Chinua Achebe vs. Margret Atwood Essay Example for Free

Chinua Achebe vs. Margret Atwood Essay Compare the ways that vultures are portrayed and used in the poems by Margaret Atwood and Chinua Achebe. By Jessica Tilbrook. Chinua Achebe and Margret Atwood grew up in two very different environments. They were born almost a decade apart, yet they both managed to construct two very meaningful poems about vultures. Achebe was born in Nigeria in 1930. In 1967 the region of Biafra broke away from Nigeria. Achebe became a devoted supporter of Biafra independence and served as ambassador for the people of the nation. But to get this point there was a 3 year war of independence ravage. Chinua Achebe witnesses some horrific scenes. He saw babies, children and adults starving to there death. He saw his own people from Biafra killing others from Nigeria. He saw how loving people have the capacity to be evil and vice versa according to Achebes version on the poem vultures. Chinua Achebe believed that any good work of art should have a purpose. Achebes vultures defiantly had a purpose, as it shows how even evil, vile creatures like vultures have the capacity to love. Throughout Achebes poem there is a negative feel. From the very start of the poem it is unpleasant and quite graphic in the description of the vultures. In the poem it occasionally refers to love as one of the vultures inclines affectionately. This suggests that even vile creatures can have the capacity to love. Chinua Achebe uses many techniques throughout his poem vultures. The structure of the poem has no rhyming scheme or lines of the same lengths. The lines are written short, probably on purpose as you can then appreciate the horror, by reading it slower, creating tension. Achebes poem isnt really in Stanzas it is more split into four sections; this is probably done to keep the flow of evil and ideas running through the poem. There is also a lack of punctuation throughout the poem, this could have been done on purpose to keep the poem flowing, like the sections. Chinua Achebe choose to right in past tense for the description of the vultures, as its easier to understand what vultures are like whereas the Belsen Commandant is described in the present tense. This might of been done to remind us that evil is all around us now, and everyone has the capacity to be evil. The word strange on its own, at the beginning of the second section makes us pause, and think about whats actually going to be strange, which makes you think about the whole section. Throughout Achebes poem there is a lot of imagery a good example of this is Belsen Commandant a mass murderer and his children calling him Daddy, not father. This is probably done so you can visualise how the children have no idea of what there father has actually done, and they are treating him like normal. This is quite emotional to read, as you can imagine this really happening. Another example of Achebes imagery is the metaphors he uses to describe death and horror. In the first section it says vulture perching high on broken bones of a dead tree. This makes the atmosphere more intense, and builds up the tension from the very beginning. There is some alliteration in the poem, but there are not many references to sound. I think Achebe wants to concentrate on more visual images rather than sound effects to suggest his ideas. I liked Achebes version of the poem vultures. It had a very meaningful purpose, which is what Achebe wanted to achieve. He wanted to use vultures as a vehicle to get people to understand that even the most loving of people have the capacity to be evil. I think he used vultures as a very successful vehicle at getting his point across. I also think that this poem is ambiguous on one hand, you could say that even the cruellest of creatures show even the tiniest amount of love, but on the other hand, that even the most loving creatures have potential to be even the slightest bit evil. The second poem called vultures was written my Margret Atwood. She was born in Ottawa, Ontario in 1939. She was a daughter of a forest entomologist, and spent part of her early years in the bush of North Quebec. Atwood is the joint honorary president of the rare bird club of birdlife international. The main message of this poem is how life comes of death. So basically the cycle of life, and even from the most horrific things in life, can bring something extraordinary out of it. Throughout Atwoods poems there are references to death, such as hung and bones. This does not give a good vibe to the poem. Atwood uses several metaphors throughout. Then theyre hyenas, raucous around the kill, flapping their black umbrellas. This is two metaphors in one sentence. She describes the vultures as hyenas which is not only a good comparison but good use of imagery. Also Atwood says the vultures were flapping their black umbrellas this makes them out to seem huge evil animals. The structure of Atwoods poem is done very well, as she occasionally puts odd words on a separate line to make you think about the poem in more depth. The poem is sort of in stanzas but there isnt maybe, which helps the poem keep flowing. All of the lines in the poem are roughly the same length, apart from the occasional odd word. I think it makes the poem easier to read, and get the rhyme flowing at the right pace. Margret Atwood uses a variety of meaningful and powerful words. For example carnage violate gluttonous all these words have a negative impact on vultures. As they are explaining why and how they are vile creates. But some people might say that the way vultures act is completely natural. This is because it is natural for them to eat, which means killing other animals, to feed themselves and there family. Which shows this poem is also quite ambiguous. There arent many references to sound throughout Atwoods version of Vultures. But she does say vultures snigger at funerals. And sniggering refers to sound. This also implies vultures are vile creature, as it is inappropriate to horribly giggle at a funeral. I think that Margret Atwood successfully used vultures as a good vehicle to show how life comes out of death, even in the most horrible circumstances. I thought both Chinua Achebe and Margret Atwoods poems both had very different meanings, but both shows contrasts between humans and vultures. In my opinion Chinua Achebes version of vultures was the best used vehicle to get his point across. As he point his point across very well, and he achieved his purpose that any good work of art should have a purpose. So I think Chinua Achebes poem just slightly had an edge over Margret Atwoods because of Achebes aims for his poem.

