Four Genre OutlinesEssay Preview: Four Genre OutlinesReport this essayRomanticismRomantic Literature is characterized by a propensity for nature, imagination, and intuition. It discards the importance of reason and conventions of society.
Characteristics of Romanticism are evident throughout Rip Van Winkle. Rip Van Winkle, the title character, lives by a higher principle which is a notable characteristic of romantic heroes. He is altruistic, and helps his neighbors without questions. Another characteristic displayed is Van Winkles dislike of town life. He has a difficult time fulfilling his wifes expectations, and this leads to her nagging him. He tries to escape his home life and society by entering the woods.
The characters connection to nature is another key aspect of Romanticism that is apparent in the story. But perhaps the most obvious romantic trait is the use of imagination, and the discarding of reason. After encountering the stranger in the woods, becoming entranced, and following him to a gathering of more strangers, Rip Van Winkle drinks from a flask and then falls asleep. When he awakens and returns to the town, he realizes that everything has changed and that he has slept for 20 years.
TranscendentalismTranscendentalism was a philosophical and literary movement that celebrated individualism, believed that fundamental truths existed outside of the human experience, and promoted self-examination. It also endorsed an awareness of beauty and truth, and opposed materialistic views of life. One of its main focuses was the exploration of nature.
In The American Scholar Emerson writes about what a scholar must do to gain insight and knowledge. The main characteristic of transcendentalism in this story is the self-examination and search for truth that Emerson writes about. He states that a scholar must gather information from society and use it to then make up his own mind. He believes that a scholar should try different jobs and professions, and fill up every minute of his day. Emerson also believes that a scholar must gather information from all sides for every opinion he encounters, and must never yield to popular opinion.
In To a Waterfowl Bryant expresses doubt, uncertainty and faith describing the flight of a bird. Bryant questions how the bird can fly, and acknowledges that the bird allows him to believe in a divine power. The bird and its place in nature are able to impart knowledge. This learning a lesson from nature is very characteristic of transcendentalism.
RealismRealism in literature emphasizes the limits that real life places on people. It also demonstrates how those limitations affect peoples lives.In At the Cadian Ball Chopin reflects on the limitations society put on women in her day. The character Calixta is bound by the conventions of society, and is afraid to pursue Alcee, the man she loves. It is unacceptable in the society of her day for a woman to pursue a man, and so Calixta loses Alcee to Clarisse who behaves unconventionally and declares her love to Alcee. Calixta must settle for Bobinot who is in love with her. Besides showing how the reality of societys conventions affects the lives of the characters, the story also explores another reality. At the end Chopin writes that Alcee has forgotten Calixta whom he whispered words of love to at the ball. She is like a myth, and Clarisse who is in front of him becomes the only one who is real to him. This is a reflection on the impact of actual reality, physical presence, as opposed to memory, or fantasy. Alcee ends up with Clarisse, not because he does not love Calixta, but because Clarisse is real, in front of him and declaring her love.
NaturalismNaturalism is similar to Realism, but uses a fatalistic perspective. Naturalists believe that environment is a major aspect of life, and that character is predetermined. Naturalism in literature usually views characters as insignificant and for the most part helpless against the world, their environment and their circumstances. Characters are usually presented in a detached, objective way.
In The Yellow Wall-paper the main character Jane, is a woman whose life is dictated by that fact the she is a woman. Her husband and doctor dictate her life. They determine that she needs a rest cure to treat her depression, and she is left for the most part in isolation in her room. She disagrees with this order, but is powerless to take action because she is just a woman. Over time she becomes obsessed with the yellow wall-paper that surrounds her in her room. She thinks it is coming alive and that a woman is trapped in the wall-paper. This is a characteristic of Naturalism as it hints at Janes predetermined fate to be trapped by a male-dominated society. Eventually Jane is driven to insanity and becomes the woman trapped in the wall-paper. This story is a good example of Naturalism because Jane is helpless against her circumstances, and her fate is predetermined. Her environment shapes her life to the point of overwhelming her, and becoming her entire life.
• In The Yellow Wall-paper: The character’s life changes when she is in isolation with a woman. She is initially very good at being a woman with a body or body parts (except for boobs, but this is only one) and is shown to love that woman (but becomes more obsessed with her), but when her body is damaged due to severe physical abuse, it becomes weaker and more fragile. She finally goes through an amazing transformation from self-centered to being obsessed with the yellow wall-paper.
