Please+paste+in+your+essay+plans+here+over+Easter....with+your+names+ and+the+questions+written+clearly+at+the+top

Paste your essay plans here with names and questions clearly marked....

=__Anna A.__= **With close reference to two or three novels or short stories in your study, compare the ways in which writers have used narrative strategies and with what effect.**

Both Orwell’s __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ and Lermontov’s __A Hero of Our Time__ are character driven novels that revolve around a single, central protagonist. However, considering the time and place these two authors were writing, it is evident that their purposes were different. __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ was published in 1949, indicating that Orwell had been writing at the time of fascist Germany and the communist Soviet Union. Clearly inspired by the totalitarian regimes around him, __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ propounds the dangers of a societal structure led by an autocratic government. Conversely, __A Hero of Our Time__ was first published in 1840, an era of Russian history that was dominated by the ‘lost generation' of youth motivated by excessive ennui; hence, Lermontov instead appears to be painting a portrait of the superfluous man that belonged to the upper-class stratum of nineteenth-century Russia. It is therefore not surprising that the combination of a polyphonic narration, a generally chrononological structure and a straightforward foreshadowing of events present in __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ creates a subtly different effect than what is established by a comparable use of narrative strategies in __A Hero of Our Time__. Nineteen Eighty-Four tells a story with its narration, and we see that it is specific events that propel the novel forwards. Contrarily, __A Hero of Our Time__ lacks a clear plotline; therefore, we see Lermontov’s narrative style shift slightly from Orwell’s to allow the former to slowly unravel Pechorin’s psychological revelations. **Narrative voice:** __1984__ The mélange of the third person Orwellian narrator and Winston’s own voice due to the free indirect discourse allows Orwell to focus on his protagonist whilst nonetheless presenting external contextualisation imperative to our understanding of the plot of __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ Ultimately, the Orwellian narrator is a tool which Orwell operatures to develop external aspects of Winston’s story and be openly critical and satirical of totalitarian regimes until Winston is able to discuss these things himself.__A Hero of Our Time:__The main difference between __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ and __A Hero of Our Time__ is that, whilst the former uses polyphony to explore external elements of the world around Winston, the latter uses it as a way to propound internal facets of Pechorin; the Narrator and Maxim Maximych are essential in giving us glimpses of Pechorin’s character to prepare us for his journal. It is necessary for Lermontov to paint Pechorin using multiple narrators to expatiate on various aspects of Pechorin’s character, for it was arguably Lermontov’s intention to emphasise that one individual would never be able to fully understand Pechorin’s entire being. **Narrative structure** __1984__ By structuring __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ in a chronological manner, Orwell places particular emphasis on the importance of particular, largely sequential events, in the development of the novel’s plot. It is these incidents that prompt Winston’s growth as a character, and not vice-versa like in __A Hero of Our Time__. The chronological structure of the novel only serves to fortify Orwell’s intentions of proffering the dangers of a totalitarian regime and the insignificance of the individual when compared to grander designs by portraying Winston’s development as a mere consequence of the overall plot. __A Hero of Our Time__ However, __A Hero of Our Time__ is structured in a way that disregards the chronology of events to accentuate Lermontov’s intention of painting a portrait of a certain type of individual in specific strata of nineteenth-century Russia. Unlike __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, __A Hero of Our Time__ is designed specifically to revolve around Pechorin’s character. It is only logical that Lermontov decided to structure __A Hero of Our Time__ around first describing Pechorin’s actions and then revealing his motivations, as it signifies that plot and external aspects of Pechorin’s life are relatively insignificant when compared to the pivotal role of the gradual revelation of Pechorin’s psyche. **Foreshadowing** __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ Since we have established that __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, although containing a central protagonist in the form of Winston Smith, is largely plot-driven, Orwell’s reasons for including foreshadowing are evident: to hint at events that will occur later on in the novel.
 * Introduction**
 * //“It’s smooth, creamy paper was of a kind that had not been manufactured for at least forty years.”//
 * //“The voice of the telescreen was still babbling about pig iron.”//
 * //“If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death.”//
 * //“All this time, though, I never once saw a tear in his eye. Perhaps he couldn’t cry, perhaps he controlled himself.”//
 * //“Brilliant white teeth,” “phosphorescent brilliance,” “dazzling brilliance of smooth steel.”//
 * Julia’s hedonism
 * O’Brien’s manipulation
 * Winston never truly being free—always watched by the Party
 * Events such as the duel and the multitude of dances are only significant because of what they impart of Pechorin’s character
 * //“A grand fellow he was, take it from me. Only a bit odd.”//
 * //“An insatiable craving inside me that consumes everything and makes me regard the sufferings and joys of others only in their relationship to me, as food to sustain my spiritual powers.”//
 * Winston’s dream of the Golden Country—//“old, rabbit-bitten pasture,” “slanting rays of the sun gilded the ground,”// foreshadows the first time he and Julia make love: //“dappled light and shade,” “pools of gold,” “misty with bluebells.”//
 * O’Brien—//“we will meet in the place where there is no darkness,”// foreshadows the torture

__A Hero of Our Time__ Foreshadowing isn’t a narrative strategy that is as ubiquitous in __A Hero of Our Time__ as it is in __Nineteen Eighty-Four__; however, Lermontov does use it occasionally to allude to particular traits of Pechorin’s character in lieu of specific events like Orwell.
 * //“The inaccessible mountains.”//
 * //“Dark and misty depths.”//
 * //“Silver thread of the Aragva [. . .] stretches glistening like a scaly snake.//

**__How far__, and __in what ways__, do writers present issues of //self-awareness// and/or //self-deception// in two or three novels or short stories you have studied?**

Both Lermontov’s __A Hero of Our Time__ and Twain’s __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ are novels concerned with issues of self-awareness, or lack thereof. However, considering the context of when these two novels were written, it is understandable why they approach the same thematic discussion in a distinctly different fashion. Lermontov’s wrote __A Hero of Our Time__ during, and based it on, a time in Russian history that was dominated by the ‘lost generation’ of upper-class youth: a stratum of society that was characterised by excessive ennui and a feeling of powerlessness in the face of an autocratic government. Because of Pechorin’s symbolic role as an amalgamation of different traits present in the ‘superfluous man’ of 19th century Russia, Lermontov portrays Pechorin as lacking a certain amount of self-awareness; in fact, at times Pechorin even attempts to deceive himself—especially with regards to his own motivations. Contrarily, __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ was first published in 1884, after the end of the American Civil War, but is set in the Deep South before slavery was officially abolished in the United States. Twain therefore propounds, like Lermontov, a clear lack of self-awareness in the society at the time and juxtaposes it with Huck’s evident inner honesty.
 * Introduction**

Lermontov and Twain use comparable techniques to expound the notion of self-awareness: a sense of hypocrisy and a revealing narrative voice. Although hypocritical tendencies are used in both novels to convey a lack of self-awareness, Lermontov uses polyphonous narration to emphasise aspects of Pechorin’s character that Pechorin himself isn’t aware of, whereas Huck’s sincerity in his narration highlights a contrasting sense of self-honesty. However, one could ultimately argue that the theme of self-awareness is more prevalent in __A Hero of Our Time__, as __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ is—at heart—a bildungsroman novel concerned with Huck’s transition to adulthood caused by a growing understanding of the society he lives in rather than a deeper appreciation of himself.

