Vanity Fair, Bleak House And Felix Holt Essays -

Vanity Fair, Bleak House And Felix Holt Queen Victoria and her consort, Prince Albert, established the idea of a sound family life as a prime value of the mid-century years. In Vanity Fair, Bleak House, and Felix Holt we see a very different idea in family rapport. In Vanity Fair, the Sedley family gives us a good example of a family that did not see sound family life as a prime value. Though both Amelia and Jos live good lives, Amelia going to a respectable girls academy, Miss Pinkertons, and Jos living abroad in India, neither of them is exceptional, though, an outsider might have seen them so. Amelia, whom we see being well liked by many and a seemingly lovely girl, is not as perfect as she seems. A major fault that Amelia has is her ideas about love. Though we see this more as the novel progresses, we see her relationship with George and see it more as an infatuation then a genuine love. She is in love with the appearance of George and the idea of George more than the person that he actually is. In chapter 3 we see Jos cruelly tricking Becky into eating spicy food which she has never tasted before. As for Mr. Sedley, he is not a loving father. He is very mean to Jos, calling him names and making fun of him at any given opportunity. Mr. Sedl ey is thoughtless, nasty and cruel. To an outsider like Becky, ones initial reaction to the Sedleys is that they are an ideal family, but once one is submerged into their world he/she begins to see the truth behind their fa?ade. Becky also idealizes them initially because she is an orphan. She comes from a family less fortunate than the Sedleys and therefore sees them as a perfect. Now that she is alone she must work to take care of herself. She is very unhappy about this because she likes being with the Sedleys and also because she has set her sights on Jos as a potential mate. In Bleak House the first encounter we have with a family or non-family is with Sir Leicester and Lady Dedlock. Not only are they are thirty years different in age but they have no children. We can infer that this bothers Lady Dedlock because of her reaction to the neighboring family who seem loving and caring. We become acquainted with Esther was raised by her godmother who treated her horribly. She constantly reminded Esther that she was her mothers ruin because of the circumstances under which she was born. Esther grew up without love and feeling worthless. After her godmothers death she becomes a ward of the crown and is taken care of by Mr. Jarndyce. (There are also other ward of the crown, Rich and Ada, whom Mr. Jarndyce takes care of.) The Jellyby family is quite dysfunctional. Mrs. Jellyby is only interested in her charity work. She ignores her children and her home leaving them in squalor. The house and the children are filthy. The only child who she pays attention to is Caddy, whom she uses as her secretary. Mrs. Pardiggle also does charity work, missionary work to be exact. Her five sons dislike her and are ferocious with discontent because she forces them to do that work as well and to contribute money to it. One more example of a non-family situation is the Neckett family. After Mr. Neckett dies, Charlotte, better known as Charlie, must take care of her siblings. Though they adore her this is far from what we would see as the ideal family situation. In Felix Holt the first family we encounter is the Transome family. They are quite dysfunction from the very beginning. We are told that Mr. and Mrs. Transome have not seen their son in many years nor have they ever met their grandson, this alone makes us begin to wonder what kind of familial ties they have. After Harold arrives he is nothing but mean and disrespectful to his mother and father. He arrives without his son, he bosses his mother around rearranging everyones living quarters in the house to suit his own needs, and he makes fun of his

Definition and Examples of Appeal to the People

Definition and Examples of Appeal to the People An argument (generally considered a logical fallacy) based on widespread opinions, values, or prejudices and often delivered in an emotionally charged way. Also known as argumentum ad populum. Appeal to the majority is another term often used to describe a large number of people in agreement as  a valid reason or argument. Appeal to the People Mark Antonys famous funeral oration [see synchoresis, dubitatio, paralepsis, and kairos] over the body of Caesar in William Shakespeares Julius Caesar (act 3, sc. 2) is a brilliant example of mob appeal. . . .This magnificent speech helps us see, again, how an argument can be turned away from reason and toward emotion through the cunning introduction of irrelevancies. When the audience is a large group, the enthusiasm stirred up can reach powerful proportions which can bury the real question at issue. Through tactics like sarcasm, suggestion, repetition, the big lie, flattery, and many other devices, . . . mob appeals exploit our irrationality. (S. Morris Engel, With Good Reason. St. Martins, 1986)The public buys its opinions as it buys its meat, or takes in its milk, on the principle that it is cheaper to do this than to keep a cow. So it is, but the milk is more likely to be watered.