100% Secure Payment
© 2025 Copyright:
BoutEssays. All rights reserved
The origin of the two heroes Beowulf and Hercules is stated to be associated with divine heroes. They were honored and royal servants of their country and communities they lead their communities to heroic events and battles. In majority of their stories the two warriors usually have a successful end. The two worries had a similar origin of European. To be more specific the two worries inspired two different generations in the Germanic history ("Compare and Contrast Beowulf and Hercules").
Get original essayHercules came before Beowulf. He was an inspiration of majority of German population that was interested in martial heroic events and deeds in Roman period ("Compare and Contrast Beowulf and Hercules").The Beowulf story was an inspiration to the Germanic warriors that came later in the generation, he took fights with monsters that lived in the caves. Beowulf fought a deadly dragon while Hercules encountered the Cacus Monster. They both came from royal backgrounds, one originated from Greece while the other one originated from Denmark.
Beowulf and Hercules attain similar status, power, and battles in their tales thus allowing one to come to the conclusion that these heroes are the same. Some may argue that these two are very different, however we must remember that the tale of Hercules influenced the Germanic people of heroic tales and bravery, as did Beowulf for the later generations of the Germanic people, thus the reason for the likeness in both. Hercules and Beowulf are both tremendous warriors. Beowulf is called to fight the beast Grendel who is terrorizing the people of Heorot. Grendel does not like the noise and commotion that happens there, so as a result he harasses the people and kills them as they attempt to fight him off.
Beowulf comes to King Hrothgar and volunteers to fight Grendel and sails to Denmark to do so. He defeats the beast successfully and goes on to fight Grendel’s mother followed by a Dragon. He’s ability to fight and defeat these beasts show his skill, and he becomes known as the defender of the city, and the person the people call to fight for them. Hercules is alike in the sense that he was a great fighter and was a protector. He fought the Minyans which were a group of people threatening Thebes, Greece. He also went on twelve labors which were challenging and dangerous. Some of his tasks included killing the Stymphalian Birds, a group of birds that ate humans and terrorized the city, the Lernean Hydra which had nine heads and as he cut one off another one grew, and the Erymanthian Boar which was another beast he defeated by chasing it, until the beast was tired.
Even after completing his twelve labors, he went on to fighting more battles and adventures. Hercules and Beowulf both are men who were constantly victorious in their battles and were always willing to help others. They attained the status of the protectors of the people. These men also had tremendous amount of strength and special powers. Beowulf’s abilities is apparent during his battle with Grendel. During the fight, Grendel attempts to grab Beowulf but instead Beowulf grabs him so strongly, that he becomes scared. Grendel is unable to escape from Beowulf’s hold and their fighting is shaking the kingdom. Warriors attempt to jump in with their weapons and help Beowulf, but don’t know that Grendel is prone to weapons, thus forcing Beowulf to use his bare hands.
Beowulf rips Grendel’s arm and carries it to mount it on the wall. We see his special abilities again with the fight against Grendel’s mom, which occurs underwater. Beowulf has the ability to hold his breath for hours while he fights and can go days and nights without resting or food. Hercules has the reputation of being the strongest man that ever lived. From his infant stage he killed two poisonous snakes that were in his crib sent by the goddess Hera, who was jealous of Zeus, his father. He also killed the Nameon Lion who was a ferocious beast with his bare hands just as Beowulf did and challenged Gods to battles and often won. He never aged and could jump 100 feet into the air.
Another similarity between the two is that they experienced some kind of down fall in each of their stories. When Beowulf fights his last battle which is the Dragon, he is in his old age. He is risking the chance of possibly losing because he wasn’t as young as he was when he fought the other two beasts. The dragon and Beowulf begin to battle but then it takes a bite out of Beowulf and he starts to bleed. Though he is wounded he gets a knife and stabs the dragon and it dies. Unfortunately, Beowulf dies also. Hercules’s second wife Deianeira, was the cause of his death. The two were trying to cross the Evenus River and a centaur called Nessus offered to take Deianeira across. She allowed it, but only after she was given the ride Nessus tried to rape her. Hercules of course protecting his wife shot Nessus to stop him. As he was dying however he told Deianeria to keep some of his blood, so that just in case Hercules begins to fall out of love with her she could use it to make him fall back in love. This was a lie and his blood is actually filled with poison, however Deianeria still takes it. Later on, Hercules begins to look another woman named Lole in a desirable way. Worried for their marriage Deinaneria takes Nessus blood and soaks his clothes in it so that he will continued to be interested in her.
When Hercules goes to put it on, his skin catches on fire as the poison sets in. He is in immense pain and because he is a demi-god, he doesn’t die immediately meaning he has to endure the slow, agonizing pain. After realizing what she had done, Denineria kills herself. Finally, Hercules decides to kill himself and set the rest of himself on fire. This kills the mortal part of him but not the immortal part. He goes to his new home on Mt. Olympus to rejoin with the other gods. These two men also have patriarchal figures that had some sort of authority. Hercules was the son of Zeus, who was the God of King and Thunder who ruled Olympus and the other gods. Beowulf’s father brother was the king of the land of Danes.
Though the two heroes fought and represented their nations and communities in dangerous and important quests they weaknesses of human nature. Beowulf main weakness was his ego that was accompanied by pride. This aspect made him to be reckless making him to undertake very dangerous challenges individually. This aspect distinguished Beowulf from the rest of the Roman and Greek warriors. The Greek and roman warriors always had tragic flaws that lead them to their defeat and destruction in most of the instances. Some dangerous quests without the use of weapons and with no help as he always confident that he will be a victor.
At his older age when he had no much strength, Beowulf decides to fight the dragon alone, when he was wounded an unable to defeat the dragon, he takes that as his fate and accepts that he would die at that point. This distinguished him against the Greek classical heroes that their fate was based on their poor choices that they made at the very crucial moments. He had to choose from deciding to encounter the dragon or many people would die. In this action he never demonstrated Greek hamartia but demonstrated the fatalism of Western.
Beowulf strengths included; the supernatural strength, loyalty, faith, honor and bravery. This is well demonstrated by him agreeing to destroy Grendel and the mother. He elaborates his bravery by fighting the two creatures individually and him dying still fighting and battling to save his people. His strength is well elaborated by him ripping off Grendel ribs with his hands. He demonstrated his faith and recognition of the Supreme Being by always giving thanks to God when he emerge successful in his battles ("Beowulf Characteristics").
The mythology of the Greek stipulates that Herculkes most of the time he was led by his gluttonous and lustful nature. There information from unreliable sources that stated that he impregnated the daughters of Thespius that were 50. His wife Megara also had given birth to him three kids. He was also very vigorous. He kept on changing his character with time, in some of the stories he is depicted as being very humble. Hercules strengths included his passion to overcome that appeared along his ways, his strength physically, and bravery. Hercules strengths and capabilities are mostly compared to Samson of the Bible hence in some times he is referred to as the Greek Samson ("Greek Samson").
Thomas Freeman’s Maxim article, “Here’s Why Narcissists Have the Most Friends,” claims that “people with narcissistic personalities more quickly amass friends and admirers,” but that people with high emotional intelligence “gain the most popularity overtime.” He goes on to briefly describe a study conducted in Poland in which groups of students took personality tests which would describe their levels of narcissism and emotional intelligence and “voted who they liked best in each group multiple times.” In the article, the people higher in narcissism were said to have been listed as well-liked at the beginning of the study, but the people high in emotional intelligence became the best-liked group members by the end of study, which took place over three months. Freeman then makes two inferences about the study: “a positive is that people will eventually realize who's capable of being a "best friend for life," but a negative is that narcissists prove to be incredibly persuasive and can easily assume leadership positions.”
Get original essayThe article is terribly written. Initially, Freeman makes the associative claim that narcissistic people “more quickly” gain admiration from others. This is not worded correctly in reference to the rest of the article; really Freeman is making the claim that narcissists are better-liked than people who are not narcissistic at first, and then as time passes, narcissists make gradually fewer friends. Also, he doesn’t specify who narcissists are compared to in this initial claim. Readers of the article would then make up their own ideas and could assume that the narcissists in this claim were being compared to people who are not narcissistic, or people who are emotionally intelligent. People who have read the Maxim article but not the referenced study would be misled to believe a false claim because the actual claim in the article is not clear or specific enough. Freeman should have been more specific making his claim, and should not have included his personal implications about the study’s findings in reference to leadership positions for the sake of accuracy, since the study does not mention leadership positions as they relate to narcissism.
