Literature Close Analysis Essay Submission Feedback Thread.

[charmanderp]

If you want feedback on an essay, post it here! The compilation thread is for 'model' essays'.

[pi]

English work submission and marking

This is a place for all English, ESL, English Language and Literature students to post their work for comment and criticism.

[charmanderp]

Re: English Language submission and marking

[chisel]

JANE EYRE - passage analysis [Jane in red-room, Homeless Jane in the lead up to Moor House & Introduction of Mr Rochester on horse

ANY HELP/THOUGHTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED GUYS, cheers 

Passage 1 of Charlotte Bronte’s novel, Jane Eyre, immediately establishes a desolate mood through the description of “the red room” as “a square chamber, very seldom slept in.” This mood of isolation is accentuated through Bronte’s detailed descriptions of the chamber’s interior, detailing the “blinds being always drawn down” which evokes an ominous mood through darkness having evident connotations of gloom and despair. The room “was chill, because it seldom had a fire,” and also “it was silent…” Bronte here further highlights the isolated state in which Jane has been placed, and moreover, her thorough descriptions of the “week’s quiet dust” on the mirrors and furniture additionally enhance this mood. Jane is not only subjected to an isolated state, Bronte has intended to emphasise her inferiority through the descriptions of Jane’s surroundings. The “massive pillars of mahogany” coupled with “the bed that rose before me [Jane]” together convey this notion of Jane’s fragile, weak demeanour. Evidently, there is a fundamental notion of entrapment and restriction present as Jane is forced to stay in the red-room, incomparable to anywhere else in terms of restriction as she states, “no jail was ever more secure.”

Similarly, the notion of entrapment is somewhat highlighted in passage 3, however it is rather mental restriction than physical. Jane’s isolation, once again, evokes a “sense of desolation – total prostration of hope” for her. This, along with Bronte’s inclusion of Jane’s abundant rhetoric – “For who will receive me?” – creates confusion which symbolically reflects her fragmented state of mind as a result of her departure from Thornfield and thus, the man she loves. The disintegration of Jane’s mental state symbolically causes her entrapment, as her thoughts are temporarily restricted to negative ones, “I should die before morning.” Even the vast array of “fields” surrounding her, which are generally associated with a sense of liberty, are described as “wild and unprotective” thus, it is an undesirable sense of freedom.

Passage 3 adequately conveys Bronte’s views on the concepts of persistence and resilience through her characterisation of Jane in a moment of despair. Initially, Jane is portrayed negatively, with the majority of her thoughts being pessimistic – “shall I be an outcast again this night?” which Bronte disapproves of. Bronte incorporates the melancholy weather such as the “rushing rain” to emphasise the miserable position Jane is succumbed to, while the symbolism of colours is evident as the “black soil” enhances the ominous mood created as “darkness” approaches. Moreover, Jane states, “colour had faded with the daylight” which reflects the darkness of her situation as Bronte associates colour with life, which is beginning to fade. Contrastingly to this negative depiction of Jane, Bronte creates a pivotal opposing moment at the point in which “a light sprang up.” Evidently, light has connotations of purity and hope, therefore, in this specific case, the light symbolises a “forlorn hope” for Jane in her time of despair. The continual appearance of the light caused Jane to “drag her exhausted limbs” towards it. Bronte utilises the word “dragged” to accentuate Jane’s exhaustion. Furthermore, Bronte endorses Jane’s resilience as she “…fell twice; but rose and rallied her faculties” and also validates her persistence and perseverance to find the source of the light, as Jane states, “I must gain it [the light].”

Passage 2 subtly exemplifies the notion of male dominance, whilst simultaneously introducing the dominant male character of Mr. Rochester. Similar to the other passages, passage 2 depicts Jane once more in an isolated state in the “absolute hush” surrounding her. Upon the arrival of Rochester, dominance is immediately asserted as he demands Jane – “you must just stand on one side.” Bronte’s use of the word “must” along with a lack of general politeness indicates her attempt to convey Rochester as a domineering figure. Moreover, the exclamatory syntax utilised in “Down, Pilot!” as a command towards the dog further emphasises Rochester’s dominant nature. In stark contrast, in the same passage Jane is portrayed as an obedient, polite figure as she obeys not only Rochester’s commands without hesitation, but the dog also – “I obeyed him [the dog] and walked down to the traveller [Rochester].”

