Good and Evil in Billy Budd Essay Example for Free

Good and Evil in Billy Budd Essay Contrast Between Good and Evil in Billy Bud Since the beginning of time, there has always been a tenacious struggle between good and evil. In a particular famous book, The Bible, the continuous clash between good and evil remains evident throughout the work. In Herman Melvilles novel, Billy Budd, symbolism, characterization, and irony are put to use to develop the dramatic contrast between good and evil. Symbolism is used to directly contrast good and evil. The night before Billys hanging, through the rose-tan of his complexion no pallor could have shown. Billy portrays a very pure Christ-like character before his demise. His white garb, and natural glowing of light makes his death seem symbolic for good. Claggort whos brow was of the sort phrenologically associated with more than average intellect symbolically manipulated Billy Budd as did the wisdom of the serpent manipulate Adam. Evil always tries to antagonize what is good. Therefore, Claggort was Billys antagonist throughout Billy Budd. Also symbolic to the novel is the actual demise of both Claggort and Billy Budd. Claggorts death is very short and appropriate to his navel grade. In contrast, Billys death occurs during the dawn where Billy ascended; and ascending took the full rose of the dawn. Claggorts death completely contrasts with the pure death of Billy Budd. Billys death is portrayed as good, conquering, and symbolic, which directly foils that of Claggorts. Not only using symbolism, Melville also uses characterization to contrast good and evil. Characterization is used to contrast the concepts of good and evil. Billy Budd is like a young horse fresh from the pasture suddenly inhaling a vile whiff from some chemical factory. Billys innocence and purity is exterminated at the hands of his main enemy, John Claggort, much such as Adam presumably might have been ere the urbane Serpent wriggled himself into his company. Claggorts silken jet curls and pallor tinged with a faint shade of amber skin even denote evil. Dark traits are often used to express evil, as light and beauty to express good. In contrast to Claggort, Billy Budds welkin-eyes, blonde hair, and tan complexion ultimately portray good. Besides from the use of characterization and symbolism, Melville uses irony to portray the battle of good versus evil. Irony is used to contrast the concepts of good and evil. Billy, the fighting peacemaker kills John Claggort with a blow quick as the flame from a discharged cannon. It is ironic that Billy, this innocent Christ like character loses his composure and ultimately does something evil. Through out the novel Billy Budd is never aware of Claggorts ill will towards him. Even when warned, Jemmy legs is down on you, Billy still can not grasp the concept that evil can happen to him, so when it does he doesnt know how to react. It is ironic that right before Billys hanging, he shouts God Bless Captain Vere even though Vere was the main advocate in the prosecuting of him. It is overall ironic that evil prevails in this novel. Claggort unfortunately got the last laugh. He is able to adulterate Billys purity and innocence in such a way that even the newspapers consider Billy as the criminal [who] paid the penalty for his crime In the end Claggort is portrayed as this martyr who is killed by this evil, and bad person, Billy Budd. This assumption is a major mistake. To develop the dramatic contrast between good and evil in the novel, Billy Budd, Herman Melville uses symbolism, characterization, and irony. Good and evil are a flip of a coin, and separated by a very thin line. The innocent martyr, Billy crossed this line once in the novel, to cause his downfall. After reading Billy Budd the reader ultimately realizes good and evil with out a problem.