The empirical research article conducted an observational study on formal study groups at Polish universities. Institutions of higher education in Poland assign students to groups in which they have to take all the same classes. The researchers in the study targeted these groups at the very beginning of the semester, before the group members had met each other, and then a second time after three months. The group members took personality tests measuring their levels of narcissism, emotional intelligence, explicit self-esteem, and implicit self-esteem at the beginning of the study. All the measurements were based on a Likert-scale format, except for implicit self-esteem, which was measured by the size of the participants’ casual handwritten signatures. They were also asked to list the group members they liked the most. The study then examined the interaction between narcissism, emotional intelligence, time, and the number of “edges” sent or received, which refers to the nominations the group members made. The number of received edges was compared between the first and second waves of the study in one two-way interaction.
Like the researchers predicted, narcissism was linked to receiving edges during the first wave (the beginning of the study), but not the second wave (three months later). There was a negative correlation between narcissistic group members receiving edges at the beginning as compared to the end, with the narcissism of the senders and time being controlled. The narcissists did not, however, lose friends; they rather made friends at a slower rate than those who were not narcissistic as time went on. Emotional intelligence was linked with general receiving of nominations as compared to group members with low emotional intelligence, but was not significant with respect to time. Individuals who were high in narcissism and low in emotional intelligence received the most nominations, and second place went to individuals who were high in emotional intelligence and low in narcissism. The people who were low in both narcissism and emotional intelligence received the least nominations. The findings report two associative claims: 1) that narcissism is linked with initial popularity, which wanes over time but does not decrease, and 2) that emotionally intelligent people are overall linked with popularity, but it also increases over time. The report did not find an association between narcissism and emotional intelligence.
These associative claims meet the criteria for validity. The variables were operationally defined well, with popularity being measured as the number of times someone was nominated as someone likable in the group, and narcissism and emotional intelligence being operationally defined as scores on Likert-scale type personality tests. The one discrepancy in the construct validity is the implicit self-esteem, which was measured as the size of the participants’ signatures. The article did not back this up as a reliable measurement of implicit self-esteem. The external validity of the study is questionable. The study generalizes to “people,” which is vague and inaccurate. Polish college students should not be able to generalize to all people because they are biased with respect to age and location. The participants could generalize to a larger population if the study was an experiment and involved random assignment of some treatment. But since this was simply an observational study, some underlying factors could account for the trends in the findings and skew them. The researchers also misuse some language. The word “effects” in the abstract has causal connotations even though the research findings and the report make it clear that they are making an associative claim, not a causal claim. The researchers should have used words such as “link” and “correlation” instead of “effects.”
The study and the Maxim article make more or less the same associative claim, but the Maxim article uses misleading language that shows that the journalist did not fully understand what implications he can make from the study’s findings. He should have separately described the two claims the researchers made instead of combining them into one grandiose statement. The Maxim article generalizes the claim to a dichotomy between narcissistic people and emotionally intelligent people, when he should have drawn a connection between being liked and the qualities of narcissism and emotional intelligence themselves and as they relate to each other. Some participants had both qualities, and some had neither, and all with differing levels; they were not mutually exclusive. In sum, this Maxim article is misleading because the author uses skewed language and includes personal opinions that have no research to back them up.
The theme of cultures in the art can be seen in many artworks throughout history. Whether the piece of art was made to depict cultural beliefs, the norms of a culture, or the views of culture, the theme of culture is important to show how art has evolved and also how cultures have evolved. Another way culture can pose a theme in art is the way in which a specific culture chooses to create their art, the mediums they use, and the elements that they include in their pieces.
Get original essayThe first culture that I want to address when speaking about art and the cultural influence on it as well as cultural depictions in art is Native American artwork. Native American art differs between each tribe but has individual characteristics that set it apart from other pieces of art. A lot of Native American artworks are things that were useful to the tribe or accessorize the way that they looked every day. The artworks all range from clothes to jewelry, to combat tools and useful everyday items. Their artworks display the way that they lived and the things that they found to be important and a necessity to them. Personally, I have always been fascinated by the mediums in which Native Americans made their clothes, bowls, and other items.
One item of native American artwork that I find the most fascinating is the clothing of the time. I will insert in the bottom of this paper some of the traditional Native American headdresses, clothing, and other items. All of these really interest me because of the composition of them. When I was younger I learned about how the Native Americans made their clothing and how they skinned animals fleshed them and tanned their hides. All of it is very innovative work for the time period and has a really big influence on what the clothes look like as to most of the clothes are tan with no other color than some painted on the designs.
The designs that are depicted on Native American works of art are all very colorful but at the same time are dull, which could one be because they have been found years after they were made or two Native Americans are unable to make that bright colors with the materials that they were able to get in that day and age. Either way, the designs are usually beautiful, sometimes have to do with nature and depict animals of plants or the sun and moon, and other times they have geometric-like designs. It is amazing to see the way that their culture, is heavily influenced by nature and nature; things influence that way that their artworks are created and the designs that are put on each piece.
The next thing I want to talk about in the way that culture is depicted in art, whether that be in modern art or even in art from hundreds of years ago. Modern art and art from a long time ago can both depict the view of certain cultures in that time period. If someone who is viewing the art has little to no understanding of the culture that is being shown the piece of art can maybe even look offensive when it really is not. The act can show us depictions of the culture at that time and give us a better understanding or it can confuse us even more if we have no underlying knowledge of the culture itself. Take for example the piece of art, Woman with a Gun, by Shirin Neshat. This piece of art is a black and white image of that looks to be an Islamic woman. This woman has words written in another language written all over her face. Held up in front of her face the woman has a gun pointing straight upward held right in the center of her face. If you had no understanding or prior knowledge of this culture this image would seem to be offensive to islamic women. It seems to almost be degrading at first glance and doesn't really look like something someone would like to pose for.
Our lack of prior knowledge to this artwork screws our visions away from what the art is actually supposed to be and supposed to represent and almost makes us think the opposite. Instead of the piece of art being degrading to women of that country and religion it actually is an empowering picture. The words on the picture are actually empowering words that are in that country's native language. This is an example of the ways art can show you the culture and you not even know that it is actually showing you a good thing about the culture rather than a bad thing. This work of art goes to show you that you really have to have background knowledge of the item you are viewing before you judge or make assumptions about it because you may not truly know what the piece of art is really about.
Another couple of pieces of art that I would like to talk about that do similar things as the one described above is Treaty Signing at Medicine Lodge Creek by Howling Wolf and Treaty Signing at Medicine Lodge Creek by John Taylor. Each of these artworks is a depiction of the exact same event in history. They both show the same exact thing but are shown from two different sides of the treaty signing. This was a very interesting thing to me because most of the time when you see events in history they are only shown from one side of the story and from one of the groups points of view and that makes these two artworks compared side by side very cool to see the ways the even was seen differently.
The first work of art is the Treaty Signing at Medicine Lodge Creek by Howling Wolf who was a native American on the native American side of the treaty signing. Howling Wolf was a member of the plains Indian tribe and he drew a picture of what he saw as the treaty signing that he was at when it happened. His artwork has a lot more depiction of the Indians, it is very simplistic and very two-dimensional. He drew all of the Native American teepees and all of the native Americans standing around in their little village. Up the paper diagonally Howling Wolf drew what looks like a stream and the teepees are drawn following up along the stream in the image. The white people are drawn in the background and in the image, there are only two white people compared to a lot of native American people. The white people look very boring, they are wearing only black and white and nice fancy clothes. The native American drawing is also done in color and all f the Indian's houses and clothes are made of colorful colors and the white people's things are still only in black and white. This shows how the Native American people of that time viewed white people and this is a depiction of the white people's culture through the eyes of the native American people. It also shows how the culture of the native American people viewed this historical event.
The next drawing this the Treaty Signing at Medicine Lodge Creek, by John Taylor. This drawing is a depiction of the same thing as the drawing by Howling Wolf but this time instead by the white people's perspective rather that the native American people's perspective. This drawing is a lot more complex than the one done by Howling Wolf and is more three-dimensional in the way that it is done. The drawing shows a lot more people and a lot more white people than the one done by a howling wolf. Rather than how Howling Wolf has them all just kind of standing there the one by John Taylor has them all sitting around in a circle almost and it looks like they are having an important discussion. This is something that shows the different views of the event in the eyes of the white people's culture rather than that of the native American people. It shows that they saw themselves in it more. It also shows that depiction of the native American culture through their view. Other than that view each of the pieces of art shows the way that each piece of art is made compared to the way that art is done in the culture and the cultural ways of art in of each piece's culture. It is amazing looking at the two of these drawings and comparing them side by side.
