Disturbing lack of common sense - Citizen Khan

Recently a lot of folks I know have been complaining about the BBC comedy, Citizen Khan. For those of you who don’t know, Citizen Khan is a ‘comedy set in Birmingham following the trials and tribulations of Mr Khan and his family’. Essentially like Eastenders for Asians, but funny.

The main complaint? They make fun of Pakistani/Asian culture, which is ‘racist’, and they treat religion lightheartedly – Because NO Muslim would ever have the laissez-faire attitude towards their religion that this comedy describes. And that’s fine, you’re all welcome to your opinion, I’m not asking you to conform to mine and enjoy the show. My main problem is firstly, the amount of butt-hurt comments the BBC is receiving over the ‘inappropriateness’ of the show, secondly when people decide to shove their opinion down my throat and thirdly, the hypocrisy of it all.

Allow me to explain. This show that you’re all taking offence over? It’s a SATIRE. A light hearted comedy for people to laugh at. It’s SUPPOSED to be ridiculous and over the top and poke fun at cultural differences. But it isn’t racist, and I’ll tell you why. There is absolutely nothing in that show that isn’t already true, and if you think there is, you’re just lying to yourself. I’m not saying every single person has every single ‘flaw’ (for lack of a better word) that the Khan family portrays, not at all. But each of us will identify with at least some aspect of it. My mum for example loves a good bargain! And so what? There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Yes we do tease her for it sometimes, but it’s a cultural stereotype isn’t it, and that’s what this show is full of, stereotypes!

‘But that’s not what we’re like, people will get a bad impression of us’. The multiculturalism of Britain means that everyone will have known/knows/will know at least one Asian person in their lifetime - you are seriously insulting their intelligence if you think that anyone will watch this show and automatically assume that all Asians are exactly like that. You watch Eastenders, do you assume that all your Caucasian friends own a pub and run down the road screaming ‘RICKYYYYYYY’ in a chavvy accent? I thought not.

And the fact of the matter is, there are many Muslims who take the back seat when it comes to religion. I’m not saying it’s you, but it might be someone you know. Because people like that do exist, and the show has chosen to highlight the fact that these people exist. You cannot be upset by their portrayal of real people surely? Because not every Muslim follows the Quran and Hadith 100%. Yes, many of them do their best, and that is very admirable. But there are also just as many that don’t bother, and that is their choice entirely. One show’s portrayal of those people will not mean that your sense of religion is questioned, by any means. You may know Christians or Jews that don’t really follow their religion at all, but does that mean you’ll judge every Christian or Jew by the precedent that the non-religious people set? No. If it really bothers you that much, improve your own life and religion before you complain about others. You cannot point your finger and say ‘its people like that who make all the rest of us look bad’. Really? So it wasn’t you I saw attempting to run your mother in law over? (Yes, that was an exaggerated example, lighten up)

Again, I am NOT saying that everyone is like this, I’m just giving a few examples of people that I have heard complain about this topic, when I know for a fact that they behave in a very similar way themselves. But they’re not famous or on TV so no one will judge them and apparently they think it’s ok to be hypocritical. The real fact of the matter is, this show has hit too close to home for some people and so they’re lashing out. If you were truly nothing like what’s portrayed in the show and happy with your own take on religion, you wouldn’t care about this show at all - you might even enjoy the laughs.

Then there are the people who think their kids will be negatively influenced by this. Firstly, parents tend to grossly underestimate their kids’ intelligence. Honestly, your child CAN understand the difference between a satirical comedy show and real life, sometimes better than the parents. They are more influenced by their home environment than what they see on TV, because they know that it’s not real life. Your blind panic about this affecting your children is sometimes quite obviously your parental insecurity, over the shortcomings of their upbringing. If you are confident that you gave your children the right religious and cultural upbringing, you would have no problem in letting them watch the show because you’d be assured that your children will know that what they see on the TV isn’t the same as what they’ve been taught by you.

So chill out, take a step back and just enjoy the (cheap) laughs the show provides. If it’s really not your thing, don’t watch it, there are many other things on too. But why increase your stress levels worrying about something that truly isn’t the end of the world? No one is asking you to watch and if you don’t watch, you don’t have any complaints J

And please note that this is all my own opinion, I’m not asking you to agree with everything I’ve written. If you identify yourself with any of the people I’ve written about though, please do give thought to what I’ve said. You’re more than welcome to share your own opinion with me and I respect that. At the end of the day, these are all our own thoughts, and none of them are ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ – it’s all about how we as individuals perceive things J

Coasting into a Decent Grade

Introduction

  As part of Management Enquiry, undergraduates were split into groups to deliver a presentation, based on a management topic of their choosing. This had to be referenced with a film of similar subject matter, from which examples and parallels could be drawn.

  The aim of this paper is to reflect upon said presentation, using academic theory to address key issues arising from such a project, and noting the points at which personal experience differs from the literature.

Ø  Team Role Theory

Belbin (1981) suggested eight group roles [See Table I], focal to any team;

    While the sentiment behind this theory may have been to combine a mix of strengths, allowing the team to bring together their work, in practice, it is far more difficult to successfully define the exact roles that individuals are suited to. A variety of such roles also requires a consequent variety in personalities, which isn’t always advantageous, as this particular group realised during the introductory seminar. One member hadn’t turned up and the rest couldn’t agree on a topic for the project, mainly due to the group deciding to base their research topic upon a film, as opposed to choosing a relevant film to use as an extended example of their research topic. Their taste in movies being dissimilar, it was almost impossible to choose a film, and therefore the research topic was also not chosen until a much later stage.

- Prevention of similar occurrences in the future

    Firstly, it would have been easier to select a research topic before deciding which film to include in the presentation. This shows an absence of methodical thinking and a lack of understanding of the task. The best way to prevent this would have been to thoroughly read the study guide, and further question the seminar leader to ensure a sound understanding. Hesitance to do so inevitably led to insubstantial knowledge in terms of how to begin approaching the project, as was clear from the backwards approach the team members took.

    Further, rather than fitting together, the different personalities clashed – each individual wanted to base the project on a different film and did not want to concede to other members. An example of a democratic approach to this situation would have been for each member to write down their choice and pick one out of a hat. This way, a film would have been chosen immediately and no team member could plead injustice. 

Ø  Leadership

    The first role that Belbin has listed is that of ‘Chairman’. Probably the most high-profile role, this position should be filled by a confident, charismatic individual with the ability to command the rest of the team. With this group, there was no leadership structure, and therefore no delegation. In an ideal world, we might have said that the members were simply too nice to put themselves above the rest. In reality however, it was most likely that they were too lazy to take on the extra responsibility. As a result, action points were agreed to, although hardly any were implemented. There had been no arrangements to monitor progress and so, no progress was made. Week upon week, everybody was assured by everybody else that the work would be done ‘soon’ – but nobody asked the burning question ‘how soon?’

    Handy notes in  his book, Understanding Organizations [1976, pg.159], that ‘teams whose players saw themselves as all about equally influential were less satisfied and made less profits than teams whose players agreed that some particular individuals were a good deal more influential than others.’ This supports Belbin’s theory that a team requires a focal personality, a leader, to be effectual.

- Prevention of similar occurrences in the future

    In such a situation, one person should have nominated themselves as leader. Although this involves further responsibility, effective leadership would have ensured that the individuals would complete their responsibilities, if only for fear of being ostracised by the rest of the group, who would accuse the person of holding them back.

Ø  Communication

While Belbin has included a Resource Investigator role for external communication, it seems he took good internal communication as a given. The strength of any team can be assessed through their communication. Constant, comprehensive communication indicates strong teams, while sporadic and inadequate communication indicates weak teams.

    While the group had many electronic resources, they barely made use of them. In this day and age, ‘virtual teams’ exist, whereby all group work is done via electronic communication. Even with such benefits, the group did the bare minimum – texting each other only two days before the deadline set, and using email to pass the presentation back and forth between team members for each individual to add their share of the work.