**Use of hypocrisy** __A Hero of Our Time__ In __A Hero of Our Time__, there are distinct characteristics Lermontov attributes to Pechorin that the protagonist, in turn, chastises in others, particularly Grushnitsky. One could therefore argue that, through emphasising Pechorin’s inherent hypocrisy, Lermontov intrinsically propounds Pechorin’s lack of self-awareness. __Huck Finn__ An equivalent sense of hypocrisy presented by Pechorin’s character in __A Hero of Our Time__ can be found in many of the societies that Huck encounters on his journey; consequently, one could argue that Twain is, similarly to Lermontov, propounding an absence of self-awareness amongst the ‘civilised’ communities.
 * //“Make a solemn display of uncommon emotions, exalted passions and exceptional sufferings,”// (Grushnitsky)—yet Pechorin is incredibly hyperbolic, //“I lay there a long time, weeping **bitterly**, not attempting to hold back the tears and sobs. **I thought my chest would burst**. All my coolness and self-control vanished like smoke, my heart **wilted**, reason **deserted** me.”//
 * Most evident is in Pechorin’s description of Grushnitsky: //“The sole preoccupation of his life has been himself . . . he’s spent so much time trying to convince others that he’s not of this world and that fate has some mysterious sufferings in store for him, that he practically believes it himself.”//
 * //“There must have been some purposes, I must have had some high object in life, for I feel unbounded strength within me.”//
 * //“I’ve loved for myself, for my own pleasure, I’ve only tried to satisfy a strange inner need.”//
 * //“And she took snuff too; of course, that was alright because she done it herself.”//
 * //“The men took their guns along, so did Buck, and kept them between their knees or stood them handy against the wall.”//
 * //“Col. Grangerford was a gentleman, you see.”—“The old gentleman owed a lot of farms, and over a hundred niggers.”//

**Use of narrative voice** __A Hero of Our Time__ It is important for __A Hero of Our Time__ to incorporate different narrators in order to highlight Pechorin’s lack of self-awareness as Lermontov employs the Narrator and Maxim Maximych to underline elements of Pechorin’s character he himself is blind to, thus ultimately stressing Pechorin’s superficial understanding of himself. __Huck Finn__ Unlike in __A Hero of Our Time__, where the multiple narrators help to elucidate aspects of Pechorin’s character he himself overlooks, it is the honesty of Huck’s single, first-person narration in __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ that conveys his heightened sense of self-awareness.
 * //“An expanse of dazzling white linen showed him to be a man of decorous habits,”// and //“Do you see what a dandy he is now he’s back in St. Petersburg?”//
 * Yet—//“They are dandies and strike classic poses as they lower their wicker-cased tumblers into the sulphur spring.”//
 * And—//“Out of some peculiar brand of dandyism goes around in a thick private’s greatcoat.”//
 * //“It was because my heart warn’t right; it was because I warn’t square; it was because I was playing double.”//—Huck accepts the blame as opposed to Pechorin who simply blames fate
 * //“It warn’t no use to try and hide it from him. Nor from// me//, neither.”//
 * //“But I reckon **I got to light out for the Territory** ahead of the rest, because Aunt Sally she’s going to adopt me and civilize me, and **I can’t stand it. I been there before.**”//

**How far?** __A Hero of Our Time__ Since __A Hero of Our Time__ is largely centred on Lermontov’s portrait of Pechorin-type figures, it is not surprising that it treats the theme of self-awareness, or lack thereof, with quite a lot of depth. However, it is also important to be aware of the fact that, although Lermontov portrays Pechorin’s lack of self-awareness extensively, Pechorin ultimately doesn’t gain any true insight into himself. As Lermontov himself states in the Preface to __A Hero of Our Time__, he is essentially proffering the, //“malady,”// of self-deception, but purposefully not presenting a, //“cure.”// __Huck Finn__ Although __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ is commonly considered a bildungsroman novel, there isn’t the same focus on Huck’s growing sense of self-awareness as there is in __A Hero of Our Time__ with regards to Pechorin’s continuous and increasingly apparent self-deception. Instead, we see Huck developing from childish naïveté to adulthood as a consequence of what he experiences with Jim and, ultimately, what he learns about society. Therefore, one could argue that __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ is a novel centred on Huck’s discovery of the society he lives in rather than unearthing more about himself.
 * //“Through all my active life **fate** always seems to have brought me in for the dénouement of other people’s dramas . . . **thrust** into the **pitiful** role of executioner or betrayer.”//
 * //“How many times since then have I been the axe in the hands of fate?”//
 * //“I didn’t want no trouble with their kind. I’d seen all I wanted to of them, and wanted to get entirely shut of them.”//
 * //“ ‘Did you want to kill him, Buck?’ ‘Well, I bet I did.’ ‘What did he do to you?’ ‘Him? He never done nothing to me.’ ‘Well, then, what did you want to kill him for?’ ‘Why, nothing—only it’s on account of the feud.’//
 * //“They don’t know now what the row was about in the first place.”//
 * //“ ’The whole bilin’ of ‘m ‘s frauds! Le’s duck ‘em! Le’s drown ‘em! Le’s ride ‘em on a rail!’ and everybody was whooping at once, and there was a rattling pow-wow.”//
 * // “But I reckon I got to light out for the Territory ahead of the rest, because Aunt Sally she’s going to adopt me and civilize me, and I can’t stand it. I been there before. //

**A story has to be told by somebody. Compare in detail __your impressions__ of the story-tellers in two or three novels or short stories that you have studied. Was the story-teller the __same as the writer__ (implicitly or explicitly) or not? How does this question __influence your reading?__**

**Introduction** Both Orwell’s __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ and Twain’s __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ are novels rooted in the historical and geographical context of their authors and therefore have strong socio-political discussions at their core. Orwell wrote __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ after the WWII, and, having witnessed the horrors of both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, decided to focus his novel on propounding the dangers of a totalitarian regime. Conversely, __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ was first published in 1884, but is set in the Deep South prior to the American Civil War, and fundamentally highlights the hypocritical nature of racism and the importance of freedom and equality.

However, it is important to note that the two novels are narrated in completely different manners: whilst a third-person omniscient narrator, who appears to be Orwell himself, recounts __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, it is Huck who narrates __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__. Ultimately, one could argue that the difference in narration is due to the difference in purpose of the two authors. Orwell seems to have been primarily concerned with clearly conveying his thematic discussions and the narrator's main role is to emphasise varying aspects of the Party’s rule. Although Winston’s own voice does pepper the narration in order to emphasise his growth, it could be claimed that Orwell includes this merely to stress his eventual destruction at the hands of the Party, thus underlining their overarching control. Twain addresses issues of similar importance, but the use of Huck’s genuine and charming narration conveys Twain’s ideas in a far gentler way than Orwell. Furthermore, by having Huck narrate the novel, Twain also includes another layer to __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ by incorporating bildungsroman elements as we witness Huck’s transition from childhood to maturity caused by his increasing awareness of the society around him. **Impression of the narrator** __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ Although a third-person omniscient narrator narrates __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, the narrative voice also gives a distinct impression of Winston’s state of mind. One could, in fact, argue that Winston’s thoughts permeate the narration through a narrative style of free indirect discourse; therefore, the narrative voice changes to represent the four stages of Winston’s character development: initial inarticulacy and oppression, growing political insight, increasing emotional awareness and, finally, ultimate submission to the Party’s control. __Huck Finn__ Unlike __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ is clearly narrated by Huck, the protagonist of the story. Twain portrays Huck as a charming, genuine and honest storyteller, which ultimately allows Twain to criticise complex and controversial issues, such as the inherent hypocrisy of racism and superficial reliance on religion, in a gentle manner that wouldn’t ostracise contemporary readers. **Is it the writer?** __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ Although Winston does seem to interject in the narration, particularly in the end of Party 1 and throughout Part 2, it is important to note that the third-person narrator, often referred to as an ‘Orwellian’ narrator, dominates the beginning and end of the __Nineteen Eighty-Four__. We mainly see Orwell’s voice in the diction and descriptions, which are too elaborate for Winston who—at these points in the novel—is still relatively inarticulate. __Huck Finn__ Whereas in __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, Orwell’s voice does appear through the third-person narrator, __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ are wholly narrated by Huck—a distinction which is made clear at the very start of the novel and maintained throughout. However, there are instances when we are able to hear Twain’s voice clearly through that of another character, albeit never directly through Huck.
 * //“DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER.”//
 * //“If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event,// it never happened//—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death?”//
 * //“The paperweight was the room he was in, and the coral was Julia’s own life, fixed in a sort of eternity at the heart of the crystal.”//
 * //“Oh cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast!”//
 * //“She let it out that Moses had been dead a considerable long time; so then I didn’t care no more about him; because I don’t take no stock in dead people.”//
 * //“Well, I couldn’t see no advantage in going where she was going, so I made up my mind I wouldn’t try for it. But I never said so, because it would only make trouble, and wouldn’t do no good.”//
 * //“But somehow, I couldn’t seem to strike no places to harden me against him, but only the other kind.”//
 * //“**Fruity** voice,”//
 * //“In the far distance, a helicopter **skimmed** down between the roofs and hovered for an instant **like a bluebottle**, and darted away again with a curving flight.//
 * //“It was a **peculiarly beautiful** book. It’s smooth creamy paper, a little yellowed by age, was of a **king that had not been manufactured for at least forty years past.**”//
 * //“You don’t know about me, without you have read a book by the name of __The Adventures of Tom Sawyer__, but that ain’t no matter. That book was made by Mr. Mark Twain, and he told the truth, mainly. There was things which he stretched, but mainly he told the truth.”//
 * Passage with Sherburn—//“The pitifullest thing out is a mob; that’s what an army is—a mob; they don’t fight with courage that’s born in them, but with courage that’s borrowed from their mass, and from their officers . . . If any real lynching’s going to be done, it will be in the dark, Southern fashion.”//