The last piece of art I want to touch on that represents the culture of a group that is very familiar to everyone today is It Takes Every Kind of Person to Make the World Go Round by Hildos A. This painting is something that depicts a movement that is still going on today. It shows the movement of equal rights for everyone which isn't as much of an issue going on today as it use to be but there are new movements that go along with this one. The new movement black is beautiful and black is strong is depicted in this image and shows that the world needs every kind of people and every kind of people matters. This is an amazing piece of art that is still going on with these movements. This painting is an abstract painting of a woman's face, half of the woman's face is white with blonde hair and bright-colored lips. This side of the face seems to be the standard of beauty for people all the time. The other side of the face is a brown face with an afro and this shows that both sides are beautiful. This shows the culture of the world today and the changes in the culture in the way beauty is viewed and the way that people view each other.
Celebrated American author Herman Melville wrote 'Moby-Dick' and several other sea-adventure novels, before turning to poetry later in his literary career.
Get original essayHerman Melville was born in New York City in 1819. He worked as a crew member on several vessels beginning in 1839, his experiences spawning his successful early novels Typee (1846) and Omoo (1847). Subsequent books, including his masterpiece Moby-Dick (1851), sold poorly, and by the 1860s Melville had turned to poetry. Following his death in New York City in 1891, he posthumously came to be regarded as one of the great American writers.
Herman Melville was born in New York City on August 1, 1819, to Allan and Maria Gansevoort Melvill (Maria added the "e" to the family name following her husband's death). In the mid-1820s, young Herman fell ill to scarlet fever, and though he regained his health not long afterward, his vision was left permanently impaired by the illness. The family had enjoyed a prosperous life for many years due to Allan Melvill's success as a high-end importer and merchant. However, he was also borrowing heavily to finance his business interests, and after he moved the family upstate to Albany in a failed attempt to branch into the fur trade in 1830, the family's fortune took a big hit. When Allan died suddenly in 1832, finances dwindled significantly. Allan's oldest son, Gansevoort, took control of the family's fur and cap business in New York following his father's death, while Herman Melville clerked at a bank to help make ends meet. During the 1830s, he was enrolled at Albany Academy and Albany Classical School, where he studied classical literature and began writing poems, essays and short stories. He left Albany in 1837 for a teaching job in Massachusetts, but found the work to be unfulfilling and soon returned to New York. That year, Gansevoort's fur and cap business folded, putting the Melville's back into a dire financial situation. The family relocated to Lansingburgh, New York, and Herman enrolled at Lansingburgh Academy to study surveying, hopeful of gaining employment with the newly initiated Erie Canal project.
Unable to gain a coveted job, Melville instead followed Gansevoort's suggestion to work as a crew member on a boat. In 1839, he signed on as a cabin boy for a merchant ship called the St. Lawrence, which traveled from New York City to Liverpool, England, and back. In 1841, Melville embarked on his second sea voyage after being hired to work aboard the Acushnet, a whaling ship. His subsequent wild journey provided the sparks for his yet-to-be-realized literary career: After arriving at the Marquesas Islands of Polynesia in 1842, Melville and a crewmate deserted the ship and, soon after, were captured by local cannibals. Although Melville was treated well, he escaped after four months on board another whaling ship, the Lucy Ann, and was jailed after joining the crew in a mutiny. He eventually wound up in Hawaii before catching a ride back to Massachusetts on the USS United States, arriving home more than three years after he left. Melville immediately set about putting pen to paper to capture his experiences.
Typee: A Peep at Polynesian Life (1846), a combination of his personal tales and imagined events, drew attention for its detailed descriptions of seafaring life and a seemingly too-wild-to-believe plot. The author followed in 1847 with an equally successful sequel.
Omoo: A Narrative of Adventures in the South Seas. His career on the ascent, Melville in 1847 married Elizabeth Shaw, daughter of the chief justice of Massachusetts. They would go on to have four children.
Melville continued with the sea-adventure theme for Mardi: and a Voyage Thither (1849), Redburn: His First Voyage (1849) and White-Jacket; or, The World in a Man-of-War (1850). The author in 1851 delivered what would become his signature work, Moby-Dick(initially titled The Whale). Moby-Dick, categorized as American Romanticism, is based on both Melville's years of experience aboard whaleships and the real-life disaster of the Essex whaleship. Traveling from Nantucket, Massachusetts, to South America, the Essex met its doom in the Pacific Ocean in November 1820, when a sperm whale attacked and destroyed the ship. The crew, adrift in their small whaleboats, faced storms, thirst, illness, and starvation, and were even reduced to cannibalism for survival. However, succeeding in one of the great open-boat journeys of all time, the few survivors were picked up off South America. Their story, spread widely in America in the 19th century, provided inspiration for Melville's tale of a ship captain seeking revenge on an elusive whale. While Moby-Dick eventually achieved immense critical acclaim, Melville didn't live to witness that success. In fact, the book didn't bring him any wealth or respect during his lifetime. Early critics were unimpressed by the novel; an 1851 article in the Illustrated London News called it "Herman Melville's last and best and most wildly imaginative story," and a testament to his "reckless imaginative power." The article went on to note Melville's "great aptitude for quaint and original philosophical speculation, degenerating, however, too often into Rhapsody and purposeless extravagance.
"Moby-Dick sold poorly, as did subsequent novels like Pierre; or, The Ambiguities(1852) and Israel Potter: His Fifty Years of Exile (1855). Following the release of The Confidence-Man: His Masquerade in 1857, Melville all but gave up on writing novels. Later Years, Death and LegacyMelville delivered a series of lectures throughout the late 1850s, and the following decade he began a 20-year career as a customs inspector in New York City. He also turned his creative interests to poetry during this period, publishing a collection called Battle-Pieces and Aspects of the War in 1866. In 1876, he published the epic Clarel: A Poem and Pilgrimage in the Holy Land, based on a previous trip to the region.
Melville had finally begun work on another novel when he died of a heart attack in New York City on September 28, 1891. His early fame had vanished by then, but many of his books were eventually reprinted, and his name began slowly gaining traction in the literary world. By the early 1920s, Melville had become a well-known figure among readers and critics alike; his last novel also saw the light of day, published in 1924 as Billy Budd, Sailor. Today, Herman Melville is regarded as one of America's greatest writers, his masterpiece Moby-Dick adapted for the big screen in 1956 and enduring as a staple of school reading lists. Interest in Melville and his works spiked again in 2015 with the release of the Ron Howard-directed In the Heart of the Sea, about the ill-fated voyage of the Essex.
In Herman Melville’s novel, Moby Dick, Ishmael, the protagonist, undergoes a series of stages in the development of his personal qualities. As Ishmael ventures further out of his comfort zone and experiences life-changing moments together with his newfound acquaintance, Queequeg, Ishmael’s character is cultivated from an unaware, ignorant person to a much more refined, conscious individual. Although Ishmael did not entirely seek refuge or camaraderie with other parties, Ishmael’s interaction with new people developed the theme of companionship as salvation from his oblivious and judgmental nature.
Get original essayIshmael’s original oblivious nature upon meeting Queequeg underscores the commencing development of the theme of companionship as salvation. After meeting Queequeg for the first time, Ishmael criticizes Queequeg’s appearance and behavior, which he continues to do so until they familiarize with each other. Ishmael states that “[Queequeg] was just enough civilized to show off his outlandishness in the strangest possible manners” (70). Ishmael’s statement clearly reveals how judgmental he already is in the beginning of novel, refusing the show any kind of acceptance of Queequeg’s personality. Ishmael then continues on to say, “if he had not been a small degree civilized, he probably would not have troubled himself with boots at all” (70). As shown in his descriptions of Queequeg, Ishmael does not convey a welcoming or friendly nature toward Queequeg. He is quick to distinguish Queequeg as a “savage,” essentially bestowing the hostile nickname on him. Considering that the novel takes place in the mid-1800s, the word “savage” would denote a much harsher connotation. Ishmael basically believes that he is supreme to Queequeg, which conveys Ishmael’s oblivious nature in the fact that he doesn’t know anything about Queequeg.
