The Difference between the Ghost Stories of Dickens and Gaskell Essay Example for Free

The Difference between the Ghost Stories of Dickens and Gaskell Essay The belief of the supernatural or those things beyond the capacity of human explanation is not widely accepted ideology nowadays; however, the supernatural belief had really existed in the past and is evident in the numerous literary works of celebrated authors. There is also certain logic in that the supernatural belief is very strong during the past times and had continually wane to a cynical, disbelieving attitude that the people now adopt towards the supernatural. That is, there are times when these beliefs are explicit and the so-called beliefs are rather â€Å"bizarre† or â€Å"extreme† and in this manner, I would seek to explain the supernatural attitude of a specific era, in this case, the Victorian Era, and try to explain their beliefs on the context of the literary works of Charles Dickens (To Be Taken With A Grain of Salt) and Elizabeth Gaskell (The Old Nurse Story). This does not end here though, as I aim to differentiate the â€Å"sexist† literary treatment of the two celebrated authors and of course, tore apart the literary works by its parts. Most noticeable between the two is the first-person-point of-view adopted by Dickens and Gaskell. Almost all horror stories are fabricated in this manner and probably the reason is that the author wants an active participation of the reader by delving into the intimate thoughts of the central character; in the Dicken’s ghost story, central figure was a male juror in a murder crime, while in Gaskell’s story, central figure, was female nurse-maid. Notice that both authors are very sexist in picking out their central characters and even their subordinate and their supporting characters as well. Females naturally dominate Gaskel’s story while Dicken’s story redounds with males. Dickens’ may have liked to paint the males in his story as good persons whilst Gaskell presents suspicious characters in every other characters except the maid, Rosamund and the helpers. The sisters Maude and Grace Furnivall was illustrated as bad, not to be trusted types. Even Maude’s child was evil in the manner that she tried to lure Rosamund to the deadly Fell. Old Lord Furnivall was atrocious and unforgiving while the young Lord Furnivall was uncaring. Naturally the nature of the characters contributed to the degree of horror or ghostly appeal of the story. The trend is that the more evil the characters, the scarier the story appears to the reader. Like in almost every Victorian story, position and power and the disparity between the classes are illustrated (although not explicitly pronounced) here. The juror have servants (Dicken’s) and the Furnivalls are beyond the reach of the normal house staff (e. g. they dine separately). In Dicken’s story, the servants were simply a fleeting thing/character but in Gaskell’s, much participation of the help was observed. Remember that Gaskell’s story was related by a nurse-maid. Charles Dickens’ choose to ignore their presence (except once) in the story. The tone of both ghost stories, being that of supernatural, is eerie and hair-raising although much can be said about the differential treatment of the male and female species regarding the supernatural. Gaskell’s maid from the start, acknowledges and is wary of the Supernatural (being afraid to go to the East Wing), and adopts a rather frightened prissy, girly fear towards the Girl-Ghost (who aims to take away Rosamund) and Lord Furnivall (who haunts the piano and is considerably a bad and frightening figure not to be reckoned of). On the other hand, Charles Dickens’ juror, adopted first a disbelieving attitude towards the Murder-Victim-Ghost until he saw one but he did not show any fright towards the ghostly character. In fact, it was almost as if Dickens wants to convince us that even on the face of Supernatural, males are indomitable and will still display signs of bravado. Dickens and Gaskell may also have opposing ideas on the character of their central ghost/s. All the ghosts were victims of ugly situations; Dicken’s ghost was a victim of murder in Piccadilly while Gaskell’s ghost were one family ? girl and mother, were victims of cruel treatment from Lord Furnivall, and Lord Furnivall, was a victim of his conscience over what had happened to her child and granddaughter. The difference between the ghost/s from the two stories is that Dickens’ adopted a protagonist ghost while Gaskell adopted that of the antagonistic Ghost. The Murder-Victim-Ghost (Dickens’ story) helped the jury decide on the outcomes of the court decision regarding his murder whilst that of the Three-Furnivall-Ghost aimed for retribution towards the remaining family members. They took away Grace Furnivall for the atonement of her sins over the tragic matter that had occurred in the Fell. Grace turned over the secret of her hated sister to Lord Gaskell and did not do anything with the banishment during the winter in Fell, hence the heavy retribution. Also, the tone differs for both stories because the reader tries to accept the purpose and presence of the ghost in Dickens’ story, hence there is no-fright-appeal. Opposite is true for Gaskell’s story, which sets an easy tone at the start of the story followed by a frightening tone in the middle which builds incessantly until the last part of the story. If a reader wants to be really frightened, then, he/she should read Gaskell’s The Old Nurse’s Story. The theme for both stories is justice and retribution. Charles Dickens’ Murder-Ghost seeks justice for the heinous act of the prisoner who killed him in Piccadilly by approaching a favorable juror which will point or clear his case even on the demise of his after-death. He even whispers and apparatus at dreams of each juror and was an active participator in the litigation of his murder case. He whispers to the witness and even dabbles with the thoughts of the venerable Judge. Ghost is powerful here since he has the ability to mobilize people in the courtroom through their thoughts. Elizabeth Gaskell was rather extreme and dramatic in the unfair retribution that he had bestowed on Grace Furnivall. Gaskell opted at first for a scandalous family, full of deceit and lies and with all the family members jealous of each other. She paints the death of each member of the family as an ugly moment, wherein, even the souls would never seek peace. Understand that this is the most commonly adopted mantra for horror stories nowadays ? scandal associated with un-restful souls. The ghosts then seek retribution for the death that had occurred in the Fell and the culprit was found to be Grace Furnivall. What is most amazing about Gaskell is that she inserted an important character Rosamund which turned out to be only an accessory character in the story. In this manner, Gaskell was able to mislead the reader into believing that the girl Rosamund was their target when in fact it was the old Grace Furnivall who was really their intention. In the end, Grace becomes afflicted with madness or becomes a neurotic. A perfect case for retribution. Victorian Era’s literary appeal is that it redounds with romance and horror that is highly popular during those times. Much can be said regarding the perception of the supernatural as gained from the two stories. Unrestfull souls (in the form of ghosts, apparitions) whose death is not yet conclusive, seek to circulate around the earth looking for answers before exiting from this human world. They may either be good or bad. Sometimes they manifest in dreams or they may as well have been the result of conscience (e. g. Grace Furnivall). The supernaturals are intangible and are separate entities from the human beings. Although they are viewed as concrete-abstract, they are believe to have an active participation in earthly doings (This cannot be proven and explained. ). Supernatural literature may have reflected the ideologies and beliefs of the people in the past but in the realm of technology today, they are still regarded as literary amusement; something to be entertained with but never to be believed in. Work Cited Stone, W. and M. Edwards. Understanding Literature. NY: JMC Press Inc. , 1986.

