Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
In this essay I will be looking at two stories one written in the nineteenth century "The signalman" and the other in the twentieth century "Lamb to the Slaughter". I will look at these two stories and compare all the similarities and differences between them, especially in terms of style, content and language. At the beginning of Dahl's "Lamb to the Slaughter" Dahl sets the scene very well by using a lot of adjectives, this gives the reader a better description of where and when the story is set "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight "“ hers and the one by the empty chair opposite." "There was a slow smiling air about her" From these quotes we can see that Dahl has set the scene and it is happy and relaxed. At the beginning of "The Signalman" Dickens begins with speech, this makes you want to read on I think, he also uses the narrator to make the story more interesting. These are two very different ways of beginning a story, the readers expectation depends on how they interpret the beginning but I think that Dahl tried to make the reader ask them self who is this woman waiting why is she so happy, but Dickens on the other hand wants the reader to think who is this shouting who is this person telling the story, both beginnings make you want to read on. Dahl creates suspense by building the scene and using a lot of adjectives, this helps build up the suspense very well. Dickens builds suspense by keeping the characters very secretive so the reader is always asking questions so they will read on this I think is a very good way of building suspense. We aren't told what Patrick says to Mary in "Lamb to the Slaughter" because this would be a bit of a predictable story, I think not being told also creates more suspense. Where "Lamb to the slaughter" is set at home adds to the story it is homely but at the same time deadly because anything can happen behind closed doors "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the two table lamps alight "“ hers and the one by the empty chair opposite." "The Signalman" is set in a valley like place on a train track this sets a scary mood because down there anything could happen "his post was in as solitary and dismal a place as ever I saw". Both of the stories were written at different times "Lamb to the Slaughter" in the twentieth century and "The signalman" in the nineteenth century so the styles are very different. "Lamb to the slaughter" is written in the third person and so there is lots of direct speech, but "The Signalman is written in the first person and so there is not really any direct speech. I think direct speech is better and adds more to the story. I think the language used by Dickens, because it is older makes the story more eerie. The stories do have different purposes I think they both have morals but they are very different in the way that I think Dahl wrote his story with a moral but also made the story funny to prove that not all stories have to be serious to have a moral. On the other hand, Dickens wrote his story to warn people. Dickens didn't support new technology like trains and so wanted to warn people about the terrible tragedies that could happen. Dahl, on the other hand, wanted to express that even if you love someone they can still make you angry enough to kill them. I think both of the authors use the same sort of main characters even though the stories were completely different! Both of the characters had been very nervous and unsure about themselves. I think the authors used violence and death to put across their stories because it grabs people's attention and makes them think about what is going on in the stories. I don't think it is very important that the stories are written in the First person or the third person "she might as well have hit him with a steel club" "I was not sure, I told him that I did fully understand" these ways of telling the story are just as good as each other. Dickens wrote about a train killing someone because people were afraid of trains in those days, in 1866 trains were relatively a new invention. Dickens didn't support new technology and trains so in his story he could express his dislike for train and warm people of what they could do. Dahl's massage had more of a moral to it the concerns about the rights and wrongs murder. He used Mary Maloney as an example that murder is a spur of the moment thing and you can even use the anger to hurt someone you love. This shows that both writers suggested in their stories that new technology is not always helpful for example trains, forensic science-finger printing etc. For the time we are in now Dahl is more up to date and writes for a more modern audience and often his work is written for television and radio, he would assume that his readers would know what a typical household would look like because they would have seem many on the television. This is because Dahl's story was written in 1979 when the TV and radon had been invented "she carried it upstairs, holding the thin bone-end of it with both her hands, and she went through the living room she saw him." This quote does not use a lot of description about what the living room and stairs etc looked like because it would be the same as on TV every other suburban household. Dickens wrote his story in a lot more detail because people only had access to books and written words they would need to build a picture of this story in their imaginations, and because this story was a ghost story this would have thrilled and excited them. Televisions were not invented when this story was written in 1866 "there was a fire, a desk for an official book in which he had to make certain entries, a telegraphic instrument with its dial, face, and needles, and a little bell of which he had spoken." This quote uses a lot of description because if you had a TV you would have probably seen an example of a signalman box or a little hut before but because the television hadn't been invented Dickens had to use a lot of description. I have found the difference between these two stories are, "The signalman" is supernatural "Lamb to the Slaughter" is not, both writers have a serious but different purpose for writing their stories, both writers suggest that modern science and technology don't give you all the answers in life, both have central characters who have seem to have "lost their minds", both writers involve violence and death in their stories to draw the readers attention, and the ending to both stories had a twist which in both of the stories I did not expect. "Lamb to the Slaughter" is very funny but at the same time ends on a cliff hanger, but "The signalman" is not really a cliff hanger but leaves you thinking.
