Description BOOK: The Handmaid’sTale by Margaret Atwood To show Extended Understanding: Book Comparison: Compare and contrast(organizer attached) this book to another that you have read.…


BOOK: The Handmaid’sTale by Margaret Atwood

To show Extended Understanding:

Book Comparison: Compare and contrast(organizer attached) this book to another that you have read. These books should be similar in some way (perhaps in genre, theme, setting, etc.) so that there is a reason for comparison. Use quotes from each novel to support your ideas and use specific examples to support your comparison. Use proper MLA Style citation. You can discuss theme, purpose, style, characters, etc..y summarizing the stories. This is your opportunity to show the depth of your understanding of both stories through close analysis. Use specific examples opposed to vague statements to support your ideas. (400-500 words).

Alternate Ending: Match the author’s style in your own writing as you create an alternate ending for this story. Pick a point near the end of the book as your beginning and then write 400 – 500 words that will change the way this story ends. Your ending should still support the rest of the novel by honoring the character development and plot development that the author has already established. For example, do not radically change the way a character behaves because that would disrupt the development the author has established. Your ending should also still support the book’s overall theme and purpose.

PS: Complete both Bool Comparison and Alternate Ending

Sample Solution
In what manner Can Fairy Tales Be Used to Understand Current Politics? Presentation At the point when Marina Warner presents fantasy, she portrays a guide, a guide formed by the scene of narrating, whose pinnacles are populated by the mammoths Charles Perrault and the Brothers Grimm, and a guide whose landscape enlarges to incorporate the tales toward the east (Arabian Nights) and the tales toward the north (Hans Christian Anderson). The guide becomes more extensive still, to house the storytellers who populate these pinnacles, offering their very own diverse interpretations of fantasy (Angela Carter, Margaret Atwood, Speranza Wilde – to give some examples). For fantasy has the same number of adaptations as individuals ready to let them know. The primary fantasies started not from the pen, however by mouth, went from storyteller to storyteller before being amassed into assortments eponymously connected to their gatherer. Later came the scholarly forms, stories gathered, re-composed and designed, a style starting in the seventeenth century that proceeds right up ’til the present time. As they blunder during that time they assemble dust; conveying with them the social, political and moral states of the different minutes in which they were spoken and composed. Warner plots the characterizing qualities of fantasy; a short account populated with legendary animals, their storyteller is matter-of-reality, the tone exists all through paying little mind to any brutal demonstrations. They start in a vague time and perpetually end ‘joyfully ever-after’, their soul is of expectation despite widespread bad form and savagery. Such lively good faith, can offer expectation in obscurity, however uncover the states of the dinkiness itself. The two craftsmen I will explore in this paper name their sources as fantasy, Rachel Maclean’s Spite Your Face is a “dull venetian fantasy” re-told from the Pinocchio story. Jumana Emil Abboud gathers and re-composes conventional Palestinian fantasy, performing them close by different storytellers in her ongoing establishment and execution, A Happy Ending III: Tate Tales (from this time forward will be composed as A Happy Ending). Both use fantasy to remark on contemporary political settings; Spite Your Face was made because of the Brexit vote and Trump political decision, A Happy Ending reacts to the social attack of Palestine amidst the Palestinian-Israeli clash. The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology characterizes legislative issues as: “… the way toward arranging social force in a network. Legislative issues happens at different degrees of social connection, from the smaller scale level – the governmental issues of fellowship, family legislative issues, etc – to the full scale level (universal governmental issues and worldwide legislative issues).” This paper will predominately focus on legislative issues at the ‘full scale level’ because of the idea of every craftsman’s scrutinize. The article is separated along the twofold of substance and structure, however there is unavoidable slippage between the two, these have filled in as two general classes from which to adjust my reasoning. First I will focus on how substance is utilized to address legislative issues, dismembering topics of Truth and UnTruth in Maclean’s Spite Your Face and considering the linkage of belief system and political proclamation with the assistance of Terry Eagleton’s book Ideology. The wellspring of Abboud’s story and their watery affiliations and their connection to the legislative issues of water in Palestine today will follow. In the last segment of ‘content’ Maclean’s scrutinize of industrialism will be investigated, close by basic compositions about craftsmen working in the post-web customs. Nearby Brechtian compositions by Walter Benjamin and Terry Eagleton, I will take a gander at structure, and how Brechtian techniques exist (or don’t) in the system of the craftsman’s work and how these can add to a political message. Each will ask how legislative issues is tended to and how significance is delivered on each level and how this identifies with a political message/source of inspiration. Rachel Maclean Rachel Maclean is a Scottish craftsman working in film and advanced print. Known for her luxurious costuming and utilization of green-screen innovation, Maclean plays every one of the characters her movies lip-syncing to establish sound or contents voiced by on-screen characters. Initially charged for the Scottish Pavilion of the 2017 Venice Biennale (later appeared at Talbot Rice Gallery and The Zabludowicz Collection), Spite Your Face is the film I will focus on, so picked as it re-tells the Italian abstract fantasy Pinocchio and was made in light of the Brexit vote and appointment of President Trump. The title itself an implication to Maclean’s perspective on the Brexit vote; ‘remove your nose to show disdain toward your face’. Fig. 4. Rachel Maclean, “Resentment Your Face.” Scottish Pavilion. Venice. 