Frankenstein: A Warning Against Masculine Individualistic Freedom Essa

Frankenstein: A Warning Against Masculine Individualistic Freedom In this commentary, I wanted to examine a little further the implications of a point brought up in the presentation on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. They briefly suggested that Victor might occupy a space of idealised masculine freedom; given Victor's less than ideal fate and Mary Shelley's Feminism, such a masculine idealisation becomes highly problematic. Victor holds a privileged social position that allows him a financial and social freedom through which he can choose his occupations at will. In choosing Science, Victor's freedom to experiment holds potential benefit, both for him and for Others. However, I'd suggest that it's Victor's overdetermined sense of individualistic Self that results in a misuse of his freedom and the destruction of his social sphere. Victor's specific type of unfettered individualism results in the ultimate danger of individualism: he shakes off the shackles of social responsibility both literally, in his solitude, and metaphorically, in his failure to a cknowledge the possibility that his actions might have some social impact. His ultimate and most dangerous freedom lies in that he is free to consider only his own ambition. In creating the monster, Victor is, in both of these senses, outside the range of society. Quite literally, he moves away from his family (and his social background) to an unfamiliar space; he achieves an extra measure of freedom in his solitude in Ingolstadt. It is through this solitude that he is able to immerse himself in Science. Even as Victor leaves Geneva for Ingolstadt he believes himself "totally unfitted for the company of strangers" (38) but in Ingolstadt he becomes even more secluded, relating ... ...108-110). Thus Lucifer's vow in favour of the forces of evil is based on a loss of hope, fear and -- most importantly -- remorse; Frankenstein's Monster does abandon both hope and fear but his remorse is intense. Paradoxically, it is the Monster who is torn by "the bitterest remorse" (170) while Victor refuses it. In the end, Victor's freedom to create in league with his believed freedom from social responsibility makes him not the 'ideal scientist' but a destructive force towards himself, his creation, and his society. Perhaps, as critics have suggested, it is Victor who is the real 'monster' in Mary Shelley's story. Works cited Milton, John. "Paradise Lost." John Milton: The Major Works. Ed. Stephen Orgel and Jonathan Goldberg. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. 355-618. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Chatham: Wordsworth Classics, 1999. Frankenstein: A Warning Against Masculine Individualistic Freedom Essa Frankenstein: A Warning Against Masculine Individualistic Freedom In this commentary, I wanted to examine a little further the implications of a point brought up in the presentation on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. They briefly suggested that Victor might occupy a space of idealised masculine freedom; given Victor's less than ideal fate and Mary Shelley's Feminism, such a masculine idealisation becomes highly problematic. Victor holds a privileged social position that allows him a financial and social freedom through which he can choose his occupations at will. In choosing Science, Victor's freedom to experiment holds potential benefit, both for him and for Others. However, I'd suggest that it's Victor's overdetermined sense of individualistic Self that results in a misuse of his freedom and the destruction of his social sphere. Victor's specific type of unfettered individualism results in the ultimate danger of individualism: he shakes off the shackles of social responsibility both literally, in his solitude, and metaphorically, in his failure to a cknowledge the possibility that his actions might have some social impact. His ultimate and most dangerous freedom lies in that he is free to consider only his own ambition. In creating the monster, Victor is, in both of these senses, outside the range of society. Quite literally, he moves away from his family (and his social background) to an unfamiliar space; he achieves an extra measure of freedom in his solitude in Ingolstadt. It is through this solitude that he is able to immerse himself in Science. Even as Victor leaves Geneva for Ingolstadt he believes himself "totally unfitted for the company of strangers" (38) but in Ingolstadt he becomes even more secluded, relating ... ...108-110). Thus Lucifer's vow in favour of the forces of evil is based on a loss of hope, fear and -- most importantly -- remorse; Frankenstein's Monster does abandon both hope and fear but his remorse is intense. Paradoxically, it is the Monster who is torn by "the bitterest remorse" (170) while Victor refuses it. In the end, Victor's freedom to create in league with his believed freedom from social responsibility makes him not the 'ideal scientist' but a destructive force towards himself, his creation, and his society. Perhaps, as critics have suggested, it is Victor who is the real 'monster' in Mary Shelley's story. Works cited Milton, John. "Paradise Lost." John Milton: The Major Works. Ed. Stephen Orgel and Jonathan Goldberg. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. 355-618. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Chatham: Wordsworth Classics, 1999.