(Samuel Butler, Note Books)The argumentum ad populum used in democratic political rhetoric can make political argumentation appear to be reason-based when it is not and subvert and undermine reason-based deliberation in democratic political argumentation. (Douglas Walton, Criteria of Rationality for Evaluating Democratic Public Rhetoric, Talking Democracy, ed. by B. Fontana et al. Penn State, 2004) The Direct and Indirect Approach Nearly everyone wants to be loved, esteemed, admired, valued, recognized and accepted by others. The appeal to the people uses these desires to get the reader or listener to accept a conclusion. Two approaches are involved: one of them direct, the other indirect. The direct approach occurs when an arguer, addressing a large group of people, excites the emotions and enthusiasms of the crowd to win acceptance for his or her conclusion. The objective is to arouse a kind of mob mentality.   ​In the indirect approach the arguer aims his or her appeal not at the crowd as a whole but at one or more individuals separately, focusing on some aspect of their relationship to the crowd. The indirect approach includes such specific forms as the bandwagon argument, the appeal to vanity, and the appeal to snobbery. All are standard techniques of the advertising industry. (Patrick J. Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic, 11th ed. Wadsworth, 2012) In Defense of the Appeal to the People [N]ot only is the appeal to popular sentiment or opinion of the type associated with the traditional argumentum ad populum a nonfallacious kind of argumentation in some contexts of dialogue, it is a legitimate technique and can be an important part of constructing a correct and successful argument.(Douglas N. Walton, The Place of Emotion in Argument. Penn State ​) Also Known As: appeal to the gallery, appeal to popular tastes, appeal to the masses, fallacy of mob appeal, ad populum

Economic of race and gender Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Economic of race and gender - Assignment Example These films could be brutal but sometimes, reality is worst than we would like it to be. The stories are just examples of what really happens in this world, whites discriminating Blacks or Asians and men acting like gods over women. What could be alarming is to know that there are also other skin colors discriminating the whites and more shockingly, women discriminating men. The films may have not shown the latter but in reality, things happen and it is not a news to break because there have been news of domestic violence also where the men are the victims. It is sad to realize that we can not escape these realities and they could happen to any of us. It is then very helpful to be educated about the issues on race and gender discrimination. Taking this class has opened my eyes and my understanding of the existence of such acts, now I know the rights of a person one needs to fight for, as well as what way of thinking one should have so as not to involve ones self in such actions. I believe that if I consider not discriminating, there would be one less racist in this world and no matter how minute its effect could be; still I could impact the world I am moving in. Diverse social positions can lay the foundations of a person’s political and economic access. For instance, a poor person can be deprived of education in his early years because he has to work in order to survive. Eventually, he will have minimal probabilities of ever going to school to get a better job in the future. Politically, he would have limited access to the rights of a regular paying worker if he ends up with menial jobs which do not give him the benefits of government employed workers. Loss of job pushes a person to self-employment particularly getting in to business because it gives advantages like being the boss of oneself, the opportunity for success and the convenience

Advocacy in action Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Advocacy in action - Essay Example Cases that occur are for instance nurse on nurse conflict, incivility in nursing, horizontal conflict as well as lateral conflict (Hover, 2010). A majority of nurses are scared of speaking out when they see incivility being conducted to other nurses or they do not know what is and is not the tolerated behavior (Harris, 2012). The question is why do such caring experts allow such behaviors to exist? How can nurses stop horizontal conflict and welcome those entering the nursing career with open arms and caring hearts? This paper will discuss horizontal violence and incivility in nursing. It will also examine some key ways of addressing such hurtful and non-caring behaviors to the hospital administration and its stakeholders in the form of a letter. Horizontal violence refers to an aggressive or hostile behavior by group members or an individual towards another individual or persons of another despised group. Critics refer to this as inter-group rivalry or violence. It is endemic among the health care environ, and it is a destructive and unacceptable phenomenon (Hover, 2010). All nurses are urged to work together to tackle issues of oppression and eliminate any unhealthy actions from the workplace. Horizontal violence may be conscious or unconscious behavior. The conflict normally causes emotional, psychological and spiritual damages. It can also have devastating and enduring effects on the recipient nurse or nurses. It may be covert or overt (Harris, 2012). It is mainly non physical, but at times nurses take it to the extent of hitting, shoving or throwing objects. Horizontal violence originates from an internalized low self esteem or self-hatred as a result of being part of an exploited group (Longo, 2008). Horizontal violence is the inappropriate manner that oppressed nurses use to release tension or stress when they cannot address or solve issues with the oppressor. In a majority of nursing institutions, a dominator model of social organization facilitates wor kplace hierarchy. This limits practice and autonomy of various groups of nurses and, therefore; it functions as an oppressive force. Nurses are grouped