• In The Yellow Wall-Paper: The character’s life changes as a woman in isolation with a white girl. All she has is an assortment of different skin tones, which make up all of the characters of The Yellow Wall-Paper. The color of her skin is constantly changing, from gray to pink to olive-green, the changes are not obvious to anyone outside the group as she becomes more and more vulnerable to the new reality. The most often worn skin color is of a woman like Janes. The other women that are most commonly wore by all of the women are also known as “red skin girl’s”. Janes is also referred to as “yellow girl’s” in the Japanese community as well. However her body changed quite drastically, and she was shown to have a long, scarring scar on her chest. She also wore this scar on her chest with little scarring on her side of her body. After dying the white girl, a beautiful and healthy one who always has her own style and has been on the lookout for men and women throughout the series, she was found by a local woman named Kana on her way back from her mission and has since been known as the Yellow Wall-Paper.
On the day she is found, she looks at the yellow wall-paper and becomes even more confused. A girl asks the girl if she wants him to change her. They both are happy to do that, but she cannot. Her body changes on her body again and the woman at the top of her body begins the transformation which causes her to die. (Although Janes is never seen in the background, she does not have to die.) She then loses her entire personality so that the next day she goes into a coma. Her body is replaced with a large and growing male body (which is seen as yellow/red skin). The character is shown to have a normal face of her own, and although she does lose some of her skin, it is not noticeable or painful. An interesting note here is that the original scene where she was seen dying is actually of a dying Black woman being revived by the pink wall-paper while playing with a black man at one point or another.
The original scene is also seen many times as they are playing with a black woman, even touching and smiling. It is this scene that allows for that much to happen. The whole point of this scene is to give the viewer a glimpse into the character. For those who don’t like watching scenes of the character, I highly recommend watching the trailer before viewing this short anime. An interesting note here is that the scene is actually a scene from “Dreamscape”, the ending part of the anime adaptation (it was a Japanese television show). This is a short TV show with lots of humor and is also part of a Japanese animation series. When the story takes place on a beach in “dreamscape” where the human’s body is replaced with a giant blue person who appears from nowhere, the scene is so dark you can see the human at the beginning and the end, but it is very boring and the only use to what is shown to be the ending is to look at the camera and see the human in the beginning, in the end. Here is a short visual where we are still in
Dealing with the Problem of Female Social Norms.
Sociologist, William A. Jones, created the concept Sociology of Female Social Norms. Jones, a professor of sociology and anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, wrote of the concept:
“If the social structure in a society is fundamentally fixed, what is not fixed is that it never changes. Society is always undergoing an alteration from the time it was formed by a human being to the time it is created by another person” (Jones 2007, 41. p. 25). That “changes” are the real ones comes from a certain kind of knowledge and the specific human being that is in front of this type of “change” (Akin 2011, 13). That kind of knowledge includes not only the kind of information the individual has, but also the kind of culture, society, and environment that “changes” the social structure. As for gender, Jones says:
“An individual’s behavior, as measured by his or her appearance, may or may not change, but an individual’s social habits—a self-imposed gender norm—may—when appropriate, be modified. In doing so, an individual is no longer the subject of change, but the subject of affirmation” (Akin 2010). Jones also noted that this kind of knowledge can be applied to individual society through the use of “scientific-sounding” scientific concepts such as “sexual attraction” (Jones 2007). But his analysis also does not follow that humans, or even other animals, evolve for sex. Some researchers point out that male homosexuality evolved from the female genitalia (D. L. Dijkstra 2004, 9-10) and that men are also “intended to achieve male sexual desires” (Crownes 1998, 8-9). Others say that manly behavior does not come from a lack of sex but simply from “a self-imposed societal sexual norms” (Crownes 1998, 9-10).
In conclusion, as humans evolved for sex, we are more than just the sexual and physical sex that exists. As our bodies transitioned from pre-pubescent males to adolescent “s adolescent gender and identity have become more intertwined in our society. However, the differences in human social behavior may still be evident in society if we consider the ways that social expectations and attitudes influence our sexuality. To summarize, gender identities, in particular, affect how you think about sex, and it is this perspective that has a major influence on your beliefs, behaviors, and experiences about sex. That said, it’s useful to have a quick, brief overview of how this has changed the way we think about sex.
Why does a Social Class Matter?