Political Dynasty, Is It Acceptable or Not?

University of Perpetual Help System DALTA FCL 6 Jerome B. Rustia BS-AE 1. ) Political Dynasty, is it acceptable or not? * Political Dynasty is not acceptable for me because it is not fair to other people who deserve in such position in politics. Give chance to other to have a good leadership. Not only in one family the true/wise leader will come, every family/dynasty have it. 2. ) Must there be an absolute separation of church and state? Church and state must have no absolute separation because church is commanded by God through the use of priest/pope, on the other hand in state it is head by an president, prime minister etc. . Those politicians are also choose by God also to help such people, to produce good things in our society and it is again commanded by God by different purposes. 3. ) Is same sex marriage acceptable in our modern society? * No, it is not acceptable in our modern society because as a Christian people and one of the Christian country in Asia, God only created 2 g ender which are the men and women.You can love your same gender as friend or companions but marrying them are not acceptable in the eyes of many people and in our God. 4. ) Was the Pope’s resignation beneficial or detrimental to the church? * No, because when you were choose by God as a Pope you must served God forever whether you have some deficiency. God has a purpose so you must stand on it. 5. ) Conflict in South China Sea or West Philippines, a failure in leadership or a historical dilemma? It is a failure in leadership because that island is Philippine territory it is closer to the Philippine than other country. . . so what are president do? He just talk to the Chinese President then what is the result? Like in what I saw in the television lately, the wild life resources that the Chinese caught in Philippine sea was not back yet in us. Why did the president do on that problem? He just sat there and waiting for the help of United Nation. We are independent country so the first move must be on us not in our alliances.