**Influence on novel** __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ The presence of an Orwellian narrator not only allows Orwell to introduce contextual information that would otherwise be missing due to the limitations of Winston’s knowledge, but also establishes an underlying satirical tone; consequently, Orwell is able to propound the ridiculous elements of absolute control and bring, to a certain extent, a feeling of hope through a subtle mocking and undermining of the Party. __Huck Finn__ Conversely, one could argue that Twain purposefully doesn’t include his own voice directly in the narration as __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ is, at its core, a bildungsroman novel concerned with Huck’s journey to maturity; thus, Twain ensures that Huck fully narrates the novel in order to clearly depict his emotional growth.
 * //“It was the police patrol, **snooping** into other people’s windows.”//
 * //“The telescreen was still **babbling** away about pig-iron.”//
 * //“It was a lean Jewish face, with a great **fuzzy** aureole of white hair and a small goatee beard—a clever face, and yet somehow inherently despicable. With a king of **senile silliness** in the long thin nose near the end of which a pair of spectacles was perched.”//
 * o //“The little sandy-haired woman gave a **squeak** of mingled fear and disgust.”//
 * //“He had been appointed to **a sub-committee of a sub-committee** which had sprouted from one of **the innumerable committees** dealing with **minor** difficulties that arose in the compilation of the Eleventh Edition of the Newspeak dictionary.//
 * //“You can’t teach a nigger to argue.”//
 * //“Give a nigger an inch and he’ll take an ell.”//
 * //“All right then, I’ll// go //to hell.”//
 * //“But somehow, I couldn’t seem to strike no places to harden me against him, but only the other kind.”//
 * Closeness to Tom: //“I was glad about that, because I wanted him and me to be together.”//
 * o //“But I reckoned it was about as well the way it was.”//
 * //“I told Jim all about what happened inside he wreck, and at the ferry-boat; and I said these kinds of things was adventures.//

**Compare __the ways__ in which writers have explored the //relationship between experience and understanding//. Refer in detail to any two or three works of literature in your study.** **Introduction** Both __A Hero of Our Time__ and __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ explore the relationship between experience and understanding, albeit in subtly different ways. Whilst __A Hero of Our Time__ focuses on the link between experience and internal self-awareness and discovery, __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ explores the connection between experience and the gaining of external knowledge about society as a whole. Arguably, this distinction is caused by the fact that, although both __A Hero of Our Time__ and __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ are novels that revolve around a single, central protagonist—Pechorin and Winston Smith respectively—there is a significant difference between the overarching purpose of Lermontov and that of Orwell. __ A Hero of Our Time __ is essentially intended to paint a portrait of Pechorin as an amalgamation of various character traits that dominated the ‘lost generation’ of Russian history­: ennui and the subsequent craving for excitement, manifested by Pechorin into the emotional torture of those around him. Contrarily, Orwell’s main objective in __ Nineteen Eighty-Four __ is seemingly to propound the dangers of a certain type of societal structure—totalitarianism—rather than of a certain type of individual.

** Narrative structure ** __1984__ As Winston chronologically progresses through __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, he naively believes that he understands more about the society he lives in and, in particular, he is convinced that he has unearthed the Party’s true nature. __A Hero of Our Time__ Although Lermontov didn’t structure __A Hero of Our Time__ chronologically like Orwell chose to in __Nineteen Eighty-Four__, specific events in the journal sections of the novel prompt Pechorin to confess and explore intricacies of his character; therefore, Pechorin believes that he understands himself and his motivations on a deeper level at the end of his diary than at the beginning. **Irony** __1984__ However, rather ironically, as Winston experiences more rebellious acts, moments of individuality and supposed political freedom, he actually understands increasingly less about the Party as seen by his own inherent naïveté and misguided sense of optimism.
 * //“Perhaps the Party was rotten under the surface, its cult of strenuousness and self-denial simply a sham concealing iniquity.”//
 * //“For how could the fear, the hatred and the lunatic credulity which the Party needed in its members be kept at the right pitch, except by bottling down some powerful instinct and using it as a driving force?”//
 * //“He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly. The Party does not like such people.”//
 * Winston only learns aspects of the Party which instil a sense of hopelessness and fear—the Party uses Winston’s belief that he is free in order to further plant their control and supremacy.
 * //“I often wonder why I’m trying so hard to win the love of a girl I have no desire to seduce and whom I’d never marry. Why this womanish coquetry?”//
 * //“I’ve an insatiable craving inside me that consumes everything and makes me regard the sufferings and joys of others only in their relationship to me, as food to sustain my spiritual powers.”//
 * //“I’ve loved for myself, for my own pleasure, I’ve only tried to satisfy a strange inner need.”//
 * //“’If there is hope,’ wrote Winston, ‘it lies in the proles.’”//
 * //“He knew, with more certainty than before, that O’Brien was on his side.”//
 * //“Unlike Winston, she had grasped the inner meaning of the Party’s sexual puritanism.”//

__A Hero of Our Time__ A similar sense of irony is present in __A Hero of Our Time__, for although Pechorin believe his experiences increase his self-awareness, he becomes progressively incapable of genuine self-reflection and criticism.
 * //“And perhaps tomorrow I’ll die, and then there’ll be no one who could ever really understand me. Some will think me worse, others better than in fact I am. Some will say that I was a good fellow, others that I was a scoundrel. Neither will be right.”//—doesn’t question his own understanding of himself
 * //“I doubt everything.”//

**Lack of understanding** __1984__ Ultimately, Winston doesn’t gain any genuine insight into the society around him because the Party itself controlled his experiences hence also regulating what he was able to understand about the Party. Orwell is therefore emphasising the extent of the Party’s power over its citizens and, subsequently, the warped nature of absolute control. __A Hero of Our Time__ Winston and Pechorin are comparable characters in the sense that both lack some sort of understanding at the end of their respective novels; however, Pechorin differs from Winston as he never truly understands his own self and motivations. He imposes on himself what he is allowed to comprehend, using fate as a scapegoat for his actions in order to avoid self-evaluation and analysis. One could therefore argue that Lermontov is ultimately propounding the lack of self-awareness of the superfluous man, as Pechorin is fundamentally symbolic of the nineteenth century ‘lost generation’ of Russian upper-class youth.
 * //“I understand HOW: I do not understand WHY.”//
 * //“He had still, he reflected, not learned the ultimate secret. He understood// how//; he did not understand// why//.”// —Book most likely written by the Party itself (wouldn’t reveal anything particularly important)
 * //“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power.”//
 * //“How many times since then have I been the **axe** **in the hands of fate?**”—//victimising himself, use of hyperbole
 * //“Is it my sole purpose in life, I thought, to be the ruin of other people’s hopes? Through all my active life fate always seems to have brought me in for the dénouement of other people’s dramas.”//—use of rhetorical questions, doesn’t give answers
 * //“I doubt everything.”//

**How far has the confidence in the reliability of the narrative voice or voices had an impact on your appreciation of works of fictional prose?**