As the story progress Ishmael’s supercilious nature is cultivated through his continued interaction with Queequeg, promoting the theme of companionship as salvation. Once Queequeg begins to open up his life story and Ishmael grows accustomed to Queequeg’s daily habits, Ishmael begins to understand and accept Queequeg for himself. For instance, as Queequeg participates in his own religious activity and invites Ishmael, Ishmael “thought he seemed anxious for [him] to join,” but had “deliberated a moment whether, in case he invited him” (113). Ishmael can be seen to initially be relatively reluctant in joining Queequeg, however Ishmael then continues his statement to say, “I would comply or otherwise,” revealing that he at least considers the option. In fact, Ishmael does not make any critical comments of Queequeg’s religious beliefs, instead Ishmael grows from that experience and eventually calls himself and Queequeg a “cosy, loving pair,” showing that the companionship is beginning to liberate Ishmael from the oblivious, ignorant attitude he had at first.
Looking further into the novel, Ishmael matured much more in his behavior, further exposing the companionship as salvation as the novel’s motif. After meeting Captain Ahab, Queequeg’s bravery and quick actions in the coming predicament allows Ishmael to finally see the good in him. Ishmael states that “all hands voted Queequeg a noble trump … from that hour I clove to Queequeg like a barnacle,” to show his newfound admiration for Queequeg (130). This development elucidates how much Ishmael really matured. He is accepting of Queequeg, and even seems to be not judgmental but rather open-eyed to the ideas he thinks about, such as regarding religion, Ishmael states “we good Presbyterian Christians should be charitable in these things, and not fancy ourselves so vastly superior to other mortals” (166). Ishmael’s cultivated nature could have only been developed through Queequeg’s continuous resilience in dealing with Ishmael’s original personality.
Throughout the novel, Ishmael stage of developments is owed to the deepening companionship he has with Queequeg. Queequeg allows Ishmael to undergo life-changing experiences that allow Ishmael to elevate his thoughts through consistent communication and expression of new activities Ishmael has not seen.
In the ancient Germanic world, heroes are strong men who exude defining personality characteristics that pose them as a threat to others. These traits are what make them formidable, but they are also what drive these heroes to their death. For example, in The Nibelungenlied, Siegfried appears as the confident, omnipotent hero; he is rendered almost invincible by a dragon’s blood and kills men left and right using this power. In the Icelandic epic Njals saga, Gunnar seems to be a parallel character to Siegfried: he also is virtually undefeatable with his magic halberd and kills men everywhere he goes. Even though they are both physically powerful, Siegfried and Gunnar represent opposite poles of heroism. Certainly, they are both considered heroes in the traditional sense, but their relationships with their loved ones and enemies demonstrate that these men have vastly different values: Siegfried values power and strength, whereas Gunnar values loyalty and honor. For both, however, the values that make them heroes also bring them to their deaths.
Get original essayLike all great heroes, Gunnar and Siegfried are portrayed as the greatest fighters in the land. Despite his parents’ concerns, Siegfried journeys to Burgundy in the very beginning of the story and immediately threatens to start a fight and take over the land. Even though he is the intruder, Siegfried intimidates the men of Burgundy with his confidence in the face of danger. Hagen warns that, “We must receive this young lord with more than usual honour, lest we incur his enmity” (page 28). Similarly, the first description the readers get of Gunnar is that:
He was big and strong and an excellent fighter. He could swing a sword and throw a spear with either hand, if he wished... and there was no sport in which there was any point in competing with him and it was said that no man was his match. (34)
Physically, Siegfried and Gunnar seem to be strong, heroic men. However, at one point in Njals saga, Gunnar says, “What I don’t know... is whether I am less manly than other men because killing troubles me more than it does them” (page 93). It is this hesitance to kill that marks the key difference between Siegfried and Gunnar. Siegfried is strong and confident and is willing to kill. Because of this, he utilizes his relationships and strength to obtain more power and disregards the value of other lives. Gunnar, on the other hand, honors the value of each human and thus honors the relationships he has.
Siegfried and Gunnar each have a deep friendship with another character in the book. For Siegfried, it is Gunther. For Gunnar, it is Njal. On the surface, both pairs seem to have the same relationship dynamics in that they both stick up for their friends whenever they need help. However, this is not entirely true. Siegfried, being a power-hungry hero, does not have a genuine relationship with Gunther. A king’s power comes from his honor, but Siegfried basically usurps all of Gunther’s power by fighting his battles for him and taking his wife’s virginity. If Siegfried were merely helping out his friend, he would not take the ring and the garter as a consolation prize for raping his friend’s wife. Siegfried does not really need Gunther as a friend; he is just using him.
On the other hand, Gunnar and Njal both need each other, which is why they have such a close friendship. Njal is not a fighter, and Gunnar is not as wise as Njal. Together as a team, they are able to get peacefully past the quarrel between their wives and the frequent troubles that Gunnar gets himself into. Although Siegfried defends Gunther’s power, Gunnar defends Njal’s honor. When Hallgerd forces Sigmund to write a poem mocking Njal and his sons, Gunnar becomes angry and says to Sigmund:
You are foolish and unable to follow good advice if you are willing to slander Njal’s sons, and even worse, Njal himself, on top of what you have already done to them, and this will lead to your death. And if any man here repeats these words he’ll be sent away, and bear my anger besides. (74)
Gunnar further proves his loyalty to Njal by saying this, showing that words can be a powerful testament to friendship.
Although both men claim to be in love with their wives, Siegfried and Gunnar each have very different relationships with their women. For a man with such a big ego, it seems odd that Siegfried would go to such great lengths to obtain a woman. But in fact, his pursuit of Kriemhild is perfectly in line with his ego. His motive is not to take over Burgundy or obtain more riches, but solely to win over Kriemhild. We already know that Siegfried wins the greatest treasures from Alberich and already has the highest ranking in his land. What he does not have is a woman. Siegfried doesn’t fall in love with Kriemhild; he falls in love with the idea of obtaining the one great treasure he doesn’t have. This is evident from Siegfried’s intense longing for Kriemhild before he even saw her. Siegfried declares that:
I shall take Kriemhild the fair maiden of Burgundy... on account of her very great beauty, since even if the mightiest emperors wished to marry, I know he would not demean himself in loving the fair princess. (23)
He had the knowledge that she was a rare beauty and was a woman that many suitors hoped to woo. Knowing only this, Siegfried sees Kriemhild as the ultimate prize for his ego, the final piece of the puzzle that would bring him greater renown.
In contrast, Gunnar is genuinely attracted to his wife, Hallgerd, and wants to marry her despite all the warnings that he was given. Unlike Siegfried, who was determined to marry Kriemhild before he even met her, Gunnar and Hallgerd had “talked aloud for a long time” (page 53). Even though “Hrut told Gunnar... everything about Hallgerd’s character, and thought it seemed to Gunnar at first that there were many faults, it finally came about that they made an agreement” (page 54). This shows that Gunnar knew that Hallgerd was not perfect, but loves her regardless because he sees her as a person rather than a prized object, as Siegfried saw Kriemhild.
Ironically, both heroes were ultimately brought to their ends by none other than their own wives. Siegfried, being an egotist, is too confident in his strength, and this causes him to be careless in using his power. Since he only sees Kriemhild as a weak object, he never stops to think that she would ever be powerful enough to do anything. Hence, he feels comfortable telling her about the one spot on his shoulder that is not invincible. Hagen knows that Siegfried is overly confident and would feel safe exposing his weakness to his wife, and thus, Hagen uses this knowledge to manipulate and kill Siegfried. Hagen challenges Siegfried to a race, appealing to Siegfried’s competitive nature, and even eggs him on by saying that he, Hagen, is no match for Siegfried. Through this ego boost, Siegfried refuses to win the normal way: he purposely handicaps himself. Siegfried tells Hagen that he “will lie down in the grass at your feet, as a handicap... [and] will carry all my equipment with me, my spear and my shield and all my hunting clothes” (page 130). Hagen deliberately does not provide wine for the whole day so that after the race, Siegfried gets tired and thirsty and takes a drink from the brook. This is exactly the vulnerable position that Hagen wants him to be in, and he takes the opportunity to attack Siegfried from behind and kill him. Ultimately, it is Siegfried’s relationship with Kriemhild that acted as the catalyst for his death.
