; it disregards the fact that the novels are not accurate portrayals of society. Important facts: first the philanthropic attitude in the novels is simply not a reflection of the literal changes in society, the novels cannot be classified an expression of