Conflict between Hindus and Muslims :: essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  India is the center of a very serious problem in the world today. It’s a very diverse place with people from many different religious backgrounds, who speak many different languages and come from many different regions. They are also separated economically. Two of the country’s religious sects, Muslims and Hindus, have been in conflict for hundreds of years. Their feelings of mistrust and hatred for each other are embedded in all those years and will not leave easily. What’s most disturbing is that there seems to be no plan for reconciliation available. There are numerous reasons for this conflict.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Power struggles amongst the two groups are ever present and each group thinks the other is out to get them. Hindus comprise the majority of the population of India at eighty percent while Muslims are a minority, making up only fourteen percent, which is a problem in itself. The feeling of being dominated by the majority comes from being a part of the minority. To complicate things even more is the controversy that surrounds Ayodhya, a holy place in Gujarat claimed by both groups. The Babri Masjid, a Muslim temple in Ayodhya was burned to the ground by Hindu extremists in 1992 and caused a wave of violence that resulted in the loss of over two thousand lives. These Hindu extremists believe the temple rests on the birthplace of Ram, one of the Hinduism’s most revered deities. They want a temple built on the site to commemorate Ram’s birth. Muslims in turn want the Babri Masjid rebuilt in the same spot. Neither side wants to give in and are currently fi ghting on.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The most threatening conflict between Hindus and Muslims is the province of Kashmir. This is where the decision to divide India into India and Pakistan seems to have been a terrible mistake. Kashmir, which is the only Muslim majority city in India, lies between the divided India and Pakistan. After India’s independence in the 1940’s, Kashmir had to choose to either unite with India or Pakistan. The Prince of Kashmir chose India but Pakistan invaded the province soon after and have occupied part of Kashmir since then. Controversy still surrounds the province today because naturally, Muslims want to control it. While many Muslims relocated to Pakistan and the Hindus to India, half of the Muslim population was left in India and their relations did not improve after being partially separated.