** Introduction: ** It is often easy to take the reliability of narrative voice for granted, but it becomes of prime importance in novels such as Lermontov’s __A Hero of Our Time__ and Twain’s __The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn__ where characters themselves recount the story. However, Lermontov and Twain differ in one crucial element: whilst Lermontov’s narrators are purposefully unreliable at times and often subject to their own misconceptions and prejudices, Twain presents Huck as an undoubtedly genuine narrator who is honest with himself if not those around him. Arguably, the reliability of the narration is inherently linked with the author’s purpose. The chain of narrators in __A Hero of Our Time__, all slightly unreliable in some way, emphasise the complex nature of Lermontov’s unfathomable protagonist and highlight the fact that—as an amalgamation of character traits common in the ‘superfluous man’ of nineteenth century upper class Russian society—Pechorin will never be able to be completely understood by one person, not even himself, which fundamentally hinders any sort of growth. Conversely, the bildungsroman __Huckleberry Finn__ needs Huck’s honesty to allow his transition from childish naïveté to maturity, and it his charming and believable narration that ultimately leads to us empathising with him. ** Keeping reader attention: ** __ A Hero of Our Time __ Lermontov structured __A Hero of Our Time__ to establish a chain of reliability in the narrators so that Pechorin is revealed to us gradually in order to maintain our attention. Maxim Maximych’s questionable portrayal of Pechorin heightens the alluring sense of mystery that permeates Pechorin in the non-journal sections of the novel. Since __A Hero of Our Time__ is essentially a portrait of the type of individual Pechorin is symbolic for, had Maxim Maximych or the traveller been fully accurate and reliable in their depiction of Pechorin, the rest of the novel would have been redundant. __ Huck Finn __ Contrarily, reliance on Huck’s narration is precisely what maintains reader attention throughout __Huckleberry Finn__, as the reader has to genuinely believe in Huck and his story to be captivated and share an empathetic connection with him.
 * // “A grand fellow he was, only a bit odd.” //
 * // “Perhaps he couldn’t cry, perhaps he controlled himself, I don’t know.” //
 * // “This brilliance was not the outward sign of an ardent spirit or a lively imagination. It was like the cold dazzling brilliance of smooth steel.” //
 * // “I felt so lonesome I most wished I was dead.” //
 * // “That book was made by Mr Mark Twain and he told the truth, mainly. There was things which he stretched, but mainly he told the truth.” //
 * // “I begged, and told him I was only Huck, but he laughed such a screechy laugh, and roared, and kept on chasing me up.” //

** Characterisation: ** __ A Hero of Our Time __ Ultimately, one could argue that Lermontov uses polyphony and has three slightly unreliable narrators to emphasise the fact that Pechorin cannot be fully understood by one person, not even himself; he is too complex and contradictory for one man to be able to grasp all of the different elements of his character without fail. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">__ Huck Finn __ <span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Conversely, Twain ensure that Huck appears straightforward and genuine so that we believe his narration; however, particularly at the beginning of the novel, we can’t rely on Huck to understand the more mature aspects of his surroundings, which essentially emphasises his innocence and naïveté.
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “He’d get something in his head and not be content till he got it. He must have been spoiled as a child.” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “His whole posture gave the impression of some nervous debility.” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “There was two old dirty calico dresses, and a sun-bonnet, and some women’s underclothes, hanging against the wall, and some men’s clothing too.” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “I told Jim all about what happened inside the wreck, and at the ferry-boat; and I said these kinds of this was adventures.” //

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">** Ability for growth: ** <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">__ A Hero of Our Time __ <span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Even in the journal sections of __A Hero of Our Time__, there is still a level of unreliability in Pechorin’s narration that ultimately shows his inability to reflect and his dependence on self-deception, thus fundamentally inhibiting any type of character growth. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">__ Huck Finn __ <span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">On the contrary, Twain presents Huck’s narration as incredibly genuine and straightforward, and thus reliable; in fact, one could argue that it is Huck’s ability to be honest with himself—as opposed to Pechorin’s self-deception—that allows him to grow and mature as a character.
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “There are two men within me—one lives in the full sense of the word, the other reflects and judges him.” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “I’ve been the indispensable figure of the fifth act, thrust into the pitiful role of executioner or betrayer” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “How many times have I been the axe in the hands of fate?” //
 * <span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Inability to face Maxim Maximych—symbolic of his avoidance of his past sins
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “About an hour or two ago, it would have been a little different, but now it made me feel bad and disappointed.” //
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">// “Human beings can be awful cruel to one another.” //
 * <span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Difference between Tom & Huck at the end: //“But I reckoned it was about as well the way it was.”//
 * //"It warn't no use to try and hide it from Him. Nor from// me//, neither . . . It was because my hear't warn't right; it was because I warn't square; it was because I was playing double."//

**Introduction** __A Hero of Our Time__ and __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ are both novels that include certain symbols and motifs largely to compensate for limitations in the narrative voice and explore elements of Pechorin and Winston respectively that would otherwise disturb the narrative flow. Lermontov includes symbols in __A Hero of Our Time__ to emphasise Pechorin’s inability to reflect on his behaviour and truly look within himself, an aspect of Pechorin that can otherwise only be inferred by his contradictory and superficial belief in fate. Since Pechorin is himself symbolic of the superfluous man that pertained to the ‘lost generation’ of nineteenth century upper-class youth, one could argue that Lermontov’s revelations of Pechorin’s inner workings through symbolism are representative of traits that were common in this specific type of individual. It is therefore not surprising that Lermontov uses setting as a motif for Pechorin’s distaste for social customs and his desire for freedom from the predictability of upper-class life. Similarly, in __Nineteen Eight-Four__, Orwell includes motifs in particular sections of the novel to indicate Winston’s state of mind and his growing feeling of independence from the Party. Like Lermontov, Orwell subsequently extends the use of setting as a motif to also represent the degrading state of society as a whole under the Party's totalitarian regime, as well as Winston’s own inner state of mind at specific moments.
 * Symbols and/or motifs are an essential element of many novels and short stories. __How__ have either or both of these devices been used and, in your opinion, __how successfully__, in two or three of the works you have studied? **

However, one could argue that Lermontov is more successful than Orwell in the use of symbols. Lermontov was writing during a period of Russian history that was dominated by Pechorin-type figures, and so __A Hero of Our Time__ can essentially be seen as a portrait of a type of individual: the superfluous man. Although Lermontov could be criticized for using symbolism that is obscure and difficult to comprehend, it can be argued that this enigmatic quality of symbols used to represent Pechorin—himself a figure that cannot fully be understood—serves to emphasise Pechorin’s mystifying and unfathomable nature. Contrarily, __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ was first published in 1949, closely after the fall of Nazi Germany and during the time of a Communist Soviet Union. Hence, the main purpose of __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ appears to be to propound the dangers of totalitarian regimes; however, Orwell’s use of symbolism is focused on Winston’s character development, which, although important, doesn’t necessarily form the core of Orwell’s thematic discussions.

**Characterisation** __A Hero of Our Time__ Symbols used to reveal implicit elements of Pechorin’s character. AHoOT as a portrait of the superfluous man pertaining to the ‘lost generation’ of 19th century Russian upper-class youth. Importance of it being symbols and **not** motifs—Pechorin doesn’t undergo a change, unlike Winston. __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ Motifs used to reveal Winston’s state of mind—more of a straightforward character than Pechorin, supposed to represent the ‘every-day man’, importance of Winston’s state of mind in terms of how an individual would respond to complete control. Importance of them being **motifs**—shows a change in Winston. Recur in different conext to show a change.
 * Sea—symbolic of himself, capricious and unpredictable //“There was a **sheer drop** to the sea, with dark blue waves **splashing and murmuring unceasingly** below. The moon looked calmly down on the **turbulent** element it ruled.//
 * Rejection of Maxim Maximych—inability take responsibility for what he has done, inability to be self-critical and reflective. —// “There now, I’ve not really changed, have I? But what can you do? We’ve all got our own way in life. Perhaps we’ll meet again—who knows? //
 * Caucasus mountains—symbolic of Pechorin’s dangerous allure, his mystery //“Inaccessible mountains,” “silver thread,” “black, mist-filled gorge,” “glistening like a scaly snake.”//
 * Paperweight—freedom, individuality
 * //“It’s a beautiful thing,” “it was not so much its beauty as the air it seemed to possess of belonging to an age quite different from the present one.”//
 * • Shatters when Winston is caught //“someone had picked up the glass paperweight from the table and smashed it to pieces on the hearthstone.”//
 * Diary—individuality of thought, Winston’s intellectual and emotional growth and his fledgling rebellious spirit, a place of refuge and safety.
 * //“Peculiarly beautiful book. Its smooth creamy paper, a little yellowed by age, was of a kind that had not been manufactured for at least forty years past.”//
 * Varicose ulcer — physical health
 * //“Winston, who has thirty-nine and had a varicose ulcer above his right// __Nineteen Eighty-Four__

