Bible as Literature Essay Example for Free

Bible as Literature Essay One of the central arguments of the Old Testament book Genesis is its credibility as a historical account. Nobody may never really know if the events written in this book actually happened or not, especially parts (or chapters) where hints of culture and detailed places can be read. Except maybe chapters 1 and 2 which is the beginning of existence itself. Then again, details may have been passed through oral tradition, but considering the eternity of years between the time of creation and the time words were even put on to the most primitive of ways, details may be greatly distorted. After the creation story (Chapters 1 and 2) virtually all introductions of all chapters start out with the father siring a son, and that’s son’s son. A family tree in other words. An elaborate one at that, because the writer can trace back up to Adam. The Chapter starts out as, again, that familiar family tree starting from the children of Abraham and Keturah, Abraham’s other wife, up to the twins Esau and Jacob. By this, Genesis chapter 25 provides evidence that it should be taken as part of history and not as fiction. Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah. And she bare him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah. And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshirim, and Letushim, and Leummim. And the sons of Midian; Ephah, and Epherm and Hanochm and Abidahm and Eldaah . All of these were the children of Keturah. (Genesis 25: 1- 4) It is not clear whether Abraham married Keturah when he was still with Sarah or after her death. At any rate, Keturah seemed to be more fruitful, which just helped Abraham seal his place as the Father of All Nations. Patriarchal Theme Indeed Abraham is the father of all nations, heck, we even have a nursery rhyme to prove it, but what about the mother of all nations? Or in this case the mothers of all nations? The patriarchs are always one of the great figures in history and literature, which what the Bible actually is, a piece of (very old) history and literature. Patriarchy is the accepted system in most societies since people evolved into social creatures. Social groups are based in this system, governments, religion, and the family alike. Perhaps the most controversial of all, would be in religion, God is branded as â€Å"He† even though no one can ever really tell. But if Jesus and God are one in the same, logic tells us that the Supreme Being is also male. There’s a popular saying that in order to be of worth in this world; one must either write a book, plant a tree, or sire a son. Sons were always cherished by families, especially fathers since they would be able to inherit the family’s wealth and continue the blood line. In fact, during biblical times, and in some countries, even today, people are addressed by their names following who their father is: I am (name) son of (name of father), or I am from the house of (name of father) They only recognize who the father is. The theme of Patriarchy is a sensitive topic today, especially when women now are becoming more and more involved in the society, and sometimes more successful than most men. It has long been argued what the role of women are in the world. If they are fit in every position the world has to offer. Tradition (and our patriarchal society) tells us that men are supposed to be the leaders, but things has changed since Abraham’s time. There’s no doubt that men should hold high positions in the church, that’s just the way it is. Feminists can’t argue with that, but with everything else, men and women should have fair chances in finding their place in society. Covenant Theme Now the Lord said to Abram, ‘Go forth from your country, and from your your relatives And from your father’s house, To the land which I will show you; And I will make you a great nation, And I will bless you, And make your name great; And so, you shall be a blessing; And I will bless those who bless you, And the one who curses you I will curse. (Genesis 12:1-3) This is the covenant that God made with Abraham, it’s more like a promise of God to Abraham than a mutual agreement since Abraham benefited a lot from this covenant regardless of his future actions. As long as he leaves his country, his relatives, and his father’s house, all of God’s promises to him would be fulfilled This covenant making business isn’t new to God, e has done this in a couple of occasions. First was his covenant with Adam and Eve after they ate the forbidden fruit and was expelled from Paradise, God cut them some slack so they could still live and procreate. Another was during Noah’s time after God destroyed the rest of Mankind, except Noah’s family, He promised Noah that he would no longer destroy man by the use of flood. Then came Abraham. (Genesis 6-9) Abraham lived a comfortable life before God called upon him. What God was asking Abraham wasn’t easy. Nomads were considered inferior during that time plus the fact that God didn’t specify where exactly He wanted Abraham to be. Regardless of this uncertainty, he followed God’s will, and left the city, with all its comforts, to live the life of a nomad in the desert plains. (Genesis 12:1-3,7; 13: 14-18; 15: 4, 5, 13-18; 17-19; 22: 15-18) The covenant that God made Abraham is known as an Unconditional Covenant, for the promises that God made to Abraham would not be revoked even if he does not continue to comply on his side of the bargain. As long as Abraham leaves the city, all the conditions would be fulfilled by God. There’s more to it than God blessing Abraham’s descendants and making them more numerous than the stars. Let’s see what are some of the things that Abraham got from this deal: 1. Abraham will become the father of all nations (technically just Israel) 2. Abraham would inherit Canaan 3. He would be blessed 4. His name would be great 5. He would be a blessing to others 6. He and Sarah would have a son despite their old age Brewer, David, God’s Covenant with Abraham These promises however aren’t instantaneous, some are in the distant future ranging from Isaac’s birth, about 20 years later, and the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, which is a good 400 years later after the covenant. Critical Analysis of the literary, cultural, and religious issues The first issue that may be noticed in this chapter is from the first verse. Abraham taking a new wife, Keturah. The author does not say if Keturah was concubine of Abraham or if she was â€Å"taken† by Abraham after his wife’s death. One thing’s for sure, God is fulfilling His promise that Abraham would have descendants more numerous than the stars. It might sound a bit odd for a Christian to read about a Christian figure having concubines, but apparently, Abraham have had lots of concubines, and have had many sons with them. Another issue is Abraham’s death. Genesis tells us that he died one hundred and seventy five years old probably three times, on average, of today’s life expectancy. Sure, people back then lived a lot longer than today, but 175 is way too old. The calendar year then may have been different from today. Abraham gave gifts to his sons and sent them away towards the country to the east, while everything else he gave to Isaac. There’s Hebrew story that Abraham sent the other sons away fearing that they might begin conflicts. He might be right, because Islam can be traced back from the other sons of Abraham. On the family level, favouritisms were already a part of the family during that time. Isaac preferred Esau while Rebecca likes Jacob. Isaac probably liked Esau more, because he was a hunter, he provided the family with his game. Esau would make any typical dad proud. Esau liked the outdoors and was very masculine . Jacob on the other hand stayed at home, tending to the tents or in modern day terms, doing household chores. Of course mothers would have loved this. (Genesis 25: 27-28) Divine election is the power of God to choose whoever He desires, to do something or receive his blessing. God had already chosen Isaac and Jacob to be the recipients of Abraham’s blessings way before they were born. However this doesn’t mean that God chose them because he already knew that they would be more pious than the others. In Jacob’s case, Esau might have been more worthy of God’s blessing since Jacob took advantage of his brother’s weakness. Esau sold his birth right to Jacob for food, saying that he doesn’t need it since he is dying. God had chosen them simply because it is his will. He is God after all. (Deffinbaugh, Th. M, Divine Election) Arguably the most controversial issue is Jacob, as mentioned, Jacob schemed to buy his brother’s birth right so he can have most out of the inheritance he would get from his father. He need not do this because he was already chosen by God. Which Rebecca probably revealed to him already since he is her favorite. (Genesis 25: 31-33) Genesis’ Author The author of Genesis was probably a nomad just like Abraham, who raised livestock like cattle, and sheep on the plains of their land. The author may have written the book out of the urge to tell a story to trace their roots, or if it’s true, really trace his family tree up to Abraham. The author must have felt that he had to write into account his family’s heritage. What Genesis is, is really just an extensive family tree from Adam, to his last descendant in the book. The author might have written the chapters of the book, sitting under a shade of tree after tending to his flock. To pass time, he might have decided that he might as well do something productive during his break. It’s possible that these stories were later told at his household and soon became popular that it was told to every tent in the community. There’s also a chance that the author was a scholar, born several hundreds of maybe a thousand years after the estimated date of its last chapter. He (assuming he was a man) maybe the very first ethnographer of the world. If in deed, he was, he was very successful. He gathered a large number of information; from traditions/cultures: what the ancient people actually do during those times and how they lived, what they wore†¦etc. , history; detailed accounts of what happened, including probable conversations that might have happened between the people and God, and among themselves. What the author has done is simply astonishing, generations upon generations of ancient history, written in just one book, and its not even as thick as today’s novels. which may hypothesize that the book wasn’t just made by a single author but by the family historian in each generation. Works Cited Deffinbaugh, Th. M. â€Å"The Principle of Divine Election† bible. org. September 1, 2008 http://www. bible. org/page. php? page_id=104 New American Bible. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops 3211 4th Street, N. E. , Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202) 541-3000

Terrorism Essay Example for Free

