George Orwell’s Uses of Literary Devices in 1984

In a Washington Post article written in 1988, journalist David Remnick states that “Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union was the model for the dark totalitarian society George Orwell portrayed in his 1984” In 1949, when 1984 was published, the Iron Curtain had risen, effectively separating the Eastern Bloc from the former European and American allies. As many know now, the Soviet party controlled the spiritual, social, and creative lives of its citizens, but the concepts of such control could not be fully comprehended by prosperous citizens in western countries at the time. It was not until 1984 was published that westerners began to understand how closed and depraved the Soviet model really was. George Orwell’s depiction was brought to life by his skillful use of the literary devices dystopia, dysphemism, and distortion.

Orwell’s 1984 was inspired by the Soviet totalitarian regime to create his own dystopian society where Winston, the main protagonist, goes through the book questioning the Party’s motives and ideas. The Party, with its leader known as O’Brien, are the main antagonists of the book. They force citizens to believe they are equal even though they are not. Readers are able to see this world through Winston’s eyes. Orwell narrates, “Outside, even through the shut window pane, the world looked cold. Down in the street little eddies of wind were whirling dust and torn paper into spirals, and though the sun was shining and the sky a harsh blue, there seemed to be no color in anything, except the posters that were plastered everywhere (Orwell)

.” This description of a colorless, toxic, and gloomy environment makes it much easier for the reader to understand the injustice that Winston and the proles face. When Winston narrates, he describes that Oceania lacks color except the Party’s propaganda posters which read “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.” As Orwell states this in his book, he uses the literary device dystopia to set up his imaginary, totalitarian-based society. His imagery of an unsettling, toxic, and gloomy society affirms an environment of the injustice that Winston and the proles face.

This societal inequality is a hallmark of a dystopian society. In the book, both society and the Party itself is made up of unequal rights and injustice. For example, Orwell states, “Always in your stomach and in your skin there was a sort of protest, a feeling that you had been cheated of something that you had a right to.” Orwell shows Winston’s thoughts and how he believes that there is something he should have a right to, but can not seemingly have, even if it’s simply better coffee or food.

Inner Party members like O’Brien experience a much better lifestyle and better rights. O’Brien is able to turn off the telescreen in his room and later on O’Brien gives Winston and Julia, Winston’s lover, wine. In the beginning, the book says, “The instrument (the telescreen, it was called) could be dimmed, but there was no way of shutting it off completely.” Orwell also writes, “Wine was a thing he had read and dreamed about.” Winston and others like him are not able to turn their telescreens off, nor are they allowed to drink wine, however when meeting with O’Brien, an Inner Party member, Winston and Julia find it possible to turn off their telescreens and drink wine. This shows the inequality to the forefront of a dystopian society.

Orwell’s use of dystopia shows injustice in societies that are controlled by totalitarian regimes. A majority of individuals that make up Oceania are the proles. Compared to O’Brien, they do not have luxuries. The proles are at the bottom of society, and in the book, they experience daily bomb attacks and they live in poor conditions that are dirty and unsafe. Orwell describes the: “vague, brown-colored slums to the north and east,” “a cobbled street of little two-story houses with battered doorways which gave straight on the pavement and which were somehow curiously suggestive of rat holes,” and “there were puddles of filthy water here and there among the cobbles.

” Even though the party says everyone is equal, Winston shows the inequality and poorer living conditions that the proles face. By using the proles as a group of people in his dystopian society, he shows the inequality that the proles are forced into when they themselves do not realize that it is an injustice. Orwell narrates that “the Party taught that the proles were natural inferiors who must be kept in subjection, like animals, by the application of a few simple rules.” As stated in the beginning, the Party requires everyone to be equal when they are not and as mentioned, the proles do not know that they are unequal. As a whole, Orwell uses dystopia to depict a society of inequality and injustice that is ruled by a government that controls what everyone else does.

Besides the literary device dystopia, Orwell also uses dysphemism. Dysphemism is a literary device used to slander, humiliate, or degrade a character. When Winston is taken to Room 101, O’Brien degrades him when Winston answers a question. He says “That was stupid, Winston, stupid!” he said. “You should know better than to say a thing like that.” He degrades him by calling him stupid for not believing the same principle or ideas as O’Brien and the Party believes in.

As O’Brien keeps torturing Winston, he humiliates him, saying “Look at this filthy grime all over your body. Look at the dirt between your toes. Look at that disgusting running sore on your leg. Do you know that you stink like a goat? (Orwell).” O’Brien also says, “Look! He plucked at Winston’s head and brought away a tuft of hair.” “Open your mouth. Nine, ten, eleven teeth left. How many had you when you came to us? And the few you have left are dropping out of your head. Look here!” He seized one of Winston’s remaining front teeth between his powerful thumb and forefinger.” “He tossed it across the cell.” “You are rotting away,” he said; “you are falling to pieces. What are you? A bag of filth. Now turn round and look into that mirror again.” The way Orwell uses dysphemism to degrade Winston is so powerful.

Throughout the book, Orwell is able to captivate readers in a way where readers are able to sympathize and grow with Winston, and believe that Winston can escape this world he is stuck in; however, when Winston is taken away, everything that was built up crumbles apart. Orwell is able to use dysphemism to show how sinister the Party is in degrading and brainwashing the people of Oceania. Finally, O’Brien humiliates Winston by using his greatest fear against him, rats. O’Brien uses a cage of rats in order to get Winston to betray Julia and to humiliate him. By humiliating and degrading Winston again, O’Brien and the Party are successful in getting Winston to betray everyone except the Party, and the Party is able to get Winston to believe everything that the Party says. For example, Winston writes down that two plus two equals five rather than four. As stated, Orwell uses dysphemism in order to drastically kill Winston’s spirit and arguably getting Winston to murder himself and in everything he once believed. As a whole, Orwell’s use of the literary device dysphemism works in humiliating Winston and changing him.

Finally, Orwell uses the literary device distortion to twist and change society. For example, Orwell uses distortion to exemplify how the government has twisted society in a way where everything that everyone thinks and speaks has changed to eliminate certain concepts and phrases. For example, the Party’s slogan “WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH” is a distortion of the real definitions behind war, freedom, and ignorance.

The concept of freedom being equal to slavery distorts the concept of freedom. The whole aim of Newspeak is to change words and definitions so they only become one meaning rather than several. Syme, Winston’s friend, goes into detail talking about Newspeak. Syme says “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.” Syme continues by saying, “Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.” An example of this is the definition of orthodoxy,” as Syme says, “Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think.

Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.” In reality, orthodoxy means “authorized or generally accepted theory, doctrine, or practice (Bing).” Orwell is able to distort the way people think by twisting words to the point where the thought of thoughtcrime will no longer exist and in a way, only further the fact that the Party will be able to get everyone in Oceania to believe their ideas. Aside from Newspeak, the Party is able to exterminate history and distort it in order to make it mean only what the Party wants it to mean. Winston’s job involves him rewriting history in the Ministry of Truth; however it is ironic to say that he is writing the truth because he is rewriting lies. For example, Winston distorts a story that talks about Big Brother predicting when an attack would happen in Africa rather than India; however “as it happened, the Eurasian Higher Command had launched its offensive in South India and left North Africa alone.

” Orwell then writes, “it was therefore necessary to rewrite a paragraph of Big Brother’s speech, in such a way as to make him predict the thing that had actually happened.” This shows the distortion that Orwell uses in order to manipulate and rewrite history. As a whole by using Newspeak and a means of rewriting history, the Party is able to distort society, its language, is history, and its culture as well.

To conclude, Orwell brought to life his depiction of a totalitarian society by using the Soviet Union as his model. To do this, Orwell used the literary devices dystopia, dysphemism, and distortion to show others that what the Soviet Union was really doing and what a society like the Soviet Union’s really looked like. Orwell shows 1984 as a controlled society where everything to social, spiritual, and the everyday lives of its citizens becomes nothing more than a government’s idea of a perfect society.

Works Cited

Orwell, George. 1984. New York, Harcourt Inc, 1949.
Remnick, David. “Soviets Will Publish `1984'; Decision Ends a Strict 40-Year Ban on
Novel.” Soviets Will Publish '1984', 1988.

Did you like this example?

George Orwell's Uses of Literary Devices in 1984. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

George Orwell 1984 Passage Process Paper

The main idea of “its all political” ties into the thought that every action or occurrence in this world is shaped from our past and present and shapes our future. Political ideas discussed in the passage were the thoughts on how formal government can alter lives living in a society, that rights and freedoms are at risk, and the idea that government can manipulate an individual's thoughts and ideas of the people. Bringing a main idea of that it is okay to question ways of life, and not to believe and follow everything that is told. Individuals have to have a mind of their own and not simply conform to the ways of society and politics.

“It’s all Political” captures the reader's attention by making them really focus on the meaning of the text, because not everything is as it seems. Politics is a hard and confusing topic and is manipulated by the government to influence the people and societies individuals live in. The tone established help readers understand the characters feelings towards the government and bring the sense of manipulation and coercion to the passage. The government instills a type of uncertainty against the world outside Oceania,

“The sealed world in which he lives would be broken, and the fear, hatred, and self-righteousness on which his morale depends might evaporate” and the people are choosing to believe what is simply being told to them. Individual’s must not simply follow, they must have a mind of their own it is what makes the world such a unique and diverse place. “He has forbidden the knowledge of foreign languages”, this mysterious tone brings questions of the government and how it is controlling and deciding what's best for the people. When really the idea and thought is revealed that maybe the government doesn’t know all, and the people need more of a say.No one can live in a confined world that is controlled, and restricted, one must experience new things and question ideals of government it's what makes the world so controversial and diverse today.

The passage also brings to light the fears presented by the citizens and that their freedoms and rights are at stake. Individuals were confirmed by the government and told what to do and how to live, “it is absolutely necessary to their structure that there should be no contact with foreigners, except, to a limited extent, with war prisoners and colored slaves.” The government is taking away the people’s right of life and the possibility of engaging in a world beyond, they are stuck inside the world of Oceania with no escape. We have freedom of speech, religion, and the rights to learn about more than the society we live in, “the average citizen of Oceania never sets eyes on a citizen of either Eurasia or Eastasia, and he has forbidden the knowledge of foreign languages.

” The government has instilled a sense of fear and and uncertainty of the world outside their society, controlling the loyalty of Oceania’s citizens. People have the right to believe and learn new and more things then what is simply shown to them in their community. It’s how the world spreads culture and knowledge around the globe and makes individuals unique and not conform to such a simple and controlled life. There is power in knowledge, and it is vital to society in creating individuality and uniqueness in the world.

Government in Oceania altered the livelihood of its people as presented in the passage through the use of irony. The government instilled the idea of, “war is peace” and that fighting between the neighboring countries would bring this idea of, “peace” and ease to the society. The people follow with a blind eye, “it is a warfare of limited aims between combatants who are unable to destroy one another” not knowing that the government has put them in a war that may or will never end. These ironical examples are seen by the readers of the passage and illustrate the ignorance of the people and the powerful structures of the government and how it alters life in the society they live in. Blindly following an idea or a government may not always be the best choice, it is okay to question facts of life and ideals of government. Having a mind of your own doesn’t make you an outsider or a traitor, it gives the world new points of view so that we may all one day live in a world of peace and harmony.

Government can alter lives living in a society or effect the rights and freedoms that individuals hold, and also manipulate an individual's thoughts and beliefs. These themes are seen through the idea of “its all political”. Also they display the universal idea of that it is okay to not conform but to believe in what you want, and live life how you choose. You are your own person, and are in control of your own life, and you can either live it how you choose or conform to the ways of a robotic, mindless society.

Did you like this example?

George Orwell 1984 Passage Process Paper. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

George Orwell’s Experience in Burma

Imagine having to live life-based on the government's unjust decisions, societal pressure, and having to put personal beliefs aside. George Orwell describes, in his short story “Shooting an Elephant,” a life-changing experience of being a police officer for the British Raj in colonial Burma and having to choose from your own beliefs and the governments. This story explains the narrator’s conflict after he has been informed that an elephant is on the loose. The essay explores the process through which he makes his decision.

The essay describes Orwell’s feelings: “And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all. The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward, irresistibility” (Orwell). The description of his feelings emphasizes the conflict in which he finds himself. Orwell’s essay provides a lens through which the reader can understand the challenges of the British Raj. Through the characterization of his narrator and symbolism, Orwell demonstrates the effects of societal pressure and government corruption, ultimately suggesting that even people in power do not have the freedom to make their own decisions.

The characterization of Orwell’s experience demonstrates the ongoing pressure of societal expectations through Orwell’s role as a police officer. Orwell describes his experience deciding whether or not he should shoot the elephant. By describing his role as “the white man with his gun standing in front of the unarmed native crowd-seemingly the leading actor of the piece” Orwell provides his readers with the idea that he is supposed to have the power and be in charge, however that is not the reality (Orwell). Orwell goes on to say, “in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind” (Orwell).

The additional description explains to the reader the truth of the situation, which is that white officers are pressured to make decisions based off of the natives. Orwell expresses his role in society is to look as if he has the power, but his real role is to follow the natives' rules. James Tyner’s analysis of “Shooting an Elephant” emphasizes the corruption of the society’s expectation of roles as a whole. He states, “In his work Orwell wrote about the connections of self and humanity of the experiences of living in dehumanizing environments” (Tyner 266). Tyner’s description helps readers understand Orwell’s characterization of his experience. Living in a dehumanizing environment affected Orwell’s self and humanity. The pressure he experienced to fulfill his role as an officer by shooting the elephant resulted in him losing his humanity.

The pressure that Orwell experiences while trying to maintain his role in society is symbolized through the shooting of the elephant. Orwell states, “To come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trial feebly away, having done nothing-no, that was impossible. The crowd would laugh at me. And my whole life, everyone white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at” showing the corrupt expectation of roles in society (Orwell). By describing his experience, Orwell compares shooting the elephant with how the British Empire treats the natives. Shooting the elephant was a difficult experience for Orwell, his description of this situation showed him how much power the Empire had over the locals. The natives had no control, freedom or say over their countries' decisions. In order to maintain control, the government had to escalate the amount of violence against natives.

The way the elephant was killed, so violently, parallels how the empire needs to subdue the native people through violence. In his critical analysis of “Shooting an Elephant,”Thomas Bertonneau explains Orwell’s symbolism of his expectations of the corrupt society’s roles: “‘Shooting an Elephant’ depicts a cycle of resentment and violence, in part obvious, in part subtle. Obvious is the fact that, oppressing the Burmese, the British incur their righteous wrath” (Bertonneau 262). Bertonneau emphasizes the violence the empire uses to get what they want. He takes Orwell’s story and expands its lesson to explain the oppressive pattern of British rule. Bertonneau conveys the larger implications of the story in order to show his readers that Orwell’s essay addresses a larger issue in society. Throughout the story, Orwell illustrates that the empire is constantly using violence to maintain the appearance of authority. Orwell feels forced to shoot the elephant due to the pressure of his role in this cycle of violence and oppression.

Orwell shows the corruption of the government through the characterization of his narrator. Throughout the story, Orwell uses the description of the narrator’s experience to emphasize the presence of corruption in the society and government. Orwell provides the narrator’s opinion on the British Empire: “I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing and the sooner I chucked up my job and got out of it the better” (Orwell). Orwell further demonstrates the disconnect between the narrator’s personal beliefs and his later actions.

The narrator clearly disagrees with his position of power. However, he recognizes that in order to maintain this power he has to fulfil the expectations that the government assigns him. Despite his personal feelings, Orwell understands, “It is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the ‘natives’ and so in every crisis he had got to do what the ‘natives’ expect of him” (Orwell). Orwell acknowledges that he has no real authority. In order to maintain his role he must keep up the appearance of the British Empire’s command. By reframing his role in terms of the expectations of the natives, Orwell describes the reality of his relationship with the people that he is expected to govern. By doing so, Orwell emphasizes the corruption and ineffectiveness of the British Empire. To illustrate this, Orwell provides his readers with specific examples on the corruption within the society and government. Peter Marks’ analysis of “Shooting an Elephant” asserts,

“The narrator’s function as the personification of imperialism is seen clearly in the revelatory claim that ‘when white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom the he destroys.’ This appears to indict imperialism, to provide an index of its dehumanizing impact” (Marks 265). Marks specifically illustrates that Orwell is criticizing imperialism by identifying its effect on those in power. In doing so, Orwell emphasizes the corruption of the British Raj by demonstrating that even those who should supposedly benefit from British rule are victims of imperialism.

Orwell demonstrates the power and corruption of the government through the symbol of the beaten prisoner. In Orwell’s story he provides a variety of symbols to describe the corruption within the government and society. Orwell illustrates, “The wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey cowed faces of the long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos-all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt” (Orwell). Orwell uses the symbolism of the prisoner to show the government’s power through the abuse of its citizens.

Throughout this sentence Orwell describes the state of the cages, the prisoners poor health and how they are being treated to provide context for the cruelty of the British Empire. He hates to be part of a government that treats their people so poorly. He states, “In a job like that you can see the dirty work of the Empire at close quarters” (Orwell). Orwell expresses his distaste for the violence of the British empire, using the beaten flesh of the prisoner to symbolize the power of the government. Through his use of symbolism, Orwell illustrates that there are daily reminders of the corruption of the Empire, and the resentment that British rule brings. Similarly, in his analysis Bertonneau explains, “‘Shooting an Elephant’ depicts a cycle of resentment and violence, part obvious, in part subtle. Obvious is the fact that, in oppressing the Burmese, the British incur their righteous wrath” (Bertonneau 262).

Bertonneau’s critical analysis summarizes Orwell’s use of the beating of the prisoner to symbolize the violence of the British Empire as a whole. He describes that shooting the elephant represents the dissatisfaction and cruelty of the government. Bertonneau explains that because the government had to maintain the use of cruelty on their society, the people started rebelling and lost all of their respect for the Empire. Orwell describes the presence of the beaten prisoners as if it is a routine occurrence, highlighting the pervasive corruption of the government's power.

George Orwell uses the symbols of shooting the elephant, the image of the beaten prisoner, and the characterization of his narrator’s experience to show the societal pressure and the corrupt government he experienced in Burma. Orwell’s characterization of the narrator's experience illustrates the effect of societal pressure on those in power during British rule.

The shooting of the elephant symbolizes his role in society. Orwell’s characterization of the narrator demonstrates the corruption within the government. His use of symbolism shows the power within the British Raj through the beaten prisoner. Through this symbolism and characterization, Orwell’s short story, “Shooting an Elephant” is demonstrative of what was happening throughout the British Empire. The British Raj used cruelty and violence to keep their power, which resulted in the hostility and bitterness from the people. Orwell experienced the reality of living life where he had to put his personal beliefs aside and deal with the government’s unfair decisions. In the end, Orwell was upset and humiliated, he felt foolish and uncomfortable with how his government acted. Orwell’s larger message was this type of power, the absolute rule, is not the way to live one’s life.