Father/Son Relationships in Shakespeares Henry IV, Part One Essay

Father/Son Relationships in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part One    The relationship between a father and his son is an important theme in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part One, as it relates to the two main characters of the play, Prince Hal and Hotspur. These two characters, considered as youths and future rulers to the reader, are exposed to father-figures whose actions will influence their actions in later years. Both characters have two such father-figures; Henry IV and Falstaff for Prince Hal, and the Earl of Northumberland and the Earl of Worcester for Hotspur. Both father-figures for Hal and Hotspur have obvious good and bad connotations in their influence on the character. For example, Falstaff, in his drinking and reveling, is clearly a poor influence for a future ruler such as Prince Hal, and Worcester, who shares Hotspur's temper, encourages Hotspur to make rash decisions. The entire plot of the play is based on which father-figure these characters choose to follow: had they chosen the other, the outcome would have been wholly diff erent. At the start of the play, the reader sees that Prince Hal has been acting in a manner which has disappointed his father. The King compares Hotspur to Hal, saying that Hotspur is à ¬A son who is the theme of honour's tongue,à ® and that à ¬riot and dishonour stain the brow of [Hal] (I.i.3).à ® He even wishes that the two were switched: à ¬Then would I have his Harry, and he mine (I.i.3).à ® The King obviously does not approve of Hal's actions, and believes that, if Hal does not change his ways, he will be a poor successor to the throne. This is quite true, as Hal spends the majority of his time in seedy taverns, associating with what his father calls à ¬rude societyà ® (III.ii.... ...ators to join them, and who sets the wheels of the revolution in motion. The consequences of the Hal and Hotspur's choice in father-figures are indeed what leads the play to its final outcome. Hal, who sides with his father and not Falstaff, becomes a noble prince and redeems himself in the eyes of his father. Hotspur, on the other hand, sides with Worcester, and their collective tempers lead them to make the rash decision to revolt. Their tempers are also responsible for other poor decisions that evade the chance of truce, resulting in the inevitable failure of the rebellion. Indeed, all could have been prevented if Hotspur sided with his father, rather than his uncle, and Hal would have become a desolate criminal had he followed Falstaff. Works Cited Shakespeare, William. Henry IV: part one. Ed. P. H. Davison, New York: Penguin Books, 1996.

1981 Springbok Tour Focus Questions

SPRINGBOk TOUR OF NEW ZEALAND FOCUS QUESTION 1 Why did the game between the waikato rugby team and springbok? the reason why the game was cancelled because 350 protesters ivaded the rugby field after pulling down a fence using sheer force . the crowed were trowing bottles and other objects at the protesters,as a stolen lightplane was aproching the stadium the police called off the game because itwas to unsafe to play with bottles and other objects on the pitch! FOCUS QUESTION 2 Aftermath of the springbok tour!The All Blacks did not tour South Africa until after the fall of the apartheid regime (1990–1994), although after the official 1985 tour was cancelled an unofficial tour did take place in 1986 by a team which included 28 out of the 30 All Blacks players selected for the 1985 tour. These were known both inside and outside the Republic of South Africa as the New Zealand Cavaliers, but often advertised inside South Africa as the All Blacks or alternatively depicted with the Silver Fern! FOCUS QUESTION 3 Background on the springbok tour!A poster advertising a meeting of the Citizens' All Black Tour Association to protest against racially selected All Blacks teams touring South Africa. The Springboks and New Zealand's national rugby team, the All Blacks, have a long tradition of intense and friendly sporting rivalry. From the 1940s to the 1960s, the South African apartheid policies had an impact on team selection for the All Blacks: the selectors passed over Maori players for some All Black tours to South Africa. Opposition to sending race based teams to South Africa grew throughout the 1950s and 60s.Prior to the All Blacks' tour of South Africa in 1960, 150,000 New Zealanders signed a petition supporting a policy of â€Å"No Maoris, No Tour†. The tour occurred however, and in 1969 Halt All Racist Tours (HART) was formed. During the 1970s public protests and political pressure forced on the New Zealand Rugby Union (NZRU) the choice of either field ing a team not selected by race, or not touring the Republic. However, South African rugby authorities continued to select Springbok players by race. As a result, the Norman Kirk Labour Government prevented the Springboks from touring during 1973.In response, the NZRU protested about the involvement of â€Å"politics in sport†. In 1976 the All Blacks toured South Africa, with the blessing of the then newly-elected New Zealand Prime Minister, Robert Muldoon. Twenty-five African nations protested against this by boycotting the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal. In their view the All Black tour gave tacit support to the apartheid regime in South Africa. The All Blacks again failed to win a series in South Africa (they would not do so until 1996, after the fall of apartheid).The 1976 Tour contributed to the Gleneagles Agreement being adopted by the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in 1977. info from wikipedia . http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/1981_South_Africa_rugby_union_t our_of_New_Zealand. pictures from goggle images Ic;vpx=531;vpy=352;dur=2160;hovh=184;hovw=274;tx=155;ty=115;sig=117611310865036074857;page=2;tbnh=141;tbnw=188;start=18;ndsp=24;ved=1t:429,r:14,s:18. http://www. google. co. nz/imgres? q=1981+springbok+tour+protests;hl=en;sa=X;biw=1366;bih=653;tbm=isch;tbnid=CdGqd-_vJn5rNM:;imgrefurl=http://www. stuff. co. nz/sport/rugby/gallerie.