Terrorism Essay Given the growing global threats of terrorism, it is significant that an understanding of the history, nature and mechanism-premises under which terror operates is obtained. This is significant as it would shape the perspective of policy makers when addressing issues of this nature. Terrorism, as it is understood is the action of none-state weak actors, individual or groups, who for some reasons feels suppressed, marginalized and, or denied what they may view as the basic human right. All terrorism has political objectives, even though the perpetrators may use religious relics to appeal to a wider existing audience, and invoke a response through violent act to prove or propagate their point. Yoram Schweitzer in Suicide Terrorism Development ump; Characteristics, Mark Sedgwick in Al-Qaeda and the Nature of Religious Terrorism, and Dr. James Armstrong, all demonstrates that suicide terror attacks are politically motivated even though the perpetrator may use religious symbolism to justifies their acts. Observing areas in the world where terrorism is frequent, especially in the Middle East, it can be argued that groups that engaged in terrorists activities are those that feel suppressed and taken advantage of by a much greater power. Thus, terrorism, particularly suicide terror is prevalent in areas where systems of gross injustice seem to exist. Therefore, the actual use of terrorism by non-state actors is a tactic aimed at polarizing the population in their favor. By killing people in mass number, they are attempting to take away the view that only the state can legitimately kill – thus undermining the state authority. As Armstrong, Sedgwick and Schweitzer exemplify, suicide terrorism is not a new happening, but an old historical phenomenon. And that just as modern day terror organizations, particularly Al-Qaeda, uses religious concepts to motivate its actions (though their immediate goal is political), various old terrorist groups have used similar approached to achieve their political end. To understand the history of suicide terrorism and how terrorist groups in the past have used religious tone to propagate their political course, Armstrong pointed out the Zealots-an extremist Jewish sect that opposed Jesus. The Zealots engaged in political assassinations of their political foe, knowing that they would be killed in the process. Even though their ultimate goal might have been religious, the Zealots immediate aim was political. In the same way, during the third century, the Assassins- a notorious terrorist wing (similar in nature to Al-Qaeda) in modern day Syria, assassinated many of their political opponents in order to establish their own form of Islam. In this case, although their ultimate goal was religious, their immediate objective was political. They wanted to institute a government that would represent their view. According to Armstrong, these were the first sets of suicide terrorism. Besides their used of terror, these two groups share other things in common. They both resorted to suicide terrorism based on the situations they find themselves. As indicated, they both feel suppressed or taken advantage of, and consequently wanted to turn their situation around through the use of suicide terror. Armstrong cited that the first wave of modern day suicide terror occurred in Lebanon at an American embassy in Beirut 1983, and was carried by Hezbollah (meaning the army of God). The formation of Hezbollah and its used of suicide terrorism came about as a result of Lebanon being under foreign occupational forces from Israel, France and the United States. The second suicide terror attack by Hezbollah was against the U. S. Marines headquarter, which was followed by an attack on the French multinational force. The last two, as Schweitzers (2000: 2) implies, resulted in the death of 300 personals and dozens injured. These events led to the departure of Western forces from Lebanon. Having two more enemies to face, Hezbollah redirected its suicide terror attacks against South Lebanese Army and Israeli military positions. Hezbollah suicide terror attacks forced the Israeli army to pullout from their heartland of central Lebanon, and caused the UN peacekeeping force to withdraw completely. Observing such occurrence, one could notice that Hezbollahs actions were mainly political. Even though they may glorify and promote martyrdom to achieve their course. Also Schweitzers demonstrates that Hezbollah tends to use suicide terror against Israel as a deterrent and retaliatory apparatus. He exemplify for instance, that after an Israeli air force assassinated Abas Musavi, secretary general of Hezbollah in February 1992, Hezbollah retaliated by carrying out suicide bombing against Israeli embassy in Buenos Ares, in March 1992 injuring 250 people and killing 29. In addition, Armstrong forwarded that, terrorist organizations tend to decrease their terror activities whenever they seem to achieve a political objective. For instance, he reasoned that in Lebanon, suicide terror increased when the Israeli army arrested top Hezbollah leaders, but decreased when the prisoners were released. These indicate that the primary goal of suicide terrorist organization is political, not religious. Also, because the dominant religion in the Middle East is that of Islam, terrorist organizations use this to their advantage. By using religious tone to propagate their course, they are effectively communicating to an audience that understands them in that term, which helps to promote their political agenda. To illustrate that the main objective of suicide terror groups is not religious, but political, Armstrong cited the Tamil separatist group in Sri Lanka-the LTTE as another example. The LTTE is a secular nationalist group that seeks to establish an independent state in Sri Lanka that is occupied by the ethic Tamils. The LTTE has engaged in conventional, guerrilla, and terror campaign, with over 200 suicides bombing (more than any other terrorist group) since the late 1980s. The carnage has lasted for two decades now and has resulted in the deaths of 60, 000 people. Although the LTTE gained some of their inspiration from Hezbollah, they are clearly a secular group with no religious claim to back or color their course; but have so far committed the greatest number of suicides terrorism in history. The popular image of Muslims Arabs in the Middle-East shouting God is great in the wake of terror attacks might have blinded some scholars into concluding that the main motivation for terrorism is religion. Suicide terrorism spreads to Israel in 1993 by the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Hezbollah also influenced both of these two groups with regard to the uses of suicide terrorism. Because their audience is predominantly Islamic, they have been successful in exploiting just that in propagating their course against Israel. In essence, what Hamas is doing is what any other group (terrorist or non-terrorists) would do – speak in the language that their audience would understand the most. In this case Islam. Secondly, it has been argued that the practical existence of the day-to-day Palestinians lives-living under constant occupation by a much greater power, Israel, created a condition for suicide terrorism to strive. The pervading view is that Israel, being a super military power in that part of world has used and continues to exercise absolute military superiority over the Palestinian people with the backing of the United States. This, most scholars argued, have created enormous amount of anxiety, desperation and anger between Palestinian and Arabs alike all over the globe. Since 1993, Hamas has carried out numerous of suicide bombing against Israeli claiming that they have no interest in politics and that their main objective is based on moral grounds-aimed at avenging the death of their loved once and to create a stable social situation for the Palestinians. Armstrong (2006) argues that this may be partially true because over the years, Hamas embarked on many social programs, health care, education and various construction projects to better the lives of the Palestinian people. But as evident today, Hamas has transformed its movement into political stage in its quest to institute a system or government that would represent their view. Armstrong (2006) attests that this new wave of religious terrorism might have derived from the fall of the Soviet Union. The fall of the Soviet, which also marked the end of colonial outposts in most of the Middle East, created a vacuum in anti-colonial terrorism, resulting in religious suicide terror. Thus, most of what Middle Eastern terrorism is about today is anti-imperialism. They view western way of life as suppressive and corrupt and wanted to create a state or government that would protect their culture. This view is illustrated in most of Osama bin Laden’s (head of Al-Qaida) demands – that the United States should pull out all its force from Middle Eastern lands. His main goal is to create a system of govern with very little or no western influence. This brought me to the question as to whether the U. S. war on terror has been effective. Most scholars have argued that the United States has fashioned conditions in the Middle East, especially in Iraq that would precipitate the creation of more terrorist activities than existed there before. All together, Armstrong (2006) argues that the U. S. war on terror is equivalent to waging a war on global warming by producing high fuel machinery that doubles the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. You cannot fight a successful battle against problem by creating conditions that caused it in the first place. But this is exactly what the U. S. is doing. By invading Iraq and deploying our forces there, we are unconsciously proving the points or propaganda of terrorist organizations that, the U. S. is this evil country that is taking over or occupying Arab lands and is suppressing Muslims all over the world. They are not aware that the US main interest is to protect freedom and liberty of all people, regardless of their ethnic or religious affiliation. Also, as Armstrong exemplify, one cannot fight against terrorism because it is a tactics, a strategy of non-state weak actors. Thus, in order for terrorists groups to get what they want, they need all the strategies they have employed this far – invoking response that would prove their point through violent theater, solicit mass organization to achieve their goal, polarization of the population and the use of symbolism and exploitation of religious tones to justify their course even though their immediate goal might be political. Absorbing both the intellectual and moral realm of this argument, terrorism of any kind is unacceptable. By engaging in terror activities, the propagators inexplicable invalidate whatever moral argument they might have had. People should follow the examples of Mohammad Gandhi and Martin Luther King’s Jr. , non violence approach to fight for a course they believe is just.