Works Cited

Bertonneau, Thomas. 'Critical Essay on 'Shooting an Elephant.'' Short Stories for Students, edited by Kathleen Wilson and Marie Lazzari, vol. 4, Detroit, Gale, 1998, pp. 251-73. Gale eBooks, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX2695100024/GVRL?u=sicpl_main&sid=GVRL&xid=865e56e2. Accessed 22 Jan. 2020.
Marks, Peter. 'The Ideological Eye-witness: An Examination of the Eye-witness in Two Works by George Orwell.' Short Stories for Students, edited by Kathleen Wilson and Marie Lazzari, vol. 4, Detroit, Gale, 1998, pp. 251-73. Gale eBooks, link.gale.com/apps/doc/CX2695100024/GVRL?u=sicpl_main&sid=GVRL&xid=865e56e2. Accessed 22 Jan. 2020. Originally published in Subjectivity and Literature from the Romantics to the Present Day, edited by Philip Shaw and Peter Stockwell, Pinter Publishers, 1991, pp. 85-92.
Orwell, George. 'Shooting an Elephant.' Shooting an Elephant and Other Essays, New York, Harcourt, Brace & World, 1950, p. 3+. Gale Literature: LitFinder, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A267063599/LITF?u=sicpl_main&sid=LITF&xid=2b5f3682. Accessed 14 Jan. 2020.
Tyner, James A. 'Landscape and the Mask of Self in George Orwell's 'Shooting an Elephant.'' Area, vol. 37, no. 3, Sept. 2005, pp. 260–267. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2005.00629.x. Accessed 23 Jan 2020.

Did you like this example?

George Orwell’s Experience in Burma. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Neil Riemer Discusses the Differences that Characterize 1984 as a Myth

He tries to prove that dystopian masterpiece imbibes the features of historical tragedies that have a particular tendency to repeat (Riemer 225). A regime that is designed in “1984” is an image of typical totalitarian power that manages to consolidate impact on citizens and reach the maximum level of control. Reimer believes that Orwellian society is a theoretical instance of the environment that might be a result of extensive oppression.

The chance of dictators to usurp the leadership is illuminated in “1984”. Orwell writes about the possible scenarios and outcomes, which may provoke the uncontrolled cruelty and violence that, in turn, might become a nightmare for the population. Frederic Svoboda depicts the parallels between the Orwellian world and the reality of modern political administration that partially resembles the events in the dystopian novel. He underlines that characters of Orwell’s work are literally suppressed by the tension that is surrounding them and, thus, the shock is the main reaction that is depicted by Svoboda (Svoboda 17).

He points that his first impression as a reader was characterized by a strong disagreement with a fact that this type of reality might exist. The researcher mentioned that he analyzed the novel with students and concluded that the verisimilitude of Orwellian fiction is an equivocal matter (Svoboda 17). In contrast to the reality, Orwell’s world is dark and deprived of options Palmero 5 that are available to characters. Winston Smith is literally trapped in the dead loop of the authoritarian wheel of Big Brother that monitors every move and word of citizens that remind hopeless zombies. Orwell’s characters are poor and exhausted due to the perplexities that constantly occur in the “1984”.

On the one hand they are threatened, but on the other hand, Svoboda argues that threatening should not necessarily be explicit to be considered as a phenomenon that is described by Orwell (Svoboda 17). The writer uses irony and satire to imbue the chapters of “1984” with hidden sense. Thus, Svoboda emphasizes that Orwellian world is, to some extent, based on reality. William Baker provides a critical assessment of Orwell’s story about the almighty and ubiquitous Big brother. The explanation of Orwell’s reality is reflected in be Baker with a specific sarcasm that the author uses to address an issue of political ideology in the novel. He crystallizes the Orwellian assumption about the circumstances that motivate Winston Smith to change the worldview. In fact, Baker underscores that the oppression and newspeak become the actual conditions that induce the protagonist’s mental transformation (Baker 645). He summarizes the content of the novel and gives brief comments on the plot.

The control over cognitive apparatus of the population is described as an objective of authorities in the book. Baker highlights that the interested parties applied medical treatment to take over the financial pie (Baker 646). The similar scenario is provided by Orwell, who states that medicine might be used to take over the administration pie. This statement of the author is implicated with reality and Baker assumes that Orwell illustrates the breakthrough in the field of cognitive service that is initiated by the Ministry of Truth in the novel (Baker 646). Palmero 6 Orwell’s Newspeak is a backbone of totalitarian horror that becomes a setting for the dimension of the fictional life of the characters in “1984”.

Batra Mukta believes that newspeak is a persuasive form of device that is used by the author that shows terror in a new light. Orwell literally exaggerates the negative issues in the plot and makes the authorities completely evil due to the fact that they even manage to diminish the initial function and value of the basic tool of communication. In other words, Mukta stresses that the role of language is essential and a distortion of a primordial aspect of human realization is immoral and brutal. George Orwell’s incorporation of Newspeak in the structure of social affairs is a genius contextual choice, according to Batra Mukta, because the researcher states that deterioration of language is a sign of absolute despotism that takes over minds of individuals (Batra 2).

The control of abstract and intangible dimension of affairs is a signal of pervasive dictatorship and limitless political influence on people. Thus, they become explicitly enslaved by the reign of a system that is characterized as an opposite side of democracy. Liberty and fundamental freedoms become terms that are deprived of the actual importance and meaning. Batra Mukta delineates Newspeak as a language that is an apogee of Orwell’s fiction. This structural component of “1984” makes the author’s story special because it is not only a disruptive method of psychological manipulation but also a terrifying technique of surveillance (Batra 3). Newspeak is a weapon and is also a barrier that is artificially procreated by the government in the Orwellian world. The term cruelty is tactically and thoughtfully depicted as ungood.

Hence, this oversimplification brings sense to the general construction of the new world. Batra Mukta points that the purpose of authorities is to instill a new order and to erase the memory about cultural prosperity of mankind. A world of primitive relations and Palmero 7 obedience is presented by Orwell to inform a reader about a hazard of ignorance that could be a stimulus of intellectual collapse (Batra 3). The review of “1984” in literature discourse displays that the majority of researchers are the proponents of Orwell’s ideology. Moreover, they underscore Orwellian mastery as a perfection of dystopian style and determine the author’s efforts to create a political philosophy that epitomizes a message to the readers’ audience. The Orwellian reality becomes a particular symbol of phraseological articulation of the totalitarian despotism that is an absurdity of control over population. In addition, the synthesis of the above-mentioned sources serves as a theoretical background for Orwell’s ideas explanation.

It is noteworthy to state that the writer conceals a multitude of contextual meanings in “1984” that is a reflection of the historical circle. Newspeak is illustrated as a main instrument of manipulation that is the greatest horror in the Orwellian world because it controls the reasoning of individuals and the formation of their psychological identity. Finally, the study on Orwellian world reports the main principles of the author’s novel creation. The essence of Orwell’s dystopia is compared with a concealed realism that is tactically presented as political satire

. Definitions of brainwash and propaganda are synthesized and contextualized in this work. The paper answers crucial questions and illustrates the depth of Orwell’s vision of the totalitarian state as phenomenon that might occur in the real world. Furthermore, the ambiguity of historical events is implicated in the story that includes a portrayal of Stalin a prototype of an unprincipled tyrant that becomes Big Brother in “1984”. The novel promotes the concept of liberty that depends on freedom of reasoning. Hence, absolute authoritarian power might occur both in a communist society and in the pseudo-democratic state. Palmero 8 This condition is a pillar of “1984” because Orwell conceptualized his view on social regulation and wrote the fictional political manifestation to persuade readers that the ethics of administration should not contradict the principle of liberal articulation of one’s beliefs or thoughts.

Did you like this example?

Neil Riemer discusses the differences that characterize 1984 as a myth. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

1984 by George Orwell Book Review

It is set in a dystopian London where it is ruled by a tyrannical styled government that is known as “The Party”. The story takes place after a calamitous nuclear war that devastated the planet. The Party creates a chilling (to some) living environment for its inhibitors in which it is virtually impossible to have any privacy and enforces its will through the use of various forms of technology. In every home, office, bar and other locations there is a device called a “telescreen”, a version of a flat screen television with a built in camera and microphone to observe occupants. Additionally, where the telescreen cannot reach to ‘spy’, hidden microphones are put in place. This world is one where every action and thought is scrutinized and examined for any anti-Party actions, thoughts or affinities and if you are suspected of such actions you can be arrested and “reeducated” at any time.

Although the book was written in 1949, it predicted a lot of what was to come in terms of technology and surveillance. I believe that are several similarities from what was written in the book to what we are seeing now. According to Richard H. Immererman and Petra Goedde in The Oxford Handbook of the Cold War, the chief developments that gave rise to the information and communications technology (ICT) revolution occurred during the cold war. These include the global spread of the electrical generation; the production of communications satellite; commercial solicitation of assimilated circuits, fiber optics and microprocessors; and the volatile growth of home/personal computers, the Internet and World Wide Web.

The rise of technology in our present era began funnily enough in 1984 when Steve Jobs launched a commercial that was based on a dystopian future of mankind and was meant to save the world from the ‘conformity’ of IBM’s endeavor to rule computer industry. The ad stated that “on January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like 1984.” The computers arrived in October and signaled a new generation of computers making more revolutions in personal technology on one hand and catalyzed competition in this sector.

In terms of major similarities between 1984 and today’s world, I think the most talked about parallel is the constant surveillance devices that are used nowadays. In the novel, Orwell introduced telescreens and hidden microphones located inside people’s homes and workplaces. He detailed that the telescreens can monitor the change in people’s facial expressions, hear the breathing of a person and even their heartbeat. There are several international cases in which we can see the similarities between what was written in the book and what transpired. In 2006, ABC news reported that the FBI can listen to everything that is being said, even when the cellphone is turned off. Additionally, in 2004, the NSA had developed a technique that was christened “The Find’ by special operation officers. The method was used in Iraq and allowed the agency to trace cellphones even when they are turned off.

This predication of the author was a physical form of surveillance. However, with the introduction of the Internet, the possibility of searching for personal information passing through Internet Nodes preserved either by companies or even the government has increased vastly. The geographical reach of surveillance has increased and so are the capabilities of the governments. Furthermore, another example is that the companies that we work for have software in place to monitor our emails, citing administrative purpose as reasons. It is also beneficial to point out that there is now technology that is used by the FBI and other relevant authorities that recognize our facial features and use them for solving crimes.

Another similarity that stood out to me in the novel was Orwell’s Speakwrite. He explains that speakwrite is done with the use of a mic with a mouthpiece and whatever is said into the mic is transformed into text and written down. In today’s world there are several speech-to-text softwares and applications. Almost every phone, tablet, and PC’s is equipped with speech recognizing virtual assistance. For example, Windows has Cortana, Apple has Siri and Android has OK Google.

In the novel, the main protagonist Winston Smith described a scenario where he dialed “back numbers” on a telescreen and then called for “appropriate issue of Times”, the air-filled tube “slid out” the required document after a few minutes. Electronic document management systems in offices, libraries are extremely common in today’s world.

The author mentions in the book “Proles” who had some type of knowledge that a rocket was heading in their direction several seconds before it actually lands. In the United States, after the horrible 9/11 attacks, there were talks about Missile Detection System that will detect such an item in the country’s airspace and being able to destroy such object before the intended disaster.

The use of memory hole was mentioned in the novel, where it was used to alter or destroy incriminating documents, photographs, transcripts or other documents. History is packed with examples where books were burned in an attempt to erase history. However, with time and technology forging on ahead, the way of destroying documents have changed greatly. Nowadays offices such as my own use paper shredders to destroy documents that are no longer wanted or needed. In some serious cases, computer viruses are used to erase soft copy forms of documents almost permanently.

The world of 1984 is what everyone seemingly wants to avoid and it is the last place anyone would want to live. A life where the government and your peers know everything that you do, whether it is good or bad, there is no confidentiality of information. Unfortunately, I believe that this is the world that we are skidding into, and the most horrible part is: we are doing it freely, albeit without the torture and oppressive government.

Did you like this example?

1984 by George Orwell Book review . (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Protracted Military Conflict Without Violence

Although the term Orwellian can be applied in many disciplines, its political usage refers to how an autocratic nation governs or how a few nations conduct warfare with each other. In 1984, Orwell depicts a powerful dictatorship that relies on propaganda. Moreover, Oceania, the nation that is the primary setting of 1984, participates in long-standing conflicts with other nations. However, the motives for these conflicts vary greatly. Typically, a long-standing military conflict that lacks violence is caused by the desire to maintain or spread an ideology. This idea is relevant to the international relations that are present in 1984 and the war between Saudi Arabia and Iran because these conflicts have these characteristics.

Saudi Arabia and Iran are currently political adversaries, and these nations exhibited acts of retribution towards each other. Their governmental structure vest much of their power in one leader. This is similar to the government of Oceania in 1984 because one or a few people control Oceania. These nations recruit aid from foreign governments in the Middle East and around the world. Non-governmental forces also supply support to these countries. Retribution refers to light warfare or sanctions against one and other.

Although the war between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a conflict that involves many countries, it is not a traditional war. These countries fight smaller wars or battles infrequently, but a lack of cooperation is always involved in military tension. . Moreover, this conflict also lasts for a much longer time than a standard war. The Saudi Arabia-Iran military tensions, as well as the conflicts between Oceania and its competing countries, have two commonalities: underlying motives and the frequently changing alliances with other nations. However, Oceania and its rival nations seek to spread their ideology through conquest, whereas Saudi Arabia and Iran seek dominance over international trade and usage of Islam in government.

One of the reasons why there is a military tension between Saudi Arabia and Iran is because of differences in how Islam is commonly practiced. One of the things that was a point of political and military contentiousness was the Muslim faith in political and extremist governance in the 20th century Middle East, as stated by Gawdat Bahgat in Arab Studies Quarterly (Bahgat 53, jstor.org). This is reflected in Saudi Arabia and Iran’s relationship, since they have governments that emphasize the role of Islam and politics. Saudi Arabia and Iran also play roles in smaller religious conflicts n the Middle East. The intermittent tension that these countries have about Islamic relations illustrate the concept of military tension, because these battles do not have much of an effect on human life in these regions when compared with larger-scale wars. Moreover, this war’s lengthiness and lack of impact show how the tension between these two countries are in a state of negative peace as opposed to a typical war.

Like the conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran, the tension between Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia is spurred by the desire to spread an ideology. Oceania and its rival nations have strict political ideologies. However, the desire that is the underlying cause of the tension between the nations in 1984 is for a nation’s slight increase in power through conquest. In Goldstein’s work on how societies currently operated, “a war for labor power” in certain parts of the world is present worldwide (Orwell 187). This illustrates how the motive for the military tension between Oceania and other nations is for a slight increase of power because one of the aims of conquest was to spread their political ideology by controlling a part of the world. One of the ways that Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia controlled their citizens was by limiting the resources that most citizens could have. Therefore, the economic motivation for small-scale conquests between the three nations in 1984 reflects how this military conflict is spurred by a desire to gain power.

The alliances between Oceania and one of the two other nations change frequently in 1984 as they engage in conflict with Eurasia or Eastasia. Oceania forges a relationship with the nation that it is not warring against. The presence of “the alliance with Eastasia” and Oceania in international relations in 1984 shows how Oceania forges ties in its constant state of conflict (Orwell 182). This alliance is similar to those that are formed in the tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran because these countries recruit and receive aid from other nations.

Saudi Arabia and Iran also form alliances with extremist groups and foreign powers to become more dominant in the military tension between each other. According to David E. Long in the Mediterranean Quarterly, one of the things that “US-Saudi relations” are characterized by is their trade relationship, which often leads to tension (Long 30, eds.a.ebscohost.com.proxy-gsu.psao.galileo.usg.edu). This volatile political relationship shows how the United States and Saudi Arabia have an unstable alliance because the U.S. would turn against Saudi Arabia if their actions do not aid them economically. Although this is not the only reason that drives the alliance between the United States and Saudi Arabia in the tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, economic development is an important motivation for this alliance. The wealth that a country has influences their ability to affect global and regional politics.

This fluctuating relationship is similar to the changing alliances between Oceania and the other nations in 1984 because their relations always change. In 1984, the Oceanian military might side with Eurasian forces for a few years, and then, Eurasia would become their enemy. The conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran mirrors the oscillating conflicts between Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia in George Orwell’s novel 1984. In 1984, constant tensions that switched between Oceania and Eurasia or Eastasia occurred over a longer period of time.

In 1984, the key component of international relations was that “war. . . ceases to be dangerous” (Orwell 198). This reflected the Orwellian concept of a negative peace because it involved constant tension between two or more nations and/or factions without the violence that is associated with war. One of the only means that Oceania used to communicate with Eurasia and Eastasia was through consistent warfare.

War, in an Orwellian sense, does not refer to a violent and/or short-lived war. Rather, Orwell’s concept of war consists of less violent military and political tensions that are motivated by the desire to spread a political ideology or increase a country’s economic standing as a world power. Another key component of military tension in an Orwellian sense is the formation of alliances during these conflicts. These facets of war are present in the conflict between Oceania and the other two nations in 1984 and in the Saudi-Iran conflict. Therefore, the idea of a long-standing proxy war is Orwellian because it represents a phenomenon in international relations in 1984 as well as in current global politics.

Did you like this example?

Protracted military conflict without violence. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

1984 Biography of George Orwell

Written by George Orwell, 1984 is a classic literature novel that has been a phenomenon through the years. 1984 is a highly known book for its show on society with major political flaws. This fictional story takes place in Oceania. In 1984, Winston Smith lives in a dystopian society, where the Party shames the thought of individuality. With a totally new language, Newspeak, and an all-controlling leader, Big Brother, this society seems to lack all individual freedoms. Winston Smith defies the Party and expresses his individuality through a relationship and a diary, causing all the attention to fall on him. Now in the spotlight of the authorities, he must conform to their ways to avoid being continuously oppressed. Today, 1984 is quite the eye-opener, making a novel written 70 years ago start coming true.

The English author, George Orwell is most commonly known for his many novels, one being 1984. This politically energized book was first published in 1949. The reason why Orwell decided to write 1984 was as a warning against a totalitarian type of government. The totalitarian governments he was against included British imperialism, European fascism, and Soviet communism. He wanted to express his fear for the world after the wars, through a book. Orwell explained that having such a society would not only crush the people as a whole but inevitably make it unlivable. Orwell says, “He can’t say that two and two are five, because for the purposes of, say, ballistics they have to make four. But in the sort of world that I am afraid of arrives, a world of two or three great superstates which are unable to conquer one another, two and two could become five if the fuhrer wished it” (“George Orwell’s letter”). In other words, Orwell is referencing when individuals believe the propaganda the government feeds them; the lines between reality and fiction begin to blur.

Three years before George Orwell published 1984, he wrote a letter to Noel Willmett that had not been found only until recently giving more information as to why he had written this novel. He was asked by Willmett, “whether totalitarianism, leader-worship etc. are really on the up-grade and instance the fact that they are not apparently growing in this country and the USA.” Orwell explains in his letter the possibility of the higher authorities overruling the people and taking away their personal freedom as an individual. Orwell also later describes in his letter, that the way we are headed is reversible and preventable. He characterized the people in 1984 to be just like “a mindless puppet, just following what their master told them to do.” After he writes that response letter, Orwell then goes on to write a one of the most famous literary novels to date.

Although Orwell envisioned the world to follow under circumstances in 35 years to that of 1984, that did not happen. Unlike utopian societies, where authors’ descriptions of such societies are perfect, Orwell described it negatively, as a dystopian, and focused on the lack of choice and freedoms. Not only 1984, but Orwell’s other works all maintained the same politically corrupt tone. In his other famous book Animal Farm, Orwell also recognizes the lack of freedom through farm animals here in this famous quote, “No animal in England knows the meaning of happiness or leisure after he is a year old. No animal in England is free. The life of and animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth.” Through his writing, Orwell wanted to warn his audience of the possible outcome that could come in the future involving the government/rulers.