2017. Fig. 4 shows Spite Your Face in its Venice emphasis; supplanting the special raised area of the deconsecrated church Chiesa di Santa Caterina. Screened on a huge scale, the film is shot in picture mode its tallness ascending to four meters high. In fig.4 we see the focal character, his name refashioned from Pinocchio; Pic, and it is his story that Spite Your Face follows. Isolated into two polarities, Spite Your Face is part between an idealistic upper world and a dystopic under world; one actually living on the other. Told through a consistent account the story circles; Pic is allowed the opportunity to climb to the upper world and is given a jug of ‘Truth’; an aroma elixir that vows to conceal any indication of his humbler beginnings. Once there he picks up prevalence and force through selling ‘Misrepresentation’ a scent that guarantees the pardon Truth awards, yet in reality sits idle. When his constrained container of Truth in the long run runs out, the falsehoods he advised start to unwind, until in the end he goes wrong, delineated as a strict tumble from the upper to bring down world. Fallen Pic’s body is wondered about by the more youthful Pic from the earliest starting point of the story, thus the story rehashes itself. In fig.4 we see Pic in the upper world, a universe of rich gold and striking blue. On the other hand – as observed in fig.5–the lower world is a dulled palette of grayed tones; the intricate gold costuming of the occupants of the upper world supplanted by frayed and fixed articles of clothing. Fig. 5, “Hate Your Face” venice-biennale/(got to 3/01/18) Truth and Untruth To close the story, the Russian storyteller says, “The story is finished; I can’t lie any longer.” Fiction is frequently conflated with lying; they are each other’s equivalent words. As good stories fantasy regularly cautions against lying. Pinocchio – the story to which Spite Your Face takes its motivation is an ethical story that does only that. Rebel wooden doll Pinocchio, will not comply with any authority rather following his very own impulses and wants. His activities are not without result, when he lies his nose develops, he is deceived, hung and eaten by a shark. All through Spite Your Face we see Pic lie to an ever increasing extent however the ethical exercises are misty; the limit among truth and falsehoods has gotten unstuck. At the very heart of Spite Your Face are two aroma items; Truth a fix all medication that covers any sign of the lower world, and Un-truth which vows to do likewise however in certainty sits idle. Incomprehensibly, Truth, as opposed to uncovering the genuine idea of Pic, veils him, turning his skin sparkling gold. Falsehood then again, while promising to hide the stench of the lower world, does the inverse. Giving no mask, Untruth rather uncovers the character as they genuinely may be. So Truth, doesn’t uncover ‘reality’ and Untruth doesn’t present a ‘lie’. Here we see the spillage among truth and un-truth, their limits unclear as they transform into each other. In Ideology scholar Terry Eagleton opens up the thought ‘bogus’ understanding it as far as ideological articulation. “… ideological explanation include lie without either essentially aiming to trick or being fundamentally selective, ‘I’m British and pleased with it,’ for instance. The two pieces of this perception might be valid, yet it infers that being British is a prudence in itself, which is bogus.” Eagleton diagrams a less paired qualification of truth and deception, demonstrating the spot of belief system while deciding these. Articulations might be built from ‘realities’ yet consolidated their suggestion might be bogus. The political atmosphere ahead of the pack up to the Brexit vote spun so vigorously around every side view of truth and bogus. These parallel differentiations adding to the recognizable divisions between those that casted a ballot Remain and those that casted a ballot Leave. In Spite Your Face, what is said to be genuine is in reality bogus, and what is said to be bogus is in reality evident; while it recognizes the deceptive explanations engaged with later political battle despite everything it returns to a paired. Maclean doesn’t grill the belief system driving such explanations, and in this way we don’t develop our comprehension of the main impetuses of such battles. The Nose and Phallus Maybe the most well-recalled highlight of Pinocchio is that at whatever point he lies his nose develops and it is a similar revile for Pic. As Pic’s capacity increments in the upper world, so too do his falsehoods and nose. Be that as it may, in contrast to the first, Pic’s long nose is praised with different characters wearing imitations. At the pinnacle of Pic’s capacity and superstar, the nose becomes sexual organ, utilized as phallus in an assault scene. Emblematically at that point, the falsehoods are connected to a savage male force. In Maclean’s very own words, “We have become desensitized by the commonness of sexist symbolism in contemporary culture and my method for tending to this is to stand up to it in an immediate and instinctive manner.” While I don’t contest that we have become desensitized to misanthropic symbolism, I question whether simply demonstrating a scene of rape Maclean is truth be told>GET ANSWER Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Do you need any assistance with this question?
Send us your paper details now
We’ll find the best professional writer for you!


error: Content is protected !!