Professor Hicks
English 1301
July 29, 2018
Assignment Thirteen
Task 1: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “The Minister’s Black Veil” by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 350 words.
Hawthorne describes in, “The Minister’s Black Veil” (Hawthorne 1) that human peoples are innately affected with the seven deadly sins. These are listed as sloth, lust, gluttony, anger, and covetousness. Hawthorne shows what people are underneath their social acts in, “Young Goodman Brown” (Hawthorne 1). Similarly, in this story Hawthorne hides the true self of a character, while hinting that the faces of all others are masked. That his hidden sin occurred around the time of the death of a girl, that he will not take off the mask, and that he is persistent to his grave.
That day, there is a funeral and it is lead by Reverend Hooper. During this funeral, he leads it whilst wearing a black veil. The town mildly losses their minds. Because, in this suspicious/prejudice society that they live in, they believe Reverend Hooper is hiding a sin committed to the girl while she was alive. This sin is unknown, but we are led to believe it is one of the seven deadly sins.
Hoop’s fiancé pleads for him to take off this veil, but he refuses. He states that, “no mortal eye will see it withdrawn. This dismal shade must separate me from the world” (Hawthorne 7). Whatever sin this may be, it is serious enough for him to truly separate himself from the public. This eventually ends in the Reverend’s fiancé to reject him. Yet, he still keeps the veil. He states that there would now be no inherent barrier within these souls.
His persistence continues, and he even takes the veil to his deathbed. He, once again, refuses to take off the veil. Stating that he sees a black veil on every person he comes across. He then dies, taking the veil to his grave.
We can see that the veil holds immense significant worth to the Reverend. This veil is worth more than his reputation, comfort, and marriage. However, the more interesting point is what he states at the end. He states that there is a black veil on every individual. That everyone has a hidden sin, but does not physically show it because of the society that they live in.
Task 2: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “The Man Who Would Be King” by Rudyard Kipling. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 375 words.
This short was written in 1888 and was published by Rudyard Kipling. Kipling is proficient and well known for writing on the subject of British colonialism, a subject that was popular at this time. However, this story withholds deeper underlying themes. It hides these deep implications within a story about British influence in India. This story takes on a peculiar combination of reality and fantasy. Discussing the ideas of reality/fantasy, arrogance, and friendship.
This story takes on the theme that dichotomy of two different ideas of reality. First would be the realistic idea of an author who has the bourdon of the day to day world. Then we see Dravot and Peachey, who make up their own world and live inside of it. The theme of reality in fabrication is first noticed when the protagonist meets Dravot and Peachey.
Daniel Dravot was a man of arrogance, and it pressed him to create an entire empire. This ‘self over others’ mentality caused him to decide that he was fit to rule over others. Once he accepted the rules, Dravot did not carry himself to be a ruler. He instead married an average woman from the area (without her consent) even though the public insisted he not. Peachey told Daniel that he was to avoid alcohol and women, but Daniel insisted. He was resilient to push his own agenda and believed that he was well over the rules. He still had the chance to avoid problems, but his arrogance/pride prevented him from choosing them.
Then, lastly, the theme of the commitment of friendship. The story states that there is a, “contract between [Daniel] and [Peachey] perusing witnessth in the name of God” (Kipling 9). The two men at first worked well as a symbiotic system, but eventually Daniel is the clear leader with Peachey being a assistant. Daniel’s arrogance causes him to eventually leave Peachy. Unfortunately, Peachy starts to go mildly insane. The people eventually kill Daniel and give Peachey his head.
This parable is one that seemed to be much different than what it really was. The story seemed to be just another parable to tell an interesting story. However, this parable explains to us different ideas through underlying themes. First starting with the difference of encountering the different ideas of reality and fantasy. Through the Narrator, Daniel, and Peachey. Then showing us threats of arrogance and pride. Then, finally, explaining the importance and commitment of friendship.
Task 3: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “Flowering Judas” by Katherine Anne Porter. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 375 words.
This short, written by Katherine Anne Porter, speaks about the emotions of isolation. And, within the story, we are shown several types of emotional isolation one may obtain and the absence to another’s knowledge of it.