Examining Violence In Titus Andronicus Film Studies Essay

Examining Violence In Titus Andronicus Film Studies Essay Titus Andronicus is probably one of the most notorious and violent plays that the poet and playwright William Shakespeare has ever written. But even if this certain revenge play is unheard-of, there is still a lot of room for interpretation, even more when it is compared to a film version. One could for example comment on the several murders, the cannibalism, the rape, the dismemberment of human bodies and so on. Thus, revenge and violence are an important topic in this play and that is why I will analyze the presentation of violence in Julie Taymor s version of Titus Andronicus named Titus and released in 2000, and compare it to the representation of violence in the primary source. What I would like to demonstrate is that in the film violence is presented in a grotesque way. So the question is, whether the play offers a grotesque basis for Taymor s film or whether this is rather her own interpretation. In order to do that, I will first define the concept of the grotesque, including its connotations and effects on the reader or the audience. Furthermore, I will pick out scenes that support my argument. To demonstrate the grotesque in the film I will depict and interpret three key scenes. The first scene will be Lavinia s rape, in which Lavinia is assaulted by Chiron and Demetrius and gets her hands and tongue cut off afterwards. In addition, I will present a scene, where a messenger delivers Titus Andronicus his own hand and his sons heads. The last scene will deal with the situation, where Titus dresses up as a cook and serves Tamora, his most dreaded enemy, and others her two sons that he killed and cooked earlier. 1.2. Information on the Play and the Film In this section I would like to give information on the play and on the film in short terms. Titus Andronicus, which is a revenge play as already mentioned, was written by Shakespeare in the late 1580s and updated around 1593 . Sw rdh claims that there are still critics who are not sure whether the play was written by Shakespeare alone, since it is very different from his other plays. Julie Taymor s film Titus was released in 1999 and failed at the box office although it was highly praised by critics. In her adaptation the story is set in Ancient Rome but is mixed with modern elements, such as cars and firearms. In addition, in Taymor s framing of the Shakespearean play the boundary between reality and fiction is crossed several times . This crossing of boundaries is a hint that Taymor uses the filmic mode in her adaptation. According to Jorgens there are several modes that are used to measure the films relative distance from the language and conventions of the theatre . In Shakespeare on Film he introduces the theatrical, the realistic and the filmic mode. The theatrical mode looks like a theatre performance and involves the audience. There are a lot of medium and long shots used. The realistic mode, however, takes advantage of the camera s unique ability to show us things [] . This for example includes close-ups. The filmic mode is the mode of the film poet, whose works bear the same relation to the surfaces of reality that poems do to ordinary conversation . That means that reality becomes insignificant in the filmic mode and can be mixed up with elements of the unreal. In this mode many non-theatrical techniques which also include close-ups, long shots, several camera angle and movements. In Taymor s adaptation the reality is penetrated by dream sequences that Taymor herself calls Penny Arcade Nightmares or short P.A.N.s. Two examples of the P.A.N.s will be discussed later in this paper. According to Jorgens, the filmic mode makes it possible for the directors not only to present what Shakespeare literally has written in his plays but also the subtext , which reveals the character feelings and thoughts between the lines of a play. In this paper I will show that the grotesque is what is hidden between the lines in Shakespeare s play and what is made extremely visible in Taymor s film. 2. The Grotesque According to Thomson the concept of the grotesque changes from time to time and has gained importance only since the 1950s. However, the concept of the grotesque is old and was already used by poets as Dante and Ovid. The modern way to define the grotesque is to view it as a fundamentally ambivalent thing, as a violent clash of opposites [ ] Thomson argues that the grotesque is always connected to the comic and the terrifying at the same time and that there is problem to decide whether something is funny (not only in the sense of comic but also in the sense of strange) or horror. This leads to an unresolved problem and [the] special impact of the grotesque will be lacking if the conflict is resolved .Thus he offers the definition that the grotesque is the unresolved clash of incompatibles in work and response . Something grotesque can also be named bizarre, absurd and macabre, which I think is also very common in both, the film and the play. One of the lines Titus says in the scene where he asks Aaron to cut off his hand is: Lend me thy hand and I will give thee mine (3.1.189). He asks Aaron to help him to cut off his hand and tells him that he will give him his hand when Aaron is done. This is a macabre situation because the fact that Titus is having his hand lopped off is very gruesome, but the line he is saying is funny (in the sense of comic) and this evokes two opposite feelings namely disgust and amusement which is, according to Thomson, the usual but abnormal reaction to the grotesque. Harpham puts the definition of the grotesque in different words: when we use the word grotesque we record [ ] the sense that although our attention has been arrested, our understanding is unsatisfied . He also explains that the grotesque has always to do with the clash of two opposites, such as the known and the unknown or the perceived and the unperceived . Although he agrees with Thomson concerning the reaction towards the grotesque, he elaborates more on the fact that the grotesque also depends on our own perception and interpretation of a certain issue. He argues that these two points (among others) play a [ ] crucial role in creating the sense of the grotesque . Yates also points out that in Greek mythology a grotesque creature was something that had human and animalistic body parts. This could be a person with the head of a bat, a plant with the teeth of an animal [] and so on. In Taymor s film, this definition of the grotesque is used several times. The most persistent picture is that of Lavinia as a woman with the head of a doe. This comparison will be discussed later. In this paper, I will define a scene as grotesque if it matches Thomson s definition. That means that I will analyse whether a scene is funny and terrifying at the same time in order to be called grotesque. 3. The Original Titus Andronicus and Taymor s Adaptation 3.1. Scene 1: Lavinia s Rape 3.1.1. The Main Scene The scene starts with Tamora s sons entering with the ravished Lavinia in 2.4.1 in the play and their hysteric laughter in 63:05 min in the film, ending at line 55 and at 66:19 min. This scene will be analyzed concerning camera movements, angles and framing, because this is very important for the interpretation of this scene. This scene was chosen as one of the grotesque scenes because Lavinia is presented in a very grotesque way. It is not only her looks but also the use of the camera and the music that create this impression. All of these elements will be explained in this chapter. The rape scene begins with an extreme long shot of the two brothers laughing and moving around Lavinia, who is only shown from the back, being obviously filmed after the rape and mutilation. It is filmed from a high angle and creates the image that the audience sees the scene from her point of view. There is also a hand-held camera used, which moves quickly and follows the two men (or rather boys) causing a jerky, ragged effect , which is very often used in the horror genre. In addition, the fact that Lavinia is only seen from behind arouses the feeling that something very uncomfortable is following. When Lavinia is finally seen from front view, a canted angle, suggest[ing] imbalance , and a long shot are used, so that Lavinia s whole body and her surroundings can be recognized. She starts moving, her face wreathing in pain. This adds to the grotesque impression of the whole scene. When Chiron and Demetrius leave we can see