- Prevention of similar occurrences in the future

    With projects of this nature, it seems face to face meetings may be more effective than virtual communication. Perhaps because during a meeting, it is easier to ask questions, ask for further explanation, and become comfortable with team members. Relying solely on virtual communication detracts from establishing a connection with others, which could potentially aid in realising like-minded goals and working towards them, rather than a few members doing all the work, while others ‘coast’ on their efforts.

Conclusion and Self Reflection

Although we pulled together the presentation on the morning it was due, there were steps I personally could have taken into ensuring that the team worked well together and got the work done ahead of time. This includes stepping up as delegator, being firm with other members in terms of deadlines and making attempts at better communication. Perhaps if I had done this in the first instance, our group and presentation may have been much more successful. In the future however, I fully intend to be more organised and authorative, especially with ‘coasting’ group members.

References

1. Belbin, R.M., 1981, Management Teams – Why They Succeed or Fail, Heinemann.

2. Handy, C, 1976, Understanding Organizations, Penguin, 4^th Edition.

Phantom

Some say the world will end in fire,

Some say in ice.

A sure way to bring about -

This ruin, is one word

By leaders;

War.

Armies march, ever closer, higher

I gaze with staring eyes

Cities blazing, in the fire;

The armies fall, the lustre dies.

Rearing flames tell me true,

Where are those men marching to?

Homes of their brothers, theirs too

Is that justifiable to you?

Then once again the glow returns;

Down the red-hot valley blow

Again the phantom city burns;

Again the phantom armies go!

Reality

‘Owen’s intent is to confront the reader with as much reality as he is able to create’ - How Owen achieves his purpose

Owen used poetry as a means of communicating the realities of trench warfare to the masses, contrasting the propaganda of the time.  Through Owen’s use of visceral imagery, sensory language, personas and various rhetorical and literary devices, he is able to confront the reader with a variety of realities related to the war. This is also done by his naming the poems in a particular way.

By using ellipses in his poetry, Owen allows the reader to continue imagining the different forms of realities he talks about and to develop their own responses to them. In ‘Exposure’ for example; “The poignant misery of dawn begins to grow…”; the ellipses add a sense of foreboding and creating a pause so the reader can reflect upon the how the soldiers must have felt at the start of each day; and; "Wearied we keep awake because the night is silent..."; Usually silence is a beautiful tranquil state of mind. Yet, here it is something that creates "nervous" and "curious" soldiers. This truly creates pathos for the soldiers- do they ever have a chance to relax?  This technique is also used in other poems, such as ‘Disabled’; “He thought he’d better join. He wonders why...” This line causes the reader to reflect on what is being said and they begin to think of reasons why soldiers would sign up, which is the effect Owen wanted to create, putting the readers in the position of the soldiers.

The title of ‘Exposure’ indicates that Owen will be ‘exposing’ the truth to us and that there is no form of physical protection for the soldiers, they are ‘exposed’. It also introduces a sense of nakedness and vulnerability. This implied agenda lets the reader know what to expect from the content of the poem. All of his poems are named in order to convey the reality of war to those reading them. For example, ‘Insensibility’ is rightly named to describe the feelings or indeed lack of, that the soldiers have to deal with while fighting in the war. ‘Mental Cases’ and ‘Disabled’ are further examples where Owen tells the reader of the harsh realities; the ones no one at the time would have talked about; that he will go on to talk about in his poems.

‘Exposure’ is a war poem, written from a soldier’s point of view. From the first line, personification is used effectively to introduce us to the harsh weather conditions the soldiers faced “merciless iced east winds”; as such the feeling is created that everyone and everything is against them. This is continued throughout the poem, becoming pathetic fallacy as “the rain soaks, and clouds sag stormy” reflects the seemingly hopeless nature of their situation. “the wind’s nonchalance” is another implication of uncaring austerity from nature. The unceasing actuality of war and the harsh weather conditions is repeatedly referred to through phrases such as “successive” “incessantly” “war lasts” and “pause and renew” . This idea of never-ending hardship contrasts the shortness of the soldier’s lives, made evident by allusions to “dying”. Owen appeals to humanity and makes the shortness of the soldiers’ lives more poignant as we are reminded that they are people, like us, who “lie out here; therefore were born” and are not unfeeling killing machines. The use of pathetic fallacy and personification is also present in poems such as ‘Miners’, ‘Futility’ and ‘The Last Laugh’. Owen uses pathetic fallacy to recreate the harsh elemental conditions of war and reflect the mood of the soldiers. Personification is used to address the reality of a crisis of faith in most of the soldiers and to expose to the reader the inner turmoil most of them had to face during the war.

“Our brains ache” helps us imagine what it felt like for the men; a reassuring sense of solidarity is conveyed by “our”. The cold, noise, exhaustion or feeling generally overwhelmed that could have caused the soldier’s brains to “ache” means the line conveys more of the harsh reality of war than the patriotic image “our” may have. This links with feelings of disorientation later in the poem when they “drowse, sun-dozed” and dissociate themselves from “a dull rumour of some other war” as it all gets too much for the soldiers.

Owen builds tension throughout the poem, using interrogatives “What are we doing here?” and “Is it that we are dying?” so the reader considers the poem more deeply and searches for an answer. He has opted to use repetition to reinforce the feeling of anticipation. The more we are told that “nothing happens” the more we expect something to occur. This mirrors the soldiers’ feelings as they anticipate going over the top.

We are brought back to Owen’s aim (“Exposure”) to convey the reality of war when “The poignant misery of dawn begins to grow…”. The light revealing reality in the same way Owen is ‘exposing’ the truth. “Misery of dawn” is a very effective oxymoron, as it inverts our expectation of dawn being a new start, bringing hope. Owen continues to describe the effects of war on men “All their eyes are ice”, showing the truth of the emotional turmoil the soldiers went through as well as earlier references to the physical hazards “men among its brambles”. We empathise further as it has now been illustrated how like us the soldiers were and how much they suffered.

In the poem ‘Insensibility’, Owen uses an inverted sentence structure along with biblical references as well as using Horace’s poetry, using it ironically to portray his differing viewpoint on the war. “Happy the lad whose mind was never trained”. It is clear that Owen believes that the ‘lads’ who have never been mentally trained are better off than the older soldiers perhaps because their natural instincts are to shut down and stop feeling. Using ‘lad’ makes the reader think of a young boy at war rather than a fit older soldier. This plays on the reader’s sympathies as it reminds them that many of the soldiers are only young boys. He also does this in ‘Arms and the Boy’ and ‘Anthem for Doomed Youth’ where he describes the soldiers as children. This conveys the reality that many young boys lied about their ages and snuck into the armed forces hoping for glory and victory.

The Bloody Chamber - Recreative w/ Analysis

This is my own recreative writing, based on Angela Carter's The Bloody Chamber, and below, an analysis of my own work.

I fumbled for the matches in my pocket; what a dim, lugubrious light they gave! And yet, enough, oh, more than enough to see a room designed for desecration and some dark night of unimaginable lovers whose embraces were annihilation.

Perhaps this was the result of near comatose exhaustion; a delirious state of half-sleep in which ludicrous scenes draped over my eyes, each a little more preposterous than the other. Nay, my husband had gone to deal with monetary matters that allowed me to recline so comfortably upon the cushion of his wealth. He shall return imminently, bringing with him an atmosphere of apprehension; compelling my slim, lithe form to hold taut; the atmosphere which had all but disappeared after his departure.

Having seen the first ever mistress of this mansion during her performance of Isolde; that opulently draped diva, trepidation had tingled to my toes, knowing that I may never compare to such a grace. But what an euphoric feeling it had been, being held in the same light as so fine a woman, in the same light as all these women; knowing that to the Marquis, I was as coveted a treasure as any of them.  It may simply have been to feed his fiendish desire to watch, while his vulnerable lady; attractive for her form or indeed in my own case, innocence; lay writhing on a bed of stone. He had surprised me with many a treat. A box of the finest marrons glacés, a bouquet of hot-house flowers or even his frequently desired, solitary lily.