Jane’s ‘imprisonment’ in the red room of passage 1 was a consequential punishment for her assertive actions prior towards Mrs Reed, her benefactress. This is indicative of Bronte characterising Mrs Reed as someone who reflects society’s conventions through ensuring women remain passive and submissive, both qualities which Bronte strongly disapproves of. This dominant figure in Mrs Reed is somewhat comparable to the dominant Rochester in passage 2: one reflecting society’s conventions towards assertive women, the other towards a dominant male, and in turn gender inequality.

[charmanderp]

ANY HELP/THOUGHTS WOULD BE APPRECIATED GUYS, cheers 

I think the analysis itself is quite good. Only issue is that the paragraphs seem disjointed from each other. Don't read the passages in isolation and then attempt to synthesise an overarching reading in your conclusion. They should be analysed logically to build some kind of argument/contention by drawing links between the paragraphs, demonstrating linguistic patterns, etc.

[zerbe6]

Hi. This is an intro and first paragraph for Who's Afraid of Virginia  Woolf? Could you please have a look?

Albee’s play Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? responds to the development of popular dissatisfaction in the patriotic institutions of post-second world war America. Albee develops allegorical allusion throughout his absurdist production to convey his view that the noble society envisaged by the signatories of the declaration of independence had faltered.
Albee’s allusion to George and Martha Washington through Martha and George facilitates the development of an allegorical reading in which the illusion of the child is a motif for the progress of American Society. The cycle of “fun and games” and distortion of truth which propels the play’s narrative is established as Martha uses the plot of “that Bette Davis film” to develop a thinly veiled criticism of the “modest” nature of their lifestyle. As Martha contrasts George with the ironic description of “modest Joseph Cotton” a symbol of male sexuality she bemoans their “modest cottage”. As Martha insists that the ambiguous “she” is “discontent”, she makes it clear that she blames George’s failure to progress within the college for their circumstances. Martha’s claim of discontentedness becomes critical as later in the play she reveals that “only one man has ever made [her] happy”. The fact that man is George shatters one of the central precepts of the play (that Martha really is seeking escape) and gives the audience pause to consider what other fundamental truths may simply be illusion. As Martha states that their son was “raised as best I can against… vicious odds, against the corruption of weakness and petty revenges”, Albee develops an implicit link between the “corruption” facing American society, the “vicious odds” that surrounded the birth of a nation and the fate of the son. As George counters that their son is “a son who is deep in his gut sorry to have been born”, Albee contends that rather than triumph over the “vicious odds”, America has instead fallen. In the development of this dialogue Albee contrasts the vision of the founding fathers with the realities of contemporary society. In doing so Albee argues that America’s self image of messianic democracy is itself a grand delusion.

[maturegambino]

I've attached a passage analysis for Jane Eyre
If the passages are needed, I'll upload them 

Thoughts/feedback would be awesome

[thecreeker]

Feedback would be awesome

"All the Pretty Horses"- Cormac McCarthy

For Cormac McCarthy the austerity of modern society has the tendency to stifle human dreams. Pervading the passages is the realization that the innate desire to be “somethin special” is unfounded amongst the rigid reality of the changing world.

With the lyrical tone to passage one, McCarthy illuminates his character’s affinity for the romantic West. The manner in which Cole “walked among [the horses] with sweat and dust” isolates a simplistic nature to the passage far removed from the brutality of passage two. McCarthy places the scene amongst the backdrop of “high headlands” and “wind tattered fire” in addition to the imagery of the wild horses to reinforce the untouched segment of Mexico that remains even amongst the lattice of corruption. With this in mind, the “souls of horses” act as a symbol of incomparable purity, a notion that is reasserted in the repetition of the phrase by Luis. Thus, in the personification of the horses-“horses also love war”- coupled with the manner in which the “souls of horses mirror the souls of men”, McCarthy elucidates how humanity has fallen away from its spiritual moorings within the context of Mexican society.