“Flowering Judas” begins with introducing a girl named Laura. Laura works for a fat man named Braggioni, and is in her 20’s. Her loneliness is described to be psychological. She does not like Braggioni, but she understands, “her comfortable situation and her salary [belongs] to him.” Because of this, she is not able to fully explain how she feels. This is phase one of her confinement. Due to her not being able to express herself, she feels trapped and restricts what she can do within her life. As the story continues, we are shown that there have been many occurrences where she makes her isolation worse. This leads to her being unable to find her freedom. A prime example of this happening is when the prisoners, “can’t understand why she in in Mexico.” She is a beautiful woman and is likely to find a husband that is beyond there. The poor woman has tied herself down, causing inability for her to leave and pursue something greater. At the end of the story, it shows that she truly wants freedom. But, she doesn’t believe she can do greater.
When she sleeps, she sleeps of a dead prisoner. In this dream, the prisoner leads her to death. However, the death that is represented in this is actually her freedom. In the dream, she would respond to the prisoner “no” (Porter 7). He stated, “eat these flowers. . . take [them] and eat” (Porter 8). She does so, but the prisoner screams that she is now a cannibal. That the flowers were his body. I believe that this is symbolic of her relationship with the man she works for. That she cannot take anything from her “master” without feeling like she owes him for it.
This short explains mental confinement, primarily self-inflicted. The story explains this to us by explaining the mind of Laura. Through her eyes Porter explains what she is going through and how it has melded her mind. Our protagonist stuck in a mental cage, even though the key is right there.
Task 4: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “Barn Burning” by William Faulkner. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 375 words.
There is a conflict amid individual morality and family ideas. Is there worth in morality if there is not a family to support it? And, is there worth in a family if they just hinder us psychologically. William Faulkner explains to us that there is a complicated condition in a young child’s life. Where a child must differ amongst his family, and his morality.
Faulkner first sets the scene with a, “[young] boy, crouched on his nail keg at the back of the crowded room [at the Justice of Peace’s court]” (Faulkner 1). The boy is called to dispute his father; however, the boy does know and understand that his father wants him to lie. Faulkner introduces us to a scene that pressures a naïve child to choose his family ties over his pure values. He, naturally didn’t want to lie about his father, but he understands if he was to tell the truth he would lose his father. After the trial, we can see that the tautness between the boy and is father rises. He states “You were [going] to tell them. You would have told them” (Faulkner 3). His father explains that you need to stick to your family or they will betray you too.
The short endures and the tension rises. The climax eventually strikes and we (the audience) are at a cross road just as the boy. His father is planning another crime, but this time the protagonist wants to do something about it. He begins to struggle and break out of his mother’s hold. He runs and tells the man who his father is about to wrong. The poor boy didn’t know at the time that his decision would impact him so heavily. Unfortunately, this leads to the death of his father by gunshot.
The story wraps up its dramatic and tragic ending with a conclusion. We are only left with the boy “sitting on the crest of a hill at midnight” (Faulkner 12) completely alone. “He went down onto the hill toward the woods [and] he did not look back” (Faulkner 12). He left everything behind to continue foreword. These quotes show that his innocence and youth are at an end. That he is now ready to start understanding his world with his own morality and ideas.
Task 5: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “The Hanging” by George Orwell. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 250 words.
In the world that we live in, there are thousands of tragedies. Many people die of unfortunate causes, while others die of natural. Some people are fortunate enough to have a peaceful death, while others are given a stressful/painful/tragic death of hanging. Orwell explains that we need to step back and look at executions in a different perspective. That we need to reevaluate ourselves and reconsider if we have the right to take others’ lives.
Orwell tells us of a story of the average routine in prison. However, out of all the days, that day specifically there was to be a hanging. It was the hanging of “a Hindu, a wisp of a man’ (Orwell 1). Walking behind this man was our protagonist, and he had begun to have a change of mind about it all. Suddenly he thought, “the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide” (Orwell 2). That this man was “this man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive” (Orwell 2) He came to the conclusion, that man and himself were the same just as he and the executioner were the same. That they all are human beings, none different from the other. This is the climax, where the theme is truly underlined.
Orwell showed a much-needed light to a very real problem that was occurring during this time. That we should hesitate killing people, for all these people are human beings too. That their heart is beating just as ours is. This theory resonates with the mind of every individual that would read it. For it is something that we have all considered, at least subconsciously.
Task 6: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “To Shoot an Elephant” by George Orwell. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 250 words.
Personally, something that I struggle with is expectations. It is something that we value highly as human beings. But, the real question is, why are we so innate to withhold them? Maybe it’s the fear of disappointment, or it could be having high societal standards. “Shooting an Elephant,” by George Orwell, explains that he struggles with being a police officer of the town. He explains through the shooting of an elephant that the expectations that are on an officer.