**Setting—a motif symbolizing inner state of mind** __A Hero of Our Time__ In the journal sections of __A Hero of Our Time__, we see Pechorin describing setting differently depending on whether or not people are near—> the mountains are symbolic of his desire for freedom from social restrictions, and the social settings are representative of Pechorin’s contempt for predictability __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ The degradation of the setting (London) used to reveal the deterioration of society under a totalitarian regime (mismanagement when only concerned with keeping power). However, when Winston is with Julia in the Golden Country—believing himself free, the setting is starkly different. **How successfully?** __A Hero of Our Time__ Generally difficult to grasp—>perhaps would have been more successful had the symbols been slightly more obvious? At the same time, however, one could argue that since Lermontov is trying to symbolize aspects of Pechorin’s character, this undecipherable aspect of the symbols is representative of Pechorin’s unfathomable nature. __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ In complete contrast to __A Hero of Our Time__, the motifs in __Nineteen Eighty-Four__ are relatively obvious to the reader, but they seem to revolve too closely around Winston’s state of mind—>important for characterization, but Orwell’s use of symbols and motifs seems to be lacking in terms of his thematic discussions regarding the nature of power and the dangers of totalitarian regimes. Motifs like ‘Big Brother’ are perhaps too simple and straightforward to properly represent the complex issues Orwell contemplates in __Nineteen Eighty-Four.__
 * //“My room was filled with the perfume of flowers growing in the modest front garden. The branches of cherry trees in bloom look into my window, and the wind occasionally strews my desk with their white petals.”//
 * //“The air is pure and fresh, like the kiss of a child, the sun is bright, the sky is blue.”//
 * //“Several melancholy groups,” “narrow path leading to the Elizabeth Springs,” “the medicinal springs **babble**, and so does the multilingual crowd.”//
 * //“Swirl of gritty dust,”//
 * //“Decaying, dingy cities.”//
 * //”Nineteenth century houses that smelt always of cabbage and bad lavatories.”//
 * //“London, vast and ruinous, city of a million dustbins.”//
 * //“Dappled light,” “pools of gold,” “the ground was misty with bluebells,” “the air seemed to kiss one’s skin.”//
 * //“Yellow beam of the sinking sun slanted through the window.”//
 * //“It was not the reflection of the soul’s glow . . . this was akin to the gleam of smooth steel.”//
 * // “Why had fate thrown me into this peaceful circle of honest smugglers? //
 * //“I prefer to doubt everything.”//
 * //“BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.”//
 * Name—should connote warmth, protection, affection. Use of capitals makes the message seem frightening, alongside adjectives such as, //“commanding,” “dark,” “enormous.”//
 * //“Victory Gin,”// and //“Victory cigarettes,”//—again, the symbolism is caused by the irony of the name, //“sickly,” “oily,” “crumpled,” “nitric acid.”//

=__Iván Bosch Chen__=

1) Credibility of characters and situations essay plan

**Intro:** The three novels, “Huckleberry Finn,” “1984,” and “A Hero of Our Time,” are all reflective of the time in which they were written. Twain for example, sets his story during the time in which slavery was permitted. Although the novel itself was written after the official abolition of slavery, the black community still faced oppression in the United States of America. In the case of “A Hero of Our Time”, Lermontov reflected in his character, “Pechorin,” his own generation which was known as the superfluous Russian youth. Finally, Orwell depicted a world ruled by totalitarianism, a type of government prevailing in certain areas of Europe. Since the novels were based on the authors’ time, we would expect credibility in the narration. Although this is true, the authors use a wide range of techniques to render the events and characters of their stories credible in order to successfully evoke their social and political critiques. In most cases, the novels depict realistic situations similar to actual occurrences to make their commentaries credible. Furthermore, some of the authors explore themes such as fatalism, as is the case with Lermontov, which reflects the ideas and discussions being held by the generation he aimed to mirror. Additionally, in “Huckleberry Finn,” it is apparent that Twain wished to evoke a sense of honesty and innocence in his protagonist’s narration to make his character credible to the readers.

**Paragraph 1:** All through the plot of, “1984,” Orwell reflects real situations which occurred under totalitarian regimes to allow credibility in his criticism of oligarchic rule. - Satire of Nazi youth “‘You’re a traitor!’ yelled the boy,” “roared the boy in his huge voice” Child hands Mr Parsons over to thought police By demonstrating how governments can control populations through the indoctrination of children, Orwell not only makes his critique of totalitarian regimes apparent, he also is able to prove how this situation could become a reality in any country. **Paragraph 2:** Orwell also places a great emphasis on how oligarchic regimes can eradicate people from society and history. In this case, aspects such as the censoring of images and the elimination of records, which occurred in the USSR, are reflected in the novel. As with the satire on the Nazi Youth, Orwell makes events like the complete disappearance of Syme, believable due to the realism in the possibility. - Reference to the censoring of pictures by in O’Brien’s speech, “Dust. It does not exist. It never existed.” - Disappearance of Syme and records of his existence, “list of members of the Chess Committee... was one name shorter” Through this technique, the author allows his critique of olicharchical rule to seem realistic and explains why so many have interpreted the novel as an actual prophecy of the future. **Paragraph 3:** In a similar manner, Lermontov is able to make his portrayal of the Russian youth believable. Modern day readers may not be able to consider the extent of the immorality and boredom expressed in Pechorin as possible, but since Lermontov reflects actual behaviour characteristic of the generation, the reader is more willing to trust the image created in, “A Hero of Our Time”. - Duels “I shot... When the smoke had dissipated, there was no Grushnitsky on the platform” So although the traits that make up Pechorin are a compilation of a whole generation and so are somewhat hyperbolic in nature, the portrayal is believable since the reader is aware that individuals did behave in this manner **Paragraph 4:** Not only does Lermontov make use of actual events to bring credibility to his depiction, he also mirrors the mentality and the ideas being considered at the time, in particular the notions surrounding fatalism. - Attributing individual’s actions to fate, removing responsibility “Fate has somehow always led me into... the sorry role of executioner” We as readers are able to believe that individuals reacted to this discussion of fate in this manner, because of how helpless the Russian generation did seem to feel after the Decembrist revolts. **Paragraph 5:** “Huckleberry Finn,” on the other hand does reflect situations which occurred during the time period it is set in, but the credibility achieved is more due to the honesty and innocence of the main protagonist. - Self – awareness and honesty “The book... told the truth, mainly... with some stretchers” - In this case, not only does Twain achieve credibility in the fact that he narrates actual situations, he allows the readers to trust Huck’s perception of the world because of his honesty. **Conclusion:** By accurately mirroring the societies in which the authors criticise, and by evoking a sense of honesty in the narration, the authors are able to convince the readers of their reliability. This allows the readers to accept the criticisms made towards the societies concerned. It is probable that the precision of their fiction is one of the many aspects which have made the novels classics of literature.
 * Diction expressing the ferocity of the Children, displays power over the adults
 * Also shows the extent to which the party can control and indoctrinate
 * Absent in Pechorin’s narration which displays self – deception

2) Narrative strategies plan **Introduction:** The authors Orwell, Lermontov and Twain were all living during a period of time were individuals’ freedoms were being diminished due to certain elements of their societies. In Orwell’s case, he wrote 1984, shortly after the fall of Nazi Germany and whilst the USSR was still in power. So, he was aware of the manner in which people’s freedoms were being reduced under totalitarian governments. Twain finished his novel after slavery was abolished in the United States of America, but at a time when there was still a large amount of prejudice against the black community. Lermontov similarly, was part of what was known as the “superfluous” generation of Russian youths who felt useless under the government of Nikolas I. As a result, they acted unconventionally and at times immorally to overcome their boredom. The authors used their novels to criticise the governments, societies and individuals on how they undermined others at the time. In the novels, “1984,” “A Hero of Our Time,” and, “Huckleberry Finn,” the authors use a variety of narrative strategies including narrative voice and narrative structure. In, “Huckleberry Finn,” a single first person narrator goes through a series of chronological episodes. In this case the effect is that Twain allows the reader to follow the development of the protagonist’s ideas concerning slavery. In a similar manner, the unchronological order and differing narrators in Lermontov’s novel help unravel the character of the protagonist to the reader. On the other hand, the free indirect discourse and the chronological narration in Orwell’s novel, does not focus as much on the development of the protagonist but places more importance on demonstrating how powerless the individual is under the totalitarian state.