Similarly the defining act of violence in passage two-Blevins’ murder- is met with an almost inaudible “pop” as McCarthy portrays the extent to which society has become desentized to the horrors within it. The false sense of security within the reader as the captain “put one arm around the boy” is ensconced in the brutality of the act of follow.  The paradoxical nature of the simile “like some kindly advisor” evidences the growing deceit within the novel, as the captain transforms into a murderer without reservation. The confounding nature of this act is portrayed in McCarthy’s description of Blevins as he utilises the diminutive adjectives “small” and “ragged” to detail a figure that all but “vanish[es]” from the world. McCarthy marriages the disbelief of Rawlins’ comment “they caint just walk him out there and shoot him” to the “flat sort of pop” marking Blevins’ demise, to portray the alienation of the two Americans’ moralistic foundations. Thus, the reader comprehends that the romantic ideals governing Cole’s and Rawlins’ view of violence at the outset of the novel is misplaced within reality.

The resignation of Cole in the comment “it just bothered me you might think I was somethin special” highlights the insufficiency of the character’s throughout All the Pretty Horses. In both passages two and three the reader envisions a defeated individual; a jarring disjunction to the image of youthful adventure embodied by Cole and Rawlins at the commencement of the novel. McCarthy attributes Cole’s defection from the idyllic human dream to the failing of his moral code in the face of a disparaging Mexican society, evidenced in the despair of the comment “I never said nothin” in relation to Blevins’ murder. Expanding upon this notion is the “strange land, strange sky “of passage two.  In the repetition of ‘strange”, McCarthy reestablishes the connotations of displacement within the minds of the readers and therefore illuminates the social segregation between Coles and Rawlins and society. Hence, the casual nature of the captain’s comment- “Vamonos”- after killing Blevins, epitomizes the reality of such occurrences that Cole in passage three finally comprehends; they are embedded within humanity and an individual is powerless to change it.

Contrary to this damning vision of society in passages two and three, passage one depicts the images that Cole and Rawlins envision at the outset of their journey. Even the harsh images of wild horses “biting and kicking” are suppressed in the euphemism “some evil dream of horses” as McCarthy laments a society tearing away from its spiritual foundings.  The melodic tone utilized in Luis’ “tales of the country” elucidates an air of deep longing that the reader indeed attributes to Cole. Yet, in the confession “war had destroyed the country” coupled with the oxymoronic phrase “the cure for war is war”, Luis implies that this dream is one that had long faded into the depths of a suppressive world.

McCarthy ultimately attributes the degradation of the human dream to the rapid onset of a deeply mechanical society. Thus, All the Pretty Horses is a lamentation, and a cautionary reminder of the dying human dream and the “country” it embodies.

[mseleanor]

Close analysis to Euripides' The Bacchae

If anyone could correct this I'd be very greatful

In ‘The Bacchae’, Euripides explores the contrary concepts of nature and the human construct of civilization to necessitate the holistic fulfilment of all elements of one's human psyche and physical form.

Passage One demonstrates the disdainful pride inherent in the advocacy of civilization. The forceful way in which Pentheus labels Dionysian worship on Mount Cithaeron as an “astounding scandal” establishes the rage with which he conducts his rule of Thebes. The militant tone in which he resolves to “hunt out” Bacchic worshippers that includes even his own mother, Agave, suggest a tyrannical leader threatening destruction to any form of conduct that disrupts his understanding of order. The images of metropolis evoked by “iron fetters” and “walls”, in which Pentheus wishes to entrap Dionysus, attribute Pentheus’ stringent determination to restore order to Thebes to civilization itself, an image through which Euripides portrays it as rigid and oppressively inhibiting. Ironically, after the spiteful soliloquy, Pentheus’ profession: “is not his arrogance an outrage?” further paints the character as excessively prideful and thus embodying the extreme, excessively cruel characteristics of nomos (civilization). Concurrently,  the dramatic irony Euripides here establishes foreshadows Pentheus’ demise, his own arrogance already deluding him to the reality of his own state.