Whereas Siegfried dies because he is overly confident about his strength, Gunnar dies because of his stubborn attachment to being loyal and honorable. During the famine, “Gunnar shared hay and food with many people, and everybody who turned to him got supplies as long as there were any” (page 79). He continues his generosity until he runs out of supplies and then goes out to go buy some from Otkel. Nj?l recognizes Gunnar’s generosity by saying that, “There is no hope for others if men like him cannot get supplies” (Page 80). Meanwhile, Hallgerd gets the slave to steal food from Otkel. When Gunnar finds out, he slaps her on the face. Even though he had heard all the stories Hrut told him about Hallgerd’s previous husbands, Gunnar does not hold back because he finds it so shameful that his wife would do such a dishonorable deed. Later on, Gunnar has a battle with Gizur and Elif and his brothers. Gunnar is on the brink of winning when he decides to shoot their own arrow at them. He wants to do this because he believes that “it [would] shame them to be hurt by their own weapons” (page 129). Even though his mother urged him not to, Gunnar still insists on doing so, because he feels that shame would cut them deeper than any physical attack. This attack, however, provokes them to attack him back and ultimately kill him. When he asks Hallgerd to help, she refuses because of that slap. Ultimately, it is Gunnar’s deep value of honor that kills him.
Both heroes, at times, appear to make decisions that seem incongruous to their actions. However, these incongruities only serve to hide their true motives. In The Nibelungenlied, Gunther becomes stressed out when Liudegast and Liudeger threaten to invade his country. Siegfried self-sacrifically says to Gunther, “If you are looking for friends I shall assuredly be one among them, and I trust I shall acquit myself honourably till the end of my days” (page 35). In this instance, it seems like Siegfried’s true motive is to help out his friend. This “honor” he would gain, however, is only a means to an end. He is only using his strength in helping Gunther to gain more power for himself. His later actions (e.g., raping Brunhild) prove that Siegfried does not truly value honor like he says he does. At one point in the Njals Saga, Gunnar goes out raiding and killing men for over a year. The book graphically describes Gunnar killing people left and right and taking their money. In this case, Gunnar seems to be driven solely by the appeal of power and money. With this large amount of treasure, Gunnar gains the respect of King Harald Gormsson who offers him even greater power and wealth. At this point, Gunnar shows his true colors. He refuses the King’s offer, saying that he “wanted to return to Iceland to see his kinsmen and friends” (page 51). Upon his return back home, Gunnar shares his new wealth with his friends. He also tells Njal that he “wants to get along well with everyone” (page 52). Here, Gunnar shows that his pillaging and killing was only a way to gain respect and honor from those around him. He does not actually enjoy the killing, as he later confides in Njal about feeling guilty whenever he kills men. As with Siegfried, Gunnar’s contrasting actions are only a means to an end.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayUnexpectedly for heroes, both Siegfried and Gunnar die very early on in their stories. Ironically, it is their heroism that causes their downfalls, and this makes the two very similar. Siegfried is a hero in that he is confident and uses this confidence to get what he wants. Eventually, his ego gets the best of him. Hagen is able to manipulate Siegfried’s ego and his relationship with his wife to put him in a vulnerable position. Similarly, Gunnar meets his death when he breaks his agreement to be exiled from his friends and his people. He also falls at the hands of his wife when she refuses to rescue him. Strangely, in both cases, these heroes die because of their relationships with others. Both heroes cause their own demise, yet they do so differently. Siegfried dies because people are jealous of his tremendous strength and power. Gunnar dies because of his loyalty to his powerful and influential friends. So, as with all fallen heroes, greatness ultimately becomes the greatest imperfection.
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the definition of a hero is “a person admired for achievements and noble qualities.” While this may be true, I don’t believe the definition of what makes someone a hero can be so simply determined. A person's morals and what they believe in their core values determine how they respond to certain situations in their lives. This being said, the morals and ideals of a person determine whether they are a hero or not, because they are what leads them to accomplish the aforementioned achievements. A hero is someone whose actions are fueled by their desire to help and care for others.
Get original essayAnother thing to consider is that throughout all time, every culture had different perspectives on personality traits that a hero exhibits. For example, in some cultures such as Ancient Greek and Roman cultures, as exhibited in Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey, people recognized kill count as a heroic trait because it showed a warrior’s strength in battle. However, this is not always the case, and some cultures don’t believe that murder is one of the key criteria that make a hero. Different time periods and cultures play a big role in determining the heroism for a mythological figure.
Enkidu from The Epic of Gilgamesh and Eleven from the Netflix series Stranger Things are two heroes from very different cultures. They have different backgrounds and vastly different stories, but they were both very protective of those they loved and they were both selfless. Both Eleven and Enkidu were the unlikely heroes of their story.
Enkidu was described as a wild man. He lived in the forest alone with no human interaction, and he was quite primitive compared to the rest of society. According to the myth, he lived like this until he had interactions with a woman who introduced him to the society she lived in and told him about the kingdom of Uruk. The king of this area was Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh had little to no regard for the people he was ruling and didn’t recognize the fact that he was being ignorant to their needs. After learning this information, Enkidu took it upon himself to travel to Uruk and make Gilgamesh aware of the fact that his people were suffering. Enkidu voiced his concerns, Gilgamesh got extremely angry and they started to fight. After a while, they realize that they are both equally powerful and their respect for each other grows. This respect blossoms into a strong friendship and Enkidu begins to have a profound effect on Gilgamesh’s life. As they went along on an adventure, Enkidu ended up killing Humbaba, who was thought of to be “a monstrous version of what Enkidu once was”, and one of the gods decided that Enkidu needed to die. Around this time, Gilgamesh begins to get horrible nightmares about events that may happen in his future. Enkidu takes on the burden of these nightmares so that his best friend wouldn’t have to suffer. Soon, Enkidu dies after days of being sick and Gilgamesh becomes distraught with grief. Experiencing the death of a loved one taught him empathy and compassion for others.
This story took place in 2100 BC in Mesopotamia. This culture was polytheistic, which means they believed there were many gods who had regular divine intervention in the lives of the people. Some characteristics that were desired in a hero were strength, selflessness, and bravery. The people of this area believed that if someone put themselves in front of danger to protect others, and did right by the gods, the gods would approve of them and help them along their journey to reach their goals. This presence of religion and manipulation by beings more powerful by humans was heavily influential to the Epic of Gilgamesh, considering that some of the gods made the decision regarding Enkidu’s death. While Enkidu did not make one of the gods happy by killing the monster, his whole reason for the killing was Humbaba was to respect and help a different god: Shamash the sun god. This was heroic of Enkidu because he was trying to honor the god Shamash in order to gain his approval and help him to help the people of Uruk.
Enkidu showed his selflessness by being fiercely protective of his best friend, as well as protective of the country his best friend rules over. After they became close, Enkidu did everything in his power to protect Gilgamesh. He took the awful nightmares Gilgamesh was having and put the burden on himself so that he wouldn’t have to suffer. He promised Gilgamesh’s mother that he would protect him. He even protected Gilgamesh from the Bull Of Heaven, which ended up being the reason for his death. The fact that Enkidu put himself in harm's way in front of his loved ones countless times, and died by doing just that, shows that he is incredibly brave and cares about others more than himself, which is quite heroic.
Eleven, also known as El and Jane Ives was a young girl with telekinetic abilities. She grew up in a research facility where she was experimented on and used as a weapon for the United States government. After opening a gate to another dimension, she managed to escape the lab and meet Mike and his friends Lucas and Dustin. They soon found out that their other friend Will was brought into the other dimension, which they called the “upside-down”, and a monster from the upside-down had entered their dimension. She becomes close friends with the gang and feels a sense of duty to right the wrongs that she inadvertently created, which she did by killing the monster and getting Will back from the Upside down. She ends up sacrificing herself (as far as season one is concerned) to kill the Demogorgon.
This story was set in Hawkins, Indiana in the 1980s. Some heroic characteristics of this time period were selflessness as well as moral integrity. People in the American Suburbia this story took place in believed in a strict right versus the wrong mindset, and that heroes were always “perfect” model human beings. Eleven doesn’t strictly adhere to this, because she had to kill and was forced to do things that weren’t right, such as stealing, in order to survive her captivity. However, she makes up for it and stands out as a hero because the decision she makes with her free will are intended to help others and follow moral integrity.
Eleven was selfless by putting herself on the line to protect the rest of the people. Even though the events that transpired weren’t technically her fault, but the fault of the government, she felt a sense of duty to help in any way she could to fix the problem. She helped the boys listen to Will in upside-down countless times, even though using her powers drained her. In the end, she even gave her life to kill the monster that was terrorizing the town. She got herself killed to protect people she had only met a week ago. This demonstrates how much of a hero she was.