**Paragraph 1**

As the plot progresses in, “1984,” we see different stages of the development of Winston’s mind. Initially, the reader follows the narration of Winston, but also is helped by a third person narrator. Winston’s difficulty in expressing his thoughts against the party rule and the need for a third person narrator allows Orwell to demonstrate how totalitarian control reduces the mental capacity of the citizens. - Free indirect discourse “Inside the flat a fruity voice was reading out a list of figures” Although the reader is presented with more aspects of Winston’s state of mind, the focus Orwell appears to place is on the effect of the party control, and less about the individual character. The effect of this form of narration is that the reader is given insight into how Orwell believes Oligarchical rule diminishes the mental ability of the individuals it rules over. **Paragraph 2** Lermontov on the other hand makes use of a similar concept, the changing narrator, to unravel the character of Pechorin to the reader. Initially, Lermontov does not use Pechorin as a narrator to introduce the aspects of his character such as his ability to manipulate and gain the admiration of women and men. - “He had barely touched the door when she jumped up, sobbed, and threw her arms around his neck.” - “What do you need with the likes of an ill-educated old man running behind you!” The effect of this choice of narration is that the reader becomes intruiged by the way in which others admire Pechorin and how he leaves them so melancholic.

**Paragraph 3** Furthermore, along with introducing the character traits of Pechorin, the particular structure of the narrative helps the reader understand Pechorin’s superficial belief in fate. By having the diaries placed before the events in, “The Fatalist,” we witness the development of Pechorin’s belief that his life is dictated by fate. - “Why had fate thrown me into this peaceful circle of honest smugglers?” - Begins to feel melancholic about his ‘role’ “fate has somehow always led me into the dramatic climaxes of others’ lives,” - Finally makes conclusion that events which occured must indicate life is dictated by fate eventhough he acts according to his own free will. “After all this, how could one not become a fatalist?” The order of the books in, “A Hero of Our Time,” allows for a greater grasping of Pechorin’s misunderstanding of his own behaviour.

**Paragraph 4** The techniques that Twain uses in, “Huckleberry Finn,” though, are more similar to the strategies used in the narration of, “1984”. As is the case with Orwell’s novel, the reader witnesses the maturing narration of Huck, but more significance is placed on the character’s development of ideas. The single narrator and the chronological set of episodes in, “Huckleberry Finn,” are used to show a progression in Huck’s views concerning slavery which builds up to his final epiphany when the King sells Jim to the Phelps. - Hypocrisy, self-righteousness of Miss Watson “She was going to live so as to go to the good place.” - Sheburn speech, following the mass “The pitifulest thing out is a mob” - Huck’s epiphany. Does not need to follow the mass or religious standards and feel guilt for acting morally. Sees Jim as a human “’All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ – and tore it up.” Twain may have been aiming to let readers at the time to follow the same development as Huck and see the human sides of the slaves, not as mere property. Nonetheless, with the help of the narrative strategies chosen, the modern reader becomes aware of the reasons why slavery was accepted. **Paragraph 5** In the case of, “1984,” though, the chronological structure of the narrative shows the reader the different stages of Winston’s rebellion. Through this technique, Orwell transmits the idea with more effectivity, that the individual is powerless under the totalitarian government. - The developing of ideas against the Party “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER” - The acting beyond the boundaries of the Party “There is nothing big enough to hide a mike in” - Finally the complete breaking down of the dissidents by the party. “Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose” Through this technique, Orwell does not need to directly state that the individual is powerless under the totalitarian regime. By ordering the structure in this manner, Orwell demonstrates to the reader how helpless the citizens are facing Oligarchism. **Conclusion** The three novels, use the narrative strategies to either develop the protagonists and their ideas, or to simply indicate some aspect of the society that the protagonist lives in. Although the authors use the similar narrative structures or forms of narrative voice, the outcomes are not always the same. As is the case with the chronological structure of, “1984,” and, “Huckleberry Finn,” both are written in this manner but in Orwell’s novel it helps show how the government undermines its citizens, whilst in Twain’s novel it allows the reader to follow the maturing of Huck and his ideas. In a similar manner, the differing narrators of, “A Hero of Our Time,” and, “1984,” are different in the sense that the former allows for the unraveling of the protagonist’s character whilst the latter shows how incapable the citizens of Oceania are in developing their own thoughts.

3) Experience and understanding plan **Intro**  **Background?**

Both of the novels, “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” and, “A Hero of Our Time,” narrate the experience of two characters living under regimes with absolute power. The protagonists’ experiences, allow them to develop ideas concerning their society, in the case of Winston, and their individual actions, as is the case of Pechorin. Winston attains his experience by going through the different stages of his rebellion, whilst Pechorin obtains his experience from disrupting the lives of his lovers, rivals and others he encounters. Ironically, although the respective protagonists begin to formulate certain notions about their society or behaviour, their quest for understanding does not progress and the characters ultimately comprehend less about themselves/ society or merely comprehend as much as they did before their experiences. The authors make use of techniques such as dramatic irony and the exploration of certain themes, like fatalism in the case of, “A Hero of Our Time,” to make clear to the reader the progress the protagonists’ have made concerning their understanding. **Paragraph 1** As the plot in, “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” progresses, Winston’s experiences begin to shape his beliefs about the party rule but his understanding remains confined to what the party wants its dissidents to comprehend. - New knowledge from, “The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism,” - “Had not actually told him anything he did not know,” - Now able to formulate his own ideas “It was curious to think that the sky was the same for everybody in Eurasia or Eastasia,” His experience though rebelling against the party’s principles does not provide him with any new found knowledge on how the party maintains power. **Paragraph 2** Moreover, the particular ideas and thoughts that Winston does formulate indicate that he in fact does not comprehend the way in which the power of Big Brother can be overthrown. Through dramatic irony, we understand that Winston is naive in his belief that the proles can over throw the Party. - “If there was hope, it lay in the proles!” - They are intellectually incapable to understand or even try to overthrow the party Therefore, Winston’s experience is unable to overcome his naivety, which consequently indicates that his understanding of the proles does not progress. **Paragraph 3** In a similar manner, Pechorin provides evidence throughout that he begins to reflect more on his actions but by using fate as a scape goat, he shows the reader that he has gained no true understanding over his behaviour. - Blind to the fact that his own curiosity drives him, “Why had fate thrown me into the peacefull circle of honest smugglers?” - Does not accept that his character causes the disruptions, “fate has somehow always led me into the dramatic climaxes of others’ lives... I have played the sorry role of executioner or traitor involuntarily” - Lermontov further propounds the notion that Pechorin’s understanding is flawed shortly after, by indicating how willing he is to obtain sour relations, “I am very pleased, I love enemies.” In this case it is made obvious that not only does Pechorin wrongfully victimise himself for his malicious behaviour, he shows no understanding over how his own desires cause the suffering of others not fate. **Paragraph 4** At the end of, “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Winston believes that his own suffering througout his life has been due to the denial of Big Brother’s, “kind,” “smile.” Ultimately, Winston’s experience leads him to understand less as he no longer percieves the party’s rule as unjust and restricting to his own personal freedom. - Initial combination of adjectives which induce negative connotations, “vile,” - “DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER,” understands the oppression of the Party In contrast, after his experience with O’Brien, Winston no longer can grasp this, and instead believes that his rebellion was due to a, “needless misunderstanding.” **Paragraph 5** Conversely, Pechorin, in the chronological ending of the plot, appears to understand more about the wrong doings of his actions but chooses not to reflect on them. - Refusing a warm enounter with Maxim Maximych, does not want to reflect “I must go, Maxim Maximych,” no longer believes fate was the cause of so much suffering - “Pechorin went slightly pale, and turned away...” - Superficial belief in fate indicated before in, “Princess Mary,” “why didn’t I want to folow the path opened to me by fate,” Therefore, one can deduce that Pechorin has developed an understanding concerning his guilt in treating characters, such as Princess Mary, the way he did, but that his refusal to reflect on his actions prevents him from gaining any further grasp on the motives for his behaviour **Conclusion** The protagonists’ experience allows them the opportunity to grasp a more developed understanding over their surroundings and themselves. Though ultimately, the main characters do not understand more about themselves or the societies in which they live. In the case of Pechorin, it is because of his inability to accept his own actions and in the case of Winston, it is because of the Party’s ability to indoctrinate him.
 * “They remembered a million useless things... but all the relevant facts were outside the range of their vision.”
 * Dramatic irony as we are aware of this whilst Pechorin is not

