Term Paper on "Modernism, and How the Literature"

Quoted Instructions for "Modernism, and How the Literature" Assignment:

Using Norton Anthology World literature third addition volume F. Must pass turnitin.com I copied two examples of previous paper as an example of my lack of writing skills. I do not request a technical paper because it will be obvious.

DIRECTIONS FROM INSTRUCTOR:

Ultimately, I want you to understand that literature is a reflection of political, economic, and social realities. It is both a product of these different facets of human life as well as a reflection of them. Literature can also be a call and/ or a catalyst for social change (think of Swift, Moliere, Blake). We read literature to learn about and speak of ourselves as individuals and ourselves as members of a larger group as well as our society as a whole. Basically, literature is an examination of and a reflection of everything that pertains to us and the world around us. That’s really broad, right? The books are broken down into the major periods with the focus on European and then American history (as well as broad sweeping looks at other parts of the world: Asia, the Middle East, etc): The Enlightenment, (Volume D) Revolution (and Romanticism, which we did not cover) (Volume E) Realism, Naturalism, and Symbolism, (which we did not cover) and finally Modernism, Postcolonialism (which we did not cover) and the contemporary world (Volume F) The big picture question is: How does the literature of each period reflect the events and philosophy and social changes of their periods? If you understand the general characteristics of each period listed above and can generally discuss events and trends and the characteristics of the literature of each period and why that literature had those characteristics, you pretty much have it. However, you have done all of this for every period except Modernism and contemporary world literature. Final exam question: Discuss Modernism, and how the literature that is considered to be Modernist literature is representative of the period. Then explain how contemporary world literature comes from Modernism How to answer the final exam question: I would set it up by explaining how we got to Modernism, which will involve some discussion of the periods that precede it, but this is much, much less involved than the previous exam topic. a. Discuss three Modernists and their work. You can bounce around the globe if you wish, but if you do, you need to set up what Modernism is in that particular country. Each country or region has been affected a bit differently due to different economic, political, and cultural contexts. b. Then discuss two contemporary authors. Explain how they represent NOW (or the contemporary world which is from 1968 on.) c. Then discuss the differences between Modernism and contemporary literature. (Hint: the big difference will be between an internal examination, personal reflection and person expression of reality (Modernism) and a focus on political forces and the clash between traditional and new and the uneasy coexistence of cultures and beliefs in this increasingly shrinking world (contemporary, now). d. For extra depth to your paper, you can briefly explain the importance of the Enlightenment and the Revolutionary periods to current thought. How are these periods still with us? d. This is going to be formatted like a paper, (MLA format!) and it will be due on your final exam date, which I am changing because I want to give you extra time: Saturday night, 11:55pm. My grades are due Monday at noon, so I cannot give you more time than that. e. There will be a discussion board on this, so feel free to post questions. I know that this is weird, to know the final topic now, but this way, you can read with a purpose. You know what you have to do, and you can prepare for it. f. I should not have to say this, but I will: Submit to both the final exam dropbox in the course and the final exam dropbox in turnitin.com. g. You must have a Works Cited page. h. Please, please pay attention to your formatting. Watch the video that I have posted. In that video, I explain how to format your papers. i. One last thing. Do not try to do this without reading the works. If you rely on Puchner, you will not get a good grade on this. I want DEEP analysis of the works, not a skimming of the main ideas.