After quite some time of Nazism and Stalinism (World War II), Orwell decided to write of that experience in 1984. This novel was based on real life events that had previously occurred, but with the use of fiction. George Orwell was an advocate of freedom of speech. Having seen the communist situations in Russia, he had volunteered to fight against the Fascist government in the Spanish Civil War. This war caused Orwell to think critically of the authoritarian tendencies. It also inspired how he would describe the Party in 1984 as brutal, paranoid, and included much betrayal.

1984 is a novel about lack of individuality and freedom. The high authority or Party encouraged people to limit their thinking to one way. Some of their popular phrases included, “War is peace,” “Freedom is slavery,” and “Ignorance is strength.” The phrase “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU” is introduced in this novel. The idea of thinking for yourself is scrutinized and is rewarded with punishment. Every move, every word, everything you do is monitored. Propaganda is everywhere and discounts the idea of free speech. Orwell effectively shows the similarities between the authority in 1984 and the Nazis.

Throughout the novel, Orwell incorporated real life events into his novel. An example being, a couple years before 1984 was published, the United States dropped a bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He managed to reference “nuclear-powered wars happening in different parts of the world.” In 1984, Orwell also included his own life-time struggles at the time of World War II; such as rationed food, horrible electricity, and a scarcity of everyday household items.

Through the many years, 1984 has never lost its relevance. Even now, people are referring back to this novel and comparing it to how governments are run. Unfortunately, 1984 might possibly become a reality if the world continues to further on the route we are headed. Every government/ruler has their faults, but stripping individuals of their personal freedom is totally unnecessary.

Did you like this example?

1984 Biography of George Orwell. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

“Newspeak”, the Systematic Deterioration of Language as a Means of Truth

The systematic deterioration of language as a medium of truth, e.g. “War is peace,” “freedom is slavery.” Why do the people in the novel accept these so-called truths? How are they used as tools to manipulate opinion and reinforce the total dominance of the state? Can you find examples in our own day of the corruption of language as a dependable reflection of reality?

There seems to be a certain benchmark in the construction of the regime in Orwell’s Nineteen-Eighty-Four - a regime that prioritizes a linguistic purification in the pursuit of a doctrinally predicated social configuration that is unlike any other in the universe of English Literature. Indeed, Orwell’s synthesis of the language of Oceania, Newspeak, as spawned by the doctrinal ideology of Big Brother, sheds light on its inherent parallel with standpoints exhibited by French philosopher Michael Foucault. Such perspectives upheld by Foucault discussed the dissemination of power through a social medium, wherein language facilitates power through social discourse and language, where Foucault asserted that “the circuits of communication are the supports of an accumulation and a centralization of knowledge; the play of signs defines the anchorages of power”. (Foucault, 1977, p. 88) .

Ideologically determined power is perhaps at the heart of newspeak, wherein the notion of language and thought as inseparable concepts is an ever-pervasive idea in the novel. Indeed, for it is not the powerful “Thought-Police” that constitutes the novel’s most frightening aspects, and neither is it the irrational and illogical malice exhibited by the inhabitants of Orwell’s classic dystopia. It is, rather, that corrupted language is used as a medium for truth - an idea that becomes progressively more important with modern-day society, for it can indeed be stated that the insight that Orwell’s novel exhibits looms over much over the contemporary debates transpiring around language and political ideologies.Indeed, for by perverting language, the

Party’s newspeak regiments the thoughts of Oceania’s inhabitants by prescribing socially-acceptable bulwarks in their framework of mind. Indeed, for perhaps Orwell's insight that language is inherently intertwined with man’s fundamental nature is possibly at the heart of the novelist’s dystopian society. Subsequently, it is through this lens, that the corrupted language of Newspeak, as transmogrified from Oldspeak, not only serves as an authorial reminder of how through language restriction, one’s thought and thus individuality is regimented, but that Newspeak denotes a stagnation in mankind - our descension into mindless beings. Indeed, it can be argued that this is the Party’s primary objective with the inhabitants of Oceania, for the Party is not preoccupied with mediation of a geographical region, but alternatively the minds of that region’s citizens.

Newspeak not only acts as the textual manifestation of Orwell’s preoccupation with his attempts to engage the reader into his dystopian universe, but, and perhaps more intrinsically, a chilling reminder of mankind’s chambers of thought. The novel, subsequently, is rendered a monetary tale concerning the startling effects of totalitarianism, and it is through Orwell’s synthesis of this fictional dystopian language that underscores the ever present assault on language in contemporary society as a means to control the many’s personal freedom.

Perhaps what endows Newspeak as a startlingly revolutionary language is that the novel’s narrator supposedly grounds the Orwellian tale in the Oldspeak “past”, acting as a pre-linguistic paradigm to the “present” of the Party’s Newspeak. This concept takes on a symbolic resonance in Winston Smith’s “secret” diary wherein he can write down his innermost thoughts with his “archaic Instrument” - a pen -on “creamy paper ...that had not been manufactured for at least forty years past”. Indeed, through Orwell’s notably implicit insinuation of the time before (the “past”)he Party’s upsurge serves as an authorial intrusion that underscores the disparities between two eras wherein the linguistic utilisation is vastly different.

The antithetical “past” as alluded to by the novel’s narrator may also serve as a textual and thematic subversion to the Newspeak “present”. From a readership’s perception, the Oldpeak narrator enables a reader to analyse the perversion of language in the form of Newspeak much more objective. Indeed, for the Party’s ever-narrowing linguistic paradigm that means to restrict thought is reflected in the textual manifestation with the abbreviated and constricted titles of “Miniluv”, “Miniplenty”, “ Minipax” and “Minipax”. However, the Party is not only concerned with perverting language but destroying it as well, with Syme referring to the “destroying” of “words”. O’Brian informs Winston that power exists in “tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in shapes of your own choosing”. Indeed, this new “shape” is one enforced by the Party and certainly not one of Winston’s “own choosing”, for the Party’s linguistic rules are intended to do the exact antithesis - which is to restrict autonomous human thought.

The belligerence and hostility of Orwell’s language utilisation here in “tear” and “pieces” is arguably representative of the Party’s relentless assault on language as a means to dictate avenues of consciousness. Winston actually adopts the Party’s principles and rules, as exemplified when he contends that he detests “goodness” and that he does not want virtue “to exist anywhere” and that “[he] want[s] everyone to be corrupt to the bones”. This idea takes on a more extensive level in the daily Two minutes of hate, which Smith describes to be “creat[ing] a hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness” that transforms “one..against their own will into a grimacing screaming lunatic”. In his essay Language and Ideology in Orwell's 1984, Blakemore asserts that ``the Party’s linguistic imperialism injects itself into Winston’s consciousness so that he uses words as the Party intends them”.

This concept, on further exploration, can be extended as to perceive Winston Smith, subsequently, as a microcosm for the widespread psychological domination of Oceania’s inhabitants. Indeed, for Oceania’s inhabitants believe the Party’s supposedly antithetical and contradictory statements: War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength. Blakemore goes on to suggest that there is also perhaps an irony prevalent in Winston’s stream of consciousness, wherein what Winston deems as “goodness” is in fact corrupt and his perceived corruptness is in fact “good”. Indeed, it is at first an enigma when seeking to answer as to why Oceania’s inhabitants accept these so-called truths, and yet language is indeed the answer. For indeed, by perverting language, Ingosac not only regiments autonomous human thought, but, through this, limits the potentiality for rebellion.

The limits placed on individual or communal rebellion takes a textual manifestation in a dual format - with both discourse and written text curtailing personal freedom. For the latter, perhaps the text that exemplifies this the most palpable is the recurring “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU”, placing the inhabitants of Oceania in a sort of linguistic prison wherein they are inseparable from the ever-present watch of Ingsoc, as underscored by the pronoun “you”. Indeed, the almost omniscient existence of the “telescreen” which “receives and transmits simultaneously” endows Oceania with a chilling realism that only reinforces the psycholinguistic facet of Newspeak as a means of subsiding personal and intimate thoughts. This makes the inhabitants of Oceania not only susceptible to adopting the Party’s systematic deterioration of language, but the values on which the Party is predicated upon.

In terms of discourse, the way in which language is utilised to suppress thought can be examined through the discourse that transpires between O’Brian and Winston. After Smith is “tortured inexorably” and is destroyed in his ability of “arguing and reasoning”, O’Brian asserts the declarative statement “you are afraid”, acting, at least through a linguistic lens, as a perturbing parallel to the aforementioned “you” in “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU”. Indeed, this instance can be perceived as a way in which linguistics are used as a means to ontrict thought as O’Brian’s assertion leaves no room for Smith’s response. Indeed, O’Brian’s final assertion in the description is “That is what you are thinking, is it not, Winston?, which leaves no room at all for Winston to speak his mind, and only serves for Winston to supposedly confirm O’Brian’s assertions.

The world of Oceania is shrouded in an extensive list of misused epithets. Exemplary of this are the names of Ministries. For instance, Winston Smith’s role in the Ministry of Truth is to edit newspapers into what Ingosac intends the Inhabitants of Oceania to believe. Indeed, for the ministries are named contradictory to their purpose of operation, and thought is subsequently controlled among the many. This extends to the other ministries and their subsequent objectives. The Ministry of truth promulgates lies and falsifies physical text, The Ministry of Peace appertains to war, the ministry of Love concerns itself with torture, and the Ministry of Plenty concerns itself with starvation..

These discrepancies are certainly deliberate, and perhaps serve as an authorial reminder that Ingosac is inherently corrupt. Indeed, the Ministries’ names perhaps also serve as a startlingly familiar parallel to the names, euphemisms, epithets, and maxims utilised in contemporary times wherein they are used as hollow titles. An example of this would be political language which Orwell defined “ [as] designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable”. In an ever- evolving world of Politics, political discourse and language perhaps needs further examination. Words such as ‘Brexit’, ‘Leaver’ and ‘Remainer’ regularly appear in today’s headlines, papers and articles but would have been alien and unknown a couple of years ago. Indeed, it is also analogous with people who characterize themselves as “left-wing” and “right-wing”, for those who did the same many decades ago would be defined by very different ideas. Indeed, there are other prescribed titles prevalent in modern times. Such is the case with many fraudulent commercial advertisements which attempt to persuade onlookers to purchase a product or service. Indeed, the reasons people believe in such things are, however, different to why Oceania’s inhabitants believe in the contradictory statements posed by the Party. Indeed, for in his essay.

At the end of the novel, though, Winston has been tortured and broken; he has been remodeled into a model citizen (Orwell 1949). His desire for freedom of action and the same right for others has been destroyed by his re-education and he actively seeks to violate the negative face of those around him and overall in his society, as can be seen in his daydreams: “He was in the public dock, confessing everything, implicating everybody” (Orwell 1949: 244-5). At this point, his mind naturally leads him to undermine his negative face, but he does not view this as wrong or a violation of what is expected of him. Instead, he is thankful for this part of himself and believes it to be correct as compared to his original beliefs:

“He had won the victory over himself” (Orwell 1949: 245). He is now congruent with the cultural expectations of society; he is now typical in that he has no negative face nor does he expect anyone else to have it. In this pseudo-rebirth, Winston has gained a semblance of lien in that he has now been integrated into the society and consequently has obtained a certain aspect of face automatically granted through this entry. He is a member of INGSOC, and he is a fanatic of Big Brother. Through these criteria he has a certain standing within the society. In a discourse action, he is given a certain amount of respect because he is a part of this society, but this also places a strain on him in that he is a representative of this society so he must simultaneously fulfil the expectations of the situation and act as a representative of them. His actions in accordance with those expectations—societal norms and customs—are what keep him as part of the society.

The exploitation of language in Nineteen-eighty-four illustrates the grim realism of Orwell’s fictional dystopian world, and the Machiavellian scheme of control to machinate the human mind remains intrinsic in dominating the inhabitants of Oceania.

References

Language and Ideology in Orwell's 1984 - Steven Blakemore, Social Theory and Practice, Vol. 10, No. 3, A Special Issue: Orwell's 1984 (Fall 1984), pp. 349-356
Orwell, G. (1977). Nineteen Eighty-Four. New York: Signet Classic.
LANGUAGE AS THE DEVICE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL MANIPULATION IN GEORGE ORWELL’S NINETEEN EIGHTY-FOUR: A PSYCHOLINGUISTIC ANALYSIS Md. Mozaffor Hossain
Orwell in English and Newspeak: A Computer Translation Joseph Foley and James Ayer, College Composition and Communication, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Feb., 1966), pp. 15-18

Did you like this example?

"Newspeak", the systematic deterioration of language as a means of truth. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Family Famous Writer George Orwell

George Orwell, the famous novelist, was born under the name Eric Arthur Blair from his parents Richard Blair and Ida Mabel Limouzin. Eric’s parents raised him in India but then decided that their children needed to have a better education. Because of the need for education, Mrs. Blair decided to move back to her hometown in England. Eric’s father was not able to accompany his family during the move due to his occupation, so Eric did not see his father very often. Eric’s family was described to be “lover-upper-middle class.” Eric was able to go to a private school that fed into larger high schools, but Eric did not enjoy his time there because the teachers would only teach to the test (White).

As time went on Eric was allowed into a good high school. In high school, Eric did relatively well so he was put into the class elite group which was called the “College.” This group excelled in the memorization of information and often looked down on other students that were worse academically than they were. People in this group ended up in jobs with a lot of political influence and intelligence heavy jobs. Even though Eric was in the “College,” he was unable to get any scholarships into any Oxford level schools. All of Eric’s grades were only slightly above average, except for his knowledge of the literature and history in Brittan (White).

After being diagnosed with bronchitis, Eric decided that he wanted to become an author. His parents did not agree that Eric should become a writer and were strongly against him doing so. Eric’s father wanted Eric to go into the military, so he could do something productive with his life instead of just writing. At this time, Eric had already started writing in newspapers. He wrote about poverty in almost an autobiographical sense, speaking on what he had gone through as a child. His story was only picked up after he scoured all the news agencies around him to get it published (White).

When Eric was being published he didn’t want to embarrass his father and the family name. He chose to go under the pseudonym of George Orwell. The name was chosen by a long list of names that the publisher had created. He got the idea for his last name through a river that he really liked, and he thought that George was a good working-class name (White). After this, he changed his name to George Orwell and was known as such from then on (Forman).

Did you like this example?

Family Famous writer George Orwell. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

George Orwell was a very Prominent Author in British Literature

During his life, he published two poems, ten books, and twenty-seven essays. He published two very popular pieces of writing, Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell was known as “a political and cultural commentator, as well as an accomplished novelist, [and] is among the most widely admired English-language essayists of the twentieth century” (newworldencyclopedia.org).

His life was not always focused on his literature and books, and he also did not grow up wealthy and rich. George Orwell had a life that was diverse with many different events and hardships, but it never stopped him from being successful. Eric Arthur Blair, later known as George Orwell, was born on January 23, 1903, in Motihari, India. (Scott-Kilvert 275). His parents were Richard and Ida Blair. Orwell, along with his sister, Avril, and his mother moved to Britain when he was just one year old. Richard Blair had to stay back in India because he worked in the Civil Services.

Richard worked a lot and was often out of town or in different countries for the job that he had, so Ida was the caretaker and the one who took care of Eric and Avril. At an early age, Eric began school and attended different small schools when he was young. St Cyprian's School, one of the best preparatory schools, recommended Eric to attend this school, so therefore he decided to try it out in Eastbourne, Sussex (georgeorwell.org). Soon after Eric started attending St. Cyprian, he realized he was in a lower state than the other children and figured out his parents only had to pay half of what the other parents did.

The other children often had “gifts and qualities he did not have, [which] set in his mind, he believed, a pattern of failure and depression” (Scott-Kilvert 275). Eric did not give up after all that was going on at his school, it made him work harder. When he was thirteen, he received two scholarships, to Wellington and Eton. Eric first attended Wellington but soon changed to Eton, where for the next four years he was named King Scholar (georgeorwell.org). During his time in school, he made many friends in which some he worked with when he became more involved in literature. After Eric graduated from Eton he started working in 1922 where he became the assistant superintendent at the Indian Imperial Police.

After being in the workforce for a short while, Eric Blair found a job as a school teacher. His time of being a school teacher led him to his first piece of literature, A Clergyman’s Daughter, where he wrote about the many experiences he had prior to the years of 1935 (newworldencyclopedia.org). His first novel was not his favorite, in fact, he disliked it very much and never wanted it to be remembered by anyone.Eric Blair knew that the life of literature for him had just begun and realized he should change his name to George Orwell in safety for himself and for his family.

Orwell, Eric’s new pen name, published his first book, Down, and Out of Paris and London, which described his prior jobs and work ethics in many different places and this book was the reason why he adopted a pen name. After this book was written, he decided to go to war and combat. Around the same time of Orwell being in and out of the war, he was married to a lovely lady by the name of Eileen O'Shaughnessy. In 1944, they decided they wanted a child so they adopted a little boy who they named Richard Horatio Blair (newworldencyclopedia.org). In Eileen’s last few months she was informed she had tumors in her uterus and surgery was needed as soon as possible to save her.

Eileen did not write to Orwell to tell him what was going, but sadly the day of her hysterectomy she died on the operating table due to many complications (Sheldon 377). Back on the war front on an early morning in May, Orwell was out fighting a serious battle and was shot in the neck and was seriously wounded but still was able to recover (Scott-Kilvert 281). After recovery and many tries of going back into the forces, Orwell realized his times in the military were over. Orwell’s next major piece of work that went viral was Animal Farm which was published in 1945. Animal Farm-related real-life groups to the lives of animals and how they are similar to one another.

Orwell uses different animals to symbolize different types of people such as “the naive but hard-working horse represents the ignorant lower-classes; the conniving pigs represent the educated upper crust” (newworldencyclopedia.org). Although this book was a big hit, Orwell knew he still was not finished which is why he started working on Nineteen Eighty-Four. This book was about his vision and knowledge of what would happen in the upcoming years and in the future of all people. While writing the book of Nineteen Eighty-Four, he moved to Jura, for peace for not only himself but also for his son, Richard, to be able to enjoy the countryside (georgeorwell.org).

Orwell got very sick after he moved to Jura, and soon starting making trips in and out of the hospital. He spent days or weeks in hospitals before he got to go back to his home which delayed him finishing and releasing his Nineteen Eighty-Four book. This book was not published until 1949, a year after it was intended to be published. During this time on October 13, 1947, he got married for the second time to a woman by the name of Sonia Brownell who he had known for some years prior due to his literature experiences with her (Scott-Kilvert 185). After he married Sonia, his health went downhill. On Christmas Eve, Orwell was sent to Hairmyres Hospital, in Glasgow where they determined he had tuberculosis in his left lung and was not given much longer to live (historyguide.org).

He suddenly died on the night of January 21, 1950, due to a hemorrhage (georgeorwell.org). He was buried by his real name of Eric Blair in the Thames Valley Cemetery. It was a grieving time for his family and followers after he passed away, and before he died, Orwell believed there would be conflicts over his son Richard. After Orwell passed, Sonia did not bring up anything to do with his son and went her own ways while Avril, his sister, took Richard in for good care at age five (Sheldon 444). Although this was the end of his life, Orwell was still remembered in many different ways.