Passages One and Three reflect the dangers inherent in the oppression Pentheus enacts, particularly the sexual repression of women at a societal level. The deluded pride exhibited by Pentheus is intertwined with his vigilant repression of women. The possessive reference to “our women” connotes ownership and a dominant sense of male superiority as he conveys blatant disgust towards thoughts of their “gadding about” and submission to “lecherous men”, language that belittles the grounds of the female rebellion. However it is Pentheus’ own doing that results in his ironic fate by female destruction. Escaped from the oppressive rule of the city of Thebes, the Bacchae are burst into another extreme. Their violent murder of Pentheus is illustrated by vivid imagery evoked by descriptions of their “hands thick with blood” and their “tossing and catching” of Pentheus’ body in Passage Three, demonstrating the savagery and brutality inherent in the complete, rebellious submission into the primal forces of nature. Yet it is as a result of Pentheus’ rigid imposition of order that forced women from one extreme to another – from stringent subjugation to this sheer embodiment of sparagmos. The dramatic irony of Pentheus donned in female garb in Passage Two signifies how stifling order breeds the very conduct it tries to repress in perhaps its most extreme form possible; the transition from Passage One, where Pentheus is militantly condemnatory of their “outrageous Bacchism” and Passage Two where Pentheus is dressed as a “frenzied Bacchic woman” reflect the inherent inability of civilization to repress elements of nature.   

Particularly through Passages One and Three, Euripides criticizes the rigid notions of civilization. Pentheus’ prideful disdain for Dionysian worship is founded upon dictatorial want for absolute order, relative to his personal attachment to nomos. His rejection of Dionysus’ gift of wine reflects his own extremity, while his disdain for Dionysus’ “golden hair” and “scented ringlets” further reflect the rigidity of both Pentheus and wider Theban society. Through this, Euripides criticizes the oppression and gender normativity characteristic of the human construct of nomos, whereby Dionysus’ androgyny and liberating gifts that challenge Thebes’ strict hierarchical and patriarchal structure. Indeed, the destructive potentiality in the converse is revealed, most poignantly in Passage Three, yet Euripides utilizes this to illustrate the inevitable consequence of militant oppression: destructive rebellion. Were such women able to indulge their primal human desires in accordance with other elements of their lives in Theban society, balance would have prevented such violent extremity.

Passages One and Two demonstrate the need to fulfil one’s inherent sexual, animalistic tendencies. The transition of Pentheus’ state between Passages One and Two is stark. The dialogue and relations between Pentheus and Dionysus in Passage Two reveal Pentheus’ surfacing sexuality. Previously forceful in expressing his fervent disgust for Bacchic activity in labelling it an “astounding scandal”, Pentheus’ voyeuristic curiosity piercing his militant self-control can be seen in Passage Two where is he “dressed as a Bacchic devotee”, demonstrating the strength with which his sexual curiosity is working to thrive, relinquishing his pride to observe the Bacchic activity. Dionysus ‘ gentle tending to Pentheus when he realizes that: “A curl has slipped out” and Pentheus’ request: “you dress me please” suggest sexual enticement. The image of Pentheus becoming “entirely subservient” to Dionysus further imply that is he sexually allured by him, figuratively reflecting his succumbing to the sexuality he so stridently sought to repress. His literal denial of Dionysus as a God seen in Passage One where he blatantly states that “he’s dead” represents the mental and physical denial of his natural want for what Dionysus embodies: wine, dance, and sexual liberation. Thus, Dionysus’ rage reflected in his innocuous enticement of Pentheus to his death represents the flared sexuality within Pentheus that will come to vengefully consume him, having been denied so long as an integral element of the human psyche. Images of Agaüe “foaming at the mouth” while her “rolling eyes were wild” connote godly possession. However, metaphorically, it is the repression of her natural want for release that, unfulfilled, has consumed her ability to see reason, the societal rebellion in which she partakes emblematic of this notion at an individual level.