One of the things that both Eleven and Enkidu had in common was the exclusion from society at the beginning of their stories. Enkidu spent a large portion of his life living in aforethought with only wind animals to talk to. In fact, in his narrative, some didn’t even consider him to be human at all in the beginning. He was thought of as a beast that had no exposure to human life. The same goes for Eleven. While she had human interaction, it was with scientists who didn’t communicate with her or show her any semblance of normal life and society. She grew up in this type of environment ever since she was a baby, so when she escaped and met some people her own age who lived a normal life, she didn’t know how to react to most of the things they did and said.
Another similarity between the two characters was that they were both examples of heroes that had flaws. Many people from all different cultures believe that heroes should perfectly fit the mold of what they expect a hero should be, and they aren’t flawed like the rest of us. This is probably because in many stories, the hero is portrayed as a perfect, flawless human being. Enkidu and Eleven both prove to be examples that people can have flaws and make mistakes but still come out as heroes in the end. Enkidu killing the monster in the forest when he was on his quest with Gilgamesh probably wasn’t the wisest decision considering that he knew it would upset one of the gods. Despite this, he still had positive intentions behind it and all of his other actions were intended for good, so the good outweighed this one bad decision. For eleven, she sometimes used her powers to do things like lie to her friends and hurt others. This is not something that is normally considered heroic, but considering her upbringing, she likely didn’t know better and believed that she needed to use her abilities in whatever way possible to stay alive. And even when she did this, it was almost always done with the intention to help her friends. When she killed the people from the lab at the end of episode eight, she was doing so because she knew if they took her back, she wouldn’t be able to kill the Demogorgon that was terrorizing her friends, and they would force her to do more destructive things with her powers. Even though her judgment was sometimes off, she always exhibited heroic characteristics in her actions.
A key difference between the stories of Eleven and Enkidu was the presence of divinity. In the epic of Gilgamesh, becoming immortal and fully a god was Gilgamesh’s goal throughout the entire story. This theme was influenced by Enkidu's death because it taught Gilgamesh that he should appreciate and make a difference in the life he has rather than try to live forever. The presence of gods makes the impact Enkidu had on Gilgamesh more significant. While Enkidu was alive, he influenced him by teaching him compassion: “as the relationship develops into a deep friendship, Gilgamesh learns respect for other people, which he is experiencing for the first time”. This impact hit even harder at the end of the story, and once he accepted his mortality, he went back to Uruk and followed his Best friend’s precedent by treating his people with respect. In Stranger Things, there was no god influencing the story. This meant that none of the goals and actions were influenced by the desire to please the gods or achieve power in the afterlife. Eleven’s intentions were sole to protect her friends and her end goal was to be able to live a peaceful life away from the lab with these new friends. Another difference between Eleven and Enkidu was how they were perceived by others. Enkidu was a buff, adult man who was hardened by life out in the wilderness. He was almost animalistic, and people saw him as someone who was powerful and almost to be feared. His strength was equal to Gilgamesh’s strength, and there was no doubt in the people of Uruk’s minds that he could be a hero. For Eleven, that was not the case. At first glance, she was a small, scared child that wasn’t expected to be powerful. To those that didn’t know she had special abilities, which was most of the public besides her friends and the people at the lab, she didn’t look much like a force to be reckoned with. Due to this, she was often underestimated in her ability to be a hero.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayTo sum up, this essay has analyzed what makes someone a hero on the example of Enkidu from The Epic of Gilgamesh and Eleven from the Netflix series Stranger Things. Despite their differences, both Enkidu and Eleven proved themselves to be heroes of their stories. They were excellent examples that a hero can have flaws and make mistakes. A hero is someone who has a desire in their heart to help others, and their actions are reflecting of this desire. Eleven and Enkidu follow their morals, and they are the heroes of their stories.
Heroic stories are critical in world literature, reflecting the daily life of individuals. Such narratives follow a particular structure to reveal the journey of a character towards success. Some of the stories represent heroic characters of the time past which include Beowulf and King Arthur. The heroes experience many challenges, but finally, they emerge strong and earn respect. However, the research paper includes discussion of the heroes, monomyth formula, the role of women in the selected texts. The role of supernatural phenomenon and modern films.
Get original essayA hero is an individual that gives his/her life to something bigger than oneself according to the definition by Cambell. For one to be a hero, the first step is to have a call for adventure or strong urge, and although at first somebody has fear and may refuse the request, the person overcomes the fear, crosses the threshold, and embarks on the journey (Cambell 2004). However, as they continue with their adventurous journey, they face several tests, meet friends and enemies, get ready for some ordeal, and difficulties. Sometimes, they may face more significant fear, and after such a trial one becomes a hero.
In Beowulf, the protagonist, Beowulf, is a hero that fights the monster Gredel, the fire breathing dragon, and Gredel’s mother. Thus, his journeys and encounters reveal him as the strongest warrior due to his unique abilities. In addition, he becomes an efficient leader, even in his old age. During his young days, Beowulf was a great warrior with courage and strength, as depicted in the swimming match against Breca (Liuzza 2000). Germanic hero code dictates that a hero must have some values such as loyalty, pride, and courtesy. He is unable to lead as a king for many years, but finally, he ascends into the throne. Beowulf seems to do something to improve the livelihoods of the people by taking challenges to defeat the vicious monsters Grendel, Grendel’s mother, and the dragon.
In Higham, N.J. King Arthur: Making of a legend, King Arthur is a hero who saved the British from Saxons and became the king around AD 500. Celtic Mythology depicts King Arthur as a great king claimed by groups such as Scotland, Brittany, Wales, and Cornwall. There is also a theory that portrayed him as a Roman soldier with high mythical power being the central figure in legends, although there is a lack of convincing evidence. English authors and audiences have claimed Arthur as their hero, the romance originated from French culture. Arthur is typical in various works of romance in films and theatre. Arthur can be seen as forgiving in various romances, although Lancelot his most trusted knight betrayed him by having an affair with his wife Queen Geneverie. However, he is also a model for modern behaviors such as in Britain, where his ideas were used to represent medieval Chivalry.
Cambell argues that every story bears a particular structure with the beginning, middle, and end. The opening sets the hero and the story behind his progress. The next is to introduce some conflict that causes trouble to the heroin, which he must overcome and emerge the winner (Cambell 2004). However, the mythical sagas consist of a single-story, the monomyth giving the hero’s journey, which has three main parts. The parts include departure, initiation, and return, although each of them has its subsections. The hero behaves supernaturally and encounters several challenges that he keeps on defeating. The hero’s routine has various critical repeated individuals such as the hero, mentors, villains, and a goddess. In addition, there are magic potions, assistants, rogues, and tricksters, Besides, there is the struggle of good and evil or light and darkness.
The story of Beowulf is in the form of an epic poem involving a terrifying demon by the name of Gredel and his defeat by Beowulf. Beowulf follows Cambell’s identified parts which include departure, initiation, and return, each with its subsections. For instance, Beowulf’s separation is the call to his adventures. He leaves his home, and the called to venture out leads him to dark places where he experiences terrible incidences. The structure entails three main parts that include Beowulf’s ultimate fight with Grendel, fight with Grendel’s mother, and the fight against the dragon. The story follows the six elements of an epic, which are the plot of the hero, superhuman strength actions, vast setting, involving supernatural, sustained elevation style, and an omniscient poet. In the poem, Beowulf is an unbelievable hero with supernatural power and courage. The journey of Beowulf across the sea and land as he goes to Gredel’s place represents the vast setting of the poem. The supernatural being is Gredel, who is a demon while in the entire narrative, the author is objective and omniscient.
In King Arthur, the story also follows Cambell’s structure in narrating the heroic story of King Arthur. The story begins with an exposition, followed by conflict and rising action. In this stage, Arthur pulls a sword from a rock, which reveals him as a hero and the king of England. Conflict is also apparent in this story. Arthur faces several battles as he tries to protect his throne and using Merlin’s magic. He beats all his atrocities. At the round table, King Arthur marries the beautiful Guinevere, and Sir Lancelot becomes the mightest champion for Guinevere. The return is depicted when Arthur claims the throne for himself while Mildred and Morgana have a plan to strike. Mordred proves the existence of an affair Lancelot, and Guinevere thus feels heartbroken. This is the resolution, and in this stage, Guinevere is sentenced to death before being saved by Lancelot. Finally, Modred and Arthur end up in a Vicious circle, but later, Arthur succeeds in killing him. Arthur suffers a mortal wound and clings to life. Morgana reappears with the desire to heal Arthur in the Mist. However, from the analysis, Arthur’s story follows Cambell in analyzing texts. Therefore, the story follows the structure similar to Cambell’s in bringing out the nature of the hero in the narrative. As the story ends, Arthur is A hero. Although he can also be a villain since he suffered mortal injuries.