Marcus walking through the forest. As he sees Lavinia, he starts walking towards her. Here, a medium shot is used and the scene is filmed on eye level. The camera movement can be described as a reverse dolly shot, which just follows the character that is filmed slowly and steadily. The camera starts zooming closer to Lavinia and when she opens her mouth, there is a medium shot showing her upper part of the body, which is followed by a close-up at Marcus s face. This whole second part of the scene with Marcus and Lavinia is shot at eye level. This is a contrast to the first part where Lavinia is filmed with Tamora s sons. It creates the impression that Marcus and Lavinia are at the same level. Marcus is devastated and pities Lavinia and you can see how much he loves his niece, so there is no imbalance or violence at all. Tamora s sons, however, hurt Lavinia and make fun of her afterwards. Moreover, the steady movements of the camera in the second part of the scene and the fast camera movements in the first part of the scene also aggravate this effect. In the film version, a lot of lines from the play have been left out in this scene. However, the words that Marcus says in the play are shown by the actors through facial expressions and movements of the body. In the play he says: Alas, a crimson river of warm blood [] Doth rise and fall between thy rosed lips (2.3.22-2.3.24). These lines and the following monologue are left out in the film. But since Lavinia opens her mouth and the audience can actually see the blood, it is not necessary for Marcus to repeat that. The whole monologue where he regrets what happened to Lavinia is also made superfluous through the close-up at his face, which already has been described. At this moment, his facial expression demonstrates his distress and words are not necessary. Another important fact in this scene is that Lavinia is compared to a tree. Marcus says in the play: Speak gentle niece, what stern ungentle hands Hath lopped and hewed and made thy body bare Of her two branches, those sweet ornaments [ ] (2.3.16-2.3.19) Here, Marcus uses a lot of expressions that have to do with wood and wood processing, which are branches , lopped and hewed , thus comparing her body to a tree. When he finds Lavinia in the film version, branches have been plugged into her stumps. This creates a very grotesque impression. It is funny in the sense of strange, because it is a very uncommon picture and it is terrifying at the same time, if one thinks about the pain that Lavinia must feel at this moment. Although this is not explicitly mentioned in the primary source, one could say that the play provides a basis for Taymor s interpretation because of the several comparisons to wood. Taymor also sets the scene that is described here in a place that reminds of a dead wood, because there are dead, black trees and stubs everywhere, surrounded by a lot of mud. In this scene Lavinia is also standing on a stub, which adds even more to Marcus s comparison of her as a tree, and her movements remind of a thin tree that is swaying in the wind. What is also worth mentioning is that earlier in the film, in the scene where Chiron and Demetrius kill Lavinia s husband Bassanius in front of her, the scene is set in a verdant forest. But after her rape the forest is dead, which could also be an allusion to the destruction of Lavinia and her chastity. Another hint that Lavinia s rape should be presented in a grotesque way is that fact that the incident that happened to her is often compared to Philomela s story. Harpham argues that the grotesque can also be found in the work of the Roman poet Ovid. Interestingly enough, Ovid s work is also used very often as a metaphor in Shakespeare s play. Marcus says later in the scene about his niece: A craftier Tereus, cousin, hast thou met, And he hath cut those pretty fingers off, That could have better sewed than Philomel. (2.3.41-2.3.43) Here, he compares Lavinia to Ovid s Philomela who is raped by King Tereus of Thrace and gets her tongue chopped off, as well. That comparison establishes a connection between the grotesque scene in Taymor s film and Shakespeare s play. However, according to Cartelli and Rowe, Taymor does not present Lavinia as Philomela but as Daphne, who is also one of the protagonists of Ovid s poems. Daphne was like Lavinia a chaste virgin. She was persecuted by Apollo who was madly in love with her and so she asked her father Peneus, a river god, to change her shape in order to stop Apollo. Consequently, her father turned Daphne into a tree. The picture of Lavinia as Daphne is even more strengthened when Young Lucius brings her wooden hands to replace hers. Another important argument is that Lavinia is constantly compared to an animal. In the scene where Aaron talks Chiron and Demetrius into raping Lavinia she is very often referred to as a doe. Aaron even says: And strike her home by force, if not by words (1.1.618). According to the notes of this edition the word striking was used as a technical term for killing or wounding a deer . In Taymor s film, there is a P.A.N. that reflects this allusion, which will be discussed later in this chapter. Thus, Lavinia is often compared to animals and to trees, but she is never regarded as a woman. Hanson argues that female composite figures are seen as sexual animals in Greek mythology. Lavinia is reduced to a sex symbol (as would be called nowadays). Finally, one could say that Lavinia s rape scene which is depicted in a very grotesque way in the film is not explicitly grotesque in the play. However, Shakespeare provides a basis for the grotesque scene, by comparing Lavinia to a tree and to Philomela, whose story was perceived as grotesque, as well and by actually having her hands and tongue lopped off. 3.2.2. Additional Scene: Lavinia as doe woman This scene cannot be found explicitly in Shakespeare s play. However, it is important for the scene that was described above and adds crucial information for the picture of Lavinia in the play. This very short scene is also one of the already mentioned Penny Arcade Nightmares . It starts at 93:25 min and end at 94:15 min. Starks argues that [t]he P.A.N.s, which occur at strategic moments throughout Titus, [ ] further interrogate the act of viewing horror . She adds that they are supposed to mix reality and imagination. Usually, in P.A.N. the characters try to reprocess something that has happened to them. But there is also always a nightmare element in these P.A.N.s. This P.A.N. happens parallel to the action in the play. It is the moment where Lavinia writes down the names of Chiron and Demetrius in the sand. The stage directions tell us that [s]he takes [a] staff in her mouth, and guides it with her stumps, and writes (4.1.76). In the film the staff reminds of a phallic symbol (Lavinia is reduced to a sex symbol again) and the P.A.N. takes place while she writes. At the beginning she can be seen with the head of a doe on her head and with tigers jumping from both sides at her. There is a long shot used and the whole scene is shown in slow motion. The doe usually connected to innocence and weakness and one must involuntarily think of Walt Disney s Bambi. The tigers however are connected to strength and power. This shows that poor Lavinia had no chance to protect herself from the two brothers. The music in the background sounds psychedelic and is accompanied by Lavinia s grunts. The colours are mainly blue and black except for her white dress. Suddenly Lavinia looks scared and there are close-ups of her face and the faces of Chiron and Demetrius. The last shot shows Lavinia standing on a pedestal in a breeze in her white dress which reminds very much of Marilyn Monroe, who was a sex symbol in the 1950s. This comparison underlines the idea that Lavinia is reduced constantly to an object of desire in the play and in the film. This P.A.N. shows us what cannot be seen in the main scene. We can see how much Lavinia must have suffered and as Taymor puts it a bolt of electric shock seems to run through [Lavinia s] body . However, the comparison to Marilyn Monroe in that situation and the fast cuts that are put together in the P.A.N. create a very grotesque image. According to Cartelli and Rowe the arrangements in this scene are the same as in all the other P.A.N.s. The victim stands in the middle and is attacked from the left and the right side. Stark also connects the shot where Lavinia can be seen standing on a pedestal to the first shot after her rape. The idea is basically the same: Lavinia is standing