Passage Two further demonstrates the paradoxical nature of the rationality Pentheus attaches to his understanding of Theban nomos. The inversion of Pentheus’ resolve to “hunt” in Passage One to himself being subjugated to the vengeful Dionysus in Passage Two, demonstrated through the stage directions describing him as “entirely subservient to Dionysus”, reflect his deteriorating hold on rationality in the process of his ironic quest to restore reason to Thebes, a notion governed by the human concept of nomos. Pentheus’ pensive-sounding remark, “I see two suns” reflects his “dazed” state of mind, where his mental obliviousness to what actually constitutes reason is transcending the mind and manifesting into his physical reality. Having previously so forcefully attempted to uphold the understanding of reason he had used in governing Thebes, such extreme rationality is revealed as thus itself irrational through Pentheus’ loss of reality, his conflicting mental state rendering him deluded.

Through Passages One and Two, Euripides illustrates the importance of fulfilling one’s own natural human desires for release and sensuality, an element of primal nature that is integral to the complete human psyche. The fate that befalls Pentheus and Agaüe reveals how the want for the natural engagement seen as subordinate to civilization has, unsatisfied, consumed them. The destructive potentiality revealed in the “frenzied Bacchic women” indeed necessitates some discipline as opposed to complete submission into one’s primal self. Yet, Euripides concerns himself more with illustrating how the inevitable societal rebellion of such women was emblematic of the inevitable self-destruction when one leaves unmapped this element of the human psyche. The image of Dionysus as a “bull” in the eyes of Pentheus heightens his representation of a force of nature, symbolic of the primal elements of the human psyche that Euripides necessitates a balanced, holistic fulfilment of.

Word count: 1161

[Excelsior]

Hi. This is an intro and first paragraph for Who's Afraid of Virginia  Woolf? Could you please have a look?

Albee’s play Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? responds to the development of popular dissatisfaction in the patriotic institutions of post-second world war America.Albee develops allegorical allusion throughout his absurdist production to convey his view that the noble society envisaged by the signatories of the declaration of independence had faltered.I don't think its necessary to give background info - just start your analysis
Albee’s allusion to George and Martha Washington through Martha and George this is not clear, why do you need to repeat their names? facilitates the development of an allegorical reading in which the illusion of the child is a motif for the progress of American Society. The cycle of “fun and games” and distortion of truth which propels the play’s narrative is established as Martha uses the plot of “that Bette Davis film” to develop a thinly veiled criticism of the “modest” nature of their lifestyle. this reads well but I think you need some more specific textual analysis As Martha contrasts George with the ironic description of “modest Joseph Cotton”, a symbol of male sexuality, she bemoans their “modest cottage”. As Martha insists that the ambiguous “she” is “discontent[ed]”, she makes it clear that she blames George’s failure to progress within the college for their circumstances. Martha’s claim of discontentedness avoid repetition, perhaps use dissatisfaction becomes critical as later in the play she reveals that “only one man has ever made [her] happy”. The fact that man is George avoid using 'the fact that', perhaps you could rewrite this: 'This man is George, which shatters ...'shatters one of the central precepts of the play (that Martha really is seeking escape) you don't need to put this in brackets - just use commasandif you use my suggestion, change this to which gives the audience pause time? to consider what other fundamental truths may simply be illusion. As Martha states that their son was “raised as best I can against… vicious odds, against the corruption of weakness and petty revenges”, Albee develops an implicit link between the “corruption” facing American society, the “vicious odds” that surrounded the birth of a nation and the fate of the son. As George avoid starting two sentences with 'as' counters that their son is “a son who is deep in his gut sorry to have been born”, perhaps you could start the quote at 'deep in his gut...' to avoid the repetition of 'son'Albee contends that rather than triumph over the “vicious odds”, America has instead fallen. In the development of this dialogue Albee contrasts the vision of the founding fathers with the realities of contemporary society. In doing so Albee argues that America’s self image of messianic democracy is itself a grand delusion. I think you need to do a bit more textual analysis - perhaps looking at language features or punctuation. I liked how you linked to the author's views and values at the end. Your expression is very good, my suggestions are only minor things. Please don't think I'm being too harsh! 