The University College in London displays The George Orwell Archive, which has many different research studies and all of his works or literature for all the people to visit and explore (historyguide.org). This place, it allows Orwell to be remembered even after he is gone from the earth. George Orwell’s life influenced what he wrote and published whether it was where he worked, his time in the war, his family, or just something he had encountered. He had many obstacles that made things hard and that tried to stop him from being successful but he moved beyond them and achieved great amounts of goals. His life may have been cut a little short at the age of forty-six, but he worked hard in every aspect of life while he was living. Orwell’s legacy will continue to move forward in our world and will always be very influential and important to British literature.

Did you like this example?

George Orwell was a very prominent author in British Literature. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Dream Agritech is an Agricultural Consulting Company Based in the Philippines

The organization was started by a group of classmates studying different branches of agriculture in university, with the aim of becoming a “one-stop-shop” of knowledge for clients, who are often landowners without a background in agriculture. The firm provides guidance on how landowners can operate their farms effectively even if they are relative beginners in the industry.

The “Dream Team,” which is scattered across the country, uses mobile phones, email, Slack, and Google Drive to stay connected and provide real-time updates. Recently, they began using drones to get a better view of the fields where they are working. The team initially used images from Google Earth to get a view of new farms, but they found that the shots were not up-to-date, and some of the more remote areas of the country were not yet covered by Google Earth. This led the company to purchase a small drone that they use to take area photographs of a site and help with farm layout. In the future, they hope to integrate additional technologies such as low-cost sensors for soil testing.

While most of Dream Agritech’s team are in their mid 20s and early 30s, their farmer clients tend to be older, in their early to mid 50s. Most of their clients have mobile phones and can make and receive calls and SMS, and a handful have Facebook, but they typically do not use email or access spreadsheets. Part of Dream Agritech’s service to their clients is to help enhance their use of digital and mobile technologies, such as mobile phones, and the company hopes to integrate more technology training into their model in the future.

Dakila Olfindo, founder of Dream Agritech, did not grow up expecting to work in agriculture. While most of his friends’ parents encouraged them to find jobs in fields such as engineering, medicine, and law, his mother — who went to the same university that he did and worked in agricultural business management — encouraged him to pursue agriculture, telling him that “if there’s one thing the world can never run out of, it is food, so [if you work in agriculture], there will always be demand for people like you.”

More recently, Oflindo recalls, activists on Facebook and social media have started to shift the perception of agriculture, with a groundswell of support for the industry coming from youth who are reacting to news about food shortages across the Philippines and recognizing the role they can play in addressing this problem. Dream Agritech is committed not only to providing excellent service for their clients, but also to helping change the perception of agriculture for youth in the Philippines and showing that agriculture can be both a profitable and exciting career path.

Did you like this example?

Dream Agritech is an agricultural consulting company based in the Philippines. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Analysis of Literary Works with Themes of the Lost Generation and the American Dream

WWI had devastating effects all around Europe and America and left the young population growing up during that time questioning life and everything it encompasses. There had to be more to life than just war and death; there had to be more than to just follow orders blindly and do what was expected. Young adults, in the 1920’s era, were uncertain of what to do with their future, but knew they were not willing to settle down and continue as it was done in the past; those young adults are known as the Lost Generation.

A generation that was searching, but not sure of what they were searching for, where they were supposed to look for it, and how they were supposed to achieve it. Authors like Ernest Hemingway, and F. Scott Fitzgerald emerged during that time, expressing their emotions and feelings of a post-war society in their literary work. Novels like The Sun Also Rises, and The Great Gatsby became well known all over the world and later are part of historically literary greatest works. Characters in their novels, the relationships, and themes are drawn from their personal life experiences and are influenced by war and the aftermath just as the authors were in real life. Honor and nationalism didn’t mean much anymore and things that were important before WWI, ideals and passion to strive finding ones’ own identity in society, are lost.

A disillusioned ideal of how to find happiness was growing in Europe and in America. In America, during the same time frame the philosophy of the American dream started to grow and the thought behind it was full of good intentions, ideals and vision of a future that anybody can get out of a low life state and make something out of their life. The American dream was raising to the challenge and make a better and happier life for yourself and your family, working hard to get the job that you want, and being a morally upstanding citizen, that your family can be proud of. But with the growing despondent feelings in the years after WWI the lost generation has tainted the ideals of the American dream. Relaxed social values, corruption, and money that was earned through illegal measures had negative underlining influences on the meaning of the American dream. Fulfillment of one’s own happiness was still in the forefront, but it was achieved with whatever measures were deemed necessary. That said, if the sale of illegal alcohol was making a person happy and rich, then that’s what was done. Moral and regard for others was out the window, in order to achieve the disillusioned ideal of the American dream.

The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway is famously known for being a lost generation-themed novel. It is influenced by Hemingway’s own experiences in the aftermath of WWI, although the book hardly mentions the war at all. The characters in the book are searching for exciting things to do, for entertainment, no matter the cost. Drunkenness and euphoria are part of the 1920’s era lost generation life style and the book illustrates all that. The main character Jake Barnes, a journalist, is living in Paris France. It is mentioned that he served in WWI and became impotent due to an injury during the war. The daily lives of Jake and his friends is characterized by living the typical life of the roaring 20’s, with a steady alcohol consumption, hanging out in bars in the Latin Quarters, escapades, parties, and a general carelessness.

The main event in the whole book is when Jake travels together with his friend Bill Gorton to Spain to relax, and go fishing, and the city Pamplona to the festival of San Fermin. Together with Mike Campbell, Robert Cohn, and Lady Ashley, friends, who joined up with him, they take part in the festivities and spectacles of bullfighting. Though at the beginning of their adventure everything was fine, after days of partying and drinking and increasing tensions between them, due to jealousy, it comes to a fight between Jake and Robert. Brett Ashley, the woman of interest in this fight, is not interested in dealing with jealous men and takes off. Though Brett is married, she doesn’t care about her husband. She flirts with every man, drinks and wants to enjoy life. Jake Barnes moves on to San Sebastian to take a break from all the excitement of the festivities and fighting. He wants to just lay under the sun on the beach and relax while swimming in the ocean; take a breather.

The licentious time in Pamplona, the excessive life style in Paris and the tranquil days spend in nature create a sharp contrast. Jake views life as it comes; everything that happens, is as it is. Nothing impresses him, and he is not too overly concerned about it either. Jake, Brett, and the other characters are a mirror image of the lost generation; they want it all. They want to have fun and party, they want to drink whenever they feel like it without any rules or regulations they must abide by, and they want to relax and do nothing. All that they want to achieve with or without money. If they don’t have it, they’ll figure out how to get it or how to get around it.

The theme in the whole novel is a representation of post war futility, and Hemingway’s simple, and factual writing style enhances the lack of emotions and sensibility of the characters. Another lost generations themed novel is The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. The main character Jay Gatsby is a young man of a modest background who fell hopelessly in love with Daisy, a woman of high society and wealth. To break down the barrier of the social differences between them and win her for himself, he needs to become rich, and fast. With varies legal and illegal business adventures he manages to obtain enough money to be considered wealthy and is finally able to win over the woman of his dreams.

Gatsby is blinded by his love for Daisy and holds on to this love by providing material things like the great mansion they live in and extravagant parties. After a series of bizarre coincidences and misunderstandings the novel ends in a bloody tragedy with Gatsby dead in the swimming pool. Like the characters in The Sun Also Rises, the characters of The Great Gatsby are living in the 1920’s era. The period of the lost generation and their dream of glitter and glory, richness and fame, and endless parties; the period of the roaring twenties.

The misguided view of wealth and the disillusioned love story allude to the destructive power of that time and the fleetingness of everything on earth, including money. Money is perceived as something that brings happiness and gratification, health and beauty. It opens the door to paradise and allows the fulfillment of the wildest dreams. But, in reality, money is not everything; being rich is not the last stop on a train to happiness. The power of money can turn into cold calculation where everything in life, including people, are measured and valued by their wealth and wealth only. Jay Gatsby displays that throughout the novel. He is the personification of a man, who rises out of mediocre circumstances into a self-made business man, marries the love of his life and has everything he ever wanted. Money has made it possible to achieve his dreams, at least that’s how it seems. The achievement of his dreams turns out be rather superficial, not bringing the happiness that was so hoped for, but rather a muddle of reality and illusion.

Conclusion

The Great Gatsby and The Sun Also Rises are novels that express the authors’ bitterness of the aftermath of WWI and the discontent in the fictitious ideals of the American Dream and how they play out in society. Hemingway and Fitzgerald reveal the problems of the 1920’s respectively of their own society with these novels. They include biographical features to increase the credibility and arrange corresponding characters to enhance understanding of the lost generations influence on the American dream. Mental and physical wounds caused by WWI, leading to the pursuit of material happiness and ultimately to the corruption of the American Dream are expressed with great truthfulness, minuteness, and vividness (Shen, 2012).

Did you like this example?

Analysis of Literary Works with Themes of The Lost Generation and The American Dream. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

GEORGE and LENNIE’S BIG DREAM

Michelle Obama once said, “If proud Americans can be who they are and boldly stand at the altar with who they love then surely, surely we can give everyone in this country a fair chance at that great American dream.” This quote explains that anyone in the country can live their American dream as long as they are doing what they love. In the novel Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck tells the story of two men who travel together during the Great Depression. Steinbeck explores the major theme of the hard work that is needed to achieve the American dream and the loss of hope that happens when a person’s dream dies.

In the novel, George tells about his dream of owning his own home so that he would no longer need to depend on others. In the novel, he said “there wouldn’t be no more runnin’ around the country and gettin’ fed by a jap cook. No, sir we’d have our own place where we belonged and not sleep in no bunkhouse.” (Steinbeck, 57) This shows that he is tired of traveling from place to place with nothing of his own and he just wants to have his own place. He rambles on about how he would not have to work so hard. He is tired of working for someone else and he wants to do things that benefit him. In the novel George declares “if we don’t like a guy we can say,’get the hell out,’ and by god, he’s got to do it.” (Steinbeck, 57) The quote tells that he wants to be in control of his own life and wants others to respect him.

On the other hand, Lennie has his own version of the American dream. He wants to raise rabbits and live off the land. He wants to be constantly reminded of it and he can’t stop thinking about it. Lennie thinks his dream is going to be great and good. That is until the dream never happens. “We could live offa’ the fatty the land”. (Steinbeck 57) This shows that he truly believes that they could live off and everything it offers. But what he didn’t realize is that the American dream is never going to happen for him. “You let um try to get the rabbits. I’ll break their Goddamn necks.” ( Steinbeck 58) This explains how much Lennie cares about animals, especially rabbits, and how he would do anything to protect them. Lennie has a very open imagination and wants things ro go well so badly, but sadly he can’t always get what he wants.

Lennie and George have had some great times together and have had plenty of talks about what their American dreams would be like, but their dreams failed. I believe that anybody in this country can have a chance at their American dream. They should have hope in themselves. They should take a shot at doing what they love. Even when other people say it is unreachable or you are incapable of achieving it. Everybody has a dream, but for some, it takes longer to find that dream. But when you find it make sure you never let go of that dream. Make your American Dream happen!

Did you like this example?

GEORGE AND LENNIE’S BIG DREAM . (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

The Nuances and Hard Truths of the American Dream

The 30th president of the United States, on January 17, 1925, remarked, “The chief business of the American people is business!” While the quote has been paraphrased throughout the decades, Calvin Coolidge’s initial meaning has stayed largely static. Indeed, business was, and still is, the beating heart of America: the buying, the selling, and the growing prosperity of all American people. The quote also shows how true progress is made through the people, and the people’s determination to better themselves and their country.

This, in essence, is the core of a principle known as the “American Dream”. When Calvin Coolidge uttered these words, no one could have known of the economic downfall that was to come in four short years. On October 24th, 1929, known as “Black Thursday”, America’s stock market crashed, plunging the country into its worst economic depression in history. During this Great Depression, the concept of the “American Dream” started to take root, not just out of optimism, but out of necessity. Citizens needed something to hold onto: a belief that if they worked hard enough and persevered through hard times, they might be able to regain what they had lost.

And thus the “American Dream” truly blossomed. Two works in particular heavily relate to these ideals, and how it affects those who pursue it. In In Cold Blood, Truman Capote retells the gritty and haunting murder of the Clutter Family in 1959, while also exploring deeper concepts, such as vengeance and loss. Additionally, Arthur Miller’s play, Death of a Salesman, shows the tragic downward spiral of a man simply trying to live out his own “American Dream”. It can be concluded from these two works that the notion of “work hard and you will succeed”, otherwise known as the “American Dream”, is too formulaic for real-world situations.

The reality is that life, especially in business, is too unpredictable to guarantee long-term success for any one person. However, if an individual approaches the “American Dream” with realism, logic, and a strong work ethic, they have the opportunity to not only bring success to themselves, but also to the people around them. The first and larger of the two works that will be analyzed is Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood. This non-fiction work is a chilling, comprehensive account of the Clutter Family murders of 1959. Capote writes from the perspective of many people, describing the Clutter’s daily lives, the sleepy town of Holcomb, Kansas, and the approaching threat of Perry Smith and Dick Hickock. As the novel progresses, the readers get a clearer picture of the Clutters, the murderers, and what forces motivate and drive them both.

Eventually, both murderers are caught, tried for murder, and hung. So, the question is: why do the duo decide to kill the Clutters? What had Mr. Clutter achieved that made him such a target? Herb was, as described by Andy Erhart, “a modest man but a proud man, as he had a right to be. He raised a fine family. He made something of this life’” (Capote 79). Herb was the model American as described by the “American Dream”: hard-working, self-sufficient, family-oriented, and above all, prosperous. What does this say of the murderers?

Capote writes about Dick, “Envy was constantly with [Dick]; the Enemy was anyone who was something he wanted to be or who had anything he wanted to have” (Capote 200). Capote also writes from Dicks perspective, “Why should that sonofabitch have everything, while he had nothing? Why should that ‘big-shot bastard’ have all the luck? With a knife in his hand, he, Dick, had power. Big-shot bastards like that had better be careful or he might ‘open them up and let a little of their luck spill onto the floor’” (Capote 201). Dick was an individual who sought to bring down those who he felt had “all the luck”: perhaps, those who had accomplished the “American Dream”, such as the Clutter Family. What would give Dick such reason to be so vengeful? Capote writes, quoting Dick’s mother, “After [Dick] graduated from high school—June, 1949—he wanted to go on to college. Study to be an engineer. But we couldn’t do it. Plain didn’t have the money.

Never had any money” (Capote 166). Perhaps Dick felt cheated at his lack of opportunity to achieve the “American Dream”. Without college, and a steady way to make money, his check-writing and thievish tendencies would arise. His accomplice, Perry Smith, shares some similarities in this respect. Capote quotes from Perry Smith, “’You think I like myself? Oh, the man I could have been! […] But you, Bobo, you went to school. You and Jimmy and Fern. Every damn one of you got an education. Everybody but me. And I hate you, all of you—Dad and everybody’” (Capote 185). Both Perry and Dick share the same feeling of vengeance towards successful people.

They both desire to make up for what they could never have by targeting those who have it. In this case, they targeted a family who had, in large, achieved the “American Dream”. Capote writes, quoting Perry, “’And it wasn’t anything the Clutters did. They never hurt [Perry]. Like other people. Like people have all my life. Maybe it’s just the Clutters who had to pay for it’’ (Capote 290). It is also important to consider how the author himself seems to feel about the American Dream since it is a force that drives many of his novel’s events. He writes, of the Clutters, as their earthly possessions burn, “…how could it happen, Erhart wondered as he watched the bonfire catch. How was it possible that such effort, such plain virtue, could overnight be reduced to this—smoke, thinning as it rose and was received by the big annihilating sky’” (Capote 79)?

Capote is expressing that, even as accomplished as the Clutters were, no one is truly invincible, no matter how respected or successful they may be. Not only is this idea expressed with regards to the Clutters, but also with regards to Perry Smith and his family. Capote writes, “Strong character, high courage, hard work—it seemed that none of these were determining factors of Tex John’s children. They shared a doom against which virtue was no defense” (Capote 185). These quotes seem to directly subvert the idea that if you work hard, everything will turn out right in the end: The “American Dream”. Life simply isn’t that clear-cut.

However, this isn’t to say that pursuing the “American Dream” is a futile cause. Capote writes, “[Mr. Clutter] was, however, the community’s most widely known citizen, prominent both there and in Garden City, the close-by county seat, where he had headed the building committee for the newly completed First Methodist Church, an eight-hundred-thousand-dollar edifice. He was currently chairman of the Kansas Conference of Farm Organizations, and his name was everywhere respectfully recognized among Midwestern agriculturalists, as it was in certain Washington offices, where he had been a member of the Federal Farm Credit Board during the Eisenhower administration” (Capote 6). Based on this, a reader understands that not only was Mr. Clutter stable enough to provide a living for himself, but his outreach in church and government meant that he was able to help foster the same success in others. Truman Capote is making a statement that the pursuit of the “American Dream” is not fruitless and that it can bring success. Conversely, he also makes a point to clarify that succeeding in this endeavor does not necessarily make a person impervious to all hardship, either. The next work, Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman, is a very different work than Truman Capote’s.

Death of a Salesman is a play, telling the story of the Lowman family. Willy Lowman, the head of the house, is a salesman encountering rough economic times and difficult realizations about the business world. When his two sons return home after not finding themselves in a profession, Willy’s psyche reaches a deadly boiling point, driving him to suicide after he realizes how little he truly has. This work is explicitly about the “American Dream”, particularly the negative and gritty side. Willy Lowman is the definition of an optimist, always ready to make a deal with a smile on his face. “[Willy]: …because it’s not what you do, Ben. It’s who you know and the smile on your face” (Miller 86). He believes that if he can muster up enough charisma and elbow grease, the whole industry will be at his feet.

The “American Dream” hinges on this belief; A person can be anything in America so long as he or she has the determination to get there. However, as a reader continues, these hopeful concepts begin to crumble. “[Willy]: There’s not a breath of fresh air in the neighborhood. The grass don’t grow anymore, you can’t raise a carrot in the backyard […] Remember those two beautiful elm trees out there? When I and Biff hung the swing between them” (Miller 17)? Ultimately, Willy is unsatisfied with his lot in life, longs for the simpler past, and is working under the belief that it will all be alright if he can simply make it past the hard times. Part of the reason Willy continues to act under this delusion due to his brother, Ben, who has passed away. Ben was everything that Willy could’ve ever hoped to be: self-sufficient, rich, and successful.

After striking diamond in the Africa’s jungles, Ben flourished the way Willy never could’ve. Willy had the opportunity to go with Ben to Africa and is deeply regretful of the fact that he declined. “[Willy]: God! Why didn’t I go with my brother Ben that time! That man was a genius, that man was success incarnate! What a mistake! He begged me to go” (Miller 41). This makes Willy all the more of a tragic character. Readers know that he, at one point, had the chance to achieve his own “American Dream”, but passed up the opportunity. Now, Willy is left trying to compensate for what he could’ve had. Not only that, but the dynamic between Ben and Willy helps a reader understand how Willy himself defines “being successful”: it’s all monetary. Tangible wealth is the ultimate indicator of achievement and status to Willy.