Raising my shy gaze heaven-ward, my eyes made out large, bulky shapes of yet another set of gargoyles through the dim light, backs arched as though waiting for me to make my escape. Their stiff, solid posture and smooth, glossy marble texture causing an involuntary shiver down my spine, not unrelated to the bitter blue breeze penetrating in through some fissure in the walls.

I was alone, standing in an unknown place where nothing made sense, save for my grey mind and its newly accumulated thoughts; the mad ravings of a mousey pianist.

The walls of this stark torture chamber were the naked rock; they gleamed as if they were sweating with fright.

-

Analysis of my writing;

The writings of Angela Carter are unique, in the way of style, themes, symbols and motifs. The stories written by Carter are not those of cheerfulness and happy endings, they are different in a most spectacular way. Carter's rewritten fairy tales are a frightening look at the true reality of what fairy tales really are.

I have chosen this story as it is a familiar fairy tale story, combined with the unfamiliarity of a young girl going to her marital home. I have used this particular gap in the narrative as it is in this moment that the lead character is about to discover her husband’s deep dark secret. This gap made it possible to explore her anxiety of realising that she does not know the man she has married, her reluctance to accept the truth, and perhaps the emotions she feels on being left alone in such a way. Carter had only hinted at her character being a conventional heroine of fairy tales; passive and meek. I wanted to explore why she would feel this way, how she would react, and whether I could alter this view so that she is more concerned with her relationship with the Marquis rather than screaming bloody murder.

Unlike a traditional fairy-tale narrator, generally an impartial third person, this narrator is the heroine herself. By giving the heroine a voice, Carter challenged the fairy-tale tradition of our seeing, from the outside, events befall an innocent girl. Letting the distressed heroine tell her story empowers the figure of woman by putting her in the traditionally male-dominated roles of storyteller and survivor instead of relegating her to the role of helpless princess. In The Bloody Chamber, the heroine tells us personally about how her suffering became the source of her enlightenment.

I wanted to replicate the way in which Carter empowers her character by making her a poor pianist that marries primarily for money. I did this by continuing her interior monologue into how she feels about her husband and their marriage and whether she could believe what she was about to see. I included his past, such as “the first ever mistress of this mansion during her performance of Isolde; that opulently draped diva”, in order to reflect upon the character’s own inexperience and wonder whether this was the reason he had left her alone to find such a scene.

I have kept the setting of my narrative the same as it is before and after the gap in the narrative; the chamber she has wandered into. I wanted to focus on the underlying feeling of her being trapped, in this case, literally in a stone dungeon, to symbolise being trapped in the marriage. Keeping with the narrative, the atmosphere was one of tension within the character’s own mind, emphasised by the gargoyle statues in the room, watching her every move, as though the Marquis had never left, leaving her unable to relax.

Carter uses a variety of syntax in her work, ranging from two short words to whole paragraphs without a full stop. Instead, she uses semi-colons. I have tried to re-capture this style in my work. It is most evident during the second paragraph, in which there are three long sentences and one short one. I have also used certain phallic symbols such as; ‘stiff, solid posture and smooth, glossy marble texture’ to describe the gargoyles, and ‘recline so comfortably upon the cushion of his wealth’, ‘feed his fiendish desire’  ‘lay writhing on a bed of stone’ and ‘penetrating’ to interweave sexual ambiguity into the narrative. She raises her eyes ‘heaven-ward’, symbolising a religious undercurrent within the text, since gargoyles are typically seen to ‘guard’ churches.

When the Marquis is present, he dominates the relationship, able to make her do as he wishes. The colour used to symbolise their relationship is mostly red, symbolising male dominance and their sexual relationship. This is also used in other stories, such as “The Company of Wolves” to symbolise virginity and hormonal urges. In this extract however, I have used the colour blue to describe the ‘bitter blue breeze penetrating in’. This is because the character is worried and apprehensive, and the colour blue would feel chilly, bringing out goose-bumps in such a situation. I have also described her as having a dim ‘grey mind’ to emphasise the numbness of her brain after learning of her husband keeping something from her, of not knowing him at all, of the knowledge that she had married such a man and will have to spend the rest of her life there.

To the reader, this passage between the original narrative implies that the character knows the truth about her husband but refuses to believe it at first, insisting that “ludicrous scenes” are a part of her “delirious state of half-sleep” although the truth slowly scrapes away at the back of her mind.

I believe this piece, while fitting well into the narrative, lacks Angela Carter’s unique style and depth in the characters. On reflection, I would have concentrated the character’s thoughts into a rational sense of fear and explored this emotion.

First Impressions and their role in Pride & Prejudice

First impressions take up a major role in the plot of Pride and Prejudice as they form the main basis of how the characters interact with each other within most of the story, as is conveyed below:

Pride and Prejudice is a novel about overcoming obstacles and achieving romantic success. For the protagonists, Elizabeth and Darcy, one of the main obstacles they need to overcome is what the novel was originally named; First Impressions. These first impressions begin at the ball in which Mr Darcy and Mr Bingley are initially introduced to the rest of the characters. Without the two main leads even interacting with each other, each has their mind made up about the other.

Darcy, the proud noblewoman’s nephew must break free from his original dismissal of Elizabeth as ‘not handsome enough to tempt me,’ and from his class – based prejudice against her lack of wealth and family connections. However, Elizabeth’s first impressions register Darcy as arrogant and self-satisfied; as a result, she later accepts malicious accusations against him as true.

Both Elizabeth and Darcy are forced to come to grips with their own initial mistakes. The first half of the novel outlines Darcy's progression to the point at which he is able to admit his love in spite of his prejudice. In the second half, Elizabeth's mistaken impressions are displaced by realizations about Darcy's true character.

Darcy's two proposals to Elizabeth chart the mature development of their relationship. He delivers the first at the mid-point of the novel, when he has realized his love for Elizabeth but has not yet escaped his prejudices against her family, and when she is still in the grip of her first, negative impression of him.

The second proposal—in which Darcy humbly restates his love for her and Elizabeth, now with full knowledge of Mr. Darcy's good character, happily accepts—marks the arrival of the two characters, each finally achieving the ability to view the other through unprejudiced eyes.

The marriage between Darcy and Elizabeth reveals the characteristics that constitute a successful marriage. One of these characteristics is that the feeling cannot be brought on by appearances, and must gradually develop between the two people as they get to know one another.

In the beginning, Elizabeth and Darcy were distant from each other because of their prejudice. The series of events which they both experienced gave them the opportunity to understand one another and the time to reconcile their feelings for each other. Thus, their mutual understanding is the foundation of their relationship and will lead them to a peaceful and lasting marriage. This relationship between Elizabeth and Darcy reveals the importance of getting to know one’s partner before marrying and not judging them from first impressions.

Owen's portrayal of Memory & the Physiological effects of War - The Sentry

"I try not to remember these things now" (THE SENTRY)

 

The poem The Sentry is an accurate and detailed account of an actual event that occurred while Owen’s company were occupying a German dugout on the front line. This can be seen in his letters to his mother. Within the poem, Owen describes the conditions of the waterlogged dugout as it is hammered by explosions, until a sentry he had posted was blasted into the dugout by an explosion. He then goes on to describe the soldier himself, and how his appearance and sobbing haunted Owen in his dreams.

The language throughout the poem is simple, which lends its defining trait of gritty texture and onomatopoeia to the poem to great effect. ‘Hammered on top’, referring to the shelling, gives a powerful impression of the relentless assault on the aural sense the soldiers suffered, and this is further depicted later on in the poem with the phrase ‘shrieking air’, which likens the sounds of war to an almost inhuman and banshee-like scream. ‘What murk of air remained stank old, and sour’ focuses on the sensation of smell, and along with the visual description of the ‘guttering’ rain compared to slime, and the dugout steps ‘too thick with clay to climb’ paint the scene in the full spectrum of human sensation. It is not just horrific scenes that are recalled, but sounds and smells too. Like in Dulce et decorum est, as much as the narrator tries to forget, he cannot.  “In all my dreams before my helpless sight / He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.” The memories become stronger the more he tries to forget, even the smallest details aren’t left out. These vivid, visceral and disorienting memories almost mock the narrator’s attempt to not remember. The use of harsh, violent, progressive verbs makes the physiological damage the soldiers suffer even more violent.