Essay about St. Anselm of Canterbury - 1110 Words

In the following I intend to prove that the ontological argument is in and of itself, insufficient in proving that God exists. There are a few problems with the argument that I will be discussing in detail in an attempt to illustrate exactly why ‘The Ontological Argument’ is unsatisfactory. The Definition of ‘Greater’ St. Anselm of Canterbury defined God as â€Å"that-than-which-a-greater-cannot-be-thought† (Bailey, 2002). The problem with this definition is that the term ‘greater’ is surely up for interpretation. The term ‘greater’ requires a comparison between itself and one or more things, which could pose a problem for Anselm’s argument; however Professor Thorp states that the only difference between these two things is that one exists†¦show more content†¦One person may perceive their ‘real beer’ as a Corona, a Molson or other, and still their ‘real beer’ is better than their ‘imaginary’ Corona or Molson or other. Whose beer is better is merely a preference and no amount of reasoning can safely or conclusively determine a ‘greater’ between the two. This is exactly the problem with Anslem’s ‘Ontological Argument’ and is sufficient in itself to prove that even with the accept ed definition of God, â€Å"that-than-which-none-greater-can-be-thought† (Bailey, 2002), Anselm cannot prove that a God exists, but rather, that each individuals perceptions of their own God in their mind must exist. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; With regards to the above objection, I do admit that I have not disproved Anselm’s argument to the point where I could say that his first two premises of his argument being true, that God doesn’t have to exist. My objection only stands to establish that Anselm has failed only to prove the existence of a single and only God in existence. He has not proved the existence of a God but of everyone’s personal view of God in their own minds. I believe my next objection causes more serious problems for Anselm’s Ontological argument. My second problem with Anselm’s Ontological argument resides once again in Anselm’s use of the word ‘Greater’ but this time in a very different context. In Anselm’s Argument, ‘Greater’ implies infinity. ForShow MoreRelatedSt. Anselm Of Canterbury2376 Words   |  10 Pagesphilosophers have been concerned with proving the existence of god, and from this has sprouted many arguments attempting to prove or disprove god’s existence from a wide variety of different perspectives. St. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury has proved a true pioneer in the study of the philosophy of religion. Anselm provided one of the most crucial and influential solutions to solving the mystery of god’s existence, the Ontological Argument. While there were many different arguments (along with their originators)Read MoreThe Cathedral Of Canterbury Cathedral1209 Words   |  5 PagesGreek ‘Kathedra’ meaning seat. The Canterbury Cathedral is located in England, United Kingdom. The Cathedral is one of the most famous and oldest Christian structures in England. 597 AD was the founding of Canterbury Cathedral. The cathedral’s physical context is located in a sprawl area meaning ther e is low density residential, there are many other attractions around such as the theatre,hotel and museum. Saint Augustine was the first ever Archbishop of Canterbury. The style of the Cathedral is Gothic;Read MoreAssess the Ontological Argument818 Words   |  4 Pagesargument demonstrates the existence of God. (30 marks) The ontological argument was first formulated by St. Anselm in the 11th century. It argues the existence of God from a deductive and a priori stance. God is a being than which none greater can be conceived. This is the response given by St Anselm to the fool in the psalm who believed there was no God. St Anselm the Archbishop of Canterbury and of the Benedictine Order explained that for God to exist in the mind he would not be the greatest beingRead MoreSummary and Analysis of Various Documents1852 Words   |  7 Pageswrite an essay analyzing separately each of the texts in the attached documents. I would like each analysis to start with a summary followed by a transition to analysis of the document. From the Prosologion, Anselm of Canterbury 1077, Hopkins and Richardson trans. (Chaps. 