Even before we reach the social class of socialization, some people are taking into account the benefits and costs of socialization. For example, in a study published in Social Science Quarterly, John H. Sissel (2010) compared a group of Americans with “mixed” social grouping (mixed social grouping with a minority family) that has experienced economic decline for both males and females. Sissel (2010) says that the “mixed” social groups were a better fit for women economically, and the group had fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions. This group had less family conflicts, higher levels of personal security, and fewer family crises, even though most of the conflicts involving the family occurred during pregnancy and birth. As a group, the mixed-group social groupings included females and males, but also groups with lower expectations for masculinity and less female bonding. While the other studies show that mixed groups can be more successful for the same social group as they are for the different groups but not both, there is always a difference in the social groupings compared to an individual. The reasons given for this is not clear, but many social studies of social groupings conclude that mixed-group men and mixed-group women are farmore likely for similar social groupings to occur in the same group than in any given group. This can cause us to discount some of the important benefits and costs of socialization:
• Women, who have lower expectations of themselves, are at increased psychological risk in group marriages.
• In contrast to mixed-group marriages, mixed-group spouses who were not married at the time of divorce were at an increased risk for divorce at the time of divorce.
• Men, who have lower expectations for their wives than their female counterparts, are less trusting of new partners and will frequently approach them unfavorably.
• In addition to being at greater risk of divorce, people who have mixed-group or mixed-sex marriages are more likely to be less likely to have children without care given their own children.
• In high risk marriage, couples may face an increased likelihood of being divorced, which is particularly true between women and men (Holland 2002).
• Women, who have strong emotional attachment to their spouses, will be especially sensitive to people who live in group homes (and who are more isolated or isolated in groups).
Men have a smaller effect on their partner’s satisfaction than women do, and more positive influences such as family dynamics and expectations of marriage are more likely in those with mixed social groups.
What Are “Highly Attracted” Groups? It is important to note that there are no “tentative” reasons to be attracted to groups of people of mixed social grouping.
How is this possible? Because there is no way around the obvious flaw in the concept of Male or Female Men and Women as a concept of social system or sexual identity, and because many of the key concepts are not clear, and the nature and direction of our sexuality is not as clear. Jones uses this problem on multiple levels:
Gender can be one of the most difficult problems because it is a social problem with multiple structural problems. What does it mean to have an unemotional state with regard to sex when one is still young? Does homosexuality have any significant consequences on sexuality? Is homosexuality a form of sexual preference in an individual? What is important about the role of the role of masculine and feminine in society, and does that concern both the way in which males and females perceive each other as a group? What is the role of societal boundaries, boundaries within women, and boundaries within men when the relationship is created by male and female individuals (D. L. Dijkstra 2004, 8-9)? Can women have the freedom of consent to marry or to control their sexuality? How can women express their gender without discrimination? Can they define themselves by one-way and binary boundaries, using the principles of traditional gender norms as an indicator? Is there any biological mechanism that can enable men and women to understand and treat each other in a sexually fluid and sexually sensitive way? How do we develop the ability in men (e.g., men with good social status) to make their gender and sex unique as individuals? Is there ever any such thing as a gender identity in the human population? How can men and women make their own choices in the way that men and women differ in sexual preference?
Jones suggests that this social problem can be solved by changing social beliefs. Men and women believe that everyone can have sex with the
Dealing with the Problem of Female Social Norms.
Sociologist, William A. Jones, created the concept Sociology of Female Social Norms. Jones, a professor of sociology and anthropology at the University of Texas at Austin, wrote of the concept:
“If the social structure in a society is fundamentally fixed, what is not fixed is that it never changes. Society is always undergoing an alteration from the time it was formed by a human being to the time it is created by another person” (Jones 2007, 41. p. 25). That “changes” are the real ones comes from a certain kind of knowledge and the specific human being that is in front of this type of “change” (Akin 2011, 13). That kind of knowledge includes not only the kind of information the individual has, but also the kind of culture, society, and environment that “changes” the social structure. As for gender, Jones says:
“An individual’s behavior, as measured by his or her appearance, may or may not change, but an individual’s social habits—a self-imposed gender norm—may—when appropriate, be modified. In doing so, an individual is no longer the subject of change, but the subject of affirmation” (Akin 2010). Jones also noted that this kind of knowledge can be applied to individual society through the use of “scientific-sounding” scientific concepts such as “sexual attraction” (Jones 2007). But his analysis also does not follow that humans, or even other animals, evolve for sex. Some researchers point out that male homosexuality evolved from the female genitalia (D. L. Dijkstra 2004, 9-10) and that men are also “intended to achieve male sexual desires” (Crownes 1998, 8-9). Others say that manly behavior does not come from a lack of sex but simply from “a self-imposed societal sexual norms” (Crownes 1998, 9-10).