The idea of physical assets being so important is also crucial to the American Dream, especially after the Great Depression. Money was seen as the only way to alleviate a person’s burdens, even if that wasn’t necessarily the case. To Willy, no money means no worth. This way of thinking is expressed in a masterful metaphor near the end of the play. “[Willy]: I've got to get some seeds. I've got to get some seeds, right away. Nothing's planted. I don't have a thing in the ground” (Miller 122). After Willy is fired, and Biff reveals that his one chance at success (in Willy’s eyes) has gone bad, he realizes just how little he has to show for his dozens of years of toil: money nor satisfaction. The American Dream has failed Willy, who realizes that even if you’ve got a great personality, there is nothing guaranteed in the business world. “[Charley]: Willy, when’re you gonna realize that them things don’t mean anything? You named him Howard, but you can’t sell that.

The only thing you got in this world is what you can sell. And the funny thing is that you’re a salesman, and you don’t know that” (Miller 97). It is also important to consider the dynamics of the rest of the Lowman Family. Biff Lowman, Willy’s son, is a character that relates to Willy in insightful ways relating to the “American Dream”. He, contrary to Willy, has no taste for the world of business. “[Biff]: And it’s a measly manner of existence. To get on that subway on hot mornings in summer. To devote your whole life to keeping stock, or making phone calls, or selling or buying. To suffer fifty weeks of the year for the sake of a two-week vacation, when all you really desire is to be outdoors, with your shirt off. And always to have to get ahead of the next fella. And still—that’s how you make a living” (Miller 22).

If the American Dream were centered around business, especially making money, then by all accounts, Biff should be considered a failure. And yet, Biff still finds true satisfaction in his life out in Texas. it seems that Biff has a more realistic worldview than his father does. Sure, Biff doesn’t have a steady supply of income, but at least he acknowledges this fact instead of clinging to the past. “[Biff]: I just can’t take hold, Mom. I can’t take hold of some kind of life” (Miller 54). Biff also sees through Willy’s delusions and helps bring him back to reality. “[Biff]: I am not a leader of men, Willy, and neither are you. You were never anything but a hard-working drummer who landed in the ash like all the rest of them” (Miller 132). Biff has seen the futility of blind optimism in the American Dream. On the other hand, Happy, Biff’s brother, is more like Willy. Happy is also in business, and is, in Biff’s eyes, a success. “[Biff and Happy]: Are you content, Hap? You’re a success, aren’t you? Are you content? / (Happy): Hell no! / (Biff): Why? You’re making money, aren’t you” (Miller 23)? Happy strives for more concrete things in life, as oppose to Biff. Happy, at the end of the play, also vows to live out his father’s dream, so that Willy’s struggles are not forgotten as Biff suggests they will. “[Happy]: All right, boy. I’m gonna show you and everybody else that Willy Loman did not die in vain. He had a good dream. It’s the only dream you can have—to come out number one man. He fought it out here, and this is where I’m gonna win it for him” (Miller 138-139).

Perhaps Biff fears that Happy will end up just like Willy: someone who will drive himself to the edge because he won’t be able to come to reality soon enough. Linda, Willy’s wife, is portrayed as loyal and loving towards him. She supports him as a way to live out her supposed “role” as a wife. However, she is aware of her husband’s downfalls and begs Biff and Happy to sympathize with him. “[Linda]: I don’t say he’s a great man. Willy Lowman never made a lot of money. His name was never in the paper. He’s not the finest character that ever lived. But he’s a human being, and a terrible thing is happening to him. So, attention must be paid. He’s not allowed to fall into his grave like an old dog” (Miller 56). Altogether, the Lowman Family is used to show the damage that the American Dream can cause, especially to people like Willy. Even though he is a fictitious character, Willy is used by Miller to represent the “common man”, as if his downward spiral can happen to anyone who puts too much faith into the “American Dream”. Arthur Miller is trying to express to his audience that the “American Dream” is not as clear-cut as it seems.

An American is not guaranteed success or satisfaction just because they work hard, which is a complete contradiction of the “American Dream”. He is trying to express that blind faith in the “American Dream” can lead to failure, and, in Willy’s case, a complete loss of hope. After examining both works in their entirety, it’s now important to cross-examine them, noticing what one can lend to another and vice versa. The characters in both In Cold Blood and Death of a Salesman are affected by the “American Dream” in different ways. For instance, Truman Capote shows a success story of the “American Dream” through the Clutters. Herb Clutter worked for everything he had with a square head on his shoulders. Arthur Miller, on the other hand, only shows a success story through Willy’s dead brother, Ben;

He never directly shows his main characters succeeding, even as they try to work towards it. However, one could say that both the Clutter Family and Ben give the rest of the characters something to relate to and to strive for. The Clutters gave the whole town of Holcomb a gold standard, while Ben gave Willy (in Willy’s mind) part of his conviction to be the best salesman. Both authors also show that the pursuit of the “American Dream” does not make a person invincible, as Capote shows the quadruple murder of the Clutter Family, and Miller, a tragic suicide. Conversely, the manner in which both characters fail relates to the “American Dream” differently. The Clutters died after achieving the “American Dream”, and they were relatively happy beforehand. Indeed, the role of the “American Dream” itself didn’t play a huge role in their murder until you bring Perry Smith and Dick Hickock into the picture.

In Death of a Salesman, however, the pursuit of the “American Dream” directly causes Willy his grief and, eventually, suicide. Taking both of these conclusions into consideration, a careful reader could conclude that both works lend themselves to the idea that the “American Dream” isn’t so black and white. Different things happen to different people based on different circumstances. All of those people can strive for the “American Dream”, but it is unrealistic to assume that everyone will succeed. Ultimately, not every American can achieve the “American Dream”, even if they all work for it with everything they’ve got. Now, does this mean that pursuing that “American Dream” is a pointless endeavor? In this area, I believe the authors might disagree. Truman Capote would argue that even though they were murdered, the Clutters lived a happy and productive life, all due to their hard work and rationality. Arthur Miller might argue against that and say that the “American Dream” is a façade, trapping overly-optimistic businessmen like Willy Lowman, and wearing them thin before throwing them out.

However, there is a key difference between the characters of Willy Lowman, who failed, and Herb Clutter, who succeeded. Willy Lowman was overly-optimistic and placed too much faith in the “American Dream”, while Herb Clutter approached the matter with a clear and objective rationale. What does this ultimately mean? It means that, yes, everyone can attempt the “American Dream”, but only those who do so wisely and most rationally have the best chance of success. And, especially in such a virulent market as selling, having a square head on your shoulders can mean the difference between success and failure. In essence, both authors have done a difficult thing by encompassing both the nuances and the direct truths about the “American Dream”. All of these ideas discussed are not merely arbitrary, however.

Many of these hard truths about the “American Dream” were realized all over the country, by people from all walks of life. Simply reading about them and thinking about what they mean is one thing, but when a reader considers the real-life implications that these works represent, it can be chilling. It can be hard to think about all of the failures that people have endured, as Willy has. It can be equally as hard to imagine someone working as hard as Herb and the rest of the Clutters did, only to end up dead in their own home. However, when one also thinks about the accomplishments of millions of Americans who worked day in and day out, bettering themselves and their country, it’s hard to believe that the “American Dream” is dead in any fashion. It is not fool-proof, nor is it completely concrete, and things don’t always go as planned. And yet, America was and still is built on the perseverance of its people, who, knowing the odds, undertook challenges anyway. America has thrived on this spirit. Overall, when a person has got a hard-working spirit, rationality, and perhaps a little luck on their side, they’ve got great chances to improve themselves, and the people around them, even when nothing is guaranteed to anyone.

Did you like this example?

The Nuances and Hard Truths of the American Dream. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Image of Curly’s Wife in the Book “On Mice and Men”

In the book Of Mice and Men Curley’s Wife wanted to feel like she was special, and that she was able to be something bigger than she was on the ranch. Steinbeck made it seem like she was trying to convince herself more than the reader that she can achieve her goals. Her family keeps getting in the way of her dreams. In Chapter 5 Curley’s Wife finds Lennie alone in the barn. She started to talk to Lennie and told him of her dreams.

She told him she lived in Salinas with her mom and dad. She told him that a traveling show or circus came to her town, she met one of the actors, and he told her that she was a natural actress and should join them. But since she was so young her mother wouldn’t let her go. She tells him she met another man, who she went dancing with. He told her he was going to put her in the movies. He said he would send her a letter she never got one back. She then explains how she could’ve been famous, how she could’ve had nice clothes, lived in a nice house, and she could’ve had pictures taken of her. She says the only way she was able to escape her parents was by running away with Curley. She told Lennie that she believed that was the only way to out, but she doesn’t like Curley, he isn’t a nice person.

We can say her dream is an American dream, because the American dream is about opportunity, success, and ideals of freedom, achieved by hard work and dedication. Her dream was shattered by society and the people around her. Steinbeck used Curley's Wife as an example of how people were treated in this time period. “I get lonely,” she said.”You can talk to people, but I can’t talk to nobody but Curley,” said Curley’s Wife (Steinbeck 87). Her dream is important because it shows that she has a reason behind the way she acts, for example painting on red nails, flirting, and curling her hair. Curley’s Wife represents the role of women during the time period this book took place.

During this time period, women were thought to be trophies or property. Steinbeck proves this theory by how she is referred to as Curley’s Wife, and doesn’t have her own name. Curley proves this more when she dies. He isn’t upset that she died because he loved her, he’s upset because it messed with his social status, and how people perceived him after her death. She also represents loneliness, by being the only female on the ranch and not be allowed to talk to others. Curley's wife in the book feels very alone most of the book and she needs validation from someone else to help her Elise her dream is achievable.

Curley’s Wife's dream was not achievable. Being a female in the 1930’s was really difficult, men always got jobs first and women were often viewed as property or trophies. When Curley’s Wife was 15 a man told her he was going to put her in the movies. This man most likely never had any intention of putting her in the moves. He was just trying to take advantage of her. Curley’s Wife thought her mother stole the letter, and in spite of this she got mad and married Curley so she could escape. From there she gets isolated on the farm by other men and Curley, because the other men are scared of what she can do to them.

Due to the boundaries of society she wasn’t able to pursue her dream. Her dream is unachievable because she has secluded herself to an unwanted marriage to Curley. Curley would never let his wife leave him and pursue her dreams individually. 'I tell you I ain't used to livin' like this. I coulda made somethin' of myself.' She said darkly, 'Maybe I will yet.' And then her words tumbled out in a passion of communication, as though she hurried before her listener could be taken away. 'I lived right in Salinas,' she said. 'Come there when I was a kid. Well, a show come through, an' I met one of the actors. He says I could go with that show. But my ol' lady wouldn't' let me. She says because I was only fifteen. But the guy says I coulda. If I'd went, I wouldn't be livin' like this, you bet,' said Curley’s Wife (Steinbeck 88).

Her marriage with Curley has stopped her from pursuing her dreams, and because of her marriage she has lost her freedom. Freedom is a big role to the American dream, now that she has lost it by marrying Curley her dream is unachievable. Steinbeck was trying to tell us that Curley’s Wife really believed in the American Dream. He also told us that most women wanted to become famous actress or singer and that was the American Dream for them.

Most men wished for a steady income and a property of their own. For some it was to join the military. To have honor for protecting the country, which they live in. For some other women it was to be a housewife and to be the best one possible. Curley’s Wife fit into the first category wanting to become a famous actress she hated the ranch life. Her dream was once achievable with all the opportunities she was given to join the show and get a written letter from the man. Once she married Curley to escape, her dream became unobtainable because she was now isolated from everyone but Curley. Her dream is also no longer obtainable because she gets killed by Lennie in chapter 5.

Did you like this example?

Image of Curly's Wife In the book "On Mice and Men". (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

The “American Dream” is the Idea of a Liberal and Prosperous America

It has always been around since the 19th century when they discovered the North American continent, the development of the Enlightenment, The establishment Of the Capitalist Economy, along with the Westward Movement. When the Historian James Truslow Adams provided us with an insight of his idea of the American dream, in 1931 he stated “The American Dream is the Dream of the land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for every man, with opportunity for each according to his ability or achievement.” where he clarified, “it is not a dream of motor cars and high wages merely, but a dream of a social order in which each man and woman shall be able to attain to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable, and recognized by others for what they are”. It refers to the freedom, opportunities and equalities people should receive in the United States regardless of race, culture and social class.

In general everyone can achieve their goals as long as you force yourself, work hard and you have the desire to go forward in life. Along with Thomas Jefferson wherein the declaration of independence he wrote that people are “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights that along these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There is an amplitude of inhabitants who came to America to make a difference in their lives, not only for them but for others as well which it will take sacrifice, strength, and most importantly courage, to face the world and achieve their dreams, For instance Martin Luther King Jr, barrack Obama, and Donald trump.

Each president had a dream to obtain. Mainly for the humanity, it may be for good or bad but they were willing to do anything to get what they wanted in America. Let’s start off with Martin Luther king jr. Martin Luther King Jr. An extraordinary American civil rights civilist who was born in January 15, 1929 in Atlanta, Georgia, He was a man who is best known for his phrase “i have a dream” which we all can relate to, because just like we all have dreams, he had a dream of his own which he wanted to fulfill. He devoted his life to desegregation and nonviolence, he disputed for equal rights for everyone regardless of race and ethnicity.

He can be described as a courage man who is willing to do anything to achieve his goal even if it meant giving his life away, where at some point in his life in a speech he mentioned “if anyone must die in this movement, i pray that it be me” more clear as water could not have said, he clearly would sacrifice his life in exchange of equality. Back in the 1950’s and 1960’s, he had a major impact on civil rights where at that time there was no equality for people, due to the fact that people with different races could not sit together, African Americans were only able to ride in the back seats, where white people had more priority based on their skin color. Children’s were not granted to attend at the same school and receive the same education nor contribute the same churches. If disobeyed they may be at risk of being under arrest, murdered or even beaten.

Martin Luther King Jr’s conspicuity in the civil rights movement accomplished the respect of many political commanders, which gave him the power to perform a dominant transformation. By the year 1960 Martin Luther king was greatly pledged for the passing of the civil rights act and as well for the voting act for African Americans. With his achievements, United States and the world changed remarkably so that people could not be treated differently because of their race. From there on people would describe him as a civil rights leader, humanitarian, a person who cared about other people’s rights, he would put others first before himself.

His dream was achieved, but that was not all he dreamed of, he also dreamed for everyone to live and accept one another, his inspiration was also to end segregation, to discontinue poverty. Sadly Furthermore he was able to make his dream come true; he is one example of a person trying to achieve a dream in America, where equalness has been fulfilled. Adolescents regardless there color can go to school and get the same education, schools have no forced segregation in them, white and black people are allowed to collaborate with each other, multicultural marriages are acceptable, another way that his dream been fulfilled is black and whites possess the same opportunities in life where nowadays nobody is treated differently.

The majority of the people in today’s society are not racist. If we look back at Martin Luther King Jr. Time and look how things are today, we can see things have changed, where racism is no longer seen as it was back then. He is one example that you can obtain your dreams, and that dreams do matter, because thanks to your dreams it can help the world and make a difference towards time. A role model who was willing to make a change for many people who came to America for a better future, Barack Hussein Obama who was our 44th president of the United States and was appointed at the white house from January 20, 2009 till January 20, 2017, the American dream in the presidents view incorporates the following points or policies like for instants the provision of a universal health care cover, expansion in number of paid sick days, make college education affordable for students with low incomes.

His main goal was for everyone in America to have an opportunity Today in the 21th century many Americans have lost their faith in the idea of the American Dream, imperialist policies of the U.S government more than the economic crisis are responsible for the occurrence of this situation, Our 45th president of the united states Donald trump, what Martin Luther King Jr fought in the time 1950 and 1960s, now Donald Trump’s immigration policies are pulling the dreams from many wishful Americans, his procedure which he is willing to obtain is to dismiss every person who causes danger in America, along with all the dreamers who are allowed to live in America covered by the deferred action for childhood arrival program who are patiently eager on congress and the courts to see if they will be authorized to stay.

Daca is not just a simple piece of paper for all these dreamers, it’s the opportunity they appealing for, considering a better job, earning higher wages and to obtain more sophisticated working conditions, as well as the capability to buy a car or even own a home. All this 800,000 dreamers are hard working youngsters which came to America to enrich and strengthen our cities, states, schools, businesses, congregations and families. Assuming that the Republicans and the Trump Administration abolish these protections from Dreamers, thousands of young Americans would be bound back into the shadows.

Families would be split apart, employment would be cast away, academic careers would be discontinued, and communities would be made less risk free. We’ve invested in these Dreamers already the moment the stepped foot in America by providing them education, work, freedom, we might as well considerate their potential and give them the opportunity to achieve and return that investment by enriching the country as adults. Perhaps the Dreamers are not capable to obtain federal benefits like financial aid or food stamps, but we have to be aware that they do pay taxes.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that Dreamers pay over $1.2 billion annually in federal, state and local taxes. That’s $1.2 billion that may disappear from our budgets if President Trump repeals this program. It’s time to put politics aside and do the right thing for our communities by giving Dreamers the certainty and respect they deserve. Going back to the phrase that Adam defined his American dream as the dream” “, the American dream, does it matter? In my view the American dream does not care what religion you practice, what gender you are and what nationality you come from, the American dream is a fundamental part of what makes the united states of America. Parents want their children to do better, to have more opportunities then they did.

Did you like this example?

The “American Dream” is the idea of a liberal and prosperous America. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

She is the Wife of a Man she Loves but Hates

“The Eve who occasions the destruction of all men’s hopes,”(Watt, 1978: 61) alias Curley’s wife has a dream as well1.. Although different in detail from the other character’s dreams, her dream is similar in desires. She yearns for material comforts and friendship just like the other men as each and every character suffers from solitude: “I get lonely.[...] You can’t talk to people but I can’t talk to nobody but Curley. Else he gets mad. How’d you like not to talk to anybody?” (Steinbeck, 1993: 87) She wants to become a famous Hollywood actress dreaming of fame, fortune, and expensive hotels, fancy clothes. Her marriage to Curley destroys this dream because once she gets married; Curley will not permit her to leave the ranch to become an actress. Her life becomes a failure, as she is the wife of a man whom she does not love but hates.

The destinies of Curley’s wife and of Lennie go hand in hand; they are linked by their solitude. They are both rejected by the men on the ranch who do not want to have anything to do with them. They need each other to put end to their painful lives and, at the same time, they spoil each other’s dream. Although Lennie is good in intention he is evil in fact. He tries to express affection but strokes too hard the soft hair of Curley’s wife. He is too violent and snaps her neck trying to force her to be quiet. It is something he cannot help. It is the moment when he is afraid that this would make George too angry and ruin his dream about petting the rabbits.

For Lennie, tending the rabbits whose fur he likes so much to touch is the equivalent of his future happiness. He feels very proud when he dreams about George entrusting him to raise the rabbits, to feed them, to protect them. Doing something “bad” –whether killing a puppy or Curley’s wife- seems to be in Lennie’s mind the equivalent to George not allowing him to care for rabbits. He does not see his actions in terms of good or evil. Lennie acknowledges that if he is not allowed to tend the rabbits then he has done something bad; this can suggest that he is not fit for the society described in Of Mice and Men. In the novel, Steinbeck does not present Lennie like a monster; because without intention he acts destructively in moments of fear without intention, he becomes a sympathetic figure. Any reader would regard him not only with despair but also with affection as his only companion and friend, George.