The sounds of the words are a main tool of Wilfred Owen’s poems, and this poem is no exception. In the opening lines, he uses a combination of repetition and rhyme in ‘…hell, for shell on frantic shell’ and ‘hour by hour…sour’ to establish the cadence, and this, along with the heavy dull sounds of ‘thud! flump! thud!’ later in the poem all reinforce the reference to an endless hammering, and the continuity strengthens the impression of the ceaseless barrage. To describe the shells as frantic gives a sense of the terror and confusion they inspired, but also blurs the distinction between objects and humans, in a similar way in which he insinuated that soldiers had been dehumanized and ‘die as cattle’ in Anthem for Doomed Youth. These repetitive sounds give the impression that these memories are recurring, they go through the soldier’s mind often and he is unable to stop this repetitive loop. The alliteration of the ‘t’ sound in ‘wild chattering of his broken teeth’ emphasises what is already an unpleasant image, through the rattling of the consonant, and this again displays how Owen ensured that his poetry was effective not only through the power and horror of his topic, but through the sounds and rhythm the words create.

The sentry himself is introduced as being distinct from his physical being, with ‘The sentry’s body’, making him seem like nothing more than an object possessed by life rather than a living human being. One of the most effective similes Wilfred Owen employs in the poem is comparing the sentry’s ‘huge-bulged’ eyes to those of a squid, as the grotesque and slimy sea creature being related to a person’s eyes, which have associations of beauty and innocence, is powerfully incongruous. The other soldiers are later described as ‘Those other wretches’, continuing the theme of war’s dehumanizing effect.  This is not dissimilar to the line “Treading blood from lungs that had once loved laughter.” from the poem Mental Cases. The grotesque images of the soldiers’ deformities are echoed here and by putting a negative image of blood with the positive image of laughter, Owen once again builds another incongruous image whereby the stark morbidity of blood is compared to the innocence of laughter. By doing this, Owen puts together bizarre images that ensure the reader does not forget such appalling memories and the physiological pain of the soldiers, just as he cannot. It also shows how the war must have looked to the soldiers who had never before experienced anything of the sort, and the tumultuous emotions they must have felt while trying to cope.

Pathetic fallacy presents nature as a theme of ‘The Sentry’. “Rain guttering down in waterfalls of slime / Kept slush waist-high and rising hour by hour”. These two lines explore the idea that nature has become the British Armies’ enemy and that the Germans have become less of a threat in comparison. The use of pathetic fallacy gives the poem an aura of inevitability and the rain seems to give the poem a sinister tone. In this sense, Owen presents the experience of war as a regrettable, dark one. This idea links in with the poem ‘Futility’ where pathetic fallacy is also used. The use of the technique on the words ‘sun’ and ‘snow’ gives the poem different contrasting ideas of hope and despair, similar to the words “lights” and “died out” in the last line.

Owen’s recollection of the memories of war and its physiological effects, as described in The Sentry are very similar to those in Disabled. Both poems describe the persona in the poem forlornly remembering the days he was at war and how they affected him. The lines “Now he will never feel again how slim / Girls’ waists are” show not only the pain in the physical loss of his arm, but also the psychological scars, as the soldier knows he will be shunned for it. Owen sees memory as neither good nor bad, but describes the role it plays in helping the soldiers get through the war, as well as taking them back to it well after they are freed from it. ‘Although memories are not necessarily a bad thing, they may tie you down to a past you wish to escape’ seems to be his message across his poems.

The Snow Child

This is my own re-creative, based on Angela Carter's 'The Snow Child'

The Count lifted her up and sat her in front of him on his saddle but the Countess had only one thought: how shall I be rid of her?

This child, created only moments ago, was clothed in my finest garments and I had been overlooked by my dear Count. Were these clothes only what mattered? It seemed as though the best-dressed female was the only one deserving of any attention.

As the Count settled his gaze on me, I stared back defiantly, refusing to become the meek female he usually dominated. I was the Countess, not one of his befouled whores. The child watched his every move, unconsciously mirroring it all. It was true; she was the child of his dreams, radiating innocence and youth, as yet untouched by the imperfections of the world we belonged to. And I hated her for it.

Yet being able to call myself Countess was an achievement in itself, no other woman had gotten this far. I was above the rest of them, displaying elegance and grace. None of the women had gotten so far; until now. This one child, a Child I say! has become the Count’s favourite in a matter of a few minutes.

Even now his eyes followed her, raking in her appearance, admiring her form. The edges of my teeth pushed themselves into the soft flesh of my lips, pushing further, until they split the skin and it bled; red drops forming on the surface. This had been my downfall, this infernal bleeding. If I could somehow be trapped within the folds of time for eternity, unchanging, I would gladly do so; keeping my body as it once was, that of a young virgin, newly married to a Count, the joy shining on my face.

It matters not now. It is better to let the Count have his fun now, in the lost land of snow. I shall be the one returning to his castle tonight. We rode on.

Pain & Pleasure of Human Relationships - A comparison between Enduring Love and A Streetcar Named Desire

Most people stay in a relationship where pain outweighs pleasure because they perceive the possible separation as being more painful than being together, and so they choose the less painful option of staying. We will obviously try to choose something that will cause us the most pleasure. If all choices are perceived to be result in pain, then we will either choose to make no choice at all, or that which gives us the least amount of pain. Similar choices are made in the two texts that will be explored in this essay; Enduring Love and A Streetcar Named Desire. These two pieces are modern drama and modern prose, set fifty years apart, set in different places, dealing with the human condition – what unites us is stronger than what differentiates us. We will also be looking at how pain and pleasure are two binary oppositions but looking deeper into the texts, these two seem interchangeable and so it is possible to get both pain and pleasure in certain circumstances. 

One interpretation of Enduring Love looks beyond the plot to the overall effect the author is trying to achieve, to the novel’s central theme, that ‘unreliability is an ineradicable part of who we are,’ according to Adam Mars-Jones. The novel can be seen as a philosophical argument that looks at the ideas that fascinate the post-modern world. The ideas involving the concept of truth are explored in the novel, what is truth? How can the truth ever be known and how can it ever be objective? It is with this base idea that the lead characters of the novel have trouble and so begins the breakdown of relationships. This idea of the truth is also portrayed in Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire. Streetcar is a story of damaged people. Blanche DuBois, a repressed and sexually warped Southern belle, seeks either atonement or reassurance; she wants someone to help lift the burden of her guilt for her twisted sexuality. Through this character’s introduction to the play, the story changes immensely and we learn that she does not tell the truth, but ‘what ought to be the truth’. The slow unraveling of her illusions is what makes up the foundation of the play. The theme of truth in both these texts determines how the characters act around each other. And with each action, comes an opposite and equal reaction from someone else. Joe, for example, has an extremely scientific mind and is able to remember details with uncanny precision, as is Blanche. Whether they divulge these details to the people around them depends on what they believe the truth is, or in Blanche’s case, what the truth should be. 

Both texts focus on and analyze heavily the intricate web of relationships between their characters, in a variety of situations. Some of the relationships are painful, others pleasurable. Most, however, cannot distinguish the fine line between the two. There are two sides to every relationship and no matter how pleasurable they are, there is always the potential for pain. In Enduring Love, Jed begins to fall in love with Joe after the balloon accident and starts to stalk him, which we later realize is due to an illness. The formation of this one new relationship slowly but surely picks at the other relationships in Joe’s life and weakens them significantly. While this gives Jed varying amounts of pain and pleasure according to Joe’s reactions, it causes Joe only pain, ‘It was as if I had fallen through a crack in my own existence’. In the same way, when Blanche comes to Stella’s home in Streetcar, she must accept her sister’s relations and make them her own. Even though she loves her sister, Blanch is unable to get any pleasure from the other relationships. She seeks comfort from Mitch for some time but it does not last long and causes Blanche a significant amount of heartache, ‘But I have been foolish – casting my pearls before swine!’. 