Animal Farm By George Orwell Essay - 1430 Words

Animal Farm is of course, a satirical allegory, very specifically of the Russian Revolution and of Stalin (Napoleon in the book), but more generally of revolution, the idealism of utopias, and the way in which people take control of societies founded on principles of equality. It is a satirical allegory of Soviet totalitarianism. Orwell based major events in the book on ones from the Soviet Union during the Stalin era. Orwell, a democratic socialist, and a member of the Independent Labour Party for many years, was a critic of Stalin, and was suspicious of Moscow-directed Stalinism after his experiences in the Spanish Civil War. In Animal Farm George Orwell demonstrates the psychological foundation of revolution, its processes and the irony of displacement of an oppressive regime by the new revolutionary order. The revolution is hardly complete before differences appear and so idealistic intentions are progressively undermined by the assumption of total authority by the pigs. The pig s did not actually work but directed and supervised the others. Orwell intended Animal Farm to be a strong condemnation of what he saw as the Stalinist corruption of the original socialist ideals. He, in the two books, is obsessed with the idea of revolution directly or indirectly. He described what gave him the idea of setting the book on a farm: I saw a little boy, perhaps ten years old, driving a huge carthorse along a narrow path, whipping it whenever it tried to turn. It struck me that ifShow MoreRelatedAnimal Farm And George Orwell By George Orwell1034 Words   |  5 Pages Eric Arthur Blair, under the pseudonym of George Orwell, composed many novels in his lifetime that were considered both politically rebellious and socially incorrect. Working on the dream since childhood, Orwell would finally gain notoriety as an author with his 1945 novel Animal Farm, which drew on personal experiences and deeply rooted fear to satirically critique Russian communism during its expansion. Noticing the impact he made, he next took to writing the novel 1984, which similarly criticizedRead MoreAnimal Farm By George Orwell1397 Words   |  6 PagesAn important quote by the influential author of Animal Farm, George Orwell, is, â€Å"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism.† George Orwell, a Democratic Socialist, wrote the book Animal Farm as an attack on the Communist country of Russia (â€Å"The Political Ideas of George Orwell,† worldsocialism.org). He had a very strong disliking of Communism and the Socialist party of Russia. However, he insisted on finding the truthRead MoreAnimal Farm, By George Orwell1545 Words   |  7 Pagesallow because an this elite institution of people often use this gear to dominate and oppress society. In George Orwell’s story, Animal Farm, Orwell demonstrates that education is a powerful weapon and is a device that can be used to at least one’s benefit. Living in a world where strength is a straightforward to benefit, the pigs quick use education to govern the relaxation of the animals on the farm to serve themselves worked to their advantage. This story in shows the underlying message that   firstRead MoreAnimal Farm By George Orwell944 Words   |  4 Pageslegs(Orwell 132). He carried a whip in his trotter(Orwell 133). In the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell, animals have the ability to talk and form their own ethos, Animalism. Animal Farm is an intriguing allegory by George Orwell, who is also th e author of 1984, includes many enjoyable elements. More knowledge of the author, his use of allegorical elements, themes, symbols, and the significance in the real world, allows the reader to get more out of this glance into the future. George OrwellRead MoreAnimal Farm, By George Orwell876 Words   |  4 Pagesrebellious animals think no man means freedom and happiness, but they need to think again. The animals of Manor Farm rebel against the farm owner, Mr. Jones, and name it Animal Farm. The animals create Animalism, with seven commandments. As everything seems going well, two of the animals get into a rivalry, and things start changing. Food starts disappearing and commandments are changed, and the power begins to shift. Father of dystopian genre, George Orwell writes an interesting allegory, Animal FarmRead MoreAnimal Farm by George Orwell1100 Words   |  4 PagesIntroduction: Widely acknowledged as a powerful allegory, the 1945 novella Animal Farm, conceived from the satirical mind of acclaimed author George Orwell, is a harrowing fable of a fictional dystopia that critiques the socialist philosophy of Stalin in terms of his leadership of the Soviet Union. Tired of their servitude to man, a group of farm animals revolt and establish their own society, only to be betrayed into worse servitude by their leaders, the pigs, whose initial virtuous intentionsRead MoreAnimal Farm By George Orwell1538 Words   |  7 PagesMecca Animal Farm The Russian Revolution in 1917 shows how a desperate society can be turned into a military superpower filled with terror and chaos. George Orwell uses his book, Animal Farm, to parallel this period of time in history. This book is an allegory of fascism and communism and the negative outcomes. The animals begin with great unity, working toward a common goal. The government then becomes corrupted by the temptations of power. George Orwell uses the characters in Animal Farm to showRead MoreAnimal Farm by George Orwell1175 Words   |  5 PagesAn enthusiastic participant in the Spanish civil war in 1936, George Orwell had a great understanding of the political world and made his strong opinions known through his enlightening literary works, many of which are still read in our modern era. Inspired by the 1917 Russian Revolution and the failed society it resulted in, Animal Farm by George Orwell is an encapsulating tale that epitomises how a free utopian society so idealistic can never be accomplished. The novella exemplifies how influencesRead MoreAnimal Farm, By George Orwell1089 Words   |  5 PagesIn George Orwell’s â€Å"Animal Farm†, the pigs as the farm leaders, use unknown language, invoke scare tactics and create specific laws, thereby enabling them to control other animals, to suit their greedy desires, and to perform actions outside their realm of power. Because of the pigs’ use of broad language, and the implementation of these tactics they are able to get away with avoiding laws, and are able to convince other animals into believing untrue stories that are beneficial to the pigs. The firstRead MoreAnimal Farm, By George Orwell1212 Words   |  5 PagesShe stood there over the dead animals thinking to herself what have we come to? We try to become free but we just enslave ourselves to a so called superior kind. Napoleon killed the animals in front of the whole farm and said that this was to be the punishment for the traitors. Snowball was known as a traitor now and anyone conspiring with him would be killed. Snowball and Napoleon both represent historical characters during the Russian revolution in 1917.Snowball who was one of the smartest pigs