4) Self-awareness and/or self-deception

**Intro** Both, “Huckleberry Finn,” and, “A Hero of Our Time,” are character based novels which revolve around the development of the characters and in many cases the development of the protagonists’ ideas and beliefs concerning the morality of their own actions. This reoccuring theme in the two novels was very relevant at the time they were written. Twain wrote Huckleberry Finn shortly after the official abolition of slavery but at a time in which black Americans still felt oppressed and discriminated. So, as Twain wished to demonstrate, some of the self-righteous, and white-Americans oppressed and discriminated the black-American community, refusing to see them as human beings. Lermontov, in a similar manner was part of what is known as the, “superfluous” generation of Russian youths who felt helpless and intellectually useless under the governance of Nikolas I. To overcome their boredom and as a result of the hopeless feeling many acted maliciously and illogically. Therefore, it is expected that the authors, Lermontov and Twain would explore the notions of morality and how individuals face their own guilt. Lermontov explores the issues self-deception in, “A Hero of Our Time,” to demonstrate how the protagonist, Pechorin, removes himself off of any responsibility for his conduct. Though he does show an awareness of his mistreatment of others, Pechorin chooses not to reflect on his actions. In the case of, “Huckleberry Finn”, Twain demonstrates that Huck is aware that his conduct is considered in his society as morally incorrect. As a result, Huck decieves himself at times into believing that following the conventional behaviour is the ethically right decision. **Paragraph 1** Following the first person narration of Pechorin, we often encounter moments in which he reflects on his own nature. In these instances, we as readers are shown how easily Pechorin deceieves himself for how he places himself as a victim of fate and other peoples prejudices. - Guilt, blaming others for his behaviour when it can be argued that he is the one who creates the aversion towards him - Attributing his malicious behaviour to fate, although it is clear that he himself knowns
 * “Everyone saw in my face evil traits that i didn’t possess. But they assumed I did, and so they developed”
 * “What was fate’s intent in all this?”
 * “I often ask myself, running through thoughts of the past: why didn’t I want to follow the path opened to me by fate, where quiet happiness and spiritual peace awaited me?”

Following the narration of Pechroin, it appears that although Pechorin refueses to accept the responsibility for his own actions, Lermontov indicates that his protagonist does show an awareness of his own cruelty. The issue here with Pechorin’s self-awareness is that he refuses to reflect on these matters. - Towards the end he refuses to reflect and come to terms with his actions, “‘...and Bela?’ Pechorin went slightly pale, and turned away...” - After the dual, aware he has acted irresponsibly and with cruelty, “I couldn’t help closing my eyes...”
 * Paragraph 2**
 * In both cases the short statements are followed by elipses and Pechorin rapidly moves on

Twain’s protagonist is very different in the sense that Huck divulges into these issues of ethics, and does come to terms with the moral implications of his actions. Though before Huck’s final epiphany concerning his relationship with Jim, he decieves himself into believing that behaving against his own principles is the manner in which he can relieve himself of guilt. - Religious guilt, going against his own principles, and following order he never believed in - Irony in his pity Instances such as these indicate that although he is decieving himself in his beliefs he is aware of controversy in his protecting of Jim from slavery
 * Paragraph 3**
 * “...my wickedness was being watched all the time from up there in heaven”
 * “...whilst I was stealing a poor old woman’s nigger”
 * Long syntax with run off sentences, as if he were recieting not relaying his actual thoughts

Argueably like Pechorin towards the chronological end of the novel, Huck no longer decieves himself, but unlike Pechorin he accepts that he acted unethically according to the society but no longer regrets his decisions. - Begins to view Jim more as a person and fatherly figure than an possession - Decides that he does not have to behave according to the standards, “’All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ – and tore it up.” **Conclusion** The issues of self-deception and self-awareness are both explored in the two novels, though because of the very different characters of Pechorin and Huck, the two novels do not approach these issues in the same manner. Pechorin chronologically earlier in the novel, suffered from great self-deception when facing the responsibility of his actions. Later he no longer decieves himself and blames fate for his malicious behaviour, instead he refuses to reflect on his own actions. Huck on the other hand, initially decieves himself when making judgements about Jim as a slave but ultimately, he rejects the conclusions he deduces when decieved. Huck shows awareness of the fact that he is acting against the ethical conducts of his society but eventually he chooses to reject them as the standard he wishes to follow. 5) Symbols and/or motifs – small plan
 * Paragraph 4**
 * “and we a-floating along, talking and singing, and laughing.”

In both novels, “A Hero of Our Time,” and “1984,” the two authors frequently use symbolism to bring out certain elements of the plot to the reader. Both Orwell and Twain, employ this feature two either indicate some aspect of the character or to propound some notion about the society that the novels mirror. By using these symbols, the authors, Orwell and Lermontov, are successfully able to emphasize a criticism of the society or highlights some particular trait of the protagonists without having to explicitly state them. **Paragraph 1** Symbolism of the varicose ulcer and the setting indicates to the reader the state of the mental health of Winston. When provided with freedom the effects subside. - “His veins had swelled with the effort of the cough, and the varicose ulcer had started itching” - “It was no use trying the lift. Even at the best of times it was seldom working,” **Paragraph 2** Symbolism also used to both highlight aspect of society and the character. The Paperweight as a symbol for the inaccessability of the past –> choral surrounded by glass. The breaking of the glass symbol for the Party’s destruction of the past and Winston’s hope of retrieving it. - “It was as though the surface of the glass had been the arch of the sky, enclosing a tiny world with its atmosphere complete” - “There was another crash. Someone had picked up the glass paperweight from the table and smashed it to pieces on the hearth-stone” **Paragraph 3** By using the symbolism of the varicose ulcer, he is able to indicate to the reader the state of Winston’s mental health. This prevents the need to explicitly state in the narrative that Winston’s mental health is either improving or is deteriorated. - “He had grown fatter, his varicose ulcer subsided,” Furthermore, Orwell is able to also highlight the inaccessibility of the past in Winston’s society through the symbolism of the Paperweight. Though, it is not as essential as the varicose ulcer symbol, since this is already made evident in Winston’s encounter with the proles. **Paragraph 4** Lermontov in a similar manner is able to use symbolism to indicate a certain element of Pechorin’s character, for example his inability to accept responsibility for his own actions. - Belief in fatalism symbolises his inability to face his own actions. “Why had fate thrown me into this peaceful circle of honest smugglers?” This allows Lermontov to unravel the character of Pechorin. Provides opportunity to the reader to determine one of the many motives for Pechorin’s behaviour **Paragraph 5** Not only does Lermontov make use of these techniques to develop Pechorin’s character, he also uses symbolism to criticise the “superfluous” generation of Russian’s. Through the symbolism of the horses and their relation to women, and the detail focused on uniforms, Lermontov is able to highlight the superficiality of the society and the role that the women played during the time. - Women and horses described similarily “I can see that horse now: black as pitch, its legs like taut strings, and eyes as nice as Bela’s.” Both merely as possessions to overcome their boredom. - Superficiality of the society “My Petersburg-cut frock coat led them to an initial illusion, but as soon as they recognized the army epaulets they turned away with indignation”
 * Intro**

6) In the end is my beginning

Background?
 * Intro**

One can argue that the statement, “In the end is my beginning,” is refering to the manner in which an author organizes his works to make the end events of the ending reminiscent of the beginning of the plot. This explanation of how some authors construct their plots events could be applicable to both, “Huckleberry Finn,” and “1984,” as the endings are similar to the beginnings in certain respects. The two authors though, use this type of plot construction for two entirely different purposes. In, “1984,” Orwell places the protagonist in a similar situation as he was towards the start of the plot to emphasize the change or lack thereof in Winston’s character and his view of the rebelion against the Party rule. On the other hand, it can be argued that Twain designs the ending in, “Huckleberry Finn,” to seem similar to aspects of the beginning to simply attain a complete conclusion of the plot. Unlike, “1984,” the changes in Huck’s character and view of society is indicated before the final episode of the novel which is infact radically different to the initial segments of the plot. **Paragraph 1:** After witnessing the stages of Winston’s rebellion, the character of Winston returns to a similar position as he was in the in the first sections of the novel. Therefore, one can deduce that Orwell sought to demonstrate how ultimately, Winston does not progress with his rebellion or his understanding of the Party rule. - Health deteriorating and return to dependence on Gin, “...gulped it down like a dose of medicine,”(beginning) “It was gin that sank him into stupor every night, and gin that revived him every morning.” (end) - Believes he is powerless and the party will always triumphs, “The Thought Police would get him just the same.” (beginning) “The huge face gazed back at him, full of calm power. White always mates.”