A recurring theme that can be found in A Streetcar Named Desire is the constant conflict between reality and fantasy, actual and ideal. This theme is read most strongly in Williams' characterization of Blanche DuBois and the physical tropes that she employs in her pursuit of what is magical and idealized, such as her letters and phone calls to Shep Huntleigh. Blanche says "I don't want realism, I want magic." As one critic writes, "Blanche spins a cocoon linguistically for protection." Blanche creates her own fantasy world through the characters she plays, such as the damsel, southern belle or school teacher. She wears her costumes to create a façade to hide behind, concealing her secrets and attempting to reach her former glory. Her character is not so different from McEwan’s Jed. He also creates his own world where he believes that Joe is in love with him. His belief is so strong that he constantly tries to meet Joe and tells him “ 'I just wanted you to know, I understand what you're feeling. I feel it too. I love you'...". This suggests that both Blanch and Jed are unsatisfied with their relationships and so have a desire to formulate ones that do not exist, pretending to get pleasure from them and hoping that if they believe hard enough, it may become a reality. 

Havelock Ellis, in Studies in the Psychology of Sex, argued that there is no clear distinction between the aspects of sadism and masochism, and that they may be regarded as complementary emotional states. He also made the important point that sadomasochism generally desires that the pain be inflicted or received in love, not in abuse, for the pleasure of either one or both participants. This is most clearly seen in the relationship between Stanley and Stella in Streetcar. Scene three underscores the primal nature of their relationship. After Stanley throws out the radio, Stella shouts at him, inciting his attack on her. Later in the night, Stanley shouts to her and their reunion is described in terms of animal noises. Stanley cruelly abuses his wife yet she sides with him and later tells Blanche that he ‘didn’t mean it’. This compares to when Jed sent out gunmen to kill Joe, although changing his mind later, and the pleasure he felt causing Joe pain, receiving pleasure from Joe rejecting his advances and thinking he was doing God’s divine work. He writes in his letter to Joe ‘What were you trying to do to me? Hurt me? Insult me? Test me? I hated you for it, but I never forgot that I loved you too, and that was why I kept going.’ Jed is similar to both Stanley and Stanley as he receives pleasure from causing pain as well as inflicting it on Joe. 

In some ways, Blanche and Clarissa aren’t so different from each other. Neither is able to have children for their own reasons. Blanche as she is unmarried, and Clarissa because she biologically cannot mother a child. This can cause a significant amount of pain to them, as is evident. Blanche comes to visit her sister while Stella is pregnant, and when she hears the news about the baby, is unsure what to do with herself. It is just after she and Stanley have had an argument about Belle Reve and so Blanche says she was ‘flirting with your husband’ to Stella, perhaps trying to make herself feel better. Clarissa’s pain is a little more overt, as we are told about her pain from Joe’s point of view and so he must be able to see it in order to tell the reader about it. This also affects her relationship with Joe near the end of the book. Perhaps if they had a child, or were capable of having one, they would have a last reason to stay together or it would make them work harder at their relationship. Instead, they have to even cover up the subject with talk of something else all together. As Joe says; ‘What we were really talking about this time was the absence of babies from our lives’. A child would make their relationship more pleasurable and less painful. 

Joe and Jed's bond, forged in the masculine homo-social activity of a physical rescue, leads to a doubling whereby Joe is under increased anxiety to distinguish his heterosexual identity from Jed's homosexual one. When Clarissa hears Joe's first reports on Parry's phone calls and letters, she jokes, "A secret gay love affair with a Jesus freak! I can't wait to tell your science friends" and asks whether the two men are getting married. While a traditional psychoanalytic reading would say that her joke expresses the unconscious truth of Joe's latent homosexual desire, a Sedgwickian reading would claim, with somewhat different emphasis, that Clarissa indicates the shifting terrain on which male homo-social relations must always be enacted. This determination to prove himself as a heterosexual and worthy of Clarissa ends up isolating Joe from her instead and brings grief to both, although Clarissa is the first to realize this while Joe puzzles over her behaviour. In Streetcar, Stanley is equally determined to prove his masculinity, whether it be through sexual innuendoes and anecdotes, physical strength, teasing those less masculine than him or through rape. Where in most of his relationships this causes anguish to others, such as Blanche, he is almost revered by others for his blatant display of manliness, such as his friends and his wife Stella, to whom such things are painful to the point of being pleasurable or even pleasurable to the point of being painful. As the stage directions at the end of scene three tell us, Stella is ‘blind with tenderness’. 

Blanche’s neurotic symptoms emerge as she represses the instance of discovering the true sexual nature of her husband. This painful rejection of her sexual love for him leads her into extreme promiscuity. This speaks of her need to control her sexuality with men and receive sexual validity through their desire for her. The ultimate testament of this is her relationship with a 17 year old. By engaging in this relationship, Blanche can be secure in her desirability to men. Blanche’s impossible desires to have the man she loved, her husband, find her sexually desirable leads her into this. The paradox of this relationship is that by trying to control men’s desire for her she gets swept up in promiscuous behaviour, through which she makes herself undesirable to the one man she wants to marry her, Mitch. She goes through tremendous pain with the death of her husband and no other relationships offer her the shelter that she needs. Even before she meets Mitch however, she begins to flirt with Stanley, perhaps hoping she could pull it off and he would let her stay as long as she liked. She obviously has no qualms about sabotaging her sister’s home, even though she cares deeply about her. The same intensity of emotion is reflected in Jed Parry. He is very manipulative in the way he attempts to get closer to Joe, he makes Joe curious about what he wants and uses this as a chance to try and persuade Joe to love him. He also uses Clarissa. When talking about his and Joe’s future he mentions Clarissa; ‘Clarissa. It’s best to deal with this head on.’ He knows he has the power to jeopardise their relationship and uses this to his advantage. He causes pain to Joe and Clarissa to receive pleasure for himself. 

Relationships that we form with other people will always have both pain and pleasure, whether they are caused by that person or not. It is not possible for it to be a healthy relationship otherwise. As we are shown, both texts explore such relationships and each character receives a certain amount of both. McEwan and Williams balance these out with other characters, giving some more pain and others more pleasure. They are able to express such emotions through showing us the effects of positive and negative relationships and the toll they take on people.

Effectiveness of Rhetorical Devices - Wilfred Owen

A rhetorical device is a technique that an author uses to convey to the reader a meaning with the goal of persuading the reader towards considering a topic from a different perspective. Owen uses many of these devices in almost all of his poems, one of them being ‘Dulce et Decorum est’.

The title of the poem is a sarcastic play on words, this poem being a retort to one published previously by Ms Glasgow, under the same name. The 28-line poem is narrated by Owen himself. It tells us of a group of soldiers in World War I, forced to trudge ‘through sludge’, though ‘drunk with fatigue,’ marching slowly away from the falling explosive shells behind them. As gas shells begin to rain on them, the soldiers begin to scramble to put on their gas masks and save themselves. In the rush, one man clumsily drops his mask, and the narrator sees the man ‘yelling out and stumbling / and flound’ring like a man in fire or lime.’ Owen then talks about how he has to throw the man into the back of a wagon and the man's ‘hanging face, like a devil's sick of sin.’

This poem is very effective because of its excellent manipulation of the emotional parts of poetry. Owen’s use of vivid language emphasizes his point, showing that war is terrible and devastating. The use of extremely graphic imagery adds even more to his argument.