1st paper: Greg Dodge K. Carter English 2333.3002 September 24, 2012 The reality to Satire The Reality of Satire?? Say something about the literature you will be analyzing The eEighteenth century was a period in time thatduring which people, after seeing light at the end of the tunnel, started wanting to know where it was coming from ?This sentence makes no sense. The scientific and mathematical advancements that had been made in previous years, gave logical and factual explanations to the everyday occurrences around them.. They People were no longer giving Providence credit for everything that happened around them and had developed an eager ambition to look further into, not only more causes of the effects, but at themselves for solutions. The aristocracy resisted the notion that anyone other than themselves was capable of thinking for themselves, much like some of our politicians. *****s of the period were able to expose the hypocrisies and inhumane treatment of its society people in a light that could be understood by many different classes of people. Jonathan Swift and Jean-Baptiste Poquelin Moliere were two such *****s., Jonathan Swift, born in the mid seventeen century, is a renowned satirist that who pokes fun at all different stature ofclasses people. “What he said he most wanted was to ‘vex’ his readers with an uncomfortable awareness of the follies of the world.” (Punchner 265) At the time, the English Monarchy sold large tracts of land to rich Protestants aristocrats. The Irish were Catholics, and under the suppression as oppressed people, they were not allowed to hold public offices, join the military , or educate their children. (You need a parallel structure). and the children were not permitted to be educated. Swift is was born to such a Protestant family in Ireland. His father dieds This should be in past tense. young though and his mother moves back to England leaving him to be raised by his uncle, who is less than caring. He is well educated, hangs out with other affluent *****s and begins writing papers and comics that expose the reality of government and society. (265) As you can imagine, Ireland becomes impoverished with the starving and uneducated, and thus invokes a need to makeSwift wrote A A Modest Proposal. Through his satirical wit, Swift describes the situation of the Irish plight and provides a solution. It What is IT? Pronoun Reference problem. is pretty ridiculous in its very nature but plausible in the explanation of how it could be fundamentally and economically viable. Using statistics and logical reasons, along with hear-say confirmations of its acceptance, he proposes using the children as a cash crop. In reality, we know this cannot be a morally correct solution but logically, it could work under the pretenses that we treat the children as a commodity. It’s It is a win- win situation... , rRight? We then begin to sit back and explore the logic and morality of the idea and we discover we must think of another way to resolve a deplorable situation. Does he come out and say to the nobility that this is an age of enlightenment and we should be thinking of ways to better ourselves or that we are equal people in this world and one group of people should not be treated this way regardless of race, ethnicity or religion? No…, but he does accomplish his goal, and we are forced to rationalize that if eating the children is not the answer…,what is? Stop it with the ellipses. It is quite witty the way he sets himself amongst the elite when describing how his suggestions are not merely his own but that he has been told by other, well to do Englishmen, that there is nothing wrong with eating children and that they are actually quite tasty. “A very worthy person, a true lover of his country, and whose virtues I highly esteem, was lately pleased, in discoursing on the matter, to offer a refinement upon my scheme.” (317) He describes all the benefit of his plan in an intellectual way describing how it will reduce the maintenance cost while increasing the capital of the country. Allowing the poor to harvest their own children and sell them to those that are more deserving and can afford finer foods, will give them a bargaining chip. Since most of them have already been stripped of everything, they will have something of value to barter with when they are either short on money or need something to forfeit after becoming delinquent on a debtpt. It would also promote unity in the family. Men will want to stay with a bread winner, the wife who gives birth to the babies, while creating pride in the woman’s ability to contribute to the support of the family. In reality, he is poking fun at the supposed “enlightened” aristocracy, but because he is one of them and suggesting the idea, it becomes merely a modest gesture. The suggestion causes those that are probably most capable of making a change, to ponder the situation in not only an economical aspect light but a moral one. It will take much more creative thinking to resolve this issue, but they have the majority of power to do so. A good comedian can describe a wrong without stating who is to blame or reveal serious flaws in the human nature without offending the particular group that is most likely