[Excelsior]

Feedback would be awesome

"All the Pretty Horses"- Cormac McCarthy

For Cormac McCarthy the austerity of modern society has the tendency to stifle human dreams. Pervading the passages is the realization that the innate desire to be “somethin special” is unfounded amongst maybe impossible in... would be better the rigid reality of the changing world.

With the lyrical tone toof passage one, McCarthy illuminates his character’s affinity for the romantic West. The manner in which Cole “walked among [the horses] with sweat and dust” isolates a simplistic nature to the passage far removed from the brutality of passage two. good link between passagesMcCarthy places the scene amongst the backdrop of “high headlands” and “wind tattered fire” in addition to the perhaps 'and uses imagery of...' imagery of the wild horses to reinforce the untouched segment of Mexico that remains you need to reinforce something, perhaps you could say: 'to demonstrate that segments of Mexico remain untouched even...' even amongst the lattice of corruption. With this in mind, the “souls of horses” act as a symbol of incomparable purity, a notion that is reasserted in the repetition of the phrase by Luis. Thus, in through the personification of the horses-“horses also love war”- coupled with the manner in which the “souls of horses mirror the souls of men” - McCarthy elucidates how humanity has fallen away from its spiritual moorings within the context of Mexican society.

Similarly the defining act of violence in passage two-Blevins’ murder- is met with an almost inaudible “pop” as McCarthy portrays the extent to which society has become desentized to the horrors within it. The false sense of security within the reader as the captain “put one arm around the boy” is ensconced I haven't read the text, but do you really mean 'ensconced'? If I understand what you're trying to say correctly, I would put 'The reader develops a false sense of security as the captain (quote), which is shattered/broken/a better word after the subsequent acts of brutality.' Feel free to disregard what I said if I didn't understand it correctly. in the brutality of the act of tofollow.  The paradoxical nature of the simile “like some kindly advisor” evidences the growing deceit within the novel, as the captain transforms into a murderer without reservation. The confounding nature of this act is portrayed in McCarthy’s description of Blevins as he utilises you can just say 'using' the diminutive adjectives “small” and “ragged” to detail a figure that all but “vanish[es]” from the world. McCarthy marriages you mean marries?! the disbelief of Rawlins’ comment “they caint just walk him out there and shoot him” to the “flat sort of pop” marking Blevins’ demise, to portray the alienation of the two Americans’ moralistic foundations. Thus, the reader comprehends that the romantic ideals governing Cole’s and Rawlins’ view of violence at the outset of the novel is aremisplaced within you can just say 'in'reality.

The resignation of Cole in the comment “it just bothered me you might think I was somethin special” highlights the insufficiency of the character’s no need for an apostrophe!! throughout All the Pretty Horses remember to underline the title when you're writing. In both passages two and three the reader envisionsmaybe sees or perceives a defeated individual; a jarring disjunction to the image of youthful adventure embodied by Cole and Rawlins at the commencement of the novel. McCarthy attributes Cole’s defection from the idyllic human dream to the failing of his moral code in the face of a disparaging Mexican society, evidenced in the despair of the comment “I never said nothin” in relation to Blevins’ murder. Expanding upon this notion is the phrase “strange land, strange sky “of passage two.  In the repetition of ‘strange”, McCarthy reestablishes the connotations maybe 'idea' of displacement within the minds of the readers and therefore illuminates the social segregation between Coles and Rawlins and society. Hence, the casual nature of the captain’s comment- “Vamonos”- after killing Blevins, epitomizes the reality of such occurrences that Cole in passage three finally comprehends; they I think you need to explain what 'they' is. Perhaps you could start a new sentence are embedded within humanity and anthe individual is powerless to change it. A good paragraph, but perhaps you could begin with some more textual analysis

Contrary to this damning vision of society in passages two and three, passage one depicts the images that Cole and Rawlins envision at the outset of their journey. Even the harsh imagesavoid repetition of wild horses “biting and kicking” are suppressed in the euphemism “some evil dream of horses” as McCarthy laments a society tearing away from its spiritual foundings. perhaps 'origins' would be betterThe melodic tone good textual analysisutilized in Luis’ “tales of the country” elucidates an air of deep longing that the reader indeed attributes to Cole. Yet, in the confession “war had destroyed the country” coupled with 'and in' I don;t think you can use 'coupled with' if you start the sentence with 'in'the oxymoronic phrase “the cure for war is war”, Luis implies that this dream is one that had long faded into the depths of a suppressive do you mean oppressive?world.