on a stump, wearing a white dress in a breeze. In this scene she seems to be the one who is put above all of the others but she is also the one who is humiliated in the worst way. However, the two shots evoke completely different feelings. After her rape the audiences is shocked by that shot and we pity Lavinia. But in the second shot the audience looks at her as an appealing woman, who is teasing with her movements, which adds a grotesque element to the whole Lavinia theme in the film. But, from our point of view her representation in the whole play is grotesque as well because of her constantly reduced role. 3.2. Scene 2: Titus and many severed body parts This scene will deal with Titus cutting off his hand with the aid of Aaron in order to trade it for the live of his sons. But Aaron tricks him and so, Titus only gets the heads of his two sons and his own hand at the end. In the play this scene starts in 3.1.151 and ends with line 206, going on from 3.1.235 until line 241. In the film the scene starts at 75:19 min, goes on until 78:00 min and continues from 80:19 min to 84:21 min. The part in between is not connected closely to the scene and will be left out. In this scene hands play again an important role. Lavinia loses her hands after the rape and cannot be an independent person anymore. In this scene the meaning of hands becomes even more evident. According to Katherine Rowe the hand is perceived as a separate part of the body, which controls the material world. She argues that the hand is [ ] the body part most often associated with intentional, effective action [ ] . Even Aristotle discussed the importance of hands and claimed that the hand is the instrument of instruments . According to Rowe, the Greek philosopher Galen continued Aristotle s thought and asserted that the hand not only is the supreme instrument but also a tool that uses tools . In the play there are often allusions made to the hand and it is associated with many different adjectives and attributes. It is called victorious, noble, idle and so on. What is also interesting is that the hand is the one that gets credited for several deeds. In this scene for example Lucius says to his father: Stay father, for that noble hand of thine That hath thrown down so many enemies Shall not be sent. (3.1.163-3.1.165) Thus, it is the ultimate punishment to lose a hand and turn into a person, who cannot be independent anymore. But still, Titus does not hesitate to give his hand for his sons lives, even though the thought of cutting it off must be horrible. This is the part of the scene, which fulfils the criterion of being terrifying in order to be grotesque. The funny part (this time in the sense of comic) is fulfilled by what is said by Titus. He tells Aaron: Lend me thy hand and I will give thee mine (3.1.188) Titus is actually making a joke in this very serious, potentially life-threatening situation. This creates an image of something grotesque and this is also how Taymor presents the scene in her film. This part of the scene is set in a kitchen. Here, the grotesque is very explicit, because Titus enters the kitchen with Aaron, takes away the cook s carving board, which she just used to chop vegetables, lays down his hand and lets him cut it off with a cleaver. It is a comic situation because the severed hand looks unreal as if it is elastic and because there is no blood at all, but still the thought of the pain that one must suffer getting his hand lopped off and Titus s facial expression, create a feeling of horror, which is supported by a close-up at Titus s face. The use of the camera and the filming techniques do not have as much importance in this scene as in the scene discussed in chapter 3.1. However, it is noticeable that Aaron talks directly to the camera several times, which is called a face-on tracking shot. This creates the effect that he is directly addressing the audience and he usually does that, when he is supposed to say something aside in the stage directions of the play. However, what is more important is the use of music in this scene. When Aaron and Titus walk to the kitchen to cut Titus s hand off, a lot of trumpets, horns and string players can be heard. The music sounds aggressive, frightening and loud and fits to the determined walk of the two characters and their speed. When Aaron leaves the kitchen with the hand and starts talking to the camera, the music changes and jazzy sounds can be heard. This again underlines the words that are said and helps turning the mood from frightening to comic. The second part of the scene is even more grotesque, because Taymor once again mixes modern elements with those from the Roman Empire. Guneratne puts it in the following words: [ ] a derelict biker-clown pulls a wagon functioning as a mobile arcade [ ] and, after dancing grotesquely about and manically promoting his show like a demented carny barker, he unveils the severed heads of Titus s two sons and the hand Titus severed to ransom them . This scene is described as a P.A.N. by Taymor herself. According to Cartelli and Rowe The penny arcade evokes the carnivalesque atmosphere of a fair or beachside entertainment zone given over to casual meandering among games of chance, fortune tellers, tattoo parlo[u]rs, and overstuffed displays of cheap prizes and merchandise . This quote implies that what you usually can see in such a circumstance is meaningless and just used as entertainment, but seeing the heads of one s own two sons has actually nothing to do with entertainment and cheap prizes , which add to the grotesque effect. Cartelli and Rowe continue that the P.A.N.s also demonstrate nightmare and let the characters relive what has happened to them before. However, the P.A.N described here is different, since it reflects a situation that is actually going on and not just a dream of one of the characters: This still life P.A.N. signals the turn in the play where the nightmares are now reality and madness can be confused with sanity [] . To underline the grotesque picture of the messenger Taymor also changes his character. In the play he seems to be compassionate, talking to Andronicus about his father s death. But in the film, he seems to be uninterested in what he is saying, as if he is quoting something he, himself, has no stake in . The way he delivers his massage supports the grotesque in the film. However, in this short part Taymor did not take the play as a basis for her interpretation. In this whole scene the comic element is presented at first by the clown and the little girl. The music, that is played, sounds like circus music and stops abruptly as the clown pulls up the roller shutter. The effect is that the audience is shocked and terrified, since the two heads of the sons, which look fairly unreal and disgusting, swimming in a red fluid, put in a dirty glass cover, are finally visible for everyone. This is already very grotesque but it becomes even more grotesque when Titus asks Lavinia to take his dead, severed hand in her badly injured mouth. The picture of the raped and mutilated girl with the dishevelled hair and the hand in her mouth makes her look like a dog, which is a very disturbing thought. Finally, one could say that this is also a scene, where the play offers a grotesque basis for Taymor s version. Marcus suggests that Titus should rant but instead of ranting Titus starts laughing. This is a reaction, which is not expected by the reader and turns the situation into something uncommon. In addition, the moment where Lavinia shall take her father s hand and carry it in her mouth is really happening in the play and Taymor takes Titus s request literally. The effect of this scene is stronger in the film than in the play, because watching Lavinia taking the hand is much more disturbing than reading it. 3.3. Scene 3: Titus, the Cook The last scene that will be discussed in this paper starts in 5.3.26 and ends with line 65. In the film the scene goes from 138:30 min to 144:30 min. In this scene, the grotesque can be found everywhere. It is grotesque how the cakes containing the two dead sons are presented. It is grotesque how Titus kills his own daughter and how all of the protagonists are stabbed with a knife, a spoon and a candleholder. The music, the camera angles and filming techniques everything in this scene seems grotesque. This analysis will begin with the filming techniques. Directly at the beginning of the scene there is a close-up at the two pies that Titus made out of Chiron s and Demetrius bodies, cooling down on a windowsill. There is