into oppressive structures and unequal power relations in the workplace system (Hover, 2010). Some groups of nurses such as supervisors within each particular station automatically adopt inflated attitudes and feelings of superiority. Some groups, such as new nurses, automatically adopt submissive feelings and attitudes and, therefore, they seem to be helpless within the health center (Harris, 2012). The internal conflict, caused by conforming to structural demands, leads to the buildup of low self esteem and self-hatred of certain groups of nurses that eventually causes horizontal violence (Hover, 2010). Horizontal violence refers to a symptom of the dynamics involving oppression and a feeling of powerlessness (Hughes, 2005). These factors are common in health care just as water is common to fish. They shape, mould, as well as dicta te, the behavior of nurses within the workplace culture. Horizontal violence is an example of harassment to those who are from different status quo (Hughes, 2005). Horizontal violence among nurses is as a result of history and politics of the western civilization and practices and ideology associated with the stereotyping and socialization classes of people in western culture, especially females. It is a cultural and system issue, a symptom of a spiritually, psychologically and emotionally toxic and oppressive environment. Even though, individual pathology flourishes in an environment that supports and condones aggressive behavior,

Structure of the judiciary power

Structure of the judiciary power Introduction Every society in the human history confronted the question of how disputes should be resolved. Independence of the judiciary is the principle that the judiciary should be politically insulated from the legislative and the executive power. Courts should not be influenced by the other branches of government. Different nations deal with the idea of judicial independence through different means of judicial selection. An independent judicial branch is one of the main guarantees of democratic system of government and it ensures the rule of law so that it is free from outside influences and judges can render cases only due to the law and facts. The importance of the independent judicial system in England were established in the beginning of 11th century, when William The Conqueror come to throne in 1066 and had started settling new laws in the whole England (today is known as Common Law) and also had fixed by The doctrine of the separation of powers. Whereas, In Kazakhstan legal system the Judicial power as the legal category is rather new. On 30th August 1995 on the basis of the Declaration of Independence the Constitution of The Republic of Kazakhstan had been accepted and it covered the initial principles and appointments of independence of judges (The Constitution of The Republic of Kazakhstan, 1995). Firstly, I would like to return to the past of the UK to observe the formation way of the power structure, which we have today. The ideas based on a modern principle of division of the authorities, for the first time was expressed by Aristotle, in his fourth book named, Politician. He formulated the idea of separating the power in the state on three parts: legislative, official, judicial; each of the authorities should be represented by the separate body. The further development of the theory of division of the authorities is bound to John Lock and Charles Louis Montesquieu, who have carried out the most thorough working out of this principle. Later on, by the end of 18th and the beginning 19th century, the principle of division of the authorities was recognised in many states. Next paragraph separately exposes the origin ways of each power branch in the UK. The Parliament The British Parliament is one of the oldest parliaments in the world. It is often named foremother, but in my opinion it would be more exactly to call it forefather of all parliament systems in the world, and it continues to function throughout the whole political history of the country since the second half of 13th century. Formation and development of The British Parliament occurred during XII and XV centuries. Considerable value of this long process traditionally was attracted by a crown of the higher nobility to the decision of the state, affairs monarchy going back to its origin. Meetings of the Kings vassals, from the middle of XII century, became an obligatory part of the state life and they were the historical beginning of the class representations. The ancestor of legislative system of England was the Curia Regis (the council of tenants-in-chief) it was created by William The Conqueror, who brought to England the feudal system from his native Normandy after the Norman conquest in 1066, and was granting land to his most important military supporters, further the supporters were granting that land to their own supporters thereby creating feudal hierarchy of England. Eventually this council has developed into the Parliament of England, and now includes the head of the state (monarch), chamber of lords (historically chamber of the nobility and the higher clergy) and the House of Commons (historically chamber of commoners). The Monarch and Government Formation of strong English government begun in the beginning of 12th century when English people were victims of intestine wars and feudal anarchy. This severe historical experience had definitively convinced English people that nothing but the strong central power and the wide state organisation can serve for them against those harms. Reducer of the reeled English state order was Henry II Plantagenet (years of board 1154-1189). During Henrys reformatory activities people