Beowulf is an epic, and in the poem, women play different roles due to they’re unique characteristics. In the poem, women are depicted as reliable and play certain roles in society. Wealhtheow and Hygd are gracious, but other women, such as Gredel’s mother, are monstrous. However, women who represent the Angelo-Saxon culture in the seventh century, which represent women as peaceful and assertive. Women were men property and would play the role of peace-weavers by marrying them off to warring tribes. For instance, they performed the role of pass the cup from one warrior to the next during ceremonies. Wealhtheow is “queenly” and “dignified”. She is a respectable woman due to her courtesy, she represents the voice of the woman in that society. Women also provided entertainment as they assist in hosting celebrations and parties in halls.
However, some women were disastrous such as the two villains in the poem. For instance, Gredel’s mother was wicked and unhospitable. She uses violence to resolve issues and cannot welcome people in their halls. They use weapons and physical abuse instead of applying diplomacy and polite language. Modthryth is quite a manipulative and evil queen capable of killing anyone that comes to her hall. Although women from this region are under their men, they play some roles in the society. Some are good, while others are pure evil and can harm others in the community.
In King Arthur, women play a major role and have a significant influence on many of the events that occurred. For instance, the love of Lancelot and Guinevere reveals the definition of women concerning their men. Some women are loyal, while others have unacceptable behavior. For instance, Morgan le Fay is a queen who tempts Lancelot leading to conflict with Guinevere. Queen Guinevere helps to create suspense and develop the plot as she penetrates the men’s world, a trait that is uncommon in other women. Some ladies also accompany the queen to keep the knights in good company. However, women have no legitimate power simply because they are figures that can be discarded due to the male domination of society. Women suffer humiliation as seen at the round table since the bond among the knights does not leave any room for Guinevere. She becomes essential in the absence of the knights, her role is to provide company whenever needed. Queen Guinevere is the only one who never conforms fully to societal expectations. For instance, she rejects Modred’s desire to inherit her as his queen.
Arthurian Legends utilize supernatural phenomena in developing the themes and the plot. Some of the examples include the use of magic and other scaring beasts. Supernatural contributes to the main themes of the narrative, such as heroism, revenge, and human nature. Merlin and Griffin are some of the examples of supernatural beings used in the text. The creatures facilitate story enhancement and force people to utilize imaginations to interpret the message. Magical events created witchcraft and wizardly are frequent in Arthurian Legends. Queen Morgause practices black magic, while Merlin engages in white magic. Merlin predicts challenging circumstances that King Arthur must endure in the future. He also transforms Arthur into different creatures, including fish, birds, and ant, which creates suspense. The story cannot be attractive without magic since some individuals like the Lady of the Lake, Morgan Le Fay, and Merlin plays important roles in developing the legend of the great King Arthur. Arthur was protected in battles due to magical protection from various characters such as witches. For instance, King Arthur received items such as the magic sword/Excalibur. The sword increased his stamina and courage to attack his enemies, including his son. He was always determined to achieve his objectives and never feared that he could be fatally wounded. Attacking monsters was cause for him to use magical powers since the supernatural beings were quite powerful.
In Beowulf, supernatural powers present itself in many instances throughout the text, for example, monsters such as Gredel, Grendel’s mother, and the dragon represent mythological creatures that exist only in fiction. Without supernatural beings, development is challenging, affecting the story to flow in Beowulf. Beowulf likens the monsters to the biblical descendants of Cain due to their heinous characters. The creatures used their supernatural powers to harm the people and make life difficult for the villagers. Beowulf has to fight the dragon and the animals in the lake and sea monsters. The supernatural beings help to prove the heroic characteristics of the protagonist. The story fuses the supernatural with religion to depict evil. The monsters also reveal the supreme strength in Beowulf as he fights them all emerging the winning. However, by fighting and defeating the creatures, Beowulf proves to be a hero in the story and emerges a winner. The humans and monsters live together and engage in activities, although there is a lot of violence. Human beings are always prone to supernatural beliefs, such as monsters and other creatures. The presence of monsters and their interaction with human beings creates an unjust world. Gredel and his mother are uncivilized because of their magical powers and monstrous lifestyle.
Beowulf is a great warrior that must fight and defeat Grendel who keeps on terrorizing villagers. “The movie Beowulf directed by Robert Zemeckis, borrowed from the English epic poem Beowulf plays the role of a heroic warrior. Beowulf fights several battles, he develops the theme of the heroic code of chivalry due to his honorable behavior and manners as taught by the Anglo-Saxon culture. Some of his characteristics in the movie include courage, bravery, and the will to keep fighting. In the movie, the theme of good versus evil is clear to encourage the young generation to be courteous. Beowulf possesses superhuman powers and fights with monsters. For example, Beowulf and Hrothgar are good for their generosity and fairness to the people. Beowulf is courageous brave and wise as revealed during his encounters with his enemies. The movie also demonstrates the real characteristics of the great warrior such as the respectful behavior of Beowulf towards the king. The movie reveals that Grendel and his mother are evil creatures who disturb the peace of the villagers. Beowulf depicts great strength in the film which helps him in fighting his enemies.
Generosity is a theme in the movie as well from characters such as King Hrothgar that welcomes Beowulf and his army of men with open arms. Beowulf is full of vengeance as he wants to revenge the death of the Danes murdered by Grendel. Beowulf succeeds in defeating and killing Grendel, which sends Grendels mother in a rage. Grendel’s mother wants revenge against Beowulf and during the night she murders numerous of Beowulf’s soldiers. “That hostile flier would leave nothing alive”. When the battle is fierce, he adopts smart tips, including trickery. However, all supernatural beings are fierce in the movie. Beowulf and his closes friend Wiglaf leave in search of Grendel’s mother cave to kill her for slaying all his soldiers while they slept. Beowulf battles with Grendels mother but does not succeed in slaying her instead, she offers him the chance to be king. Beowulf returns to the village and announces he has defeated Grendels mother. The King had doubts of that not being true from his facial expression for he was once in Beowulfs position. Hrothgar gave his title as king to Beowulf shortly before his death.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
Get custom essayBeowulf and King Arthur are great analyzed heroic stories of the past time, despite some of the shortcomings they have. The individuals fought wars and achieved significant milestones. Their functions are essential, they commit themselves to promote victory. The movie Beowulf is an example of epic and is critical for analysis. Comparing the texts and the movie reveals some common characteristics in the heroes of the time.
As many health masters describe it, heroin is a chemical substance originating from an opium poppy plant and used as a highly compelling painkiller. Its synthesis involves the slitting of poppy pods to release milky and sticky substances commonly referred to as opium. It is this opium which then undergoes a particular processing procedure to result in heroin. Its high strength of it is all about its diacetylmorphine content which yields heroin’s sought-soon after intoxicating impacts. The research compares its power to 50 times that of morphine a pain killer as well.
Get original essayToday in the US, the drug’s utilisation has gained roots in the past two decades, and statistics indicate that it is a highly utilised illegal substance. Its occurrence comes in varied formations especially based on colour. You will always find it as either brown, white or black powder though other versions may exist as well. All these colours indicate the extent to which the refining process reached. Black is usually the least pure all the way to white. How users use it all depends on the level of comfort and pleasure involved. Often, the drug will either be swallowed, smoked, snorted or injected into the body system. Identifying users can sometimes be easy as apart from their behaviours, they will always have their rooms with different hollow items such as an empty pen, straw, and lighters marked in a specific manner indicating levels. Most users, however, fail to understand or ignore that this drug causes health-threatening impacts and severe ill-health conditions if not managed.
Pure heroin which is often common is usually in the form of a white powder generally excellent in its nature. However, other varieties exist as well including the shades of beige, black, grey, brown, or even pink. All these differences emerge depending on the kind of additives involved in the mixing. Among these additives are sugar quinine, caffeine, powdered milk, and stark, plus other drugs. Usually, the brighter the colour of this substance the purer it is. The dark and more courser ones usually tar-black and sticky indicate the crude manner in which they are processed and therefore are the least pure. This type is mainly found in the Western US or Mexico. It has many users owing to its low affordable price.
Despite having significantly great health benefits, this drug introduces diverse ill-health conditions on the human body upon its consumption. When introduced into the body, via an injection it quickly yields the feeling of euphoria which is typically followed by a dry mouth, heavy extremities and a warm flushing of the skin. Out of the initially felt euphoria, the handler experiences an interchangeably drowsy and wakeful state. Mental operation becomes compromised due to despair of the brain system.