0 User(s) Rated!
Words: 1256 Views: 163 Comments: 0
In this essay I will be looking at two stories one written in the nineteenth century "The signalman" and the other in the twentieth century "Lamb to the Slaughter". I will look at these two stories and compare all the similarities and differences between them, especially in terms of style, content and language. At the beginning of Dahl's "Lamb to the Slaughter" Dahl sets the scene very well by using a lot of adjectives, this gives the reader a better description of where and when the story is set "the room was warm and clean the curtains drawn, the...
but different purpose for writing their stories, both writers suggest that modern science and technology don't give you all the answers in life, both have central characters who have seem to have "lost their minds", both writers involve violence and death in their stories to draw the readers attention, and the ending to both stories had a twist which in both of the stories I did not expect. "Lamb to the Slaughter" is very funny but at the same time ends on a cliff hanger, but "The signalman" is not really a cliff hanger but leaves you thinking.

Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

Charles Dickens aimed to convey messages...Charles Dickens aimed to convey messages about social problems in his writing and was a social reformer. Hard Times, first published in 1854, is a prime example of his ideas that with the introduction of industrialisation, humans qualities would be driven out and be reached with an utilitarian philosophy "“ where there was no place for fancy. Dickens criticises this. He believed that each human was different. He believed that people required a balance between fact and fancy to have a 'healthy' effect on society. Dickens uses contrasting pairs to show what he approves and disapproves of. One of the contrasting pairs used by Dickens to criticise utilitarianism is Cecilia Sissy Jupe and Bitzer. Their appearance is completely different. In the classroom, Sissy is described to be a "dark eyed and dark haired" girl when the sunlight hits her, but when the same ray of light hits Bitzer, he is "light hair and light eyed". It is as if the utilitarian approach to education has sucked Bitzer's life, making him seem unhealthy. They also contrast in their answers in the classroom. When asked to define a horse, Sissy is "thrown into the greatest alarm by this demand." It is obvious that she is not used to such as matter-of-fact way of education. However, when Bitzer is asked the same question, he says almost mechanically, "Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinden, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too"¦" Dickens disapproves of the utilitarian education approach, as Bitzer seems to have no imagination, no life, and no childhood. He seems to a robot, just giving definitions when asked. Unlike Sissy, Bitzer only knows the 'utilitarian lifestyle', and therefore does not have a clue about the fanciful side of life. It would also have to be said that Sissy is having difficulty adjusting to the utilitarian lifestyle, as she answers questions from the heart. "'What is the first principle of this science'"¦ the answer, 'To do unto others as I would that they should do unto me.'" But I believe that if Bitzer was taken off to the circus, then he would also not be able to cope with the laughter, excitement and with the people at the circus. Dickens approves of Sissy's values, whereas he does not like the way Bitzer has been raised as a mini-adult in a "practical" way, taking away his human qualities and replacing them with mechanics. Another pair that Dickens uses to disapprove of the utilitarian life is through the acts and results of the parents, the "eminently practical" Mr. Thomas Gradgrind, and the circus clown Mr. Signor Jupe. Mt. Gradgrind believes that children, including his pupils and children, are "little vessels" ready to be filled with "imperial gallons of facts." On the other hand, according to Sissy, Mr. Jupe was a loving and understanding father that appreciated the importance of the fact and fancy balance. Mr. Gradgrind only wants his children to know about the factual side of life whereas Mr. Jupe wanted his daughter to have a balanced life. This is evident as Jupe put Sissy in a school. It seems as though Gradgrind does not care about his children's lives. For example, he marries off Louisa without consulting her feeling, because according to Gradgrind feelings are not "eminently practical." This is completely different to the fathering of Jupe. Jupe, ran away from her daughter for her benefit, as he did not want to live with a clown who could not producing laughter; a failure. The effects of fathering can be seen in the attitudes of their offspring. Tom Gradgrind, can wait to leave home in Book One, calling it a "Jaundice Jail" "“ unhealthy and diseased. Louisa does not care about her life anymore, and compares it to a fire. On the other hand, Sissy is caring and pleasant. Dickens is appalled at Coketown, and describes it in disgust. He condemns the architecture of the town. "It was a town of