The only sight of a rabbit that Lennie can have is a hallucination after the death of Curley’s wife. The dream takes the form of an illusion at the end of the novel when Lennie first has the vision of his aunt Clara who scolds him. Then he hallucinates about giant rabbit that tells him that he will never be permitted to tend the rabbits: “[...] out of Lennie’s head there came a gigantic rabbit. It sat on its haunches in front of him, and it waggled its ears and crinkled his nose to him.” (Steinbeck, 1993: 102) The huge Rabbit is in fact the embodiment of his fear. Lennie cries in his own defence, being afraid that he will lose the privilege of tending the rabbits. He is doomed to killing, as he cannot help shaking the small creatures till their necks are broken.

His killing of Curley’s wife awakens George to the impossibility of their dreamed of farm. He has to admit that the bitter Crooks is right: such paradises of freedom, contentment, and safety are not to be found in this world. Just like the reader, George knows that their dream will not get accomplished in the end. Lennie’s actions just as the actions of a mouse are predictable. After killing mice and a puppy with his tenderness and uncontrolled power, George knows that he will not stop killing. He understands Lennie only too well, and wants him to die with the image of their dream farm in front of his eyes.

The final scene shows Lennie calling George who tells him the story of the farm they are going to have one day, just like a father who tells a bedtime story to his son. But this time it is told for the very last time. He tells Lennie to look across the river and imagine their farm: “And live on the fatta the lan’” (Steinbeck, 1993: 110) While telling about the places they are going to have, out of real affection for him, George shoots Lennie in order to prevent a worse death. Thus, Lennie dies with the hope that their dream will get accomplished soon. But George is not permitted such comfort. He has to live with the guilt of having killed his friend and has to go on living with the failure of their dream. Although he should have felt free from a burden like Lennie, he feels now even more miserable as there is no other dream to strive for.

When reading Of Mice and Men, the reader has to acknowledge the inevitability of some situations that are part of an unforgiving world. Despite George and Lennie’s efforts, their dreams fail. Lennie dies and George continues living in loneliness and without any hope. None of the other characters ever achieve their dreams. In this novel, dreams are ways in which the characters try to defeat the hopelessness of their existence, as John Steinbeck himself stated: “Everyone in the world has a dream he knows can’t come off, but spends his life hoping it may.” (Steinbeck, 1975: 105) The topos of disillusionment or failure is acknowledged as part of existence; in this respect, Peter Lisca upholds, “The ending of the story is... neither tragic nor brutal but simply a part of the pattern of event.” (1978: 76)

Most of Steinbeck’s contemporary critics perceived the novel as the embodiment of non-teleological thinking, according to which events are beyond humankind’s comprehension and control. Steinbeck’s best friend, Edward Ricketts, coined the term non-teleological thinking; the two men shared the same philosophy: to accept life on its own terms. They emphasized the need to see life as clearly as a scientist and to focus not on ends but on the process of life, the Aristotelian cause of nature. The same idea is perceived in the novel Of Mice and Men. Under the influence of the Great Depression, Steinbeck describes the fate of the common man, lonely and hopeless in his struggle to survive, dreaming about a future that will never come to pass. The writer seems to say, “this is the way things are,” just as epitomized by the original title of the novel, “Something that Happened.”1

Lennie, himself something of a mouse, is killed because of his vulnerability. Like mice that suffer for being physically small, Lennie is the victim of his mental smallness. Both mice and men suffer from the randomness of their fate2. Lennie has to die because he cannot control his fatal strength. But Lennie is not the only one in the novel who is doomed. Curley cannot stop being a beast of jealousy; George cannot give up his dream. They cannot control their own actions and eventually their own destiny. The only exception is Slim, the jerkline skinner, the tall man with the “God-like eyes.” (Steinbeck, 1993: 78). Critics consider that he is the voice of the writer, acting above the humans like Lennie, George or Candy.

In Steinbeck’s novel3, poverty draws the human and the natural worlds closer together. Poverty has reduced the characters in Of Mice and Men to animals. the author’s characters are more animal-like than human, as Edmund Wilson wrote in an essay in 1940. The two men, especially Lennie, are described in animal similes: Lennie drags his feet “the way a bear drags his paws” and drinks from the pool “like a horse.” (Steinbeck, 1993: 9) He even dreams about living in a cave like a bear. Human actions are foreshadowed by the actions of animals. Lennie embodies the double image of animal and of man as Steinbeck outlines man’s condition in the novel In Dubious Battle: “I believe that man is a double thing, a group animal and, at the same time an individual. And it occurs to me that he cannot successfully be the second until he has

1 The title Of Mice and Men comes from an eighteenth century poem by Robert Burns entitled “To a Mouse” that has become widely known and quoted: But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,/ In proving foresight may be vain:/ The best laid schemes o’ mice and men/ Gang aft a –gley /An’ leave us nought but grief an’ pain/ For promis’d joy// (Robert Burns, 1950: 84) In the poem, Robert Burns extends the mouse’s experience to mankind while in Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck extends the experience of the two migrant workers to the human condition. The dream of the two workers is never to be. The ending of the novel, like the field mouse ‘s nest being destroyed by a plow, is not tragic but simply a part of the pattern of events. The plans of men are not safer than those of the mouse, and this is the point of Steinbeck’s title.

As a naturalist yet unlike Crane, London, Dreiser, Norris, Steinbeck accepts man’s condition as being that of just another animal in an infinite and indifferent universe. He perceives life from a biological perspective. After studying the complex marine organism, the writer came to understand the human behaviour in comparison with the animal one. He considered the biological approach as a really great perspective for one’s understanding the phenomenon of group or community behaviour. This philosophy fascinated Steinbeck and this new personal outlook on life made him love every variety of life as it is, not as it should be: “a love which could look with equanimity at human freaks and social outcasts.”(Lisca, 1978: 106) Here we can include Lennie, a giant with the power of ten men, but with the mind of a child.

He lives in a harsh world where only the strongest survive - this is the only rule that seems to work. Yet Of Mice and Men does not portray the world of the strongest only; the author reveals the hard life of the weakest yet the purest as well. Many of the novel’s characters are discriminated because they are handicapped (Lennie is mentally inferior; Candy does not have one hand) or are not treated as equal (Crooks has to suffer because he is black). They live in a world where the classical values no longer exist; it a society where people swear a lot, go to brothels, talk about sex. Many of them are discriminated because of their race, age or sex. There are featured such tremendous killings and violence that the book has been frequently banned in schools. Steinbeck uses his characters to criticize bitterly a society that makes its people feel completely worthless as they live at a time when they are not able to support themselves anymore. Their dreams never come true and their destiny is that of unhappiness and solitude. All the notions about the happy American way of life get vanished.

In creating the characters in Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck clearly draws on the biological concept - the environmental fitness. They seem to be unfit for the community where they live because of their race, physical or intellectual abilities, their social status; these are also reasons why they are isolated. Firstly, Lennie is not allowed to take part in any social activity because of his mental disability. The other men on the ranch do not want to include him in such activities as horseshoes: “From outside came the clang of horse shoes on the playing peg and the shouts of men, playing, encouraging, jeering.” (Steinbeck, 1993: 8) Just like George and Lennie, Candy and Crooks suffer from isolation. They are treated differently from the other ranch men because of their social class; they are offered unrewarding jobs; they are not happy and for this reason they dream about getting their own farm. Crooks –the black stable hand- is a representative of the oppressed black people in America; he feels isolated from the other men because of the colour of his skin.

An apparently cynical and indifferent attitude towards both people and animals is encoded. Candy’s dog is shot without a second thought just because it smells bad1. Although there were better solutions –a bath, a new place to live- the more fit members of the bunkhouse society decide his destiny. In this world only the strongest are right. The dog is in fact the symbol of the cruel fate of the feeble. People have forgotten not only the master-dog bond, but all bonds. In the tough times of the Great Depression, they have forgotten the bonds they can make to each other. Slim, the wise skinner, said to himself: “Ain’t many guys travel ‘round together. I don’t know why. Maybe ever’body in the whole damn world is scared of each other.” (Steinbeck, 1993: 35) Although they all have the same low place in the social hierarchy, they remain isolated and continue to be treated disrespectfully; but, as Steinbeck suggests, so is life. If they had not remained individualized but rather collective, they could have found power in numbers. But they are helpless, weak, predictable, and entrapped in a similar way to the little rodents that Steinbeck makes allusion to so many times throughout the novel as he describes the activity of the natural world.

Rabbits also epitomize the universe of the novel Of Mice and Men. Steinbeck foregrounds the rabbits many times so as to reveal Lennie’s unfulfilled dream, as they are all he hopes. They offer the simple ‘access’ to the soft fur that he likes so much to touch. Rabbits are a source of comfort for Lennie. Some readers may wonder why John Steinbeck emphasized rabbits so much in the novel Of Mice and Men. Critics found an answer: rabbits played a major role during the Great Depression in the American society and especially in California. Even the U.S. Government encouraged the raising of rabbits for meat. In the 1940’s the sales of rabbit meat were above those of poultry sales. But as America started to become prosperous, rabbits were no longer bought for their meat but as house pets.

In the last analysis, George and Lennie symbolize something of the enduring and hopeful as well as the meaningless. They manage – if only for a brief time – to rise above circumstances and to convince others as well as themselves that dreams are part of the territory, that all they have to do is keep working and hoping and some day they will have their own place. If they only somehow control their weaknesses and keep a little ahead of circumstances, but they cannot. (McCarthy, 1980: 102)

George and Lennie struggle against the injustice of the world and at the same time against their own weak features that are part not only of the human nature, but also of the ‘animal’ world. Despite his physical size and strength, Lennie is powerless in front of the universal laws just like the little rodents.

The novel Of Mice and Men is not just a book about a particular time and space. It is timeless because it includes elements that are part of every human being’s existence: suffering determined by isolation and solitude, friendship, sacrifice; the most important message of the book is probably the futility of one’s holding onto dreams. Because of some stark observations, the novel may seem pessimistic. Still, the writer suggests that dreams keep people going on when they normally would have given up. Dreams are part of the human nature; even in an abnormal society people can dream; nobody can take this right away from them.

Did you like this example?

She is the wife of a man she loves but hates. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

The Unattainable American Dream a Story by John Steinbeck

It demonstrates how unachievable the American dream was throughout the story. Lennie and George are two mean migrating to a new farm , due to Lennie cause some trouble in the farm they used to work at and to fulfill a dream. They arrive and start to do their job, Curley the boss son is displeased that Lennie is taller than him.

Two days later Lennie kills Curley’s wife and the workers want to kill him, so he runs away to a specific spot to meet George but George hase to kill him. Many Americans believe in a dream that is unreachable such as Lennie and George saving their paycheck to pay for a piece of land that does not exist in the world, Curley’s wife wanting to be an actress but giving up on it and staying in an unfulfilling marriage. In particular George and Lennie are saving up for their own farm so they do not have to work anymore.

George wants to buy this land because of Lennie being special and doing so will George does not have to watch over Lennie. George has a piece of land in mind like more men : “ They come, an’ they quit an’ go on; an’ every damn one of ‘em’s got a little piece of land in his head.” men think that they are going to get the piece of land that they dream of but they end up spending all their money at town “They come to a ranch an’ work up a stake and then they go into town and blow their stake, and the first thing you know they’re poundin’ their tail on some other ranch.”

American dream often was never fulfilled during Arroyo 2 the great depression because they are too far fetched during the great depression.George wanting to buy land during the worst time when no one is willing to give up a piece of land. Likewise with Curley’s wife she wants to be and actor but she is put down by her mother. Curley’s dream to become a star also ends once she gets married because she is in a marriage that is unfulfilling to her needs. She wants to talk to someone but Curley never pays attention to her. ““Wha’s the matter with me?” she cried. “Ain’t I got a right to talk to nobody?” Curley’s wife Arroyo 3 Works Cited John Steinbeck. Of Mice and Men. Pascal Covici, 1939.

Did you like this example?

The Unattainable American Dream A Story by John Steinbeck. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

the American Dream has Changed over Time

People still have a strong desire to make it happen and it be the reality. Both authors had similar ideas of the American dream and how it consisted of freedoms for the oppressed , yet they had many differences in who they supported the most.

Martin Luther King Jr. ideas of the American dream praised the promise that Lincoln’s momentous Proclamation would allow blacks to be equal to whites and have the same rights. King dreamed for all people to be treated equally. “In a sense, we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check”, since the promise he wrote about ahs not been accomplished or fulfilled, he stated that the check was marked with “insufficient funds” (King). He confronted the nation with its failure to honor its promise of equal liberty for everyone. He even implored his fellow protestors and all of his fellow citizens to understand that their destinies as Americans were bound together. Envisioning an America whose children could all sing with new and true meaning the proud claim “sweet land of liberty” in its namesake, he brought his speech to its unforgettable phrase. The famous phrase, “I have a dream”,a dream not apart from or against, but rather of, from, and for America—“a dream deeply rooted in the American dream” (King). He want a black to free in the future; a desire that has been for many years. In Let America be America the poem outlines the reasons why this ideal America has gone, or never was, but could still be.

The land that’s mine—the poor man’s, Indian’s, Negro’s, ME— (Hughes 62-65). Hughes question the same as king of society was doing anything about striving for some equality. His poem explores the darker parts of life. The history of exploitation and the unique struggles of the people who make up America, both black and white. For the poor, the oppressed, and the downtrodden, the reality of day to day existence makes the dream of one day being a person in society, a cruel illusion. Whilst pessimistic, the poem does have an optimistic ending and lights the way forward with hope.

Hughes talks about how people will renew and refresh and rebuild something wholesome and sustainable. That there remains hope that the cherished ideal of America can be made good again.

The American Dream soon became something to strive for, of soon became a role model for the rest of the world. The American dream still may never be achieved but King and Hughes has dream and their dreams did change Soviet and the ways people live. Their ideas similar and different, yet still wanting to achieve the dream of being free.

Works Cited

Hughes, Langston, “Let America Be America Again”, New York: George Braziller, 2004. Print. tinyurl.com/americandream181, retrieved: October 11
King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968. I Have a Dream; the Quotations of Martin Luther King, Jr. New York :Grosset, 1968. Print. Retrieved: October 11
Wright, Luke S. H. “The Death of the American Dream.” Virginia Quarterly Review, vol. 85, no. 4, Fall 2009, pp. 196–199. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=47427381&site=ehost-live. Retrieved: October 16

Did you like this example?

the American dream has changed over time. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Where are the Complication, Climax, and Denouement

How is the plot arranged? Explain your reasons for choosing these places.

Aristotle says that the plot is “the soul of a tragedy.' First, we meet our characters and get to know them a little. We find ourselves in the High Middle Ages, in Scotland. The plot is arranged in a way that shows us life of the main character, the decisions he makes, etc. It all revolves around him. The complication comes when Macbeth decides to fulfil the prophecy and kills the king. After this, there’s no turning back. The climax is the turning point of the play. In my opinion, it happens in the third scene of the third act, when Fleance escapes. It means that Macbeth didn’t succeed in the end. He’s not going to be the ruler. His wife dies, He loses his mind, and we can tell that it’s not going to be the happy ending for him. The denouement is Macbeth’s death. It puts a period to his life and his story. Now it’s all in the past.

Examine the characters in Macbeth. Name the protagonist, and explain your answer. Name the principal antagonist, and explain your answer.

Macbeth is definitely the protagonist. The whole plot revolves around him. This is his story. As in any tragedy, a protagonist should always have an antagonist. I think Macbeth’s principle antagonist was Macbeth himself. He ruined his own life, he was his own enemy. Of course, anyone who was against Macbeth in any way can be counted as the antagonist. And the main one among others was Macduff. He opposes Macbeth and in the end, he’s the one that kills him.

What is Macbeth’s nemesis, or fatal flaw? Name and explain two examples of his hubris (pride or excessive self-confidence) in the play.

His fatal flaw is that he loses everything. His wife, his kingdom, his peace, his life. He was sure he cannot be killed, because the witches prophesied that “None of woman born shall harm Macbeth”. As we know, Macduff wasn’t born naturally, so this prophecy didn’t apply to him. Of course, Macbeth didn’t know about this. He also thought that he can easily become a king by murdering Duncan without any consequences.

Explain three major thoughts or themes of the play. How does the reading of Macbeth encourage virtue in the audience member?

The first thing that came to my mind was conscience or guilt. We can see it being one of the main themes throughout the play. You cannot escape it. Especially if you live a life similar to the Macbeth’s. You lose your peace, you’re always scared, you can’t trust anyone because you can’t really trust yourself. After killing Duncan Macbeth says that he will never sleep again and kept seeing his blood-stained hands. After killing Banquo, he sees him as a ghost. In the end, we see what it leads to. Macbeth practically lost his mind. Another theme would probably be ambition and courage. Although the way Macbeth pursues his dreams and goals is not at all noble or virtuous, we can say that he was very ambitious and courageous.

When Macbeth doubts his decision to kill Duncan Lady Macbeth’ asks: “Are you a man?” and he replies: “Ay, and a brave one.” He really did whatever it took to make the prophecies come true. Third one would be false appearances. Again, an example of withes’ promises that no man born of a woman can harm Macbeth. Such promises make Macbeth think that he’s invincible, which isn’t true. I think that this story teaches us a lot. Seeing a bad example encourages virtue in the audience. I personally realized that I’m my own agent. And I need to make my own decisions and be true to myself. Macbeth’s story shows us one way things could go after he heard the prophecy and talked to his wife. But the story could’ve gone in a complete opposite direction if he chose it to be so. We are the ones that make these choices. I feel like whenever I do the right thing, I’m always rewarded. I get what I want, I’m happy. Perhaps Macbeth could have achieved everything and more if he chose a better way instead.

Did you like this example?

Where are the complication, climax, and denouement. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Coronation Dinner of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth

Everyone was invited to the events to congratulate him on his accomplishments and becoming the new king. Entering the dining room is filled with beautiful and valuable antiques. Lennox, a tall white man with long dark hair, and Ross who is about the same height as him with black short hair and a long beard walk into the room. As everyone settled in the dining room, Macbeth walks in along with his wife, Lady Macbeth and was greeted by the guest.

As the dinner begins, Macbeth goes to take his seat at the head of the royal table but he seems a bit off and appears to be speaking to himself. Macbeth begins to act weird and is not talking as much as he usually is. He starts keeping it to himself, but you can see in his facial expressions that something in his head is bothering him. Lennox who was closely observing Macbeth, 'how strange'. Ross who was sitting across from Lennox noticed how strangely Macbeth is acting also.

During the dinner progress, Macbeth suddenly starts to shout at an invisible figure. All the guests turn their attention to him and are very concerned. Everyone started whispering and wonders what is going on with Macbeth. Lady Macbeth notices the situation and pulls him aside. She scolds at him and asks him what is going on. He tells her that he is hearing voices of Banquo’s ghost feel guilty about murdering Banquo. Lady Macbeth, of course, didn’t care and tells him to get his act together before anyone finds out about what really happens. Macbeth and Lady Macbeth went by into the dining room and act as nothing happens.