vivid, friendly, jazzy music playing in the background and the curtains are moving slowly because of the wind. This picture evokes the feeling that some lovely housewife who lives in a cosy home, made these delicious looking pies for her family. But of course, this is not the case and the knowledge of the two dead human beings inside that pies cause feelings of disgust and agitation. As soon as the guests including Tamora, Saturnius, Lucius, Marcus and others are seated Titus brings in one of the pies and cuts it. The first peace is for Tamora and inside the pie looks bloody and raw, once again creating disgust. The whole scene is shot at eye level and most frequently there are medium shots and close-ups used to show the characters. However, when everyone starts eating there are several extreme close-ups at their mouths chewing with pieces of the pie sticking between their teeth. Wilson argues that these kinds of shots are supposed to cause dramatic effect . Looking at these people chewing raises the feeling of disgust even more. What is also remarkable is the use of the camera in the very last seconds of the scene. When Lucius puts a spoon in Saturnius mouth and feeds it into him until he suffocates, the scene is suddenly shown in slow motion and finally comes to a complete stop. Suddenly, Lucius is the only one that can move. He spits at Saturnius and shoots him afterwards. Finally, the scene is over and the rest of the characters are standing in the Coliseum. My suggestion is that these last seconds are used in order to point out Lucius s role. He is the only child of Titus who all in all lost one daughter and 23 sons that is still alive. Lucius makes not only an end to the scene but also to the whole violence and revenge, and becomes the new Emperor afterwards. Music and sounds in general are also very important in this scene. They underline the action in the film and support the use of the camera. When the very beautifully looking Lavinia enters the room the music changes and there is a quite orchestra in the background. As soon as Titus says that she must die it starts getting louder and when he breaks her neck, which is highlighted by a creaky sound, the music gets very loud and dramatic. A few seconds later there is again a change. When Titus stabs Tamora the soft music changes after a short moment and becomes aggressive. Now, rock music is used and is played until the ends of the scene. The rock music underlines the chaos that is breaking out at this moment and since everything goes very fast from there adds to the perplexity that the audience experiences after the end of the scene. Here, Lavinia is once more reduced to an animal. The way her father breaks her neck reminds more of wounded sparrow then of a woman or even a child. Again, Lavinia is compared to a historical figure. Titus alludes to Virginius who killed his daughter Virginia because she was deflowered (5.3.38). What is shocking is that in this scene he kills Lavinia not because of her pain or shame but because he cannot bear looking at her and because he has already cried so much because of her pain. As always Lavinia is not regarded as a woman but as something that is there to serve men. An interesting point in this scene is the connection of the character Titus to Hopkins s role as Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. In this film Hopkins played a cannibal and in Titus he once again turns into one, when he serves the cakes. This adds a comic element and once again strengthens the grotesque impression of the whole scene. Cartelli and Rowe also observe that Hopkins sucks in his spit before slitting Chiron and Demetrius s throats , which is also usually connected to his role a Lecter and which happens shortly before the scene described here. Starks connects this last scene to the opening scene of the film and calls it a grotesque parody of the opening frame of Young Lucius (Osheen Jones) playing with ketchup-blood on the kitchen table [] . In the first scene of the film a boy can be seen playing with toy soldiers and other figures in a kitchen, wearing a paper bag on his head. Hinz describes the setting as a typical American kitchen of the 1950s and read the paper bag as a symbol for the thin wall between real and imagined violence . The picture of the boy with the paper bag on his head is comic but disturbing considering his violent game and thus grotesque. Young Lucius is a character who really exists in the play but in Taymor s adaptation his role is taken by a boy who acts as the audience. He appears in every scene described in this paper and has influence on the film. In this scene, or rather after this scene and after his father being elected as the new Emperor, Lucius leaves the Coliseum with Aaron s and Tamora s baby on his arm, which, according to Hinz, hints at the end of violence between the Romans and the Goths. 4. Conclusion In this term paper it has been shown that violence is treated as something grotesque in Taymor s adaptations of Titus Andronicus. First of all, the term the grotesque has been defined and afterwards three scenes were chosen from the film and interpreted. Whether a scene is grotesque or not has been analysed according to Thomson s criteria. Finally the film scenes have been compared to the corresponding scenes in the play. Camera angles, camera movements, the gestures of the characters, the music and of course the text is what was taken into consideration during the analysis of the film. What has been pointed out in this paper is that the play offers a grotesque basis for Taymor s interpretation. It was not only presented very explicitly through the actions of the characters but also hinted at by the stage directions, by the actual text (e.g. through the use of metaphors and allusions to Greek mythology) and t

Pro-Child / Pro-Choice: An Exercise in Doublethink? by Judith A. Boss E

In her essay â€Å"Pro-Child / Pro-Choice: An Exercise in Doublethink?† Judith A. Boss deconstructs the argument supporting legalized abortion on the basis that it is beneficial to children in general. Boss presents the oft-used slogan of the pro-choice position, â€Å"Pro-Child / Pro-Choice†. She maintains that this slogan seems closely related to â€Å"newspeak†, which she characterizes as â€Å"†¦vocabulary pared down to a minimum so that whole ideologies are expressed in a single slogan†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (156-7). The term â€Å"newspeak† comes from George Orwell’s 1984. In the novel, these simplistic slogans serve to perpetuate â€Å"doublethink†, which entails, as Orwell writes, â€Å"holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously and accepting both of them† (156). Boss also explains, â€Å"Doublethink is maintained by a refusal to examine the assumptions and facts supporting one’s beliefsâ₠¬  (156). In order to weaken the pro-child/pro-choice position, Boss begins by presenting the â€Å"assumptions and facts† supporting it. Boss states that the basic assumption behind the pro-child /pro-choice position is the belief that â€Å"†¦the exclusion of humans prior to birth from the protection of the moral and legal community, thereby leaving the choice of carrying a pregnancy to term entirely up to the woman, benefits children† (157). Boss creates two categories of children and presents the possible benefits that abortion-on-demand provides. The first category, the unborn child, benefits because his or her â€Å"†¦ abortion will spare him or her a life of misery† (157). On the other hand, the second category, the born child, benefits because he or she â€Å"can enjoy a higher quality of life and paternal love unhindered by the presence of burdensome siblings who were... ...recognizes that the true utility that legalized abortion serves may lie in the benefits that it presents to women and that those benefits may appear in the form of social empowerment. It does seem that since 1973, women have been able to empower themselves in the occupational realm. However, Boss leads us to ask ourselves if this professional empowerment of women has come at any cost. In order to understand the true utility of allowing abortion-on-demand, one must weigh all the consequences it creates. It seems though that we have not appropriately measured the consequences of ensuring abortion-on-demand. Questions: How is doublethink mutually exclusive with the correct use of utilitarian theory? What positive consequences, if any, come from ensuring abortion-on-demand? How does one ensure that every child is a healthy child? Is it even possible?