McCarthy ultimately attributes the degradation of the human dream to the rapid onset of a deeply mechanical society. Thus, All the Pretty Horses is a lamentation, and a cautionary reminder of the dying human dream and the “country” it embodies. maybe refer back to the passages again. You could say something like 'Throughout Passages One and Two, McCarthy...' Apart from a few small issues with expression, this is generally excellent! I liked how you could link the specific analysis of the passages to comments about the work as a whole and the author's intentions/beliefs. Your links between the passages were also good. Well done! 

[zerbe6]

Thank you Excelsior. I appreciate your feedback.

[master_revan]

Ooh If I could get some feedback on this for The French Lieutenant's Woman, I'd really appreciate it!


“A planned world … is a dead world”.
Fowles’ The French Lieutenant’s Woman reveals Fowles’ argument that it is the realization of an individuals’ truest desires which allow them to “begin to live” and experience a life of authenticity; even if such a decision leads to “an affront to provincial convention”, Fowles suggests that such a challenge to convention may be unavoidable and even necessary in order for the authentic life to exist.

Charles’ struggles against the restrictions which have been “conditioned” into him via societal and cultural pressures in an attempt to realize his desires towards Sarah. Presented as a man “struggling to overcome history”, Charles’ rejection of Mr. Freeman’s offer of a career in trade initially reveals the obeisance that he has towards the societal expectation of the era in which he lives. Indeed, that Charles is asked to “pay” the “best of his past self” and that his decision to Reject Mr. Freeman’s offer is influenced by the “common human instinct to preserve human identity” reveals an individual who is arrested by the societal notions of his age: the notion that trade is an inferior profession for a gentleman of the likes of Charles. Charles, however, is critiqued by Fowles whilst simultaneously having his decisions treated with a degree of empathy by the authorial voice. Fowles’ suggestion that Charles is a “poor clown” is suggestive of a degree of pity being attributed to Charles’ actions – rather than being an individual fully aware of the degree to which he is a pawn of the societal prerogative of his time, Charles’ actions are instead “foolish”, lacking “insight” and decidedly uninformed. Fowles also critiques him when Charles relaxes and conjures up a “consoling image” – here, Fowles tempts the reader with seemingly noble, authentic and honorable ideals: “Hope? Courage? Determination?”  before mocking Charles and stating “I am afraid not. He saw a bowl of milk punch and champagne”. In this way, Fowles critiques the negligence of choices and decisions which would benefit an individual’s life in lieu of following the customs which an individual’s societal milieu dictates as being the ‘proper’ manner of acting. The utilization of a first person authorial voice (“I am afraid not”), coupled with the progression to a probing second person urging (“you have just made some decision in which your personal benefit … has not been allowed to interfere?”, and finally to a series of imperative commands to the reader (“do not dismiss Charles’ state of mind as a mere conditioning”) serve to initially draw the reader into an awareness of the authorial consciousness of the narrator, before allowing the reader to realize that just as they may be unjustified in judging Charles due to his ignorance of the degree of his societal obeisance, the imperative urging of “see him for what he is… and even though he does not realize it” has within it the suggestion that the reader themselves may “not realize” the degree that their own societal pressures influence their own lives. Indeed, Fowles’ questioning – “you have just turned down a tempting offer in applied science in order to continue your academic teaching?” – cements his notion that the reader is perhaps just as liable to be critiqued as Charles is; and within such a suggestion lies implicit the urge to be aware of the degree that this occurs in the reader’s own life.