Shortly after that, there is an awkward atmosphere going on in the room after what happened. There are whispers and undertones from the guest that are concerned with Macbeth's odd behavior. Ross who was sitting and talking to Lennox seems to the most curious and was about to walk up to Macbeth and question about his visions but Lennox stops him. “If much you note him, you shall offend him and extend his passion. Feed and regard him not,” said Lennox.

They both went outside to gossip with the other guest about Macbeth but Lady Macbeth was behind the wall listening to their conversation. She was furious and felts disrespected about what they are saying about her husband. She confronted them in the middle of their talk and they were shocked. Lady Macbeth threatens them to keep their silence and don’t tell anyone about what they saw. Lennox right away apologized but Ross who wasn’t threatened by her words didn’t. Ross tells Lady Macbeth that he couldn’t care less of what she is going to do to him. “I shall tell everyone in the town of Macbeth.” Lady Macbeth was even angrier but decided to control herself and plotted a way to get rid of Ross.

Later on, the sun has set and the sky begins to shimmer in the darkness. Lady Macbeth asked everyone to leave. She then asked Ross and Lennox to stay back as the guests leave. When it was just the three in the room, she apologized to Ross and Lennox for overacting about the situation and try to settle with them. Little did they not know is that it was just one of her manipulative strategies to get rid of them especially Ross. After talking, Lennox returned home first. Lady Macbeth decided to not kill Lennox because he listens to her demand but it a different story for Ross. Ross didn’t listen to her and tell everyone about Macbeth's behavior. On the way back home, Ross was murdered by one of Lady Macbeth's servants. Lady Macbeth asked the servants to make his murder seem like suicide and never tell anyone about this or he will be killed too. Ross never makes it back home.

The two-person I have picked were my classmates Kali and my cousin Vattey. Kali helped me improve on my diction and vocabulary. In certain sentences, she picks out my mistakes and tells me that some words don’t fit in the sentence. She goes over my essay and gives me tips to improve it. Vattey, my cousin, help me with my grammar and spelling errors. She helps me by going over my essay, making sure everything is spell rights and flow rights.

In my first draft, I noticed that I make a lot of spelling and grammar errors. I noticed that my narrative is very fast-paced and doesn’t give that much detail to what is happening. I feel like the flow of my story is rush in my opinion. While in my final draft, I change words that would not only get my point across but allow the reader to create their own image on what was going on in the story. I tried to put more in-depth while writing it. I also realized while revising my essay that there is a lot of words that aren’t supposed to be in there. So I fix it by removing it and making the sentence flow smoothly.

Did you like this example?

Coronation Dinner of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Similarities with Tabaliban and Macbeth

The Taliban is a group of Islamic extremists that go to very intense measures to gain power, Macbeth is a man that is greedy to be king and is willing to do anything to get the power he wants including murder. Both Macbeth and the Taliban make radical decisions that most would find unethical. The similarities between the two of them shows that they both have an obsession of control and have an ambition to be the most powerful out of everyone around them. Unlike most people Macbeth and the Taliban do not care about playing fair or making ethical decisions.

They both will do anything from hiding information from their people to killing anyone they feel is a threat or can be a threat. This is clearly not the proper way to gain the power of a country’s land and people but to the Taliban and Macbeth it is. They feel what they are doing is for the greater good but, they are ruining people’s lives. Due to the extreme measures taken by both Macbeth and the Taliban, it can be inferred that they both seek power and control and will stop at nothing to achieve it.

The Taliban’s leader Osama bin Laden is very greedy for power. Him and all his people will do anything to gain more power and land. The Taliban first started as a group that wanted to turn Afghanistan into a pure Islamic country. Osama is a well-educated man that many people respected and looked up to. Everyone thought of him as a hero but that soon began to change. He began to start plotting against the United States of America. He began to start making radical choices. Many people started to notice that Osama bin Laden was more extreme than anyone in the middle east and wanted to take control of the world.

Afghanistan started to notice that he wanted to take full control he was “soon regarded as a radical threat” (“Osama bin Laden”). People began to realize that Osama bin Laden did not care about making a pure Islamic country but rather he wanted full control of the country which put many people’s lives at stake. Osama bin Laden made many people worry for their lives after he started to plot against the United States, seeking to gain power. Osama was willing to kill for the power and control he wanted which shows his ambition for power.

He used extreme punishments to make sure everyone followed his rules and made sure that everyone knew what he wanted which made him dangerous to everyone. Osama bin Laden knew many people would worry about their own lives and their family’s lives so he hid everything from the people of Afghanistan. Osama banned T.V., education for women, and did not allow older men to learn. By doing this all the people of Afghanistan would not know what is going on outside of their country and would not be able to understand any writing on newspapers or any source of media regarding to the rising tensions between the U.S. and Osama bin Laden.

Him hiding all information from the people of Afghanistan shows that he never wanted to take the country for religious reasons he only wanted to gain the country so he could start his main goal of “remaking the world” (“Address to a joint session...”). The U.S. made efforts to try and find peace but Osama bin Laden was not interested in making peace because he felt the U.S. was stealing from Afghanistan. The fact that the U.S. did not want to fight and Osama bin Laden did not care if they went to war shows that the Taliban only want to take over the world and make it their own form of Islam. The Taliban don’t want to make peace because they feel that when they have all the power in the world, they will not need to make peace with anyone. The Taliban will do anything to take over the world and become the most powerful regime in the world.

Osama bin Laden and the Taliban are obsessed with the thought of have having all the power in the world much like in the story Macbeth, when the main character Macbeth has obsession with having the throne to himself. Macbeth is a character in a story wrote by William Shakespeare and has many traits that coincide with Osama bin Laden. Macbeth was once a hero and looked up to like a royal figure. At the beginning of the story Macbeth and his friend Banquo meet witches, they go on to tell them both what the future has in store for them.

Macbeth was told that he would become king but never was told how he would achieve such royalty. He and his wife also known as Lady Macbeth were very intrigued by the royal life. Macbeth’s wife pushed him to the point of insanity, she is the one who initially introduced the idea of killing to take the throne from King Duncan. At first, he did not want to take the throne because he felt that there was no need to commit such a crime. However, his wife began to belittle him, she constantly told him he was not strong enough to take the throne from King Duncan and asked if he was a man. Macbeth was pushed to the breaking point and killed King Duncan after he finished murdering the king in his sleep he came out of his room and told Lady Macbeth: “I have done the deed. Didst thou not hear a noise?” (Macbeth 2.2.19).

Macbeth wanted to make sure no one hear d him kill the king so he would not get in any trouble for the crime he committed. Macbeth began to suspect that his friend Banquo knew about the crime so he hired murderers to take care of his issue. Macbeth told the killers “Both of you know Banquo was your enemy” (Macbeth 3.1.130). Macbeth’s goal was to try and make the killers feel all their issues are because of Banquo which eliminates all of Macbeth’s suspicion of Banquo knowing anything about King Duncan’s murder. Macbeth’s obsession for power made him kill his best friend and an innocent king that everyone liked. As time passed and Macbeth was still the king, people began to not like the way he ruled the land.

Macbeth their opinion on how he should rule without a severe punishment. Everyone is scared of Macbeth and keeps to their selves to stay out of trouble and pain. Macbeth And the Taliban both took power from other people by using various methods of violence, crimes, and threats. Macbeth and the Taliban both use various methods to get the power and control they feel that they must have. Macbeth and Osama bin Laden have made many similar choices and have similar ideas.

Macbeth and Osama bin Laden have both killed innocent people to gain the power that their greed longs for. They have both made sure that no one knows exactly what is going on around them so they will not get into any trouble or deal with people trying to get revenge against them. The “Taliban did anything and everything they possibly could to win any war they were involved in” (“Mapping Militants”). The Taliban are willing to use anything that they have to gain the power that they want. For example, the Taliban bomb cities to take over areas of land which increases their power since they now have taken more land from other people.

They will kill anyone they feel is necessary so they can take what they want whether its land, people, or just because they want to kill. The Taliban act like they want Afghanistan to make it a holy place for its people but in reality, it is not for a good cause. The Taliban always attack when they are least expected which is also how Macbeth gained his power. Macbeth acts like a friend of King Duncan’s then kills him when he least expects it. (Macbeth 2.2 ) Macbeth acts kind to King Duncan so he can get closer to him and not be suspected by his guards. While Duncan is asleep Macbeth and his wife plot against him and devise a plan to take him out. Macbeth then kills Duncan which turns the throne over to Macbeth which satisfies his greed. Osama bin Laden’s extreme Islamic ideals are not approved by Muslim educators much like Macbeth’s rule is not approved by any of the people he has power over.

Did you like this example?

Similarities with Tabaliban and Macbeth. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Correspondence between Macbeth and the Teachings on the Nature of Virtue

Macbeth’s virtue is problematic because he initially seems courageous when on the attack in battle. Although in reality, he shows the excessive vice of boldness. He fails to manifest courageous endurance and patience in obtaining to the good. Macbeth finds himself often drifting into relentless and impatience.

Thomas Aquinas defines evil as “a privation of the good.” Macbeth constantly chooses apparent good rather than authentic good, as he is tempted by numerous of witches and also Lady Macbeth. Macbeth violates the natural law and suffers extrinsic and intrinsic punishment. It is commonplace among critics of Macbeth to point out that the eponymous hero’s first words echo a similarly antithetical line chanted by the witches in the opening scene of the play. Macbeth’s ‘‘So foul and fair a day I have not seen’’ is noteworthy not only because it reiterates a paradoxical statement, but because it refers back to the very beginning of the play rather than to the sorceries which have just preceded Macbeth’s arrival.

I agree with Kranz statement “he fails to manifest courageous endurance and patience in obtaining to the good.” Macbeth finds himself constantly wanting to be in power. Macbeth is shown as a vigorous war hero. Then he assassinates a great King by the name of Duncan. He displays an image of weakness by blaming the murder on King Duncan’s two guards and even his own son. Lady Macbeth constantly informs Macbeth that he does not show the characteristics of a real man. She basically forces him into doing evil actions.

After Macbeth becomes King, he then becomes afraid of Banquo. So he orders three murderers to wait for him and murder both him and his son. Macbeth does not show the characteristics of a great King. He uses his authority for his weakness. Macbeth desires to be powerful by betraying others. He gains knowledge that he will be defeated by a man that is not born to a woman. Being arrogant, he believes that no one ever will defeat him. He soon send men out to murder Macduff and his family.

Not knowing King Duncan’s son and Macduff are creating an army that will defeat his. When the soldiers arrive to battle Macbeth and his army, he constantly says he will not be defeated by a man born to a woman. He sadly kills Siward’s youngest son in a battle. Afterward, Macduff steps up and murders Macbeth. Finally, Malcolm becomes the Great King. In conclusion, Macbeth does not exactly defeat others to gain power. He is basically afraid of his conscience and to be defeated by man. Macbeth shows the characteristics of a coward that lets others have an influence on him. For instance, the three witches informed him that he will become King soon.

Also, his wife, Lady Macbeth, influences him to kill King Duncan while he is visiting their palace for a celebration. Therefore, Macbeth fail to manifest courageous endurance and patience in obtaining to the good. He transforms from a war hero, thane of Glamis, to a murdering King of Scotland. The higher he rose on his road of power the more corrupt and evil he became. Which ignites the entire them of the play.

Did you like this example?

Correspondence between Macbeth and the teachings on the nature of virtue. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Three Witches who Foretold that he would Become King of Cavdor

The witches acted as agents of Satan because they manipulate Macbeth into killing the king so he can become king fast, they prophesies the future of how Macbeth was going to become king, but the witches’ temptation caused Macbeth to do all the bad things.

Some people think the witches act more as guides than as evil people because they told the future which throughout the play, start to come true. They told Macbeth that he “shalt be king hereafter!” (Shakespeare 1.3.50). People don’t think it matters about how Macbeth became King as long as the witches’ prophecy came true because he becomes King by the beginning of act 3. Some might think that the witches have full control over the events because they are agents of fate.

The prophecy of the witches seems to make everything turn bad and makes everyone start hating and turning their backs on each other. The witches told Macbeth that he “shalt be king hereafter”! (Shakespeare 1.3.50) The bad decisions Macbeth made were because he was trying too hard to fulfill the prophecy and become king. He probably wouldn't have made the bad decisions if the witches’ prophecy didn’t tempt him to do evil. The consequences that he suffers are the result of his actions. The witches also prophesied Banquo's future:

The prophecy said that Macbeth will become king, but they tell Banquo that he won’t be king himself but others down the line in his family will. Macbeth sees Banquo as a threat, so he hires people to kill him but Banquo’s son, Fleance, escape. Banquo lets us know that evil will sometimes tell the truth to provoke harmful consequences, meaning, the witches will tell things that are true or things that will come true to make a person or to trick a person into doing evil.

Macbeth falls prey to the power of the witches’ words by choosing to murder Duncan. But, Banquo shows the ability to spring back and recover quickly from the witches’ temptation. Banquo doubts the witch's promises but Macbeth appears eager to be named Thane of Cawdor. Banquo later tells him that he will support his claim of the crown if it was going to happen, but as long as he could “keep/ My bosom franchised, and allegiance clear,” (Shakespeare 2.1.28). After, discovering Duncan's murder Banquo says “In the great hand of God I stand” (Shakespeare 2.3.124). Because of his faith in God, Banquo never fails to resist any evil acts for his gain.

The witches act like a lot like agents of Satan because of the way they try to manipulate people and cause them to do bad things. The strength of the witches seems to be more powerful with Macbeth because he has grown away from God and has little faith in him. Banquo refers to the witches as “instruments of darkness” (Shakespeare 1.3.124). The witches lurk people in with weaknesses like Satan and tries to mess up their lives. “Against the churches; though the yesty waves/ Confound and swallow navigation up..” (Shakespeare 4.1.53-54).

Macbeth decided to let the witches control him by letting them tempt him into doing bad things and he let the prophecies tell him how he was going to live his life instead of doing it himself and dying as a result. Because the witches were agents of Satan, they manipulated Macbeth into killing the king and messing up his whole life.

Did you like this example?

Three witches who foretold that he would become king of Cavdor. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

The Dagger of the Famous Play Macbeth is a Story Within a Story

The famous “dagger” represents so much more than just a weapon used to kill. It symbolizes the bloody path Macbeth will go down. Macbeth was always well known for being a brave and successful warrior. Stories were told by the Captain that Macbeth fought through Macdonwald soldiers all by his lonesome and eventually killed off Madcondwal himself. Needless to say, Macbeth is well determined and shows this trait very well throughout the story.

Macbeth started off as a noble warrior but would soon turn into a rogue. This all begins because of a trio of witches who give Macbeth an apparition. In Act 2two MacbethMacBeth is finally committed to killing King Duncan. This is a crucial point for the symbolization of the dagger, as well as for Macbeth himself. This is the start of Macbeth's bloody path to the throw.

Though Macbeth's guilty conscience will become his undoing. With Duncan now dead and gone, Macbeth will soon be able to take power, but only if he isn't caught for the murder of the former leader. In Act 3three of Macbeth's journey, he begins to feel nervous and guilty. This as well as other stuff makes Macbeth feel as though he must kill Banquo and Fleance. This causes Macbeth to send out murderers to kill Banquo and Fleance before they can do anything or figure out anything.

Though Fleance is able to escape in the darkness of the night, Banquo sadly fell at the hands of his attackers. Now that Banquo is down and out, Fleance seeks to get his revenge once again continuing on the bloody cycle Macbeth started with his power. In Act 4four the guilt truly begins to catch up with Macbeth, and you can tell his downfall is coming. Macbeth begins to hallucinate at the witch's meeting place all he can see is the dagger before he killed Duncan.

This soon becomes a living nightmare for MacbethMacBeth as he realizes he has truly done wrong. This guilt has begun to build inside Macbeth Macbeth and stab at his conscience. This ultimately leads to his untimely death in battle. In Act 5, Macbeth is finally killed in a battle with Macduff. Though Macbeth knew he was doomed he truly believed he couldn’t be killed and chose to continue the fight. This happened all the way up until the very end where Macduff beheadsbeheaded Macbeth. This is the last symbol of the dagger as well. It symbolizes the end just like it symbolized the beginning. In conclusion, the daggers story was one that usually can go unnoticed. It's a story of chaos and traumatic stress. Though it doesn’t just show those things. The dagger shows growth as well some good and some bad, but everyone who came in contact with it changed not only for the worst but even some for the best.

Did you like this example?

The dagger of the famous play Macbeth is a story within a story. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

“Man is a Complex Being; he Makes Deserts Bloom and Lakes Die” by Gil Stern

As Stern said, being a man is not a simple task considering a man cannot please everyone to succeed. A man will blossom many flowers in one eye while in the meantime he drains the lakes of others' eyes. Macbeth, Macduff, and Banquo had shown many “masculine” traits throughout the entire play. Arguably many of the men in Macbeth could have masculinity traits, but so did women. Lady Macbeth had a sundry amount of malicious thoughts and even came across the same intentions as Macbeth just in different timing of the play. Masculinity is shown in many characters especially in Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as their traits start to influence each other as the play progresses. Masculinity can be conveyed through Lady Macbeth's mentality, Macbeth's thoughts before and after killing Duncan, and Macbeth's changing mentality after becoming king.

When Macbeth was written, in the early 1600s, most women had no sovereignty in society or even over their own lives. Considering that this play was written during the 1600s, it had the impression that Lady Macbeth had a lot of say in her relationship with Macbeth. During her soliloquy, Lady Macbeth had expressed, “Come you spirits that tend of mortal thoughts, unsex me here” (Shakespeare 1.5.31). Lady Macbeth assumed if she had qualities of a man like the lack of care, then she could do any deed. Undoubtedly after the dire situation, Lady Macbeth showed no regret,

“A little water clears us of this deed”(Shakespeare 2.2.68). Lady Macbeth was the man in this situation; she had taken the role of the leader and told Macbeth what he had to do. But over time, the reader sees a sudden change, Lady Macbeth feels the pressure for killing Duncan and the effects that came with it. Towards the end, she starts reliving what occurred on the night of the murder to where she becomes dauntless she kills herself because of the guilt. Overall Lady Macbeth had a brave soul, she was truly convinced she could have killed Duncan or at least help Macbeth kill Duncan. But, “guilt is perhaps the most painful companion of death” by Coco Chanel.

Unlike Lady Macbeth in the situation of killing Duncan, Macbeth had a different reaction. Macbeth perturbation had triggered before and after the killing of the king. Before the death of Duncan, Macbeth had imaginations: “I see thee still/ And on thy blade and dudgeon gouts of blood/which was not so before” (Shakespeare 2.2.45).

Macbeth hallucinates a dagger covered in blood but not just any dagger but the one he will soon kill Duncan with. Moments before Duncan was killed, Macbeth rethinks the situation he would be placed in but with some encouraging words from Lady Macbeth and ambition to become king. He soon realizes that it’s better now with the opportunity than later when it’s gone. Once Macbeth had committed the evil deed the guilt started to palpable Macbeth’s conscious, “will all great Neptune's ocean wash /this blood clean from my hand?” (Shakespeare 2. 2. 60-62). Macbeth perceived the malicious act just so he could succeed. The water would clean his hands from the sin physically but he knew the water could not clean his conscious clear.