against feudal lords joined him and it can be said that absolute monarchy formation in England begun with him. The restrictions of the monarchs power began being introduced in the beginning of the 13th century, when the English nobility forced King John to recognize the certain document named, Magna Carta. The constitutional monarchy in that way we see it today, has developed and has become stronger in 18th and 19th centuries when function to administer the affairs of the state has passed to the Cabinet which were appointed from elective parliament. The Cabinet has arisen before the bourgeois revolution of 17th century on the basis of secret council, as the narrow board helping the king to quickly solve the important problems of the government. At first this body completely depended on the monarchy. Further, by the end of 18th century and the beginning of 19th century, it was ceased to be a subsidiary organ of the Royal management and should lean against Parliament support. As the result by that time it started being recognised that the Cabinet should have the majority of voices in Parliament and the head of it should be the Prime minister. The Legislative If the legislative and executive powers are assigned on the exactly higher state body then the judicial power is much more difficult. It is assigned to set of judicial bodies from the local Supreme. Each judicial body is independent and it has own place in the system, resolving concrete affairs absolutely independently. The todays judicial power of England has arises from 1178, when Henry II appointed five members of his personal household to hear all the complaints of the realm and to do right, however the role of the Lord Chancellor was still formal and judgements were a prerogative of the King. Such situation had been existing till Glorious Revolution, the acceptance of the Bill of Rights in 1689 and the Act of Settlement in 1701. After those changes the power of the monarch was essentially limited and courts received independence and leadership of the law. The doctrine traditionally demands separate of powers, that the state system of the power must be divided into three branches and each branch is not only supplemented by two others, but also could be balance. As I said above, the judicial power became independent from executive, legislative and Royal powers when The Bill of Rights 1689 was introduced. According to the Bill the monarch was deprived to a duty to support and supervise judicial system, and the right of the Queen was only to dismiss judges on ministerial council. However, until recent time the principle of separate of powers in the Great Britain was not completely observed. So that the Lord Chancellor being the head of the judicial power in the Great Britain simultaneously was the member of the Cabinet and a member of Lords chambers. Moreover, the Lord Chancellor was appointed to the post by the Queen on representation of the Prime Minister. In July 2003, Tony Blairs government tried to make radical changes to a judicial branch of the power and declared plans to cancel a post of the Lord Chancellor to abolish the system of Law Lords and to replace it with separate Supreme Court. These plans caused considerable contradictions, and finally, Prime Minister decided to change, instead of cancelling an ancient role of the Lord Chancellor. Reform of the role of the Lord Chancellor has started the process of separating his various duties making clear distinction between the government, Parliament and the judicial power. Kazakhstan 16 December 1991, the Parliament of the on the Republic declared the independence of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Republic Kazakhstan was formed. During the period 1991-1995, the political system and Constitutional legislation of the Republic were formed. The first Constitution of sovereign Kazakhstan was adopted in January 1993. Being to some extent a compromise between the old and new political systems, reflecting attempts to introduce into the post-Soviet context a western democratic model, this Constitution initially contained some contradiction which occasionally took the form of unnatural opposition and resistance of power. As a result of the Referendum held on 30 August 1995, a new Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan was adopted, eliminating the shortcomings of the former constitution. The new Constitution established a Presidential Republic, and solved rationally the problem of divided responsibilities among different branches of power, while also welcoming changes to the market system. According to Article 3 of the Constitution states that the state power in the Republic of Kazakhstan is unified and executed on the basis of the Constitution and laws in accordance with the principle of its division into the legislative, executive and judicial branches and a system of checks and balances that governs their interaction. The legislative branch comprises Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan (the Senate and the Majilis). The executive branch comprises the Cabinet of Ministers, state committees, others central and local executive bodies of the Republic. The judicial branch comprises the Supreme Court and Constitutional Council and local courts (regional, district and others). The President of the Republic of Kazakhstan is the head of state, its highest official determining the main directions of the domestic and foreign policy of the state and representing Kazakhstan within the country and in international relations. He shall ensure by his arbitration concerted functioning of all branches of state power and responsibility of the institutions of power before the people. (Art. 