The main example would be the first stanza, which uses compelling adjectives to describe the situation and their surroundings. The men turned their backs on the ‘haunting flares’. This puts the image of men under great suffering in the mind of the reader, haunted and ghost-like, as though in a trance. Typically, ghosts are associated with fear, something that Owen is well aware of, as he subtly links it with the soldiers. This, along with the description of the soldiers as ‘old beggars under sacks’ builds up a contradiction to the heroic image that soldiers had, a direct contradiction to the title. Lines such as “knock-kneed”, “coughing like hags”, “Drunk with fatigue” and “limped on, blood-shod” are all examples of the horrific conditions that the soldiers lived in. Moreover, the phrase "blood shod" shows how the troops have been on their feet for days, never resting. Also, the fact that the gassed man was ‘flung’ into the wagon reveals the urgency of the fight. The fact that one word can add to the meaning so much shows how the language adds greatly to its effectiveness. At the time the poem was written, this idea would not have been widely accepted and would have shocked readers back home. Civilians would have been surprised by these aspects of war and this instilment of sympathy was a strange thing for war.

Through the effective use of all of these tools, this poem conveys a strong meaning and persuasive argument. The poem's use of excellent diction helps to more clearly define what the author is saying. Words like "guttering", "choking", and "drowning" not only show how the man is suffering, but that he is in terrible pain that no human being should endure. Other words like writhing and froth-corrupted say precisely how the man is being tormented.

 Likewise, the use of figurative language in this poem also helps to emphasize the points that are being made. As Perrine says, people use metaphors because they say "...what we want to say more vividly and forcefully..." Owen capitalizes greatly on this by using strong metaphors and similes. Right off in the first line, he describes the troops as being "like old beggars under sacks." This not only says that they are tired, but that they are so tired they have been brought down to the level of beggars who have not slept in a bed for weeks on end. Owen also compares the victim's face to the devil, seeming corrupted and baneful.

A metaphor even more effective is one that compares "...vile, incurable sores..." with the memories of the troops. It not only tells the reader how the troops will never forget the experience, but also how they are frightening tales, ones that will the troops will never be able to tell without remembering the extremely painful experience. These comparisons illustrate the point so vividly that they increase the effectiveness of the poem. The most important means of developing the effectiveness of the poem is the graphic imagery. They evoke such emotions so as to cause people to become sick.

The images can draw such pictures that no other poetic means can, such as in line twenty-two: "Come gargling from the froth corrupted lungs." This can be disturbing to think about. It shows troops being brutally slaughtered very vividly, evoking images in the reader's mind. In the beginning of the poem the troops were portrayed as "drunk with fatigue." With this you can almost imagine large numbers of people dragging their boots through the mud, tripping over their own shadow. Later in the poem when the gas was dropped, it painted a psychological image that would disturb the mind. The troops were torn out of their nightmarish walk and surrounded by gas bombs. How everyone, in "an ecstasy of fumbling" was forced to run out into the mist, unaware of their fate. Anyone wanting to fight in a war would become nervous at the image of himself running out into a blood bath. The graphic images displayed here are profoundly affecting and can never be forgotten.

Owen used this poem to bring the plight of the soldiers to the attention to the people back home who thought that fighting for your country was good and proper. He was deeply offended and aggravated by the views of civilians back home He wanted them to be aware of the pain and anguish of war. He felt incredibly passionate about condemning the war and his feelings are reflected by the clipped sounds he uses throughout the poem, although sparsely. An example would be the alliteration in the first stanza when he describes the soldiers as ‘knock-kneed’ as opposed to simply scared.

The poem ties it all together in the last few lines. In Latin, the phrase "Dulce et decorum est pro partria mori" means: "It is sweet and becoming to die for one's country." Owen calls this a lie by using good diction, vivid comparisons, and graphic images to have the reader feel disgusted at what war is capable of. This poem is
extremely effective as an anti-war poem, making war seem absolutely horrid and revolting, just as the author wanted it to.

Failure of the Weimar Republic

“The Weimar Republic failed because it never had the support of the people.” Do you agree? Reference 1919-29.

The Weimar government had been set up after the First World War but had faced several problems in its first five years, including:
· Having to sign the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, which was unpopular with many Germans.
· Unemployment.
· Attacks from extremists on both left and right of the political spectrum.
· The French occupation of the German Region of Ruhr in 1923 caused by failure of the German government to pay reparations.
· Massive hyperinflation, which brought ruin and misery to many Germans, who blamed the Weimar Republic Also many other economic problems.
· The formation of the Nazis under Hitler.
· Social problems caused by the stresses of war

The Republic did recover from paying massive amounts of reparations during the years 1924 to 1929, mainly under the foreign secretary, Gustav Stresseman. He organised loans from the USA, which stabilised the German currency and helped industrial expansion. He also improved relations with other countries and Germany was allowed to join the League of Nations.

The recovery of the German economy was fragile. It depended heavily on American loans. In 1929, disaster in the form of the Wall Street Crash struck. Many American banks were forced to recall their loans. German companies were unable to pay these debts. German businesses began to close and millions lost their jobs. Another cause of unemployment was the restriction of Germany’s army. This meant that thousands and millions of returning soldiers needed jobs but were faced with only poverty.

Between 1928 and 1230, German unemployment rose from 2.5 to 4 million. This provided an opportunity for extremist groups such as the Communists and Nazis. As unemployment rose, more and more people felt let down by the Weimar government and began to support extremist parties. These parties thrived under the waves upon waves of public support and began uprisings against the already failing government. Examples of these revolts would be the Spartacist uprising, The Kapp Putsch and The Munich Putsch. During these, members of the Weimar government were identified as the ‘November criminals’ (those who had signed the Treaty of Versailles) and held liable for the destruction of Germany.

When Germany could no longer keep up with paying the war reparations, French and Belgian soldiers marched into the most important industrial region in the country, Ruhr during the year 1923. This was seen as embarrassing and a blight on the Germans. The Weimar Republic was perceived as a scapegoat for all of Germany’s problems. Another disadvantage of Ruhr being occupied by allied soldiers was that Germany’s industries also had major fallbacks and Germany went into further recession.

National income in Germany was at this time a third of what it had been during 1913 and the war had left 600,000 widows and 2 million children without fathers. By 1925, the state was spending about a third of its money on war pensions. Industrial production was also lowered to two thirds of what it had been in 1913. Due to all these economic problems, the German government began to print more and more money which led to its value being lost. This hyperinflation was the last straw to cause Germany to enter a Great Depression.

This depression caused a period of utter chaos. No government could take control and solve Germany’s terrible economic problems. During this time came the real appearance of the Nazis. The German people were looking for a scapegoat for Germany’s problems. The Nazis gave them scapegoats, including the Weimar politicians. The Weimar Republic was seen as weak. Because of voting by Proportional Representation, no one party could achieve a majority in the Reichstag.

Germany was ruled by weak coalitions that were unable to tackle the serious problems brought about by the Wall Street Crash. Chancellors began to rely on the President’s power to issue decrees, rather than on trying to pass laws. A number of social problems had also arisen. The war deepened divisions in German society. Many German workers were bitter at the restrictions placed on their earnings during the was while the factory owners made vast fortunes from the war. These effects of the war downhearted the public and they turned towards the government for a form of explanation, which could not be provided under the circumstances.

Therefore, I disagree with the statement above. The Weimar government failed due to all the reasons listed in this essay, which caused it to lose support of the people. This is illustrated by the time during the Kapp Putsch when the President, Ebert, was forced to leave Berlin due to an uprising. The government couldn’t be sure of the army any longer, though many hadn’t joined the uprising yet. Ebert therefore turned to the ordinary people and called for a general strike. The strike was successful and the uprising was made unfeasible as they didn’t have the means to control the people. If the government hadn’t had the support of the people, this strike could never had happened. Consequently the lost support of the public, in my opinion, is an effect of the failure of the Weimar government, not a cause of it.

Austen's Pride and Prejudice - A critical examination of Georgian Society.