machinery and tall chimneys"¦ The jail might have been the infirmary, the infirmary might have been the jail, the town-hall might have been either, or both, or anything else, for anything that appeared to the contrary in the graces of their construction." The town is monotonous; featureless. It is "severally workful." Dickens also disapproves of the town river, saying that it "ran purple with ill-smelling dye." He is not only attacking that unnaturalness of the town, but saying it is not environmentally friendly. Coketown is described as a boring town, with roads that are all the same, the people all the same and the building made all of "red brick." On the other hand, Dickens describes the circus favourably. It is totally fanciful, and not one bit "eminently practical". It holds lots of different characters, all of which are friendly and emotional, including Mr. Sleary, who's philosophy is to "make the betht of uth: not the wurtht!" All the people in the circus use colloquial words, saying that Dickens is indicating that not all people need to proper and matter-of-fact. Dickens approves of the life of fancy more than the life of fact as he describes things such as the circus in a favourable light, unlike people such as Mr. Gradgrind, Bounderby and M'Choakumchild. Dickens tries to make the reader think that the best way of bringing up children is to give them a balance of fact and fancy in their life. This is being threatened because of the industrial revolution. His method of criticism is effective at times, such as when Sissy moves in with the Gradgrinds, she is lost of colour and seems unhealthy.   

Charles Dickens aimed to convey messages about social problems in his writing and was a social reformer. Hard Times, first published in 1854, is a prime example of his ideas that with the introduction of industrialisation, humans qualities would be driven out and be reached with an utilitarian philosophy –...

Words: 987 View(s): 168 Comment(s): 0
Macbeth is one of... Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's greatest tragedies. It is a story telling the tragic story of Macbeth and how he was led to his death. He was full of bravery, courage, determination, and ambition, but his ambition was his downfall. He was told his fate and he had a promising future, but his ambition soon turned into greed. He tried to take matters into his own hands and that was wrong. Macbeth is a basically good man who is troubled by his conscience and at the same time is ambitious and murderous. He is led to evil initially by the witches" predictions and then by his wife"s wishes, which he loves. His obsession over the kingship shows a certain kind of selfishness. The play also contains a lot equivocations, which means Macbeth's character, can be misinterpreted in many ways. But I am sure of one thing Macbeth's characters changes a lot through the play due to his ambition and greed. When the play starts at the scene of the battle, you can tell Macbeth is very important and a trust worthy man. "What he hath lost, noble Macbeth hath won". He wins the battle and fights without help of the army. At this point I have considered Macbeth is very brave and honourable man. He is reputation in the play at this point is thought to be very noble and honest. He also handed a title for his gratitude by King Duncan. Which shows he is a highly respected soldier. The turning point in Macbeth's life and also in play is when he meets the witches for the first time. When his prophecies are told that is when the ambition takes over. Act one, scene Three First Witch: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane of Glamis. Second Witch: All hail Macbeth, hail to thee Thane of Cawdor. Third Witch: All hail Macbeth, that shalt be King hereafter. This point in the play is defiantly at a great importance, because this is what led to so bad and wrong. But going back to the prophecies, they are enough to turn anyone's aspirations on. At this point I would say Macbeth is more confessed than being ambitious. I say this because, Macbeth knows that somebody is all ready the Thane of Cawdor and he knows somebody is already inline for kingship. But I do think he is curious and fascinated. Shakespeare is being very cleaver and devious by bringing the witches in, and setting a plot. I think the biggest change to Macbeth character came when he heard the news that he was now given the title. This brought great mischief in the play. "And for an earnest of a greater honour, He blade me, from him, call thee Thane of Cawdor"¦ When Macbeth heard this news he immediately was amazed and pleased. He started thinking about the prophecies and knew the first two came true. This put his mind in doubt, and also his ambitious side started to take over. At this point Macbeth moral side and honesty are still there; he has no thoughts of anything dreadful or bad. I think Macbeth is more excited then being scheme full. Macbeth has not changed an awful a lot, the only thing that has changed according to me is his state of mind. The most influence on Macbeth's character came from his wife. Macbeth's wife is very strong-minded