40 of the Constitution). The President is elected every seven years on the basis of universal suffrage. One and the same person may not be elected the President of the Republic more than two times in a row. Nursultan Nazarbaev has been the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan since 1 December 1991. Parliament The highest representative body of the Republic of Kazakhstan is the bicameral Parliament. According to the Presidents Decree having force of Constitutional Law  «On elections in the Republic of Kazakhstan » (1995) the parliament will consist of two chambers the Senate and the Majilis and work on professional base. Parliament at a joint session of the Chambers: introduces amendments and makes additions to the Constitution; adopts constitutional laws, approves the republican budget, the reports of the Government, and the Accounts Committee about its implementation, and introduces changes into the budget; conducts a second round of discussion and voting on the laws or articles of the law; hears the report of the Prime Minister on the Governments program and approves or rejects the program and annual messages of the Constitutional Council of the Republic on the state of the constitutional legality in the Republic or reports on the activity of the commissions; decides issues of war and peace; adopts a decision concerning the use of the Armed Forces of the Republic to fulfill international obligations in support of peace and security at the proposal of the President of the Republic; puts forward an initiative calling for an all-nation referendum; exercises other powers assigned to Parliament by the Constitution. The Government The Government is appointed by the President and accountable to the Parliament. It implements the executive power in Kazakhstan, heads the system of executive bodies and exercise supervision of their activity. Judicial Authority Justice in the Republic of Kazakhstan is exercised only by the court. The judicial system in the Republic consists of the Supreme Court Republic of Kazakhstan, the highest judicial body, and regional, district, town, and city courts. (Art.75) The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan shall be the highest judicial body for civil, criminal and other cases which are under the courts of general jurisdiction; exercises the supervision over their activities in the forms of juridical procedure stipulated by law, and provide interpretation on the issues of judicial practice. The chairman of the Supreme Court is the judge and is appointed to the post by the President with the consent of the Senate of Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Independence of the judicial power in Kazakhstan completely based on the Constitution and the Constitutional Law named, About courts and the status of judges, and the guarantor of the constitution is the President. However, the theory of division of the authorities does not assume creation of the Chinese wall between various branches of the power. That is also impossible, as their interaction and interdependence are the questions of uniform institutes and the government shall be necessarily differentiated from its branches, generating an interlacing of some elements. The general meaning of the modern legal doctrine are the connection of ideas of unity and division of the authorities, their interactions and system of controls and counterbalances. Such understandings are reflected in the newest constitutions. The most distinctive expression is the point 4 of article 3 of the Constitution of Republic Kazakhstan of 1995 which says: the Government in Republic Kazakhstan is uniform, is carried out on the basis of the Constitution and laws according to a principle of its division into legislative, executive and judicial branches and their interactions among themselves with use of system of controls and counterbalances. Basically the Kazakhstans and English models of the judicial power are very difficult to compare moreover they are based on various legal foundations. English system of the Right is based on judicial precedent and actually courts of England create laws. In Kazakhstan the system is based on the code system of the right, such as the constitution, the constitutional laws, codes etc., and the Kazakhstan courts in contrast to English courts do not have the legislative initiative. It is believed that the judicial power is the weakest branch and it does not lean against wish of voters as the legislature, has no power for compulsion as the Executive. The force of the judicial power is in respect from the civilised society to the right and court. Here again we can see considerable distinctions. In that number, and in relations of other branches of the power both judicial in England and Kazakhstan. The execution institute of court decisions in England is so accurate also punishment for default so serious, that the practical excludes concept  «default of the decision of court » and communication with what, the authority of the judicial power is indisputable. Since independence Kazakhstan has undertaken huge efforts for a raising of courts authority, however corruption and a principle of the telephone right create for this purpose very big obstacles. Also I would like to stop in detail on the status English of judges put in English statutes. According to this statutes judge are appointed for life. In Kazakhstan the similar norm of the law does not exist. And although the legal judge is appointed to the post and dismissed by the President of Republic, the nonflexible system of estimations of activity of the judges allow to the chairman of courts easily release the judges who was not undesirable to him.