at fault. They can make light of an issue that with humor and satire and may be seemingly funny but really needs to be addressed. Swift is able to do that with “A Modest Proposal.” He satirically describes horrible a conditions but in a form that is humorous to all that is reading it. He does not point the finger to whom is at fault but allows the reader to come to his or her own conclusions take their own responsibility. Is it the uneducated child that is resorting to stealing or the mother that continues to have more children or the wealthy that continue to suppress them? Men of such enlightenment should be able to come up with a more agreeable and moral solution. Moliere’s Tartuffe is just as cynical about the corruption and hypocrisies in the church. He does not come out and tell everyone that the church is full of a bunch of swindlers, but the hypocritical actions of Tartuffe, who represents pietythe hypocrisy of false piety, sheds a light on this divine authority that most people have come to accept from their priest. Moliere portrays Orgon as a simple and caring person who, while deeply committed to his faith, is blinded by it as well. It is dangerous to contradict the church or to even talk negative about its members and his play is banned. His point in this story is, not so much to make people hate the church or to mistrust all the people that wear a robe awkward structure., but to influence people to open their eyes to the reality that all people are human, especially including priests, and as such, they are prone to use other’s weaknesses to their advantage. Tartuffe uses his position in the church to justify his lust for Elmire and even suggest that heaven gives a wink of approval if his desires are pure. He first suggest that Ggod knows and it is ok and then, when that does not seem to be working fast enough, suggests that as long as nobody knows, then it is ok. When he is trying to seduce Elmire, he tells her, “There’ll be no sins for which we must atone, ’Cause evil exist only when it’s known. Adam and Eve were public in their fall. To sin in private is not to sin at all. (186). He wants her really bad and like the dog that he is, will say whatever he must to get his way with her. I am sure there was weremany a fair lady made to feel part of god’s God’s good work back in the day. I am sure everyone is aware of all the little boys the Vatican has had to pay off in present years also. The character Moliere creates is certainly a hypocrite and gives you the reader justification to question his integrity and that of the church he represents. We learn that Tartuffe is a fraud from the servant in his opening pages. He is soon exposed by the son n law, the son and even his wife. It is only after he has lost everything that Orgon realizes that he should have questioned what he has been taught to never question. Fortunately, the king who is a big supporter in reality, is given a big plug in the play. He is shown to be an enlightened person also, as all us readers certainly are, in having the intuition to look past the black cloak. Orgon is probably representative of most of us at some point in time. We see and hear things but somehow choose not to listen, even against our own best judgment. It is Moliere’s objective to make his readers question the things they are told not to and that they have a duty to look out for their own best interest. Enlightened people are thinkers and, as so, should use reason rather than emotion to make decisions. I find Moliere a bit more cynical, than Swift in his approach to exposing the hypocrisies and realities of a real world but they both induces the same effect. They both reveal very important social issues of the time period in somewhat the same fashion. The ways in which both stories are written allow us to examine the faults of the characters and the situation from the outside. As a third party looking in at Tartuffe’s behavior, the reader is able to criticize the fictional character without actually criticizing a real person or church. We can look at Swift’s crazy idea from a third party as well. While scoffing at the idea of eating all the children, we are unconsciously being forced to examine the reality of starving children. It is easier to pass judgment and suggest solutions to difficult issues when, we as the reader, will not be affected by the outcome. This was what the Age of Enlightenment was about and how Moliere and Swift complimented it. They helped to induce a behavior to question all the things that were going on around them. If it does not feel right or sound right than it probably is not right. The people were persuaded to not look at the church, its leaders or providence anymore for strict guidance but to use the voice of reason and the laws of nature and science to see and explain the hypocritical things in life. The atrocities that they were experiencing or could view going on around them, was not necessarily right just because it was, as Pope suggested, (351) but real events that could be explained and solved. As a reasoned person and in an enlightened society, they had a duty to examine and with all the new developments in science, be able to solve and eradicate all the sufferings of the human race.