Orwell explains how, “a police officer was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so [by the] anti-European[s]” (Orwell 1). The anti-Europeans looked down upon him and it had unknowingly affected him psychologically. Then, the plot is introduced through a phone call explaining, “an elephant was ravaging the bazaar” (Orwell 2). “[He] took his rifle [that was] much to small to kill an elephant” (Orwell 2). His intents were most pure. He did not want to kill the elephant because he believed (morally) that that would be murder.
When he arrived on the scene, he saw there were two thousand Burman intently watching him. They wanted to see if the officer would be able to kill the beast. He did not want to kill the elephant, but the idea of humiliation, becoming, “a grinning corpse like that Indian up the hill…that some of them would laugh,” (Orwell 5) had pushed him to finish the beast. Every part of him did not want to disappoint, but every part of him did not want to kill the beast. His morality was (in the end) pushed away to fulfil his duty.
The story stated it best, “In the end [he] could not stand it any longer and went away. . . later, it took [the elephant] half an hour to die. . . [he only] had done it solely to avoid looking a fool” (Orwell 6). Expectations overruled his morality, and in the end, made him regret all of it happening.
Task 7: For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “Gimpel the Fool” by Isaac Bashevis Singer. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 350 words.
The world is filled with impurities and sin, it’s pretty common knowledge. However, we are called to be pure at heart and follow the correct path. Or should we instead follow a path of deceitfulness and corruption. Saul Bellow explains to us Isaac Bashevis’ words and made it known the inherent theme of the short story. Should be pure and good, but seen as a fool or be consumed by the darkness that is our world?
The introduction is opened with our protagonist, “Gimpel the Fool.” Due to his naïve state, he is fooled quite easily. Because of this, he has been dubbed the fool of the town. And, it was added to his name. He does understand that he is gullible, but he would not confront others due to it, “[making] trouble. People got angry” (Bellow 1). People would think he was calling them liars, so he would play their games and play along. Because he was naïve, he was confronted with many problems in his life. His goodness caused him pain, but he did not mind it. He married out of pity instead of love, but he ended up loving her in the end. He was pure within his heart even after the grave. He stated, “it is [better] to be a fool all of your days than for one hour to be evil.” (Bellow 2).
He was not treated kindly, but he was pure and refused to go down wicked paths of the world. The loving are too kind to wrong one another or any one else. That is why the evil will always battle the evil. Only will death take them all to peace. Like the states, not even a fool can be deceived there.
Task 8. For this exercise, we will be writing a response to “The Perfect Day for Banana Fish” by J.D. Salinger. Your essay needs a good introduction with a clear organizational thesis statement, multiple body paragraphs, transitions, and a conclusion. I am looking for a concise description of the text, a clear interpretation of the piece, and quotes that support your claims. Use MLA for in-text citations. Answer in no fewer than 350 words.
“The Perfect Day for Banana Fish” is a short story presented and published by J.D. Salinger. Speaks about a young woman named Muriel Glass. Muriel has been married to a man named Seymour Glass who has just returned from WWII. Unfortunately, he has somewhat lost his mind among other things. The story speaks about
One of the most prominent themes is mental illness. Seymour Glass is having issues coming back home after his service in WWII. Like “Flowering Judas,” Seymore shows actions of self isolation. He alienates society that doest understand what he is currently going through
Task 9. Read the first chapter from The Society of Spectacle. It is 34 theses. Discuss the general trajectory of the author’s thought. You will need to include quotes from the piece that help to support your contentions. Answer in no fewer than 200 words.
Our society is constantly changing, and a sequence of spectacle shift the accurate perspective that we perceive. This story tells us that through Devord’s book “The Society of the Spectacle” highlights on a fabricated society that we have made.
Through clips of words and paragraphs, that have been carefully sewn together, Debord explains the different perspectives that we have on our world. First (and thankfully), he explains what a spectacle is. He states that spectacles are not the collection of images, but rather the “social relationship between people that is mediated by [said] images” (Debord 2). We have created these spectacles with the original intention of creating unity. But, because of isolation, it “merely [is] the language of generalized separation” (Debord 2). Because of these spectacles, we have a sense of relief that is not actually real. We have clouded and tampered the truth so that we might feel better about our current condition. So that we can (psychologically) pretend that the very real consequences don’t exist.
Debord speaks to open the minds of people reading his works. To notice how our society shifts the changing views to cloud them with spectacles. We need to gather ourselves and reevaluate our selves and society.
Task 10. Save this file to your computer. The title should be: Assignment13. Follow guidelines for submitting through Turnitin.