Passing: Debut Albums and Best Friend Essay

What is going to happen now that the deed is done? What is the future for Irene? Did she push her or did she just fall? Clare was supposed to be Irene’s best friend. How could she push her? Clare has been passing through and now was spending a lot of time with Irene and Brian. Irene has now started to think that Clare and Brian are together. This hurt Irene her husband with her best friend how could they do that to her. Now she is spending all her time trying to find a way to save her life and family. Clare is having fun keeping her husband from knowing that she is half black. Clare’s husband finds out and goes to the party that they are at, and Irene knows that if Clare gets freed from her husband. She will take Brain for sure. It all happened so fast Clare fell. Irene pushed her out the window. She didn’t think she just pushed. What is going to happen to Irene was she seen and will she get in trouble? Irene has been upset for a week before the party. Clare, Irene’s best friend, was spending a lot of time with Brian and she is still hiding the fact that she is half black from her over racist white husband. All he does it insult black people constantly. Clare was beautiful as Irene would say. Irene didn’t start to think there was anything wrong until a week ago. Irene was sure that Brain was mad at her. He had been is a bad mood all that last week. Then when Clare came over it was all good. This is what told Irene the truth she knew right then and there that Brian had been cheating on her with Clare. Irene was hurt but what could she do. How was she going to be able to keep Brian? What was going to be her next move? Irene was thinking a lot she was not sure what to do. She thought about telling Clare’s husband, but she didn’t know how to tell him. That wouldn’t work if Clare was free from John then what is holding her back from taking Brian away. No she couldn’t let that happen. She couldn’t lose Brian she just couldn’t. That night they were going to go to a party Irene didn’t really want to go she and Brian had just had a fight. She got ready to go. On the way up to the party Brian had Clare and Irene on his arms. It was bothering her the way they acted around each other. Clare was standing by the window when John started pounding on the door. All Irene could think was John found out. Irene couldn’t let her get freed. She just couldn’t let it  happen. She ran for Clare and grabbed her arm. Then it happen it was so fast Clare fell out the window. How did it happen? What will happen next? Did she push her? Did she fall? Irene was freaking out, knowing what she had done. Then she had a terrible thought. What if she is still alive? She would lose Brian for sure if she was alive. She was going to have to go down. â€Å"Should she put on her coat? Felise had rushed down without any wrap. So had all the others. So had Brian. Brian! He mustn’t take cold!†(pg.178) So she went down the stairs. When she got down there she went to Brian. She gave him his coat, but he rapped it around her. People were asking what happened. Someone asked Irene what she saw, did Clare get pushed by her husband. â€Å"You’re sure she fell? Her husband didn’t give her a shove or anything like that?†(pg.181) Irene’s answer was short and sweet. Irene told them that Clare just fell. She said no one pushed her. I bet that Irene was going crazy after that. Would they find out? All Irene wants was to be free of Clare and live happily with her husband. Now her life is unpredictable what’s next what going to happen to her family. It is mostly going to be like this. Now that Clare is died Irene and Brian will be happy again. For a while then Brian will get sad again and maybe he will want to leave Irene but won’t because of their kids. Jack will feel the loss for a while but then he will go back to his racist way he will leave and go home to his daughter and he will tell her that he hates her and that her mother was have black and a lot of other horrible things. He will try and kill her or he will send her away to a boarding school. He will never want to see her again. He will find a racist white women and marry her. Irene will be scared and looking over her shoulders her rest of her life. Always worrying if they found out. Irene will want to start over and forget. She will never get too thought she will have to ask Brian to let them move. Irene will want to leave or at least move to a different house. She will never want to think about Clare again. That won’t be possible because every party ever event she goes to she will think of what she has done to her best friend. She pushed her best friend out of a window after all she been though thou it still does not seem right and the biggest reminder of all is Brain.  