**Paragraph 2:** Moreover, Orwell indicates that Winston’s development and understanding of the society he lives in ultimately is worse than at the start as he no longer comprehends that the Party is restricting his freedoms. - Symbolism of chessboard. Attributes the good to Big Brother, “In no chess problem since the beginning of the world has black ever won. Did it not symbolise the eternal, unvarying triumph of Good over evil?” - No longer as bitter, does not place as much focus on the terrible smells, tastes and run down setting. Indicated by the lack of bitter diction. “Vile,” “Rotting,” (Beginning) As we can see, the statement can indicate to the reader that Orwell chose to end in a manner reminiscent of the beginning to both propound the notion that Winston has failed and not progressed in his rebellion or understanding, and that his view of the Party rule has infact worsened. **Paragraph 3** Twain though, approaches the ending of his novel in a different manner. Although both Orwell and Twain use this technique, the ending in “Huckleberry Finn” seems not only to show a difference in Huck but also provides a simple manner in which the author can effectively close all the plot points. - Huck before used Jim as an object of his own pleasure to play tricks on. Ending now shows difference between him and Tom - Huck’s wish to avoid being “Sivilized” humourous way to end **Paragraph 4** Real ending of the development of Huck is before the encounter with Tom Sawyer as he chooses not to follow the conventional standards of treating slaves. - Sees Jim as property initialy “I was stealing a poor old woman’s nigger” - Sees fatherly and human properties of Jim, litany of memories, “and I see Jim before me, all the time, in the day, and in the night-time, sometimes moonlight, sometimes storms, and we a-floating along, talking, and singing, and laughing.” Repitition of gerunds Considering this, one could deduce also that the statement expresses the authors idea that the development of their character does not occur at the end the same way it does not occur at the beginning. **Paragraph 5** This statement though, can also make reference to the fact that it brings a new perspective to the novel’s plot. Considering this arguement, “1984,” may have its true ending with the appendix and provides the hopefull outlook of the novel which is not very prominent throughout. - Past tense, indicates the rule of the Party has ended, and they were unable to replace Oldspeak, “the final adoption of Newspeak had been fixed for so late a date as 2050” - No new found knowledge of Newspeak can indicate that the importance is not in the details of the language but in the fact that it is no longer used. **Conclusion** The novels may both utilize this style of plot structure but they both achieve a different effect. The ending of, “1984,” allows the reader to see the change in Winston from the beginning regarding his final submission to the Party. Similarily, the ending of, “Huckleberry Finn,” allows us to see the difference in Huck’s view of Jim and the difference now between him and Tom Sawyer. Though the two novels have other endings if the appendix in, “1984,” can be considered the true conclusion to the plot indicating the fall of the Party, and the Huck’s epiphany regarding slavery as the end to his road to maturity.

8) Story Tellers

**Intro:** The two novels, “Huckleberry Finn,” and, “1984,” both have different styles of narrative voice. Orwell’s novel is narrated in the third person but expresses the ideas that go through the protagonist’s mind. Though at times, Winston’s deteriorated mind is unable to deliver some of the ideas relayed in the novel. In instances like these, Orwell makes use of the free indirect discourse which expresses the notions that Winston is incapable of articulating. Twain’s, “Huckleberry Finn,” is completely narrated in the first person. A common impression left from the story-tellers of the two novels is that they are both at times naive. Although this is the case with both Huck and Winston’s narration, this impression of the characters allow for different effects on the reading of each one of the novels. The naivety in Huck allows the character room for the development of his ideas concerning the society which he is part of. On the other hand, the naivety of Winston demonstrates that he, the everyman, is powerless against the totalitarian regime. Furthermore, it shows the extent to which the Party can deteriorate the minds of its citezens. Although the two characters are naive, the manner in which the authors relay their critiques through the narration is different. Huck is ultimately able to develop his ideas concerning slavery and so Twain is able to make his commentaries through the protagonist’s moments of epiphany. On the other hand, Orwell’s protagonist is never able to properly develop ideas concerning the Party’s totalitarian governance, and so the use of the free indirect discourse incorporates Orwell’s voice.

**Paragraph 1** From the very beginning the reader is given the impression that Huck is innocent and naive. This character trait though, allows for a gentle criticism of the society in which Twain is mirroring but more importantly provides a room for Huck to develop the ideas concerning slavery which Twain sought to propound. - Innocence and naivety from his evaluation of the religious principles being taught by Miss Watson “Well, I couldn’t see no advantage in going where she was going, so I made up my mind I wouldn’t try for it.” - Later begins to react to the observations he makes before he can finally conclude with his own ideas. “It was enough to make a body ashamed of the human race.” **Paragraph 2** Throughout his journey, the naive Huck witnesses the kind of atrocities that white individuals are capable of, and observes incidents such as the quarrel between Sheburn and the mob. From his experience Huck is then able to develop from his naivety and deduce his own principles on slavery. - Hypocrisy of some of the preachers of religious principles, “And she took snuff too; of course, that was all right, because she done it herself” - Not needing to follow the crowd view. “The pitifulest thing out is a mob” - Towards the end, he can finaly see Huck as the loving fatherly figure and no longer views him as mere property. “...and would always call me honey, and pet me,” “’All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ – and tore it up.” **Paragraph 3** Winston’s naivety is indicated in his inability to articulate his thoughts against the party but more significantly in his misjudgment of the proles and their capacities. Though, unlike the, “Huckleberry Finn,” the effect of this characterization is that it highlights the Party’s ability to mentally deteriorate its population and emphasizes the individual’s impotence against the totalitarian rule. - Diaries entries “theyll shoot me i dont care theyll shoot me in the back of the neck i dont care down with big brother” - False judgement of the Proles capacity “... all the relevant facts were outside the range of their vision,” “If there was hope, it lay in the proles!”

This impression allows us to see Winston, representative of the average man as powerless against the totalitarian regime and indicates the extent to which the the Party can deteriorate the individual’s mind. **Paragraph 4** Although Winston is mentally incapable of articulating the criticisms against the totalitarian form of gorvernance, it is through the free indirect discourse and the evaluation that the reader makes that Orwell’s voice on Oligarchical rule comes through. - Free indirect discourse in the hyperbolic satire on the two minutes hate, propoganda of Nazi’s, “A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness a desire to kill...” - Characterization of Winston as naive, Orwell showing impotency of individual under the totalitarian government

**Paragraph 5** Twain’s protagonist, unlike Orwell’s, ultimately is able to mature from his initial naive character due to his experiences traveling down the Mississippi river. As a result, Twain is not only able to initially convey a subtle criticism of the American society, he is later able to induce the ideas concering slavery through Huck’s narration. - View that individuals must see the slaves as humans not possessions. “I was stealing a poor old woman’s nigger” - Religious guilt of Huck representative of the people following the immoral conventional standards of society “I felt good and all washed clean of sin for the first time I had ever felt in my life, and I knowed I could pray now.” **Conclusion** The narrators in the two novels both at times give off the impression that they are naive and unable to deliver the criticisms of society that the authors wished to make. In the case of “Huckleberry Finn,” it gives the narrator an opportunity to mature and finaly express the ideas of the author. Though in the case of, “1984,” it is through the free indirect discourse in and the symbolism in Winston’s naivety, that Orwell is able to relay his commentaries on the totalitarian regimes.