   In the novel Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen holds up certain aspects of Georgian society, within which the novel is based, for critical examination. Carefully crafting her story, she uses many devices in order to persuade the reader to share her own view of society. These aspects include gender roles, status and social class, courtship and marriage. These aspects were almost laws in the way that they controlled the behavior of people within the society.

   Pride and Prejudice depicts a society in which gender roles are clearly defined and acting outside of these makes a person vulnerable to ostracism. This society is patriarchal and the role of the woman is extremely passive. Austen has created a comparison between the characters of Jane and Elizabeth, setting both of them to become the eventual heroine later in the novel. Jane is shown as a polite, beautiful and ‘gentle creature’, with a ‘sweet temperament’ and boundless innocence.  During the nineteenth century, women were expected to be this way and almost all novel heroines around the time were depicted in the same way, making the obvious, traditional choice of heroine to be Jane. Elizabeth on the other hand is far more unconventional, speaking her mind and able to make fun of her friend for wanting to marry for convenience rather than romance. By doing so, Austen has created a conflict of interest for the readers and through making Elizabeth her heroine, she persuades the reader to look at society through Elizabeth’s eyes, who undoubtedly shares the same opinions as Austen herself.

   Status and social class defined a person. Usually, only men were given the most important status, based on their earnings, titles and estates. Women were defined by the man they chose to marry and their reputation. The theme of class is related to reputation, in that both reflect the strictly regimented nature of life for the middle and upper classes in Regency England. The lines of class are strictly drawn. While the Bennets, who are middle class, may socialize with the upper-class Bingleys and Darcys, they are clearly their ‘social inferiors’ and are treated as such. Austen satirizes this kind of class-consciousness, such as in Mr. Darcy, who believes in the dignity of his lineage. His conception of the importance of class is shared, among others, by Miss Bingley, who dislikes anyone not as socially accepted as she is. The satire directed at these characters is therefore also more subtly directed at the entire social hierarchy and the conception of all those within it at its correctness, in complete disregard of other, more worthy virtues. Through the Darcy-Elizabeth and Bingley-Jane coupling, Austen shows the power of love and happiness to overcome class boundaries and prejudices, thereby implying that such prejudices are hollow, unfeeling, and unproductive.

   One of the main themes within the novel would be of courtship and marriage, introduced early on, by the very first sentence; ‘It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man, in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife’. In saying so, Austen also implies that the reverse is true, more so in fact. That a single woman is in want of a man who is in possession of a good fortune.  Courtship takes on a profound, if often unspoken, importance in the novel. Marriage is the ultimate goal; courtship constitutes the real working-out of love. Courtship becomes a sort of forge of a person’s personality. There are traditional expectations within the society of the proper way in which to conduct yourself during each of these stages and how they should be carried out, with a most ‘proper alacrity’. Denouncing the rules of society, Elizabeth and Darcy’s relationship is formed in most unusual circumstances, where they share a mutual dislike of the other, and their journey eventually leads them to not one, but two proposals of marriage in which each understands the other far more than any other couple in the novel. Austen shows and indirectly criticizes the 18th century England's rural society and its rules through several people's marriages who are in different social positions. Through this journey of one couple, many of the characters, and therefore the readers of the time are able to differentiate between marriage for convenience and marriage for love.

Assessing the extent to which religious division was responsible for creating challenge to royal authority in the period 1485-1588.

During the period 1485-1588, a variety of factors, including religious division, were responsible for creating challenge to royal authority. Religion was the biggest cause of challenge for monarchs such as Mary, with her Protestant burnings, and Elizabeth, when she finally had to go through with the Religious Settlement. However, various different issues were more important to other monarchs, such as individuals with claims to the throne for Henry VII, foreign policy for Henry VIII and the government for Edward VI. Alongside these, the factor of economics was always present and caused many a challenge to royal authority, almost as much as, and sometimes more so, than religious division. Therefore, the extent to which religious division was responsible for creating challenge to royal authority varied not only with each monarch, but also at different times during their individual reigns.

The extent to which religious division created challenge to royal authority cannot be exaggerated. One of the monarchs with whom religion was an unquestionable challenge was Mary Tudor, or ‘Bloody’ Mary. She not only turned back to Catholicism after her father specifically broke with Rome and began to persecute Protestants by burning them, but also changed the religion of an entire nation alongside it. This religious turbulence for the country incited anger and confusion, resulting in challenge to royal authority. One of the best examples of this during Mary’s reign would be Wyatt’s rebellion. Traditionally it was believed that the rebellion rose out of concern about Mary’s marriage to Phillip II of Spain, unpopular with the English due to their fear of being overrun by strangers. D.M Loades is also partial to the origins of the rebellion being of political considerations. He contends that apart from William Thomas, the Protestant enthusiast, ‘all had conformed without protest under Edward, and those still alive were to do so again under Elizabeth, but throughout the period of the rebellion and trials which followed it, all protested their loyalty to the Catholic Church.’ In opposition, Conrad Russell expressed doubts over the ‘conformist’ attitudes of the rebels, stating that many other besides Thomas were deeply anti-catholic and that ‘it is hard to prove that their Protestantism was unconnected with the rebellion.’ But the fact that the origins of the rebellion have remained in debate due to its religious elements proves in itself that religion had been an undercurrent within this rebellion and was the biggest challenge to Mary’s authority.

Elizabeth also had to endure her share of challenge to royal authority due to religious division. She was a known Protestant like her mother, who suffice to say wasn’t very popular especially during Mary’s reign. When Elizabeth came to the throne however, the country’s religion had to be changed once again to reflect that of the monarchy, alienating quite a bit of the Catholic government that had served Mary, as well as the general Catholic population, Rome and Spain. It seemed a game of anticipating the next religious monarch to see who would be more in power, the Catholics or the Protestants. Like her father and brother, it was necessary for Elizabeth to restore the Church of England and therefore the Elizabethan Religious Settlement was created, comprising of two acts; the Act of Supremacy, and the Act of Uniformity. This did not come without repercussions however. During her time, Elizabeth faced three major rebellions; the Rising of the North, the Ridolfi Plot and the Desmond Rebellions. While the Desmond Rebellions were primarily due to feudal lords wanting to regain independence from the monarchy, it also had an element of religious antagonism. The Rising of the North and the Ridolfi Plot were both created to replace Elizabeth with her cousin, Mary Queen of Scots, a staunch Catholic. While many would argue that it was Mary Queen of Scots herself that was the biggest threat and cause of rebellion during Elizabeth’s reign, it would seem that it was in fact the religious division between the two women that was the threat. If Elizabeth had been Catholic, or Mary Protestant, they may even have been allies rather than foes. Therefore, religious division was the greatest cause of challenge to Elizabeth’s royal authority.

Another monarch that had challenges to his monarchy due to religious division was Henry VIII. This was only during and after the English Reformation however. His main cause of challenge was foreign policy and power in foreign lands, and it could be argued that the English Reformation and the subsequent religious divisions were because of the challenges he faced in these, not despite them. The reformation therefore could be seen as an outset of foreign political dispute, rather then a theological one. Rome’s interference with England was becoming increasingly unbearable to Henry VIII, not to mention the tax that went to the Pope. Along with this, Henry had bad relations with Spain, due to his want of divorce from Catherine of Aragon, which he wouldn’t be allowed under Catholicism, and was waging war with France as well. One of the main reasons for the reformation has been argued to be Henry’s want of power over his own country rather than actual religious differences with Rome because in reality, Henry kept many of the Catholic beliefs and it was essentially only the name of the religion and the Church in England that changed. The 1536 uprising, the Pilgrimage of Grace, was to contest England’s break with Rome, the Dissolution of the Monasteries and the death of Anne Boleyn, due to the ‘assumption that, with her death, Henry’s split with Rome was now no longer necessary and could be reversed’¹°. Protestant reformers saw her as the figure-head of the revolution and her death frightened them due to their precarious position within the society of a temperamental king. The split could not be reversed though, it was far too late. Henry had broken all relation with Rome and mostly with Spain and to reverse that would be accepting defeat, which the king was too proud to do. These religious grievances however, were only part of the cause of the pilgrimage of grace. The other reasons included Economics and high food prices, and political issues, such as Henry ‘casting off’ Catherine of Aragon, which the rebels wanted the King to cater to just as much as the religious elements. Therefore, the challenges to Henry VIII’s authority could be seen as a combination of religious division and division in views on foreign policy.