2-5) Summary: St. Anselm argues the existence of God based on the following premises: God exists in our understanding which means that the concept of God exists as an idea in our mind. Anything that exists in our understanding hasRead MoreEssay on The Ontological Argument for the Existence of God1545 Words   |  7 Pagesintroduced by Anselm of Canterbury in his book Proslogion. Anselms classical argument was based on two principals and the two most involved in this is St Anselm of Canterbury as previously mentioned and Rene Descartes. The ontological argument argues that if you understand what it means to talk about God, you will see His existence is necessarily true. Anselm defined God as that than which nothing greater can be conceived, hence God must exist. Anselm also believedRead MoreQueen Matilda Of England And The Marriage Table A Dowry Of Estates1168 Words   |  5 PagesPope supported William in his invasion of England in 1066. William claimed he was going to revive the Anglo-Saxon church and bring it back in line with religious orthodoxy. Additionally, the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time, was a pluralist, holding the sees of Worcester and Canterbury concurrently, and, per Duke William, King Harold supported the sins of the Archbishop. The Church was eager to see Duke William return the Kingdom of England to the Churches authority. William fulfilled theRead MoreThe Arguments For The Existence Of God1056 Words   |  5 Pagesthat he s a perfect being meaning He is flawless, ideal and he has all the required or desirable elements, qualities, and characteristics. The ontological argument was first concocted by St Anselm in the eleventh century, his book Proslogium, Chapter 2. Anselm was a Benedictine monk, Archbishop of Canterbury, and one of the great medieval philosopher-theologians. In his argument, he derives the existence of god from his concept, which is being than which no greater can be conceived. He reasonedRead MoreThe s Ontological Proof For The Existence Of God Essay1134 Words   |  5 Pages1077-1078, St. Anselm of Canterbury, introduced the first formulation of his ontological proof for the existence of God. In an effort to gain a deeper knowledge and acquaintance with his creator, Anselm set out to logically deduce God’s existence from the very definition of God. In the Proslogion he writes, â€Å"God is that which a greater cannot be thought. Whoever understands this properly, understands that this being exists in such a way that he cannot, even in thought, fail to exist† (Anselm, 101). Read MoreAnshelm ¬Ã‚ ¥s Proof of God ¬Ã‚ ¥s Existence1466 Words   |  6 Pagesissue to this day! In the following I will commit myself to the ab ove-mentioned question by firstly reconstructing Anselm ´s proof of God ´s existence and secondly considering his position in the light of the critique put forward by Gaunilo, Aquinas and Kant. St. Anselm (1033-1109) was an Italian philosopher and monk who later left his country to become Archbishop of Canterbury. As Anselm firmly believed in God, he wanted to prove God ´s existence through use of logic and reason and thus set out to demonstrateRead MoreOntological Argument999 Words   |  4 Pageson pure reason alone. They attempt to show that we can deduce God’s existence from, so to speak, the very definition of God. St. Anselm of Canterbury proposed the first and most well known ontological argument in 1078 in his Proslogion, but it was actually Immanuel Kant, an 18th century German philosopher, who first called the argument â€Å"ontological.† In his argument, Anselm defines God as â€Å"that than which nothing greater can be conceived.† This can be interpreted as defining â€Å"God† as maximal perfection