Other related impacts include:
In case of an overdose, effects such as hypotension, slow and shallow breathing, blue lips and nails, coma, convulsions, muscle spasms, and possible death may result.
Other illnesses or syndromes may result for instance HIV/AIDS or hepatitis out of sharing of injection needles. Otherwise, general medical hitches on this include:
Lack of desire for food Immediate impacts The very immediate effect of this drug is pain-killing which is combined with depression of the central nervous system by influencing the following;
With continued or repeated use, these effects diminish as the body becomes tolerant of them.
Under self-diagnosis, one will always experience great compulsion towards its utilisation. Often, this feeling is uncontrollable, and therefore most people would give in for it. Out of such dependence, the victims stand a chance to fall back on their responsibilities and relationships as well. Generally, however, users will experience the following ill-health indicators as soon as they commence their consumption.
Just like in the case of other heavy drugs, withdrawing from heroin consumption comes along with severe effects some of which may be life-threatening, especially when not better managed. For the proper success of it, medical guidance from an expert is very critical to avoid further inconveniences or co-occurring illnesses. Withdrawal Symptoms They comprise:
How much time one takes in recovering from such obsessive dependence on heroin is never precise. Generally, it’s a factor depending on how fast your body is responding to the current medication or training you are perusing. Once you have the will to shun away from it plus a proper recovery strategy, the process might take a much lesser time compared to the otherwise situation. Addiction Treatment Strong dependence on this substance mainly causes adverse effects on the brain thus yielding to some elements of mental disorder. The best way to prevent oneself from all this is either avoiding it yourself or seeking medical assistance. The best places you can visit about this are rehab centres. They offer both preventive and therapeutic curative measures that help in the recovery of all kinds of addictions.
The essentiality of heroin towards creating health benefits is no longer of use as many users across the world have converted it all to abuse. Being one of the best recommendable painkillers, it has for years been offered to patients suffering from persistent muscle and bone aches. However, today, its utilisation has become more of illegal with the government posing strict user regulations. From its stimulating effects, the drug was discovered to inflict severe ill-health complaints among the many users. Problems acquiring sleep, loss of appetite, abnormal sweating, and sex malfunctions among many other adverse health impacts were discovered to result from its utilisation. The unfortunate bit about it is its addictive nature. Most users tend to crave for its euphoric feeling and therefore fall for its persistent use. Redemption for such victims is however available now with the presence of lots of both medical and rehab facilities. There are outlined medicinal as well as therapeutic training outlines which can effectively help one attain full recovery.
Since drugs have been shown in films, people have had strong opinions about if this is okay to do. In 1987 President Ronald Reagan once said “the film industry should be part of the solution, not part of the problem”. The Depiction of drugs in films have influenced the general population in both positive and negative ways.
Get original essayEver since the beginning of film the way drugs have been depicted in movies has changed and evolved throughout each era of film. It had first begun with the silent era (1900-1920). Thomas Edison set the scene and made the first ever drug related movie called Chinese Opium Den? in 1894. The Silent Era mostly depicted drugs in a more positive and comedic light because in this time, drugs have not been studied as much and most people did not know of their harmful effects yet. During this time, drugs were not controlled by the government or the film industry at all. In fact, the New York Film Academy said that “Hollywood first officially dealt with drugs in films in 1921 by advising against films that show ‘the use of narcotics’ ”.
The next era of film was the production code era from 1930-1950’s. This is when more laws were passed in which made drugs be viewed in a more negative light. For example, the Motion Picture Production Code was passed by Motion Pictures in 1930. This made it so that films were required to be approved before they could be released to the general public. After the production code was passed, Hollywood started to only show anti-drugs movies and entered an “exploitation phase”. Many people relied on movies and tv shows to inform the public about drugs.
As we enter the Times Are Changing Era, the portrayal of drugs evolved again. This time, instead of everyone being absolutely scared of drugs and the film industry being totally one sided, we began to look at the negative effects of being an addict and informing and educating the public of realistic situations. “While social unrest built up throughout the decade, it was only near the end of the 60’s that drugs began to be portrayed differently and not just negatively in film”. By the 1970’s, cocaine became a more accepted “upper class” drug and thus became more desired.
As the title of this era implies, The Just Say No Era in the 1980’s was a huge time in which many were advised to be against drugs and addiction and had a mostly negative connotation. This was shown on every form of media. For example, as cocaine was on an uprise in the United States, films shifted their focus and increased the amount of films that showed the effects of cocaine. There was even a “decline of popular use and film depictions of marijuana”.
Modern Film Cinema (1990-2010’s) was the most neutral era for drugs depicted in film ever. It did not lean to one side more than the other. “With the Clinton administration and Generation X signaling a new permissiveness toward drug use, drug films became more common and neutral in their depictions, moving away from negatively moralizing toward more nuanced stories”. As drugs and addiction in films became more neutral, there has been a mix of films both advocating and informing people about drugs.
The frequency of drugs shown in films differs depending on the type of drug and trends in society. For example, The use of ecstasy in films expanded as rave culture became more popular. Tobacco has also been huge in the film industry. Tobacco is actually depicted in 90 percent of R rated movies and three fourths of G, PG, and PG13 movies between 1996 and 2004. Cannabis is another common drug that is often shown in films with both negative and positive outcomes. The statistics of Cannabis in films is mostly even in both a neutral light and no consequences and a positive light. Drugs in movies have an influence in what happens in the real world. For example, “In 2000’s meth usage declined where meth being in films raised”. In the movie ?Trainspotting?, drugs and addiction are being shown throughout the entire movie. It is made clear that the characters have a strong addiction and are aware of how bad it actually is and how it is affecting their life. Although they don’t seem to really care. Choose life, choose a job, choose a career, choose a family... Choose your future, choose life. But why would I want to do such a thing? I chose not to choose life. I chose something else. And the reasons? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you got heroin” (?Trainspotting?).
This quote by Renton shows the audience two different paths they could take in their lives, your future or drugs. This makes the audience think about the best option to choose. Renton is addicted to heroin and is having a hard time trying to come clean. “In junkie limbo right now. Too ill to sleep, too tired to stay awake. But the sickness is on its way. Sweat, chills, nausea, pain and craving” (?Trainspotting?). Another character by the name Tommy goes from having a good life with goals, but ruins his it when he turns to heroine and you see his entire life go upside down. Although the film shows both the highs and lows. Sometimes the characters are struggling, and other times they are having the time of their lives. “When you take drugs you have a fucking great time. Unless you're very unlucky. We wanted the film to capture that” (Byrne). Throughout time, drug use in movies affected and influenced the general population in both positive and negative ways. As we advance in technology and the production of movies, films become more accessible to the general public through DVDs and multiple different online sources. Which in turn affects people's decisions as “there is convincing evidence that the entertainment media influences behavior”.
There is also the films that show drugs in a negative light and change the audience's perspective on how addiction can damage your life. “There's half of the film which is obviously considerably darker. If you prolong the experience with drugs, your life will darken. The film doesn't try to hide that” (Byrne). Through ?Trainspotting’s? “disgusting imagery” the movie has made an impact on the rate of drug addicts according to a swedish study led by Dr Hasantha Gunasekera. ?Requiem for a dream? was an intense movie that showed the lives of four different people that were addicted to drugs. The films storyline and cinematography was so jarring that it made a lasting impression on so many people. “In today's world it is very hard to create images and ideas that people remember more than right in the moment so you want to create an experience that lasts. That usually has to be a pretty intense journey” (Aronofsky). “People were telling me that I raped them, people threw up, there was an ambulance in toronto when we screened it at the toronto film festival because a guy had heart palpitations” (Aronofsky). The movie also showed how far each character would go to get their fix. To finish the film with a powerful ending, the audience was left with four scenes that showed how the characters actions have affected them. Sara is in a mental ward, Harry ends up with his arm amputated, Marian turns to prostitution, and Tyrone is in jail (?Requiem?).
Although some people believe that the media and movies are responsible for informing the public about drug safety, others believe that it is not the filmmakers responsibility to do so. Edward Lawrenson said “ I dont think its the role of the film industry to educate the public about public health”. Dr Hasantha Gunasekera, ignolished this as well. Saying that besides his studies he knows that it's not the film industry's job to worry about this. And that movies are there to focus on their art in creating and entertaining others and to make money.