The Conflict Between Reason And Emotion In Arcadia

Both deliberately gender oriented; it is to be resolved how far they follow the

Overall these books show a huge similarity of the they way the characters respond to events they are given. Where the girls both act in a calm matter and are very accepting of their

On the other hand, they are opposites because in the movie Dr. Strauss plays the role of a female psychologist instead of being characterized as a male in “Flowers for Algernon”. Even though these two books and movies (that are based on the same plot) have more similarities than differences, they are still absolutely different like “apples and oranges”, because, “ they are both fruit but are extremely different” as said by Stephen

There are two sorts of knowledge in Arcadia: the knowledge of love and academic knowledge. These two types of knowledge are in constant conflict throughout the text. It is only the proposition of marriage, the intellectual justification for sex, which allows a resolution between the two forces. The theme of love vs. intellect is touched upon in the first pages of the play. Thomasina interrupts her lesson with Septimus by asking what carnal knowledge is.

In ‘Good People” the more modern contemporary version of “Hills Like White Elephants" we are introduce to the thought of abortion in the fifth paragraph "What if he was just afraid, if the truth was no more than this, and if what to pray for was not even love but simple courage, to meet both her eyes as she says it and trust his heart?". Another one of the first similarities depicted from these stories would be that both men are very misogynistic or described in the class “the Nice Bustard”, they both want the women to have abortions. The way they persuade their thoughts to their partners are different, for example in “Hills Like White Elephants" we see the man being very pushy towards the girl trying to down play the fact that it is a serious surgical operation by stating “it’s really an awfully simply operation, jig.” (Hemingway, 1927). In “Good people” the man is pushy in a nice way so it’s soddenly caught if your paying attention to him, for example he states “I think it's the best thing to do.

In Graham Greene’s novel, The End of the Affair, he was able to illustrate the story of Maurice Bendrix and Sarah Miles’ affair through various perspectives. Greene started with Bendrix, then in Book Three he changed the narrator to Sarah ’s point of view. Overall, Greene was able to create this novel using nonlinear narration and unreliable narration.

Although the room was designed to be Thomasina’s own, it by no means serves its actual purpose in the play. Then, in the last section, titled “Return to Scepticism(?),” Muller-Muth returns to the original question which caused her to write this article: “Whether Arcadia professes a sceptical attitude towards the pursuit of knowledge or not”(286). She cites several textual examples of unknowns that are left without answers (such as who shot the hare) and the existential comment by Hannah, “It’s wanting to know that makes us matter”(2.7). In closing, Anja Muller-Muth does not try to prove or disprove scepticism in Tom Stoppard’s play, but makes about the overall process of seeking knowledge; the process is much more important than the final answer, even if you don’t ever find it. As Hannah said, sometimes it can be “better to struggle on knowing that failure is final”(2.7).

The themes of both books are both knowledge is power. Both of the settings are around the same time period and they are dystopias. Finally, the characters of the two stories are both lifeless wives and the main characters are against the society. This shows how the two stories are similar by themes, settings, and

Often times, literary works can easily distinguish between a good character or an evil character. Other times, a character can be very complex, which makes it difficult to characterize the character as good or evil. This complex character complex is known as Moral Ambiguity. In other words, readers are discouraged from identifying a character as purely good or evil. One particular character that can be views as morally ambiguous is a woman named Edna Pontellier.

The main difference is that women are seen as an object and not as people. This is due to the unfaithfulness of both of the king’s wives. I found it brutal and unreasonable how the women characters in the stories are treated. The woman was clever in managing to survive in a society where women were not valued. The structure relies on her bravery and cleverness.

Although, they have similarity, the two stories has major differences also. First, both author differs the way they introduce and develop their lead characters to the reader. Second, they also differ in perspective from which their stories are being told. Third, they differs on the choice of settings and how it impact to the stories.

Thornfield was a completely different world for Jane. It was a major change physically and socially, as a governess she had more opportunities and duties to fulfill. Jane was not intimidated by what was expected of her, yet she was excited to see what the future at Thornfield had in store for her. The power of love was unavoidable for Jane, “The claims of her former love prove stronger than her sense of duty to that honorable but emotionally shallow Rivers” (Moss 3).

Both pieces of literature have messages of enlightenment, but each piece focuses on a specific

(Brontë 72) and other questions about Jane’s faith. Brocklehurst immediately tells Jane that she must have “a wicked heart” (Brontë 72) since

The first instance which supports the notion that a lapse of communication is responsible for the unsuccessful nature of heterosexual relationships is the case of Duke Orsino and Countess Olivia’s relationship. Both start the play preoccupied with their own concerns, Orsino is worried about finding love, specifically with Olivia, meanwhile she is busy mourning the death of her brother by refusing to marry anyone for seven years. However, it is Orsino’s obsession with seeking love and how he goes about pursuing Olivia that best exemplifies the problematic nature of a male and female’s relationship. Orsino opened the play by saying of love, “Give me excess of it, that, surfeiting, / The appetite may sicken and so die” (1.1.1-3), essentially saying that he so badly craves the feeling being in love gives him, that he would like in so great a quantity that it would end his life.