Hitlers Weltanschauung (world View) :: essays research papers fc

In the early quarter of the twentieth century, a young man was beginning to fill his mind with ideas of a unification of all Germanic countries. That young man was Adolf Hitler, and what he learned in his youth would surface again as he struggled to become the leader of this movement. Hitler formed views of countries and even certain cities early in his life, those views often affecting his dictation of foreign policy as he grew older. What was Hitler's view of the world before the Nazi Party came to power? Based in large part on incidents occurring in his boyhood, Hitler's view included the belief that Jews should be eliminated, and that European countries were merely pawns for him to use in his game of world dominion.Adolf Hitler grew up the son of a respectable imperial customhouse official, who refused to let his son do what he was most interested in-art. Hitler never excelled in school, and took interest only in art, gymnastics and a casual interest in geography and history due to a liking he had taken to his teacher. It was his history teacher who would fill Adolf's mind with a simple thought: "The day will come, that all of us, of German descent, will once more belong to one mighty Teutonic nation that will stretch from the Mediterranean to the Baltic, just like the Empire of the Middle Ages, and that will stand supreme among the peoples of this earth." Already the young Adolf could envision himself in such a position.Much of the ideology that Adolf Hitler used was not original by any means. There were many thinkers and writers who laid the groundwork for what would become not just Hitler's, but the Nazi Party's Weltanschauung (world view). Three primary writers were Dietrich Eckart, editor of a harshly anti-Semitic periodical, Auf gut deutsch (Agd), Alfred Rosenberg, a Baltic German and contributor to Agd, and Gottfried Feder, an opponent of finance capitalism. These three men molded the political outlook of the German Worker's Party before Hitler encountered it in 1919, and would become quite influential in Adolf's ideology. Rosenberg contributed largely to Hitler's view of the Jews on an international perspective, suggesting the existence of a Jewish conspiracy to overthrow established nation-states on a worldwide scale. In 1924, Hitler proclaimed that he had departed from Vienna as an absolute anti-Semitic, a deadly enemy of the whole Marxist outlook, and as a Pan-German in his political persuasion.

The Destruction of the Rainforest :: Environment Environmental Science

The Destruction of the Rainforest The purpose of this paper is to inform the reader of the destruction of the rainforest. In my paper I discuss many aspects of the rainforest. I explain what the rainforests are, and give a brief summary of the importance of the rainforests. I also give a description of the destruction of the rainforest, and how a person can help to save the rainforest. The rainforests are disappearing acres per minute, a number that grows so quickly it would be impossible to cite here because it would be outdated within a week. The rainforests are home to over half of the entire species of the world, which are being destroyed with the rainforests. Unlike the rainforest itself, which may appear to grow back, it will never be the rainforest it once was, and the species that were killed will never return again. Many of the species that have not yet been discovered may very likely cure cancer, AIDS, and many other diseases and viruses of today. If the rainforests disappear so will most of the population of the world. By the end of my paper the reader will know more about the horrifying destruction of the rainforest and how we can all work together to stop it. There are two different types of rainforests: tropical and temperate. Tropical rainforests are found in 85 countries around the world. They are located near the equator, where temperatures stay above 80 degrees Fahrenheit year round. These dense, damp forests occur in Latin and South America, Africa, and Southeast Asia. Although they (tropical rainforests) cover just seven percent of the earth’s surface they can provide habitat for 50-90 percent of its animal species. In 1990, tropical rainforests totaled some 1.7 billion hectares (Forest Alliance of British Columbia, 1996). Half of the world’s rainforests lie within the borders of Brazil, Indonesia, and Zaire. Tropical rainforests have 3 layers: the forest floor, the understory, and the canopy. The forest floor has soil and is home to mainly insects although large mammals like gorillas and jaguars are also found there. Many smaller animals, including anteaters, lemurs, and tree kangaroos live in the understory. This is also where many small trees and shrubs are found.

Of Mice and Men Quotations

â€Å"Of Mice and Men† Quotes Hopes and Dreams: â€Å"An’ live off the fatta the lan’,† Lennie shouted. â€Å"An’ have rabbits† â€Å"We’d jus’ live there. We’d belong there. We’d have our own place where we belonged and not sleep in no bunk house† They fell into silence. They looked at one another, amazed. This thing they had never really believed in was coming true. â€Å"Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody never gets no land. It just in their head. † [Crooks] â€Å"why I’d come lend a hand† â€Å"Well just forget it,† said crooks. â€Å"I didn’t mean it. Just foolin’. Wouldn’ want to go no place like that. † George said softl, â€Å"- I think I knowed from the very first.I think I knowed we’d never do her. He usta like to hear about it so much i got to thinking maybe we would. † Friendship VS Isolationism George: â€Å"Guys like us , that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family —- â€Å" â€Å"With us it ain’t like that. We got a future. We got somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. Lennie broke in â€Å"But not us! An’ why? Because†¦ because I gotyou to look after me, and you got me to look after you, and that’s why† Candy: â€Å"Well-hell! I had him so long. Had him since he was a pup. He was the best damn sheep dog I ever seen. †Slim: â€Å" Ain’t many guys travel around together,† he mused. â€Å"I don’t know why. Maybe ever’body in the whole damn world is scared of each other† Crooks: â€Å"A guy needs somebody – to be near him. A guys goes nuts if he ain’t got nobody† 1. â€Å"Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world. They got no family. They don’t belong no place. . . . With us it ain’t like that. We got a future. We got somebody to talk to that gives a damn about us. We don’t have to sit in no bar room blowin’ in our jack jus’ because we got no place else to go. If them other guys gets in jail they can rot for all anybody gives a damn.But not us. † Toward the end of Section 1, before George and Lennie reach the ranch, they camp for the night in a beautiful clearing and George assures Lennie of their special relationship. In this passage, George explains their friendship, which forms the heart of the work. In Of Mice and Men, Steinbeck idealizes male friendships, suggesting that they are the most dignified and satisfying way to overcome the loneliness that pervades the world. As a self-declared â€Å"watchdog† of society, Steinbeck set out to expose and chronicle the circumstances that cause human suffering.Here, George relates that loneliness is responsible for much of that suffering, a theory supported by many of the secondary characters. Later in the narr ative, Candy, Crooks, and Curley’s wife all give moving speeches about their loneliness and disappointments in life. Human beings, the book suggests, are at their best when they have someone else to look to for guidance and protection. George reminds Lennie that they are extremely lucky to have each other since most men do not enjoy this comfort, especially men like George and Lennie, who exist on the margins of society.Their bond is made to seem especially rare and precious since the majority of the world does not understand or appreciate it. At the end, when Lennie accidentally kills Curley’s wife, Candy does not register the tragedy of Lennie’s impending death. Instead, he asks if he and George can still purchase the farm without Lennie. In this environment, in which human life is utterly disposable, only Slim recognizes that the loss of such a beautiful and powerful friendship should be mourned. 