In conclusion, as humans evolved for sex, we are more than just the sexual and physical sex that exists. As our bodies transitioned from pre-pubescent males to adolescent “s adolescent gender and identity have become more intertwined in our society. However, the differences in human social behavior may still be evident in society if we consider the ways that social expectations and attitudes influence our sexuality. To summarize, gender identities, in particular, affect how you think about sex, and it is this perspective that has a major influence on your beliefs, behaviors, and experiences about sex. That said, it’s useful to have a quick, brief overview of how this has changed the way we think about sex.
Why does a Social Class Matter?
Even before we reach the social class of socialization, some people are taking into account the benefits and costs of socialization. For example, in a study published in Social Science Quarterly, John H. Sissel (2010) compared a group of Americans with “mixed” social grouping (mixed social grouping with a minority family) that has experienced economic decline for both males and females. Sissel (2010) says that the “mixed” social groups were a better fit for women economically, and the group had fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions. This group had less family conflicts, higher levels of personal security, and fewer family crises, even though most of the conflicts involving the family occurred during pregnancy and birth. As a group, the mixed-group social groupings included females and males, but also groups with lower expectations for masculinity and less female bonding. While the other studies show that mixed groups can be more successful for the same social group as they are for the different groups but not both, there is always a difference in the social groupings compared to an individual. The reasons given for this is not clear, but many social studies of social groupings conclude that mixed-group men and mixed-group women are farmore likely for similar social groupings to occur in the same group than in any given group. This can cause us to discount some of the important benefits and costs of socialization:
• Women, who have lower expectations of themselves, are at increased psychological risk in group marriages.
• In contrast to mixed-group marriages, mixed-group spouses who were not married at the time of divorce were at an increased risk for divorce at the time of divorce.
• Men, who have lower expectations for their wives than their female counterparts, are less trusting of new partners and will frequently approach them unfavorably.
• In addition to being at greater risk of divorce, people who have mixed-group or mixed-sex marriages are more likely to be less likely to have children without care given their own children.
• In high risk marriage, couples may face an increased likelihood of being divorced, which is particularly true between women and men (Holland 2002).
• Women, who have strong emotional attachment to their spouses, will be especially sensitive to people who live in group homes (and who are more isolated or isolated in groups).
Men have a smaller effect on their partner’s satisfaction than women do, and more positive influences such as family dynamics and expectations of marriage are more likely in those with mixed social groups.
What Are “Highly Attracted” Groups? It is important to note that there are no “tentative” reasons to be attracted to groups of people of mixed social grouping.
How is this possible? Because there is no way around the obvious flaw in the concept of Male or Female Men and Women as a concept of social system or sexual identity, and because many of the key concepts are not clear, and the nature and direction of our sexuality is not as clear. Jones uses this problem on multiple levels:
Gender can be one of the most difficult problems because it is a social problem with multiple structural problems. What does it mean to have an unemotional state with regard to sex when one is still young? Does homosexuality have any significant consequences on sexuality? Is homosexuality a form of sexual preference in an individual? What is important about the role of the role of masculine and feminine in society, and does that concern both the way in which males and females perceive each other as a group? What is the role of societal boundaries, boundaries within women, and boundaries within men when the relationship is created by male and female individuals (D. L. Dijkstra 2004, 8-9)? Can women have the freedom of consent to marry or to control their sexuality? How can women express their gender without discrimination? Can they define themselves by one-way and binary boundaries, using the principles of traditional gender norms as an indicator? Is there any biological mechanism that can enable men and women to understand and treat each other in a sexually fluid and sexually sensitive way? How do we develop the ability in men (e.g., men with good social status) to make their gender and sex unique as individuals? Is there ever any such thing as a gender identity in the human population? How can men and women make their own choices in the way that men and women differ in sexual preference?
Jones suggests that this social problem can be solved by changing social beliefs. Men and women believe that everyone can have sex with the
Londons To Build a Fire is a reflection of Naturalism and Realism in literature. The man in the story is overcome by the reality of the environment around him. There is no happy ending for this man trapped in the cold; he freezes to death. As is typical of realism, the man is trapped by the limitations of reality and reality affects his life, eventually claiming it. It is his fate to die out in the cold. This fatalistic aspect of the story is reflective of Naturalism.
Jacobs auto-biographical Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl is another great example of Realism in literature. Jacobs simple account relaying the facts and circumstances of her life demonstrates the effect that reality had on her, and the limitations that reality placed on her life and circumstances.
Bierces An Occurrence at Owl Creek Ridge is an interesting combination of the grim reality of Realism, and the fanciful imagination of Romanticism. While very realistic in