But the guilt didn’t last long for Macbeth. Macbeth had become an avaricious, murky, and a vile king. Macbeth just wanted to be king for as long as possible. Which resulted in Macbeth having visits to the witches so they could tell him prophecies, which is where all the unnecessary killing starts. Macbeth was told, at the beginning of the play, that Banquo’s sons would be more prosperous than Macbeth. Which was more than enough for Macbeth to concluded that he had to kill Banquo but he didn’t do the deed himself, he had convinced minions to do it for him: “Who wear our health but sickly in his life, Which in his death were perfect.”(Shakespeare 3.1.110). Macbeth had manipulated these hitmen into thinking Banquo was the bad guy. That Banquo has brought all the adversity into their lives. Macbeth was a clever man, and he knew if Banquo was dead, he could be king for a long period of time. But, Macbeth also knew he had another threat, Macduff. Since Macbeth is the king, he allowed his pitiless dominated his behavior which the outcome was the death of Macduff’s family :

“Your castle is surprised, your wife and babes/ Savagely slaughtered” (Shakespeare 4.3. 208-209). Considering that Macbeth wanted to keep his sovereignty and be king until the moon turned blue. Macbeth is ruthless, merciless, and cold-hearted towards anyone he believed would get in his way. This leads him to kill Banquo and the Macduff family because not only did they upbraid him for killing Duncan but they were both obstacles in Macbeth’s life.

Overall, Masculinity could be conveyed through this play heavily by Lady Macbeth and Macbeth. Lady Macbeth had represented masculinity in her inner thoughts by wishing to have men qualities. Macbeth had his last moments of being warm-hearted and having a guilty soul. To Macbeth having no care in the world and this was shown by the way he had reacted when his wife had killed herself from the guilt she carried. But masculinity was also showed that you don’t need to be a cold-hearted person to want male characteristics. But “too much” masculinity can lead a person to be conceited and imprudent. Masculinity is a trait that has a certain limit and when it's surpassed, it turns into pure hatred.

Did you like this example?

“Man is a complex being; he makes deserts bloom and lakes die” by Gil Stern. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

The Influence of the Image of Witches on Duncan

There are so many people in this world that think murder is the only way to get by and get what they want but truly it isn't. The witches in the book have to tell Macbeth how he is going to become king by killing Duncan. In The Tragedy of Macbeth by Williams Shakespeare, he was evil because he didn't take care of his family, he killed Duncan because that's the only way he knew how to become king, and he also killed other people since the witches told him that’s how he had to become king.

The witches tell Macbeth how he was supposed to become king, and they say “All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter!” (Shakespeare 1.3 50). Macbeth doesn't know what to say because the witches vanished. He heard things of him becoming Thane of Cawdor. Macbeth gets a little frustrated about how he might become king. Macbeth starts to plan how he is going to kill Duncan. Lady Macbeth makes sure that he did what he was supposed to do. When he comes back after he had killed Duncan he said “I have done the deed. Didst thou not hear a noise?” (Shakespeare 2.2.15). Macbeth took care of killing Duncan.

Macbeth just could not clean his own mess up. He got the guards drunk to where he could get to Duncan. When Duncan was asleep Macbeth killed Duncan with the dagger. Then came back and killed the guards. Macbeth knew what he was doing. He was very nervous at first but did his job. Macbeth went crazy after he had killed Duncan. After Macbeth did what he did he went crazy.

Throughout the play Macbeth made sure that people did not find out that he had killed Duncan. When he knew that people started finding out he made sure that they could not tell anyone. Because he would kill them. The witches knew how they could mess with him since he was already feeling the guilt after he killed Duncan. Macbeth kills Banquo because Macbeth starts to worry that Banquo was getting suspicious of Duncan's death. So he had to kill Banquo to cover his tracks. He did not want people to know. Soon enough Macbeth starts to hear something and it says “ sleep no more! Macbeth does murder sleep” (Shakespeare 2.2.34-35).

Soon Macbeth starts to figures out what he has done. Macbeth started to kill random people because they found out what he did. Macbeth killed the king's guards, Macdonwald, Lady Macduff and her family. Macbeth kills all of Duncan's servants to frame them. He framed Malcolm and the king's sons. Macbeth hires 3 men to kill Banquo and his son. But Banquo’s ghost does make a happy visit. Macbeth decides to kill Macduff's whole family even his servants were murdered.

Macbeth did not do a good job on taking care of his family. He would make them clean up his mess or just not care. Macbeth put his family in bad situations. He had them doing a lot of bad things. Lady Macbeth had to finish the job for Macbeth because he was to scared to go back. Lady Macbeth said to Macbeth, “ Give me the daggers”

Lady Macbeth kills herself out of the guilt. Malcolm said in the play “Took off her life” ( Shakespeare 5.6.71). Before That all had happened she was going crazy. When she had helped Macbeth do murder. Lady Macbeth could not have children. Which that had hurt Macbeth and her. Macbeth blames her for not getting to have children. They had fought a lot about random things.

Though Macbeth might of done the things he had done he did do some good things to. When the witches came into the story this was when everything started to go downhill. Macbeth had killed the king but throughout the whole play things would happen to him. Witches would mess with him or he was crazy.

Did you like this example?

The influence of the image of witches on Duncan. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Macbeth Act 3 Scene

You got everything that was prophesized. You have the title of king, title of Cawdor, and title of Glamis. You have everything that the Three Witches predicted but I’m afraid that you gained the titles unfairly. The witches also claimed that my children will be kings. I hope what they said comes true for me too. I won’t say any more.

I heard that Malcolm and Donalbain are hiding in England and Ireland in order to shield their crimes from the world. They’re telling their hosts false ideas. We can talk about this at the council meeting tomorrow. Go for your ride. Good-bye until I see you at dinner tonight. Is Fleance going with you?

Everyone can do what they want until seven o’clock tonight. To let everyone have a good time, I will stay in my room until dinner. Until then, I hope God is with you.

It’s not worth it to be king if I don’t feel safe. I’m afraid of Banquo and his kind heart. His wise mind allows him to make safe choices. I am afraid of no one except for him and while I’m with him my judgement is supressed just like Caesar did to Mark Antony. He provoked the witches for information about his own future like they gave me. They said that Banquo’s children will rule. They gave me a crown and a scepter with no heir to pass it down to. I killed Duncan and disturbed my peace of mind for Banquo’s children. I did everything just so they could be kings. Instead of letting that happen I will go to extreme lengths to prevent it.

Did you think about what I said yesterday? So, you know that Banquo kept you captive, not me? I told this to you last time we met. How you were treated should make you say Banquo did it.

Yes I said this and now I’m going to continue this topic even more. Are you so kind that you will let the man go for his crimes? Are you going to pray for his good fortune despite the fact that he harmed you?

Yes, you identify as men just like all species of dogs fall under one category. You can tell them apart by their characteristics, just like men. If you are not at the bottom of the category of men then we can discuss the details of how to kill your enemy.

He is also my enemy and he is a threat to my life. I would do it myself but we have friends that we both share and whose trust I need to keep. I must feel remorseful when he dies. Therefore, I’m very appreciative for your help so that I can hide this deed from the public.

This has to be done tonight. I’ll tell you where to go and when to do it. It must be done away from the castle so that no one suspects anything. Along with killing Banquo, you should also kill his son, Fleance. I’ll leave you to think about it. I’ll be back to hear your decision.

Did you like this example?

Macbeth Act 3 Scene. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

What is the Purpose of the Appearance and Speech of the Messenger in Scene

Contents

Who might have sent this messenger?
Cite Evidence What is Malcom’s initial attitude toward Macduff? What is shown about Malcom trough the way he assesses Macduff’s sincerity?
Analyze Consider the description of Edward, the English king, in lines 146-159 of Scene 3. Why is this passage included in the play?

Who might have sent this messenger?

In Macbeth act 4, the motivation behind the appearance and discourse of the envoy in act four, scene two is to caution Lady Macduff that she is in great danger and should escape her home as soon as possible with her family. While Shakespeare does not expressly advise the crowd who sent the messenger, one can infer that a partner of Macduff and somebody contradicted to Macbeth sent him to secure Lady Macduff and her kids. To this moment, the audience has no clue who the mysterious messenger might be, but what the audience does know is that he was sent to warn Lady Macduff about the danger that is present around her and her children. The messenger often tells Lady Macduff that she should trust in him that he is an honorable person and his words are true. Lady Macduff ends up staying and taking for granted the messenger’s message.

Draw Conclusions Lady Macduff and Malcom both question Macduff’s motives for fleeing Scotland. Think about the crimes Macbeth has already committed. Why might the nature of these crimes have led Macduff to believe his family would be safe at his castle?

In Act 4, Macduff decides to flee his castle and go to England because he knows about the danger that surrounds him in the castle. He was the person who found Duncan's dead body, and he has valid justification to expect that it will be the same for him. In England he will unite with different furious people like Malcolm, Northumberland, and Siward with the goal of coming back to Scotland to take Macbeth out of his reign. Simultaneously, Macduff is wracked with blame and enduring over a choice that was to a great extent constrained upon him by conditions outside his ability to control. In making great his break, he left his wife and kids a lone. Naturally, he feels that he has double-crossed them here and there, and left them helpless before Macbeth's unquenchable fury.

Infer Why might Shakespeare have decided to show the murder of Lady Macduff and her children on stage? Explain how watching this scene rather than hearing about the event occurring offstage might affect the audience’s view of Macbeth.

Shakespeare might have decided to show the murder of Lady Macduff and her children on stage because he wanted to give the audience an insight on how brutal the murders where. Illustrating the murders to his audience makes it seem more real than just hearing about them happening, this helps the audience feel inside of the play and feel like they just witnessed a murder in real life, this helps Shakespeare make a connection between his audience and his novel, the audience feels connected because of the atrocious murder they just witnessed. Shakespeare also described this scene because he wanted the audience to realize about Macbeth’s lack of sympathy towards anyone, this violent act shows how real of a monster he has become due to envy.

Cite Evidence What is Malcom’s initial attitude toward Macduff? What is shown about Malcom trough the way he assesses Macduff’s sincerity?

In Act 4, Malcom’s initial attitude toward Macduff is that he cannot be trusted; Malcom believes that Macduff is on Macbeth’s side, he believes that Macduff is bad like Macbeth. Malcom cannot find a reasonable answer to why Macduff would leave his family behind and move to England. He believes that he wants to kill him. To determine whether his insinuations of Macduff being also the bad guy, he tests him by asking him if he is qualified to be the king because all of his flaws; he is greedy, violent, and lustful. Macduff disagrees at first, but then he cannot help crying “O Scotland, Scotland” (Act 4, Scene 3). Macduff's faithfulness toward Scotland drives him to think that Malcolm is not fit to govern Scotland and maybe not even to live in there. Macduff has passed Malcolm's assessment of loyalty. Malcom then accepts Macduff as his companion and ally.

Analyze Consider the description of Edward, the English king, in lines 146-159 of Scene 3. Why is this passage included in the play?

This passage is included in Macbeth Act 4 because Shakespeare wanted to show the difference in ruling from Macbeth’s empire and Edward’s empire. The main difference between the two kingdoms is their way of ruling; Macbeth’s is greedy, bloody, and selfish. He does not care that the people in his kingdom are hurting because of his actions. Edward, the English king, wants to end Macbeth’s ruling once in for all, he wants to cut his line of bloody ruling and show the people what really is like to have a good king. Shakespeare included this passage because he wanted to show the audience that that is not the way of ruling, that if things ever where like that, someone will try to remove their bloody ways. Kings were thought to have healing in his hands, that they were closer to God, something Macbeth was not. Macbeth was not divine as supposed to a king, he was not helping anyone, he was not righteous like the other kings.

Did you like this example?

What is the purpose of the appearance and speech of the messenger in Scene. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

Patrick Byrne Professor Saunders

When it comes to the income that people receive when working a minimum wage job there seems to be two different opinions people have about it. One would say that minimum wage is too low and it is not enough to live on. The other side would say it needs to stay ay the current rate because people need to understand that a minimum wage job is not supposed to be a career. This discussion on minimum wage has been going on for many years. There has been a lot of controversies on which side is best either for the individual or society as a whole. In my opinion you should not be trying to make a career or life out of a minimum wage job.

Minimum wage jobs were designed to show how to do the basics of a job, learning skills such as working a cash register or how to treat a customer, understanding the value of a dollar or cleaning the floor. They were also designed for teenagers to work while in high school or while going through college.The minimum wage job was not designed for people to make a career out of it. Parents are contributing to the problem by not encouraging their kids to get a job at an earlier age by saying “enjoy high school and get a job later” because some kids never get a job until the age of 20.

These kids are now entering adulthood and have no idea how to adult. Some are twenty years old and still asking their parents for money instead of having money of their own to spend. The result is when at this age they go to a find a job no one wants to hire them because they do not have the experience. They think since they are twenty they shouldn't have to work at Mcdonalds. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics “people are now getting hired between the ages of 19-24 years of age which is later than it used to be”.

The old statistics show that people were getting hired at minimum wage jobs at the age of sixteen”. Parents need to start telling their kids to get a job as soon as they are able to even if it is only part time working one or two days a week. This will help prepare kids for the “real world” rather than the parents trying to protect them from it. It seems society is trying to protect kids from everything, instead society is hurting our youth by sheltering them from this rite of passage. Getting a job in your teenage years is a valuable tool to growing into a responsible adult. The current generation feels that they should get everything for free and should be provided by the government. Minimum wage jobs were created for entry level positions to prepare you for more responsibility and eventually a move up to higher pay. MInimum wage positions were never designed to maintain a livelihood. Understanding the need to work hard in our lives to become successful is important, but instead people think and expect that minimum wage is going to take them through life.

Having a minimum wage job at an early age could also help people through college without having to ask their parents for money. Parents are already exhausted paying for college. Even if the parents were not paying for college, you have the money to pay for it yourself while working this minimum wage job. I think that people are getting too comfortable with these jobs and thinking that they should be getting paid the big dollar for making a burger. They don't understand that these jobs were made just to get you through until you can get a better job or the career of your choice. It has been said that college is too expensive.

The costs are constantly increasing along with inflation but you can still go to a community college for forty six dollars a unit and get an associates degree. By doing this people can get a better job that pays more to help with the cost of living. According to the New York Times website “last october, just 65.9 percent of people who had graduated from high school the previous spring had enrolled in college.” This is one of the lowest numbers we have experienced in the past 5 years of high school graduates. Instead of going to college these students are working the minimum wage jobs. On average, people are not going to college but are now trying to survive on lower incomes and the number seems to be rising.

A suggestion would be for employers of these minimum wage jobs to start hiring more kids at the age of sixteen rather than older people or machines to do the work. They are hurting the workforce by just trying to get the biggest profit they can, while driving up the prices. If they would just let teenagers willing to work for minimum wage, work. It would help the younger generation to understand what having a job really means.

According to an interview on the Washington Post website, an interview with a Mcdonald's employee stated that “there was double the number of people working in the store, approximately 70-80, as opposed to the 30 or 40 that work there today because preparing the food took a lot more doing” this is showing that businesses are trying to get out of employing people instead of replacing it with robots or machines. This is in part due to the unwillingness to work and the quality of workers along with the fact that machinery has just become more efficient. The american worker just doesn't want to work and this is because we are not instilling a good work ethic within our youth.

When raising minimum wage the cost of living also increases. According to a California government website “on average the rate of inflation raises 3%” but with the raise of minimum wage, inflation has the possibility of sky rocketing. Minimum wage workers will make more per hour but the cost of living will also increase. The cost of living, such as going to the supermarket getting gas, interest rates, etc will go up. It is not a simple answer to the long asked question of “how to fix the minimum wage gap?”

As discussed there are two different sides of the debate when it comes to minimum wage and how it affects people. Raising minimum wage needs to slowly rise with the cost of living. To many people depend on minimum wage jobs as a way of life and this is not what they were designed to do. Our younger generations need to understand that it is not recommended to make a career out of a minimum wage job and that they should strive for a more lucrative position through education and experience. Empowering generation X and Z to strive toward a high school diploma, certificate, degree or higher education will only help them and our economy in the long run.

The counterargument to this debate is the price of living is already too high for minimum wage workers. After working a forty-hour week on minimum wage the average person makes $420. dollars which is $ 1,680. dollars a month before taxes. Workers may have a car payment, rent for housing, credit cards, food and other expenses such as medical bills. This is not a living wage and it was never designed to be that way.

In the larger picture, this is a never-ending cycle that has a constant increase in the cost of living that is affected by the increase in the minimum wage. As an american community, we should begin teaching primary and secondary students to strive for better. Minimum wage is a great place to start in the workforce but we should never stay there.

With the completion of a high school diploma or GED, people increase their attraction in good-paying employers. By looking at history the increase in minimum wage has solved little to none of our problems. Inflation has continued to grow and now workers are looking for more help from the government. “The American dream is known for freedom and opportunities so let's start our children young to work hard and achieve better.’

Did you like this example?

Patrick Byrne Professor Saunders. (2021, Nov 29). Retrieved November 3, 2025 , from
https://studydriver.com/2021/11/page/2/

George Orwell’s Uses of Literary Devices in 1984

Works Cited

Cite this page

George Orwell 1984 Passage Process Paper

Cite this page

George Orwell’s Experience in Burma

Works Cited

Cite this page

Neil Riemer Discusses the Differences that Characterize 1984 as a Myth

Cite this page

1984 by George Orwell Book Review

Cite this page

Protracted Military Conflict Without Violence

Cite this page

1984 Biography of George Orwell

Cite this page

“Newspeak”, the Systematic Deterioration of Language as a Means of Truth

References

Cite this page

Family Famous Writer George Orwell

Cite this page

George Orwell was a very Prominent Author in British Literature

Cite this page

Dream Agritech is an Agricultural Consulting Company Based in the Philippines

Cite this page

Analysis of Literary Works with Themes of the Lost Generation and the American Dream

Conclusion

Cite this page

GEORGE and LENNIE’S BIG DREAM

Cite this page

The Nuances and Hard Truths of the American Dream

Cite this page

Image of Curly’s Wife in the Book “On Mice and Men”

Cite this page

The “American Dream” is the Idea of a Liberal and Prosperous America

Cite this page

She is the Wife of a Man she Loves but Hates

Cite this page

The Unattainable American Dream a Story by John Steinbeck

Cite this page

the American Dream has Changed over Time

Works Cited

Cite this page

Where are the Complication, Climax, and Denouement

Cite this page

Coronation Dinner of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth

Cite this page

Similarities with Tabaliban and Macbeth

Cite this page

Correspondence between Macbeth and the Teachings on the Nature of Virtue

Cite this page

Three Witches who Foretold that he would Become King of Cavdor

Cite this page

The Dagger of the Famous Play Macbeth is a Story Within a Story

Cite this page

“Man is a Complex Being; he Makes Deserts Bloom and Lakes Die” by Gil Stern

Cite this page

The Influence of the Image of Witches on Duncan

Cite this page

Macbeth Act 3 Scene

Cite this page

What is the Purpose of the Appearance and Speech of the Messenger in Scene

Who might have sent this messenger?

Cite Evidence What is Malcom’s initial attitude toward Macduff? What is shown about Malcom trough the way he assesses Macduff’s sincerity?

Analyze Consider the description of Edward, the English king, in lines 146-159 of Scene 3. Why is this passage included in the play?

Cite this page

Patrick Byrne Professor Saunders

Cite this page