2. â€Å"S’pose they was a carnival or a circus come to town, or a ball game, or any damn thing. Old Candy nodded in appreciation of the idea. â€Å"We’d just go to her,† George said. â€Å"We wouldn’t ask nobody if we could. Jus’ say, ‘We’ll go to her,’ an’ we would. Jus’ milk the cow and sling some grain to the chickens an’ go to her. † In the middle of Section 3, George describes their vision of the farm to Candy. At first, when Candy overhears George and Lennie discussing the farm they intend to buy, George is guarded, telling the old man to mind his own business. However, as soon as Candy offers up his life savings for a down payment on the property, George’s vision of the farm becomes even more real.Described in rustic but lyrical language, the farm is the fuel that keeps the men going. Life is hard for the men on the ranch and yields few rewards, but George, Lennie, and now Candy go on because they believe that one day they will own their own place . The appeal of this dream rests in the freedom it symbolizes, its escape from the backbreaking work and spirit-breaking will of others. It provides comfort from psychological and even physical turmoil, most obviously for Lennie. For instance, after Curley beats him, Lennie returns to the idea of tending his rabbits to soothe his pain.Under their current circumstances, the men must toil to satisfy the boss or his son, Curley, but they dream of a time when their work will be easy and determined by themselves only. George’s words describe a timeless, typically American dream of liberty, self-reliance, and the ability to pursue happiness. 3. A guy sets alone out here at night, maybe readin’ books or thinkin’ or stuff like that. Sometimes he gets thinkin’, an’ he got nothing to tell him what’s so an’ what ain’t so. Maybe if he sees somethin’, he don’t know whether it’s right or not. He can’t turn to some other guy and ast him if he sees it too.He can’t tell. He got nothing to measure by. I seen things out here. I wasn’t drunk. I don’t know if I was asleep. If some guy was with me, he could tell me I was asleep, an’ then it would be all right. But I jus’ don’t know. Crooks speaks these words to Lennie in Section 4, on the night that Lennie visits Crooks in his room. The old stable-hand admits to the very loneliness that George describes in the opening pages of the novella. As a black man with a physical handicap, Crooks is forced to live on the periphery of ranch life. He is not even allowed to enter the white men’s bunkhouse, or join them in a game of cards.His resentment typically comes out through his bitter, caustic wit, but in this passage he displays a sad, touching vulnerability. Crooks’s desire for a friend by whom to â€Å"measure† things echoes George’s earlier description of the life of a migrant worker . Because these men feel such loneliness, it is not surprising that the promise of a farm of their own and a life filled with strong, brotherly bonds holds such allure. 4. I seen hundreds of men come by on the road an’ on the ranches, with their bindles on their back an’ that same damn thing in their heads . . . very damn one of ’em’s got a little piece of land in his head. An’ never a God damn one of ’em ever gets it. Just like heaven. Ever’body wants a little piece of lan’. I read plenty of books out here. Nobody never gets to heaven, and nobody gets no land. In this passage from Section 4, after Lennie shares with Crooks his plan to buy a farm with George and raise rabbits, Crooks tries to deflate Lennie’s hopes. He relates that â€Å"hundreds† of men have passed through the ranch, all of them with dreams similar to Lennie’s. Not one of them, he emphasizes with bitterness, ever manages to make that dream come true.Crooks injects the scene with a sense of reality, reminding the reader, if not the childlike Lennie, that the dream of a farm is, after all, only a dream. This moment establishes Crooks’s character, showing how a lifetime of loneliness and oppression can manifest as cruelty. It also furthers Steinbeck’s disturbing observation that those who have strength and power in the world are not the only ones responsible for oppression. As Crooks shows, even those who are oppressed seek out and attack those who are even weaker than they. 5.A water snake glided smoothly up the pool, twisting its periscope head from side to side; and it swam the length of the pool and came to the legs of a motionless heron that stood in the shallows. A silent head and beak lanced down and plucked it out by the head, and the beak swallowed the little snake while its tail waved frantically. The rich imagery with which Steinbeck begins Section 6, the powerful conclusion, evokes the novellaà ¢â‚¬â„¢s dominant themes. After killing Curley’s wife, Lennie returns to the clearing that he and George designate, at the beginning of the book, as a meeting place should they be separated or run into trouble.Here Steinbeck describes much of the natural splendor as revealed in the opening pages of the work. The images of the valley and mountains, the climbing sun, and the shaded pool suggest a natural paradise, like the Garden of Eden. The reader’s sense of return to a paradise of security and comfort is furthered by the knowledge that George and Lennie have claimed this space as a safe haven, a place to which they can return in times of trouble. This paradise, however, is lost. The snake sliding through the water recalls the conclusion of the story of Eden, in which the forces of evil appeared as a snake and caused humanity’s fall from grace.Steinbeck is a master at symbolism, and here he skillfully employs both the snake and heron to emphasize the predatory n ature of the world and to foreshadow Lennie’s imminent death. The snake that glides through the waters without harm at the beginning of the story is now unsuspectingly snatched from the world of the living. Soon, Lennie’s life will be taken from him, and he will be just as unsuspecting as the snake when the final blow is delivered. Themes Friendship: -George and Lennie -Candy and his dog -Saves them from loneliness -Makes sacrifices – George shoots Lennie, so that Curley will not have a hance to torture him, even though he doesn’t want to. -Loyalty – George stuck by Lennie through all his problems and did what he though was best for Lennie what he killed Curley’s Wife. – â€Å"I ain’t mad† Friendship that he forms with Slim after Lennie’s death – â€Å"me an’ you’ll go in an’ get a drink. † Loneliness: Curley’s wife – sexism -Is given a bad reputation -Sexuality: â €Å"jailbait†/ â€Å"tramp† Crooks – color/ racial discrimination -Isolated – he does not live in the bunk house with the rest of the ranch hands and is not allowed in unless under special circumstances: ChristmasCandy – His best friend was a dog -His do was shot, he was completely alone George is lonely even though he had Lennie. This is because he is not mentally compatible with George. Also since the relationship is seen as a â€Å"master-pet† or â€Å"parent-child† relationship Lennie can be more of a responsibility. [However, friendship and companionship plays a big role in their bond. ] Slim is seen as â€Å"God-like† so the reader does not see slim effected by loneliness Power: Curley has power because he is the boss’s son.Curley’s Wife also has a lot of power over the ranch hands because of her sexuality and because she is Curley’s Wife. â€Å"I could have you strung up on a tree so easy it ainâ₠¬â„¢t even funny. † â€Å"Crook’s face lighted with pleasure in his torture† â€Å"a nigger, an’ a dum-dum, and a lousy old sheep† â€Å"bindle stiffs† Wearing high heeled boots symbolizes power. This does not apply to Slim. He does not have to Wear high heeled boots yet he has authority at the ranch and has natural respect, it does not have to be forced unlike with Curley. Discrimination: Sex Discrimination – against Curley’s Wife I ain’t want nothing to go with you† George says this to Curley’s Wife. Pg. 93 – racial discrimination against Crooks â€Å"A colored man got to have some rights even if he don’t like ‘em† Inverted discrimination â€Å"In a second George stood framed in the door, and he looked disapprovingly about. ‘What are you doin’ in Crook’s room. You hadn’t ought to be in here. † Nature: Lennie is compared to animals. The actions/ mo vements of nature show foreboding/danger â€Å"One end of the great barn was piled high with new hay and over the pile hung the four-taloned Jackson fork suspended from its pulley.The hay came down like a mountain slope to the other end of the barn, and there was a level place yet unfilled with the new crop. At the sides the feeding racks were visible, and between the slats the heads of horses could be seen. Fallacy – personification but with nature. This reflects the mood of the scene. Pg. 104 – nature’s response to Curley’s Wife’s death. â€Å"But the barn was alive now. The horses stamped and snorted, and they chew the straw of their bedding and the clashed the chains of their halters. † Pathetic Fallacy – Horses reflect the danger.