Every time she looks at Brian she will remember that her cheated on her with her best friend. Irene will never get away from the fact. She killed Clare. She was the one that pushed her out that window! Irene went through a lot. I was still not right for her to push Clare out of the window though. Irene was cheated on with her best friend. Brian was always miserable when he was with her and then when he saw Clare his mood did a flip. Clare was beautiful and Irene was not there was no way else to get Brian. She couldn’t tell Clare’s husband he would have freed her and she would have taken Brian away. Then she would have been left with nothing at all. She had to keep Brian. So she pushed Clare out the window. That when her life changed she would never be the same. She would be worried all the time and unhappy. She would have never been happy again she had killed her best friend I know she was with her husband. It was still not right of her to push Clare out of a window. She did not deserve to die and for killing her Clare will suffer more then she has ever before. She will live the rest of her life with regret, and sorrow. She killed her best friend even if it was for the right reason. It was still wrong to kill her. Irene will never again have a happy family. She will always have the pain that she didn’t deserved in a way it was Clare’s last way of making her suffer.

Literary Analysis on Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery” Essay

Shirley Jackson bewildered the world when her short story â€Å"The Lottery† was published in The New Yorker magazine. The piece got a great deal of negative reaction for its shocking and gruesome story. Readers didn’t know what or why Shirley Jackson wrote this piece. She said she wanted to show the story with a â€Å"graphic dramatization of the pointless violence and general inhumanity in their own lives.† She wrote a piece about a town that continues the tradition of killing one person each year for no reason other than tradition. The theme is to show how easily a village of friends and family can follow ways of others, even if it is cruel and unusual. In this short story, she displays the theme with the use of irony of setting, situational irony, and verbal irony. The detailed description in the short story helps to build up an unexpected ending. When the story begins to introduce the setting of the book it reads, â€Å"The morning of June 27th was clear an d sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full summer day†¦.† The way the author writes it makes the readers feel like the story is going to take place in a happy environment and something good is going to happen. That may seem the case but as the reader continues to read, the story is actually talking about winning a death. This irony of setting illustrates the happy environment that they seem to live in, but that is not the case once the â€Å"winner† of the lottery is stoned to death. Readers may think Mrs. Hutchinson will not get chosen due to her positive attitude, but the story shows that is not the case at all. Mrs. Hutchinson acts like the drawing is not a big deal when she shows up late saying, â€Å"Clean forgot what day it was,† and â€Å"Wouldn’t have me leave m’dishes in the sink, now would you, Joe?.† She acts as if she wants to hurry up the process and get back to doing what she was doing. Mrs. Hutchinson has this attitude that she has nothing to worry about, yet it is her who ends up â€Å"win ning† the lottery. The situational irony shows that readers may think that the lottery is no big deal, but in fact it leads to a pointless death. The title of the short story is very misleading at first. The title â€Å"The Lottery† would make anyone assume the story is going to be about winning some money or some big prize. In the short story, Shirley Jackson wrote, â€Å"The lottery was conducted—as were the square dances, the teenage club, the Halloween program†¦.† She makes  the readers sense that the lottery is a normal thing and something good will come from it. That is the exact opposite of what the author is portraying. To win the lottery in the stories â€Å"village,† is to get beaten to death with stones by all the people in the community. The verbal irony is when the author shows that winning the lottery is winning a death by your friends and family, compared to the readers who speculate that the lottery will be something good. Shirley Jackson shows the readers how easily friends and family turn on one another because of tradition. She states the irony of setting by stimulating a good, happy environment, but it turns out to be a dramatic day. With the verbal irony, no one actually wins something; someone ends up losing their life instead. In situational irony, the author shows how someone can blame others for their own mistakes. All of her different types of irony end up making â€Å"The Lottery† a very dramatic short story. Works Cited â€Å"Shirley Jackson.† Shirley Jackson and â€Å"The Lottery† N.p., n.d. Web. 04 June 2014.