and has no sympathy or humanity. I think she as big role to play in Macbeth's change in character and mind-set. When Macbeth declines killing Duncan because of his guilt and moral. Lady Macbeth questions his man hood and drains his fears away. Act two, scene two Lady Macbeth "Who dares receive it other, As we shall make grief's and clamour roar, Upon death"? My idea of this act is very strong, as I believe it to be the reason, why Macbeth turned so evil and dreadful. I think Lady Macbeth managed to turn Macbeth conscience against him. She denied him of fear and pushed him until he broke. As she as denied her self of kindness she is very persuasive in her role to lure him to evil. Macbeth character at this point is very distressed and bewildered, and as started to crack up. After he killed king Duncan, he shows his guilty conscience. ""¦will all great Neptune's ocean wash this blood clean from my hand? No"¦" I feel that Macbeth defiantly knows right from wrong. This quote is explaining that his deed is unforgivable, and not even repentance will bring him back to what he was before. Macbeth guilty conscience proves he was a good man, and is hunted by what he as done. He is troubled a lot by this guilty conscience thought the play. " Macbeth shall sleep no more." Macbeth is so haunted by his guilty conscience that he as murdered sleep. At point he is so troubled that he wishes he were dead instead of Duncan. Macbeth character has started to become so week and evil. He is so frightened of what he has done yet he stops at nothing to satisfy him self. When he realises that his kingship is not worth little because he will not have any children to carry on his generation. He realises that he is given a fruitless crown meaning nothing. He therefore decides to kill Banquo and his son Flance. Macbeth's character as started to turn into a monster and he no longer the charter we know. He as lost his honourable side and moral, he as become so evil that he stops at nothing. When Macbeth decides to kill Banquo and his son, Macbeth becomes devious. Knowing that he suffering the effects of killing king Duncan he still willing to kill again to fulfil his kingship role. He as murdered his own sleep and cannot hold his guilt but yet he still willing to kill more. When Macbeth sees Banquo's ghost, you see how troubled his mind has become, he now haunted by his own imagination. I think Macbeth as lost his way to good and now as become a tragic hero. He no longer posses his kind heated feelings, he as become evil like Ladymacbeth. I think the main reason Macbeth carry's on killing is because he believes that there is no way back. Its like his mind at times, as been taken over by the devil him self. Act Three, Scene Five "¦I am blood so stepp'd in so far, that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er This quote sums it all up, Macbeth believes it easier to kill than to stop and repent. He so far in hell it is easier to go to hell than reach heaven. That is another a way of putting it. Macbeth evens admits that he has changed, but he thinks there is no way back. Macbeth character at this point as changed completely, he no longer the man we knew. He as become ruthless and cruel, he thinks he all-powerful. Macbeth I driven by other forces beyond his control, he become trapped. When Macbeth goes to see the witches again, they him told apparitions that change his character. These apparitions change his character for the worse. Macbeth is broken down man, and the apparitions told to him leads him to his own death. Act Four, Scene one First Apparition: Macbeth, Macbeth, Macbeth: Beware Macduff"¦ Second Apparition: Be bloody, bold, and resolute: Laugh to scorn The power of a man: for none of women born shall Macbeth. Third Apparition: Be lion- mettled, proud and take no care: Who chafes, who frets, or where conspirers are: Great Birnam Wood, to high Dunsinane Hill shall come against him. These apparitions make Macbeth think he unstoppable and invisible. They make think he all-powerful and bold. Macbeth character as not changed the sense of good and evil at this point, but has made his attitude change towards being vulnerable. He now thinks he safe and untouchable. In conclusion, I think the major reason Macbeth turned ghastly was because witches plotted against him. Lady Macbeth was the main reason why Macbeth become so, unmoral and unsympathetic. She persuaded Macbeth to kill Duncan, and drained him of kindness. And Macbeth ambitious side took control and lead him to evil. When Macbeth realised that had done so wrong he decided carry on. He did this because he thought it was as terrible to stop than to carry on. Macbeth character had changed into someone completely different when he was told the apparitions. These apparitions lead him to his own death.   

Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's greatest tragedies. It is a story telling the tragic story of Macbeth and how he was led to his death. He was full of bravery, courage, determination, and ambition, but his ambition was his downfall. He was told his fate and he had...

Words: 1484 View(s): 259 Comment(s): 0