At different times during this period, other factors have also challenged royal authority. One of these would be individuals with claims to the throne, as is most evident during the reign of Henry VII. As Henry followed mainstream Catholicism, there was no cause for debate in terms of religion. England had always had a Catholic ruler before this point and Henry VII was no different. The reason for challenges to his authority lay in the fact that he won the crown at the battle of Bosworth and not through heritage, therefore his claim to the throne was always questioned and he had to put up with many other individuals with their own, often stronger, claims. The Stafford and Lovell Rebellion was the first armed uprising against Henry, the rebels believing that they would be in a better position by restoring the Yorkists. The uprising itself was a disaster, with the rebels fleeing before Henry even got to them but it reflected the most common rebellious attitude of the time; that of differing claims to the throne, and not religious division.

Lord of the Flies - Why it should be known as an allegorical novel, and it's important symbols.

The central concern of Lord of the Flies is the conflict between two competing impulses that exist within all human beings: the instinct to live by rules, act peacefully, follow moral commands, and value the good of the group against the instinct to gratify one’s immediate desires, act violently to obtain supremacy over others, and enforce one’s will. This conflict might be expressed in a number of ways: civilization vs. savagery, order vs. chaos, reason vs. impulse, law vs. anarchy, or the broader heading of good vs. evil. Throughout the novel, Golding associates the instinct of civilization with good and the instinct of savagery with evil.

To say that ‘Lord of the Flies’ is an allegorical novel means that Golding conveys many of his main ideas and themes through symbolic characters and objects. He represents the conflict between civilization and savagery in the conflict between the novel’s two main characters: Ralph, the protagonist, who represents order and leadership; and Jack, the antagonist, who represents savagery and the desire for power. Or put in other words, it means that the book contains certain symbols which, while having a place in the story, symbolise something far deeper, the conflict between savagery and civilisation, of human nature and welfare versus the common good in the human mind and consciousness.

They also symbolise Golding’s pessimistic view: human nature is inherently corruptible and wicked, thus the nineteenth century ideals of progress and education are baseless, as they only work in a controlled environment. Although the boys had been taught social skills, their desire to kill is unleashed when there are no strict rules of the English public-school system to control their behaviour.

As the boys on the island progress from well-behaved, orderly children longing for rescue to cruel, bloodthirsty hunters who have no desire to return to civilization, they naturally lose the sense of innocence that they possessed at the beginning of the novel. The painted savages in Chapter 12 who have hunted, tortured, and killed animals and human beings are a far cry from the guileless children swimming in the lagoon in Chapter 3.

However, Golding does not portray this loss of innocence as something that is done to the children; rather, it results naturally from their increasing openness to the innate evil and savagery that has always existed within them. Golding implies that civilization can mitigate but never wipe out the innate evil that exists within all human beings. The forest glade in which Simon sits in Chapter 3 symbolizes this loss of innocence. At first, it is a place of natural beauty and peace, but when Simon returns later in the novel, he discovers the bloody sow’s head impaled upon a stake in the middle of the clearing. The bloody offering to the beast has disrupted the paradise that existed before—a powerful, allegorical symbol Golding uses to represent Satan in modern society and of innate human evil disrupting childhood innocence.

There are many such symbols throughout the book, through which Golding also explores the themes and ideas of his novel. One such idea is the theme of Good and Evil, the central theme that runs through Lord of the Flies. Two of the characters, Ralph and Jack are an example of this due to their constant struggle for dominant power. Further examples include the conch shell, Piggy’s glasses, the signal fire, the beast and the characters themselves. 

Ralph and Piggy discover the conch shell on the beach at the start of the novel and use it to summon the boys together after the crash separates them. Used in this capacity, the conch shell becomes a powerful symbol of civilization and order in the novel. The shell effectively governs the boys’ meetings, for the boy who holds the shell holds the right to speak. In this regard, the shell is more than a symbol—it is an actual vessel of political legitimacy and democratic power. As the island civilization erodes and the boys descend into savagery, the conch shell loses its power and influence among them. Ralph clutches the shell desperately when he talks about his role in murdering Simon. Later, the other boys ignore Ralph and throw stones at him when he attempts to blow the conch in Jack’s camp. The boulder that Roger rolls onto Piggy also crushes the conch shell, signifying the demise of the civilized instinct among almost all the boys on the island.

Piggy is the most intelligent, rational boy in the group, and his glasses represent the power of science and intellectual endeavor in society. This symbolic significance is clear from the start of the novel, when the boys use the lenses from Piggy’s glasses to focus the sunlight and start a fire. When Jack’s hunters raid Ralph’s camp and steal the glasses, the savages effectively take the power to make fire, leaving Ralph’s group helpless.

The signal fire burns on the mountain, and later on the beach, to attract the notice of passing ships that might be able to rescue the boys. As a result, the signal fire becomes a barometer of the boys’ connection to civilization. In the early parts of the novel, the fact that the boys maintain the fire is a sign that they want to be rescued and return to society. When the fire burns low or goes out, we realize that the boys have lost sight of their desire to be rescued and have accepted their savage lives on the island. The signal fire thus functions as a kind of measurement of the strength of the civilized instinct remaining on the island. Ironically, at the end of the novel, a fire finally summons a ship to the island, but not the signal fire. Instead, it is the fire of savagery—the forest fire Jack’s gang starts as part of his quest to hunt and kill Ralph.

The imaginary beast that frightens all the boys stands for the primal instinct of savagery that exists within all human beings. The boys are afraid of the beast, but only Simon reaches the realization that they fear the beast because it exists within each of them. As the boys grow more savage, their belief in the beast grows stronger. By the end of the novel, the boys are leaving it sacrifices and treating it as a totemic god. The boys’ behavior is what brings the beast into existence, so the more savagely the boys act, the more real the beast seems to become.

Finally, the characters themselves round up Golding’s array of allegorical symbols in Lord of the Flies. Ralph stands for the civilisation of the world, the evolvement to dealing with issues in an orderly fashion. He represents order, leadership, and civilization. Jack represents unbridled savagery, the desire for power and the complete savagery in the minds of everyone in society. The things we cannot do for fear of social and capital punishment. “He swung back his right arm and hurled the spear with all his strength. From the pig-run came the quick, hard patter of hoofs, a castanet sound, seductive, maddening – the promise of meat.” (Page 47, lines 27-30.) This extract shows Jack’s striking transition to a complete barbarian, lusting at the thought of meat, something that would have been common if he was still at home. The savagery, if compressed too much, can be unleashed brutally, as shown by Jack unleashing his frenzied feelings on pigs.

Roger characterizes one-step further of this savagery; cold-blooded murder, brutality and bloodlust at their most extreme. When a person is given too much freedom, it occurs to them that they may monopolise the world and others around them, according to their will; “The yelling ceased, and Samneric lay looking up in quiet terror. Roger advanced upon them as one wielding a nameless authority.” (Page 194, lines 26-28.) This as we know, can induce disastrous results. To the extent that the boys’ society resembles a political state, the littluns might be seen as the common people, while the older boys represent the ruling classes and political leaders. The relationships that develop between the older boys and the younger ones emphasize the older boys’ connection to either the civilized or the savage instinct. Civilized boys like Ralph and Simon use their power to protect the younger boys and advance the good of the group; savage boys like Jack and Roger use their power to gratify their own desires, treating the littler boys as objects for their own amusement.

These characters are Golding’s allegorical symbols to illustrate his remark; “man produces evil, as a bee produces honey,” demonstrating that man is innately tied to society, and without it, we would likely return to
undomesticated savagery.