Las Siete Partidas: Laws on Jews, 1265 Essay

Las Siete Partidas was a work commissioned by King Alfonso X in 1265. It introduced law codes which only took effect in Castile a century later. These law codes, which were based on earlier feudal, civil, and canon laws, were hostile to Jews. The conditions placed on Muslim Moors, however, were even more severe than those placed on the Jews (Muslims, for instance, were prohibited from having mosques. ) The focus of this essay will be on excerpts taken from Las Siete Partidas which deal primarily with the Jewish people. The â€Å"Laws on Jews† were an attempt to manage the costs and benefits of living with a Jewish minority. Laws which served to control the spread of the Jewish minority forbid miscegenation: â€Å"Jews who live with Christian women†¦shall be put to death. † Jews were also forbidden from proselytizing: â€Å"Moreover, a Jew should be very careful to avoid preaching to, or converting any Christian†¦. † Socializing with Jews was prohibited: â€Å"†¦we forbid any Christian†¦to invite a Jew or Jewish†¦to eat or drink together†¦. † Jews were prohibited from owning slaves or oppressing Christians. Some laws were based on false allegations which claimed that Jews were engaging in human sacrifice (blood libel). Blaming Jews for Christ’s crucifixion (deicide) led to further anti-Semitism. Some of the laws were designed to protect Jews. Jews were protected on Saturday (Sabbath) as well as in their place of worship (synagogue. ) Jews were prohibited from leaving their homes on Good Friday (days on which Christians were hostile towards Jews. ) Some laws served not only to protect Jews, but were degrading as well. For instance, Jews had to wear a Jewish badge to distinguish them in public: â€Å"†¦in order to avoid the offenses and evils†¦all Jews†¦shall bear some distinguishing mark†¦. † A law which requires Jews to identify themselves with a badge implies that Jews and Christians were not so different racially, but separate peoples in terms of their history, culture, and language. The Christian community in Castile, in order to maintain power over their population, introduced laws which would ensure that the Jewish minority would not grow. These laws were at times degrading and hostile towards Jews. However, there were attempts to protect and appease Christian hostility towards Jews. It would prove to be a challenge to maintain a balance between denigrating the Jewish community – in an attempt to check its growth – and making use of its influence and power (King Alfonso made use of Jewish doctors and bankers. ) It would not be unfair to ask whether the conflicting relationship between Christians and Jews was due to the fact that the Jews were in fact a nation within a Christian nation. Moreover, if the Christian community in Castile recognized the Jewish people to be a nation, then they may have felt threatened by the possibility of the reestablishment of a Jewish state.

The Crucible By Arthur Miller - 998 Words

Makoa Martin Mrs.Lorusso American Literature 4 December 2015 In the novel The Crucible by Arthur Miller, the main character Abigail Williams is presented as a mischievous girl who feels superior over many. She is responsible for the court trials, accusations, and deaths of many people in the town of Salem, Massachusetts. Abigail is the puppeteer, who pulls the strings to deceive and twist every accusation that is thrown at her. She uses threats and intense behavior to control her friends around her, as many accuse each other for performing witchcraft. Abigail is quite the sinner rather than a saint, as she creates almost all the complications in the town. Along with the help of the girls around her, they lie and name people who they†¦show more content†¦You mistake yourself, uncle!† (Miller 11). At this time, Abigail has creates more chaos to occur with this lie towards Parris, making him want to further investigate with the help of Reverend Hale. Their house servant Tituba, along with the rest of the girls are soon after quest ioned about the incident. Before this, her friends are witness to Betty telling Abigail that she saw her drink chicken blood: â€Å"You did, you did! You drank a charm to kill John Proctor’s wife! You drank a charm to kill Goody Proctor† (Miller 18). Abigail is outraged that she would say that out loud, and she then threatens all her friends to never speak of it again. She scares them all by saying she will kill them if the words gets out, and they must lie to any that ask from now on. In this scene, Abigail uses extreme intimidation to threaten all the girls so her name stays clean. Act one of The Crucible, is full of moments of Abigail acting like a complete sinner, who only thinks of herself. Manipulation and lies from Abigail and her friends are demonstrated when the questioning at the Parris house occurs. Upstairs, the girls deny all of what was witnessed and begin naming people who have seen the devil. When questioned by Hale, Abigail directly accuses Tituba for everything by saying that she makes her drink blood and tempts her to sin; She made me do it! She made Betty do it! (Miller 43). Soon after, Abigail and Betty begin by shouting out that they were