Greg, I honestly do not know how to grade this. Your Swift section is terrible. Your Moliere section and your conclusion are very good. It’s like this paper was written by two different people. 72/100 Revise if you wish. The grade will jump up if you get Swift as good as your Moliere section. You could do with a little bit of revision on Moliere as well.

2nd paper revised: Greg Dodge K. Carter English 2333.3002 October 10, 2012 The Reason for Satire: An Analysis of (Titles) The Eighteenth century was a period during which people, after seeing light at the end of the tunnel, were not afraid to walk towards it. Funny first sentence. Scientific and mathematical advancements proved that there were logical and factual explanations for the everyday occurrences .around them. The philosophy that was spreading was that of common sense and that there was more to people’s existence than simply being on earth to follow the orders of the ordained or to accept life as it was. *****s explored the moral and the social issues of the time and wrote about them in satires that grabbed people’s attention, regardless of class. They caught the interest of the peasants because the stories spoke about their hardships but in a humorous way that gave way to optimism. The middle class could relate to the characters, as well, but without assuming that they were the ones being ridiculed. The real purpose for their writings of the Enlightenment authors, the catalyst for the animosity, is the reason for satire. You could not pissThe people in charge were angering everyone else , and the Enlightenment authors used this anger to fuel their creative genius. off the people that were ruling the country. The church still had great influence, and the nobility could ban your their plays, ruin you them financially or have you them killed. These *****s were truly genius in their approach and why they were areso representative of this period. The use of intellect and reverse psychology sheds light on the issues of the day. without shedding too much light on them self. Huh? Jonathan Swift and Jean-Baptiste Poquelin Moliere were two such *****s. Jonathan Swift was born in the mid seventeenth century and had become a renowned satirist. He developed a unique skill of addressing issues in a way that was not offensive or insulting but provocative enough to make people see the need for change. “What he said he most wanted was to ‘vex’ his readers with an uncomfortable awareness of the follies of the world.” (Puchner 265). The English Monarchy, at the time, was selling large tracts of land in Ireland to rich Protestant aristocrats. The Protestants, as a way of suppressing the Catholic Irish people, would not allow the Irish to hold public offices, join the military or educated their children. The country of Ireland became rampant burdened with a population of impoverished men, women and children. Swift is wasborn to such a Protestant family in Ireland but devotes devoted most of his life to writing papers and comics that expose the hypocrisies of the church, the corruption of the government and the follies of society. (Puchner 265). Swift’s, A Modest Proposal, describes the Irish plight and provides a solution. He proposes using the children as a cash crop and says that. aA healthy one year old child is a delicious delicacy that the wealthy and more deserving would be willing to pay for. It is a pretty ridiculous idea in nature and morally wrong to eat your one’s children but with the confirmation of other well-to-do Englishmen, he is able to support a fundamentally sound plan. “A very worthy person, a true lover of his country, and whose virtues I highly esteem, was lately pleased, in discoursing on the matter, to offer a refinement upon my scheme.” (Swift 317) He supports the rest of his argument with statistics that would suggest benefits to the government, as well as to the common people. If No vague you. You are doing this a lot, too. you reduce the amount of children you automatically reduce the maintenance cost and thus increase the general capital of the country. The majority of the poor have already been stripped of anything of value, and so this would provide them an income and an additional resource that could be tapped, if they were to ever run short on money or become delinquent on debpts. The plan would also encourage family unity and thus become a benefit to the common good of the community. Men would want to stay with a bread winner, a woman that could produce more children. This would also create pride in the woman’s ability to contribute to the support of the family. It seems like a win-win situation, right? Swift’s story affects the human psyche and the reader must at least explore the logic and morality of his idea. Is it the uneducated child that is resorting to stealing or the mother that continues to have more children or the wealthy that continue to oppress them? Huh? Is what the uneducated child? Is what the mother? His satirical approach promotes a positive response rather than a response of denial. He does not point the finger at who is at fault but allows the readers to come to their own conclusions of responsibility. Men of such enlightenment should be able to come up with a more agreeable and moral solution. Nice! Moliere’s Tartuffe is just as cynical about the corruption and hypocrisies in the church. He Moliere cannot just come out and say “watch out for falsehood and swindlers,” but, through Tartuffe’s character, he illustrates what could happen when you we live life blindly and never question things involving faith. Tartuffe, who represents the hypocrisy of false piety, sheds a light is a bad example of on the this divine authority that most priest were expected to have. Moliere portrays Orgon as a simple and caring person who, while deeply committed to his faith, is blinded by it as well. ?NiceHis point in this story is not to make people distrust the church or want them to question everything the church represents. He does want though, to influence people to open their eyes to the reality that all people are human, including priests, and as such, they are prone to use others weaknesses to their advantage. Tartuffe uses his position in the church to justify his lust for Elmire. He first says God knows everything and it is ok. He even suggests that heaven might give him a wink of approval if his desires were pure. When this tactic does not seem to be working fast enough, he changes his story altogether and says as long as nobody knows, then it is ok. “There’ll be no sins for which we must atone, ’Cause evil exist only when it’s known. Adam and Eve were public in their fall. To sin in private is not to sin at all. (186) He wants her really bad and like the dog that he is will say just about anything to get his way with her. I am sure there were many a fair lady made to feel part of God’s good work back in the day. I am sure everyone is aware of all the little boys the Vatican has had to pay off in present years, also. The character Moliere creates is certainly a hypocrite and gives the reader justification to question his integrity and that of the church he represents. We learn that Tartuffe is a fraud from the servant in his opening pages. He is soon exposed by the son-i n- law, the son and even his wife. It is only after he has lost everything that Orgon realizes that he should have questioned what he has been taught to never question. Orgon probably represents most of us at some point in time. We see and hear things but somehow choose not to listen, even against our own best judgment. It is Moliere’s objective to create this character bond so we cannot judge Orgon negatively, as we cannot judge ourselves negatively, for believing blindly in a faith. It is the priest who is misrepresenting the faith and the church, that he is sheltered from, that must be looked at. I find Moliere a bit more cynical than Swift, in his approach to exposing the hypocrisies and realities of a real world but they both induces the same effect. They both reveal very important social issues of the time period in somewhat the same fashion. The ways in which both stories are written allow us to examine the faults of the characters and the situation from the outside. As a third party looking in at Tartuffe’s behavior, the reader is able to criticize the fictional character without actually criticizing a real person or church. We can look at Swift’s crazy idea from a third party as well. While scoffing at the idea of eating all the children, we are subconsciously being forced to examine the reality of starving children. It is easier to pass judgment and suggest solutions to difficult issues when, we as the reader, will not be affected by the outcome. This was what the Age of Enlightenment. Moliere and Swift complimented it in similar but also in different ways. They helped to induce a behavior to question all the things that seemed hypocritical or unjust around them. If it does not feel right or sound right than it probably is not right. Society was explaining the laws of nature through scientific methods and the works persuaded the reader to use these methods along with the voice of reason to guide their life.

Thank goodness. This is a good paper. Now where the heck is your works cited page?

96/100 72 + 96 =168/2 = 84/100.