The struggles between individual desire and societal convention are evident within the characters’ lives of the novel, and Fowles suggests that “knowledge and insight” in addition to the making of authentic choices, is the means which an individual may adapt socially and truly “begin to live”. Charles’ initial belief in the “doctrine of the survival of the fittest” result in him being “trapped” for such an initial belief leads to the realization that the “practice” means challenging the notions he holds so dear. Indeed, the suggestion of cold when Charles “felt cold, chilled to his innermost marrow by an icy rage against Mr. Freeman” reveals the cruel and seemingly heartless nature that the conflict between societal decorum and individual desire can take. To challenge that which is expected of one is to leave the warmth and safety which the subservience to societal expectation has. Once the challenge is made, however, it can be liberating, yet “repugnant”. Charles, by the end of the novel, has progressed from someone who is acutely aware of the “mealy mouthed hypocrisy” and the “adulation of all that is false in our natures” which marks the “age” in which Charles lives in. Fowles has ensure that after making authentic choice and experiencing the consequence, Charles now is closer to being an individual who fully realizes his desires, no longer to be mercilessly critiqued by the authorial voice.

Fowles ultimately suggests that even in authorship the breaking of convention and planning is a necessity in order to allow true freedoms to exist. The first-person authorial intrusions stating that “I have pretended until now to know my characters’ minds and innermost thoughts” serve to make the reader aware of the authorial consciousness and then position the reader to align themselves with the author’s perspective and commentary on the characters within the novel. When Fowles explains that “we wish to create worlds as real as, but other than the world that is” and then uses this as justification as to why “we [authors] cannot plan”, the freedoms that exist in ‘reality’ are a result of being able to make authentic, unconstrained choice which may challenge the conventions of the time – it is our ability to challenge our expectations which grant us freedom; in the same way, only if Fowles allows his characters to not only break the social conventions of their times, but also the literary conventions which dictate that the author must be fully aware of their characters’ mindsets do the characters attain any sense of freedom. The fact that “Sarah would have never … delivered a chapter of revelation” despite the author’s intentions of having a chapter “unfolding Sarah’s true state of mind” grants Sarah the character a mimetic quality in that the freedoms of reality are granted to her in the realm of the narrative structure. 

[jeanweasley]

Thoughts on the paragraphs below? I tried... I hope this is better than my first attempt.

The internal focalisation of Briony in Passage One, ‘she raised one hand and flexed its fingers and wondered’ as well as her ingenuous question about the reality of life and her own identity: ‘was everyone else really alive as she was?’ is exhibited through the stream of consciousness style which mirrors the modernist writing of Virginia Woolf, but also bears similarities with Jane Austen’s omniscient third person narration evident in Ian McEwan’s inclusion of Catherine Morland in the epigraph, cementing Briony’s ability to construct a storyworld in which she is the highest form of authority, and therefore unable to achieve the deliverance she has so long attempted. Moreover, the aesthetic descriptions in Passage One and Two and the spatial references, in Passage Three ‘back streets of Bloomsbury’ and ‘Inner Circle of Regent’s Park’ compounds McEwan’s credibility as an author and also illustrates his ability to create a functional storyworld in which he is able to elicit cognitive and perceptual responses from the reader.

Briony’s ‘white muslin dress’ amalgamated with her constant questions about life and the long descriptive sentences ‘the mystery was in the instant before it moved…when her intention took effect’ and her short and abrupt musings, ‘it was like a wave breaking’ depicts Briony’s freedom in dissecting her identity, but also showcases her retainment of childish innocence where she has positioned herself centre of an incomprehensible adult world. The availability of time in Passage One contrasts with that of the second extract, where autonomy of free thinking is replaced with solitude and lack of time; the militant imagery of the nurses’ ‘uniform’ and strict obedience to structure ‘under Sister Drummond’ echoes the callous treatment of soldiers in war, attesting to the erosion of identity that the war has created in the soldiers paralleling Briony’s new vocation; furthermore, war has engulfed the opportunity for expressing one’s self where ‘their previous lies were becoming indistinct’ and ‘their minds…emptied to some extent’, and soldiers and nurses alike must defer to a greater authority who treat them not as equals but as numbers fulfilling a purpose.

[maree271]

Literally think everyone here deserves a 50 in lit!! Wow these essays are insane.

Any tips on how to write the entire analysis or things that I want to write in the time frame? Should I skip things that are not important to make sure I cover all 3 passages or should I just talk about smaller things in greater detail??? Any advice?